The DOI matches its Crossref record; 152 of the 155 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Negative emissions—Part 1: Research landscape and synthesis
Open accessAbstract
With the Paris Agreement's ambition of limiting climate change to well below 2 °C, negative emission technologies (NETs) have moved into the limelight of discussions in climate science and policy. Despite several assessments, the current knowledge on NETs is still diffuse and incomplete, but also growing fast. Here, we synthesize a comprehensive body of NETs literature, using scientometric tools and performing an in-depth assessment of the quantitative and qualitative evidence therein. We clarify the role of NETs in climate change mitigation scenarios, their ethical implications, as well as the challenges involved in bringing the various NETs to the market and scaling them up in time. There are six major findings arising from our assessment: first, keeping warming below 1.5 °C requires the large-scale deployment of NETs, but this dependency can still be kept to a minimum for the 2 °C warming limit. Second, accounting for economic and biophysical limits, we identify relevant potentials for all NETs except ocean fertilization. Third, any single NET is unlikely to sustainably achieve the large NETs deployment observed in many 1.5 °C and 2 °C mitigation scenarios. Yet, portfolios of multiple NETs, each deployed at modest scales, could be invaluable for reaching the climate goals. Fourth, a substantial gap exists between the upscaling and rapid diffusion of NETs implied in scenarios and progress in actual innovation and deployment. If NETs are required at the scales currently discussed, the resulting urgency of implementation is currently neither reflected in science nor policy. Fifth, NETs face severe barriers to implementation and are only weakly incentivized so far. Finally, we identify distinct ethical discourses relevant for NETs, but highlight the need to root them firmly in the available evidence in order to render such discussions relevant in practice.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Although there has been significant progress in negative emissions research [260,540,575,580,707], the actual CO 2 removal industry is still in its infancy.”
From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [540]
In the citing paper
“Current research on NETs has come from two main strands: technology-focused studies that explore specific technical configurations, and integrated assessment models that investigate NETs in the context of global and long-term climate change mitigation.[3][4][5]”
From The mutual dependence of negative emission technologies and energy systems (2019) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“In fact, to meet current climate goals, the continued growth of emissions indicated by current trends will increasingly lock energy system transformations into pathways that require large-scale NETs. 4”
From The mutual dependence of negative emission technologies and energy systems (2019) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“BECCS has been the first NET widely taken up in integrated assessment models 4 and shows some appealing characteristics.”
From The mutual dependence of negative emission technologies and energy systems (2019) · cites this paper as [4]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 · Cited by 21,484
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Kriegler, E., Edmonds, J., O’Neill, B. C., Fujimori, S., Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Dellink, R., Fricko, O., et al. (2017) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009 · Cited by 6,607
Self-citationGriggs, D., & Noguer, M. (2002) · Weather · doi:10.1256/004316502320517344 · Cited by 5,801
Mackay, A. W. (2008) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.2134/jeq2008.0015br · Cited by 5,592
Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-5664 · Cited by 4,081
Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C
Rogelj, J., den Elzen, M., Höhne, N., Fransen, T., Fekete, H., Winkler, H., Schaeffer, R., Sha, F., Riahi, K., & Meinshausen, M. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature18307 · Cited by 3,637 · cited 2×
“In fact, global GHG emissions will continue to grow until 2030 unless short-term ambition is ratcheted up by many countries (Rogelj et al 2016a, Meinshausen et al 2015, Schleussner et al 2016).”
BackgroundSelf-citationSystematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006) · doi:10.1002/9780470754887 · Cited by 3,586 · cited 3×
“Literature review methods are rarely discussed in the field of climate change research, despite their central importance to knowledge synthesis and policy-relevant assessments (Minx et al 2017a, Ringquist 2013, Petticrew and Roberts 2008, Petticrew and McCartney 2017, Higgins and Green 2008).”
