2024-05-05-未来能源研究所-美国加大二氧化碳去除力度的政策（英）_8页_87kb

Summary of Policies for Scaling Up Carbon Dioxide Removal in the United States

Core Content

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is a critical tool for achieving the temperature goals set by the Paris Agreement, which aims to limit global temperature increase to less than $2.0^\circ\mathrm{C}$ and as close to $1.5^\circ\mathrm{C}$ as possible. CDR involves removing $\mathrm{CO}_{2}$ from the atmosphere and storing it in various reservoirs, such as soils, oceans, geologic sites, and long-lived wood products. However, current national goals and policies for CDR are lacking, and significant innovation is needed to accelerate its deployment.

Main CDR Technologies and Costs

Afforestation, Reforestation, and Improved Forest Management (ARI)

• CDR cost estimates range from $10–$100 per ton of $\mathrm{CO}_{2}$ stored.
• Costs vary due to differences in forest features and sequestration strategies.
• Opportunity costs of land use conversion and changes in forest management also vary significantly.

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS)

• Costs range from $80–$200 per ton of $\mathrm{CO}_{2}$, depending on the method (combustion vs. fermentation).
• Lifecycle emissions must be considered, including emissions from biomass growth, collection, and transportation.

Direct Air Capture with Carbon Storage (DACCS)

• Costs range from $90–$220 per ton of $\mathrm{CO}_{2}$ for solid-based chemical processes.
• Liquid-based chemical processes can cost up to $600 per ton.
• The cost difference is mainly due to higher thermal energy requirements.

Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS)

• Costs are not well-documented but include transport and storage expenses.
• Transport costs in the U.S. range from $20–$40 per ton.
• "Wood vault" storage costs range from $10–$50 per ton.

Other methods, such as enhanced weathering and ocean alkalinity enhancement, are still in early development stages.

Policy Recommendations for Scaling Up CDR

1. Federal Support and Incentives

• Federal programs, such as those under the USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service, provide cost-sharing for afforestation and reforestation.
• The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) expanded support for CDR, including the 45Q tax credit for carbon sequestration.

2. Addressing Challenges in Forest-Based CDR

• Additionality: Policies must ensure that CDR claims are based on actions that would not have occurred without the policy.
• Permanence: Risks such as fire, disease, and harvesting must be considered in assessing the long-term effectiveness of forest-based CDR.
• Leakage: CDR actions in one area may reduce storage in another due to market forces, making it difficult to quantify and manage.
• Policy Challenge: Improved evaluation methods are needed to correct for these distortions and ensure the credibility of forest-based CDR.

3. Enhancing BECCS and DACCS

• These technologies require significant investment to scale up.
• Advance Market Commitments (AMCs) can help finance scaling by providing long-term purchase agreements for CDR.
• AMCs are more effective than grants for mature technologies, as they provide developers with incentives and time to scale.
• Efficient procurement methods, such as reverse auctions, can be used to allocate funds effectively.

4. Complementary Policies

• Regulatory Reforms: Current regulations address health and safety risks but lack mechanisms for fair and effective siting of CDR facilities.
• Cost Recovery: Policies must ensure that transmission and storage costs are recovered fairly while limiting market power and inefficiencies.
• Local Air Pollution: CDR may increase local air pollution due to fossil fuel use for energy, especially until the grid is decarbonized.
• Equity Concerns: CDR should not reduce pressure for decarbonization or extend the operation of polluting facilities in disadvantaged communities. Mitigation and removal policies must include measures to address environmental and distributional justice.

5. Policy Design for Mid-Century Decarbonization

• Incentive-Based Policies: Setting net-emission targets and allowing CDR to offset mitigation requirements can create effective incentives for private investment.
• Coordination of Policies: Coordinating CDR and GHG mitigation policies using incentive-based approaches leads to more cost-effective outcomes.
• Tax-Based Approaches: A potential strategy is to tax fossil fuels and use the revenue to finance CDR through efficient procurement methods.
• Market-Based Mechanisms: Tradeable allowances and targeted taxes can be used to allow the private sector to finance CDR investments, with removal credits offsetting emission liabilities.

Key Policy Implications

• Financing CDR: Well-targeted financing is essential for improving the technical capabilities of CDR technologies and reducing their costs.
• Scaling Up: Mechanisms like AMCs can help scale up CDR investment beyond pilot projects.
• Environmental and Social Considerations: Complementary policies are needed to address side effects, health concerns, and equity issues.
• Institutional Infrastructure: Effective policy design requires robust institutional frameworks for monitoring and enforcing compliance.
• Cost-Effectiveness: The marginal social cost of CDR compared to GHG mitigation is a key indicator for cost-effective policy design.

Conclusion

To scale up CDR in the United States, a combination of federal support, market-based incentives, and regulatory reforms is necessary. Policies must ensure that CDR is both technically viable and socially equitable, while also addressing the environmental side effects and ensuring that the costs of transport and storage are managed effectively. The integration of CDR with GHG mitigation efforts through incentive-based mechanisms is seen as the most promising path to achieving mid-century net-zero emissions goals.