The Role of Carbon Removal in Ratcheting India’s Net-Zero Goal

Abstract

India’s revised nationally determined contribution at COP26 set a net-zero target for 2070, but the role of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) in achieving this goal remains unclear. This study quantifies the contribution of land-based CDR—bioenergy carbon capture and storage, biochar, and afforestation—in achieving India’s net-zero goal. Additionally, a stylised scenario explores an accelerated net-zero target by 2050 in India`s climate target. The global emission target is modelled to follow India’s climate ambition in both stylised scenarios. The results show that the ambitious 2050 net-zero pathway requires 56 GtCO₂ of cumulative novel CDR across the century, compared to 47 GtCO₂ under the 2070 scenario, with both requiring around 1 GtCO₂/year at net-zero. A higher ambitious pathway leads to increased economic costs, with a mid-century carbon price of USD 938, compared to USD 174 in the 2070 scenario. Without novel CDR methods, the cost of achieving net zero by 2050 quadruple. The accelerated 2050 net-zero pathway also intensifies land and water trade-offs, reducing land for crop production while increasing water demand for electricity and biomass. Despite these challenges, it limits end-of-century warming to 1.46 °C, compared to 1.79 °C under the 2070 scenario. These findings highlight the importance of clearly defined climate targets, scalable CDR strategies, and integrated resource management to balance climate ambition with sustainable development.

1. Introduction

The challenge of climate change can be framed around three fundamental themes: responsibility, actionability, and timing. The first theme, ‘responsibility’, pertains to the disproportionate contribution of anthropogenic emissions to global warming and the necessity of addressing historical emissions [1]. The recognition of human-induced climate change necessitates the development of effective mitigation strategies. The second theme, ‘actionability’, reflects the collective response under the 2015 Paris Agreement, which aims to limit global temperature rise to well below 2 °C, with efforts to achieve 1.5 °C by 2100 [2]. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assesses the nationally determined contributions (NDCs) of countries every five years to track progress. These assessments have consistently shown that peak emissions must be reached as soon as possible, with a global net-zero target around the mid-century to balance emission sources and sinks. As of COP27, 140 countries, representing 90% of global emissions, have committed to net-zero targets. The third theme, timing, highlights the urgency and scale of emissions reductions. The IPCC 2022 assessment report estimated that global emissions must decline by 43% by 2030 relative to 2005. However, despite increasing commitments, these efforts remain insufficient, particularly in high-emission sectors, such as power generation, industry, transportation, and land use [3]. A recent analysis by the World Resources Institute [4] examining 40 key mitigation indicators found that none are currently on track to meet the 2030 objectives, with most showing insufficient progress to halve global emissions by 2030.

The Sixth Assessment Report [5] underscores that carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will be required to offset residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors and reverse accumulated historical emissions [6,7,8,9,10,11]. Several studies [12,13] emphasize that deep reductions in net emissions will be necessary to return warming to safe levels in the second half of the century. However, the large-scale deployment of CDR technologies faces significant uncertainties, particularly regarding technological readiness, cost-effectiveness, and social acceptance [14]. These factors delay policy decisions and hinder investment in large-scale removals. Thus, while emission reductions and CDR deployment are essential, their timing, scale, and feasibility are critical considerations. This study examines these dynamics within the context of India’s climate policies and mitigation strategies.

As the third-largest emitter globally, behind China and the United States, India’s climate policies and technological choices are pivotal in shaping global mitigation efforts [15,16]. India’s net-zero commitment by 2070, alongside its 45% reduction in emission intensity by 2030 (relative to 2005 levels) and 2.5–3 GtCO₂ carbon sink target [17], positions it as a major player in global climate governance [18,19,20]. However, India’s approach to net-zero differs from that of other high-emitting countries in key ways:

Emission Reduction Strategy: Unlike the U.S. and China, which integrate technological CDR solutions such as direct air capture (DACCS) [21,22,23,24] and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) [25] into their net-zero pathways [26], India’s strategy remains heavily reliant on afforestation as a primary carbon sink [19].

