Bioenergy With Carbon Capture And Storage Research Articles (Page 1)

The decarbonization of hard-to-defossilize sectors, such as international maritime transport, requires innovative, and at times disruptive, energy solutions that combine efficiency, scalability, and climate benefits. Therefore, power-to-liquid (PtL) routes have stood out for their potential to use low-emission electricity for the production of synthetic fuels, via electrolytic hydrogen and CO2 capture. However, the high energy demand inherent to these routes poses significant challenges to large-scale implementation. Moreover, PtL routes are usually at most neutral in terms of CO2 emissions. This study evaluates, from a thermo-energetic perspective, the optimization potential of an e-methanol synthesis route through integration with a biomass oxy-fuel combustion process, making use of electrolytic oxygen as the oxidizing agent and the captured CO2 as the carbon source. From the standpoint of a first-law thermodynamic analysis, mass and energy balances were developed considering the full oxygen supply for oxy-fuel combustion to be met through alkaline electrolysis, thus eliminating the energy penalty associated with conventional oxygen production via air separation units. The balance closure was based on a small-scale plant with a capacity of around 100 kta of methanol. In this integrated configuration, additional CO2 surpluses beyond methanol synthesis demand can be directed to geological storage, which, when combined with bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) strategies, may lead to net negative CO2 emissions. The results demonstrate that electrolytic oxygen valorization is a promising pathway to enhance the efficiency and climate performance of PtL processes.

ABSTRACTCarbon dioxide removal (CDR) is indispensable for reaching the German climate neutrality target as a complementary strategy alongside reducing and avoiding greenhouse gas emissions. Biomass can be used in various ways to deliver bio‐based CDR, including Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), natural sink enhancement, and biomass‐based construction materials. By focusing on bio‐based solutions, actions can be streamlined to achieve both CDR and a range of co‐benefits; for example, in terms of ecosystem services. The ramp‐up of bio‐based CDR in Germany is driven by a diverse set of factors. In this study, scenarios were developed that allow for exploring these factors in a set of narratives. The selection of key drivers followed the PESTEL approach (Policy, Environmental, Social, Technological, Economic, and Legal aspects), to which the Biomass category was added. Desirable net‐zero futures and drivers identified in stakeholder surveys, interviews, and workshops were translated into consistent scenario storylines. These represent diverse bio‐based CDR portfolios that differ in the implementation level of single concepts and in the overall contribution to negative emissions for Germany in 2045, considering the national potentials for different CDR options. The scenarios encompass (1) a focus on cost efficiency, (2) prioritizing decentralized options and natural sinks, (3) larger amounts of bio‐based CDR (skyrocketing), and (4) little support for bio‐based CDR (roadblock). The scenario storylines and drivers can inform modeling for cost‐optimized implementation and paint a picture of potential developments for stakeholders. They can also serve as a basis for compiling bio‐based value chains with maximum removal capacities that deliver a series of additional system benefits.

ABSTRACT Attaining net-zero emissions globally requires counterbalancing residual emissions with carbon dioxide removal (CDR), such as bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). BECCS potential is unevenly distributed, meaning that regions may have a ‘surplus’ or ‘deficit’ potential relative to the regional need for counterbalancing. Market mechanisms can be used to transfer BECCS outcomes from one region with surplus BECCS potential to another with deficit potential. We analyse the potential for such trade within the Nordic countries. We show that Sweden has a significant theoretical surplus BECCS potential of at least 19 MtCO2/year compared to what is needed to achieve its net-zero target, which could be realized and transferred to other countries based on e.g. Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. Within the Nordics, Denmark and Iceland could be possible buyers of such outcomes due to their relatively low BECCS potential compared to the prospective need for CDR to achieve long-term climate targets. Norway also has a small BECCS potential, but it likely suffices to reach its ‘low emission society’ target. Finland has a large BECCS potential but will likely need any domestic BECCS towards its net-zero target due to unforeseen changes in forest sinks. The residual emissions in need of counterbalancing estimated in this paper, and, thus, the potential for collaboration for BECCS outcomes, is subject to uncertainty due to vaguely formulated mitigation targets. We recommend that policy makers (i) adopt separate quantified targets for emission reductions and counterbalancing measures, (ii) evaluate whether there is a surplus or deficit domestic CDR potential to reach the targets, and (iii) seek collaborations with other countries as sellers or buyers of CDR, to facilitate net-zero.

