1. Introduction

Carbon-negative electricity generation refers to electricity production in which the overall life-cycle system removes more greenhouse gases—particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂)—from the atmosphere than it emits. It therefore goes beyond net-zero generation, where emissions and removals are merely balanced.

The principal technological pathways include:

Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) – biomass absorbs CO₂ while growing, electricity is generated from the biomass, and the resulting CO₂ is captured and permanently stored.

Direct Air Capture combined with electricity or energy systems – atmospheric CO₂ is directly removed and permanently stored, although this is generally an electricity-consuming rather than electricity-generating process.

Biomass generation with permanent carbon removal through geological storage or durable carbon products.

Waste-to-energy with carbon capture, where biogenic portions of waste can potentially produce net removals.

Hybrid systems combining renewable electricity, biomass, carbon capture, storage and carbon-removal accounting.

Carbon-negative electricity creates a distinctive regulatory problem: the law must govern both electricity generation and carbon removal. A plant cannot simply be treated as "renewable" because it uses biomass or captures CO₂. Regulators must examine feedstock sustainability, land use, emissions throughout the supply chain, capture efficiency, transport, storage permanence, monitoring, verification, electricity-market participation and the legitimacy of claimed carbon removals.

2. Meaning and Legal Characteristics

A useful legal formula is:

Net atmospheric impact = emissions from the entire project − verified durable carbon removals.

A project can therefore claim to be carbon-negative only if the verified removals exceed the project's relevant emissions.

For example, a BECCS plant may have:

biomass cultivation emissions;

harvesting and transport emissions;

processing emissions;

combustion emissions;

electricity-generation emissions;

CO₂ capture energy requirements;

pipeline or shipping emissions; and

storage-site emissions.

These must be considered before calculating the quantity of carbon removal.

This makes measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) central to governance.

3. Why Carbon-Negative Electricity Requires Special Governance

Traditional electricity regulation generally focuses on:

reliability;

affordability;

electricity markets;

consumer protection;

environmental compliance; and

generation licensing.

Carbon-negative generation introduces additional legal questions:

A. What qualifies as "carbon negative"?

Legislation must define whether the calculation is:

facility-based;

project-based;

life-cycle based; or

atmospheric-impact based.

A generator could have positive operational emissions while producing a net-negative result because of biological carbon uptake and geological storage.

B. Who owns the carbon-removal benefit?

The same tonne of CO₂ removal could potentially be claimed by:

the generator;

the carbon-storage operator;

the fuel supplier;

the government;

a carbon-credit purchaser; or

another entity under an emissions-accounting system.

Without clear rules, double counting becomes a serious problem.

C. How permanent must removal be?

Forests and soils can release stored carbon through:

fire;

disease;

drought;

land-use change; or

future harvesting.

Geological storage generally raises different permanence questions. Consequently, the law must establish rules concerning durability and reversal liability.

4. Major Components of the Governance Framework

4.1 Generation Licensing

A carbon-negative electricity facility may need to comply simultaneously with:

electricity-generation licensing;

environmental-clearance requirements;

air-emission regulation;

waste regulation;

biomass sustainability requirements;

carbon-capture regulation;

pipeline regulation; and

geological-storage requirements.

The regulatory framework should prevent fragmented regulation in which each authority evaluates only one component.

4.2 Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental impact assessment is particularly important because carbon-negative projects can create environmental effects unrelated to their climate benefits.

For example, large-scale biomass production may affect:

forests;

biodiversity;

agricultural land;

water resources;

soil quality;

food production; and

local communities.

Therefore, carbon removal cannot automatically outweigh other environmental impacts.

The Supreme Court of India has historically treated environmental assessment as an important component of regulatory decision-making in electricity infrastructure.

In Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Group v. Bombay Suburban Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. (1991), the Supreme Court dealt with environmental objections to a thermal power project in Maharashtra. The case illustrates the principle that electricity infrastructure remains subject to environmental governance even when the project has substantial public-utility significance. (Indian Kanoon)

5. Carbon Capture and Storage Governance

CCS is the critical technological component of many carbon-negative electricity systems.

A legal CCS framework should regulate four stages:

Capture → Transport → Injection → Permanent Storage

Each stage creates different legal risks.

Capture

The regulator may establish:

minimum capture efficiency;

emissions-monitoring requirements;

technical standards;

safety standards; and

reporting obligations.

