Introduction

Examining Europe’s role in scaling carbon dioxide removal (CDR), this episode focuses on its long-term regulatory frameworks, geographical advantages, and market dynamics. We explore the challenges CDR faces— from political opposition to compliance market integration— and the importance of high-quality standards in building a sustainable carbon removal ecosystem.

TL;DR

• The importance of Europe’s long-term planning and regulatory frameworks in CDR.

• Geographical advantages in Europe for implementing carbon removal technologies.

• Challenges faced by CDR initiatives, including political opposition and market structures.

• The potential benefits of integrating CDR into compliance markets.

• The necessity for high-quality standards in carbon removal technologies.

• Understanding the opposition to CDR from certain political and environmental groups.‍

Europe's Position in CDR Development

Europe is uniquely positioned to lead in the field of carbon dioxide removal. As Sebastian emphasises in the podcast, Europe has consistently prioritised long-term planning and predictability. This foundational regulation is crucial as we work towards scaling CDR technologies. While some areas of the U.S. may be moving faster, Europe’s methodical approach allows for a more stable development environment. One of Europe’s significant strengths lies in its existing industries and resources. For instance, the agricultural sector in Europe has established systems that can effectively utilise resources for carbon capture. Moreover, Europe boasts geological storage capabilities across interconnected markets, allowing for more efficient carbon storage solutions.

Challenges in CDR Implementation

Despite these strengths, challenges remain. Concerns persist about the feasibility of transporting across borders and the high costs of renewable energy in some regions, which complicate the scaling of CDR technologies across Europe. Moreover, some political factions, particularly those on the left, have expressed skepticism about CDR, viewing it as a potential excuse for delaying necessary reductions in emissions. As noted in the conversation, “There’s a weird sort of dichotomy around CDR.” This sentiment highlights the need for a unified understanding of CDR’s role alongside emission reductions.

Integrating CDR into Compliance Markets

Compliance markets present a vital opportunity for scaling CDR technologies. As noted in the discussion, much of the carbon removal activity occurs in the voluntary carbon market, which is growing while has inherent limitations in its capacity to drive substantial reductions. The European Emission Trading System (ETS), for example, was valued at €900 billion last year, showcasing the potential scale of compliance markets compared to voluntary ones.

“The voluntary carbon market can only get us to a couple of megatons, but compliance markets can achieve gigatonnes.”

- Sebastian Manhart, Senior Policy Adviser at Carbonfuture

However, there are concerns about the quality and permanence of carbon removal methods being integrated into these markets. The discussion offers insights from multiple perspectives. Sebastian emphasises the importance of establishing stringent and high-quality criteria to determine what qualifies as acceptable carbon removal, ensuring that only the most effective technologies gain access to these markets.

Similarly, Simon notes that many carbon dioxide removal technologies are still in their early stages—comparable to where wind and solar power were in the 1980s and 1990s. He also highlights the support of government policies and setting appropriate standards are crucial for the development of these technologies.

“We have to avoid picking winners, and that is rarely a good idea when you try to design something like this…ensuring we don’t set the bar the wrong way because we shouldn’t set it too high and exclude methodologies in one way but we also shouldn’t be too lenient.”

- Simon Bager, CIO of Klimate

Addressing Opposition to CDR

One of the more contentious topics was the political opposition to CDR, particularly from environmental groups that have traditionally championed emissions reductions. Both Sebastian and Simon recount their experiences with this opposition. Although CDR attracts significant attention, which prompts some to argue that too much investment is being directed towards it, they point out that there is a gap between “actually getting funding” and “getting potentially attention”.

To address concerns, Simon mentions that effective solutions underpinned by robust data is the key to help stakeholders understand that CDR works in tandem with emissions reductions instead of ignoring the climate crisis. Meanwhile, Sebastian stresses the importance of targeting the right audience. He has found that his efforts are more productively spent when focused on converting neutral individuals to supporters rather than trying to shift the opinions of those who are firmly opposed.

Looking Forward

The conversation highlighted the complexity and urgency of integrating carbon removal into Europe's climate strategy. Despite these challenges, both speakers remain optimistic about the future of CDR.

In conclusion, the journey towards effective carbon dioxide removal in Europe is filled with challenges and opportunities. By focusing on collaboration, quality standards, and clear communication, Europe can position itself as a leader in the global effort to combat climate change through innovative CDR strategies.