BackgroundMethod
Flagged first, then by citations
3 of the 155 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- Baes C F, 1977, Am. Sci., 65, 310
- Blanford G J, 2013, EAERE Annual Conferences
- Ciais P ed Stocker T F, 2013, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- Clarke L E ed Edenhofer O, 2014, Climate Change 2014 Mitigation Climate Change Contribution Working Group III to Fifth Assessment Report Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 413
- Edenhofer O ed Edenhofer O, 2014, Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- Flegal J A, 2017, Int. Environ. Agreements Polit. Law Econ., 1, 17
- Hamilton C, 2013, Earthmasters
- Hourcade J-C ed Bruce J P, 1996, Climate Change 1995, Economic and Social Dimensions Climate Change Contribution of Working Group III to Second Assessment Report
- IPCC ed Bruce J P, 1996, Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed Watson R T, 1996, Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed McCarthy J J, 2001, Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability: Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed Metz B, 2001, Climate Change 2001: Mitigation: Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed Edenhofer O, 2011, Expert Meeting Report on Geoengineering
- IPCC ed Stocker T F, 2013, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed Field C B, 2014, Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed Edenhofer O, 2014, Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- IPCC ed Core Writing Team, 2014, Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- Jepma C J, 1995, Clim. Change, 31, 225
- Kauppi P, 2001, IPCC 3rd Assessment Report, 301
- Kolstad C, 2014, Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change: Working Group III Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, 173
- Kriegler E, 2013, RoSE Proj. Potsdam Inst. Clim. Impact Res., 8
- Lenzi D, 2018, Glob. Sustain.
- Luderer G, 2016, Policy Findings from the ADVANCE Project
- Lukacs M, 2012, The Guardian Oct 15
- Minx J C, 2017, Environ. Res. Lett., 12
- Minx J, 2017, Environ. Res. Lett., 12
- Morrow D R, 2016, Public Aff. Q., 30, 83
- Nabuurs G J ed Metz B, 2007, Forestry climate change 2007: mitigation Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- National Academy of Sciences, 1992, Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base
- National Research Council, 1983, Changing Climate: Report of the Carbon Dioxide Assessment Committee
- Petticrew M, 2008, Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences
- Rickels W, 2011, Eine Bestandsaufnahme der Debatte zu Climate Engineering
- Shepherd J, 2009, Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty
- Shindell D ed Stocker T F, 2013, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 659
- Shrader-Frechette K S ed Maltais A, 2015, Biomass Incineration: Scientifically and Ethically Indefensible The Ethics of Climate Governance, 155
- Smith P ed Metz B, 2007, Climate change 2007: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- Strefler J, 2018, Enivron. Res. Lett., 13, 4
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 864
Delaying carbon dioxide removal in the European Union puts climate targets at risk
Galán‐Martín, Á., Vázquez, D., Cobo, S., Dowell, N. M., Caballero, J. A., & Guillén‐Gosálbez, G. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26680-3 · Cited by 102
Low, M.-Y. A., Barton, L. V., Pini, R., & Petit, C. (2022) · Process Safety and Environmental Protection · doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2022.11.040 · Cited by 91
Huang, X., Chang, S., Zheng, D., & Zhang, X. (2020) · Energy Economics · doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104968 · Cited by 93
Satoła, D., Balouktsi, M., Lützkendorf, T., Wiberg, A. H., & Gustavsen, A. (2021) · Building and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107619 · Cited by 92
Viebahn, P., Scholz, A., & Zelt, O. (2019) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en12183443 · Cited by 99
“also pointed to the need for comprehensive life-cycle assessments to assess the various environmental impacts of these chemical-based processes [9].”
BackgroundInfluentialNet-zero approaches must consider Earth system impacts to achieve climate goals
Zickfeld, K., MacIsaac, A., Canadell, J. G., Fuss, S., Jackson, R. B., JONES, C. D., Lohila, A., Matthews, H. D., Peters, G. P., Rogelj, J., et al. (2023) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-023-01862-7 · Cited by 93
“35).”
