Abstract
Carbon markets are expanding to include various forms of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR). Standards used in the certification of CDR must define the durability of removals and implement mechanisms to manage carbon that escapes from storage. These definitions and mechanisms will impact the ability of a global carbon management system to reach and maintain carbon neutrality targets in the long term. Collecting data from 28 international standard developing organizations (SDOs) and 268 proposals received by one large carbon removal purchaser, we reviewed the different definitions and mechanisms proposed to implement durability and manage carbon loss from storage. We find that standards most often use a stipulated contractual duration of storage of 100 years, but ranges from 10 to beyond 100 years. Project developers expect their storage to last between 1 year and 10 million years and most seem willing to provide a guarantee of storage duration. Six different mechanisms are used by SDOs to manage durability and four to manage carbon loss from storage during the contractual timeframe, but the rationale for a choice is not clearly associated with the CDR method, the stipulated duration, or the type of market. The most used mechanisms are commitment periods for durability, and buffer pools and required compensation for reversal management. Although it is an incomplete picture, this global system covers a wide range of durability and stipulated contractual durations; shows signs of common practices; shows a willingness to guarantee storage; has multiple mechanism options; and has no clear association between the choice of mechanism and the type of CDR method, stipulated duration, or type of market. Further work should focus on analyzing the trade-offs for each mechanism and informing the definition of permanent storage so a global carbon management system can develop to maintain carbon neutrality targets in the long term.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from Microsoft for FY21 (https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiOGM2MGFlNGYtMGNlNy00YzY5LWEyMTAtOTA0ODEyNzEzYTczIiwidCI6ImMxMzZlZWMwLWZlOTItNDVlMC1iZWFlLTQ2OTg0OTczZTIzMiIsImMiOjF9) and FY22 (https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZTU5OTYwN2EtOTI3Ni00NGE0LThjNWItZTUzZTFlNWIxNzFhIiwidCI6ImMxMzZlZWMwLWZlOTItNDVlMC1iZWFlLTQ2OTg0OTczZTIzMiIsImMiOjF9) and from the dataset provided by Arcusa and Sprenkle-Hyppolite (2022) at https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2094308. The datasets generated in this study are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.23561535.
Notes
2021 Microsoft Projects: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiOGM2MGFlNGYtMGNlNy00YzY5LWEyMTAtOTA0ODEyNzEzYTczIiwidCI6ImMxMzZlZWMwLWZlOTItNDVlMC1iZWFlLTQ2OTg0OTczZTIzMiIsImMiOjF9. The page can also be accessed from Microsoft’s corporate social responsibility webpage under carbon dioxide removal under the FY21 past submissions (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/sustainability/carbon-removal-program).
2022 Microsoft Projects: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZTU5OTYwN2EtOTI3Ni00NGE0LThjNWItZTUzZTFlNWIxNzFhIiwidCI6ImMxMzZlZWMwLWZlOTItNDVlMC1iZWFlLTQ2OTg0OTczZTIzMiIsImMiOjF9. The page can be accessed also from Microsoft’s corporate social responsibility webpage under carbon dioxide removal under the FY22 project dashboard (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/sustainability/carbon-removal-program).
Puro Earth’s carbon removal methods https://puro.earth/carbon-removal-methods.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/.
Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets Core Carbon Principles Assessment Framework and Procedure https://icvcm.org/assessment-framework/.