Transport

CO₂ pipelines or other transportation systems raise questions concerning:

land acquisition;

safety;

pipeline access;

third-party access;

liability for leakage; and

cross-border transportation.

Injection

Injection into geological formations requires:

site characterization;

permits;

monitoring;

pressure-control requirements;

environmental safeguards; and

emergency procedures.

Long-term storage

The most difficult question is post-closure liability.

If CO₂ leaks decades after injection, the law must determine:

Who pays for remediation and who loses the carbon-removal credit?

Possible models include:

continuing operator liability;

transfer of liability to the government after a defined period;

insurance or financial-security mechanisms; or

hybrid systems.

6. Carbon Accounting and MRV

The legal credibility of carbon-negative electricity depends heavily on measurement, reporting and verification.

A regulatory authority should require the generator to report:

quantity of biomass consumed;

origin of biomass;

carbon content;

emissions from cultivation;

transportation emissions;

combustion emissions;

capture rate;

quantity of CO₂ transported;

quantity injected;

quantity permanently stored;

leakage;

energy consumed by CCS; and

net verified carbon removal.

The system should use independent verification rather than allowing generators to determine their own carbon-negative status.

7. Biomass Sustainability

BECCS presents an important governance paradox.

Biomass is often classified as renewable because plants absorb atmospheric CO₂ during growth. But renewable does not automatically mean carbon-negative.

Unsustainable biomass can result in:

deforestation;

soil-carbon loss;

biodiversity damage;

increased transport emissions;

competition with food production; and

delayed atmospheric carbon benefits.

Accordingly, legislation should establish sustainability criteria for biomass.

These may include:

no conversion of protected forests;

biodiversity safeguards;

soil-carbon protection;

sustainable harvesting;

traceability;

restrictions on high-carbon land conversion; and

life-cycle carbon accounting.

8. Electricity-Market Governance

Carbon-negative electricity may require special market treatment.

Possible mechanisms include:

Carbon-removal credits

Generators could receive credits for verified atmospheric removals.

Contracts for difference

Governments could provide long-term price certainty where carbon-negative generation has higher costs.

Capacity payments

A carbon-negative generator capable of firm electricity production could receive capacity-market compensation.

Renewable-energy certificates

A major legal question is whether BECCS should receive the same renewable-energy treatment as conventional renewable generation.

The answer depends on the statutory definition of renewable electricity and the environmental conditions attached to the support mechanism.

9. Avoiding Double Counting

Suppose a BECCS facility removes one million tonnes of CO₂.

The legal system must ensure that the same removal is not simultaneously counted:

toward the company's voluntary net-zero claim;

toward a national emissions target;

as a tradable carbon credit; and

as another country's climate contribution.

Therefore, carbon-negative electricity regulation needs a carbon-accounting registry.

The registry should record:

generation → captured CO₂ → verified removal → ownership → credit issuance → retirement.

10. Indian Legal Framework

India does not yet have a single comprehensive statutory framework dedicated exclusively to carbon-negative electricity generation. Governance therefore arises from several overlapping legal regimes.

Important instruments include:

Electricity Act, 2003

Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

environmental-clearance regulations;

forest and biodiversity legislation;

electricity regulations;

renewable-energy policies; and

emerging carbon-market mechanisms.

The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) and state electricity regulatory commissions have important roles concerning electricity-market regulation, while environmental authorities regulate environmental impacts.

11. Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India: Emerging Carbon-Governance Litigation

A particularly relevant recent development is Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India.

In proceedings concerning carbon emissions from power generation, the Supreme Court in July 2025 directed the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) and Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) to participate alongside the Ministry of Power in developing a plan concerning reduction of carbon emissions in the power-generation sector. (Indian Kanoon)

This is highly relevant to carbon-negative electricity because it demonstrates an emerging judicial understanding that climate governance cannot necessarily remain separated from electricity-sector regulation.

The case also illustrates the importance of:

institutional coordination;

regulatory planning;

emissions reduction;

technical electricity governance; and

integration between policymakers and electricity regulators.

It is not, however, a judgment establishing that BECCS or another particular technology is legally carbon-negative.

12. Vanashakti v. Union of India

The Supreme Court's environmental-clearance jurisprudence is also relevant.

