Pular para o conteúdo principal

ETHNOS_APP

Início • Busca • Periódicos • Lista 0

Negative emissions—Part 3

Innovation and upscaling

Dados Bibliográficos

ID15544697
AutoresGregory F Nemet (0000-0001-7859-4580, University of Wisconsin–Madison, autor correspondente), Max Callaghan (0000-0001-8292-8758, Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change), Felix Creutzig (0000-0002-5710-3348, Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change), Sabine Fuss (0000-0002-8681-9839, Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change), Jens Hartmann (0000-0003-1878-9321, Universität Hamburg), Jérôme Hilaire (0000-0002-9879-6339, Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change), William F Lamb (0000-0003-3273-7878, Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change), Jan C Minx (0000-0002-2862-0178, University of Leeds), Sophia Rogers (University of Wisconsin–Madison), Pete Smith (0000-0002-3784-1124, University of Aberdeen)
Ano2018
Volume13
Fascículo6
Páginas063003-063003
Data de publicação2018-05-21
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoEnvironmental Research Letters (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1748-9326 • E-ISSN: 1748-9326
EditoraIOP Publishing (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1088/1748-9326/aabff4
OpenAlexW2804836376
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas63
Referências citadas284

We assess the literature on innovation and upscaling for negative emissions technologies (NETs) using a systematic and reproducible literature coding procedure. To structure our review, we employ the framework of sequential stages in the innovation process, with which we code each NETs article in innovation space. We find that while there is a growing body of innovation literature on NETs, 59% of the articles are focused on the earliest stages of the innovation process, 'research and development' (R&D). The subsequent stages of innovation are also represented in the literature, but at much lower levels of activity than R&D. Distinguishing between innovation stages that are related to the supply of the technology (R&D, demonstrations, scale up) and demand for the technology (demand pull, niche markets, public acceptance), we find an overwhelming emphasis (83%) on the supply side. BECCS articles have an above average share of demand-side articles while direct air carbon capture and storage has a very low share. Innovation in NETs has much to learn from successfully diffused technologies; appealing to heterogeneous users, managing policy risk, as well as understanding and addressing public concerns are all crucial yet not well represented in the extant literature. Results from integrated assessment models show that while NETs play a key role in the second half of the 21st century for 1.5 degrees C and 2 degrees C scenarios, the major period of new NETs deployment is between 2030 and 2050. Given that the broader innovation literature consistently finds long time periods involved in scaling up and deploying novel technologies, there is an urgency to developing NETs that is largely unappreciated. This challenge is exacerbated by the thousands to millions of actors that potentially need to adopt these technologies for them to achieve planetary scale. This urgency is reflected neither in the Paris Agreement nor in most of the literature we review here. If NETs are to be deployed at the levels required to meet 1.5 degrees C and 2 degrees C targets, then important post-R&D issues will need to be addressed in the literature, including incentives for early deployment, niche markets, scale-up, demand, and-particularly if deployment is to be hastened-public acceptance

Business · Economics · Extant taxon · Industrial organization · Innovation process · Software deployment · Supply chain · Work in process · Air Quality and Health Impacts · Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies · Climate Change Policy and Economics · Computer Science · Marketing

  • Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning

    Open Access•David Rolnick, Priya L Donti et al.•ACM Computing Surveys•2023

  • An inter-model assessment of the role of direct air capture in deep mitigation pathways

    Open Access•Giulia Realmonte, Laurent Drouet et al.•Nature Communications•2019

  • Towards a cultural political economy of mitigation deterrence by negative emissions technologies (NETs)

    Open Access•Nils Markusson, Duncan P Mclaren et al.•Global Sustainability•2018

  • Estimating and tracking the remaining carbon budget for stringent climate targets

    Open Access•Joeri Rogelj, Piers Forster et al.•Nature•2019

  • A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II

    Open Access•H Haberl, Dominik Wiedenhofer et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2020

  • Common but differentiated leadership

    Open Access•Felix Schreyer, Gunnar Luderer et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2020

  • Sustainable scale-up of negative emissions technologies and practices

    Open Access•Selene Cobo, Valentina Negri et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2022

  • Niche level investment challenges for European Green Deal financing in Europe

    Open Access•Thomas B Long, Vincent Blok•Humanities and Social Sciences…•2021

  • Insuring the future - the insurance industry’s role in climate change mitigation

    Open Access•Moran Nabriski, Ruslana Rachel Palatnik et al.•Humanities and Social Sciences…•2025

  • Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom

    Open Access•Emily Cox, Elspeth Spence et al.•Nature Climate Change•2020

  • Diverse carbon dioxide removal approaches could reduce impacts on the energy–water–land system

    Open Access•Jay Fuhrman, Candelaria Bergero et al.•Nature Climate Change•2023

  • Food–energy–water implications of negative emissions technologies in a +1.5 °C future

    Open Access•Jay Fuhrman, Haewon McJeon et al.•Nature Climate Change•2020

  • Fair-share carbon dioxide removal increases major emitter responsibility

    Open Access•Claire Fyson, Susanne Baur et al.•Nature Climate Change•2020

  • Large‐Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal to Meet the 1.5°C Limit

    Open Access•M J Mace, Marie Mace et al.•Global Policy•2021

  • Concerns and Questions About Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies

    Open Access•Joshua Luczak•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2026

  • Coupling for climate intervention

    Open Access•Chad M Baum, Sean Low et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2023

  • Learning from the Climate Change Debate to Avoid Polarisation on Negative Emissions

    Rebecca Colvin, Luke Kemp et al.•Environmental Communication•2020

  • Storylines of Geoengineering in the Australian Media

    Anna Burnard, Rebecca Colvin•Environmental Communication•2022

  • Can coastal and marine carbon dioxide removal help to close the emissions gap? Scientific, legal, economic, and governance considerations

    Open Access•Martin Johnson, Erik van Doorn et al.•Elementa Science of the…•2024

  • Land-based implications of early climate actions without global net-negative emissions

    Open Access•Tomoko Hasegawa, Shinichiro Fujimori et al.•Nature Sustainability•2021

  • The politics of carbon management in Austria

    Open Access•Alina Brad, Etienne Schneider et al.•Energy Research & Social Science•2024

  • Applying the multi-level perspective to climate geoengineering

    Open Access•Kyle Herman, B K Sovacool•Energy Research & Social Science•2024

  • Sustainable energy experiments and demonstrations

    Open Access•Sandra Hasanefendic, Marjolein Hoogstraaten et al.•Energy Research & Social Science•2025

  • A net-zero storyline for success? News media analysis of the social legitimacy of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in the United Kingdom

    Open Access•Caspar Donnison, Karolina Trdlicova et al.•Energy Research & Social Science•2023

  • Establishing a large-scale Greenhouse Gas Removal sector in the United Kingdom by 2030

    Open Access•Mark Workman, Devon Platt et al.•Energy Research & Social Science•2022

  • Rethinking standards of permanence for terrestrial and coastal carbon

    Open Access•Tatyana Ruseva, J C Hedrick et al.•Current Opinion in Environmental…•2020

  • Towards net zero CO2 emissions without relying on massive carbon dioxide removal

    Open Access•Yoichi Kaya, Mitsutsune Yamaguchi et al.•Sustainability Science•2019

  • Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal

    Open Access•Wim Carton, Adeniyi Asiyanbi et al.•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2020

  • Carbon removal demonstrations and problems of public perception

    Open Access•L Waller, Emily Cox et al.•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2023

  • Contested framings of greenhouse gas removal and its feasibility

    Open Access•L Waller, Tim Rayner et al.•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2020

  • The International Politics of Carbon Dioxide Removal

    Bryan Maher, Jonathan Symons•Global Environmental Politics•2021

  • Undone science in climate interventions

    Open Access•Sean Low, Chad M Baum et al.•Environmental Science & Policy•2022

  • UK Net Zero policy design and deep uncertainty – The need for an alternative approach

    Open Access•Quirina Rodriguez Mendez, Mark Workman et al.•Environmental Science & Policy•2023

  • Negative-emissions technology portfolios to meet the 1.5 °C target

    Open Access•Oscar Rueda, José M Mogollón et al.•Global Environmental Change•2021

  • Rethinking Net-Zero systems, spaces, and societies

    Open Access•Sean Low, Chad M Baum et al.•Global Environmental Change•2022

  • Demand vs supply-side approaches to mitigation

    Open Access•Kate Scott, Christopher J Smith et al.•Global Environmental Change•2021

  • Mapping feasibilities of greenhouse gas removal

    Open Access•Johanna Forster, Naomi E Vaughan et al.•Global Environmental Change•2020

  • Attention, sentiments and emotions towards emerging climate technologies on Twitter

    Open Access•Finn Müller-Hansen, Tim Repke et al.•Global Environmental Change•2023

  • Beyond climate stabilization

    Open Access•B K Sovacool, Chad M Baum et al.•Ecological Economics•2022

  • Moving toward Net-Zero Emissions Requires New Alliances for Carbon Dioxide Removal

