Carbon removal vs. carbon avoidance – Which tool to use when?

Strengths and weaknesses

Carbon Removal: Directly tackles the existing problem of excess CO2 in the atmosphere, offering a crucial tool for achieving net-zero emissions, where we remove as much carbon as we emit. However, some removal technologies like DAC are still in their early stages of development, making them expensive and energy-intensive. Additionally, ensuring the long-term, secure storage of captured carbon is critical.

Carbon Avoidance: Prevents future emissions, crucial for slowing the pace of climate change and mitigating its worst effects. It’s often seen as a more mature approach with readily available options. However, avoidance doesn’t address the CO2 already present in the atmosphere, and its effectiveness relies heavily on significant behavioral and technological shifts.

How to choose the right decarbonization mechanism

The best approach depends on the specific situation. Here’s a breakdown of where each strategy might shine:

New infrastructure projects: Here, avoidance shines. Building a wind farm instead of a coal plant prevents future emissions altogether. Similarly, investing in public transportation or electric vehicle infrastructure reduces reliance on fossil fuels in the long run.

Counteracting past emissions and achieving net-zero:  Removal takes center stage. Planting trees, restoring degraded ecosystems, or utilizing DAC can help offset past emissions and bring us closer to net-zero.

The reality is, we need both strategies working together.  Achieving net-zero emissions will require a fully comprehensive approach that utilizes both avoidance and removal tactics.  Think of it like using a combination of the sponge (removal) to clean up the existing spill and a mop (avoidance) to prevent future spills altogether.

What is the demand for carbon removal and carbon offsets? 

The field of carbon removal technologies is constantly evolving, with exciting possibilities for capturing and storing CO2 on a large scale. Technologies like enhanced weathering, which involves spreading crushed rock on land to accelerate natural CO2 capture processes, are being explored alongside DAC advancements.

Carbon offset programs are another piece of the puzzle. These programs allow individuals or companies to fund removal projects to compensate for their emissions. By supporting certified removal projects, individuals and businesses can contribute to achieving net-zero goals. SBTi’s new guidance allows companies to use carbon offsets to neutralize their Scope 3 emissions, a significant change that could dramatically increase demand for these credits. Given the circumstances we are currently facing, carbon offsets are a significant opportunity to reach net-zero as there is already too much CO2 in the atmosphere and this has to be addressed rapidly. 

Currently, most companies’ carbon footprints are dominated by Scope 3 emissions, which come from their supply chains and customer use of products. With the new guidance, demand for carbon offsets is expected to surge. BloombergNEF estimates annual demand could reach 5.9 billion tons by 2050, with a peak price of $243 per ton. This high demand would create a valuable market exceeding $1.1 trillion annually by 2050.

• SEO Powered Content & PR Distribution. Get Amplified Today.
• PlatoData.Network Vertical Generative Ai. Empower Yourself. Access Here.
• PlatoAiStream. Web3 Intelligence. Knowledge Amplified. Access Here.
• PlatoESG. Carbon, CleanTech, Energy, Environment, Solar, Waste Management. Access Here.
• PlatoHealth. Biotech and Clinical Trials Intelligence. Access Here.
• Source: https://climatetrade.com/carbon-removal-vs-carbon-avoidance-which-mechanism-to-use-when/