Columbia Climate Law BlogPolicyMay 27 The Legal Framework for Direct Ocean Carbon Capture and Storage
Interest in marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) has risen in the last decade as the deadlines to meet global climate temperature goals draw closer. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) tells us that the 1.5°C and 2°C temperature targets outlined in the Paris Agreement require net zero emissions, which in turn requires some use […]
Abatify Summary
**Marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) technologies present high carbon-sequestration potential but carry significant ecological risks to marine biodiversity that challenge ICVCM CCPs regarding environmental safeguards.**
- Direct ocean capture and ocean alkalinity enhancement pose localized risks to marine ecosystems, requiring stringent environmental impact assessments to ensure compliance with 'do no harm' principles.
- The permanence of ocean-based carbon sinks remains a key point of contention under ICVCM guidelines, requiring advanced oceanographic modeling to prevent reversal and ensure long-term stability.
- Unlike terrestrial LULUCF projects, mCDR operates in a dynamic, transboundary fluid medium, making baseline establishment and leak detection highly complex.
**The lack of a unified international legal framework for mCDR under UNCLOS and the London Protocol creates regulatory uncertainty that inhibits Article 6.4 market integration and commercial scale.**
- Ambiguous regulatory boundaries under international maritime law complicate the generation of Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) under Article 6.2.
- Corporate buyers seeking compliance with SBTi net-zero targets are hesitant to fund ocean-based CDR due to the absence of standardized MRV methodologies.
- The classification of mCDR activities under national jurisdictions impacts carbon credit pricing, with high-quality, legally compliant credits demanding a significant premium.
