The Value of ReversibleCarbon Storage in a Zero-EmissionsWorld

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a quantitative framework for comparing CDR approaches with climate and cost metrics.

🏢実務担当者:Useful for companies considering nature-based solutions vs direct air capture for offsetting; highlights risk of reversibility.

🏛政策担当者:Informs national CDR deployment strategies, emphasizing need for institutional stability.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is required to stabilize global temperature. CDR can be achieved via ecosystem-based approaches that are cost-effective but reversible (e.g., soil and forest management) or by more durable but expensive approaches (e.g., direct air capture coupled with geologic storage). Here, we examine trade-offs between these approaches, focusing on timing, climate impacts, and cost. We simulated reversible carbon accrual for a range of CDR contract structures using a general minimalist model of ecosystem carbon cycling, and parameterized it to simulate US agricultural soil managementspecifically cover croppingas a case study. We then quantified the resulting impact on atmospheric carbon and global temperature using a climate model emulator. We find that maintaining a patchwork of reversible CDR projects by replacing lapsed projects with new projects can reduce warming by 22–195 μ°C in 2100 and that the magnitude of this cooling effect depends on how effectively the patchwork is maintained. Long-term maintenance of reversible CDR projects requires institutional stability that cannot be guaranteed over multiple decades. Consequently, effective CDR ultimately requires replacing reversible projects with durable projects. To address this problem, we modeled the cost of replacing reversible agricultural soil CDR with geologic CDR. We found that using reversible CDR as a bridge to durable CDR is potentially more cost-effective as a global cooling strategy (0.20–0.81 billion USD per μ°C avoided) than perpetual maintenance of reversible CDR (0.32–1.31 billion USD per μ°C avoided) or an immediate transition to durable CDR (1.37–2.19 billion USD per μ°C avoided). However, we emphasize that institutional commitments to maintain reversible CDR projects cannot be guaranteed. Reliance on reversible CDR as a bridge to durable CDR therefore carries an unknown amount of risk and will only function if efforts to maintain reversible CDR are robust.

• openalex https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/The_Value_of_Reversible_Carbon_Storage_in_a_Zero-Emissions_World/32599032first seen 2026-06-30 05:07:43 · last seen 2026-07-01 05:03:02