    Open Access•Sabine Fuss, Josep G Canadell et al.•One Earth•2020

  • Principles for Thinking about Carbon Dioxide Removal in Just Climate Policy

    Open Access•David R Morrow, Michael S Thompson et al.•One Earth•2020

  • Net-zero emissions chemical industry in a world of limited resources

    Open Access•Paolo Gabrielli, Lorenzo Rosa et al.•One Earth•2023

  • Integrated assessment of carbon dioxide removal portfolios

    Open Access•Solène Chiquier, Angelo Costa Gurgel et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  • Regional implications of carbon dioxide removal in meeting net zero targets for the United States

    Open Access•Chloé Fauvel, Jay Fuhrman et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2023

  • A global analysis of expected revenues from carbon dioxide removal

    Open Access•Alyssa Kozian, Jakob Ellensohn et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2026

  • Costs to achieve target net emissions reductions in the US electric sector using direct air capture

    Open Access•Sarang D Supekar, Tae Lim et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2019

  • Socio-political dynamics in clean energy transition

    Open Access•Saverio Perri, Simon A Levin et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2024

  • Mapping the landscape of carbon dioxide removal research

    Open Access•Romain Presty, Olivier Massol et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2024

  • Provincial-scale assessment of direct air capture to meet China’s climate neutrality goal under limited bioenergy supply

    Open Access•Hanwoong Kim, Yang Qiu et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2024

  • Land conversions not climate effects are the dominant indirect consequence of sun-driven CO 2 capture, conversion, and sequestration

    Open Access•Moritz Adam, Thomas Kleinen et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  • Efficacy of individual and combined terrestrial and marine carbon dioxide removal

    Open Access•Anusha Sathyanadh, H Esfandiari et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  • A holistic assessment framework for marine carbon dioxide removal options

    Open Access•Christian Baatz, Lukas Tank et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  • Quantifying global carbon dioxide removal deployment

    Open Access•Carter M Powis, Stephen M Smith et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2023

  • Climate change mitigation in cities

    Open Access•Mahendra Sethi, William F Lamb et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2020

  • Potentials and barriers to land-based mitigation technologies and practices (LMTs)—a review

    Open Access•Lokendra Karki, Jenny Lieu et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2023

  • Negative emissions—Part 2

    Open Access•Sabine Fuss, William F Lamb et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2018

  • Negative emissions—Part 1

    Open Access•Jan C Minx, William F Lamb et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2018

  • Deep uncertainty in carbon dioxide removal portfolios

    Open Access•Quirina Rodriguez Mendez, Felix Creutzig et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  • The role of direct air capture and negative emissions technologies in the shared socioeconomic pathways towards +1.5 °C and +2 °C futures

    Open Access•Jay Fuhrman, Andrés F Clarens et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2021

  • A deep dive into the modelling assumptions for biomass with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)

    Open Access•Isabela Butnar, Pei-Hao Li et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2019

  • Expert projections on the development and application of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage technologies

    Open Access•Tobias Heimann, Lara-Sophie Wähling et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  • Searching for a Public in Controversies over Carbon Dioxide Removal

    Open Access•L Waller, Tim Rayner et al.•Science Technology & Human Values•2023

  • Shoreline demos

    Open Access•L Waller, Emily Cox et al.•Environment and Planning E Nature…•2025

  • The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change

    Open Access•Felix Creutzig, Peter Agoston et al.•Nature Energy•2017

  • Natural climate solutions

    Open Access•Bronson W Griscom, Justin Adams et al.•Proceedings of the National…•2017

  • Trading Water for Carbon with Biological Carbon Sequestration

    Open Access•Robert B Jackson, Esteban G Jobbágy et al.•Science•2005

  • More evolution than revolution

    Open Access•Jan Rotmans, Ray Kemp et al.•foresight•2001

  • Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change

    Open Access•Timothy D Searchinger, Timothy Searchinger et al.•Science•2008

  • Global Forest Transition

    Open Access•Patrick Meyfroidt, Eric F Lambin•Annual Review of Environment and…•2011

  • A Review of Forest Carbon Sequestration Cost Studies

    Open Access•Kenneth Richards, Kenneth R Richards et al.•Climatic Change•2004

  • The slow search for solutions

    Open Access•Roger Fouquet•Energy Policy•2010

  • Implications of Limiting CO 2 Concentrations for Land Use and Energy

    Open Access•Marshall Wise, Katherine Calvin et al.•Science•2009

  • The structure of invention

    Open Access•W Brian Arthur•Research Policy•2007

  • Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century

    Open Access•Terry C Daniel•Landscape and Urban Planning•2001

  • Climate-smart soils

    Open Access•K Paustian, Johannes Lehmann et al.•Nature•2016

  • Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search

    Open Access•Lee Fleming•Management Science•2001

  • Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food Security

    Open Access•Rattan Lal•Science•2004

  • Ecological and socioeconomic effects of China's policies for ecosystem services

