Exiled Biden Officials Release Carbon Technology Wish List

by Corbin Hair (Politico Pro Climatewire) The group identified about 30 climate policies. Some of them might even find bipartisan support. -- Veterans of the Biden-era Department of Energy have developed a list of policies for advancing technologies to capture carbon dioxide from smokestacks and the atmosphere.

The team highlighted more than 30 proposals that would promote carbon dioxide removal and carbon capture and storage, while also shifting the economy away from its reliance on planet-warming oil, gas and coal. The wish list was included in a report published Tuesday by the University of Pennsylvania's Kleinman Center for Energy Policy.

Strengthening EPA's power plant air pollution regulations is among the suggested policies that are unlikely to advance during the administration of President Donald Trump, who has erroneously claimed that climate change is a "hoax" and dismantled U.S. efforts to address the problem.

But other ideas — such as supporting additional CO2 pipelines and storage wells — could win bipartisan support in Washington and state capitals because they "align well with themes of economic development, energy independence, and infrastructure modernization," Jennifer Wilcox, an energy policy professor at the Kleinman Center and the report's lead author, said in an email to POLITICO's E&E News. READ MORE

In this digest, we specifically address policies supporting carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies, including overlapping carbon dioxide removal (CDR) methods such as direct air capture (DAC) and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). While broader categories of CDR exist—including marine CDR, nature-based, or agricultural solutions—we focus here on technological approaches with significant policy intersections with CCUS, aligning clearly with industrial decarbonization pathways.

Carbon management has emerged as a vital yet often contentious strategy for addressing climate change. While some see carbon management as essential for tackling hard-to-abate industries and removing legacy emissions, others fear it may prolong reliance on fossil fuels. At the same time, many national and subnational governments remain divided on how aggressively to pursue carbon management—especially when political priorities shift.

Considering Carbon Management Policies

When are policies supporting carbon management appropriate? This guiding question reflects a growing need to determine where, when, and how carbon management can best complement the broader clean energy transition. Achieving reliable, affordable clean energy systems—while also meeting long-term climate goals—will likely require a portfolio of solutions, including carbon management in specific contexts.

The Need for a Broader Lens

Given the complexity and interdependencies involved, carbon management must not simply focus on capturing and removing CO2 but also strategically align with broader societal and environmental goals.

This digest outlines a decision-making framework—referred to here as a “rubric”—to evaluate the effectiveness of carbon management policies in meeting these goals. We then examine the U.S. policy landscape at the start of 2025 to illustrate how applying this framework can highlight each policy’s strengths and weaknesses, reveal gaps, and clarify whether a basket of policies can collectively address core concerns. Notably, no single policy will fulfill every dimension; understanding how multiple measures fit together is key.

A Note on the Current Political Landscape: While recent shifts suggest a less supportive federal environment for carbon management, best-practice design principles remain crucial for states, companies, and future federal administrations. Even if carbon management slows under certain administrations, spelling out “what good looks like” ensures that policymakers, advocates, and investors have a roadmap for when and how to revive or expand carbon management initiatives responsibly. This framework explicitly considers policy feasibility, including dynamic aspects such as evolving technology costs, market maturity, and political viability.

The Decision-Making Framework (Rubric) for “Effective Carbon Management”

Below is a ten-point framework that forms the backbone of this policy review. The ten-point framework was developed based on the authors’ extensive experience in government, specifically their direct involvement in implementing major U.S. climate and energy policies, including the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), and the Department of Energy’s Carbon Negative Shot initiative.

Each of the ten criteria supports one or more of the broader aims outlined above: transitioning fully from unabated fossil fuels, providing tangible community benefits, and promoting equitable economic development. While there is overlap (e.g., environmental, health, and safety can affect community acceptance), separating them helps ensure each dimension gets due consideration.

(A “4” is intentionally stringent, indicating the policy nearly fully meets best-practice standards. Policies that score lower on certain criteria may still be valuable but need targeted improvements.)

Important Note on the “Unit of Analysis”

The policies below are often intended to work together—no single measure covers all aspects. The framework thus helps us see how the broader landscape stacks up, rather than judging any one program in isolation.