Author:
Günther Philipp,Garske Beatrice,Heyl Katharine,Ekardt Felix
Abstract
AbstractThis article conducts a qualitative governance analysis of the European Commission’s 2022 proposal for a certification framework for carbon removals (CRCF). It highlights potential challenges and legal implications—with a specific focus on carbon farming. While the European Union (EU) acknowledges carbon farming as an important strategy to offset residual emissions, such carbon removal activities are prone to reversals and models often overestimate their sequestration potential. The CRCF aims to account for these issues, but the analysis shows that the proposal may, in part, undermine international climate and biodiversity goals set by the Paris Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity. Key concerns include its failure to consider the normative hierarchy between emission reductions and removals mandated by EU and international law, the introduction of a temporary removal crediting system, the extensive delegation of powers to the Commission, the possibility that it may incentivise shifting effects, and its lack of alignment with other EU environmental policies. Additionally, the CRCF’s failure to restrict the use of carbon credits after certification increases the risk of double claiming of removal activities—and the proposal may open the door for to future integration of carbon removals into the EU’s emission trading scheme, which should be avoided for various reasons. As an alternative, member states should consider targeted subsidy schemes and regulatory instruments to navigate these challenges in carbon farming effectively.
Funder
German Federal Environmental Foundation
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
EU project SOMPACS
Leibniz ScienceCampus Phosphorus Research Rostock
Universität Rostock
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference153 articles.
1. Ekardt F, Wieding J, Zorn A (2018) Paris agreement, precautionary principle and human rights: zero emissions in two decades? Sustainability 10:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082812
2. Ekardt F, Bärenwaldt M, Heyl K (2022) The Paris target, human rights, and IPCC weaknesses: legal arguments in favour of smaller carbon budgets. Environments 9:112. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments9090112
3. Wieding J, Stubenrauch J, Ekardt F (2020) Human rights and precautionary principle: limits to geoengineering, SRM, and IPCC scenarios. Sustainability 12:1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218858
4. IPCC (2022) Climate Change 2022. Mitigation of Climate Change Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment. Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge
5. Buck HJ, Carton W, Lund JF, Markusson N (2023) Why residual emissions matter right now. Nat Clim Chang 13:351–358. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01592-2
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献