Report highlights
No single removal type does it all
Nature-based removals are accessible and co-benefit-rich, but carry reversal risk; engineered removals offer near-permanent storage at higher cost. A resilient portfolio uses both.
Your portfolio should evolve as you do
Early buyers can start with spot nature-based credits, but as residual emissions come into focus and targets sharpen, the mix should shift toward engineered removals and forward contracts. Companies that engage with developers now will be better positioned on both price and supply.
Your credits determine your claims
Avoidance credits support a contribution narrative, nature-based removals allow compensation, and only high-quality, durable removals underpin a full neutralisation claim under the SBTi Corporate Net Zero Standard and the Oxford Offsetting Principles.
Authors
Carbon removal sits at the centre of any credible net-zero strategy, and the market has grown accordingly: nearly 40 methodologies, hundreds of active projects, and a range of prices reflecting vintage, impacts and durability.
That breadth creates complexity. Nature-based removals offer accessible entry points and strong co-benefits; engineered removals provide the durable storage that net-zero standards ultimately require. Understanding the difference, and how to combine them, is what separates a strategic, resilient portfolio from a box-ticking exercise.
Our whitepaper covers:
- How the carbon removal market works
- What different project types actually deliver
- How to build a portfolio that holds up as standards evolve
It includes a background to carbon removals, spot pricing from Abatable's transaction data, and a practical framework for matching your carbon removals portfolio to your stage of decarbonisation.