DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23675214
title: MRV Network Map from: Strengthening MRV standards for greenhouse gas removals to improve climate change governance (Mercer and Burke, 2023)

description: Strengthening MRV standards for greenhouse gas removals to improve climate change governance - Mercer and Burke, 2023. <br> Underlying data for figure 5.1 'Mapping of the landscape of MRV for greenhouse gas removals'. <br> Authors’ analysis of independently certified MRV protocols accessed through web search, and primary and secondary literature. Note: The mapping was compiled using the Microsoft Visio software platform. <br> The network map identifies 69 MRV protocols across 15 removal methods. Of these, 57 of the protocols certify land-based biological GGR activities. There are 9 chemical protocols (all for DACCS), and one geochemical MRV protocol. There is currently one ocean-based biological MRV protocol. Overall, there are far more international actors (44) than national (36). Of non-regulatory entities, Verra certifies the most removal activities, with 9 MRV protocols registered. Puro.earth, the American Carbon Registry, provides MRV for 6 removal methods and the Climate Action Reserve provides MRV protocols for 5 removal methods. The EU’s Competent Authority provides MRV certification for subcomponents of CO₂ capture, transport and storage relating to BECCS and DACCS under the EU ETS, the EU CCS Directive and the EU Industrial Emissions Directive. The US Environmental Protection Agency provides MRV for 4 subcomponents of BECCS and DACCS. <br> <strong>The mapping clearly illustrates the following: </strong> <br> There is competition between actors, with different companies producing their own bespoke MRV methods. Increased competition may be useful in driving down costs and spurring innovation, but disparate methods could also lead to siloing whereas the complexity of the challenge may require a greater degree of collaboration. The majority of MRV development is occurring with land-based biological removals from government and private certifying entities. The mapping also highlights activities that currently have no or few actors or MRV processes (e.g. enhanced rock weathering, ocean fertilization, and ocean alkalinity enhancement). Existing policies that could be latterly adapted for MRV pertain almost exclusively to BECCS and DACCS, given the CCS component. The advanced market commitments highlighted in Figure 3.1 indicate that the quantity of removals planned from chemical processes such as DACCS far exceed land-based biological removal such as soil carbon sequestration, where there is a surfeit of MRV protocols. Regulators will need to ensure that emergent removals such as DACCS, which largely (except for Climeworks and Carbfix) have MRV coverage through regulatory instruments, support MRV protocol development so that project developers can reliably meet demand. Twenty-six of the MRV protocols relate solely to a national jurisdiction, while 44 are applicable internationally. Of the 29 entities certifying GGR activities, 15 have been developed and administered by national or supranational jurisdictions – and 10 of these provide MRV domestically only.