.png)
๐ง Letโs face it: a Trump presidency creates a lot of uncertainty about what the next four years will mean for the world, for climate, and also for carbon dioxide removals (hashtag#CDR). For removals, it is safe to say that a lot more efforts will now shift to individual U.S. states.
๐บ๏ธ 1.5 years ago, I did an analysis of the CDR potential across all 50 U.S. states (see comments). Thankfully, the RMI has taken this to a whole new level by developing an innovative tool, the State CDR Atlas, designed specifically to aid state-level stakeholders in exploring CDR opportunities within their jurisdictions.
The Atlas categorises states' potential across eight different CDR approaches, taking into account each stateโs:
๐๏ธ Infrastructure
โฐ๏ธ Natural resources
๐ท Workforce
๐ I did a quick analysis looking at CDR potential (using RMI's 0-3 CDR scale - 3 being states with the highest potential) alongside the 2024 election outcomes, interestingly there was no direct correlation between a state's political leaning and its CDR potential.
Among the top-ranking states for CDR potential, there are both predominantly ๐ตDemocratic states (like California) and ๐ดRepublican states (like Texas).
๐ So where does that leave us? We might still see a lot of action in Washington D.C. Iโve got particularly high hopes for the U.S. Department of Agricultureโs role over the coming years.
๐ In the meantime, letโs get to work. We know which states hold the most promise. We have the tools we need. Time to put hashtag#CDR on the map!
๐ฃ Special shout-out to all the folks who have been working relentlessly on states level policy. First and foremost the The OpenAir Collective around Christopher Neidl. Then Jason Grillo and Mike Robinson and their Pacific Coast Legacy Emissions Action Network (hashtag#PACLEAN) focused on CDR in the North-West. And, of course, Kyle Clark-Sutton, Isabel Wood, Daniel Pike, Rudy Kahsar, and Cara Maesano at RMI.
โ What is your take? Should we double down on U.S. States and which ones in particular?
Comments