Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change

Erschienen in:

01.01.2025

Definitions and mechanisms for managing durability and reversals in standards and procurers of carbon dioxide removal

verfasst von: Stephanie Arcusa, Emily Hagood

Erschienen in: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change | Ausgabe 1/2025

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Der Artikel geht auf das entscheidende Thema der Kohlendioxidentfernung (CDR) und die Notwendigkeit ein, negative Emissionen zu erreichen, um die globalen Netto-Null-Ziele aufrechtzuerhalten. Er untersucht die Entwicklung des Konzepts der "Dauerhaftigkeit" in CDR-Standards, vom Schwerpunkt des Kyoto-Protokolls auf der "Dauerhaftigkeit" bis hin zur aktuellen Betonung der langfristigen Speicherung. Die Studie analysiert verschiedene Haltbarkeitsdefinitionen und Managementmechanismen, die von Standard-Entwicklungsorganisationen (SDOs) und Unternehmenskäufern verwendet werden, und unterstreicht die Notwendigkeit eines harmonisierten Ansatzes, um die Langlebigkeit der Kohlenstoffspeicherung zu gewährleisten. Die Autoren diskutieren auch die Auswirkungen unterschiedlicher festgelegter Laufzeiten und Umkehrmanagementmechanismen und schlagen politische Empfehlungen vor, um die Effektivität globaler Kohlenstoffmanagementsysteme zu verbessern.

KI-Generiert

Diese Zusammenfassung des Fachinhalts wurde mit Hilfe von KI generiert.

Nächster Artikel Trees Without Borders: the next challenge in climate change adaptation

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

2021 Microsoft Projects: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiOGM2MGFlNGYtMGNlNy00YzY5LWEyMTAtOTA0ODEyNzEzYTczIiwidCI6ImMxMzZlZWMwLWZlOTItNDVlMC1iZWFlLTQ2OTg0OTczZTIzMiIsImMiOjF9. The page can also be accessed from Microsoft’s corporate social responsibility webpage under carbon dioxide removal under the FY21 past submissions (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/sustainability/carbon-removal-program).

2022 Microsoft Projects: https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZTU5OTYwN2EtOTI3Ni00NGE0LThjNWItZTUzZTFlNWIxNzFhIiwidCI6ImMxMzZlZWMwLWZlOTItNDVlMC1iZWFlLTQ2OTg0OTczZTIzMiIsImMiOjF9. The page can be accessed also from Microsoft’s corporate social responsibility webpage under carbon dioxide removal under the FY22 project dashboard (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/sustainability/carbon-removal-program).

Puro Earth’s carbon removal methods https://puro.earth/carbon-removal-methods.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/.

Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets Core Carbon Principles Assessment Framework and Procedure https://icvcm.org/assessment-framework/.

Allen MR, Friedlingstein P, Girardin CAJ, Jenkins S, Malhi Y, Mitchell-Larson E, Peters GP, Rajamani L (2022) Net zero: science, origins, and implications. Annu Rev Environ Resour 47:849–887. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-112320-105050CrossRef

Anderegg WRL, Trugman AT, Badgley G, Anderson CM, Bartuska A, Ciais P, Cullenward D, Field CB, Freeman J, Goetz SJ, Hicke JA, Huntzinger D, Jackson RB, Nickerson J, Pacala S, Randerson JT (2020) Climate-driven risks to the climate mitigation potential of forests. Science 368:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz7005CrossRef

Archer D, Brovkin V (2008) The millennial atmospheric lifetime of anthropogenic CO2. Clim Change 90:283–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-008-9413-1CrossRef

Archer D, Kheshgi H, Maier-Reimer E (1997) Multiple timescales for neutralization of fossil fuel CO2. Geophys Res Lett 24:405–408. https://doi.org/10.1029/97GL00168CrossRef

Archer D, Eby M, Brovkin V, Ridgwell A, Cao L, Mikolajewicz U, Caldeira K, Matsumoto K, Munhoven G, Montenegro A, Tokos K (2009) Atmospheric lifetime of fossil-fuel carbon dioxide. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 37:117–134. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100206CrossRef

Arcusa S, Lackner K (2022) Intergenerational equity and responsibility: a call to internalize impermanence into certifying carbon sequestration. OSF Preprints, February 23 2022. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/b3wkr

Arcusa S, Sprenkle-Hyppolite S (2022) Snapshot of the carbon dioxide removal certification and standards ecosystem (2021–2022). Clim Policy 22:1319–1332. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2094308CrossRef