Renewable Energy Expansion: India has rapidly expanded its renewable energy (RE) capacity, ranking as the fourth largest RE installer in 2022. The move is a significant shift from fossil-based energy, yet it raises concerns regarding intermittency, grid stability, and land use constraints.

Sectoral Decarbonization Challenges: India’s economic structure and energy demands present additional constraints [18] project that India’s net-zero attainment is likely to occur later than the global average, given the dominance of coal in power generation, industrial emissions and the scale of energy demand growth.

While India’s mitigation actions demonstrate commitment, several policy gaps could impact domestic targets and global climate outcomes [27]. Notably, India’s net-zero pledge lacks clarity regarding specific sectoral emission reductions, making it difficult to assess whether its targets align with a credible net-zero pathway. Furthermore, India’s reliance on land-based CDR raises concerns about land availability, competition with agriculture, and long-term carbon sequestration permanence [28]. Equity-based analyses of global CDR responsibility suggest that Asia should contribute 43% of global CDR by 2100, with India expected to remove 110 GtCO₂ over the century [29]. These projections highlight the scale of required mitigation actions beyond India’s current policy scope.

Building on the themes of responsibility, actionability, and timing, this study aims to assess India’s net-zero transition within a global context. The key research questions are:

• Are India’s emission reduction targets compatible with achieving net-zero GHG emissions?
• What scale of gross emission reductions is required for India to achieve net-zero emissions by 2070?
• How would accelerating India’s net-zero target impact global temperature outcomes?
• How do different land-based CDR deployment rates affect India’s net-zero transition?
• What scale of CDR technology deployment is required to achieve net zero?
• How would global warming, land use, energy, and water demand change if the world followed India’s net-zero trajectory?

This study advances previous research using the land–energy–water nexus analysis to evaluate the feasibility of India’s net-zero commitment under different scenarios (Figure 1). This study uses a global IAM framework to assess the interplay between India’s mitigation actions, CDR deployment, and sectoral decarbonization constraints.

2. Methodology

We used the global change assessment model (GCAM v.5.4) to develop the emission scenario and CDR’s contribution to India’s climate target. GCAM v5.4 models 32 global regions, with India represented as a distinct region, allowing for India-specific policy modeling rather than relying on aggregated regional assumptions. Several modifications and scenario adjustments were incorporated to ensure that the model reflects India’s policy landscape and specific mitigation pathways.

We designed the net-zero goal for 2050 and 2070, with emissions peaking before 2025 and linearly declining afterwards (Figure 2). Importantly, we designed the scenario for the rest of the world to follow India’s net-zero ambition. This means that, for a 2070 net-zero target for India, the rest of the world follows a similar trajectory. This is the same pattern for a 2050 net-zero target for India.

The deployment of the CDR options was set to begin by 2025, contributing to net emission reduction in the near term, counterbalancing residual emissions at the net-zero year, and removing historical emissions in the second half of the century. We did not limit the growth of the CDR options; rather, their deployment was based on cost-effectiveness and competition with emission reduction. We set two stylized markets: one for the emission trajectory of India and the other for the rest of the world. Our study designed a net-zero GHG emission for both cases. This implies that the reduction in non-CO₂ gases is prioritized alongside CO₂ gases.

In this work, we designed land-based CDR options for India (

Table 1. Scenario description.

Scenario	Description	CDR Availability	Net-Zero Target	CO2 Removal from Land Use Across the Century
I_NDC	In this scenario, the stylized pathway follows the NDC submitted by India	BECCS, Biochar, Afforestation	2070	274 MtCO2
I_NDC+	In this scenario, the pathway follows a ratcheted net-zero actualization	BECCS, Biochar, Afforestation	2050	292 MtCO2
I_NDC+_NOCDR	Same as I_NDC+	No novel CDR method. Afforestation is the only removal method	2050	347 MtCO2

). Land-based CDR is particularly suitable for India’s net-zero goal due to its dual benefits of mitigating climate change and addressing socioeconomic priorities. India has significant potential for land-based CDR options like afforestation, reforestation, biochar, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), owing to its vast landscape and agricultural base. These approaches sequester carbon, enhance biodiversity, improve soil health, and create employment opportunities in rural areas. Moreover, land-based CDR aligns with India’s commitments under the Paris Agreement and its emphasis on sustainable development, providing a cost-effective and scalable pathway to offset residual emissions, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors. Given India’s growing population and development needs, land-based solutions offer a pragmatic approach to balance ecological restoration with economic growth. The emissions from land use change (afforestation/reforestation) are assumed to be priced at an increasing fraction of fossil and industrial emissions, from 30% in 2025 to 100% by 2100.

