IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v12y2021is1p34-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon‐dioxide Removal and Biodiversity: A Threat Identification Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Kate Dooley
  • Ellycia Harrould‐Kolieb
  • Anita Talberg

Abstract

Carbon‐dioxide removal (CDR) technologies offer the potential to contribute to the restoration and protection of natural ecosystems, the achievement of development goals and the safeguarding of human wellbeing. However, these technologies can also present risks to biodiversity, particularly those techniques that depend on large‐scale manipulation of ecosystems and earth‐system processes. Debates around the development of these technologies have historically focused on the dichotomy between the need to expand the knowledge base on all options related to emerging technologies, and the concern that research represents a slippery slope to deployment. This paper introduces a new approach to governing CDR research – one based on threat identification. We present a framework for assessing the impacts (positive or negative) on biodiversity and ecosystems from a spectrum of CDR interventions, so as to prioritize research to those CDR options that present minimal threats to biodiversity. Application of the framework indicates that while many CDR interventions present threats to biodiversity, certain options, such as regenerative CDR, may have positive impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • Kate Dooley & Ellycia Harrould‐Kolieb & Anita Talberg, 2021. "Carbon‐dioxide Removal and Biodiversity: A Threat Identification Framework," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S1), pages 34-44, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:12:y:2021:i:s1:p:34-44
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12828
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12828
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12828?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nathalie Seddon & Beth Turner & Pam Berry & Alexandre Chausson & Cécile A. J. Girardin, 2019. "Grounding nature-based climate solutions in sound biodiversity science," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 84-87, February.
    2. Vera Heck & Dieter Gerten & Wolfgang Lucht & Alexander Popp, 2018. "Author Correction: Biomass-based negative emissions difficult to reconcile with planetary boundaries," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(4), pages 345-345, April.
    3. Phil Williamson, 2016. "Emissions reduction: Scrutinize CO2 removal methods," Nature, Nature, vol. 530(7589), pages 153-155, February.
    4. J. Leifeld & L. Menichetti, 2018. "The underappreciated potential of peatlands in global climate change mitigation strategies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, December.
    5. Flavien M. Brethomé & Neil J. Williams & Charles A. Seipp & Michelle K. Kidder & Radu Custelcean, 2018. "Direct air capture of CO2 via aqueous-phase absorption and crystalline-phase release using concentrated solar power," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(7), pages 553-559, July.
    6. Christian Breyer & Mahdi Fasihi & Arman Aghahosseini, 2020. "Carbon dioxide direct air capture for effective climate change mitigation based on renewable electricity: a new type of energy system sector coupling," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 43-65, January.
    7. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107005198, January.
    8. Vera Heck & Dieter Gerten & Wolfgang Lucht & Alexander Popp, 2018. "Biomass-based negative emissions difficult to reconcile with planetary boundaries," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 151-155, February.
    9. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521182935, January.
    10. John Shepherd & Debora Iglesias-Rodriguez & Andrew Yool, 2007. "Geo-engineering might cause, not cure, problems," Nature, Nature, vol. 449(7164), pages 781-781, October.
    11. Joeri Rogelj & Alexander Popp & Katherine V. Calvin & Gunnar Luderer & Johannes Emmerling & David Gernaat & Shinichiro Fujimori & Jessica Strefler & Tomoko Hasegawa & Giacomo Marangoni & Volker Krey &, 2018. "Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °C," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(4), pages 325-332, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chad M. Baum & Livia Fritz & Sean Low & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2024. "Public perceptions and support of climate intervention technologies across the Global North and Global South," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Harrison, Nicholas & Herrera Jiménez, Juan & Krieger Merico, Luiz F. & Lorenzo, Santiago & Rondón Toro, Estefani & Rouse, Paul & Samaniego, Joseluis, 2023. "Nature-based solutions and carbon dioxide removal," Documentos de Proyectos 48691, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philipp Günther & Felix Ekardt, 2022. "Human Rights and Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: Potential Limits to BECCS and DACCS Deployment," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-29, November.
    2. Galán-Martín, Ángel & Contreras, María del Mar & Romero, Inmaculada & Ruiz, Encarnación & Bueno-Rodríguez, Salvador & Eliche-Quesada, Dolores & Castro-Galiano, Eulogio, 2022. "The potential role of olive groves to deliver carbon dioxide removal in a carbon-neutral Europe: Opportunities and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    3. Günther, Philipp & Ekardt, Felix, 2022. "Human Rights and Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: Potential Limits to BECCS and DACCS Deployment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11(12), pages 1-29.
    4. Aljoša Slameršak & Giorgos Kallis & Daniel W. O’Neill, 2022. "Energy requirements and carbon emissions for a low-carbon energy transition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Selene Cobo & Ángel Galán-Martín & Victor Tulus & Mark A. J. Huijbregts & Gonzalo Guillén-Gosálbez, 2022. "Human and planetary health implications of negative emissions technologies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Wim Carton & Adeniyi Asiyanbi & Silke Beck & Holly J. Buck & Jens F. Lund, 2020. "Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    7. Kazuhito Watanabe & Kiyotaka Tahara, 2016. "Life Cycle Inventory Analysis for a Small-Scale Trawl Fishery in Sendai Bay, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-15, April.
    8. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    9. Fankhauser, Samuel & Jotzo, Frank, 2017. "Economic growth and development with low-carbon energy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86850, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    11. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    12. Tilmann Rave, 2013. "Innovationsindikatoren zum globalen Klimaschutz – FuE-Ausgaben und Patente," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 66(15), pages 34-41, August.
    13. Daniel Moran & Richard Wood, 2014. "Convergence Between The Eora, Wiod, Exiobase, And Openeu'S Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 245-261, September.
    14. Lykke E. Andersen & Luis Carlos Jemio, 2016. "Decentralization and poverty reduction in Bolivia: Challenges and opportunities," Development Research Working Paper Series 01/2016, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    15. Chen, Han & Huang, Ye & Shen, Huizhong & Chen, Yilin & Ru, Muye & Chen, Yuanchen & Lin, Nan & Su, Shu & Zhuo, Shaojie & Zhong, Qirui & Wang, Xilong & Liu, Junfeng & Li, Bengang & Tao, Shu, 2016. "Modeling temporal variations in global residential energy consumption and pollutant emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 820-829.
    16. Hugh Dyer & Maria Julia Trombetta (ed.), 2013. "International Handbook of Energy Security," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15019.
    17. Tom Mikunda & Tom Kober & Heleen de Coninck & Morgan Bazilian & Hilke R�sler & Bob van der Zwaan, 2014. "Designing policy for deployment of CCS in industry," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 665-676, September.
    18. Li, Yating & Fei, Yinxin & Zhang, Xiao-Bing & Qin, Ping, 2019. "Household appliance ownership and income inequality: Evidence from micro data in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Jiang, Yida & Long, Yin & Liu, Qiaoling & Dowaki, Kiyoshi & Ihara, Tomohiko, 2020. "Carbon emission quantification and decarbonization policy exploration for the household sector - Evidence from 51 Japanese cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:12:y:2021:i:s1:p:34-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.