ArticleCommunications earth & environment2025
Carbon removal support is tempered by concerns over whether biological methods are worth it.
Article in Communications earth & environment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biological carbon removal has been proposed as a 'win-win' for climate, sustainability and public opinion, but research on public perceptions is lacking explicit evidence on trade-offs between options. Here we explore perceptions using small group deliberation (n60) plus a nationally representative survey (n2027) in the UK's four jurisdictions. We find a strong preference for carbon removal to play a substantial role in meeting national climate targets, stemming from persistent scepticism about emissions reductions and behaviour change. However, such support was tempered with caution about whether certain biological techniques - biochar, peatland restoration, and perennial biomass crops - would be "worth it". In particular, concerns were raised about life-cycle emissions, as well as land competition with urgent housing needs, and scientific uncertainty around novel techniques such as biochar. While we find that responses to carbon removal tend to shift the burden of responsibility for climate action away from individuals, we also identify region-specific discourses, highlighting the importance of local context in shaping public views.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.