Self-citationFlipkens, G., Blust, R., & Town, R. M. (2021) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c02974 · Cited by 89
Farmer perspectives on carbon markets incentivizing agricultural soil carbon sequestration
Barbato, C. T., & Strong, A. (2023) · npj Climate Action · doi:10.1038/s44168-023-00055-4 · Cited by 90
Decarbonizing hard-to-abate heavy industries: Current status and pathways towards net-zero future
Kumar, A., Tiwari, A. K., & Milani, D. (2024) · Process Safety and Environmental Protection · doi:10.1016/j.psep.2024.04.107 · Cited by 103
Löffler, K., Burandt, T., Hainsch, K., & Oei, P.-Y. (2019) · Energy Strategy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.100422 · Cited by 86
Targeting carbon dioxide removal in the European Union
Geden, O., Peters, G. P., & Scott, V. (2018) · Climate Policy · doi:10.1080/14693062.2018.1536600 · Cited by 93
“Among policymakers, there is almost no debate on the need for intentional human efforts to remove large amounts of CO2 emissions from the atmosphere (Minx et al., 2018), let alone on the benefits and risks of individual CDR techniques like bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS),…”
BackgroundInfluentialWorkman, M. H. W., Dooley, K., Lomax, G., Maltby, J., & Darch, G. J. C. (2019) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2019.10.002 · Cited by 92
“…a ff orestation and re-forestation, at the time of writing, neither BECCS nor any other CDR approaches have been developed at any substantial scale (Fuss et al., 2018), and the inclusion of CDR at such a magnitude in modelled scenarios is subject to controversy (Larkin et al., 2017; Anderson and…”
InfluentialContested framings of greenhouse gas removal and its feasibility: Social and political dimensions
Waller, L., Rayner, T., Chilvers, J., Gough, C., Lorenzoni, I., Jordan, A., & Vaughan, N. E. (2020) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.649 · Cited by 94
“In line with a range of other research on GGR (Minx et al., 2018), we treat afforestation and reforestation here together.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialFuhrman, J., McJeon, H. C., Doney, S. C., Shobe, W., & Clarens, A. F. (2019) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2019.00011 · Cited by 93
Sovacool, B. K. (2021) · Energy Strategy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.esr.2021.100656 · Cited by 90
Low, S., Baum, C. M., & Sovacool, B. K. (2022) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2022.102594 · Cited by 93
The ethics of negative emissions
Lenzi, D. (2018) · Global Sustainability · doi:10.1017/sus.2018.5 · Cited by 84
Self-citationBellamy, R., Fridahl, M., Lezaun, J., Palmer, J., Rodriguez, E., Lefvert, A., Hansson, A., Grönkvist, S., & Haikola, S. (2020) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.09.022 · Cited by 91
Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States: Perceptions, preferences, and lessons for policy
Pianta, S., Rinscheid, A., & Weber, E. U. (2021) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112149 · Cited by 87
Confronting mitigation deterrence in low-carbon scenarios
Grant, N., Hawkes, A. D., Mittal, S., & Gambhir, A. (2021) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac0749 · Cited by 92
Achieving a Carbon Neutral Future through Advanced Functional Materials and Technologies
Chapman, A. J., Ertekin, E., KUBOTA, M., Nagao, A., Bertsch, K. M., Macadre, A., Tsuchiyama, T., Masamura, T., Takaki, S., Komoda, R., et al. (2022) · Bulletin of the Chemical Society of Japan · doi:10.1246/bcsj.20210323 · Cited by 82
Don’t deploy negative emissions technologies without ethical analysis
Lenzi, D., Lamb, W. F., Hilaire, J., Kowarsch, M., & Minx, J. C. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-018-06695-5 · Cited by 84
Self-citationThe policy implications of an uncertain carbon dioxide removal potential
Grant, N., Hawkes, A. D., Mittal, S., & Gambhir, A. (2021) · Joule · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2021.09.004 · Cited by 91
Sociotechnical Considerations About Ocean Carbon Dioxide Removal
Cooley, S. R., Klinsky, S., Morrow, D. R., & Satterfield, T. A. (2022) · Annual Review of Marine Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-marine-032122-113850 · Cited by 88
Lopez, G., Pourjamal, Y., & Breyer, C. (2025) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2025.115371 · Cited by 81
The Value of BECCS in IAMs: a Review
Köberle, A. C. (2019) · Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports · doi:10.1007/s40518-019-00142-3 · Cited by 91
Support for the Deployment of Climate Engineering: A Comparison of Ten Different Technologies
Jobin, M., & Siegrist, M. (2020) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13462 · Cited by 77
“The informational texts on the CDR technologies were based on the work of Field and Mach (2017); Minx et al. (2018); Moore et al. (2010); Strefler, Amann, Bauer, Kriegler, and Hartmann (2018).”