The economic decision-making framework employed in GCAM modelling is pivotal role in determining outcomes. GCAM encompasses various economic activities, providing multiple pathways to achieve desired objectives. These pathways include various choices related to fuels, feedstocks, technologies, and transportation methods. Additionally, allocating finite resources, such as land, requires careful deliberation to ensure optimal use across competing demands.

In GCAM, decision-making is guided by a single numerical value called the choice indicator. This metric is a benchmark for ranking alternatives based on their relative desirability. The choice indicator is typically expressed in terms of cost or profit, although other metrics could also be applied. For scenarios influenced by multiple factors, such as passenger transport, where speedier modes are prioritized, these factors are incorporated as cost adjustments. These adjustments are added to the baseline cost, producing a comprehensive indicator that reflects all relevant considerations. This approach allows GCAM to systematically evaluate and compare options, enabling informed and efficient decision-making in complex economic contexts.

2.1. Land-Based CDR Modelling in GCAM

BECCS is an energy pathway in which carbon dioxide (CO₂) is captured and stored permanently from a biogenic source. GCAM incorporates several BECCS technologies that are utilized in various energy system components, primarily in the electricity and refining industries. GCAM also includes BECCS in the hydrogen production and industrial sectors. In the GCAM v.5.4 used in this work, the BECCS competed directly with other forms of CDRs for carbon sequestration, unlike previous versions of GCAM, where the energy demand from the energy technologies (where BECCS is utilized) determines the quantity of CO₂ that BECCS can sequester. In those cases, the cost of other technologies that compete with BECCS sets the limit for the CO₂ sequestration of the latter.

GCAM also resolves endogenously the resources utilized for the bioenergy supply, like land, water, and fertilizers. This was conducted among the 384 land-use regions, which are made up of 32 geopolitical regions and 235 water basins. The treatment of BECCS included biomass collection, distribution, and pelletization costs.

Table 2. Fraction of CO₂ captured by transformation technologies [30].

Supply Sector	Subsector	Technology	1971	2100
Refining	Biomass liquids	Cellulosic ethanol ccs level 1	0.26	0.26
Refining	Biomass liquids	Cellulosic ethanol ccs level 2	0.9	0.9
Refining	Biomass liquids	Ft biofuels ccs level 1	0.818	0.818
Refining	Biomass liquids	Ft biofuels ccs level 2	0.9	0.9

shows the fraction of CO₂ captured by transformation technologies

2.2. Biochar

Biochar, which is also referred to as pyrogenic carbon capture and storage, is a technology that generates negative emissions. The process entails the generation of biochar via the pyrolysis of residual biomass, followed by the biochar’s implementation in enduring materials, such as soils, cement, and tar. Carbon sinks are formed when the carbon dioxide sequestered by the plants utilized in the biochar production process remains there for several hundreds of years.

The production of biochar in GCAM was modelled to be from the lignocellulosic biomass feedstocks. Their output was syngas. The assumptions for the biochar model development in GCAM used the work of Bergero et al [31]. Generally, biochar is administered to a particular land area only once. Approximately 70% of the carbon contained within biochar remains within the soil for several centuries. An application rate of 20 t per hectare of land is administered to croplands using biochar.

3. Results

In this section, we detailed mitigation options, like the phasing down of non-fossil technologies, transition towards clean energy, cost of mitigation, and penetration of CDR in achieving the climate target in India. Additionally, we assessed the trade-off between land and water use, especially when the climate goal was ratcheted. In this section, we referred to the 2070 net-zero scenario as I_NDC (reflecting the net-zero target communicated in India’s NDC in 2022) and the 2050 net-zero scenario as I_NDC+ (reflecting a ratcheted net-zero goal). Importantly, in the Results Section, we put emphasis on the scenarios with novel CDR approaches to present clarity on how India can reach climate goals.

