Why immediate CDR investment is essential, not optional, for climate credibility and cost-effective mitigation to meet future net zero targets

Author: Alexander O’Loughnane, Young Leader Volunteer at CDR30

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is no longer an optional strategy in climate action; it is the infrastructure necessary to achieve 2030 and 2050 net-zero targets. CDR complements, not replaces, emissions reductions, addressing residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors that cannot reach absolute zero on practical timescales. Each year of delay in scaling CDR adds €120–€190 billion in additional mitigation costs, according to European Environment Agency modelling, making future net-zero targets harder to reach and threatening climate credibility.

Net Zero and CDR’s Role

The term “net zero” denotes a state where greenhouse gas emissions are balanced by removals from the atmosphere. Unlike “carbon neutral,” which may allow indefinite fossil fuel use offset by temporary credits, net zero requires durable, permanent removals. This distinction is critical: While emissions reductions must remain the priority, CDR helps address emissions that are technologically or economically prohibitive to eliminate. Leading standards define permanent CDR as geological storage for 1,000+ years.

2030 and 2050 CDR Targets

The IPCC requires a 45% emissions reduction by 2030 and net zero CO₂ by 2050 to limit warming to 1.5°C. Emissions cuts alone cannot achieve these targets due to technological and economic limits in hard-to-abate sectors.

CDR must work alongside aggressive emissions reductions to close the gap.

According to the Smith School of Enterprise and Environment’s 2023 report The State of Carbon Dioxide Removal, CDR must grow 140–180 times from less than 50 million tonnes annually to 6–16 billion tonnes by 2050. This demands 40% annual growth starting immediately.

Concrete milestones: 

– By 2030: CDR capacity must reach 1–1.5 Gt CO₂ annually (a 25–100 fold increase over 2023 levels, per Smith School analysis).

– By 2050: 5–22 Gt capacity needed, depending on emissions trajectory.

The risk of delay: The IPCC warns that postponing emissions reductions would require cuts 70% faster after 2030 to meet 2°C pathways, compounding economic and social strain. 

Climate Action Tracker data reveals a significant emission gap: under current national policies and pledges, 19–27 GtCO₂e are emitted annually versus the 1.5°C-consistent pathway requirement, underscoring the urgency of massive CDR scale-up alongside deep emission cuts.

The Cost of Delay

Time is critical. Every year of postponed CDR deployment increases costs and narrows pathways to net zero. The European Environment Agency estimates that postponement adds €120–€190 billion annually in additional climate mitigation expenses.

Delayed action creates “lock-in,” limiting options to either overshooting climate targets or accepting disruptive reductions later. Early action avoids compounding costs, economic strain, and loss of fiscal and technical capacity.

Building Climate Credibility

Early CDR deployment strengthens climate credibility, aligning national and corporate net-zero commitments with tangible action. The UK’s Net Zero Strategy plans to include GGR’s in its emissions trading scheme by 2029, representing the first legally binding engineered CDR targets (5 million tonnes by 2030, rising to 75–81 million tonnes by 2050). This integration demonstrates seriousness and builds trust in long-term climate ambitions, enhancing market confidence and unlocking financing frameworks essential for scaling.

Why Early Investment Reduces Costs

Investing early in CDR builds foundational infrastructure, de-risks technology deployment, and signals market demand.

Financing Mechanisms:

– Over $2.3 billion in private investment has been deployed across removal pathways since 2021, according to Unbound Summits research.

– The voluntary carbon market (VCM) is a primary revenue source. According to CDR.fyi, the market contracted 15.48 million tonnes of carbon removal credits in H1 2025, representing 78% year-over-year growth from 2024. However, deployment lags significantly as SINTEF data shows only 113,700 tonnes of durable CDR credits were delivered in Q2 2025, revealing operational and financing hurdles.

– Long-term offtake agreements provide developers with revenue certainty and buyers with price security. Indigo Agriculture has secured multi-year agreements with tech giants, while biochar suppliers have locked in offtake agreements covering up to 62% of high-quality capacity for 2025.

– The World Economic Forum’s First Movers Coalition aggregates early buyer commitments (50,000+ tonnes of removal or $25 million by 2030) for solutions capable of storing CO₂ over 1,000 years, driving risk reduction and technology diversification.

Early buyer participation and multi-pathway procurement foster robust market signals, support technology maturation, reduce investment risk, and build supply chain resilience necessary for long-term climate targets.

Critical Financing Challenges:

Despite momentum, Sylvera research indicates 64% of CDR suppliers plan fundraising in 2025, with 85% requiring capital by the end of 2026. Early-stage demand, especially through diverse buyer portfolios and offtake agreements, helps overcome these financing obstacles and validates multiple removal solutions.

Blended Finance & Policy Support:

Public-private partnerships and blended finance mechanisms such as combining grants, tax credits, and market mechanisms enable technology viability and portfolio approaches that attract institutional capital. The UK is investing £100 million in CDR demonstration programmes including biochar and enhanced rock weathering, while Germany has proposed €476 million in federal CDR procurement funding and is advancing BECCS integration into existing bioenergy infrastructure.

Technology Diversification for Scale

Meeting removal targets requires a diversified mix of nature-based, hybrid, and engineered solutions. Industry analysis shows biochar and nature-based methods offer cost-effective, near-term removals (£80–£1,000 per tonne), whilst engineered solutions deliver permanence and scalability at higher cost but are necessary for durable impact.

Research emphasizes that no single CDR technology has emerged as dominant, making diversification essential for reducing exposure to delays or regulatory changes in any single pathway. Portfolio construction enables companies to purchase immediate removals whilst simultaneously investing in emerging solutions, balancing delivery and risk.

Rigorous MRV Standards

Maintaining climate credibility as CDR scales depends fundamentally on rigorous monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV). Digital MRV (dMRV) platforms are replacing slow audits with automated, independent verification ensuring transparency and cost efficiency. Industry standards establish benchmarks for permanence, additionality, quantification, leakage accounting, and transparency being adopted by multiple verifiers and registries.

Key MRV Principles:

– Permanence: Demonstrate durability (100–1,000+ years per Carbon Direct standards).

– Additionality: Prove removals are project-driven.

– Leakage: Monitor for unintended emissions.

– Environmental/Social Impact: Ensure positive or neutral ecosystem and community effects.

Equitable Risk Allocation

As CDR scales, emerging frameworks allocate costs and risks based on historic and current emissions shares. Research emphasizes fair burden sharing, including blended public-private financing reflecting policy and market responsibility.

Technology-specific governance addresses distinct equity risks. For example, marine carbon removal governance must protect ocean health and fishing community rights, whilst agricultural carbon removal must protect farmer autonomy and food security.

Capacity building and knowledge transfer ensure developing nations and smallholder farmers access technical expertise, financing, and decision-making authority. Market signals now reward projects meeting rigorous equity and environmental standards, creating incentives for climate-justice-aligned scaling.

Policy and International Governance

Countries are rapidly enacting CDR policy frameworks:

– United Kingdom: First binding engineered CDR target (5 million tonnes by 2030, 75–81 million by 2050), £100 million for demonstration, CDR integrated into emissions trading scheme by 2028–2029.

– Germany: €476 million in federal CDR procurement funding; BECCS integration into bioenergy infrastructure.

– Nordic countries and Switzerland: Range of subsidies and carbon pricing mechanisms for nature-based and engineered removals.

– COP30 CDR30 Pavilion: Coordinated by the Negative Emissions Platform, this represents the first-ever dedicated diplomatic space for CDR in UN climate negotiations history. Over 90 organizations, including companies, NGOs, research institutions, and philanthropies, are collaborating to advance credible, durable carbon removal solutions.

Strong international governance, harmonized standards, and transparent MRV are needed to prevent greenwashing and cement CDR as a real climate solution rather than a reputational tool for companies.

Conclusion: The Imperative for Immediate Action

Climate physics, economics, and credibility demand immediate CDR deployment alongside aggressive emissions reductions. Current annual CDR of approximately 50 million tonnes is dwarfed by the 6–16 billion tonnes needed by 2050 (a 120–300 fold increase). Every year of delay compounds costs and limits feasible net-zero pathways.

According to the Smith School of Enterprise and Environment, early investment leads to supply chain maturity, price certainty, risk reduction, and infrastructure building. Strong governance, industry standards, and rigorous MRV guard against greenwashing and build trust for policy and market actors.

As COP30 elevates CDR to the centre of global diplomacy through the CDR30 Pavilion, the mandate is unambiguous: Governments, corporations, and investors must act now to scale CDR through diversified portfolios, robust financing mechanisms, and credible international frameworks. CDR, working in tandem with deep emissions cuts, is essential for climate credibility, affordable mitigation, and planetary stability. The time to act is now and not in 2050.