Cutting through the noise on negative emissions

Summary Negative-emission technologies (NETs) are widely viewed as a risky backstop technology for climate change mitigation. In this perspective, we challenge this limited view of NETs. We show how, notwithstanding their merit, integrated assessment models (IAMs) are largely responsible for establishing this opposition to NETs. This is because IAM-based assessments of NETs dominate the policy-facing literature, but as a result of model limitations, we are left with a deceptively shallow understanding of the role NETs could play to support long-term mitigation goals. Therefore, in the second part of this perspective, we provide a non-IAM-based fresh take on NETs. We explore NETs via a bottom-up analysis and introduce a decision-making framework to determine the circumstances under which NETs could provide value as a mitigation option at jurisdictional scales. We apply this framework to case studies in California and New Mexico, highlighting how NETs could overcome socio-technical obstacles and unlock a variety of environmental and social co-benefits as part of helping to achieve time-bound mitigation goals. Overall, this perspective aims to cut through what we see as a noisy discourse on NETs, which is wrapped-up in concerns that are dependent on scenario modeling and offer a plain evaluation of NETs as a potential climate change mitigation option.

[1]  Atul K. Jain,et al.  Land-use emissions play a critical role in land-based mitigation for Paris climate targets , 2018, Nature Communications.

[2]  B. Moore,et al.  Challenges to the use of BECCS as a keystone technology in pursuit of 1.5⁰C , 2018, Global Sustainability.

[3]  Robert E. Kopp,et al.  The U.S. Government’s Social Cost of Carbon Estimates after Their First Two Years: Pathways for Improvement , 2012 .

[4]  J. Wilcox,et al.  Getting to Neutral: Options for Negative Carbon Emissions in California , 2019 .

[5]  I. Lorenzoni,et al.  Contested framings of greenhouse gas removal and its feasibility: Social and political dimensions , 2020, WIREs Climate Change.

[6]  M. Schlesinger,et al.  Robust Strategies for Abating Climate Change , 2000 .

[7]  Nils Markusson,et al.  The co-evolution of technological promises, modelling, policies and climate change targets , 2020, Nature Climate Change.

[8]  O. Edelenbosch,et al.  Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[9]  Kevin Anderson,et al.  Duality in climate science , 2015 .

[10]  M. Fridahl,et al.  Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS): Global potential, investment preferences, and deployment barriers , 2018, Energy Research & Social Science.

[11]  Climate dreaming: negative emissions, risk transfer, and irreversibility , 2017 .

[12]  G. Teletzke,et al.  Evaluation of Practicable Subsurface CO2 Storage Capacity and Potential CO2 Transportation Networks, Onshore North America , 2019, Social Science Research Network.

[13]  Felix Creutzig,et al.  Negative emissions—Part 1: Research landscape and synthesis , 2018 .

[14]  F. Creutzig,et al.  Considering sustainability thresholds for BECCS in IPCC and biodiversity assessments , 2021, GCB Bioenergy.

[15]  N. H. Ravindranath,et al.  Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment , 2015 .

[16]  Holly Jean Buck,et al.  Rapid scale-up of negative emissions technologies: social barriers and social implications , 2016, Climatic Change.

[17]  Adam Hawkes,et al.  Societal Transformations in Models for Energy and Climate Policy: The Ambitious Next Step , 2019 .

[18]  Sean Low,et al.  A Precautionary Assessment of Systemic Projections and Promises From Sunlight Reflection and Carbon Removal Modeling , 2020, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[19]  R. Pindyck.  Climate Change Policy: What Do the Models Tell Us? , 2013 .

[20]  Benjamin K. Sovacool,et al.  Towards a science of climate and energy choices , 2016 .

[21]  R. Socolow,et al.  The mutual dependence of negative emission technologies and energy systems , 2019, Energy & Environmental Science.

[22]  David William Keith,et al.  A Process for Capturing CO2 from the Atmosphere , 2018, Joule.

[23]  Keywan Riahi,et al.  A new scenario resource for integrated 1.5 °C research , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[24]  I. Lorenzoni,et al.  Mapping feasibilities of greenhouse gas removal: Key issues, gaps and opening up assessments , 2020 .

[25]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  The Socio-Technical Dynamics of Low-Carbon Transitions , 2017, Joule.

[26]  J. Wilcox,et al.  Principles for Thinking about Carbon Dioxide Removal in Just Climate Policy , 2020 .

