New National Academies of Sciences’ Report on Marine Carbon Dioxide Removal Highlights the Need for Governance Reforms

Nature & Climate Perspective

**Unregulated deployment of marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) risks catastrophic disruption to pelagic and benthic ecosystems despite its theoretical potential to arrest catastrophic temperature overshoot. **

• Ocean-based interventions such as alkalinity enhancement and artificial upwelling carry unknown perturbation risks to marine trophic webs, marine protected areas (MPAs), and chemical ocean equilibrium.
• While advanced Blue Carbon and abiotic mCDR offer theoretical multi-century carbon sequestration, open-system biogeochemical leakage challenges current monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) protocols and ICVCM Core Carbon Principles regarding robust quantification.
• Lacking stringent ecological baselines, large-scale mCDR field trials risk inducing localized hypoxia and ecological destabilization, conflicting with ICVCM Principle 9 (do-no-harm safeguards).

Market & Policy Outlook

**A governance vacuum across international waters prevents mCDR credits from securing ICVCM CCP-approved labels and institutional-grade integration into Article 6. 4 accounting frameworks.**

• Incompatible maritime legal structures, specifically under UNCLOS and the London Convention/Protocol, stall cross-border jurisdictional integrity and the generation of Corresponding Adjustments required for ITMOs under Article 6.2 and 6.4.
• The lack of standardized ocean MRV frameworks suppresses financial liquidity and prevents high-integrity premium pricing for marine removals in compliance and voluntary carbon markets.
• Corporate buyers adhering to the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard remain restricted from utilizing uncertified marine removals for neutralizing Scope 3 emissions until clear governance and durability thresholds are ratified.