Paris climate targets–how can negative emissions and climate engineering help limiting temperature rise?
In the Paris climate agreement, the countries set themselves the goal of limiting the global temperature increase to below 2°C and ideally even to keep it within a limit of 1.5°C. However, the remaining CO2 emissions budget associated with this goal is already vanishingly small, and a lack of reductions in non-CO2 emissions or a decline in natural CO2 sinks means that the emissions budget has already been used up. Accordingly, in line with the 1.5°C target, all scenarios practically envisage additional, technical removal of CO2 from the atmosphere. These technical measures are intended to support natural measures such as reforestation. At the same time, the question arises whether these technologies can be scaled up quickly enough or whether it is already inevitable to support the causal limitation of climate change by symptomatic containment through solar climate engineering.
How can CO2 removal technologies be promoted, and what opportunities are there for establishing these technologies internationally?
What is the role of announcements by large companies such as Microsoft to achieve net-negative CO2 emission targets? What are the implications for international supply chains?
To what extent does it matter if countries choose different climate change mitigation strategies?
Can solar climate engineering be justified if it protects natural habitats such as the Arctic or the Great Barrier Reef?
How can the Arctic neighbours such as Russia be convinced to forego improved access to their northern coast?