TY - JOUR
T1 - A Comprehensive Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Removal Options for Germany
AU - Borchers, Malgorzata
AU - Förster, Johannes
AU - Thrän, Daniela
AU - Beck, Silke
AU - Thoni, Terese
AU - Korte, Klaas
AU - Gawel, Erik
AU - Markus, Till
AU - Schaller, Romina
AU - Rhoden, Imke
AU - Chi, Yaxuan
AU - Dahmen, Nicolaus
AU - Dittmeyer, Roland
AU - Dolch, Tobias
AU - Dold, Christian
AU - Herbst, Michael
AU - Heß, Dominik
AU - Kalhori, Aram
AU - Koop-Jakobsen, Ketil
AU - Li, Zhan
AU - Oschlies, Andreas
AU - Reusch, Thorsten B.H.
AU - Sachs, Torsten
AU - Schmidt-Hattenberger, Cornelia
AU - Stevenson, Angela
AU - Wu, Jiajun
AU - Yeates, Christopher
AU - Mengis, Nadine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors. Earth's Future published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Geophysical Union.
PY - 2024/5
Y1 - 2024/5
N2 - To reach their net-zero targets, countries will have to compensate hard-to-abate CO2 emissions through carbon dioxide removal (CDR). Yet, current assessments rarely include socio-cultural or institutional aspects or fail to contextualize CDR options for implementation. Here we present a context-specific feasibility assessment of CDR options for the example of Germany. We assess 14 CDR options, including three chemical carbon capture options, six options for bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), and five options that aim to increase ecosystem carbon uptake. The assessment addresses technological, economic, environmental, institutional, social-cultural and systemic considerations using a traffic-light system to evaluate implementation opportunities and hurdles. We find that in Germany CDR options like cover crops or seagrass restoration currently face comparably low implementation hurdles in terms of technological, economic, or environmental feasibility and low institutional or social opposition but show comparably small CO2 removal potentials. In contrast, some BECCS options that show high CDR potentials face significant techno-economic, societal and institutional hurdles when it comes to the geological storage of CO2. While a combination of CDR options is likely required to meet the net-zero target in Germany, the current climate protection law includes a limited set of options. Our analysis aims to provide comprehensive information on CDR hurdles and possibilities for Germany for use in further research on CDR options, climate, and energy scenario development, as well as an effective decision support basis for various actors.
AB - To reach their net-zero targets, countries will have to compensate hard-to-abate CO2 emissions through carbon dioxide removal (CDR). Yet, current assessments rarely include socio-cultural or institutional aspects or fail to contextualize CDR options for implementation. Here we present a context-specific feasibility assessment of CDR options for the example of Germany. We assess 14 CDR options, including three chemical carbon capture options, six options for bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), and five options that aim to increase ecosystem carbon uptake. The assessment addresses technological, economic, environmental, institutional, social-cultural and systemic considerations using a traffic-light system to evaluate implementation opportunities and hurdles. We find that in Germany CDR options like cover crops or seagrass restoration currently face comparably low implementation hurdles in terms of technological, economic, or environmental feasibility and low institutional or social opposition but show comparably small CO2 removal potentials. In contrast, some BECCS options that show high CDR potentials face significant techno-economic, societal and institutional hurdles when it comes to the geological storage of CO2. While a combination of CDR options is likely required to meet the net-zero target in Germany, the current climate protection law includes a limited set of options. Our analysis aims to provide comprehensive information on CDR hurdles and possibilities for Germany for use in further research on CDR options, climate, and energy scenario development, as well as an effective decision support basis for various actors.
KW - bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)
KW - climate mitigation
KW - context-specific assessments of carbon dioxide removal
KW - direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS)
KW - feasibility assessment framework
KW - natural sink enhancement (NSE)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85192051993&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1029/2023EF003986
DO - 10.1029/2023EF003986
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85192051993
SN - 2328-4277
VL - 12
JO - Earth's Future
JF - Earth's Future
IS - 5
M1 - e2023EF003986
ER -