Accounting Methods Dictate Carbon Removal Credit Integrity and Outcomes

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is distinct from emissions offsets. CDR commands a price premium relative to offsets, yet some accounting methods blur the line between them. This paper compares the project-level net CDR and economic outcomes of two carbon accounting methods — life-cycle assessment (LCA) and the net flux framework (NFF)—using nine examples spanning direct air capture and storage (DACS), biomass carbon removal and storage, and land-based mineralization. The NFF’s expansive system boundaries typically translate to less CDR calculated for systems that also produce non-CDR outputs (e.g., fuel or electricity). For example, the NFF can reduce CDR-related revenue from a typical crop residue gasification project by over half relative to LCA, and would disqualify corn-to-ethanol CCS projects from selling CDR. Conversely, LCA of the narrowly-defined carbon storage portion of a project incentivizes retrofits to existing industrial facilities, which complicates the distinction between emissions reductions and CDR, placing more scalable but costly standalone CDR technologies at a competitive disadvantage.