As the climate crisis deepens, Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies, also known as carbon removals, are gaining attention as a critical tool for mitigating climate change. However, there are several misconceptions that can cloud understanding and lead to misguided strategies, or inaction altogether. Here’s a breakdown of the top 10 common misconceptions about CDR and the reality behind them:

‍

1. CDR Is the Same as Carbon Offsets

• Reality: CDR and carbon offsets are often confused, but they serve different purposes. Carbon offsets typically involve reducing or avoiding future emissions, such as by funding renewable energy projects or cookstokes. In contrast, CDR directly removes CO2 from the atmosphere, addressing past emissions. While both can contribute to climate goals, they operate in different contexts and have different impacts. Combined with a science-based decarbonisation strategy, CDR is the only way for corporates to durably remove their residual emissions and reach net zero.

‍

2. There’s a Reputation Risk in Investing in Carbon Removals

• Reality: Unlike traditional carbon offsets, which are sometimes criticised for being based on hypothetical or "counterfactual" scenarios, carbon removal credits represent actual CO2 removal from the atmosphere that is safely stored for hundreds to thousands of years. This is the only mechanism available to remove carbon that has already been emitted, this tangible impact reduces reputational risks associated with greenwashing, making removal the most credible mechanism for companies aiming to demonstrate real climate action.

‍

3. Technological CDR Methods Are Better Than Nature-Based Ones (or Vice Versa)

• Reality: There is a spectrum of CDR methods from technological to nature-based, that all have unique strengths and should be viewed as complementary rather than competing solutions. Nature-based methods like reforestation or soil carbon sequestration provide additional benefits like biodiversity and ecosystem restoration. On the other hand, technological methods such as direct air capture are emerging and have a high potential for scale, which is essential to support  meeting 2050 climate goals. A balanced portfolio of projects across the spectrum of nature and technology is essential.

‍

4. CDR Is the Same as Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCS/CCUS)

• Reality: Although both CDR and CCUS involve managing carbon dioxide, they are fundamentally different. CDR removes CO2 that has already been emitted out of the atmosphere, whereas CCUS captures CO2 at the point of emission (e.g., from power plants) before it enters the atmosphere. CCUS also explores ways to utilise captured CO2 in various industrial processes or stores it underground. CCUS is about reducing future emissions, while carbon removal tackles the CO2 that’s already contributing to global warming. 

‍

5. CDR Will Lead to "Moral Hazard" and Distract From Emission Reductions

• Reality: The concern is that the availability and usage of CDR might reduce the urgency to cut emissions, a phenomenon known as "moral hazard." However, responsible climate policy doesn’t see CDR and emission reductions as mutually exclusive. Both are essential, and there is no net zero without carbon removals. The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) says that achieving net zero requires a combination of both emissions reductions and carbon removals, with a recommended 90/10 split. This means that 90% of the effort should focus on reducing emissions as much as possible, while the remaining 10% should involve removing carbon from the atmosphere to offset any unavoidable emissions. However, some industries, such as aviation, are recognizing the need to exceed this 10% removal threshold, as they face higher levels of hard-to-abate and unavoidable emissions, such as Boeing’s Cascade predicting a 75/25 split, needing additional carbon removal to address these challenges. Both approaches must be pursued simultaneously to meet net zero targets, and the time to act is now.

‍

6. CDR Will Solve All of Climate Change

• Reality: While CDR is a vital tool, it’s not a standalone solution. We must still radically reduce emissions to address the root causes of climate change. CDR technologies, many of which are still in their early stages, are in the process of scaling to their full potential. Immediate and aggressive emission reductions are essential, combined with CDR to reach climate goals. In addition, historic CO2 already in the atmosphere needs to be addressed.

‍

7. CDR Is Too Expensive

• Reality: It’s true that current carbon removal technologies are costly, however, costs are only expected to increase, and the availability of high-quality ex-post removal credits is expected to decrease as we move towards 2030. Moreover, the cost of a company’s inaction on climate change impacts both the bottom line and consumer trust.  By investing in CDR now, businesses can limit the potential negative impact of future cost increases, ensuring they remain resilient.

‍

8. All CDR Methods Are the Same

• Reality: CDR encompasses a wide range of methods, each with different implications for cost, co-benefits, and biodiversity impact. These include natural methods like afforestation and soil carbon sequestration, as well as more technological approaches like direct air capture and enhanced rock weathering. Different methods can also support different net zero goals, based on aspects such as how quickly the carbon is drawn down from the atmosphere, social benefits that go beyond carbon, how long the carbon stays sequestered, and more. Understanding the different attributes associated with removal methods is key to building the right portfolio for your business.

‍

9. We Can Wait to Scale Up Carbon Removal Later

• Reality: Some believe we can wait to scale up carbon removal technologies when the need becomes more pressing. However, this ignores the significant time, investment, and development required to deploy CDR at scale. Delaying action could make it impossible to meet future climate targets. Immediate investment in CDR is crucial to ensure these technologies are ready when they are most needed. We need to remove carbon at a scale 10-20 times greater than the initial production of oil, but achieve it in just a quarter of the time.

‍

10. It’s Too Difficult to Start Investing in CDR Now

• Reality: While the CDR space is still developing, it’s not too early to start investing. Companies like Microsoft, British Airways, Coca-Cola HBC, Standard Chartered Bank, have already committed significant purchases to CDR, setting a precedent for others to follow. For those unsure where to begin, there are companies like CUR8 that help businesses navigate the complexities of carbon removal investments, enabling them to take meaningful climate action starting now.

‍

Conclusion

Carbon removal is an essential component in the global effort to combat climate change, and is absolutely essential to meet net zero. It’s important to approach investing in carbon removal with a clear understanding of how to assess risk and how it fits into your organisation’s overall goals. By dispelling these misconceptions, we can better integrate carbon removal into comprehensive climate strategies that address both the causes and consequences of global warming.

‍

‍