[27]  Edeltraud Guenther,et al.  THE ECONOMICS OF MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE: WHAT CAN WE KNOW? , 2015, Tạp chí Nghiên cứu dân tộc.

[28]  S. Sorrell,et al.  Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization , 2017, Science.

[29]  L. Clarke,et al.  A new scenario logic for the Paris Agreement long-term temperature goal , 2019, Nature.

[30]  B. McMullin,et al.  Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases , 2021, Frontiers in Climate.

[31]  A. Hansson,et al.  Towards Indicators for a Negative Emissions Climate Stabilisation Index: Problems and Prospects , 2020, Climate.

[32]  R. Bales,et al.  Evapotranspiration Mapping for Forest Management in California's Sierra Nevada , 2020, Frontiers in Forests and Global Change.

[33]  Corinne Le Quéré,et al.  Betting on negative emissions , 2014 .

[34]  Christian Breyer,et al.  Techno-economic assessment of CO2 direct air capture plants , 2019, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[35]  P. Patel,et al.  Food–energy–water implications of negative emissions technologies in a +1.5 °C future , 2020, Nature Climate Change.

[36]  P. Webley,et al.  Opportunities for application of BECCS in the Australian power sector , 2018 .

[37]  Toshihiko Masui,et al.  Assessing decarbonization pathways and their implications for energy security policies in Japan , 2016 .

[38]  R. Rosen.  Critical review of: “Making or breaking climate targets — the AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy” , 2015 .

[39]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Negative emissions—Part 3: Innovation and upscaling , 2018 .

[40]  O. Geden,et al.  Govern CO2 removal from the ground up , 2019, Nature Geoscience.

[41]  J. Stock,et al.  The Cost of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions , 2018, Journal of Economic Perspectives.

[42]  F. Kraxner,et al.  Unlocking the potential of BECCS with indigenous sources of biomass at a national scale , 2020 .

[43]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Don’t deploy negative emissions technologies without ethical analysis , 2018, Nature.

[44]  M. Lawrence,et al.  Promises and perils of the Paris Agreement , 2019, Science.

[45]  Frans Berkhout,et al.  Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions , 2016 .

[46]  C. Field,et al.  Rightsizing carbon dioxide removal , 2017, Science.

[47]  Keywan Riahi,et al.  A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5 °C target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies , 2018, Nature Energy.

[48]  Nils Markusson,et al.  Towards a cultural political economy of mitigation deterrence by negative emissions technologies (NETs) , 2018, Global Sustainability.

[49]  R. Howarth,et al.  Limitations of integrated assessment models of climate change , 2009 .

[50]  F. Creutzig,et al.  The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change , 2017, Nature Energy.

[51]  Anna G. Stefanopoulou,et al.  An Energy-Optimal Warm-Up Strategy for Li-Ion Batteries and Its Approximations , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[52]  Rob Bellamy.  Incentivize negative emissions responsibly , 2018 .

[53]  J. Wilcox,et al.  Cost Analysis of Direct Air Capture and Sequestration Coupled to Low-Carbon Thermal Energy in the U.S. , 2020, Environmental science & technology.

[54]  Alexander Teytelboym,et al.  A Third Wave in the Economics of Climate Change , 2015 .

[55]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Climate change 2014 : mitigation of climate change , 2014 .

[56]  Matthew R. Shaner,et al.  Net-zero emissions energy systems , 2018, Science.

[57]  M. Tavoni,et al.  The role of the discount rate for emission pathways and negative emissions , 2019, Environmental Research Letters.

[58]  K. Lackner.  The promise of negative emissions , 2016, Science.

[59]  N. Nakicenovic,et al.  Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions , 2016 .

[60]  Keywan Riahi,et al.  Open discussion of negative emissions is urgently needed , 2017 .

[61]  Eric Biber,et al.  A policy roadmap for negative emissions using direct air capture , 2021, Nature Communications.

[62]  G. Peters,et al.  The trouble with negative emissions , 2016, Science.

[63]  Felix Creutzig,et al.  Direct Air Capture of CO2: A Key Technology for Ambitious Climate Change Mitigation , 2019, Joule.

[64]  Seoyong Kim,et al.  Comparative Analysis of Public Attitudes toward Nuclear Power Energy across 27 European Countries by Applying the Multilevel Model , 2018 .

[65]  C. Field,et al.  The future of bioenergy , 2019, Global change biology.

[66]  Zoran J. N. Steinmann,et al.  The climate change mitigation potential of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage , 2020, Nature Climate Change.

[67]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Negative emissions—Part 2: Costs, potentials and side effects , 2018 .

