Carbon dioxide removals (CDR) have become central to climate policy. Current policy approaches, however, are insufficient to create the basis for CDR technologies to scale because they are not yet aligned with the complexity shaping the emerging sector. In this article, we provide an approach to understanding the characteristics of CDR which we argue is composed of both market-creation and market-led complexity. Our engagement with market actors since 2020 suggests that we have entered this new paradigm of complexity earlier than was the case for renewables and in a different way due to the nature of demand. We illustrate how these complexity characteristics are not well captured by existing tools that support policymaking. And we provide an alternative approach to the support of decision-making which is both exploratory and participatory in nature. We call for governments to embrace new tools to facilitate engagement between the public and private sector actors in ways that can more directly capture the sector's complexity. Public-private collaborations for the next phase of CDR investment will be needed to allow governments to both guide the sector whilst also providing a backstop to risk for private sector partners. Participatory and dialectic stakeholder deliberation processes should be integrated throughout analysis, policy design and cross-sector approaches rather than being thought of as separate in order to facilitate timely, targeted interventions that are robust to different possible futures.

The transition to net zero requires coordination across public, private and civil-society sectors. Systemic transition intermediaries play a central role in this process by connecting diverse actors while also seeking to accelerate system-level change. This dual objective creates inherent tensions: Intermediaries must mobilise actors especially from the private sector while simultaneously pushing them towards ambitious transformation.This paper examines these tensions through an in-depth case study of the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) and the controversy surrounding proposed changes to its corporate net-zero standard. We conceptualise SBTi as a systemic transition intermediary whose authority rests on scientific credibility and procedural rigour, but whose influence depends on voluntary corporate participation. This dual positioning exposes the organization to competing pressures and political dynamics.Our findings illustrate the challenges associated with the strategic and political role of the SBTi. We show that the key tension with the private sector involves an ongoing balance between pushing ambition on the one hand, and at the same time relying on voluntary participation of corporations. This tension shapes the ability for SBTi to influence policy and to collaborate with other intermediaries. We contribute to the literature on systemic transition intermediaries by highlighting that this is an ongoing tension to be addressed rather than resolved. We advance a cross-sector view of systemic transition intermediaries, and we call for further research that focuses on the ecosystem of intermediaries who can support and guide the net-zero transition.

Greenhouse gas removals (GGRs) will be essential at GtCO2-scale to offset residual emissions and achieve global net zero by 2050. Engineered GGRs have the greatest long-term, large-scale CO2 storage potential and, therefore, offer opportunities to realize high-integrity removals. However, the most prominent engineered solutions are capital-intensive, generate expensive offset credits, and have achieved minimal market penetration. The United States has established policies subsidizing GGR deployment value chains which generate high-integrity removals to bring down engineered GGR costs. The US regime has the potential to result in substantial GGR cost reductions which will likely have implications on the policy frameworks for global GGR technology deployment. To date, research addressing the impact of US policies on the commercial imperatives and investment uncertainties for the global GGR sector is limited. Using a mixed methods approach, this contribution unpacked the motivations of early private sector actors. It did this by identifying characteristics of the most investable GGR business models and policy implementation requirements to establish the nascent sector, which will be critical to the GGR sector becoming a global multi-trillion-dollar, self-sustaining market. The analysis reveals that cost reduction alone will be insufficient to establish a high-integrity global GtCO2-scale sector. Systemic market risks, especially certainty of offtake through demand-side incentives, need to be `addressed. Therefore, the development of a stable and sustainable GGR sector, both in the US and globally, will remain problematic due to the inability to attract large-scale private capital investment.

In addition to radical reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, large-scale removal of anthropogenic CO2 will be required to mitigate the impacts of global warming. However, many greenhouse gas removal (GGR) methods remain at a nascent stage of development. A case study was carried out on the application of the collective intelligence (CI) model to the UK GGR sector and the need to scale up and accelerate development in an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable way. Through systems mapping, thematic analysis, workshops and semi-structured interviews, a rich dataset was formed on the existing level of and potential for CI within the UK GGR ecosystem. It was found that implementing CI thinking could address the need for increasing the visibility of the system and its workings to participants and the public. This would contribute to the formation of coherent, shared vision for the role of GGR in the UK’s net zero strategy. It is proposed that these risks could be mitigated by creating a publicly accessible ‘commons’ to visualise the UK GGR ecosystem process, dynamics, components, and goals, allowing innovation policy to be more responsive to innovator and net zero policy needs. Increasing ecosystem awareness could lay the foundations for sharing of information, promotion of a more collective culture, and increased transparency and accountability, all of which are critical building blocks in establishing a robust GGR sector for the future.