The escalating threat of climate change demands innovative approaches to mitigate carbon emissions, and Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) has emerged as a promising paradigm. The article begins with an overview of the current carbon emission landscape, underscoring the critical role of CCU in climate change mitigation. Catalysts play a pivotal role in CCU, and the review discusses cutting-edge developments in catalytic materials and design, offering mechanistic insights into catalyzed reactions. Biological strategies, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and microbial carbon capture, are explored alongside genetic engineering for enhanced carbon assimilation. Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis are scrutinized to evaluate the environmental and economic aspects of CCU. It concludes with a forward-looking perspective, outlining future prospects and research directions in CCU. This review aims to provide a valuable resource for researchers, policymakers, and industry professionals working towards a sustainable and low-carbon future.

ABSTRACTWhile burning wood for heat and electricity constitutes the largest source of renewable energy in the EU, forest biomass harvesting is weakening the EU's forest carbon sink, and some Member States have lost their net forest sink completely, including heavily forested countries like Estonia and Finland. A European Commission 2016 impact assessment for bioenergy under the EU's Renewable Energy Directive predicted the forest sink would shrink as biomass use increased, even if sustainability criteria were required. Nonetheless, the EU adopted criteria that consider “sustainable” forest biomass to have zero carbon emissions, rendering EU and UK treatment of biomass inconsistent with IPCC's Guidance for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Renewable energy incentives have increased biomass use for electricity generation 1100% since 1990, but residential heating, which is ungoverned by any criteria, still represents the largest use of wood for energy in the EU. Incentives for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), which is intended to deliver “negative emissions,” will likely increase pressure on forests. Although IPCC Guidance is clear that BECCS fueled with forest biomass does not remove net CO2 from the atmosphere just because carbon has been stored belowground, EU and UK climate policies rely on large‐scale deployment of BECCS to meet climate targets. Bioenergy use cuts across environmental, energy, and climate policy domains; thus, reversing the accelerating decline of the forest carbon sink will require significantly better integration of renewable energy policies with climate targets and ensuring that biomass policies are aligned with international emissions reporting. Policymakers can reduce pressure on forests by disqualifying forest biomass from counting toward renewable energy targets, reducing subsidies for wood‐burning, and adopting forest management policies that prioritize carbon sequestration and biodiversity. Reducing biomass harvesting and reallocating the billions currently spent on bioenergy subsidies to solar, wind, and geothermal energy is essential for restoring forests and achieving climate targets.

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is deemed necessary to attain the Paris Agreement’s climate objectives. While bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) has generated substantial attention, sustainability concerns have led to increased examination of alternative strategies, including enhanced rock weathering (EW). We analyse the role of EW under cost-effective mitigation pathways, by including the CDR potential of basalt applications from silicate weathering (geochemical CDR) and enhanced ecosystem growth and carbon storage in response to phosphorus released by basalt (biotic CDR). Using an integrated carbon cycle, climate and energy system model, we show that the application of basalt to forests could triple the level of carbon sequestration induced by EW compared to an application restricted to croplands. EW also reduces the costs of achieving the Paris Agreement targets as well as the reliance on BECCS. Further understanding requires improved knowledge of weathering rates and basalt side-effects through field testing.

This study presents a scientometric analysis of renewable energy applications in low-temperature regions, focusing on green hydrogen production, carbon storage, and emerging trends. Using bibliometric tools such as RStudio and VOSviewer, the research evaluates publication trends from 1988 to 2024, revealing an exponential growth in renewable energy studies post-2021, driven by global policies promoting carbon neutrality. Life cycle assessment (LCA) plays a crucial role in evaluating the environmental impact of energy systems, underscoring the need to integrate renewable sources for emission reduction. Hydrogen production via electrolysis has emerged as a key solution in decarbonizing hard-to-abate sectors, while carbon storage technologies, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), are gaining traction. Government policies, including carbon taxes, fossil fuel phase-out strategies, and renewable energy subsidies, significantly shape the energy transition in cold regions by incentivizing low-carbon alternatives. Multi-objective optimization techniques, leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, are expected to enhance decision-making processes, optimizing energy efficiency, reliability, and economic feasibility in renewable energy systems. Future research must address three critical challenges: (1) strengthening policy frameworks and financial incentives for large-scale renewable energy deployment, (2) advancing energy storage, hydrogen production, and hybrid energy systems, and (3) integrating multi-objective optimization approaches to enhance cost-effectiveness and resilience in extreme climates. It is expected that the research will contribute to the field of knowledge regarding renewable energy applications in low-temperature regions.

