A new study published in Joule (Cell Press) models what happens when permanent carbon dioxide removal is formally integrated into the EU Emissions Trading System. The headline finding: integration could incentivize 68–86 Mt CO₂ of removals per year by 2050. Researchers from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) contributed to the analysis.
The paper (DOI: 10.1016/j.joule.2026.S2542-4351(26)00079-6) arrives at a moment when the regulatory and market infrastructure for CDR in Europe is advancing, but the critical link between the carbon price signal and CDR deployment remains unbuilt.
The Scale of the Prize
68–86 Mt CO₂ per year is a large number. To put it in context:
- Current global engineered CDR (outside forests and soils) is measured in hundreds of thousands of tonnes per year, not millions
- The EU’s entire aviation sector emits roughly 140 Mt CO₂ per year
- Germany’s annual CO₂ emissions are approximately 670 Mt — the modeled CDR volumes would represent roughly 10–13% of that at peak deployment
Getting there requires orders-of-magnitude scale-up across direct air capture, enhanced weathering, ocean alkalinity enhancement, and other permanent removal pathways. The paper is explicit: this isn’t a projection of what will happen, it’s a model of what becomes possible when the price signal is right.
How ETS Integration Would Work
The EU Emissions Trading System operates by capping total emissions and requiring covered entities to purchase allowances for each tonne of CO₂ they emit. The price of allowances — currently in the €60–75/tonne range — creates a financial incentive to reduce emissions.
The proposed integration would extend this logic to removals: CDR projects could generate credits within the ETS framework, giving them access to the same price signal as emissions reductions. Under this model, a DAC plant or an enhanced weathering operation could sell credits at the ETS price, providing the revenue certainty that capital-intensive CDR projects currently lack.
This is importantly different from voluntary carbon market credits, which trade at much lower prices and face ongoing credibility challenges. ETS integration would mean CDR operates in a regulated, compliance-grade market — the most robust demand signal available.
The Carbon Removal Certification Framework
The EU isn’t starting from zero. The Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF), adopted in early 2024, is being implemented with the explicit goal of creating a registry and methodology infrastructure for CDR at scale. It covers permanent geological storage, long-lived products incorporating captured carbon, and carbon farming approaches.
The CRCF provides the verification layer — a standardized methodology for measuring, reporting, and verifying CDR across different pathways. What it currently lacks is the market integration layer: a mechanism for CDR credits to enter the compliance carbon market and be valued at ETS prices.
The Joule paper models the impact of closing that gap. The implication is that the CRCF and ETS together could form the demand architecture that CDR deployment at scale requires.
Why This Matters Beyond Europe
If the EU moves first on ETS-CDR integration, it creates a template that other jurisdictions can follow or adapt. The UK ETS, the Swiss ETS, and emerging carbon markets in Asia are all watching how Europe handles this design question.
More immediately, ETS integration changes the investment calculation for CDR project developers. Capital-intensive CDR approaches — DAC in particular — need long-run price certainty to justify the upfront infrastructure cost. A regulatory carbon price floor built into ETS is a cleaner signal than project-by-project government grants or purchase agreements.
The Joule paper is a modeled scenario, not a policy commitment. But the numbers are large enough that policymakers, investors, and CDR developers should be taking the scenario seriously. The EU has the legislative machinery in place. The question is whether there’s the political will to close the integration gap.
Source: Joule, Cell Press — S2542-4351(26)00079-6. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research contributed to the analysis.