Climate change mitigation in cities: a systematic scoping of case studies
Sethi, M., Lamb, W. F., Minx, J. C., & Creutzig, F. (2020) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab99ff · Cited by 89
Self-citationAnalyzing the necessity of hydrogen imports for net-zero emission scenarios in Japan
Burandt, T. (2021) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117265 · Cited by 74
“[20] Minx JC, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Fuss S, Hilaire J, Creutzig F, Amann T, Beringer T, de Oliveira Garcia W, Hartmann J, Khanna T, Lenzi D, Luderer G, Nemet GF, Rogelj J, Smith P, Vicente Vicente JL, Wilcox J, del Mar Zamora Dominguez M.”
BackgroundHemberger, P., Bödi, A., Bierkandt, T., Köhler, M., Kaczmarek, D., & Kasper, T. (2021) · Energy & Fuels · doi:10.1021/acs.energyfuels.1c01712 · Cited by 76
Creutzig, F., Callaghan, M., Ramakrishnan, A., Javaid, A., Niamir, L., Minx, J. C., Müller-Hansen, F., Sovacool, B. K., Afroz, Z., Andor, M., et al. (2020) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abd78b · Cited by 75
“…methods and literature searches (Minx et al 2017), and find encouraging support in systematic and bibliometrically supported reviews on the opposite end of climate change mitigation solutions, namely negative emission technologies (Minx et al 2018, Fuss et al 2018, p 2, Nemet et al 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationSoil organic carbon dynamics from agricultural management practices under climate change
Herzfeld, T., Heinke, J., Rolinski, S., & Müller, C. (2021) · Earth System Dynamics · doi:10.5194/esd-12-1037-2021 · Cited by 92
“…Agreement of 2015 to keep the increase in global mean temperature well below 2°C, and especially for the ambitious target of below 1.5°C, several negative emission technologies which remove carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) from the atmosphere have been proposed (Minx et al., 2018; Rogelj et al., 2018, 2016).”
InfluentialGabrielli, P., Charbonnier, F., Guidolin, A., & Mazzotti, M. (2020) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115245 · Cited by 72
Fight for carbon neutrality with state-of-the-art negative carbon emission technologies
Fu, J., Li, P., Lin, Y., Du, H., Liu, H., Zhu, W., & Ren, H. (2022) · Eco-Environment & Health · doi:10.1016/j.eehl.2022.11.005 · Cited by 78
“…pathway could temporarily stabilize global temperatures by reducing the contribution of other factors to increased temperatures to offset the contribution of increased CO 2 concentrations, the issues of the increasinggreenhouse gasconcentrations accumulatedin theatmosphere still exist [14].”
BackgroundInfluentialLearning from the Climate Change Debate to Avoid Polarisation on Negative Emissions
Colvin, R. M., Kemp, L., Talberg, A., de Castella, C., Downie, C., Friel, S., Grant, W. J., Howden, M. S., Jotzo, F., Markham, F., et al. (2019) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2019.1630463 · Cited by 85
“emissions (Minx et al., 2017; Minx et al., 2018), the potential impact of negative emissions options on”
BackgroundGeochemical Negative Emissions Technologies: Part I. Review
Campbell, J. S., Foteinis, S., Furey, V., Hawrot, O., Pike, D., Aeschlimann, S., Maesano, C. N., Reginato, P., Goodwin, D., Looger, L. L., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2022.879133 · Cited by 81
Current investigations on global N2O emissions and reductions: Prospect and outlook
Feng, R., & Li, Z. (2023) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2023.122664 · Cited by 72
Beyond carbon pricing: policy levers for negative emissions technologies
Cox, E., & Edwards, N. R. (2019) · Climate Policy · doi:10.1080/14693062.2019.1634509 · Cited by 72
“As pointed out by Nemet et al. (2018), the vast majority of existing NETs research focuses on the supply-side (for instance, R&D and technology potentials), whilst very little focuses on demand-side issues such as public acceptability and policy.”
BackgroundClimate policy for a net-zero future: ten recommendations for Direct Air Capture
Sovacool, B. K., Baum, C. M., Low, S., Roberts, C., & Steinhauser, J. (2022) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac77a4 · Cited by 79
“…emissions, the more climate models and projected scenarios suggest that at some point in the 21st century, it will be necessary to actively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to avoid dangerous warming (e.g. Minx et al 2018, Fuss et al 2016, Fuhrman et al 2019, 2021, Rickels et al 2019).”
