Resolving the mitigation-security-cost trilemma in the power sector through diversified CDR portfolios

@article{fan2026resolving,
  title = {{Resolving the mitigation-security-cost trilemma in the power sector through diversified CDR portfolios}},
  author = {Jing-Li Fan and Wenlong Zhou and Shiyu Zhou and Yidan Zhao and Klaus Hubacek and Jianzhong Wu and Xian Zhang},
  journal = {Cell Reports Sustainability},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100873},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100873},
  note = {CC BY},
}

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Resolving the mitigation-security-cost trilemma in the power sector through diversified CDR portfolios
AU  - Jing-Li Fan
AU  - Wenlong Zhou
AU  - Shiyu Zhou
AU  - Yidan Zhao
AU  - Klaus Hubacek
AU  - Jianzhong Wu
AU  - Xian Zhang
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/25
JO  - Cell Reports Sustainability
DO  - 10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100873
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100873
AB  - Carbon-negative power sectors are critical for achieving Paris Agreement goals. While current models predominantly emphasize bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), they often overlook comprehensive evaluations of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) portfolios. We develop a dynamic power system optimization framework incorporating endogenous BECCS, coal-biomass co-firing with CCS (CBECCS) along with direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), and integration with computable general equilibrium and source-sink matching models. Through 147 scenario analyses (7 CDR configurations × 21 emission trajectories) in China, we quantify critical trade-offs among mitigation potential, energy security, and economic costs. Findings demonstrate that a tripartite CDR strategy (BECCS+CBECCS+DACCS) effectively resolves this trilemma, synergistically enhancing additional 0.1–2.2 Gt/a negative CO 2 emissions by 2060 while reducing electricity shortages by 29%–74% and unit abatement costs by 13%–64% relative to other CDR portfolios. This integrated framework informs carbon-negative power planning in China and can be adapted to other coal-intensive power systems. Science for society: Cutting global warming to well below 2°C requires not just net-zero emissions but also net-negative emissions to offset residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors such as steel, cement, and aviation. The power sector, given its scale, is well positioned to deliver these negative emissions through carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), coal-biomass co-firing with CCS (CBECCS), and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). Yet deploying these technologies involves difficult trade-offs: DACCS consumes substantial electricity, straining supply; BECCS and DACCS both carry higher costs than CBECCS; and CBECCS’s negative-emission potential is limited. Policymakers face a trilemma of balancing deep decarbonization, energy security, and affordability. This study develops an integrated modeling framework that links an hourly-resolution power system model with an economy-wide model and a source-sink matching assessment to compare 147 scenarios covering alternative CDR portfolios and emission trajectories in China’s power sector, one of the world’s largest and most coal-reliant electricity systems. Results show that relying on any single CDR technology, or even two technologies, cannot achieve deep negative-emission targets while keeping the system both affordable and reliable. Combining all three technologies unlocks synergies: CBECCS offers low-cost, stable capacity in the near term; BECCS expands at scale around mid-century; and BECCS and CBECCS together reduce the system’s reliance on electricity-intensive DACCS, while a relaxed carbon budget lets existing coal plants operate more flexibly to meet peak demand. This tripartite strategy delivers the largest amount of carbon removal while reducing electricity shortages and lowering system costs compared with using these technologies alone or in pairs. The findings offer insights for other coal-intensive economies seeking to decarbonize electricity while safeguarding supply reliability, and the modeling framework can be adapted to other national power systems pursuing net-zero and net-negative emissions.
SN  - 2949-7906
ER  -