The EU ETS Draft Doesn't Yet Include Permanent Carbon Removals — Biochar Should Be Part of the Answer

We have been successful in integrating BCR into the EU Carbon Removal and Carbon Farming Certification Framework (CRCF). Now, the inclusion of carbon removals into the compliance market is under discussion.

The European Commission's draft revision of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), published today, does not yet establish a pathway for integrating CRCF-certified permanent carbon removals into the ETS. All three certified pathways — DACCS, BioCCS and Biochar Carbon Removal (BCR) — are left in the same position for now. That's a real opportunity for the biochar sector, and a chance for the EU to get this right from the start — but only if national decision-makers hear from industry now, while the file is being negotiated.

The Commission's proposal now moves into the ordinary legislative procedure, where the European Parliament and the Council of the EU (representing national governments) each negotiate and adopt their own position before entering trilogue negotiations to agree on a final text. In other words, how permanent removals — including BCR — get treated in the ETS is still very much an open question: Parliament and Council are decisive here, and national representatives can still shape the outcome. That's exactly why reaching them now, early in the process, matters.

CONTEXT

• All three permanent removal pathways – DACCS, BioCCS and BCR – are already CRCF-certified. As the ETS integration question moves forward, treating them inconsistently would create an unjustified gap between two flagship EU climate instruments.
• BCR is deployable today, at TRL 8–9, already operating at commercial scale – unlike pathways still dependent on future infrastructure build-out.
• A CCS-only approach to ETS integration would unnecessarily narrow the compliance market, raise costs for ETS-obligated companies, and concentrate deployment risk instead of rewarding a diversified, competitive removals portfolio.
• Biochar and pyrolysis are part of the EU's "Made in Europe" bioeconomy and industrial strategy.
• The scientific case for BCR's permanence is well established and is the same evidence base the Commission already relied on to adopt certification methodologies for BCR under the CRCF.

YOUR PART IN THIS

Please reach out to your national representatives – your MEPs, your national ministry contacts working on ETS/climate files, or your national industry association – and ask them to push for technology-neutral treatment of permanent carbon removals as the ETS trilogue moves forward. Feel free to use the linked position paper directly, or draw on the key points above in your own words.

Reach out to your established contacts first. If you don't already have relevant contacts, you'll find a list of your EU representatives on the right side of this page. And if you'd like support figuring out who to approach, feel free to get in touch with us.

Every voice from industry, especially from companies already active in carbon removals or affected by the ETS, adds weight. If you'd like a shorter template letter to send directly to your representative, or want to compare notes on who to approach in your country, just let us know – we're happy to help coordinate.

Thank you for your support on this.