Six of nine planetary boundaries are currently transgressed, many related to human land use. Conversion of sizeable land areas to biomass plantations for Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) – often assumed in climate mitigation scenarios to meet the Paris Agreement – may exert additional pressure on terrestrial planetary boundaries. Using spatially-explicit, process-based global biogeochemical modelling, we systematically compute feedstock production potentials for BECCS under individual and joint constraints of the planetary boundaries for nitrogen flows, freshwater change, land system change and biosphere integrity (including protection of remaining forests), while reserving current agricultural areas for meeting the growing global demand for food, fodder and fibre. We find that the constrained BECCS potential from dedicated Miscanthus plantations is close to zero (0.1 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year under mid-century climate for Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5). The planetary boundary for biosphere integrity has the largest individual effect, highlighting a particularly severe trade-off between climate change mitigation with BECCS and ecosystem preservation. Ultimately however, the overall limitation results from the joint effect of all four planetary boundaries, emphasizing the importance of a holistic consideration of Earth system stability in the context of climate change mitigation.

ABSTRACTCarbon dioxide removal technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) are required if the effects of climate change are to be reversed over the next century. However, BECCS demands extensive land use change that may create positive or negative radiative forcing impacts upstream of the BECCS facility through changes to in situ greenhouse gas fluxes and land surface albedo. When quantifying these upstream climate impacts, even at a single site, different methods can give different estimates. Here we show how three common methods for estimating the net ecosystem carbon balance of bioenergy crops established on former grassland or former cropland can differ in their central estimates and uncertainty. We place these net ecosystem carbon balance forcings in the context of associated radiative forcings from changes to soil N2O and CH4 fluxes, land surface albedo, embedded fossil fuel use, and geologically stored carbon. Results from long term eddy covariance measurements, a soil and plant carbon inventory, and the MEMS 2 process‐based ecosystem model all agree that establishing perennials such as switchgrass or mixed prairie on former cropland resulted in net negative radiative forcing (i.e., global cooling) of −26.5 to −39.6 fW m−2 over 100 years. Establishing these perennials on former grassland sites had similar climate mitigation impacts of −19.3 to −42.5 fW m−2. However, the largest climate mitigation came from establishing corn for BECCS on former cropland or grassland, with radiative forcings from −38.4 to −50.5 fW m−2, due to its higher plant productivity and therefore more geologically stored carbon. Our results highlight the strengths and limitations of each method for quantifying the field scale climate impacts of BECCS and show that utilizing multiple methods can increase confidence in the final radiative forcing estimates.

Abstract Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is a crucial element in most modelling studies on emission pathways of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to limit global warming. BECCS can substitute fossil fuels in energy production and reduce CO2 emissions, while using biomass for energy production can have feedback effects on land use, agricultural and forest products markets, as well as biodiversity and water resources. To assess the former pros and cons of BECCS deployment, interdisciplinary model approaches require detailed estimates of technological information related to BECCS production technologies. Current estimates of the cost structure and capture potential of BECCS vary widely due to the absence of large-scale production. To obtain more precise estimates, a global online expert survey (N = 32) was conducted including questions on the regional development potential and biomass use of BECCS, as well as the future operating costs, capture potential, and scalability in different application sectors. In general, the experts consider the implementation of BECCS in Europe and North America to be very promising and regard BECCS application in the liquid biofuel industry and thermal power generation as very likely. The results show significant differences depending on whether the experts work in the Global North or the Global South. Thus, the findings underline the importance of including experts from the Global South in discussions on carbon dioxide removal methods. Regarding technical estimates, the operating costs of BECCS in thermal power generation were estimated in the range of 100–200 USD/tCO2, while the CO2 capture potential was estimated to be 50–200 MtCO2yr−1 by 2030, with cost-efficiency gains of 20% by 2050 due to technological progress. Whereas the individuals’ experts provided more precise estimates, the overall distribution of estimates reflected the wide range of estimates found in the literature. For the cost shares within BECCS, it was difficult to obtain consistent estimates. However, due to very few current alternative estimates, the results are an important step for modelling the production sector of BECCS in interdisciplinary models that analyse cross-dimensional trade-offs and long-term sustainability.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), along with Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), feature heavily in climate mitigation scenarios. Nevertheless, the technologies remain controversial within the broader mitigation discourse, in part for their potential to excuse delay in more ambitious emissions reductions in the short term. Sweden has included BECCS and CCS as proposed “supplementary measures” to enable the country to meet its ambitious target of achieving net negative emissions by 2045. Hajer’s Argumentative Approach to Discourse Analysis is applied to Swedish parliamentary speeches, motions, and written questions and answers, to uncover the storylines and attendant assumptions constituting Swedish policy deliberation regarding CCS and BECCS. This study finds that by problematizing climate change as an issue of emissions, actors position CCS and BECCS within a dominant neoliberal discourse and characterize them as tools to facilitate a green transition centering on industrial and economic competitiveness. This discourse lacks detail, and risks delay by oversimplifying the needs and requirements for CCS and BECCS deployment. Meanwhile, a CCS-critical discourse acknowledges the need for negative emissions but challenges storylines portraying the technology as inexpensive or easy to deploy rapidly. If pursued, this discourse could serve to sharpen the debate about the technologies and bring planning in line with aspirations, helping to avert risks of delay.

Abstract Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is crucial to achieve the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 °C–2 °C goals. However, climate mitigation scenarios have primarily focused on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), afforestation/reforestation, and recently direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). This narrow focus exposes future climate change mitigation strategies to technological, institutional, and ecological pressures by overlooking the variety of existing CDR options, each with distinct characteristics—including, but not limited to, mitigation potential, cost, co-benefits, and adverse side-effects. This study expands the scope by evaluating CDR portfolios, consisting of any single CDR approach—BECCS, afforestation/reforestation, DACCS, biochar, and enhanced weathering—or a combination of them. We analyse the value of deploying these CDR portfolios to meet 1.5 °C goals, as well as their global and regional implications for land, energy, and policy costs. We find that diversifying CDR approaches is the most cost-effective net-zero strategy. Without the overreliance on any single approach, land and energy impacts are reduced and redistributed. A diversified CDR portfolio thus exhibits lower negative side-effects, but still poses challenges related to environmental impacts, logistics or accountability. We also investigate a CDR portfolio designed to support more scalable and sustainable climate mitigation strategies, and identify trade-offs between reduced economic benefits and lower environmental impacts. Rather than a one-size-fits-all scaling down, the CDR portfolio undergoes strategic realignment, with regional customization based on techno-economic factors and bio-geophysical characteristics. Moreover, we highlight the importance of nature-based removals, especially in Brazil, Latin America, and Africa, where potentials for avoided deforestation are the greatest, emphasizing their substantial benefits, not only for carbon sequestration, but also for preserving planetary well-being and human health. Finally, this study reveals that incentivizing timely and large-scale CDR deployment by policy and financial incentives could reduce the risk of deterring climate change mitigation, notably by minimizing carbon prices.

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is a key negative emission technology for climate mitigation. Some countries have made no commitment to carbon neutrality but are viewed as potential BECCS candidates (hereafter, non-CN countries). Here we analyze contributions of these countries to global climate mitigation with respect to BECCS using an Earth system model with explicit representations of bioenergy crops. Switchgrass cultivation in these non-CN countries can further remove atmospheric CO2 by 9.1 ± 2.8 and 19.9 ± 5.2 PgC in the low-warming and overshot scenarios, resulting in an extra biogeochemical cooling effect of 0.01 ± 0.04 to 0.02 ± 0.06 °C. This cooling is largely counterbalanced by the biophysical warming, but the net effect is still an extra cooling. The non-CN countries play a more important role in the low-warming scenario than in the overshoot scenario, despite the inequality of temperature change among countries. Our study highlights the importance of a global system for climate mitigation.

Excessive emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), have garnered worldwide attention due to their significant environmental impacts. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) techniques have emerged as effective solutions to address CO2 emissions. Recently, direct air capture (DAC) and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) have been advanced within the CCUS framework as negative emission technologies. BECCS, which involves cultivating biomass for energy production, then capturing and storing the resultant CO2 emissions, offers cost advantages over DAC. Algae-based CCUS is integral to the BECCS framework, leveraging algae’s biological processes to capture and sequester CO2 while simultaneously contributing to energy production and potentially achieving net negative carbon emissions. Algae’s high photosynthetic efficiency, rapid growth rates, and ability to grow in non-arable environments provide significant advantages over other BECCS methods. This comprehensive review explores recent innovations in algae-based CCUS technologies, focusing on the mechanisms of carbon capture, utilization, and storage through algae. It highlights advancements in algae cultivation for efficient carbon capture, algae-based biofuel production, and algae-based dual carbon storage materials, as well as key challenges that need to be addressed for further optimization. This review provides valuable insights into the potential of algae-based CCUS as a key component of global carbon reduction strategies.

Agricultural lands hold significant potential for CO2 sequestration, particularly when utilizing biomass crops and agricultural residues. Among these, Miscanthus × giganteus (mxg) stands out due to its high productivity and carbon sequestration capabilities. Recognizing the importance of such biomass crops, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has identified Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) as a crucial strategy for achieving net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050. This study examines the carbon uptake potential of mxg during its establishment year at the Sustainable Advanced Bioeconomy Research (SABR) farm in Iowa, USA, where mxg was planted at a density exceeding previous studies. Using eddy covariance (EC) measurements, we quantified the net ecosystem carbon exchange (NEE), and derived gross primary productivity (GPP), and ecosystem respiration (R eco). Our findings reveal that SABR's mxg exhibited a significant carbon uptake of -621 g C m-2, a threefold increase compared to a similar EC site in the "corn-belt" (University of Illinois Energy Research Farm; UIEF), which was established with lower planting density and pre-commercial planting equipment. Favorable growing conditions and advanced planting technologies at SABR likely contributed to this high carbon uptake. Comparisons with other global EC studies indicated a strong correlation between higher planting densities and greater carbon uptake. These results suggest that increasing mxg planting density can enhance carbon uptake, but further studies are necessary to evaluate the impacts under varying environmental conditions and management practices. Additionally, economic analyses are essential to determine the viability of higher planting densities. Our study underscores the potential of optimized mxg management practices to contribute significantly to CO2 uptake and supports the development of BECCS as a viable climate change mitigation strategy.

Abstract In response to the climate crisis, the United States has embarked on an ambitious program to achieve 100% carbon‐free electricity generation by 2035 and net‐zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The implementation of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) systems is an essential component of that strategy. BECCS is broadly defined as the utilization of biomass energy (from the processing of solids, liquids, or vapors) with the capture of carbon dioxide and subsequent permanent storage in a deep geological formation. There are numerous potential technologies and flowsheets for implementing BECCS, and the supply chains rely upon support from the agricultural, forestry, and solid waste industries. Inherent in BECCS systems are the hazards associated with combustible dusts, spontaneous ignition and smoldering of combustible solids, flammable liquids, flammable vapors and gases, toxic gases, and more. For BECCS to be deployed commercially across the United States, it is imperative that process safety risks are controlled. A risk‐based process safety (RBPS) program can help manage the risks of a BECCS facility and minimize process safety incidents. In this paper, we present two representative bioenergy technologies as mini‐case studies to illustrate the range of process hazards encountered. Process safety strategies required by regulation are briefly reviewed and potential gaps are identified. We then demonstrate how RBPS can be implemented in a practical and effective manner to fill the gaps.

Abstract. The climate mitigation potential of terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) methods depends critically on the timing and magnitude of their implementation. In our study, we introduce different measures of efficiency to evaluate the carbon removal potential of afforestation and reforestation (AR) and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) under the low-emission scenario SSP1-2.6 and in the same area. We define efficiency as the potential to sequester carbon in the biosphere in a specific area or store carbon in geological reservoirs or woody products within a certain time. In addition to carbon capture and storage (CCS), we consider the effects of fossil fuel substitution (FFS) through the usage of bioenergy for energy production, which increases the efficiency through avoided CO2 emissions. These efficiency measures reflect perspectives regarding climate mitigation, carbon sequestration, land availability, spatiotemporal dynamics, and the technological progress in FFS and CCS. We use the land component JSBACH3.2 of the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM) to calculate the carbon sequestration potential in the biosphere using an updated representation of second-generation bioenergy plants such as Miscanthus. Our spatially explicit modeling results reveal that, depending on FFS and CCS levels, BECCS sequesters 24–158 GtC by 2100, whereas AR methods sequester around 53 GtC on a global scale, with BECCS having an advantage in the long term. For our specific setup, BECCS has a higher potential in the South American grasslands and southeast Africa, whereas AR methods are more suitable in southeast China. Our results reveal that the efficiency of BECCS to sequester carbon compared to “nature-based solutions” like AR will depend critically on the upscaling of CCS facilities, replacing fossil fuels with bioenergy in the future, the time frame, and the location of tCDR deployment.

