Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Political obstacles to carbon capture and storage for carbon removal

Using carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) for carbon removal is crucial to climate policy, but implementation at scale is at risk owing to political obstacles. Climate policies must avoid relying on empty promises of CCS for carbon removal without necessary financial resourcing and support emissions reductions separately from carbon removal.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Brack, D. & King, R. Managing land-based CDR: BECCS, forests and carbon sequestration. Glob. Policy 12, 45–56 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hudson, M. Carbon Capture and Storage in the United Kingdom: History, Policies and Politics (Routledge, 2024).

  3. Chatterjee, S. & Huang, K. W. Unrealistic energy and materials requirement for direct air capture in deep mitigation pathways. Nat Commun. 11, 3287 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Palm, E., Tilsted, J. P., Vogl, V. & Nikoleris, A. Imagining circular carbon: a mitigation (deterrence) strategy for the petrochemical industry. Environ. Sci. Policy 151, 103640 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hougaard, I.-M. Enacting biochar as a climate solution in Denmark. Environ. Sci. Policy 152, 103651 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Carton, W., Hougaard, I.-M., Markusson, N. & Friis Lund, J. Is carbon removal delaying emission reductions? WIRES Clim. Change. 14, e826 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Buck, H. J., Carton, W., Friis Lund, J. & Markusson, N. Why residual emissions matter right now. Nat. Clim. Change 13, 351–358 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Smith, H. B., Vaughan, N. E. & Forster, J. Residual emissions in long-term national climate strategies show limited climate ambition. One Earth 7, 867–884 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. McLaren, D. P., Tyfield, D. P., Willis, R., Szerszynski, B. & Markusson, N. Beyond ‘net-zero’: a case for separate targets for emissions reduction and negative emissions. Front. Clim. 1, 4 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Markusson, N., McLaren, D., Szerszynski, B., Tyfield, D. & Willis, R. Life in the hole: practices and emotions in the cultural political economy of mitigation deterrence. Eur. J. Fut. Res. 10, 2 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nils Markusson.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Related links

Axe Drax: https://axedrax.uk/

Carbfix: https://www.carbfix.com/

East Coast Cluster: https://eastcoastcluster.co.uk/

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Markusson, N. Political obstacles to carbon capture and storage for carbon removal. Nat Rev Earth Environ 5, 481–482 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-024-00574-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-024-00574-6

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing