Digest

Today’s signal is a widening split in carbon markets. Engineered removals are posting record volumes and long-term contracts, while a major avoided-emissions category just got downgraded by an order of magnitude. Buyers are voting with their checkbooks, and the vote is for durable, measurable tons. The record month nobody should gloss over March 2026 logged 1.51 million tonnes of CDR purchases in a single month. That is not a cumulative figure. It is one month. The pace suggests 2026 will blow past every prior year, and the mix is shifting toward contracts with real delivery schedules rather than speculative forward offtakes. The buyers driving this are familiar names, but the volumes per deal are climbing. ...

The gap between carbon credit claims and real-world carbon removal just got another data point. A new study finds that REDD+ avoided-deforestation projects overclaimed their climate benefit by a factor of 10.7. Meanwhile, buyers and developers are shifting toward removal credits with tighter measurement, and the signals are everywhere in today’s stories. The crediting gap is reshaping where money flows A peer-reviewed study found that REDD+ projects, which sell credits based on forests they claim would have been cut down, overstated their avoided deforestation by 10.7 times on average. That means for every ton of CO2 these credits claimed to protect, roughly a tenth of a ton was real. This isn’t new territory. Earlier analyses flagged similar problems. But the scale of the overclaim keeps getting confirmed, and it matters because these credits still circulate in voluntary markets. ...

The CDR market is splitting into two lanes: one where small hardware companies race to prove unit economics, and another where policy and credit-quality questions threaten to reshape demand. Today’s five stories sit neatly across that divide. Ucaneo fires up a room-temperature DAC plant in Berlin German startup Ucaneo has opened a direct air capture facility in Berlin that operates at room temperature, a notable departure from the energy-intensive thermal processes most DAC companies rely on. The plant targets 150 tonnes of CO₂ removed per year by July 2026. That is tiny by industrial standards, but the room-temperature angle matters. Heat is the biggest cost driver in conventional DAC. If Ucaneo’s sorbent chemistry holds up at steady state, the energy bill per tonne could drop meaningfully. The next milestone to watch: whether the plant hits its 150 t/yr nameplate and what the verified cost per tonne looks like once it does. ...

CDR has a growing disconnect between paper and practice. Permits for carbon removal projects keep stacking up, but the money to build them is drying up. That gap, between regulatory green lights and actual capital deployment, is the most important pattern in today’s stories. The permits-to-payments gap Captain’s CDR Log #105 puts a sharp point on it: the pipeline of permitted CDR projects is expanding, yet financing has stalled. Permits are necessary but not sufficient. A permit lets you build. A check lets you actually do it. Right now, the industry has more of the former and not enough of the latter. ...

Carbon dioxide removal is finding its way into the built environment faster than most people expected. Today’s stories converge on a single theme: concrete and construction materials are becoming a serious vector for permanent carbon storage, and the policy and capital signals are finally catching up. Concrete Is Becoming a Carbon Sink Three of today’s five stories point to the same place: the stuff we build with. CarbonCure just won the 2026 Climate Technology Company of the Year award. The company injects captured CO₂ into fresh concrete, where it mineralizes permanently. That is not a lab demo. CarbonCure’s technology is deployed across hundreds of concrete plants. The award signals that the broader climate-tech community now sees mineralization in building materials as a proven pathway, not a speculative one. ...

The CDR market is being rewired around buyers who actually need it, not patrons who wanted to look good. That’s the thread connecting today’s stories, from Europe’s first certified enhanced rock weathering (ERW) field pilots to Germany’s stark admission that it needs up to 51 million tonnes of CO₂ removed per year by 2045. The question is no longer whether CDR will matter. It’s whether the infrastructure, policy, and commercial plumbing can keep pace with the demand signals now arriving. ...

When your anchor buyer disappears, what keeps a CDR company alive? That question ran through several of today’s stories, and the answer is converging on a single theme: the projects that survive will be the ones that deliver value beyond the carbon credit. Co-benefits as survival strategy Captain’s CDR Log #102 makes the case plainly. When a major buyer walks away, a CDR project built solely around selling tonnes of CO₂ removal is exposed. But projects that also deliver clean energy, soil health, water quality, or local jobs have fallback revenue and political support. Co-benefits are not marketing fluff. They are financial resilience. In a market where voluntary demand is still fragile and compliance frameworks are still forming, the ability to point to tangible local value can mean the difference between a project that weathers a downturn and one that folds. ...

Microsoft just hit the brakes on every carbon removal purchase it has in the pipeline. For an industry where Microsoft has been the single largest voluntary buyer, this is the most significant demand-side signal since the CDR market began to take shape. The question now is whether this is a pause or a pivot, and what it means for the dozens of suppliers who built their business plans around Big Tech procurement. ...

The CDR field is simultaneously racing to prove its economics, preserve its hard-won knowledge, and confront a biomass crediting system that may be built on shaky foundations. That tension between building and salvaging defines today’s stories. The Knowledge Drain Is Real Here’s a quiet crisis that deserves more attention: CDR startups are failing, and when they do, their technical know-how vanishes with them. One startup is now explicitly trying to rescue that institutional knowledge before it disappears for good. This isn’t nostalgia. Carbon removal is a field where failed experiments carry enormous informational value. Every reactor design that didn’t scale, every sorbent chemistry that degraded too fast, every MRV (measurement, reporting, and verification) protocol that couldn’t survive contact with reality represents lessons that the next generation of companies will need. Losing that knowledge means paying to relearn the same mistakes. The fact that someone has to build a company specifically to prevent this loss tells you something uncomfortable about how thin the CDR talent and knowledge base really is. ...