There is a large gap between the scant atmospheric capture via CDR (Carbon Dioxide Removal) compared to what scenarios compatible with the Paris Agreement would require. The ninth chapter of “The State of Carbon Dioxide Removal, 3rd Edition” report details in depth the reasons behind the growth of this gap and the importance of reinforcing both mitigation and CDR.
CDR Gap Definition
The chapter defines the “CDR gap” as the difference between the amount of CDR appearing in country commitments (NDCs, long-term targets, national strategies) and the amount of CDR deployed in the Paris Agreement scenarios from Chapter 8. The baseline reference consists of the “Highest Ambition 1.5°C” scenarios, which combine very rapid emissions reductions with large-scale CDR deployment. The gap is calculated for different years (2030, 2035, 2050) and across the whole set of CDR methods, without being limited to just one.
The analysis shows that in 2030, current contributions and targets of major countries add up to about 2.5 /year of CDR, whereas the median of the scenarios demands around 2.9 /year. This generates a gap of about 0.3 /year: not enormous in absolute terms, but significant if 1.5°C pathways are to be maintained. To close just the 2030 gap, it would be necessary to nearly double the additional ambition, moving from adding 0.3 /year to adding around 0.6 /year in that year. Toward 2035, it reaches around 1.2 /year, and toward 2050, it exceeds 5 /year, because in those horizons, the CDR levels promised by countries fall below the levels of all evaluated Paris Agreement scenarios. That is to say, even the most ambitious country today falls short of what models suggest would be necessary if the goal is truly to limit warming close to 1.5°C.
Country Removal Commitments, Corporate Announcements, and Current Reality
The chapter compares three things: observed CDR today (mostly conventional), CDR in country commitments, and CDR in corporate announcements. Today, around 2.2 /year is removed, almost entirely via conventional CDR; country commitments bring that to about 2.5 /year in 2030, while scenarios request around 2.9 /year. Looking ahead to 2050, corporate announcements add up to more than 5 /year of CDR, a figure higher than what appears in national targets, but still insufficient to completely close the gap.
Moreover, the chapter underlines that the credibility of corporate promises is uneven: a significant portion of those announcements has not translated into real projects so far, and some large buyers have slowed down or readjusted their CDR procurement programs, as seen in the recent case of Microsoft in the voluntary market. For this reason, the “CDR gap” is understood not only as a difference in declared volumes but also as a gap between declarations and effective deployment.
Relative Role of Conventional and Novel CDR
The gap includes both conventional and novel CDR. In the short term leading up to 2030, conventional CDR (forests, soils, wetlands, durable wood) remains the main contributor to partially closing the gap. However, the analyzed Paris Agreement scenarios from Chapter 8 show that between 2030 and 2050, novel CDR must multiply fivefold and reach gigatonne-per-year levels, while current commitments barely mention it. Only about a third of countries explicitly allude to novel CDR in their mid-century strategies.
This implies that a significant portion of the “CDR gap” resides within the space of novel methods: BECCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering, biochar, mineral products, and others that scenarios consider key but are not yet solidly integrated into national planning.
Concentration and Vulnerabilities of the CDR System
The chapter highlights that many elements of the CDR system are highly concentrated, which creates vulnerabilities. For example, most conventional CDR sold in voluntary markets comes from a single region (Latin America), novel CDR is concentrated in a few methods (biochar and BECCS), a single buyer dominates novel CDR purchases in the voluntary market (Microsoft), and most financing for novel CDR demonstrations is concentrated in a few countries (United States, Sweden, Denmark).
This concentration means that decisions by a few actors—such as policy changes in the United States or strategy adjustments by a major buyer—can have disproportionate effects on the pace of CDR deployment and, consequently, on the evolution of the CDR gap. The chapter argues that diversifying methods, actors, and countries would help reduce this vulnerability and build a more robust CDR system.
Importance of Demand and Policies
A central idea of the chapter is that closing the CDR gap depends as much on creating CDR supply as on generating credible demand. Innovation indicators (grants, publications, pilots) show dynamism, but many concentrate on the supply phase (technological development, demonstration). In contrast, policies that create demand—for instance, including high-integrity novel CDR in emissions trading systems or regulatory standards—remain nascent and, in several cases, feature prices that are too low relative to costs.
The chapter notes that without long-term demand expectations, it is difficult for novel CDR to scale to adequate levels. Furthermore, it warns that unstable policies, rollbacks, or abrupt changes undermine the credibility of that demand and discourage investment.
Time Urgency and the Role of the Next Decade
Finally, the chapter underlines that closing the CDR gap is urgent because CDR deployment is necessarily gradual. The 2026–2030 window is critical to establishing whether CDR will play the role required by Paris Agreement scenarios, since delaying emissions reductions by ten years increases the temperature peak and cumulative CDR needs, pushing volumes toward the higher end of potentials.
The final message is that narrowing the gap requires reinforcing mitigation right now, realistically and credibly increasing both conventional and novel CDR ambition, and designing supply, demand, and governance policies that keep CDR expansion within sustainability limits. Without these changes, the CDR gap will continue to widen, and confidence in reaching Paris Agreement goals will become increasingly fragile.
heliCO2farm
We capture carbon dioxide inspired by nature
