Thread by @Oliver_Geden

Today we publish the 1st edition of the "State of Carbon Dioxide Removal" report, a global assessment of the current #StateofCDR, and the gap we need to close to achieve the Paris temperature goal.
Full report➡️stateofcdr.org
An ongoing 🧵
[1]

This report compiles a first estimate of the total CDR being deployed (2 GtCO2/yr).
Almost all comes from "conventional" CDR on land, via afforestation, reforestation & forest management.
"Novel" methods don’t contribute much yet.
#StateofCDR
[2]

We provide a calculation of total gross CDR in #IPCC-assessed pathways to keep warming below 1.5C and 2C, including all methods. All pathways involve substantial cumulative CDR volumes (450-1100 GtCO2 by 2100) - in addition to immediate & deep emissions reductions
#StateofCDR
[3]

We also assess the role of CDR in countries' NDCs (for 2030) and Long-Term Strategies (2050), comparing proposed CDR levels with different illustrative "focus pathways" (representing different mitigation strategies) - resulting in different "CDR gaps"
#StateofCDR
[4]

Before I continue, you may want to know who exactly is the 'we' here. This report was written by a team of ~20 authors, coordinated by @stv_smth, Jan Minx, @GregNemet & myself. Organisation led by @TheSmithSchool
#StateofCDR
[5]

What's CDR? Capturing CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it durably on land, in the ocean, in geological formations or in products.
Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) w/ fossil CO2 isn't CDR, nor is Carbon Capture & Utilization (CCU) w/ fossil CO2 or short duration
#StateofCDR
[6]

Individual CDR methods can be thought of as different routes through the Earth’s carbon cycle – capturing carbon from the atmosphere & transferring it to a durable carbon pool
(keeping in mind there's no universally agreed definition of 'durability', yet)
#StateofCDR
[7]

Here the characteristic storage timescales of various carbon pools. Actual duration depends not only on core characteristics but also on human factors (i.e. forms of management). Geological formations & minerals have the longest timescales
#StateofCDR
[8]

Since the early 1990s, research on Carbon Dioxide Removal has grown exponentially – faster than for climate change as a whole. Most of this rapid growth has been driven by #biochar research.
#StateofCDR
[9]

The growth rate of the literature on (conventional) CCS provides an interesting contrast with that of CDR. There appears to be a recent levelling out, despite the strong reliance on CCS in climate change mitigation scenarios meeting the Paris temperature goal.
#StateofCDR
[10]

Only about a third of the scientific literature on CDR has a geographical focus, highlighting a lack of information tailored to specific local or regional contexts
Based on first author affiliation, 32% of CDR studies from China, 9% from U.S., 4% from Australia
#StateofCDR
[11]

Similar picture here: Total number of CDR research publications that mention geographic location in abstract/title, shown by country & world region. Share of CDR methods in publications that refer to a specific geographic location, by world region (bottom).
#StateofCDR
[12]

Next up: Innovation
Patenting activity is one measure of innovation, and one with accessible data, but innovation can also occur outside of what firms choose to patent. Important role for China and "novel" CDR methods - particularly DAC, BECCS and biochar.
#StateofCDR
[13]

Corporate upscaling plans for novel CDR methods are pretty optimistic, but are they plausible?
Here: growth trajectories of #DACCS, #biochar and #BECCS, incorporating both announced and built capacities from industry and businesses.
#StateofCDR
[14]

Innovation processes aren't linear, but at this early stage, public investment in CDR Research, Development and Demonstration is key. Globally, traceable public RD&D funding was approx. $4.1 billion 2010-2022, concentrated in a few regions, dominated by U.S.
#StateofCDR
[15]

How Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) is perceived will play a critical role in its future prospects. Te research literature reveals a small but growing evidence base, either on CDR in general or specific methods.
#StateofCDR
[16]

We found 39 peer-reviewed papers specifically on public perceptions of CDR. Only 10 of these publications are from outside of Western Europe and North America
#StateofCDR
[17]

And since twitterati love to discuss Twitter, the report also contains an analysis of the attention to Carbon Dioxide Removal on this platform. And attention is certainly growing, with peaks around #UNFCCC COPs and #IPCC reports
#StateofCDR
[18]

70% of tweets mentioning specifc CDR methods involve biological storage on land & in oceans, such as soil carbon sequestration, afforestation/reforestation or blue carbon. Comparatively few mentions of novel CDR methods such as DACCS so far, but growing rapidly.
#StateofCDR
[19]

Public perception research & sentiment analysis of tweets suggest that familiar CDR methods (afforestation/reforestation) are generally preferred, and ocean fertilisation is viewed as most risky. Sentiments in tweets more positive over time, except for #BECCS
#StateofCDR
[20]

On policymaking: we start from the #IPCC's observation that CDR can play different roles in mitigation strategies. >120 governments have net-zero emissions targets, but only very few explicitly integrate Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) into their climate policy
#StateofCDR
[21]

Action so far mainly to be found on (supra)national levels, not #UNFCCC. Therefore, we use four case studies (EU, UK, US & Brazil) to assess CDR policy in the making, not only checking documents but including politics & political economies. Context matters
#StateofCDR
[22]

CDR policymaking and deployment are so far clearly focused on forestry, where carbon fluxes are notoriously hard to assess, incl. the accounting for "harvested wood products". Different methodologies in use, leading to widely differing estimates
#StateofCDR
[23]

Reconciling methodological issues (taking out the human-induced indirect climate effects in forests), we arrive at a ('Grassi-proof') estimate of ~2 Gt of CDR p.a. on 'managed land', averaged over 2000-2020
#StateofCDR
[24]

So, 2000 MtCO2 of removals currently come from 'conventional' methods on land, only 2.3 Mt p.a. from novel CDR methods, incl. #BECCS, #DACCS, #biochar, enhanced rock weathering & blue carbon management.
#StateofCDR
[25]

Some potential upscaling trajectories until 2030. Currently available data for novel CDR focuses on gross removals from projects in Europe/N. America, w/ limited coverage of lifecycle emissions & other geographies. Our estimate of deployment is likely incomplete
#StateofCDR
[26]

Global net emissions (left) & gross CDR (right) trajectories for different temperature levels, the latter distinguishing upscaling paths of conventional CDR on land & novel CDR. Afforestation/Reforestation reaches peak by mid-century, novel CDR constantly rising
#StateofCDR
[27]

In our report, we work with illustrative 'focus pathways", assessing the role of CDR in mitigation scenarios. Not only the overall CDR volumes differ, but also the (net) sectoral contributions.
#StateofCDR
[28]

Core message here: while all focus pathways consitent with 1.5°C include aggressive near-term emissions reductions between 2020 and 2030 (14-27 GtCO2) and thereafter, they also feature large amounts of CDR by 2030/2050, even if focussing on demand reduction
#StateofCDR
[29]

CDR volumes across #IPCC database, for different 1.5 and 2C trajectories
Total cumulative CDR (by 2100) for '1.5C with no/limited overshoot' is 740 Gt (median), with a 420-1100 range (5-95%)
You may remember that #IPCC AR6 wasn't able to report total CDR numbers
#StateofCDR
[30]

Taken together, this leads us to a "CDR gap".
Well, actually several gaps, depending on the scenarios chosen (focus pathways or #IPCC database median) and different interpretations of how much CDR governments are committing to in NDCs & are indicating in LT-LEDs
#StateofCDR
[31]

The "CDR gap" also exists in a less complex, yet animated version
#StateofCDR
[32]

Conducting the #StateofCDR assessment wouldn't have been possible w/o massive support for coordinators & authors: by lead institutions & funders, and a superb team of editors & designers incl @RozPidcock, Kate Heath, @angelamorelli, @lilrezend, @nigelhawtin & @georgelnhope
[33]

This 1st edition of the #StatefCDR report intends to be only a first step in a regular series of assessments over the coming years, closing gaps (expanding the community; improving data; honing the analysis), & evolving with the field
[34]

Now you got all the figures, but there's still more to find out when reading the full #StateofCDR report or checking our website
➡️stateofcdr.org/resources
[end]