CDR library

🥊 Not one day goes by in which I do not see folks pitting these two approaches against each other. This then plays out in policy, where we see arbitrary hurdles, e.g. permanence thresholds or the lack thereof, created to lock one side out. 💬 And - to be honest - I used to be part of this problem too, actively taking one side only. But the more I speak to policy makers and corporate buyers, the more I realise that what they need is a holistic approach, one which encompasses

♀️Women working tirelessly across five governments and the EU institutions, designing the frameworks for funding and market access that decide whether carbon removal actually scales to climate relevance. 🇨🇭 Switzerland Veronika Elgart, Deputy Head International Climate Policy, BAFU/OFEV Sophie Wenger, Climate Policy Officer, International Climate Policy, BAFU/OFEV 🇳🇴🇸🇪 Nordics Sonia Ruyter, Case Manager, National Centre for CCS, Swedish Energy Agency Ane Gjengedal, Seni

🙈 We had a technical glitch last time around that shall not be named, so we're switching platforms. Come find us on our Youtube channel - and subscribe while you're at it! 🤔 Corresponding Adjustments: Necessary or Overkill? 🔥 This one has been sitting at the top of my list for a while. It sits right at the fault line between carbon market integrity and real-world finance. 🌐 In the “Necessary” Corner: Olga Gassan-zade, former chair of the Paris Agreement’s Article 6.4 Supe

📣 No surprises here: I believe the EU holds the key to scaling carbon removal policy. As such, I am thrilled to join the Board of Negative Emissions Platform (NEP), Europe’s most established industry voice for CDR. 🙋🏻 Formally, I took over the Carbonfuture seat a month ago from Leila Toplic and hold it until the next election this June. Then hopefully beyond that. 🌍 I look forward to joining Sacha Corby, PhD , Dirk Paessler , Rafael Broze (Microsoft), Johan Bör

🔥 The last few days have been heated in the CDR policy world: two objections were raised in the European Parliament - one from the far right and one from socialists + greens - requesting the outright rejection of the CRCF methodologies (both did not pass). 👁️ On top of this, some civil society actors - most notably Carbon Market Watch - have been rallying the troops against the CRCF for months. 🤔 It is thus not far-fetched to ask whether the CRCF is fit for purpose? Recent