Humanity must deploy novel carbon-sucking technologies at a pace that makes solar panel adoption look like a leisurely stroll, according to a new report that has apparently not yet been ruined by the current political climate. The study, published Tuesday, finds that so-called carbon dioxide removal (CDR) methods - machines that inhale CO2 like a giant, expensive asthmatic, plus chemical tricks like making biochar - currently account for a whopping 0.1% of the 2.2 billion tonnes of CO2 removed globally each year. The rest comes from good old-fashioned tree planting, which, as anyone who has tried to fit a forest in a parking lot knows, is limited by space.
Novel CDR has been growing at 40% annually, but it starts from such a tiny base that it needs to hit growth rates somewhere between those of solar panels and electric vehicles - basically the Formula 1 of climate tech. Unfortunately, only one-fifth of planned capacity has actually materialized, which is roughly the success rate of New Year's resolutions. "Countries have pledged around 2.7 billion tonnes of carbon removal by 2035 and about 3.6 billion by 2050, but climate pathways require much more," said William Lamb, a scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and co-author of the report. "This leaves a gap that grows significantly over time." In other words, we're bringing a slingshot to a trebuchet fight.
Scientists compare carbon removal to cleaning a beach: the cheapest solution is to stop littering in the first place, but here we are, picking up decades of denial's trash. The report notes that support is "fragile," which is diplomatic for "the US under Donald Trump has left the Paris agreement, torn up green rules, and is basically running a fossil fuel infomercial." The researchers warned that "policy dismantling and volatility" in the US is undermining credibility and making other countries feel like they can also slack off.
Microsoft, which bought 82% of all novel CDR credits - making it the Willy Wonka of carbon removal - reportedly paused its purchases in April. The company's chief sustainability officer, Melanie Nakagawa, said in a statement that the program hasn't ended, though she didn't say when purchases would resume. "At times we may adjust the pace or volume," she said, which is corporate-speak for "we're still committed, just not right this second." Ana Hernández, from the Foundation for Climate Research in Spain, noted that this contributes to a decline in corporate ambitions. "No G20 country has a legally binding removal target," she added, "and the NDCs submitted in 2025 did not increase ambition for carbon removal."
Thomas Gasser, a scientist at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, offered a glimmer of hope: "While we are indeed far behind in terms of CDR development, it remains the only option to revert climate change in the long run - although only if greenhouse gas emissions are also reduced to near-zero." So, to summarize: we need to stop burning stuff, plant a lot of trees, and build a bunch of expensive air-sucking machines. What could possibly go wrong?