Posts

📊 v2 Update — LLM-Based Reclassification This post updates v1 with fresh census data (80,382 researchers, 24,749 papers). The methodology has shifted from keyword-based to LLM-based classification of research papers — meaning we’re now using AI to understand semantic context instead of just matching terms. This catches CDR research that traditional keyword methods miss. Country and institution assignments use ORCID self-reported affiliations where available, falling back to OpenAlex’s “last known institution” otherwise. Still not perfect, but significantly more accurate than before. Your corrections still make v3 better. Bluesky · X ...

⚠️ Updated for v2 (2026-03-23) This post now uses LLM classification (title + abstract) instead of keyword search. That’s a major upgrade — but it exposed a real problem with DAC data that I need to flag transparently. Rankings are based on number of CDR papers found in our classification. Institution and country data uses ORCID self-reported affiliations where available (66% coverage), with OpenAlex as fallback. ORCID links let you verify every name. If you see errors, tell me — I’ll fix them. Bluesky · X ...

Update: V2 Data (March 2026) We’ve reclassified 122,674 researchers using an LLM-based methodology instead of keyword-only matching. 42,292 researchers lost their CDR designation because their papers weren’t actually about CDR — they were tangentially related but didn’t cross the threshold. This leaves 80,382 researchers with a genuine CDR pathway. The dabbler percentage dropped from 69% to 52.8%, which at first looks like bad news. But the real story is subtler — and slightly more hopeful. Previous version: first shot · Feedback? ...

⚠️ v2 Update — Improved Methodology This analysis now uses LLM classification instead of keyword filtering, which reclassified ~2,945 papers and shifted author trajectories. The core finding holds: CDR science is growing, but the talent retention story remains fragile. Bluesky · X This is Part 5 of the CDR Researcher Census series — the synthesis. This entire census project started with a question: Is CDR science growing fast enough to deliver gigaton-scale removal by 2050? ...

If you’ve published anything related to carbon dioxide removal, you’re probably in here. The CDR Researcher Lookup lets you search 122,674 researchers by name. Each profile shows: Your CDR pathway — which removal method your work maps toCommitment level — dabbler, part-time, focused, or dedicatedTrajectory — is your CDR output growing, stable, or declining?Career stage — early career through eminent, based on h-index and career spanInstitution and country — verified via ORCID where availableYour CDR papers — the specific publications that put you in this datasetWhy This Exists#When Lück et al. (2025) mapped 53,000 CDR papers in Nature Communications, they answered “how much CDR research exists?” I wanted to answer the next question: who are the people doing it? ...

Monday’s lineup covers three continents — a research breakthrough from Cambridge, a national strategy from Berlin, a new carbon market from Delhi, and a Formula 1 team putting real money behind six different removal pathways. Our Coverage Today#MIT Turns CO₂ and Water Into Jet Fuel Using Only Renewable Energy — A Nature Energy paper describes an electrochemical cell that converts CO₂ and water directly into jet fuel hydrocarbons using renewable electricity. No biomass, no Fischer-Tropsch. Aviation is responsible for ~3% of global emissions and notoriously hard to decarbonize — batteries are too heavy for long-haul, and sustainable aviation fuel supply is nowhere near demand. If this electrochemical approach scales, it sidesteps the feedstock bottleneck entirely. ...

📊 v2.1 Collaboration Atlas This is the collaboration layer of our CDR Researcher Census. The data reflects v2.1 paper classifications (31,234 papers). Co-authorship is a proxy for collaboration, not a perfect measure of it. Some edges are noise (250-author mega-papers), some real collaborations happen without shared papers. I’m publishing because the patterns are too interesting to sit on. Tell me what I’m getting wrong — Bluesky or X. CDR research looks like 122,674 individuals. It isn’t. ...

Global durable carbon removal today stands at roughly 0.1 million tonnes per year. Germany alone could be doing 95 million tonnes annually by 2045 — if it gets serious. That’s the headline finding from a new Carbon Removal Readiness Assessment (CRRA) published by Sweco Finland and Carbon Gap. The report is the most comprehensive analysis yet of what CDR deployment could actually look like in Europe’s largest economy. The Numbers#Germany’s climate targets are among the world’s most ambitious: climate neutrality by 2045, net-negative emissions by 2050. The theoretical CDR potential is enormous — approximately 258 MtCO₂ per year by 2045. But “theoretical” does a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. ...

490 companies across 7 energy-intensive sectors in India are about to face mandatory carbon obligations. This isn’t a pilot program. It’s a national-scale compliance market launching in months. India’s Power Minister Manohar Lal announced at Prakriti 2026 in New Delhi that formal carbon credit trading will begin within four months. The government has launched a dedicated carbon market portal for registration, verification, and trading — the full infrastructure stack, not just a policy announcement. ...

An F1 team just assembled one of the most diversified carbon removal portfolios in the corporate world. Not a tech company. Not an energy major. A racing team. Mercedes-AMG PETRONAS F1 announced a major expansion of their carbon removal commitments, adding 7 new projects across 6 distinct CDR technology types, curated by CUR8. The total commitment: approximately 18,900 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. The technology spread: Direct Air Capture, Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage, BECCS, Biochar, Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement, and Enhanced Rock Weathering. ...