    Open Access•Jianguo Liu, Shuxin Li et al.•Proceedings of the National…•2008

  • Soil carbon debt of 12,000 years of human land use

    Open Access•Jonathan Sanderman, Tomislav Hengl et al.•Proceedings of the National…•2017

  • How much land‐based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?

    Open Access•Pete Smith, H Haberl et al.•Global Change Biology•2013

  • The trouble with negative emissions

    Open Access•Kevin Anderson, Glen P Peters et al.•Science•2016

  • Managing Forests for Climate Change Mitigation

    Open Access•Josep G Canadell, Michael Raupach et al.•Science•2008

  • Functions of innovation systems

    Open Access•Marko P Hekkert, Roald A A Suurs et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2007

  • Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions

    Open Access•Paula Kivimaa, Friederike Kern et al.•Research Policy•2016

  • The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing

    Kenneth J Arrow•The Review of Economic Studies•1962

  • Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate‐Change Mitigation Benefits Misleads Policy Makers

    Open Access•Richard J Plevin, Mark A Delucchi et al.•Journal of Industrial Ecology•2014

  • Locked into Copenhagen pledges — Implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals

    Open Access•Keywan Riahi, Elmar Kriegler et al.•Technological Forecasting and…•2013

  • Carbon dioxide removal and the futures market

    Open Access•D’maris Coffman, Andrew Lockley•Environmental Research Letters•2017

  • Iron fertilisation and century-scale effects of open ocean dissolution of olivine in a simulated CO 2 removal experiment

    Open Access•Judith Hauck, Peter Köhler et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2016

  • Global economic consequences of deploying bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)

    Open Access•Matteo Muratori, Katherine Calvin et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2016

  • Assessment of reasonable opportunities for direct air capture

    Open Access•Jennifer Wilcox, Peter Psarras et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2017

  • Expert assessment concludes negative emissions scenarios may not deliver

    Open Access•Naomi E Vaughan, Clair Gough•Environmental Research Letters•2016

  • Meeting global temperature targets—the role of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage

    Open Access•Christian Azar, Daniel Johansson et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2013

  • Accounting for soil carbon sequestration in national inventories

    Open Access•Jonathan Sanderman, Jeff Baldock et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2010

  • Negative emissions—Part 2

    Open Access•Sabine Fuss, William F Lamb et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2018

  • Negative emissions—Part 1

    Open Access•Jan C Minx, William F Lamb et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2018

  • Research priorities for negative emissions

    Open Access•Sabine Fuss, Chris Jones et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2016

  • Methods for greenhouse gas offset accounting

    Open Access•Wilfried Rickels, Katrin Rehdanz et al.•Ecological Economics•2010

  • Farmer perceptions, policy and reforestation in Santa Catarina, Brazil

    Open Access•Adriana Carla Dias Trevisan, A L Schmitt-Filho et al.•Ecological Economics•2016

  • Unveiling the dynamic relation between R&D and emission abatement

    Open Access•Massimiliano Corradini, Valeria Costantini et al.•Ecological Economics•2014

  • Land use and general equilibrium implications of a forest-based carbon sequestration policy in the United States

    Open Access•Juan J Monge, Henry L Bryant et al.•Ecological Economics•2016

  • Extraordinary interventions

    Open Access•Peter Sircom Bromley•Energy Research & Social Science•2016

  • Apples, oranges, and consistent comparisons of the temporal dynamics of energy transitions

    Open Access•Arnulf Grübler, Charlie Wilson et al.•Energy Research & Social Science•2016

  • Rethinking energy innovation and social science

    Open Access•Robert W Fri, Maxine Savitz•Energy Research & Social Science•2014

  • Climate dreaming

    Henry Shue•Journal of Human Rights and the…•2017

  • Farmers fighting climate change—from victims to agents in subsistence livelihoods

    Open Access•Louise Olsson, A Jerneck•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2010

  • United States agricultural stakeholder views and decisions on climate change

    Open Access•Allison M Chatrchyan, Rachel C Erlebacher et al.•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2017

