Marginal Carbon

Marginal Carbon by Robert Höglund delves into carbon removal exploring its market dynamics, influencing policies, various removal methods, and crucial system-level thinking. It addresses the challenges and opportunities within carbon removal, emphasizing the need for scientific validation, financial mechanisms, and corporate responsibility in combating climate change.

Carbon Removal Market Policy and Climate Change Carbon Removal Methods Corporate Responsibility and Climate Action Economic Aspects of Carbon Removal Scientific Research and Climate Solutions System-Level Thinking in Climate Mitigation

The hottest Substack posts of Marginal Carbon

And their main takeaways

NEW PAPER: All Excess Emissions must be Removed

138 implied HN points • 14 Oct 24
🌞 Climate & Environment Climate Policy Carbon Emissions Environmental Science Sustainability Global Warming
  1. Countries with a history of high carbon emissions have run out of their fair share of carbon budget. They keep adding to their carbon debt with every new emission.
  2. To keep temperatures safe, all emissions beyond what's allowed must be removed. This means we need to deal with past, present, and future excess emissions.
  3. While cutting emissions is the main goal, some emissions are better dealt with using carbon removal strategies, called 'CDR-optimal' emissions.

Carbon removal is not a finite resource

257 implied HN points • 18 Dec 23
  1. Carbon removal is not a finite resource.
  2. Using CDR today builds future capacity, it does not deplete it.
  3. Paying for CDR today builds capacity that governments can allocate for future needs.

Full corporate profit and emission dataset

238 implied HN points • 20 Dec 23
  1. A new, free dataset is available on the GHG emissions and profits of the world's largest companies.
  2. The dataset includes emission data for the top 250 companies along with profit and revenue data from the Forbes 2000 list.
  3. Analysis shows that certain companies can afford to take full responsibility for their emissions and implement internal carbon fees.

Cautiously optimistic removers

416 implied HN points • 14 May 23
  1. Lack of demand is a big worry for carbon removal businesses.
  2. Certification in carbon removal needs more scientific certainty.
  3. Money alone is not sufficient to scale up carbon removal projects.

New Data: Who can Pay For Carbon Removal?

138 implied HN points • 04 Dec 23
  1. Companies with low emissions can afford to pay the full cost of their emissions and should do so.
  2. All sectors could afford to remove the last 10% of their emissions with permanent carbon removal.
  3. Big emitters should also support external climate solutions, even if they don't pay the full cost of their emissions.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

You can't wait with buying carbon removal

396 implied HN points • 05 Jan 23
  1. Companies need to start buying carbon removal at scale now to combat climate change
  2. Fear, lack of incentives, and difficulty in purchasing are reasons why companies hesitate to buy carbon removal
  3. Key recommendations include pre-purchasing carbon removal, incentivizing purchases, and developing standards and registries

When does sales of carbon removal credits benefit climate?

158 implied HN points • 14 Aug 23
  1. Sales of carbon removal credits benefit climate when they lead to increased climate ambitions by the host country.
  2. The host country should not count the carbon removed against their national emissions or should increase their climate ambitions due to the carbon removal.
  3. Countries may need to revise policies to ensure private sector purchases of removals help reduce COâ‚‚ in the atmosphere.

How can we avoid CDR delaying emissions reductions?

119 implied HN points • 27 Sep 23
  1. Mitigation deterrence is a solvable problem with 12 proposed solutions.
  2. The report discusses use cases of CDR and their associated risks and solutions.
  3. Collaboration with Carbon Gap leads to the release of a detailed report on avoiding mitigation deterrence.

Only 0.5% of Companies with SBTi Targets Have Purchased Carbon Removal

119 implied HN points • 21 Sep 23
  1. Only 0.5% of companies with Science-based targets have purchased durable carbon removal.
  2. The carbon removal industry needs to scale up quickly to meet the demands for reaching net zero targets.
  3. Clear incentives for companies to invest in carbon removal are crucial to drive sufficient demand.

A new era for corporate climate support

138 implied HN points • 19 Jul 23
  1. Companies need to significantly increase financial support for climate projects to go beyond just reducing their own emissions.
  2. Companies should move towards funding climate actions as a contribution to reaching global net zero instead of solely relying on carbon credits.
  3. It is crucial for companies to make financial contributions to climate actions as a complement to their own emission reduction efforts.

Is soil carbon a viable carbon removal solution?

119 implied HN points • 21 Jun 23
  1. Scientific consensus is lacking on the effectiveness of soil carbon building methods.
  2. Research highlights limitations in soil carbon sequestration practices and their impact on crop production.
  3. Certifying soil carbon standards for carbon credits should be approached with caution due to uncertainties and limitations.

