🤔 Like for like - the policy silver bullet? 🤔

🏛️ In carbon removal policy circles, these three simple words seem to come up more and more.

▶️ Green Claims Directive: use like for like.

▶️ Corporare net zero claims: follow like for like.

▶️ Even integration of CDR into emission trading systems: has to adhere to like for like.

🤯 What strikes me most about this concept is how obvious and simple it seems on paper vs how incredibly complex and misunderstood it actually is.

⚖️ Simply put, like for like means that short-lived emissions (think methane) can be compensated with temporary removals (think most nature based solutions). Long-lived emissions, on the other hand (think CO2), need to be compensated with at least equally durable CDR (think biochar carbon removal or direct air capture).

😅 Easy, right?

🧐 But then it get complicated: methane, for example, converts into CO2 after a few decades. Another complication is that some argue that we should also differentiate between biogenic vs fossil emissions. The more I discuss it, the less confident I feel about my understanding.

‼️ Why is this important: as stated above, like for like is becoming a core pillar of CDR policy design. We will see it all over the place.

🤩 To - hopefully - settle my doubts once and for all, I will have a conversation with two of the people whose opinions I respect most: Robert Höglund and Eve Tamme. The best part: you can listen in!

👀 Tune in to our next CDR Policy Scoop this Wednesday at 11.30am CET. Sign-up here: https://lnkd.in/dRb4VJrz

👇 What is your take on like for like? And what open questions would you like us to address, let us know in the comments?

Follow the conversation