References
Allen MR, Friedlingstein P, Girardin CAJ, Jenkins S, Malhi Y, Mitchell-Larson E, Peters GP, Rajamani L (2022) Net zero: science, origins, and implications. Annu Rev Environ Resour 47:849–887. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-112320-105050
Anderegg WRL, Trugman AT, Badgley G, Anderson CM, Bartuska A, Ciais P, Cullenward D, Field CB, Freeman J, Goetz SJ, Hicke JA, Huntzinger D, Jackson RB, Nickerson J, Pacala S, Randerson JT (2020) Climate-driven risks to the climate mitigation potential of forests. Science 368:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz7005
Archer D, Brovkin V (2008) The millennial atmospheric lifetime of anthropogenic CO2. Clim Change 90:283–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-008-9413-1
Archer D, Kheshgi H, Maier-Reimer E (1997) Multiple timescales for neutralization of fossil fuel CO2. Geophys Res Lett 24:405–408. https://doi.org/10.1029/97GL00168
Archer D, Eby M, Brovkin V, Ridgwell A, Cao L, Mikolajewicz U, Caldeira K, Matsumoto K, Munhoven G, Montenegro A, Tokos K (2009) Atmospheric lifetime of fossil-fuel carbon dioxide. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 37:117–134. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100206
Arcusa S, Lackner K (2022) Intergenerational equity and responsibility: a call to internalize impermanence into certifying carbon sequestration. OSF Preprints, February 23 2022. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/b3wkr
Arcusa S, Sprenkle-Hyppolite S (2022) Snapshot of the carbon dioxide removal certification and standards ecosystem (2021–2022). Clim Policy 22:1319–1332. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2094308
Bednar J, Obersteiner M, Wagner F (2019) On the financial viability of negative emissions. Nat Commun 10(1):1783. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09782-x
Bey N, McDonald H, Maya-Drysdale L, Stewart R, Pätz C, Hornsleth MN, Duin L, Frelih-Larsen A, Heller C, Zakkour P (2021) Certification of carbon removals. Part 1: synoptic review of carbon removal solutions. Environment Agency Austria, p 126. https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/default/files/publication/2022/50035-Certification-of-carbon-removal-part-1-web.pdf
Brandão M, Levasseur A, Kirschbaum MUF, Weidema BP, Cowie AL, Jørgensen SV, Hauschild MZ, Pennington DW, Chomkhamsri K (2013) Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:230–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0451-6
Brander M (2022) There should be more normative research on how social and environmental accounting should be done. Social Environ Acc J 42:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2022.2066554
Brander M, Broekhoff D (2023) Methods that equate temporary carbon storage with permanent CO2 emission reductions lead to false claims on temperature alignment. Carbon Manag 14:2284714. https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2023.2284714
Brander M, Ascui F, Scott V, Tett S (2021) Carbon accounting for negative emissions technologies. Clim Policy 25:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1878009
Burke J, Schenuit F (2023) Governing permanence of carbon dioxide removal. A typology of policy measures. CO2RE -The greenhouse gas removal hub. https://co2re.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CO2RE_Report_CDR_Permanence-FINAL-v7.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Cabiyo B, Dolginow A (2022) Accounting for short-term durability in carbon offsetting. Carbon Direct, February 28, 2022. Available at: https://www.carbon-direct.com/insights/accounting-for-short-term-durability-in-carbon-offsetting
Carton W, Lund JF, Dooley K (2021) Undoing equivalence: rethinking carbon accounting for just carbon removal. Front Clim 3:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2021.664130
Chay F, Cullenward D, Hamman J, Freeman J (2021) CDR Database. CarbonPlan. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5715460
Chiquier S, Patrizio P, Bui M, Sunny N, Mac Dowell N (2022) A comparative analysis of the efficiency, timing, and permanence of CO2 removal pathways. Energy Environ Sci 15:4389–4403. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2EE01021F
Climate Policy Watcher (2023) How the issue of permanence is dealt with in different schemes. May 2, 2023. https://www.climate-policy-watcher.org/kyoto-protocol/how-the-issue-of-permanence-is-dealt-with-in-different-schemes.html
Cox EM, Pidgeon N, Spence E, Thomas G (2018) Blurred lines: the ethics and policy of greenhouse gas removal at scale. Front Environ Sci 6:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2018.00038
Demenois J, Dayet A, Karsenty A (2022) Surviving the jungle of soil organic carbon certification standards: an analytic and critical review. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 27:1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-021-09980-3
