High taxes render CO2 extraction techniques unnecessary.

A new study has found that a high CO2 price would be more effective than removing CO2 from the atmosphere. The recently introduced CO2 tax in Germany is still too low, according to the scientists. Most current climate protection models propose removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. One way to do this is by growing fast-growing plants on a large scale. These could then be burned for energy, and the resulting CO2 could be captured from the exhaust gases using modern filter materials. This concept is known as “Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage” (BECCS). However, scientists from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) have published a study in the journal Nature Communications, which shows that measures such as large-scale energy crop cultivation would remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere but would also cause problems in land and water use. The team led by Jessica Strefler also found that such measures would not be necessary if there were a sufficiently high CO2 tax. According to their calculations, the CO2 price would need to start at a high level and then rise again over a short period. Once carbon neutrality is achieved, the price increase could flatten out again. This pricing model would mean that it would be economically sensible to reduce CO2 emissions as quickly as possible. Once the price is rising very slowly, it would no longer be necessary or financially viable to use expensive removal techniques. In contrast, the recently introduced CO2 tax in Germany and other models for carbon pricing in use today start with a very low price that increases exponentially over time. These models assume that the global economy will emit so much CO2 that global warming cannot be limited to below two degrees. According to the study authors, “humanity is exceeding its remaining CO2 budget.” The price curve thus creates the need for the use of questionable removal techniques from an ecological perspective. The pricing model determined by PIK with the REMIND environmental-energy-economic simulation would create a win-win situation, according to the scientists. Strefler attributes this to the fact that her model reduces both the looming dependence on CO2 removal techniques and the economic risks of high CO2 prices.