Assessing Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies Through Transitional Justice: Challenging the Moral Hazard Argument

We analyze the moral aspects of Carbon Dioxide Removal technologies (CDRs) through what we call ‘transitional justice.’ Experts currently consider CDRs to be essential for mitigating climate change. This raises the question: are CDRs compatible with a just transition? We argue that there is a strong case for adopting CDRs within a just transition, despite some potentially unjust facets of these technologies. We also show that framing CDRs as a moral hazard to climate change mitigation is not conducive to a just transition, and that instead a notional opposition to CDRs constitutes an actual moral hazard to sufficient mitigation. [Open access]