Mutual reinforcement of land-based carbon dioxide removal and international emissions trading in deep decarbonization scenarios

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies and international emissions trading are both widely represented in climate change mitigation scenarios, but the interplay among them has not been closely examined. By systematically varying key policy and technology assumptions in a global energy-economic model, we find that CDR and international emissions trading are mutually reinforcing in deep decarbonization scenarios. This occurs because CDR potential is not evenly distributed geographically, allowing trade to unlock this potential, and because trading in a net-zero emissions world requires negative emissions, allowing CDR to enable trade. Since carbon prices change in the opposite direction as the quantity of permits traded and CDR deployed, we find that the total amount spent on emissions trading and the revenue received by CDR producers do not vary strongly with constraints on emissions trading or CDR. However, spending is more efficient and GDP is higher when both CDR and trading are available.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nature Communications
Published
2024-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-49502-8
Citations
12
Primary Topic
Climate Change Policy and Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.55
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mutual reinforcement of land-based carbon dioxide removal and international emissions trading in deep decarbonization scenarios

Sergey Paltsev, Bryan K. Mignone, Haroon S. Kheshgi, Jennifer Morris et al.
12 citations
Nature Communications
Climate Change Policy and Economics
13.55
article

Mutual reinforcement of land-based carbon dioxide removal and international emissions trading in deep decarbonization scenarios

Sergey Paltsev, Bryan K. Mignone, Haroon S. Kheshgi, Jennifer Morris, Angelo Gurgel
article en
12 citations

Abstract

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies and international emissions trading are both widely represented in climate change mitigation scenarios, but the interplay among them has not been closely examined. By systematically varying key policy and technology assumptions in a global energy-economic model, we find that CDR and international emissions trading are mutually reinforcing in deep decarbonization scenarios. This occurs because CDR potential is not evenly distributed geographically, allowing trade to unlock this potential, and because trading in a net-zero emissions world requires negative emissions, allowing CDR to enable trade. Since carbon prices change in the opposite direction as the quantity of permits traded and CDR deployed, we find that the total amount spent on emissions trading and the revenue received by CDR producers do not vary strongly with constraints on emissions trading or CDR. However, spending is more efficient and GDP is higher when both CDR and trading are available.

Nature CommunicationsVol. 15(1)
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US), IIT@MIT (US), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US), ExxonMobil (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Climate Change Policy and Economics
13.55
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.