In this work, our scenarios were built on the SSP2 (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2) storyline, representing a “Middle of the Road” development trajectory. SSP2 assumes moderate population growth, economic expansion, and technological progress, with no extreme challenges or breakthroughs in sustainability or fossil fuel dependence. This pathway provides a balanced projection, making it suitable for assessing India’s net-zero transition under realistic socioeconomic and policy conditions. Under SSP2, India’s population continues to grow but is slower than in high-growth scenarios (e.g., SSP3). It is projected to peak around the mid-century before stabilizing or slightly declining due to demographic shifts, urbanization, and improved living standards. Population growth significantly influences energy demand, land-use patterns, and carbon removal potential, particularly in large-scale afforestation and bioenergy deployment.

India`s population (Figure 3) rises gradually over time, levels off mid-century, and begins a slow decline toward the end of the century. Economic growth in SSP2 is steady but not transformative, reflecting moderate increases in per capita income and industrial expansion. India’s GDP per capita (Figure 4) rises consistently, supporting greater energy consumption and infrastructural investments.

3.1. Primary and Final Energy Use in India’s Net-Zero Goal

India experiences a growing energy demand driven by gross domestic product (GDP) and population growth. India must rapidly switch fuel use in primary and final energy consumption to meet its climate targets (Figure 4 and Figure 5). The total primary energy consumption rises by 104% and 114% between 2020 and the mid-century in the I_NDC+ and I_NDC scenarios, respectively. A later net-zero year perpetuates a larger reliance on oil and natural gas consumption as primary energy resources by the mid-century, compared to a 2050 net-zero goal. There is, however, a reduction in coal consumption during this period under both scenarios. Ratcheting the net zero year drives a more rapid decline in coal consumption by the mid-century. We see a 103% increase by the mid-century in oil and gas consumption relative to 2020 levels under the I_NDC scenario. When the net-zero year is ratcheted, this increase is more than halved. Also, under this climate goal for India, coal consumption reduces by 66% between 2020 and the mid-century, whereas in the I_NDC scenario, this reduction is only 6%. There is likewise a substantial deployment of renewable energy and biomass to meet the growing energy demands while ensuring energy security, reducing GHG, and driving a net-zero goal. Wind, solar, and hydro energy are pivotal in scaling up the renewable energy share, supported by advances in carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. The share of renewable energy by 2050 is 49% and 27% in the I_NDC+ and I_NDC scenarios, respectively. Importantly, the share of renewables to achieve climate neutrality is higher in the I_NDC scenario. This is because of cheaper renewable technologies in the second half of the century. End-use electrification increases rapidly in the I_NDC+ scenario, reaching a share of 67% by the mid-century and end of the century. In the I_NDC scenario, the share of electricity is 49% and 67% by the mid-century and end of the century. When the climate target excludes the contribution of BECCS and biochar, with only afforestation serving as a carbon sink, India would need to phase down fossil fuels in primary and final energy at a more rapid scale. This situation could lead to a disruptive pace of decarbonisation, especially with the increase in energy demand.

3.2. End-Use Energy Consumption

Electrification is a critical driver of decarbonization in India’s net-zero pathways. Our analysis shows that the penetration of electricity in end-use energy is prominent in industry > buildings > transport (Figure 6 and Figure 7). The increase in electrification between 2020 and 2050 in industrial processes, buildings, and transport modes is 429–787%, 416–517%, and 284–436%, respectively. Also, we see that this increase in electrification of end-use is comparatively more rapid in the stringent mitigation pathway, especially in the near term. For example, in the industrial sector, electricity consumption grows from 2.4 EJ/yr in 2020 to 21.3 EJ/yr by the mid-century in the I_NDC+ scenario. In the I_NDC scenario, the electricity usage by 2050 is 13 EJ/yr. The electricity consumption in this scenario reaches the magnitude in the I_NDC+ scenario only around 2065. This pattern of larger electrification in the I_NDC+ scenario also shows in the buildings and transport end uses.