Bednar J, Obersteiner M, Wagner F (2019) On the financial viability of negative emissions. Nat Commun 10(1):1783. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09782-x

Bey N, McDonald H, Maya-Drysdale L, Stewart R, Pätz C, Hornsleth MN, Duin L, Frelih-Larsen A, Heller C, Zakkour P (2021) Certification of carbon removals. Part 1: synoptic review of carbon removal solutions. Environment Agency Austria, p 126. https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/default/files/publication/2022/50035-Certification-of-carbon-removal-part-1-web.pdf

Brandão M, Levasseur A, Kirschbaum MUF, Weidema BP, Cowie AL, Jørgensen SV, Hauschild MZ, Pennington DW, Chomkhamsri K (2013) Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:230–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0451-6CrossRef

Brander M (2022) There should be more normative research on how social and environmental accounting should be done. Social Environ Acc J 42:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2022.2066554

Brander M, Broekhoff D (2023) Methods that equate temporary carbon storage with permanent CO2 emission reductions lead to false claims on temperature alignment. Carbon Manag 14:2284714. https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2023.2284714CrossRef

Brander M, Ascui F, Scott V, Tett S (2021) Carbon accounting for negative emissions technologies. Clim Policy 25:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1878009CrossRef

Burke J, Schenuit F (2023) Governing permanence of carbon dioxide removal. A typology of policy measures. CO2RE -The greenhouse gas removal hub. https://co2re.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CO2RE_Report_CDR_Permanence-FINAL-v7.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Cabiyo B, Dolginow A (2022) Accounting for short-term durability in carbon offsetting. Carbon Direct, February 28, 2022. Available at: https://www.carbon-direct.com/insights/accounting-for-short-term-durability-in-carbon-offsetting

Carton W, Lund JF, Dooley K (2021) Undoing equivalence: rethinking carbon accounting for just carbon removal. Front Clim 3:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2021.664130CrossRef

Chay F, Cullenward D, Hamman J, Freeman J (2021) CDR Database. CarbonPlan. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5715460

Chiquier S, Patrizio P, Bui M, Sunny N, Mac Dowell N (2022) A comparative analysis of the efficiency, timing, and permanence of CO2 removal pathways. Energy Environ Sci 15:4389–4403. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2EE01021FCrossRef

Climate Policy Watcher (2023) How the issue of permanence is dealt with in different schemes. May 2, 2023. https://www.climate-policy-watcher.org/kyoto-protocol/how-the-issue-of-permanence-is-dealt-with-in-different-schemes.html

Cox EM, Pidgeon N, Spence E, Thomas G (2018) Blurred lines: the ethics and policy of greenhouse gas removal at scale. Front Environ Sci 6:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2018.00038CrossRef

Demenois J, Dayet A, Karsenty A (2022) Surviving the jungle of soil organic carbon certification standards: an analytic and critical review. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 27:1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-021-09980-3CrossRef

Dornburg V, Marland G (2008) Temporary storage of carbon in the biosphere does have value for climate change mitigation: a response to the paper by Miko Kirschbaum. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 13:211–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9113-6CrossRef

Dutschke M, Wong JLP, Rumberg M (2004) Expiring carbon credits from CDM afforestation and reforestation. HWWA Discussion Paper 290

Dynarski KA, Bossio DA, Scow KM (2020) Dynamic stability of soil carbon: reassessing the permanence of soil carbon sequestration. Front Environ Sci 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.514701

Fearnside PM (2002) Why a 100-year time horizon should be used for global warming mitigation calculations. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 7:19–30. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015885027530CrossRef

Fearnside PM, Lashof DA, Moura-costa P (2000) Accounting for time in mitigating global warming through land-use change and forestry. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 5:239–270CrossRef

Galik CS, Baker JS, Daigneault A, Latta G (2022) Crediting temporary forest carbon: retrospective and empirical perspectives on accounting options. Front Glob Change 5:933020. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2022.933020CrossRef

Girardin CAJ, Jenkins S, Seddon N, Allen M, Lewis SL, Wheeler CE, Griscom BW, Malhi Y (2021) Nature-based solutions can help cool the planet — if we act now. Nat Comment 593:191–194

Green JF (2013) Order out of chaos: public and private rules for managing carbon. Glob Environ Politics 13:1–25. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00164CrossRef