Dornburg V, Marland G (2008) Temporary storage of carbon in the biosphere does have value for climate change mitigation: a response to the paper by Miko Kirschbaum. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 13:211–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9113-6
Dutschke M, Wong JLP, Rumberg M (2004) Expiring carbon credits from CDM afforestation and reforestation. HWWA Discussion Paper 290
Dynarski KA, Bossio DA, Scow KM (2020) Dynamic stability of soil carbon: reassessing the permanence of soil carbon sequestration. Front Environ Sci 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.514701
Fearnside PM (2002) Why a 100-year time horizon should be used for global warming mitigation calculations. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 7:19–30. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015885027530
Fearnside PM, Lashof DA, Moura-costa P (2000) Accounting for time in mitigating global warming through land-use change and forestry. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 5:239–270
Galik CS, Baker JS, Daigneault A, Latta G (2022) Crediting temporary forest carbon: retrospective and empirical perspectives on accounting options. Front Glob Change 5:933020. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2022.933020
Girardin CAJ, Jenkins S, Seddon N, Allen M, Lewis SL, Wheeler CE, Griscom BW, Malhi Y (2021) Nature-based solutions can help cool the planet — if we act now. Nat Comment 593:191–194
Green JF (2013) Order out of chaos: public and private rules for managing carbon. Glob Environ Politics 13:1–25. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00164
Haya BK, Abayo A, So IS, Elias M (2023) Voluntary registry offsets database v10, Dec 2023. Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, University of California, Berkeley
Herzog H, Caldeira K, Reilly J (2003) An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage. Clim Change 59:293–310. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024801618900
Hurteau MD, Hungate BA, Koch GW (2009) Accounting for risk in valuing forest carbon offsets. Carbon Balance Manage 4:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-0680-4-1
IPCC (2023) Summary for policymakers. In: Core writing Team, Lee H, Romero J (eds) Climate Change 2023: synthesis report. Contribution of Working groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, pp 1–34. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001
IPCC (2021) Annex VII: Glossary [Matthews JBR, Möller V, van Diemen R, Fuglestvedt JS, Masson-Delmotte V, Méndez C, Semenov S, Reisinger A (eds)]. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pirani A, Connors SL, Péan C, Berger S, Caud N, Chen Y, Goldfarb L, Gomis MI, Huang M, Leitzell K, Lonnoy E, Matthews JBR, Maycock TK, Waterfield T, Yelekçi O, Yu R, Zhou B (eds) Climate Change 2021: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp 2215–2256. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.022
Jay JE (2012) When Perpetual is not forever: the challenge of changing conditions, amendment, and termination of perpetual conservation easements. Harv Environ Law Rev 36:1–79
Joppa L, Luers A, Willmott E, Friedmann SJ, Hamburg SP, Broze R (2021) Microsoft’s million-tonne CO2-removal purchase - lessons for net zero. Nature 597:629–632
Kalkuhl M, Franks M, Gruner F, Lessmann K, Edenhofer O (2022) Pigou’s advice and Sisyphus’ warning: carbon pricing with non-permanent carbon-dioxide removal. SSRN J 1–61:1. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4315996
Kanzaki Y, Planavsky NJ, Reinhard CT (2023) New estimates of the storage permanence and ocean co-benefits of enhanced rock weathering. PNAS Nexus 2:pgad059. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad059
Kim MK, McCarl BA, Murray BC (2008) Permanence discounting for land-based carbon sequestration. Ecol Econ 64:763–769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.04.013
Kirschbaum MUF (2006) Temporary carbon sequestration cannot prevent climate change. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 11:1151–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9027-8
Korhonen R, Pingoud K, Savolainen I, Matthews R (2002) The role of carbon sequestration and the tonne-year approach in fulfilling the objective of climate convention. Environ Sci Policy 5:429–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(02)00091-6
Lackner KS (2003) A guide to CO2 sequestration. Science 300:1677–1678
LeNeveu DM (2008) CQUESTRA, a risk and performance assessment code for geological sequestration of carbon dioxide. Energy Conv Manag 49:32–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.06.001