In Vanashakti v. Union of India, the Court addressed the legality of post-facto environmental clearances and emphasized the statutory importance of obtaining environmental clearance under the applicable prior-clearance regime. The Court's 2026 judgment reiterated that the ordinary environmental-clearance framework is mandatory unless appropriately modified through lawful governmental action. (Indian Kanoon)

For carbon-negative electricity, this is significant because a project's claimed climate benefit cannot simply substitute for compliance with mandatory environmental requirements.

In other words:

Carbon removal benefit ≠ exemption from environmental law.

13. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India

The long-running M.C. Mehta v. Union of India environmental litigation provides a broader constitutional and environmental-law context for regulating pollution and environmentally harmful activities.

The Supreme Court continues to use its constitutional jurisdiction in environmental matters, illustrating the potential importance of:

Article 21;

environmental protection;

public-health considerations;

governmental regulatory duties; and

sustainable-development principles.

The continuing litigation also demonstrates how Indian environmental law can evolve through judicial supervision of executive and regulatory action. (Indian Kanoon)

For carbon-negative electricity, this provides a constitutional background against which future CCS, biomass and carbon-removal disputes may be examined.

14. UK Case Law: ClientEarth v Secretary of State

UK jurisprudence provides especially useful comparative material because the UK is developing large-scale CCS and CCUS projects.

In R (ClientEarth) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2021] EWCA Civ 43, the Court of Appeal considered a challenge concerning the proposed Drax gas-fired generating units and issues involving greenhouse-gas policy and carbon capture. The case demonstrates the relationship between energy infrastructure approvals, climate policy and judicial review. (BAILII)

The earlier High Court proceedings emphasized an important judicial-review distinction: courts review whether the decision-maker acted lawfully; they do not simply substitute their own view of the merits of energy policy. (BAILII)

This principle is particularly relevant to carbon-negative electricity because technical disagreements concerning:

capture efficiency;

climate benefits;

electricity demand;

energy security; and

technology selection

may involve both legal and policy judgments.

15. Boswell v Secretary of State: Gas Generation with CCS

A more directly relevant case is R (Boswell) v Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero.

The litigation concerned a proposed gas-fired electricity generating station at Teesside with post-combustion carbon capture and storage (CCS).

The 2024 High Court judgment considered whether the government's decision adequately addressed greenhouse-gas emissions and the project's relationship with the UK's net-zero objective. (BAILII)

The Court of Appeal subsequently considered the case in [2025] EWCA Civ 669, including whether the Secretary of State committed legal error in assessing the significance of greenhouse-gas emissions from a gas-fired station equipped with CCS. (BAILII)

The case is important because it demonstrates that the existence of CCS does not automatically eliminate the need to assess the project's remaining greenhouse-gas emissions.

For carbon-negative generation, the implication is even stronger: regulators must verify the complete emissions/removals balance rather than assuming that carbon capture makes a project environmentally neutral or negative.

16. Finch v Surrey County Council

In R (Finch) v Surrey County Council [2024] UKSC 20, the UK Supreme Court considered whether environmental assessment for an oil-development project needed to address downstream greenhouse-gas emissions from combustion of the extracted oil. (BAILII)

Although the case was not about carbon-negative electricity, it has broader significance for climate-related environmental assessment.

It demonstrates the legal importance of examining the causal relationship between a project and greenhouse-gas emissions.

For carbon-negative generation, the corresponding question becomes:

Which emissions and removals are sufficiently connected with the project that they must be included in its environmental and carbon assessment?

That question is central to preventing artificially favorable carbon accounting.

17. Drax Power Ltd v Secretary of State

In R (Drax Power Ltd) v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change [2014] EWCA Civ 1153, the Court of Appeal considered government support for Drax's proposed biomass conversion.

The dispute concerned eligibility for an Investment Contract and the application of the relevant government criteria. (BAILII)

The case illustrates an important governance principle:

Low-carbon electricity projects receiving public support remain subject to legally defined eligibility criteria and administrative decision-making standards.

This is directly relevant to future BECCS subsidies.

18. Regulatory Challenges

Carbon-negative electricity governance faces several major legal challenges.

18.1 Additionality

A carbon removal should represent an actual additional removal rather than something that would have occurred anyway.

18.2 Permanence

Law must determine how long carbon must remain stored before it qualifies as permanent removal.