Haya BK, Abayo A, So IS, Elias M (2023) Voluntary registry offsets database v10, Dec 2023. Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, University of California, Berkeley

Herzog H, Caldeira K, Reilly J (2003) An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage. Clim Change 59:293–310. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024801618900CrossRef

Hurteau MD, Hungate BA, Koch GW (2009) Accounting for risk in valuing forest carbon offsets. Carbon Balance Manage 4:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-0680-4-1CrossRef

IPCC (2023) Summary for policymakers. In: Core writing Team, Lee H, Romero J (eds) Climate Change 2023: synthesis report. Contribution of Working groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, pp 1–34. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001

IPCC (2021) Annex VII: Glossary [Matthews JBR, Möller V, van Diemen R, Fuglestvedt JS, Masson-Delmotte V, Méndez C, Semenov S, Reisinger A (eds)]. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pirani A, Connors SL, Péan C, Berger S, Caud N, Chen Y, Goldfarb L, Gomis MI, Huang M, Leitzell K, Lonnoy E, Matthews JBR, Maycock TK, Waterfield T, Yelekçi O, Yu R, Zhou B (eds) Climate Change 2021: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp 2215–2256. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.022

Jay JE (2012) When Perpetual is not forever: the challenge of changing conditions, amendment, and termination of perpetual conservation easements. Harv Environ Law Rev 36:1–79

Joppa L, Luers A, Willmott E, Friedmann SJ, Hamburg SP, Broze R (2021) Microsoft’s million-tonne CO2-removal purchase - lessons for net zero. Nature 597:629–632CrossRef

Kalkuhl M, Franks M, Gruner F, Lessmann K, Edenhofer O (2022) Pigou’s advice and Sisyphus’ warning: carbon pricing with non-permanent carbon-dioxide removal. SSRN J 1–61:1. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4315996CrossRef

Kanzaki Y, Planavsky NJ, Reinhard CT (2023) New estimates of the storage permanence and ocean co-benefits of enhanced rock weathering. PNAS Nexus 2:pgad059. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad059CrossRef

Kim MK, McCarl BA, Murray BC (2008) Permanence discounting for land-based carbon sequestration. Ecol Econ 64:763–769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.04.013CrossRef

Kirschbaum MUF (2006) Temporary carbon sequestration cannot prevent climate change. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 11:1151–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9027-8CrossRef

Korhonen R, Pingoud K, Savolainen I, Matthews R (2002) The role of carbon sequestration and the tonne-year approach in fulfilling the objective of climate convention. Environ Sci Policy 5:429–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(02)00091-6CrossRef

Lackner KS (2003) A guide to CO2 sequestration. Science 300:1677–1678CrossRef

LeNeveu DM (2008) CQUESTRA, a risk and performance assessment code for geological sequestration of carbon dioxide. Energy Conv Manag 49:32–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.06.001CrossRef

Levasseur A, Brandão M, Lesage P, Margni M, Pennington D, Clift R, Samson R (2012) Valuing temporary carbon storage. Nat Clim Change 2:6–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1335CrossRef

Lyngfelt A, Johansson DJA, Lindeberg E (2019) Negative CO₂ emissions - an analysis of the retention times required with respect to possible carbon leakage. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 87:27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.04.022CrossRef

Maréchal K, Hecq W (2006) Temporary credits: a solution to the potential non-permanence of carbon sequestration in forests? Ecol Econ 58:699–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.08.017CrossRef

Marland G, Fruit K, Sedjo R (2001) Accounting for sequestered carbon: the question of permanence. Environ Sci Policy 4:259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(01)00038-7CrossRef

Matthews HD, Zickfeld K, Koch A, Luers A (2023) Accounting for the climate benefit of temporary carbon storage in nature. Nat Commun 14:5485. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-41242-5CrossRef

McDonald H, Bey N, Duin L, Frelih-Larsen A, Maya-Drysdale L, Stewart R, Paetz C, Hornsleth MN, Heller C, Zakkour P (2021) Certification of Carbon removals. Part 2: a review of carbon removal certification mechanisms and methodologies (no. REP-0796), certification of carbon removals, p 162. Environment Agency Austria. https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/default/files/publication/2022/50035-Certification-of-carbon-removal-part-2-web.pdf

McLaughlin NA (2005) Rethinking the perpetual nature of conservation easements. Harv Environ Law Rev 29:421–521