Levasseur A, Brandão M, Lesage P, Margni M, Pennington D, Clift R, Samson R (2012) Valuing temporary carbon storage. Nat Clim Change 2:6–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1335
Lyngfelt A, Johansson DJA, Lindeberg E (2019) Negative CO2 emissions - an analysis of the retention times required with respect to possible carbon leakage. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 87:27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.04.022
Maréchal K, Hecq W (2006) Temporary credits: a solution to the potential non-permanence of carbon sequestration in forests? Ecol Econ 58:699–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.08.017
Marland G, Fruit K, Sedjo R (2001) Accounting for sequestered carbon: the question of permanence. Environ Sci Policy 4:259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(01)00038-7
Matthews HD, Zickfeld K, Koch A, Luers A (2023) Accounting for the climate benefit of temporary carbon storage in nature. Nat Commun 14:5485. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-41242-5
McDonald H, Bey N, Duin L, Frelih-Larsen A, Maya-Drysdale L, Stewart R, Paetz C, Hornsleth MN, Heller C, Zakkour P (2021) Certification of Carbon removals. Part 2: a review of carbon removal certification mechanisms and methodologies (no. REP-0796), certification of carbon removals, p 162. Environment Agency Austria. https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/default/files/publication/2022/50035-Certification-of-carbon-removal-part-2-web.pdf
McLaughlin NA (2005) Rethinking the perpetual nature of conservation easements. Harv Environ Law Rev 29:421–521
Mercer L, Burke J (2023) Strengthening MRV standards for greenhouse gas removals to improve climate change governance. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy. London School of Economics and Political Science, London
Microsoft (2021) Microsoft carbon removal. Lessons from an early corporate purchase. January 2021. Available at: https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE4MDlc
Microsoft (2022) Microsoft carbon removal. An update with lessons learned in our second year. https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE4QO0D. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Miltenberger O, Jospe C, Pittman J (2021) The good is never perfect: why the current flaws of voluntary carbon markets are services, not barriers to successful climate change action. Front Clim 3:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2021.686516
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 (2018) Negative emissions - Part 1: research landscape and synthesis. Environ Res Lett 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9b
Moolgavkar R, Berg R, Kenyon R (2023) The carbon removal blended tonne whitepaper. https://github.com/nori-dot-eco/carbon-removal-whitepapers/blob/main/cdr-blended-tonne.md. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Moura Costa P, Wilson C (2000) An equivalence factor between CO2 avoided emissions and sequestration - description and application in forestry. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 5:51–60. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009697625521
Murray BC, Sohngen B, Ross MT (2007) Economic consequences of consideration of permanence, leakage and additionality for soil carbon sequestration projects. Clim Change 80:127–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9169-4
Neeff T, Ascui F (2009) Lessons from carbon markets for designing an effective REDD architecture. Clim Policy 9:306–315. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2008.0584
Nolan RH, Sinclair J, Eldridge DJ, Ramp D (2018) Biophysical risks to carbon sequestration and storage in Australian drylands. J Environ Manage 208:102–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.12.002
Oldfield EE, Eagle AJ, Rubin RL, Rudek J, Sanderman J, Gordon DR (2021) Agricultural soil carbon credits: making sense of protocols for carbon sequestration and net greenhouse gas removals. Environmental Defense Fund, NewYork
Owley J (2011) Changing property in a changing world: a call for the end of perpetual conservation easements. Stanf Environ Law J 30:121–176
Parisa Z, Marland E, Sohngen B, Marland G, Jenkins J (2022) The time value of carbon storage. For Policy Econ 144:102840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102840
Plastina A (2021) How to grow and sell carbon credits in US agriculture. Ag Decision Maker. https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/crops/pdf/a1-76.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Prado A, Mac Dowell N (2023) The cost of permanent carbon dioxide removal. Joule 7:700–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2023.03.006
Richards KR, Huebner GE (2012) Evaluating protocols and standards for forest carbon-offset programs, part A: additionality, baselines and permanence. Carbon Manag 3:393–410. https://doi.org/10.4155/cmt.12.38