Abstract To achieve net zero carbon emissions by mid-century, the United States may need to rely on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) to offset emissions from difficult-to-decarbonize sectors and/or shortfalls in near-term mitigation efforts. CDR can be delivered using many approaches with different requirements for land, water, geologic carbon storage capacity, energy, and other resources. The availability of these resources varies by region in the U.S. suggesting that CDR deployment will be uneven across the country. Using the Global Change Analysis Model for the United States (GCAM-USA), we modeled six classes of CDR and explored their potential using four scenarios: a scenario where all the CDR pathways are available (Full Portfolio), a scenario with restricted geologic carbon storage (Low CCS), a scenario where the availability of bio-based CDR options is limited (Low Bio), and a scenario with constraints on enhanced rock weathering (ERW) capabilities (Low ERW). We find that by employing a diverse set of CDR approaches, the U.S. could remove between 1 and 1.9 GtCO2/yr by midcentury. In the Full Portfolio scenario, direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS) predominates, delivering approximately 50% of CO2 removal, with bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) contributing 25%, and ERW delivering 11.5%. Texas and the agricultural Midwest lead in CDR deployment due to their abundant agricultural land and geological storage availability. In the Low CCS scenario, reliance on DACCS decreases, easing pressure on energy systems but increasing pressure on the land. In all cases CDR deployment was found to drive important impacts on energy, land, or materials supply chains (for example for ERW) and these effects were generally more pronounced when fewer CDR technologies were available.

Abstract Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is a bio-based Carbon Dioxide Removal Technology (CDR) undergoing detailed and comprehensive screening in many countries. The latest scientific reports emphasized that net-zero targets can not be achieved globally or nationally without deploying such technologies. Germany aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, and negative emissions thereafter, which means a higher demand for CDRs. Despite BECCS being the building block of net-zero policies, its implementation on a national and regional scale presents serious challenges. Therefore, in this study, we analyze the role of BECCS in the German bioenergy system with a spatially detailed bottom–up optimization model that accounts for techno-economics and political aspects of BECCS (e.g. availability of biomass and investment costs). Our analysis demonstrates that BECCS can remove almost 61 Mt CO2 in 2050; however, the outcomes demonstrate sensitivity toward CO2 credit and CO2 prices, which can raise the removal as high as 69 Mt CO2. Additionally, results suggest that removing enough CO2 to achieve carbon neutrality in Germany by 2045 solely through BECCS seems extremely challenging; thus, a portfolio of negative emission technologies will be necessary to contribute. Our findings provide a better understanding of BECCS feasibility and its potential to assist us in achieving climate targets in Germany. Although we apply our model to Germany, the developed tool and insights are generic and can be applied to other countries.

Carbon sequestration is emerging as a crucial strategy to mitigate the effects of climate change by reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations. While natural processes such as forests and oceans contribute to carbon storage, engineered approaches have gained significant attention due to their potential to enhance sequestration on a global scale. This review explores innovative carbon sequestration technologies, including Direct Air Capture (DAC), Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), soil carbon sequestration, ocean fertilization, and carbon mineralization. Each of these technologies offers unique opportunities to capture and store CO2, with varying degrees of feasibility, cost, and environmental impact, their promise, challenges such as high costs, storage capacity concerns, and ecological risks remain. The review also discusses the global implications of these technologies on climate change mitigation, emphasizing the need for integrated policies, international cooperation, and ongoing research to maximize their potential. Ultimately, carbon sequestration, when coupled with emission reduction strategies, can play a pivotal role in achieving long-term climate goals.