Mercer L, Burke J (2023) Strengthening MRV standards for greenhouse gas removals to improve climate change governance. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy. London School of Economics and Political Science, London

Microsoft (2021) Microsoft carbon removal. Lessons from an early corporate purchase. January 2021. Available at: https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE4MDlc

Microsoft (2022) Microsoft carbon removal. An update with lessons learned in our second year. https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE4QO0D. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Miltenberger O, Jospe C, Pittman J (2021) The good is never perfect: why the current flaws of voluntary carbon markets are services, not barriers to successful climate change action. Front Clim 3:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2021.686516CrossRef

Minx JC, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Fuss S, Hilaire J, Creutzig F, Amann T, Beringer T, De Oliveira Garcia W, Hartmann J, Khanna T, Lenzi D, Luderer G, Nemet GF, Rogelj J, Smith P, Vicente Vicente JL, Wilcox J, Del Mar Zamora Dominguez M (2018) Negative emissions - Part 1: research landscape and synthesis. Environ Res Lett 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9b

Moolgavkar R, Berg R, Kenyon R (2023) The carbon removal blended tonne whitepaper. https://github.com/nori-dot-eco/carbon-removal-whitepapers/blob/main/cdr-blended-tonne.md. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Moura Costa P, Wilson C (2000) An equivalence factor between CO2 avoided emissions and sequestration - description and application in forestry. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 5:51–60. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009697625521CrossRef

Murray BC, Sohngen B, Ross MT (2007) Economic consequences of consideration of permanence, leakage and additionality for soil carbon sequestration projects. Clim Change 80:127–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9169-4CrossRef

Neeff T, Ascui F (2009) Lessons from carbon markets for designing an effective REDD architecture. Clim Policy 9:306–315. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2008.0584CrossRef

Nolan RH, Sinclair J, Eldridge DJ, Ramp D (2018) Biophysical risks to carbon sequestration and storage in Australian drylands. J Environ Manage 208:102–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.12.002CrossRef

Oldfield EE, Eagle AJ, Rubin RL, Rudek J, Sanderman J, Gordon DR (2021) Agricultural soil carbon credits: making sense of protocols for carbon sequestration and net greenhouse gas removals. Environmental Defense Fund, NewYork

Owley J (2011) Changing property in a changing world: a call for the end of perpetual conservation easements. Stanf Environ Law J 30:121–176

Parisa Z, Marland E, Sohngen B, Marland G, Jenkins J (2022) The time value of carbon storage. For Policy Econ 144:102840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102840CrossRef

Plastina A (2021) How to grow and sell carbon credits in US agriculture. Ag Decision Maker. https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/crops/pdf/a1-76.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Prado A, Mac Dowell N (2023) The cost of permanent carbon dioxide removal. Joule 7:700–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2023.03.006CrossRef

Richards KR, Huebner GE (2012) Evaluating protocols and standards for forest carbon-offset programs, part A: additionality, baselines and permanence. Carbon Manag 3:393–410. https://doi.org/10.4155/cmt.12.38CrossRef

Richards KR, Huebner GE (2012) Evaluating protocols and standards for forest carbon-offset programs, part B: leakage assessment, wood products, validation and verification. Carbon Manag 3:411–425. https://doi.org/10.4155/cmt.12.39CrossRef

Richards TA, Wickizer D (2009) Demonstration of the Climate Action Reserve Forestry protocols at the LaTour Demonstration State Forest, WESTCARB final report, CEC-500‐05‐029. California Energy Commission. PIER Energy‐Related Environmental Research Program

Ruseva T, Marland E, Szymanski C, Hoyle J, Marland G, Kowalczyk T (2017) Additionality and permanence standards in California’s forest Offset Protocol: a review of project and program level implications. J Environ Manage 198:277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.082CrossRef

Ruseva T, Hedrick J, Marland G, Tovar H, Sabou C, Besombes E (2020) Rethinking standards of permanence for terrestrial and coastal carbon: implications for governance and sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 45:69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.09.009CrossRef

Sanei H, Rudra A, Przyswitt ZMM, Kousted S, Sindlev MB, Zheng X, Nielsen SB, Petersen HI (2024) Assessing biochar’s permanence: an inertinite benchmark. Int J Coal Geol 281:104409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2023.104409CrossRef