BackgroundTerlouw, T., Pokras, D., Becattini, V., & Mazzotti, M. (2024) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.3c10041 · Cited by 76
Recent Advances in CO2 Adsorption from Air: a Review
Yang, M., Ma, C., Xu, M., Wang, S., & Xu, L. (2019) · Current Pollution Reports · doi:10.1007/s40726-019-00128-1 · Cited by 72
Tisserant, A., Morales, M., Cavalett, O., O'Toole, A., Weldon, S., Rasse, D. P., & Cherubini, F. (2022) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.106030 · Cited by 73
Higher Carbon Prices on Emissions Alone Will Not Deliver the Paris Agreement
Daggash, H. A., & Dowell, N. M. (2019) · Joule · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2019.08.008 · Cited by 70
Promises and perils of the Paris Agreement
Lawrence, M. G., & Schäfer, S. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaw4602 · Cited by 69
Annex III: Scenarios and Modelling Methods
Change, I. P. O. C. (2023) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009157926.022 · Cited by 106
Coffield, S., Vo, C. D., Wang, J. A., Badgley, G., Goulden, M. L., Cullenward, D., Anderegg, W. R. L., & Randerson, J. T. (2022) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.16380 · Cited by 70
“…to other carbon dioxide removal technologies, NCS are comparatively low cost (Psarras et al., 2017), immediately ready for large- scale deployment (Minx et al., 2018), not reliant on energy inputs (Smith et al., 2016), and frequently come with environmental and social co- benefits (Seddon et al.,…”
BackgroundGovern CO2 removal from the ground up
Bellamy, R., & Geden, O. (2019) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/s41561-019-0475-7 · Cited by 66
(Net-) zero-emission buildings: a typology of terms and definitions
Lützkendorf, T., & Frischknecht, R. (2020) · Buildings and Cities · doi:10.5334/bc.66 · Cited by 66
Güleç, F., & Okolie, J. A. (2023) · Environmental Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1007/s10311-023-01656-5 · Cited by 69
Wang, J., Rodrigues, J. F. D., Hu, M., Behrens, P., & Tukker, A. (2019) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2019.109433 · Cited by 65
An Ecosystem-Scale Flux Measurement Strategy to Assess Natural Climate Solutions
Hemes, K. S., Runkle, B. R. K., Novick, K. A., Baldocchi, D., & Field, C. B. (2021) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c06421 · Cited by 66
The Role of Pyrolysis and Gasification in a Carbon Negative Economy
Brown, R. C. (2021) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr9050882 · Cited by 67
“Carbon removal can be generally categorized as biological or engineered approaches [4,6].”
BackgroundOptimal Planning of Dual-Zero Microgrid on an Island Toward Net-Zero Carbon Emission
Li, H., Ren, Z., Trivedi, A., Srinivasan, D., & Liu, P. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · doi:10.1109/tsg.2023.3299639 · Cited by 62
“Comparatively, negative emission techniques directly absorb CO 2 from the atmosphere by chemistry (e.g., DAC) or photosynthesis (e.g., bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) [17].”
BackgroundTokarska, K. B., Zickfeld, K., & Rogelj, J. (2019) · Earth s Future · doi:10.1029/2019ef001312 · Cited by 62
“(For a comprehensive summary of various CDR technologies and their feasibility see Minx et al., 2018; Fuss et al., 2018).”
Self-citationNegative Emissions: Priorities for Research and Policy Design
Fajardy, M., Patrizio, P., Daggash, H. A., & Dowell, N. M. (2019) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2019.00006 · Cited by 66
“Several technologies have been identified as capable of delivering CDR at scale: afforestation/reforestation (AR/RE), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), biochar, direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), and enhanced weathering of minerals (EW) (Minx et al., 2018).”
BackgroundTechnological Options for Direct Air Capture: A Comparative Process Engineering Review
Wu, X., Krishnamoorti, R., & Bollini, P. (2022) · Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-102121-065047 · Cited by 62
Afforesting arid land with renewable electricity and desalination to mitigate climate change
Caldera, U., & Breyer, C. (2023) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-022-01056-7 · Cited by 61
Leveraging the bioeconomy for carbon drawdown
Dees, J., Sagues, W. J., Woods, E., Goldstein, H. M., Simon, A. J., & Sanchez, D. L. (2023) · Green Chemistry · doi:10.1039/d2gc02483g · Cited by 68
“16 In addition to carbon sequestration, biochar o ff ers of a multitude of benefits to soil health including increased biological activity and organic carbon accumulation, reduced runo ff , increased crop productivity, and reduced nutrient leaching.”