The consumption of coal in the building is completely phased out by the mid-century in India’s NDC climate trajectory. However, in the case of industrial processes, India’s NDC goal allows for a vast reliance on coal by the mid-century. The industrial sector must shift to gas and biomass for its high-energy processes when the net-zero goal is ratcheted to 2050 (Figure 8). Importantly, our result shows that biomass becomes a prominent fuel for industrial processes in the I_NDC scenario as a substitute for electricity in the near and mid-term. This is because of the less stringent mitigation pathway. Hydrogen also becomes a significant industry fuel, especially in the second half of the century. This is because of the proliferation of renewable energy during this period to produce green hydrogen.

3.3. Gross Emission of Critical Sectors in India’s Net-Zero Goal

The power sector constitutes a challenging sector to decarbonize in India due to the high reliance on coal to meet the electricity demands of a vast population. According to Climate Analytics, the share of coal in electricity generation was 74% in 2023. Our result also shows that, across the century (between 2020 and 2100), the gross emission from the power sector is about 26–1303% larger than other sectors. Ratcheting the net-zero goal significantly drives a cut in power sector emissions, revealing an 84% reduction by the mid-century relative to 2020 (Figure 9). Under the current NDC of 2070 net-zero goal, this reduction is merely 11% by the mid-century. Importantly, despite that, India could still reach its 2070 net-zero goal; however, the continual emissions from the power sector, depicted by 44% larger residual emissions between 2020 and 2100, could cause climate damage and environmental hazards. Conversely, the building sector represents the least challenging to decarbonize, showing a gross emission of 4 GtCO₂ and 5 GtCO₂ between 2020 and 2100 in the I_NDC+ and I_NDC scenarios, respectively. The cumulative gross emissions between 2020 and 2100 of industrial processes under India’s 2070 net-zero goal is 52 GtCO₂. Ratcheting the net zero goal to 2050 cuts these cumulative emissions by 31%. This is attributed to rapid electrification and the phase down of coal in the more stringent climate target. We also see that the transport sector poses a considerable challenge to decarbonize. Emissions continue to increase across the century, albeit at a lesser rate in the I_NDC+ scenario.

3.4. Cost of Transition and Scale of CDR and Global Temperature in India’s Net-Zero Goal

Transitioning towards a national and global net-zero target requires placing a price on fossil consumption to incentivize the shift towards low-carbon solutions and foster innovation in cleaner technologies. We see that ratcheting the net-zero goal to 2050 increases the average transition cost between 2020 and 2100 to 22% higher than a 2070 net-zero goal. This difference is larger for 2020-2050, showing a 65% higher carbon price in the I_NDC+ scenario compared to the I-NDC scenario. The carbon price to achieve the net-zero goal in the I_NDC+ (by 2050) is USD 938. In the absence of novel CDR methods, the carbon price to reach net zero by 2050 is 4$\times$ that of when novel CDRs are present (Figure 10). India would need to decarbonize even faster, hence a more stringent mitigation pathway across the economy. In the I-NDC scenario, the carbon price at this mid-century period is USD 174. This highlights the trade-off between climate ambition and economic costs, emphasizing the need for strategic planning to balance these factors effectively. While earlier targets necessitate higher carbon prices, they also reduce cumulative emissions, potentially mitigating long-term climate risks and associated economic damages.

Additionally, the reliance on large-scale CDR to offset residual emissions will be pivotal for achieving a 2050 net-zero goal, requiring significant advancements in technologies such as BECCS and biochar (Figure 11 and Figure 12). Our results show that the cumulative CDR required across the century in the I_NDC+ amounts to 56 GtCO₂, while about 47 GtCO₂ is required in the I_NDC scenario. Likewise, the volume of CDR required to neutralize the residual emissions at the net-zero year is about 1 GtCO₂/yr in both scenarios. Interestingly, the cumulative emissions between 2020 and net-zero years in both scenarios are the same, reaching 10 GtCO₂. The results underscore the trade-off between climate ambition and economic costs. Earlier net-zero targets demand a greater reliance on carbon dioxide removal and higher carbon prices, but they offer the advantage of reducing long-term climate risks. Both scenarios demonstrate the importance of scalable and durable CDR technologies to neutralize residual emissions and achieve climate goals.

We also see differing roles of afforestation in both scenarios. Under a more stringent pathway, as represented by the I_NDC+ scenario, we see that land use change contributes to higher removals compared to the I_NDC scenario. Most importantly, our results show positive emissions from land use before the mid-century in both scenarios. Our results also show that, in the scenarios where BECCS and biochar are not deployed, the cumulative volume of afforestation between 2020 and 2100 is about 27% larger in the I_NDC+_NOCDR compared to their I_NDC+ scenario with the deployment of novel CDR.

We see a critical contribution of India’s climate action to the global warming target (Figure 13). The global peak temperature in the I_NDC scenario is 2.09 in 2060, while the peak warming under the more stringent climate action (I_NDC+) is 1.87 in 2045. Also, the end-of-century warming temperatures in the I_NDC and I_NDC+ scenarios are 1.79 °C and 1.46 °C, respectively. India’s role in global climate action is underscored by its significant impact on global temperature outcomes. The results show that, under the I_NDC+ scenario, India’s ambitious climate policies could help peak global temperatures earlier and at a lower level, contributing to end-of-century warming well below 2 °C. This demonstrates how India’s transition efforts are critical to its sustainable development and pivotal in shaping the global trajectory toward achieving climate goals. India’s commitment to stringent climate actions can serve as a catalyst for international collaboration and enhanced ambition worldwide.

3.5. Trade-Off and Synergy with Sustainable Development in India’s Net-Zero GOAL

Ratcheting climate targets in India highlights significant trade-offs with land and water availability for crop production. Our results show that, by 2050, the land allocated for crops is substantially reduced in the I_NDC+ scenario compared to the I_NDC scenario, driven by the need to repurpose land for carbon dioxide removal technologies like afforestation and BECCS. This poses challenges for food security and rural livelihoods, underscoring the importance of careful land-use planning. Our result reveals significant differences in water use trends between the I_NDC+ (net zero by 2050) and I_NDC (net zero by 2070) scenarios (Figure 14). Water use for electricity increases significantly in both scenarios but peaks higher in I_NDC+ due to the earlier deployment of water-intensive technologies like BECCS. Similarly, biomass water use rises dramatically in the I_NDC+ scenario, reflecting the increased reliance on bioenergy to meet the earlier net-zero target. Industrial water use grows steadily in both scenarios, with a slightly faster increase in I_NDC+ due to accelerated decarbonization efforts. In contrast, water use for food and crop production declines sharply in I_NDC+, driven by competition for water and land resources as mitigation measures expand. These results highlight the trade-offs between ambitious climate goals and sustainable resource use. While the I_NDC+ scenario advances climate action, it significantly intensifies water stress across sectors. This underscores the need for integrated resource management, prioritizing water-efficient technologies and practices to balance climate mitigation with sustainable development.

4. Social Acceptance of CDR in India

There is a lack of empirical studies on public perceptions of CDR technologies in India. This gap underscores the need for comprehensive research to understand societal attitudes toward various CDR methods. International experiences highlight the importance of public engagement in deploying CDR technologies. For instance, studies indicate that public awareness and acceptance are crucial for successfully implementing CDR projects.

4.1. Public Engagement

Fostering public engagement is a critical factor in scaling CDR in India. Effective communication and education campaigns can increase awareness of CDR technologies and their role in mitigating climate change. Engaging with local communities early in the project development process can help build trust and ensure that their concerns are addressed. Transparent decision-making and participatory approaches, such as stakeholder consultations and community-led initiatives, can enhance social acceptance and reduce resistance to large-scale implementation.

4.2. Policy Integration

Aligning CDR strategies with India’s existing environmental and social policies is essential for ensuring public support and regulatory coherence. Integrating CDR into broader climate policies, such as India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) and state-level climate action plans, can provide a structured framework for implementation. In addition, financial incentives and regulatory mechanisms can be designed to encourage the private sector and local governments to invest in CDR. Ensuring alignment with India’s sustainable development goals (SDGs) and Just Transition principles will further enhance social acceptance by demonstrating tangible benefits for communities.

4.3. Research and Development

Investing in research on the social implications of CDR is crucial to designing strategies that align with India’s sociocultural and economic context. Studies on land use, equity, and potential economic impacts can help policymakers develop technically feasible and socially acceptable solutions. Collaborative efforts between academic institutions, industry stakeholders, and government agencies can advance the understanding of CDR’s long-term effectiveness and address potential land displacement, resource use, and environmental justice concerns. Additionally, pilot projects and demonstration sites can help assess real-world implementation challenges and refine strategies before large-scale deployment.

By prioritizing public engagement, policy integration, and targeted research, India can create an enabling environment for CDR deployment while addressing concerns related to feasibility and social acceptance. These strategies will play a crucial role in ensuring that CDR contributes effectively to India’s climate commitments and long-term sustainability goals.

5. Conclusions

India’s net-zero goal represents a critical juncture in global climate action, highlighting the country’s pivotal role in addressing the dual challenges of reducing emissions and fostering sustainable development. Our analysis underscores the trade-offs and synergies inherent in India’s climate strategies, particularly between ambitious targets like the I_NDC+ scenario (net-zero by 2050) and the more gradual I_NDC scenario (net-zero by 2070).

The results reveal that, while earlier net-zero targets demand higher economic costs and a greater reliance on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies, they offer significant benefits in terms of reducing cumulative emissions and mitigating long-term climate risks. The deployment of scalable and durable CDR technologies, such as BECCS, biochar, and afforestation, is essential to neutralize residual emissions and achieve climate targets. However, these approaches also pose challenges, including land competition, reduced crop production, and increased water stress, which require careful management to avoid negative impacts on food security and livelihoods.

India’s ability to balance these trade-offs through strategic planning, technological innovation, and resource management will determine its success in meeting its net-zero targets. Furthermore, India’s leadership in accelerating renewable energy deployment and fostering international collaboration can inspire enhanced climate ambition globally.

Ultimately, India’s climate actions contribute significantly to limiting global warming, with the potential to lower peak temperatures and end-of-century warming levels. These efforts underscore the importance of timely, equitable, and integrated approaches to climate mitigation, ensuring that the pursuit of net zero is aligned with sustainable development goals.

Limitations and Future Research

GCAM represents India as a single regional entity, which limits its ability to capture subnational energy policies, regional variations in mitigation potential, and state-specific climate strategies. Future research could incorporate higher-resolution models or hybrid IAM approaches that integrate subnational energy modeling to enhance policy relevance.

Additionally, technological deployment assumptions within GCAM are based on global cost curves and do not fully reflect localized constraints such as infrastructure readiness, capital costs, or policy barriers specific to India. Future improvements could refine technology adoption assumptions by integrating bottom-up sectoral models or expert-derived constraints on deployment feasibility.

Future research should focus on improving the resolution of modeling by incorporating state-level or city-level analyses to capture regional variations in energy transitions and emissions reductions. Sector-specific mitigation strategies should be expanded, particularly for hard-to-abate industries, transport electrification, and hydrogen adoption, to provide a more detailed assessment of decarbonization pathways. Additionally, incorporating uncertainty and sensitivity analyses, such as Monte Carlo simulations or stochastic modeling, would help evaluate the robustness of the findings and assess how different policy and technology assumptions influence outcomes.

Behavioral and social factors should also be integrated into future studies to account for public opinion, consumer preferences, and behavioral economic considerations, particularly regarding the acceptance of CDR technologies, renewable energy adoption, and shifts in consumption patterns. Furthermore, the role of international cooperation mechanisms, such as climate finance, technology transfers, and bilateral agreements, should be analyzed to determine how they could facilitate an earlier and more cost-effective net-zero transition for India.