Richards KR, Huebner GE (2012) Evaluating protocols and standards for forest carbon-offset programs, part B: leakage assessment, wood products, validation and verification. Carbon Manag 3:411–425. https://doi.org/10.4155/cmt.12.39
Richards TA, Wickizer D (2009) Demonstration of the Climate Action Reserve Forestry protocols at the LaTour Demonstration State Forest, WESTCARB final report, CEC-500‐05‐029. California Energy Commission. PIER Energy‐Related Environmental Research Program
Ruseva T, Marland E, Szymanski C, Hoyle J, Marland G, Kowalczyk T (2017) Additionality and permanence standards in California’s forest Offset Protocol: a review of project and program level implications. J Environ Manage 198:277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.082
Ruseva T, Hedrick J, Marland G, Tovar H, Sabou C, Besombes E (2020) Rethinking standards of permanence for terrestrial and coastal carbon: implications for governance and sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 45:69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.09.009
Sanei H, Rudra A, Przyswitt ZMM, Kousted S, Sindlev MB, Zheng X, Nielsen SB, Petersen HI (2024) Assessing biochar’s permanence: an inertinite benchmark. Int J Coal Geol 281:104409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2023.104409
Smith SM, Geden O, Gidden MJ, Lamb WF, Nemet GF, Minx JC, Buck H, Cox E, Edwards MR, Fuss S, Johnstone I, Mueller-Hansen F, Pongratze J, Probst BS, Roe S, Schenuit F, Schulte I, Vaughan NE (eds) (2024) The state of carbon dioxide removal 2014–2nd Edition. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/F85QJ
Smith SM, Geden O, Nemet G, Gidden M, Lamb WF, Powis C, Bellamy R, Callaghan, Cowie A, Cox E, Fuss S, Gasser T, Grassi G, Greene J, Lueck S, Mohan A, Mueller-Hansen F, Peters G, Pratama Y, Repke T, Riahi K, Schenuit F, Steinhauser J, Strefler J, Valenzuela JM, Minx JC (2022) The state of carbon dioxide removal. https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/164199/. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
ten Oever N, Milan S (2022) The making of international communication standards: towards a theory of power in standardization. J Standardisation 1:1–27. https://doi.org/10.18757/JOS.2022.6205
Thamo T, Pannell DJ (2016) Challenges in developing effective policy for soil carbon sequestration: perspectives on additionality, leakage, and permanence. Clim Policy 16:973–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1075372
Trakman LE (2007) Declaring force majeure: Veracity or sham? The University of New South Wales. https://www.academia.edu/34076516/Declaring_Force_Majeure_Veracity_or_Sham. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
UNFCCC (2008) Kyoto Protocol Reference Manual. On accounting of emissions and assigned amounts. https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/08_unfccc_kp_ref_manual.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Wenger S, D’Alessandro D, Wright C (2022) Maximizing global cooling potential in carbon dioxide removal (CDR) procurements: a proposal for Tonne-Year pricing. Front Clim 4:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.927408
Whitmore A, Aragonès MP (2022) Addressing differences in permanence of carbon dioxide removal. Bellona Policy Brief. https://bellona.org/publication/addressing-differences-in-permanence-of-carbon-dioxide-removal. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Wong P-H (2014) Maintenance required: the Ethics of geoengineering and post-implementation scenarios. Ethics Policy Gov 17:186–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2014.926090
Zelikova J, Chay F, Freeman J, Cullenward D (2021) A buyer’s guide to soil carbon offsets. CarbonPlan. https://carbonplan.org/research/soil-protocols-explainer. Accessed 25 Nov 2024
Acknowledgements
S. Arcusa and E. Hagood were supported by Arizona State University. The authors thank the members of the Center for Negative Carbon Emissions and S. Kloeblen for constructive discussions and feedback.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization: S. Arcusa; Methodology: S. Arcusa and E. Hagood; Formal analysis and investigation: S. Arcusa and E. Hagood; Writing - original draft preparation: S. Arcusa and E. Hagood; Writing - review and editing: S. Arcusa and E. Hagood.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(XLSX 18.7 KB)
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Arcusa, S., Hagood, E. Definitions and mechanisms for managing durability and reversals in standards and procurers of carbon dioxide removal. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 30, 1 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-024-10184-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-024-10184-8