InfluentialSaharudin, D. M., Jeswani, H. K., & Azapagic, A. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.170266 · Cited by 66
Ai, Z., Hanasaki, N., Heck, V., Hasegawa, T., & Fujimori, S. (2021) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-021-00740-4 · Cited by 62
Managing Land‐based CDR: BECCS, Forests and Carbon Sequestration
Brack, D., & King, R. (2020) · Global Policy · doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12827 · Cited by 70
The BECCS Implementation Gap–A Swedish Case Study
Fuss, S., & Johnsson, F. (2021) · Frontiers in Energy Research · doi:10.3389/fenrg.2020.553400 · Cited by 73
“This is also important, since a criticism that has been directed toward BECCS is that it could postpone efforts to reduce fossil fuel emissions (Minx et al., 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationGlobal soil organic carbon changes and economic revenues with biochar application
Han, M., Zhao, Q. X., Li, W., Ciais, P., Wang, Y., Goll, D. S., Zhu, L., Zhao, Z. S., Wang, J., Wei, Y., et al. (2021) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12915 · Cited by 58
Millinger, M., Reichenberg, L., Hedenus, F., Berndes, G., Zeyen, E., & Brown, T. (2022) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.120016 · Cited by 70
Evaluating feedstocks for carbon dioxide removal by enhanced rock weathering and CO2 mineralization
Paulo, C., Power, I., Stubbs, A. R., Wang, B., Zeyen, N., & Wilson, S. (2021) · Applied Geochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.apgeochem.2021.104955 · Cited by 62
The environmental controls on efficiency of enhanced rock weathering in soils
Deng, H., Sonnenthal, E., Arora, B., Breunig, H. M., Brodie, E., Kleber, M., Spycher, N. F., & Nico, P. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-36113-4 · Cited by 59
Karan, S. K., Woolf, D., Azzi, E., Sundberg, C., & Wood, S. A. (2023) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.13102 · Cited by 63
“The potential for biochar CDR estimated in this study falls within the range (0.3– 1.3 Pg C year −1 ) of previously published studies (Minx et al., 2018; Roe et al., 2021; Woolf et al., 2010).”
ResultInfluentialCarbon farming: a circular framework to augment CO 2 sinks and to combat climate change
Singh, S., Kiran, B. R., & Mohan, S. V. (2024) · Environmental Science Advances · doi:10.1039/d3va00296a · Cited by 71
An ecosystem of carbon dioxide removal reviews – part 1: direct air CO 2 capture and storage
van der Spek, M. W., Bardow, A., Baum, C. M., Bolongaro, V., Dufour‐Décieux, V., Esch, C., Fritz, L., Garcia, S., Hamann, C., Hondeborg, D., et al. (2025) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/d5ee01732g · Cited by 71
Self-citationThe role of carbon dioxide removal in net-zero emissions pledges
Iyer, G. C., Clarke, L., Edmonds, J., Fawcett, A. A., Fuhrman, J., McJeon, H. C., & WALDHOFF, S. T. (2021) · Energy and Climate Change · doi:10.1016/j.egycc.2021.100043 · Cited by 60
Direct air capture by membranes
Fujikawa, S., & Selyanchyn, R. (2022) · MRS Bulletin · doi:10.1557/s43577-022-00313-6 · Cited by 56
Sovacool, B. K., Baum, C. M., & Low, S. (2022) · Political Geography · doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102702 · Cited by 61
Direct Air Capture Using Electrochemically Regenerated Anion Exchange Resins
Shu, Q., Haug, M., Tedesco, M., Kuntke, P., & Hamelers, H. V. M. (2022) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.2c01944 · Cited by 59
Life cycle assessment of BECCS systems: critical review of life cycle inventories
Duval-Dachary, S., Beauchet, S., Lorne, D., Salou, T., Hélias, A., & Pastor, A. V. (2022) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2023.113415 · Cited by 62
Technological innovation enables low cost climate change mitigation
Creutzig, F., Hilaire, J., Nemet, G. F., Müller-Hansen, F., & Minx, J. C. (2023) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2023.103276 · Cited by 66
Self-citationDelivering carbon negative electricity, heat and hydrogen with BECCS – Comparing the options
Bui, M., Zhang, D., Fajardy, M., & Dowell, N. M. (2021) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.02.042 · Cited by 61
