The race to limit global heating to 1.5C is on, and it's not just about cutting emissions. A recent report highlights the urgent need for innovative carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies to step up and play their part. While the world has been quick to embrace solar panels and electric vehicles, the report reveals that novel CDR methods need to grow at an even faster pace to bridge the gap between pledged climate action and what's actually required. This is a critical moment, as the next five years will determine the role of these technologies in mitigating climate damage.
What's particularly intriguing is the comparison made by scientists. They liken carbon removal to cleaning up a beach strewn with litter. Just as it's cheaper to prevent waste in the first place, the cheapest solution for climate change is to avoid emitting CO2 in the first place. However, when it comes to the mess we've already made, CDR technologies can act as litter-pickers, cleaning up the pollution and remediating the damage. But the challenge is that many CDR methods don't permanently store carbon, and the pace of their development needs to accelerate significantly.
The report reveals that while novel CDR methods have grown at a rate of 40% a year, they still only make up a tiny fraction of global CO2 removal, at just 0.1%. This is despite the fact that countries have pledged to remove around 2.7 billion tonnes of carbon by 2035 and 3.6 billion by 2050. The gap between these pledges and the actual need is widening, and it's not just the US under Donald Trump that's undermining the credibility of climate action. The report also highlights the vulnerability of early adopters like Microsoft, which has paused its purchases of novel CDR credits, raising questions about the diffusion of these technologies.
One thing that immediately stands out is the lack of legally binding removal targets in G20 countries. The NDCs submitted in 2025 did not increase ambition for carbon removal, and this, combined with policy dismantling and volatility in the US, is creating a fragile support system for CDR technologies. It's a complex issue, and one that requires a deeper understanding of the psychological and cultural factors at play. For instance, what makes some companies pause their purchases of CDR credits, and how can we encourage more widespread adoption of these technologies?
In my opinion, the key to success lies in addressing the underlying issues that are hindering the growth of CDR technologies. This includes not only policy and regulatory frameworks but also the psychological and cultural barriers that prevent companies and individuals from embracing these innovations. By taking a step back and thinking about these broader factors, we can begin to develop more effective strategies for scaling up CDR technologies and limiting global heating to 1.5C.