The energy modelling community’s analysis of net zero often relies on approaches that hide the extent of uncertainty. Meanwhile the extent of uncertainty involved in the realisation of net zero is proliferating. Conventional consolidative modelling approaches lack of transparency is distorting decision making and policy design around net zero. This contribution uses the UK’s Committee on Climate Changes 6th Carbon Budget as a case study. An exploratory, Robust Decision-Making approach is used to highlight the fragility of conventional UK modelling approaches in shaping national climate policy. A new suite of tools, orientation of analysis and mixed approaches are needed to address the extent of complexity, uncertainty and emergence in possible net zero futures. Only then will robust, inclusive and realisable climate policy be designed.

The need to deal with the deep uncertainty and system complexity associated to Net-Zero pathways, especially those relying on emergent greenhouse gas removal (GGR) technologies, has resulted in a growing body of literature on alternative decision-support approaches. Exploratory modelling, and specifically Robust Decision Making (RDM), are potential approaches capable of addressing these challenges: by exploring a wide range of conceivable futures, they explicitly embrace deep uncertainties while seeking to reduce system vulnerabilities. However, though RDM methods have been well documented, there is little insight as to how such approach might be integrated into Net-Zero policy design processes. By means of a workshop (n=17) and interviews (n=13) with the UK climate policy and energy modelling communities, this contribution provides insights into the role and potential of RDM in explicitly dealing with the deep uncertainties that pervade in the establishment of a 60-100 MtCO(2) UK GGR sector within three decades. The consultation process revealed that there is an appetite from the decision-making and analytical communities in integrating exploratory modelling concepts into UK policy design processes. It is recommended that to bridge the gap between theoretical RDM constructs and their broader adoption, the analytical process should include a broader set of disciplines and expertise. Specifically for the modelling community, this work suggests that in-use computational models should be adapted, rather than new tools developed. Key challenges also arise from the time and resources required, suggesting small scale place-based pilots could promote the acceptability and foster the adoption of the RDM methodology.

The majority of global emissions scenarios compatible with holding global warming to less than 2 degrees C depend on the large-scale use of Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) technologies. Recent critiques have highlighted the concerns of building long-term climate policy on such speculative technological scenarios emerging from orthodox modelling approaches - including integrated assessment modelling prominently assessed by the IPCC. Through a stakeholder consultation process with the UK modelling and policy community, we critically examine the integration of GGR technologies into UK Net Zero scenarios and the decision-making philosophy underlying the use of orthodox modelling to inform UK climate policy. We identify a number of features of orthodox modelling approaches which are unable to manage the pervasive extent of deep uncertainty in possible UK climate and energy futures. We further argue that a more fundamental issue lies in the way that the models are used by UK climate policy makers: that the handling of uncertainties which pervade the integration of GGR into Net Zero policy are resulting in substantial distortions in net-zero policy design and associated decision-making. Drawing on the principles of decision-making under deep uncertainty techniques, exemplified by Robust Decision Making, we recommend an alternative approach that explicitly embraces uncertainty, multiple values and diversity among stakeholders and viewpoints, and in which modelling exists in an iterative exchange with policy development rather than separate from it. We advocate that such an approach would provide more relevant and robust information to near-term policymaking and enable an inclusive societal dialogue about the appropriate role of GGR within UK climate policy.

EDITORIAL article Front. Clim., 22 January 2024Sec. Climate and Decision Making Volume 6 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2024.1355110

Greenhouse gas removals (GGRs) will be essential at GtCO2-scale to offset residual emissions and achieve global net zero by 2050. Engineered GGRs have the greatest long-term, large-scale CO2 storage potential and, therefore, offer opportunities to high-quality removals. However, the most prominent engineered solutions are capital-intensive, generating expensive offset credits, and have achieved minimal market penetration. The United States has established policies subsidizing GGR deployment and is expanding the supply of high-quality removals to bring down GGR costs. Using a mixed methods approach, this research unpacked the motivations of early private sector actors by identifying characteristics of the most investable GGR business models and policy implementation requirements that will balance supply and demand fundamentals to stabilize the nascent sector, which will be critical to the GGR sector becoming a multi-trillion-dollar, self-sustaining market. The analysis reveals that uncertainty of offtake, due to a lack of demand-side incentives, is impacting the willingness of the private sector to invest. Therefore, advance procurement programs and responsive policy will be integral to establishing a US GGR market. Interventions addressing systemic market risks such as certainty of offtake will be essential to stabilize GGR sector development and attract large-scale private capital investment in the near term.

The impacts of climate change on society and the natural environment are being experienced now, with extreme weather events increasing in frequency and severity across the globe. To keep the Paris Agreement's ambition of limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels there is now also a need to establish and scale a new sector to remove CO2 at Giga-ton scale for over a century. Despite this mounting evidence and warnings, current climate policy in the UK and globally falls far short of achieving the required reductions in CO2 emissions or establishment of a new removal sector needed to stave off the risks posed by climate change. Some of the science on climate risk is well-evidenced, but the policy response is lacking in effectiveness. Other evidence to design policy, such as Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), is fraught with deep uncertainty. Why are the plethora of scientific evidence, assessments and decision support tools available to decision and policymakers not always translating into effective climate-net zero policy action? How can emergent evidence be introduced to shape new sectors such as CDR? What are the capacity gaps? Through a combination of literature review, interviews and UK policy workshops over 17 months these are some of the questions that this contribution sought insight. We set out three recommendations for policymakers and other stakeholders, including academic researchers and third sector organizations, to address the identified gaps associated with translating climate risk and net zero decision support into effective climate policy:• Enhance collaboration between decision-makers, policymakers, analysts, researchers, and other stakeholders to co-develop and co-design operational climate risk assessments and policies, relevant to context.• Identify the research and capacity gaps around climate risk decision-making under uncertainty, and work with stakeholders across the decision value chain to ensure those gaps are addressed.• Co-create effective translation mechanisms to embed decision-support tools into policy better, employing a participatory approach to ensure inclusion of diverse values and viewpoints.It is fundamental that there is improvement in our understanding about how we can make good decisions and operationalize them, rather than simply focus on further research on the climate risk and net zero problem.

The deployment of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) to GtCO2 scale by the mid-century is integral to realising net zero. Some CDR methods are technically maturing whilst some are in the early stages of innovation. At the same time, first mover nations are implementing policy and regulatory frameworks to establish this sector. Policy analysis around CDR has therefore become an area of focus as a function of its importance in establishing, developing and scaling a just, equitable and sustainable net zero transition. Policy development for sustainable transitions tends to use consolidative modelling approaches. These, often protracted, analyses can become quickly outdated in dynamic fast-moving sectors, and be unable to manage the multiple objectives that actors seek when innovating. The innovation rate required to scale the CDR sector and the extent of uncertainty to realise net zero, questions the applicability of these approaches. This research proposes a novel rapid policy analysis process, based on the decision theatre format, that uses strategic foresight to develop anticipatory, values-based CDR policy insights.This contribution prototypes this rapid approach on two pioneer national CDR developers - the United Kingdom and United States. Through its application, the method identifies opportunities for globally collaborative CDR policy intervention - a roadmap, a coordination hub, and agile policy processes - supported by regional policy specialisations - coordinating offices, measurement standards, and public capacity building - to achieve GtCO2 scale CDR deployment. Most importantly, the proposed approach provides a rapid method for sustainable transitions policy analysis in contexts of deep uncertainty.

Decarbonisation of heat is critical to the UK achieving its net zero emissions target by 2050. With the low rate of asset turn-over in the heat sector, decarbonisation needs to start immediately. However, the risk and uncertainty regarding the most ‘cost optimal pathway’ across the range of technology options and the lack of a holistic UK heat policy is failing to provide a clear directive as to how market actors should address UK heat decarbonisation. This research applies a novel commercial perspective to provide additional insight beyond that which traditional cost optimal tools are able to offer. The value pool approach is used to determine the magnitude of economic opportunities and map their resilience across multiple net zero scenarios in decadal timesteps to 2050. Our work indicates that by 2050 an annual value of £28 billion potentially exists in decarbonising heat in the UK. Realising this value, however, is subject to significant path-dependency. Unlocking the value will require substantial additional policy and regulatory support, business model innovation and unprecedented levels of consumer engagement and protection in the history of the energy sector.

Despite mounting evidence and warnings of current and future climate risks, climate policy in the UK and globally falls far short of achieving the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions needed to stave off the risks posed by climate change, and limit global warming to 1.5C. The science on climate risk is strong, but the policy response is currently lacking in effectiveness. Why are the plethora of climate risk assessments and decision support tools available to decision-makers not always translating into effective policy action on climate risk? What are the challenges, complexities and uncertainties associated with this translational process, and how can we improve the research translation pipeline in order to achieve more effective decision-making on climate policy? These are some of the key questions that this UK Universities Climate Network report aims to address, through a combination of literature review, case study assessment and input from stakeholder workshops.

The UK has incorporated a net-zero emissions target into national legislation. A range of Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) options will likely play a key role in the government's strategy toward meeting this goal. Governance frameworks will need to be developed to support GGR development and manage the potential impacts, particularly those on the diverse local communities where the various options will be deployed. This research examines the UK's experience with development and regulation of shale gas - using the technologies of hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling - with a focus on governance and the implications for the development and widespread deployment of GGR. We evaluate the approach used against the principles of good governance, which emphasizes the critical role that local communities and publics play in deployment. The UK's top-down governance of shale gas highlights the risk of regulation driven by assumptions about national and local need, value and a lack of transparency or meaningful stakeholder participation in decision-making. The use of existing legislative frameworks for conventional fossil fuel extraction proved inadequate to address unanticipated consequences such as induced seismicity. Moreover, the support for unconventional hydrocarbons in UK energy policy appeared inconsistent with the goal of meeting greenhouse gas targets and passing significant legislation in 2019 to bring carbon emissions to net-zero. To gain social acceptance at the local level, deployment of new technologies needs to be evaluated from a variety of framings and viewpoints. Where new technologies or practices are deployed, such as fracking and GGR, the knowledge and understanding of the impacts - a fundamental principle of good governance - may be less certain or more contested. Early inclusion and participation of local communities would allow issues of concern to inform how trials are undertaken and regulation designed. This anticipatory and participatory approach fits with the principles of good governance and procedural justice, which can help build the trust needed to ensure social legitimacy leading to development and implementation of technological innovations.

This paper brings together socio-technical transitions theory with strategic foresight and human centred design. The aim is to bring in new methods for analysing the business model element of sustainability transitions. We propose a process for doing business model innovation work. Business models have become a key area of focus, particularly in the energy sector. Recent work shows how the development of new business models co-evolves with elements of the energy system, either driving technological innovation, changing user practices or placing pressure on the institutional or policy regime. At the same time, there is no recognised process for business model research aimed at transition management. It is time therefore to propose a more formalised and theoretically grounded approach to business model innovation work. We use this contribution to synthesise the lessons of a four-year research project centred on energy utility business models with industrial, commercial and government stakeholders. We describe the process adopted, and insights this process generated. We seek to establish this process in the literature, invite others to utilise it, adapt it and critique it.

With 1,500 companies now estimated to have set net zero targets, corporate engagement with carbon dioxide removal (CDR) has gained substantial momentum. Yet despite the corporate sector becoming a key domain of CDR decision-making, corporates have not received research attention as influential actors in the governance of CDR. This paper provides a perspective on how corporates influence and enact de facto governance of CDR. We collate a preliminary evidence base regarding possible modes of CDR governance by corporates. Focusing on voluntary corporate engagement with CDR, we examine how and why firm-level decision-making takes place, and interrogate the implications of such activity. We find that the current literature focuses on techno-economic attributes of CDR solutions as drivers of corporate engagement; however, the ability for corporates to formulate a (business) case for engaging with CDR is potentially shaped by a broader array of financial and non-financial factors that are currently overlooked. This gives corporates the influence to define what and how to govern, an inherently “political act.” We finally highlight possible lenses for future research, noting lessons to be drawn from climate justice, anticipatory governance, responsible innovation, and futures literatures. These could provide a deepened understanding of the dynamics and implications of current de facto CDR governance, and allow this to be challenged where appropriate. Ultimately, without awareness and oversight of how CDR is being governed in the real world, policy and governance research may not be successful in driving us toward desired net zero futures.

In June 2019 the UK legislated a 2050 net-zero emissions target. This will require the realisation of a technical Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) sector potentially generating over 60 MtCO(2) pa of negative emissions by 2050. In October 2021, the UK pledged that at least 5 MtCO(2) of engineered negative emissions be deployed by 2030. At present less than 0.5 ktCO(2) pa of engineered negative emissions are deployed. The 10,000-fold scale-up to 2030 will require the co-ordinated engagement of first movers to establish and realise at least one GGR value chain. The 120,000-fold scale up to 2050 will require the integration of multiple GGR value chains with existing infrastructure systems and substantive societal engagement to enhance positive social outcomes. This scaling is fundamental to the UK, and arguably international efforts, to address the worst impacts of climate change.& nbsp;A series of exploratory exercises have been undertaken to identify the financial and non-financial barriers to the establishment of a UK multi-MtCO(2) pa scale GGR sector from a first mover perspective. This is the first synthesis of first mover drivers in the UK GGR sector.& nbsp;The key findings include: (1) The GGR sector represents a multi-billion pound opportunity in 2050; and (2) inspite of this opportunity -as the incentive, policy, regulatory and governance ecosystem presently stands -first movers face too much risk, uncertainty and a multiplicity of dilemmas to commit substantive investments in establishing the UK GGR multi-MtCO2 pa sector.

The energy transition potentially poses an existential risk for major international oil companies (IOCs) if they fail to adapt to low-carbon business models. Projections of energy futures, however, are met with diverging assumptions on its scale and pace, causing disagreement among IOC decision-makers and their stakeholders over what the business model of an incumbent fossil fuel company should be. In this work, we used deep multi-agent reinforcement learning to solve an energy systems wargame wherein players simulate IOC decision-making, including hydrocarbon and low-carbon investments decisions, dividend policies, and capital structure measures, through an uncertain energy transition to explore critical and non-linear governance questions, from leveraged transitions to reserve replacements. Adversarial play facilitated by state-of-the-art algorithms revealed decision-making strategies robust to energy transition uncertainty and against multiple IOCs. In all games, robust strategies emerged in the form of low-carbon business models as a result of early transition-oriented movement. IOCs adopting such strategies outperformed business-as-usual and delayed transition strategies regardless of hydrocarbon demand projections. In addition to maximizing value, these strategies benefit greater society by contributing substantial amounts of capital necessary to accelerate the global low-carbon energy transition. Our findings point towards the need for lenders and investors to effectively mobilize transition-oriented finance and engage with IOCs to ensure responsible reallocation of capital towards low-carbon business models that would enable the emergence of fossil fuel incumbents as future low-carbon leaders.

The nationwide rollout of smart meters marks a significant milestone in the digitalisation of the UK energy sector. It has allowed the collection of unprecedented amounts of consumer energy consumption and behavioural data. Providing real-time, spatially explicit, bi-directional connectivity between service providers and consumers, this data is expected to provide benefits of over 40B pound and contribute to behavioural nudges -which are integral to 62% of all initiatives required to achieve Net Zero by 2050. Concurrently, consumers are leaving behind digital trails across a broader spectrum of their lives through their smartphones and in-home devices. This data could also be used to accelerate digitalisation within the energy sector and yet the energy sector has limited or no visibility of it. While greater access to consumer data is expected to provide substantial opportunities for economic growth and the realisation of Net Zero both in the energy sector and across the UK economy, it also risks consumer exploitation.This policy perspectives seeks to provide insights from data and digital specialists in the UK rather than just actors within the energy sector. It uses psychographics as a use case to highlight the tension where data, particularly consumer data, is under regulated and siloed across the UK economy. The potential to use consumer data to change consumer behaviour to enable net zero opportunities is explored.The analysis strongly indicates that the ability for high fidelity consumer data to elicit behavioural insight is expected to become an increasingly valuable tool to inform both policy and business decisions in the energy transition -particularly around innovation and enhanced competition. These opportunities are balanced by the fact that high-definition consumer data collection practices are already perceived as exploitative. The lack of data sharing infrastructure across the economy has allowed incumbent technology companies to establish monopoly power thereby stifling competition and raising barriers to entry. The analysis makes a series of high-level recommendations around cross-economy data principles to enhance sharing and stimulate innovation whilst protecting consumer privacy to build digital trust. Options as to how these might be realised are also proposed and should form the basis of future research.

Energy as a service, smart home opportunities and electrification of heat and transport can lead to new ways of switching supplier or choosing new energy contracts. Here, we used business model collaboration workshops to create archetypes of new utility business models, which were then tested with a representative sample of British energy consumers to explore their attractiveness to different segments of society. We show that some of these segments have a substantial appetite for new business models. However, the segments that choose these models are more likely to be affluent, educated homeowners. Without intervention, innovation in utility business models risks exacerbating existing social inequalities, as lower incomes, lower home ownership and low education result in lower preferences for, or no ability to engage with, new utility business models. We also find that institutional trust beyond the energy sector is a key driver of consumer segmentation. Utility business models are changing to accommodate energy system decarbonization. Here the authors adopt a collaborative business model innovation process to define the business models that utilities are exploring, and then identify consumer segments based on their preferences for these new contracts.