Carbon Gap has launched a free, open-access toolkit enabling governments, researchers and civil society organisations to assess how much carbon dioxide removal (CDR) their countries could realistically achieve. Announced on 2 November 2026, the toolkit provides a standardised methodology for evaluating national carbon removal potential, available resources and policy requirements. It is hosted on the new Carbon Removal Readiness Assessment (CRRA) website alongside assessments previously conducted in seven countries, allowing users to examine existing findings and apply the methodology independently.
The initiative builds on two years of research by Carbon Gap and its local partners to evaluate the feasibility of carbon removal across different national circumstances. Although many countries have established net-zero emissions targets, determining how much carbon removal they can deliver domestically remains a significant planning challenge. Countries must understand which removal technologies are compatible with their available resources, what infrastructure is required and how national policies could support deployment. The CRRA methodology addresses these questions by combining technical resource assessments with policy analysis and stakeholder engagement.
Read more: Jacobs and PCL Selected for $1 Billion San Francisco Wastewater Upgrade
The assessment process begins by examining the availability of land, energy, minerals and geological storage resources that could support different carbon removal methods. These findings are evaluated alongside national policy conditions, stakeholder perspectives, and public opinion to develop scenarios that reflect practical deployment constraints. This approach distinguishes the physical potential for carbon removal from what a country could realistically implement under its economic, institutional and social circumstances. The resulting assessments are intended to inform national carbon removal strategies and help identify priorities for further policy development.
The toolkit includes a step-by-step methodology covering assessment timelines, budgets, and staffing requirements, along with templates for background reports and national roadmaps. It also provides materials for conducting stakeholder interviews and citizen panels, supporting the inclusion of public and industry perspectives in national assessments. A taxonomy of carbon removal methods and a database of resource requirements, developed with RMI, help users compare different approaches. An optimisation tool further enables assessment teams to model how available national resources could be allocated efficiently across carbon removal methods.
Sylvain Delerce, Chief Scientist at Carbon Gap, said, "For two years we’ve been asking the same question, one country at a time: how much carbon could you actually remove?" He explained that making the methodology publicly available would allow governments, universities and non-governmental organisations to conduct credible assessments independently. With COP31 approaching, the toolkit provides countries with a practical resource for examining how carbon removal could contribute to their climate strategies. Its wider application could help translate national net-zero ambitions into more detailed assessments of domestic removal capacity, infrastructure needs and implementation barriers.
Source: Carbon Gap
Subscribe to our newsletter for more insights, case studies, and ESG intelligence.
Keep abreast of the top ESG Events on OneStop ESG Events.
OneStop ESG Educate: Your go-to source for top ESG courses and training programs tailored to your needs.
Stay informed with the latest insights on OneStop ESG News.
Discover meaningful career opportunities on OneStop ESG Jobs.
Ankit Palan is a Canada based writer who has been writing about sustainability for the past four years. He focuses on making topics like climate change, ESG, and responsible business easier to understand and more relatable. His work looks at how sustainability plays out in the real world, across businesses, finance, and everyday decisions, without overcomplicating it.
.png%3Falt%3Dmedia%26token%3D8ce51c57-6afd-45d5-98bb-b7c8362f24a7&w=3840&q=75)

.png%3Falt%3Dmedia%26token%3Dd36a38ac-7599-444b-8f07-18ff76ce73a3&w=1920&q=75)


Comments
Have a thought on this? Share it with other readers.