Why is it so difficult to fund projects that reduce emissions?

99 implied HN points • 30 Jan 23
  1. It is more efficient to avoid emitting carbon than to remove it afterwards.
  2. Current mechanisms lack efficiency in funding emissions reduction projects.
  3. Supporting advocacy and policy organizations can be more cost-effective in fighting climate change than traditional carbon credits.

Is the CDR market on track?

19 implied HN points • 08 Feb 24
  1. The durable carbon removal market is growing rapidly.
  2. Meeting midcentury needs for durable CDR is crucial.
  3. Growth in big buyers is essential to stay on track for CDR targets.

Is the high price of emission allowances in the EU good or bad news?

59 implied HN points • 08 Mar 23
  1. The high price of emission allowances in the EU may not be good news.
  2. The high price indicates difficulty in finding cheap emission reductions and uncertain economic damage.
  3. High emission prices in the EU may lead to secondary effects like emission leakage and less ambitious climate policies in other countries.

The Carbon removal market doesn’t exist

79 implied HN points • 13 Jun 22
  1. The market for durable carbon removal doesn't exist yet, but there are companies with ideas and plans in place.
  2. Investing in carbon removal requires understanding and trust in the technologies and companies involved.
  3. The growth of a carbon removal market depends on increasing investments in hard tech solutions to combat climate change.

Carbon can be temporarily stored for a long time

59 implied HN points • 24 Sep 22
  1. Carbon storage methods vary in permanence and potential for reversal.
  2. Long-lived carbon removal methods are likely to store carbon for hundreds of years.
  3. Simplifying carbon storage can lead to misleading conclusions; factors beyond permanence must be considered.

Nature restoration and carbon removal are not the same. Here’s why it matters

59 implied HN points • 23 Jun 22
  1. Nature restoration and carbon removal are different processes with different impacts on the climate.
  2. It's crucial to differentiate between short and long carbon cycle storage in addressing climate change.
  3. Efforts should focus on storing carbon away from the short carbon cycle for long-term climate impact.

Who should pay for carbon removal?

19 implied HN points • 23 Nov 22
  1. Governments are mainly responsible for funding carbon removal.
  2. Corporations can play a significant role in financing climate solutions.
  3. There is a need to bridge the gap between what companies can afford and what they are willing to pay for external climate solutions.

How much carbon will we need to remove?

1 HN point • 04 Sep 23
  1. There is a big difference in the need for carbon removal before and after reaching global net zero.
  2. Carbon removal can help offset methane and nitrous oxide emissions, but cost, resource use, and political choices are crucial factors.
  3. To bring temperatures back down after overshooting limits, a substantial amount of carbon removal will be required in addition to emission reduction efforts.

Xprize reveals the starting field carbon removal needs

0 implied HN points • 26 Apr 22
  1. A large number of contenders are needed in carbon removal to find the most effective technologies.
  2. Direct air capture is the most popular method among top teams in the Xprize competition.
  3. North America, particularly the US, dominates the field of carbon removal with the most active teams and government funding.

Carbon credits are not offsets

0 implied HN points • 28 Mar 22
  1. Carbon credits are different from offsets, even though people often use the terms interchangeably.
  2. Companies should focus on creating long-term positive impact and contributing to global net-zero rather than just buying credits to offset their emissions.
  3. Offsetting emissions through credits is not enough - support for impactful solutions that generate removals or reductions in the future is needed.

Is insurance the key to scaling carbon removal?

0 implied HN points • 08 Sep 22
  1. Derisking prepurchases can help CDR suppliers access funds needed for carbon removal projects.
  2. Insurance for pre-purchased tons can shift the risk from buyers to third parties, making it a more attractive option for scaling carbon removal.
  3. New insurance products like Kita are emerging to support the scaling of carbon removal initiatives.

How is the carbon removal ecosystem best supported? — Learnings from Microsoft’s 2022 CDR purchases

0 implied HN points • 13 Mar 22
  1. Microsoft prioritizes near-term delivery in carbon removal purchases over post-2023 projects.
  2. Pre-purchasing carbon removal tons can support new methods and companies, but R&D grants are also important for companies with evolving technology.
  3. Clear definitions and standards are crucial for scaling carbon removal methods responsibly, and transparency in corporate support is key.

Buying carbon removal — Learnings from Klarna and Milkywire

0 implied HN points • 13 Jul 22
  1. Early players in supporting carbon removal should share learnings to advance the field
  2. There is a need for more buyers to support a broad range of carbon removal projects
  3. Early buyers of carbon removal should focus on long-term impact and not solely on buying as many tons as possible