18.3 Leakage

Leakage can occur:

from geological storage;

through biomass supply chains;

through land-use change; or

from displaced emissions elsewhere.

18.4 Baseline manipulation

The amount of "carbon removal" depends partly on what would otherwise have happened.

Poorly designed baselines can artificially inflate credits.

18.5 Measurement uncertainty

Carbon removal cannot always be measured with absolute precision. Regulation therefore needs:

conservative accounting;

independent verification;

uncertainty margins; and

periodic audits.

19. Carbon-Negative Electricity and Energy Justice

Governance must also address distributional consequences.

A carbon-negative electricity project may produce global climate benefits while imposing local costs through:

land acquisition;

biomass plantations;

pipelines;

storage facilities;

industrial infrastructure; and

increased traffic.

Therefore, the legal framework should include:

public participation;

consultation;

environmental justice;

compensation;

community benefits;

grievance mechanisms; and

access to environmental information.

Carbon removal should not become a mechanism through which local communities bear environmental risks for the benefit of distant carbon markets.

20. Institutional Architecture

A mature carbon-negative electricity governance system could involve:

The principal governance objective should be institutional coordination.

21. Proposed Legal Framework for India

India could develop a dedicated Carbon-Negative Electricity Regulation Framework containing the following elements:

1. Statutory definition

Define "carbon-negative electricity generation" according to verified life-cycle atmospheric impact.

2. Eligibility criteria

Specify minimum requirements for:

capture efficiency;

biomass sustainability;

storage permanence;

monitoring;

verification; and

net removals.

3. Integrated permitting

Create a coordinated approval mechanism for:

generation + CCS + transport + storage + environmental impacts.

4. Carbon-removal registry

Every verified tonne should receive a unique identification number.

5. Anti-double-counting provisions

A removal should be credited only once.

6. Long-term liability

Operators should provide:

insurance;

financial security;

remediation funds; or

other guarantees.

7. Periodic verification

Carbon-negative status should not be permanent merely because it was established at commissioning.

8. Public participation

Affected communities should receive information concerning:

carbon-storage risks;

environmental impacts;

biomass sourcing;

monitoring results; and

emergency procedures.

22. Key Legal Principles Emerging from the Case Law

The cases discussed above suggest several principles relevant to future carbon-negative electricity governance:

Principle 1: Climate benefits do not eliminate environmental regulation.

Dahanu and the Indian environmental-clearance jurisprudence demonstrate the continuing importance of environmental safeguards. (Indian Kanoon)

Principle 2: CCS does not automatically make electricity generation climate-neutral.

Boswell demonstrates the need to assess remaining greenhouse-gas emissions even where CCS is proposed. (BAILII)

Principle 3: Climate impacts can be legally relevant to infrastructure assessment.

Finch demonstrates the importance of examining greenhouse-gas consequences within environmental assessment where the legal framework requires it. (BAILII)

Principle 4: Electricity regulators have an increasing role in carbon governance.

Ridhima Pandey is particularly significant because the Supreme Court directed coordination involving the CEA, CERC and Ministry of Power concerning reduction of carbon emissions from power generation. (Indian Kanoon)

Principle 5: Public support must operate through legally defined criteria.

Drax Power illustrates judicial scrutiny of governmental decisions concerning support for low-carbon electricity generation. (BAILII)

23. Conclusion

Governance of carbon-negative electricity generation represents a transition from conventional electricity regulation toward an integrated system of energy law, environmental law, carbon accounting, land governance, geological regulation and climate law.

The central legal problem is not simply whether a power plant captures CO₂. The crucial question is whether the entire electricity-generation system produces a verifiable, durable and additional atmospheric carbon removal after all relevant emissions have been accounted for.

The emerging jurisprudence is particularly instructive. Indian cases such as Dahanu, Vanashakti, M.C. Mehta, and Ridhima Pandey, together with comparative UK decisions such as ClientEarth, Boswell, Finch, and Drax, demonstrate the importance of environmental assessment, regulatory legality, emissions accounting, institutional coordination and judicial review. (Indian Kanoon)

Ultimately, a robust legal framework for carbon-negative electricity should rest on five pillars:

scientifically credible carbon accounting + sustainable feedstocks + secure geological storage + independent MRV + clear long-term liability.

Without these safeguards, "carbon negative" could become merely a regulatory label rather than a demonstrable environmental outcome.