The Case for a Global Carbon Removal Budget to Support Net-Zero Goals

Climate change demands that we move beyond just a carbon budget and embrace a carbon removal budget as well.

While countries and companies alike work to reduce emissions, the next step is clear: incorporating carbon removal into their strategies to achieve net-zero goals.

Carbon removal involves both natural and technological methods, from planting trees to advanced machinery that extracts carbon directly from the atmosphere.

This approach is essential for addressing climate change, but scaling it up comes with significant challenges, as discussed by researchers Ben Caldecott and Injy Johnstone from the Oxford Sustainable Finance Group.

Understanding Carbon Removal and Its Importance

Carbon removal strategies have a broad scope, but their primary goal is the same: neutralize emissions that are difficult to eliminate entirely.

For example, large corporations like Microsoft and Amazon have invested heavily in carbon removal projects.

Microsoft, for instance, supports bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS), a process where trees are cultivated to absorb carbon, then harvested and burned for energy, with the emitted carbon being captured and stored underground.

As Caldecott explains, “Carbon removal is mission-critical for tackling climate change,” highlighting its vital role in global climate goals.

However, carbon removal has notable limitations. Each method varies in feasibility based on geographical, economic, and political factors. Land-based removals, for instance, need vast tracts of land, while technology-driven methods often require significant energy, making them costly and resource-intensive.

With these challenges in mind, a carbon removal budget could help guide both companies and countries in deploying these methods more efficiently.

>> RELATED: Why the Call for Permanent Carbon Removals is Growing Louder

Challenges in Scaling Carbon Removal

As interest in carbon removal grows, so do the questions about how to scale it sustainably. Carbon removal isn’t abundant and comes at a high price compared to traditional carbon credits.

Durable carbon removal, which stores carbon over long periods, can cost up to 100 times more than carbon credits that focus on reducing emissions.

These costs mean that we must be strategic about using carbon removal for emissions that are impossible to cut otherwise.

Johnstone points out that there is also the question of how much carbon removal is available. “Not all countries or companies have the same capacity to develop and deploy carbon removal,” she notes, drawing attention to the disparity in resources and access.

Wealthier nations and corporations might have the means to purchase more removal credits, but this raises concerns about fairness.

Without careful management, the carbon removal market could exclude poorer countries from accessing the removal resources they need in the future.

Why a Carbon Removal Budget Makes Sense

Given these complexities, the concept of a carbon removal budget is gaining traction.

A carbon removal budget would allow policymakers and companies to understand how much removal capacity is available globally and ensure that this limited resource is allocated responsibly.

Just as a carbon budget guides emission reduction targets, a carbon removal budget would quantify the amount of removal required to meet climate goals and help prioritize the most effective methods.

This type of budgeting framework could also put a price on removal capacity, which would encourage better allocation of resources.

In the same way that emission reductions are priced to incentivize reductions, a carbon removal budget could help regulate the use of finite removal resources.

By balancing a carbon and carbon removal budget, we can promote both emission reductions and removal efforts without over-relying on any one solution.

>> In Other News: UK First in ‘Clean Hydrogen’ Production and Carbon Capture

How a Carbon Removal Budget Would Work

A carbon removal budget would be a tool to track and allocate removal capacity, guiding companies, financial institutions, and governments in achieving net-zero targets.

This framework could prevent wealthier entities from monopolizing removal capacity, ensuring that emerging economies have fair access to this finite resource.

For instance, fossil fuel companies should prioritize emission reductions rather than relying on removal, which should be reserved for emissions that are challenging to reduce.

Furthermore, a carbon removal budget could inform climate negotiations and help align international climate strategies.

This would allow countries and cities to integrate carbon removal into their net-zero plans. It would also enable financial institutions and businesses to set realistic, equitable climate targets.

The Equity Implications of a Carbon Removal Budget

Incorporating a carbon removal budget into decision-making is not just about achieving climate targets; it also raises important equity questions.

Without a budget, there’s a risk that wealthier countries or corporations might buy up removal resources, driving up costs and potentially limiting access for poorer nations.

By regulating removal resources, we could avoid exacerbating land scarcity and food security issues, which are already under pressure from climate-related impacts.

A structured approach to carbon removal allocation could prevent land grabs and avoid increases in food prices by preserving land for agriculture instead of dedicating it solely to carbon removal.

Such measures would ensure that [carbon removal efforts])(https://decarbonfuse.com/posts/chevron-invests-in-carbon-capture-and-removal-technology-company-svante) do not worsen socio-economic inequalities.

Why Companies and Institutions Should Adopt Carbon Removal Budgets

For companies and institutions, adopting a carbon removal budget is a strategic way to align their operations with climate goals.

By allocating resources based on removal capacity, businesses can make informed investment decisions that not only advance their climate commitments but also contribute to a fair distribution of resources.

A carbon removal budget also provides a framework for sustainable investment, focusing on the most effective removal technologies and methods.

Incorporating carbon removal budgeting into business strategies offers multiple benefits.

It provides transparency, supports net-zero transition planning, and emphasizes the role of carbon removal in reducing global temperatures.

By adopting this framework, companies can take meaningful steps toward climate accountability and progress.

Conclusion: The Way Forward with a Carbon Removal Budget

A global carbon removal budget represents a forward-thinking approach to climate action.

It encourages responsible use of limited removal resources, promotes equity, and aligns with the broader objective of achieving net-zero emissions.

By embedding carbon removal and even carbon capture budgets into their strategies, companies and governments can ensure that they are using these resources effectively and sustainably.

This framework not only supports climate goals but also ensures that carbon removal is accessible to all stakeholders, creating a balanced approach to tackling climate change.

As carbon removal becomes an integral part of net-zero planning, it’s essential for policymakers and organizations to adopt a structured approach.

This will not only facilitate progress but also pave the way for a more equitable and sustainable response to climate change.