Smith SM, Geden O, Gidden MJ, Lamb WF, Nemet GF, Minx JC, Buck H, Cox E, Edwards MR, Fuss S, Johnstone I, Mueller-Hansen F, Pongratze J, Probst BS, Roe S, Schenuit F, Schulte I, Vaughan NE (eds) (2024) The state of carbon dioxide removal 2014–2nd Edition. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/F85QJ

Smith SM, Geden O, Nemet G, Gidden M, Lamb WF, Powis C, Bellamy R, Callaghan, Cowie A, Cox E, Fuss S, Gasser T, Grassi G, Greene J, Lueck S, Mohan A, Mueller-Hansen F, Peters G, Pratama Y, Repke T, Riahi K, Schenuit F, Steinhauser J, Strefler J, Valenzuela JM, Minx JC (2022) The state of carbon dioxide removal. https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/164199/. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

ten Oever N, Milan S (2022) The making of international communication standards: towards a theory of power in standardization. J Standardisation 1:1–27. https://doi.org/10.18757/JOS.2022.6205CrossRef

Thamo T, Pannell DJ (2016) Challenges in developing effective policy for soil carbon sequestration: perspectives on additionality, leakage, and permanence. Clim Policy 16:973–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1075372CrossRef

Trakman LE (2007) Declaring force majeure: Veracity or sham? The University of New South Wales. https://www.academia.edu/34076516/Declaring_Force_Majeure_Veracity_or_Sham. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

UNFCCC (2008) Kyoto Protocol Reference Manual. On accounting of emissions and assigned amounts. https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/publications/08_unfccc_kp_ref_manual.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Wenger S, D’Alessandro D, Wright C (2022) Maximizing global cooling potential in carbon dioxide removal (CDR) procurements: a proposal for Tonne-Year pricing. Front Clim 4:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.927408CrossRef

Whitmore A, Aragonès MP (2022) Addressing differences in permanence of carbon dioxide removal. Bellona Policy Brief. https://bellona.org/publication/addressing-differences-in-permanence-of-carbon-dioxide-removal. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Wong P-H (2014) Maintenance required: the Ethics of geoengineering and post-implementation scenarios. Ethics Policy Gov 17:186–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2014.926090CrossRef

Zelikova J, Chay F, Freeman J, Cullenward D (2021) A buyer’s guide to soil carbon offsets. CarbonPlan. https://carbonplan.org/research/soil-protocols-explainer. Accessed 25 Nov 2024

Titel: Definitions and mechanisms for managing durability and reversals in standards and procurers of carbon dioxide removal
verfasst von: Stephanie Arcusa
Emily Hagood
Publikationsdatum: 01.01.2025
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change / Ausgabe 1/2025
Print ISSN: 1381-2386
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1596
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-024-10184-8

Lights and shadows of nature-based solutions in the Anthropocene: Perspectives from indigenous narratives in Latin America

Original Article

Carbon emission reduction potential and driving factors of thermal power plants: Based on the combination of LMDI and DEA approach

Original Article

Navigating climate change challenges in Sudd wetland fishing communities, South Sudan

Original Article

A mixed-method evaluation of climate change-health action plans and health expenditures for four Indian states

Original Article

Trees Without Borders: the next challenge in climate change adaptation

Original Article

Implications of freeboard policy for homeowners in different income-groups: A case study of Jefferson parish

Open Access
Original Article

Springer Professional

Definitions and mechanisms for managing durability and reversals in standards and procurers of carbon dioxide removal

Abstract

Abstract

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2025

Lights and shadows of nature-based solutions in the Anthropocene: Perspectives from indigenous narratives in Latin America

Carbon emission reduction potential and driving factors of thermal power plants: Based on the combination of LMDI and DEA approach

Navigating climate change challenges in Sudd wetland fishing communities, South Sudan

A mixed-method evaluation of climate change-health action plans and health expenditures for four Indian states

Trees Without Borders: the next challenge in climate change adaptation

Implications of freeboard policy for homeowners in different income-groups: A case study of Jefferson parish

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Lights and shadows of nature-based solutions in the Anthropocene: Perspectives from indigenous narratives in Latin America

Carbon emission reduction potential and driving factors of thermal power plants: Based on the combination of LMDI and DEA approach

Navigating climate change challenges in Sudd wetland fishing communities, South Sudan

A mixed-method evaluation of climate change-health action plans and health expenditures for four Indian states

Trees Without Borders: the next challenge in climate change adaptation

Implications of freeboard policy for homeowners in different income-groups: A case study of Jefferson parish