A prudent planetary limit for geologic carbon storage

Matthew J. Gidden (), Siddharth Joshi, John J. Armitage, Alina-Berenice Christ, Miranda Boettcher, Elina Brutschin, Alexandre C. Köberle, Keywan Riahi, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner and Joeri Rogelj
Additional contact information
Matthew J. Gidden: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Siddharth Joshi: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
John J. Armitage: IFP Energies nouvelles, Earth Sciences and Environmental Technologies Division
Alina-Berenice Christ: IFP Energies nouvelles, Earth Sciences and Environmental Technologies Division
Miranda Boettcher: German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP)
Elina Brutschin: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Alexandre C. Köberle: Universidade de Lisboa
Keywan Riahi: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Carl-Friedrich Schleussner: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Joeri Rogelj: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Nature, 2025, vol. 645, issue 8079, 124-132

Abstract: Abstract Geologically storing carbon is a key strategy for abating emissions from fossil fuels and durably removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere1,2. However, the storage potential is not unlimited3,4. Here we establish a prudent planetary limit of around 1,460 (1,290–2,710) Gt of CO2 storage through a risk-based, spatially explicit analysis of carbon storage in sedimentary basins. We show that only stringent near-term gross emissions reductions can lower the risk of breaching this limit before the year 2200. Fully using geologic storage for carbon removal caps the possible global temperature reduction to 0.7 °C (0.35–1.2 °C, including storage estimate and climate response uncertainty). The countries most robust to our risk assessment are current large-scale extractors of fossil resources. Treating carbon storage as a limited intergenerational resource has deep implications for national mitigation strategies and policy and requires making explicit decisions on priorities for storage use.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09423-y Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:nature:v:645:y:2025:i:8079:d:10.1038_s41586-025-09423-y

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/

DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09423-y

Access Statistics for this article

Nature is currently edited by Magdalena Skipper

More articles in Nature from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().