The global mismatch between equitable carbon dioxide removal liability and capacity

Pu Yang, Zhifu Mi*, Yi Ming Wei*, Steef V. Hanssen, Lan Cui Liu*, D'Maris Coffman, Xinlu Sun, Hua Liao, Yun Fei Yao, Jia Ning Kang, Peng Tao Wang, Steven J. Davis

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Limiting climate change to 1.5°C and achieving net-zero emissions would entail substantial carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere by the mid-century, but how much CDR is needed at country level over time is unclear. The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed description of when and how much CDR is required at country level in order to achieve 1.5°C and how much CDR countries can carry out domestically. We allocate global CDR pathways among 170 countries according to 6 equity principles and assess these allocations with respect to countries' biophysical and geophysical capacity to deploy CDR. Allocating global CDR to countries based on these principles suggests that CDR wi l l, on average, represent ∼4% of nations' total emissions in 2030, rising to ∼17% in 2040. Moreover, equitable allocations of CDR, in many cases, exceed implied land and carbon storage capacities. We estimate ∼15% of countries (25) would have insufficient land to contribute an equitable share of global CDR, and ∼40% of countries (71) would have insufficient geological storage capacity. Unless more diverse CDR technologies are developed, the mismatch between CDR liabilities and land-based CDR capacities wi l l lead to global demand for six GtCO 2 carbon credits from 2020 to 2050. This demonstrates an imperative demand for international carbon trading of CDR.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbernwad254
JournalNational Science Review
Volume10
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2023

Keywords

  • carbon dioxide removal
  • international equity
  • land-based solutions

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The global mismatch between equitable carbon dioxide removal liability and capacity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this