• Biomass-based carbon dioxide removal accounted for more than 95% of high-durability CDR contracted in 2025.
• The guide gives buyers and developers a framework for assessing agricultural residues such as corn stover, wheat straw, and rice husks.
• The framework aims to reduce social, ecological, and market risks as CDR buyers move toward multi-million-tonne commitments.

Carbon Removal Buyers Face A New Sourcing Test

Carbon Direct has released a global sourcing guide for agricultural biomass used in carbon dioxide removal projects, as demand for high-durability removals moves from early-stage procurement into larger commercial commitments.

The guide, Sustainable Agricultural Biomass Sourcing for CDR: A Buyer’s Guide, was developed with scientists, industry stakeholders, and buyer signatories including Microsoft and Stripe. It gives buyers and project developers a practical framework for assessing agricultural residues used as feedstock in carbon removal projects.

The document arrives as biomass-based CDR pathways become a dominant part of the durable removals market. According to Carbon Direct, these pathways made up more than 95% of high-durability CDR contracted in 2025.

That growth has sharpened scrutiny over where biomass comes from. Agricultural residues such as corn stover, wheat straw, and rice husks are often viewed as attractive feedstocks because they are by-products of existing food systems. Yet many already serve local economic, ecological, and social purposes.

For buyers, that creates a due diligence challenge. Residues may look low-cost and low-impact on paper. In practice, diverting them can affect soil health, farmer income, community livelihoods, and local markets.

A Framework For A Market Still Taking Shape

The guide is designed to help buyers and developers assess sourcing risks before formal certification systems are fully mature. It also provides language and criteria that can be used in offtake agreements.

Carbon Direct said the framework is built for use across different geographies. It recognizes that sourcing conditions vary widely by governance capacity, land tenure systems, corruption risk, monitoring infrastructure, and data availability.

“Agricultural residues exist at the intersection of food systems, land tenure, livelihoods, and carbon accounting, so poor sourcing doesn’t only undermine carbon credits, it can cause real ecological and community harm,” said Dr. Bodie Cabiyo, Director of Interdisciplinary Science at Carbon Direct. “This guide gives developers the confidence that responsible sourcing decisions made today will hold up over time and gives buyers clear lines to draw in their contracts.”

The guide is organized around four principles: traceability, community and worker protection, soil and environmental protection, and market integrity.

Traceability requires biomass to be tracked back to its origin. The guide outlines three chain-of-custody options that can be matched to supply-chain complexity, with the aim of reconciling volumes along the way.

Community and worker protection focuses on reducing harm to local communities, workers, vulnerable groups, and Indigenous Peoples. This is particularly important in regions where land rights, informal labor, and local resource access can be difficult to verify.

Soil and environmental protection addresses the risk that biomass removal could reduce soil health, soil quality, or soil carbon stocks. The guide also says sourcing should not threaten protected areas.

Market integrity looks at whether biomass sourcing could distort markets for agricultural or forestry products. That matters as CDR procurement grows and buyers begin competing for feedstocks that may already have established uses.

RELATED ARTICLE: Microsoft Pauses New Carbon Removal Credit Purchases

Microsoft And Stripe Back Higher Sourcing Standards

The involvement of Microsoft and Stripe reflects a broader shift in the CDR market. Large corporate buyers are increasingly focused on quality, durability, and supply-chain safeguards, not only headline removal volumes.

“Rigorous science and clear standards are the foundation of a trustworthy carbon removal market, and this guide delivers exactly that. By setting a high bar for sustainable agricultural residue sourcing, we are supporting infrastructure for CDR growth that translates into material climate benefit,” said Phillip Goodman, Director of Carbon Removal Portfolio, Microsoft.

Stripe also pointed to the need for practical standards as the market expands.

“Getting biomass sourcing right is table stakes for scaling CDR credibly. The science and the market will keep evolving, but this guide gives buyers and developers a strong starting point, which is what the market needs right now,” said Dr. Zeke Hausfather, Climate Research Lead at Stripe.

For investors and corporate procurement teams, the message is clear. Biomass-based CDR cannot be treated as a simple carbon accounting exercise. Feedstock origin, land governance, community impact, and market displacement are now material risk factors.

What Executives Should Take Away

The guide gives companies a tool for stronger procurement governance at a critical stage for the carbon removal sector. As buyers move from pilot purchases to larger offtake agreements, weak sourcing standards could expose them to reputational, operational, and climate integrity risks.

It also places agricultural biomass within a wider ESG context. Carbon removal projects may support net-zero strategies, but their credibility depends on how feedstocks are sourced, verified, and governed.

Carbon Direct said the guide is intended as a living resource and will be refined as science and market conditions evolve. It builds on forest biomass sourcing guidance published in 2024 and 2025, as well as five editions of the High-Quality Carbon Dioxide Removal guidelines developed by Microsoft and Carbon Direct.

The result is a more defined benchmark for a fast-growing part of the CDR market. For global buyers, the next phase of carbon removal will not only be judged by tonnes removed. It will also be judged by the systems, contracts, and safeguards behind those tonnes.

ESG News Editorial Team

The ESG News Editorial Team is comprised of veteran financial journalists and sustainability analysts dedicated to providing real-time, objective reporting on global ESG regulations, climate finance, and corporate governance. Our desk monitors daily developments from the SEC, IFRS, CSRD and international regulatory bodies to ensure our 1M+ readers receive accurate, data-driven insights into the evolving sustainable investment landscape. Follow the ESG News Editorial Team for expert reporting on global sustainability standards, ESG disclosures, and climate policy. Access over 10,000 investigative reports and real-time updates.