  • Biochar—One way forward for soil carbon in offset mechanisms in Africa

    Open Access•Thea Whitman, Johannes Lehmann•Environmental Science & Policy•2009

  • Modeling the impact of carbon farming on land use in a New Zealand landscape

    Open Access•Jason Funk, Jason M Funk et al.•Environmental Science & Policy•2013

  • An idealized assessment of the economics of air capture of carbon dioxide in mitigation policy

    Open Access•Roger A Pielke•Environmental Science & Policy•2009

  • Challenges and opportunities in linking carbon sequestration, livelihoods and ecosystem service provision in drylands

    Open Access•L C Stringer, Andrew J Dougill et al.•Environmental Science & Policy•2012

  • An economic analysis of the establishment of forest plantations in the United Kingdom to mitigate climatic change

    Open Access•Maria Nijnik, Guillaume Pajot et al.•Forest Policy and Economics•2012

  • Spatially explicit demand for afforestation

    Open Access•Julian Sagebiel, Klaus Glenk et al.•Forest Policy and Economics•2017

  • Implementing Redd+ at the national level

    Open Access•Joanes O Atela, Claire H Quinn et al.•Forest Policy and Economics•2016

  • An investigation into the effects of an emissions trading scheme on forest management and land use in New Zealand

    Open Access•Thomas Adams, James Turner•Forest Policy and Economics•2011

  • Where can I go to see one? Risk communications for an ‘imaginary technology’

    David Reiner, David M Reiner•Journal of Risk Research•2015

  • How do Public Demonstration Projects Promote Green‐Manufacturing Technologies? A Case Study from China

    Open Access•Yuan Zhou, Zhou Yuan et al.•Sustainable Development•2015

  • Managing carbon in a multiple use world

    Open Access•Lisa Dilling, E L Failey et al.•Global Environmental Change•2012

  • Carbon capture and storage, bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, and the escape from the fossil-fuel lock-in

    Open Access•Philip J Vergragt, Nils Markusson et al.•Global Environmental Change•2011

  • Assessing the likelihood of widespread landholder adoption of afforestation and reforestation projects

    Open Access•Jacki Schirmer, Lyndall Bull•Global Environmental Change•2013

  • Addressing policy credibility problems for low-carbon investment

    Open Access•Gregory F Nemet, Michael Jakob et al.•Global Environmental Change•2016

  • Afforestation and reforestation projects in South and South-East Asia under the Clean Development Mechanism

    Open Access•Maria Nijnik, Pradipta Halder•Land Use Policy•2013

  • Agri-environmental policy valuation

    Open Access•Nele Lienhoop, Roland Brouwer et al.•Land Use Policy•2015

  • The challenge of managing soil functions at multiple scales

    Open Access•Kristine Valujeva, Lilian O’Sullivan et al.•Land Use Policy•2016

  • The costs of reforestation

    Open Access•David McCulloch Summers, Brett A Bryan et al.•Land Use Policy•2015

  • Going rogue? Scenarios for unilateral geoengineering

    Open Access•Florian Rabitz•Futures•2016

  • Thinking about the future of technology

    Open Access•Jeffrey L Funk•Futures•2015

  • The Technology Pork Barrel

    William Diebold, Linda R Cohen et al.•Foreign Affairs•1991

  • Dual-function forests in the returning farmland to forest program and the flexibility of environmental policy in China

    Open Access•J A Zinda, Christine Jane Trac et al.•Geoforum•2016

  • Measuring the duration of formative phases for energy technologies

    Open Access•Nuno Bento, Charlie Wilson•Environmental Innovation and…•2016

  • How long will it take? Conceptualizing the temporal dynamics of energy transitions

    Open Access•B K Sovacool•Energy Research & Social Science•2016

  • Niche construction and empowerment through socio-political work. A meta-analysis of six low-carbon technology cases

    Open Access•Rob Raven, Friederike Kern et al.•Environmental Innovation and…•2016

  • Geoengineering, Ocean Fertilization, and the Problem of Permissible Pollution

    Open Access•Benjamin Hale, Lisa Dilling•Science Technology & Human Values•2011

  • The Relationship between Unit Cost and Cumulative Quantity and the Evidence for Organizational Learning-by-Doing

    Open Access•Peter Thompson•The Journal of Economic…•2012

Obras citantes distintas63
Citações por ano7,88
Intervalo de citações2018 - 2026 (9)
Velocidade de citaçãocurrent
Altamente citadoNão
Tipos de citaçãoNeutras: 63
Ethnos_APP • Projeto Open Source • Licença MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidade e Cookies • Documentação da API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código da API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código do Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae