1 | China is already a major CDR actor — but mainly through conventional CDR
China is one of the world’s largest emitters, but it is also one of the largest contributors to current global CDR. This reflects the structure of today’s CDR system: global removals are still overwhelmingly dominated by conventional methods, especially afforestation and reforestation.
In this sense, China’s CDR position is not marginal. Bookkeeping models suggest that China contributes more than 500 MtCO₂ per year through afforestation and reforestation. Much of the long-term increase in global conventional CDR is also associated with China’s expansion of land-based removals.
However, this should not be read as evidence that China has already built a mature CDR system. It means that China is highly relevant to the current CDR baseline, but that baseline remains narrow. Current removals are concentrated in conventional land-based approaches, where permanence, monitoring, attribution and vulnerability to climate and land-use change remain important issues.
2 | Research activity is strong, but novel CDR deployment remains early-stage
China is also becoming increasingly visible in CDR research and demonstration. The report identifies China as a major contributor to CDR publications, with growing activity across academic institutions, ministries and state-owned enterprises.
Several examples point to this emerging ecosystem. China’s Ministry of Science and Technology participates in Mission Innovation. State-owned enterprises and universities are involved in pilot-scale work, including DACCS pilots and biochar-related projects. Biochar is particularly notable, as China’s interest is reflected in both publications and patenting activity. The report also notes a biochar pilot prototype with a removal capacity of around 1,500 tonnes of CO₂ per year.
Yet the scale remains limited. Most of China’s novel CDR activity is still at the research, pilot or demonstration stage. Public funding for CDR demonstration has expanded into China, but the data remain incomplete, especially for recent years. The key point is therefore not that novel CDR is already deployed at scale in China, but that the innovation system is beginning to form.
3 | Policy signals exist, but CDR is only partially integrated
China has some policy channels relevant to CDR, especially through forestry-based carbon credits. The national emissions trading system allows covered entities to use domestic China Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) credits within a limited share (5%) of compliance obligations. The relaunched CCER framework includes methodologies such as afforestation and mangrove restoration.
This matters because it creates a limited compliance demand channel for conventional CDR. But it also needs careful interpretation. CCER is not the same as CDR. Some CCER projects reduce emissions, while others increase removals. Only a subset of CCER is directly relevant to carbon removal.
The report characterizes China’s conventional CDR policy development as active, while novel CDR remains emerging. This seems accurate. Conventional removals have clearer links to existing forestry, ecosystem and carbon market policies. Novel CDR, by contrast, is still mainly connected to early-stage CCUS-related policy and demonstration activity.
4 | Future scenarios imply a much larger role for novel CDR
The report uses the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM) to explore China-specific mitigation pathways consistent with reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions around 2060. The scenarios consider several CDR options, including afforestation and reforestation, BECCS, DACCS and enhanced weathering, across three pathways: Targets & Pledges, Highest Ambition and Delayed Ambition.
Across all three scenarios, CDR deployment in China expands rapidly between 2035 and 2050. In the Targets & Pledges pathway, removals increase from around 0.2 GtCO₂ per year in 2035 to 2.2 GtCO₂ per year in 2050. In the Highest Ambition pathway, they rise from about 2.5 GtCO₂ per year to 4.6 GtCO₂ per year. In the Delayed Ambition pathway, removals grow from around 0.2 GtCO₂ per year to almost 4 GtCO₂ per year, implying the fastest scale-up among the three.
A striking feature of these pathways is the role assigned to novel CDR. Most removals are provided by novel methods, especially BECCS and enhanced weathering, which account for more than 94% of total CDR across scenarios and years. This contrasts sharply with China’s current CDR profile, which is dominated by conventional land-based removals.
These results should be read as modelled scenarios rather than official Chinese targets. Their value is to show the scale of the transition implied by deep mitigation pathways: if China is to rely on novel CDR at this level after 2035, then policy design, MRV systems, infrastructure, demonstration projects and demand creation need to start much earlier.
Comments
Post a Comment