Prioritizing Non-Carbon Dioxide Removal Mitigation Strategies Could Reduce the Negative Impacts Associated with Large-Scale Reliance on Negative Emissions

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is necessary for reaching net zero emissions, with studies showing potential deployment at multi-GtCO(2) scale by 2050. However, excessive reliance on future CDR entails serious risks, including delayed emissions cuts, lock-in of fossil infrastructure, and threats to sustainability from increased resource competition. This study highlights an alternative pathway-prioritizing near-term non-CDR mitigation and minimizing CDR dependence. We impose a 1 GtCO(2) limit on global novel CDR deployment by 2050, forcing aggressive early emissions reductions compared to 8-22 GtCO(2) in higher CDR scenarios. Our results reveal that this low CDR pathway significantly decreases fossil fuel use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and air pollutants compared to higher CDR pathways. Driving rapid energy transitions eases pressures on land (including food cropland), water, and fertilizer resources required for energy and negative emissions. However, these sustainability gains come with higher mitigation costs from greater near-term low/zero-carbon technology deployment for decarbonization. Overall, this work provides strong evidence for maximizing non-CDR strategies such as renewables, electrification, carbon neutral/negative fuels, and efficiency now rather than betting on uncertain future CDR scaling. Ambitious near-term mitigation in this decade is essential to prevent lock-in and offer the best chance of successful deep decarbonization. Our constrained CDR scenario offers a robust pathway to achieving net zero emissions with limited sustainability impacts.