Getting to 100%: Six strategies for the challenging last 10%
Mai, T., Denholm, P. L., Brown, P. R., Cole, W., Hale, E. T., Lamers, P., Murphy, C. A., Ruth, M. F., Sergi, B., Steinberg, D. C., et al. (2022) · Joule · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.004 · Cited by 64
Quantifying global carbon dioxide removal deployment
Powis, C. M., Smith, S. M., Minx, J. C., & Gasser, T. (2023) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/acb450 · Cited by 56
“Storage lifetimes taken from [1, 3, 31]. is—projects specifically developed for the purpose of generating CDR, and recorded in a registry or carbon purchase database), data on project-level CDR volumes were aggregated from across 20 unique registries and databases (table 1).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationHuman Rights and Precautionary Principle: Limits to Geoengineering, SRM, and IPCC Scenarios
Wieding, J., Stubenrauch, J., & Ekardt, F. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12218858 · Cited by 57
“On the other hand, each of the compensation options can be critically assessed regarding their risks and possible counteracting factors compromising their storage potential [21,22] (e.”
BackgroundAlternative Pathway to Phase Down Coal Power and Achieve Negative Emission in China
Wang, R., Li, H., Cai, W., Cui, X., Zhang, S., Li, J., Weng, Y., Song, X., Cao, B., Zhu, L., et al. (2022) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.2c06004 · Cited by 55
Sustainable scale-up of negative emissions technologies and practices: where to focus
Cobo, S., Negri, V., Valente, A., Reiner, D. M., Hamelin, L., Dowell, N. M., & Guillén‐Gosálbez, G. (2022) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/acacb3 · Cited by 57
Satterfield, T. A., Nawaz, S., & St‐Laurent, G. P. (2023) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-023-03483-7 · Cited by 58
The hydrogen economy can reduce costs of climate change mitigation by up to 22%
Wolfram, P., Kyle, P., Fuhrman, J., O’Rourke, P., & McJeon, H. C. (2024) · One Earth · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2024.04.012 · Cited by 55
Biochar from cookstoves reduces greenhouse gas emissions from smallholder farms in Africa
Sundberg, C., Karltun, E., Gitau, J. K., Kätterer, T., Kimutai, G., Mahmoud, Y., Njenga, M., Nyberg, G., de Nowina, K. R., Roobroeck, D., et al. (2020) · Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change · doi:10.1007/s11027-020-09920-7 · Cited by 55
Data challenges in optimizing biochar-based carbon sequestration
Tan, R. R. (2019) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2019.01.032 · Cited by 55
Twenty Key Challenges in Environmental and Resource Economics
Bretschger, L., & Pittel, K. (2020) · Environmental and Resource Economics · doi:10.1007/s10640-020-00516-y · Cited by 59
“2016), many research questions still remain to be addressed (Minx et al. 2018).”
BackgroundMace, M., Fyson, C. L., Schaeffer, M., & Hare, B. (2021) · Global Policy · doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12921 · Cited by 62
“Recent literature has highlighted the need for ethical considerations to be taken into account when developing mitigation scenarios (Lenzi et al., 2018; Minx et al., 2018) and designing climate policy (Morrow et al., 2020).”
BackgroundTiefenthaler, J., Braune, L., Bauer, C., Sacchi, R., & Mazzotti, M. (2021) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.729259 · Cited by 56
Reversible CO 2 Capture and On-Demand Release by an Acidity-Matched Organic Photoswitch
Alfaraidi, A. M., Kudisch, B. J., Ni, N., Thomas, J., George, T. Y., Rajabimoghadam, K., Jiang, H. J., Nocera, D. G., Aziz, M. J., & Liu, R. Y. (2023) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.3c08471 · Cited by 57
Buss, W., Hasemer, H., Sokol, N. W., Rohling, E. J., & Borevitz, J. (2024) · Communications Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43247-024-01771-3 · Cited by 59
“CDR is required both to remove excess atmospheric CO 2 , and to offset emissions that cannot be easily abated 5 .”
