Skip to main content

POLICY AND PRACTICE REVIEWS article

Front. Environ. Sci.
Sec. Environmental Policy and Governance
Volume 12 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2024.1387138
This article is part of the Research Topic Green Finance & Carbon Neutrality: Strategies and Policies for a Sustainable Future View all 25 articles

How to maintain environmental integrity while realising BECCS projects via co-financing by state support and the VCM -A Swedish case study

Provisionally accepted
Malin Pehrs Malin Pehrs 1*Kenneth Möllersten Kenneth Möllersten 1,2Lars Zetterberg Lars Zetterberg 2
  • 1 Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden
  • 2 Swedish Environmental Research Institute (IVL), Stockholm, Sweden

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Limiting global warming to close to 1.5 °C by 2100 requires deep and rapid greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions and carbon dioxide removals (CDR) on a massive scale, presenting a remarkable scaling challenge. This paper focuses on the financing of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) in Sweden. BECCS is one of the most prominent CDR methods in 1.5 °C-compatible global emission scenarios and has been assigned a specific role in Swedish policy for net-zero. A Swedish state support system for BECCS based on results-based payments is planned. Furthermore, demand for CDR-based carbon credits is on the rise on the voluntary carbon markets (VCM) for use towards voluntary mitigation targets. Risks involved with the current Swedish policies are analysed, specifically for the co-financing of BECCS by the planned state support and revenues from the VCM. We find that with the current policies, state support systems will subsidise carbon credit prices on the VCM. We argue that such subsidisation can lower decarbonisation efforts by lowering the internal carbon price (ICP) set by actors, thus undermining environmental integrity. It is concluded that proportional attribution should be applied, i.e., attributing mitigation outcomes to the state support and VCM revenue in proportion to their financial contribution to the CDR achieved. The attribution analysis should be accompanied by adjustments in national greenhouse gasGHG accounting so that mitigation outcomes that are issued as carbon credits and used for offsetting are not double claimed (i.e., not used by both a nation and a non-state actor on the VCM towards their respective mitigation targets). If proportional attribution and adjustments in national GHG accounting are not implemented, the credibility and environmental integrity of offsetting claims made by carbon credit users are eroded. We recommend that action is taken to operationalise and implement proportional attribution to allow for co-financing of BECCS projects while maintaining environmental integrity. Wider implications for our recommendations beyond the case of Swedish BECCS are also analysed.

    Keywords: BECCS, voluntary carbon markets, Internal carbon price, Co-financing, Attribution, Corresponding adjustment

    Received: 16 Feb 2024; Accepted: 04 Jul 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Pehrs, Möllersten and Zetterberg. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Malin Pehrs, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.