[68]  Wolfgang Lucht,et al.  Drivers and patterns of land biosphere carbon balance reversal , 2016 .

[69]  A. Hansson,et al.  Mapping Multi-Level Policy Incentives for Bioenergy With Carbon Capture and Storage in Sweden , 2020, Frontiers in Climate.

[70]  A. Hansson,et al.  Map-makers and navigators of politicised terrain: Expert understandings of epistemological uncertainty in integrated assessment modelling of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage , 2019 .

[71]  J. Deutch.  Is Net Zero Carbon 2050 Possible? , 2020, Joule.

[72]  What We Know and Don’t Know about Climate Change, and Implications for Policy , 2021, Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy.

[73]  Division on Earth,et al.  Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration , 2019 .

[74]  Didi Adisaputro,et al.  Carbon Capture and Storage and Carbon Capture and Utilization: What Do They Offer to Indonesia? , 2017, Frontiers in Energy Research.

[75]  Engineered CO2 Removal, Climate Restoration, and Humility , 2019, Front. Clim..

[76]  Julia H. Haggerty,et al.  Opportunities and Trade-offs among BECCS and the Food, Water, Energy, Biodiversity, and Social Systems Nexus at Regional Scales , 2018 .

[77]  Mark Workman,et al.  Decision making in contexts of deep uncertainty - An alternative approach for long-term climate policy , 2020 .

[78]  D. Kammen,et al.  A commercialization strategy for carbon-negative energy , 2016, Nature Energy.

[79]  A. Gambhir.  Planning a Low-Carbon Energy Transition: What Can and Can’t the Models Tell Us? , 2019, Joule.

[80]  Peter Christoff,et al.  Co-producing climate policy and negative emissions: trade-offs for sustainable land-use , 2018, Global Sustainability.

[81]  Andres F. Clarens,et al.  From Zero to Hero?: Why Integrated Assessment Modeling of Negative Emissions Technologies Is Hard and How We Can Do Better , 2019, Front. Clim..

[82]  M. Obersteiner,et al.  On the financial viability of negative emissions , 2019, Nature Communications.

[83]  M. Sharmina,et al.  What if negative emission technologies fail at scale? Implications of the Paris Agreement for big emitting nations , 2018 .

[84]  Oliver Geden,et al.  Policy: Climate advisers must maintain integrity , 2015, Nature.

[85]  M. Schlesinger,et al.  When we don't know the costs or the benefits: Adaptive strategies for abating climate change , 1997 .

[86]  Pete Smith,et al.  A Review of Criticisms of Integrated Assessment Models and Proposed Approaches to Address These, through the Lens of BECCS , 2019, Energies.

[87]  M. Jefferson.  Closing the gap between energy research and modelling, the social sciences, and modern realities , 2014 .

[88]  Timothy M. Lenton,et al.  Investing in negative emissions , 2015 .

[89]  J. Weyant,et al.  Macro-Energy Systems: Toward a New Discipline , 2019, Joule.

[90]  Patrick Sullivan,et al.  System Integration of Wind and Solar Power in Integrated Assessment Models: A Cross-Model Evaluation of New Approaches , 2017 .

[91]  Duncan McLaren,et al.  Quantifying the potential scale of mitigation deterrence from greenhouse gas removal techniques , 2020, Climatic Change.

[92]  Wim Carton,et al.  “Fixing” Climate Change by Mortgaging the Future: Negative Emissions, Spatiotemporal Fixes, and the Political Economy of Delay , 2019, Antipode.

[93]  S. Fuss,et al.  Reducing US Coal Emissions Can Boost Employment , 2018, Joule.

[94]  Thomas Sterner,et al.  Global warming: Improve economic models of climate change , 2014, Nature.

[95]  P. Ciais,et al.  How to spend a dwindling greenhouse gas budget , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[96]  Antoine Mandel,et al.  Towards agent-based integrated assessment models: examples, challenges, and future developments , 2019, Regional Environmental Change.

[97]  Niall Mac Dowell,et al.  Investigating the BECCS resource nexus: delivering sustainable negative emissions , 2018 .

[98]  A. Bardow,et al.  Life-cycle assessment of an industrial direct air capture process based on temperature–vacuum swing adsorption , 2021, Nature Energy.

[99]  P. Kyle,et al.  Risk of increased food insecurity under stringent global climate change mitigation policy , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[100]  Nilay Shah,et al.  Reframing the policy approach to greenhouse gas removal technologies , 2015 .