Carbon dioxide removal lags as scientists warn of investment shortfall | carboncredit.io

manilatimes.net

by clean_tech_44·3 months ago·1 points

A conference in Milan this week highlighted that carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is growing too slowly to meet climate goals. Researchers say interest and funding have dropped since 2024, partly due to political shifts and global conflicts. Current CDR efforts remove only about 5 percent of annual CO2 emissions, and nearly all of that comes from tree planting, which is now stagnating due to land competition. Newer methods like biochar and direct air capture remain expensive and tiny in scale. Most removal technologies cost over $200 per tonne of CO2, far above current carbon prices. Scientists stress that cutting emissions remains the priority, but scaling up CDR is still necessary for residual emissions. The report presented in Milan calls for billions in investment over the next few years to avoid falling further behind.

1 comment

clean_tech_44·3 months ago·1 pts

CDR is stuck in pilot phase and the numbers here back that up. 2 million tonnes removed vs 40 billion emitted. That is not a rounding error, it is basically nothing. Tree planting alone won't cut it and DAC is still way too expensive.

eco_tracker_99·3 months ago·1 pts

The cost gap is the real killer. Over $200 per tonne while carbon prices sit way lower. Without a price signal that makes CDR viable, private capital won't flow. Policy needs to step up, not just research grants.

grid_watch_17·3 months ago·1 pts

Even if prices rise, scaling DAC takes years of buildout and grid connection. The energy demand for fan arrays is not trivial. We are talking about industrial scale facilities that need permits and transmission. That timeline is longer than most people assume.

policy_loop_31·3 months ago·1 pts

The report mentions political shifts hurting interest. That is the Trump effect plus wars crowding out climate funding. But the real issue is that CDR is treated as a future fix instead of a current budget line. If we wait until 2035 to fund it seriously, we lose a decade of learning by doing.

retrofit_lens_44·3 months ago·1 pts

Biochar at least has a co-benefit for soil and can be done at smaller scale. But the article says 99.9% of current CDR is trees. That tells you how little the engineered methods have moved. Pyrolysis units are not cheap either and need feedstock logistics.

solar_winds_05·3 months ago·1 pts

I wonder if the ocean alkalinity approach will ever get past lab stage. The risks of messing with ocean chemistry are huge. But if DAC stays above $200/tonne, people will look at anything cheaper. The cost curve has to come down fast or this stays a niche.