Markusson, N. O., Balta‐Ozkan, N., Chilvers, J., Healey, P., Reiner, D. M., & McLaren, D. P. (2020) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2020.00002 · Cited by 55
Buylova, A., Fridahl, M., Nasiritousi, N., & Reischl, G. (2021) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.675499 · Cited by 53
“The vast majority of climate scenarios, in which the Paris Agreement temperature target is successfully achieved (even the scenarios assuming global emission reductions by 2030), deploy carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies to sequester greenhouse gases from the atmosphere on a massive scale (Anderson, 2015; Frida…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSolar geoengineering may lead to excessive cooling and high strategic uncertainty
Abatayo, A. L., Bosetti, V., Casari, M., Ghidoni, R., & Tavoni, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1916637117 · Cited by 52
Ideas and perspectives: Synergies from co-deployment of negative emission technologies
Amann, T., & Hartmann, J. (2019) · Biogeosciences · doi:10.5194/bg-16-2949-2019 · Cited by 53
“All discussed options and technologies technologies have yet to reach the large-scale deployment stage (Minx et al., 2018; Nemet et al., 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationGalán‐Martín, Á., Contreras, M. D. M., Romero, I., Ruiz, E., Bueno, S., Eliche‐Quesada, D., & Castro-Galiano, E. (2022) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2022.112609 · Cited by 60
Bjørn, A., Kalbar, P. P., Nygaard, S. E., Kabins, S., Jensen, C. L., Birkved, M., Schmidt, J. H., & Hauschild, M. Z. (2018) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.08.001 · Cited by 51
“Biophysical limits and social resistance are also likely to constrain a potential massive deployment (Minx et al., 2018).”
BackgroundNegative Emission Potential of Direct Air Capture Powered by Renewable Excess Electricity in Europe
Wohland, J., Witthaut, D., & Schleussner, C. (2018) · Earth s Future · doi:10.1029/2018ef000954 · Cited by 56
The public remain uninformed and wary of climate engineering
Carlisle, D. P., Feetham, P. M., Wright, M., & Teagle, D. A. H. (2020) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-020-02706-5 · Cited by 52
The Role of Synthetic Biology in Atmospheric Greenhouse Gas Reduction: Prospects and Challenges
DeLisi, C., Patrinos, A. A. N., MacCracken, M. C., Drell, D., Annas, G. J., Arkin, A. P., Church, G. M., Cook-Deegan, R. M., Jacoby, H. D., Lidstrom, M. E., et al. (2020) · BioDesign Research · doi:10.34133/2020/1016207 · Cited by 51
“Given this situation, a number of new technologies have been proposed to remove CO2 from the atmosphere [6, 7], including biotic and abiotic methods [8].”
BackgroundPostweiler, P., Engelpracht, M., Rezo, D., Gibelhaus, A., & von der Assen, N. V. (2024) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/d3ee02970k · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Minx, J. C., Lamb, W. F., Callaghan, M. W., Fuss, S., Hilaire, J., Creutzig, F., Amann, T., Beringer, T., de Oliveira Garcia, W., Hartmann, J., Khanna, T., Lenzi, D., Luderer, G., Nemet, G. F., Rogelj, J., Smith, P., Vicente Vicente, J. L., Wilcox, J., & del Mar Zamora Dominguez, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (DE)
- Universität Hamburg (DE)
- Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (DE)
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (AT)
- University of Aberdeen (GB)
- Colorado School of Mines (US)
- Corresponding author
- Minx, Jan C
- ORCID
- Venue
- Environmental Research Letters
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2018-05-21
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 063001
- ISSN
- 1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2803435903
- Cited by
- 865
- References
- 155
- Citations by year
- 2026: 68 · 2025: 113 · 2024: 125 · 2023: 141 · 2022: 134 · 2021: 115 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 16
- FWCI
- 41.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Environmental Research Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- IIASA PURE (International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis) (acceptedVersion)
- Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Publication Database PIK (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
- Funders
- UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC/FFR2/3)
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01LS1610B, 03EK3046B)
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG EXEC 177, DFG SPP 1689)
- Natural Environment Research Council (NE/P019455/1, NE/P019900/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
- Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Filtration and Separation › Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
- Keywords
- negative emissions technologies, climate change mitigation, Paris Agreement, 1.5 °C warming target, 2 °C warming limit, ocean fertilization, implementation barriers, climate policy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
