According to Based on The State of Carbon Dioxide Removal, 3rd edition, published on June 2, 2026, by the University of Oxford and its partners., published on June 2, 2026, by the University of Oxford and its partners
In brief
The 3rd edition of the State of Carbon Dioxide Removal (SoCDR) report, an independent benchmark on carbon dioxide removal (CDR), was published on June 2, 2026. Coordinated by a consortium of research institutes, it analyzes the state of research, investment, and public policies for over a dozen CDR approaches. Notably, the study distinguishes between "conventional" approaches (nature-based solutions like reforestation or soil management) and "novel" approaches, whether hybrid or technological (biochar, enhanced rock weathering, or biogenic CO2 capture).
Compared to previous editions, this third edition introduces several new features:
- A comparative analysis of costs and potentials for each method.
- An aggregation of recent scenarios, compiled specifically for this report.
- A database dedicated to CDR policies in G20 countries.
- The results of a survey regarding companies' ambitions and planned projects.
The report identifies the period 2026–2030 as a critical window. Novel CDR approches, in particular, are in early-stage: they must still establish their legitimacy, prove their reliability, and scale up so that their long-term contribution to the Paris Agreement’s goals becomes achievable. While the required ramp-up trajectory is not unprecedented, it requires an alignment of demand, financing, and governance that is still lacking today.
1. CDR as an essential complement to emissions reduction
The third edition introduces a new way to quantify this effort: in the «maximum ambition» scenarios modeled for this edition, EDC accounts for approximately 16% of the cumulative effort to achieve carbon neutrality, compared to 84% for emissions reductions, with an EDC level of 8.8 GtCO₂/year in 2050 (range: 6.5–13.3 GtCO₂/year). This level is comparable to that of the second edition, which was based on different scenarios and estimated the role of EDC at around 7–9 GtCO₂/year.
One thing is certain between the two editions: reducing emissions remains by far the top priority.
2. Novel CDR is growing rapidly, but from a small base
Globally, carbon removal currently stands at 2.2 GtCO₂ per year (or approximately 5% of gross CO₂ emissions), marking a slight increase from the 2.1 GtCO₂/year reported in the previous edition. However, this effort continues to be driven almost exclusively by conventional CDR approaches.
For their part, novel CDR approaches still account for only 0.1% of the global total (0.002 GtCO₂/year). Nevertheless, they show encouraging momentum, with an average increase of +36.1% per year between 2020 and 2025, driven primarily by biochar. The rise of this solution has been accompanied by significant interest in its co-benefits, particularly soil health, support for agri-food systems, and regional resilience.
3. No single method combines maturity, high potential, and low cost
For the first time, the report systematically compares the costs and potential of 15 different methods. The range of costs is particularly wide: it varies from less than 10 $/tCO₂ for certain nature-based solutions 1,000 $/tCO₂ For technology-based solutions, the majority of methods reach estimates exceeding 200 $/tCO₂. At present, no single solution combines industrial maturity, low cost, and high deployment potential. This observation underscores the need to develop a diversified portfolio of approaches rather than relying on a single solution.
4. A decline in national contributions and a widening gap
Current national commitments remain well below the required trajectories for 2035 and 2050. Evidence of this lag is that only about one-third of countries explicitly incorporate the new ECD methods into their medium-term strategies. The key development since the previous edition remains the United States’ formal withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in January 2026, which automatically results in a downward revision of global commitments by approximately 700 MtCO₂ by 2050. Furthermore, none of the updates to the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—particularly within the G20—show a significant increase in EDC.
As a result, current commitments project a volume of 2.5 GtCO₂/year of CDR in 2030, compared to a median target of 2.9 GtCO₂/year for scenarios compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5°C. This shortfall in ambition, evident as early as 2030 (0.3 GtCO₂/year), increases dramatically to reach 1.2 GtCO₂/year by 2035 and 5.2 GtCO₂/year by 2050.
5. Innovation is on the rise, but uneven
Innovation indicators (research funding, scientific publications, pilot projects, and investments in startups) have improved compared to 2023. However, this overall momentum masks disparities, such as the decline in high-value-added patents observed in recent years. Nevertheless, the resilience of funding allocated to CDR companies is remarkable against the backdrop of a global decline in climate investments; the sector now attracts 3 % of these flows. In the voluntary carbon market, purchase agreements covering 0.04 GtCO₂ were signed last year.
6. A fragile ecosystem that requires stronger demand signals
Uncertainty surrounding future demand remains a major obstacle to the sector’s development. Most policies still focus on supply, while prices in emerging markets are too low to cover the actual production costs of most methods. Furthermore, the dismantling of federal climate policies in the United States undermines the sector’s long-term outlook, increasing pressure on other economic powers to establish robust demand mechanisms.
This vulnerability is exacerbated by the ecosystem’s extreme structural concentration: a single buyer (Microsoft) alone accounts for 82 % EDC Technology's purchase volumes on the voluntary market; 74 % conventional loans come from Latin America; 85 % public funding for pilot projects comes from only three countries (the United States, Sweden, and Denmark); and 72 % Investments are concentrated in just four companies. Microsoft’s recent strategic decisions and the U.S. withdrawal perfectly illustrate the vulnerability of this model. Diversification across methods, players, and geographies is essential essential condition a resilient scaling-up process.
AFEN's Perspective: What This Means for France
- CDR innovation ecosystem is dynamic, and France is no exception. The BCG x AFEN report (March 2025) identifies significant potential in both nature-based solutions and technological approaches, and our regional mapping shows that project leaders exist throughout France. But as this report points out, the fragility of the ecosystem is a reality worldwide: concentration of players, uncertainty regarding demand, and dependence on a few buyers. France must actively support its ecosystem to prevent its players from being weakened by this global context.
- Other countries are taking concrete action. The United States, Sweden, and Denmark have committed several billion dollars to the deployment of large-scale CDR projects. The United Kingdom, Germany, and Canada have allocated budgets ranging from tens to hundreds of millions of euros to R&D and pilot projects. Canada and Germany have also initiated public procurement mechanisms for EDC credits. In light of this global acceleration, France must formalize a clear national strategy, backed by concrete financial levers, to ensure the long-term sustainability of its industrial and environmental sovereignty.
