Snapshot of the Carbon Dioxide Removal certification and standards ecosystem (2021–2022)

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) will be necessary to fulfil the hundreds of pledges to reach net-zero by 2050. As with any industry, standard methodologies and certification are crucial to guarantee successful and reliable activities. However, buyers and policymakers currently face challenges in evaluating the ecosystem of CDR certification. The issue is not with CDR, nor with individual certifications – some of which may be very robust – but with the lack of transparency in the overall ecosystem. To bring some clarity, we present a snapshot of the CDR certification and standards ecosystem for the year 2021–2022. We find a complex ecosystem with at least 30 standard developing organizations proposing at least 125 standard methodologies for carbon removal from 23 different CDR activities and selling 27 different versions of certification instruments in voluntary and compliance markets. This exercise reveals many more existing standards for nature-based than for engineering-based activities and more diversity from standards serving the voluntary rather than the compliance market. It also highlights a proliferation of standards for the same activity, and a plethora of activities without standards. The process revealed ambiguity on what constitutes carbon removal, with many standards certifying activities that remove CO₂ already in the environment as well as activities that avoid or reduce new emissions by sequestering the carbon into reservoirs. This mapping highlights key gaps and potential starting points for reforms to strengthen the CDR certification industry; it also underscores the need for independent oversight. The CDR certification ecosystem is complex and evolving rapidly, raising questions about oversight and quality.Targeted support would be necessary for the timely development of standards for nascent but promising CDR activities, and oversight would be required to ensure the quality of certification.Ensuring a minimum quality would require clarifying the treatment of emission reduction, removal, and avoidance, amongst other concerns. The CDR certification ecosystem is complex and evolving rapidly, raising questions about oversight and quality. Targeted support would be necessary for the timely development of standards for nascent but promising CDR activities, and oversight would be required to ensure the quality of certification. Ensuring a minimum quality would require clarifying the treatment of emission reduction, removal, and avoidance, amongst other concerns.