Accounts of the fair distribution of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions rights have mostly advocated emissions sufficientarianism (a right to subsistence emissions) or emissions egalitarianism. There are well known criticisms of either position and more generally, the distribution of emissions rights altogether. This paper assumes at the outset that it unproblematic to talk about the distribution of GHG emissions rights and considers what the impact of negative emissions technologies might have on our understanding of a fair distribution. Negative emissions technologies are those that can increase global carbon sink capacity. This paper argues that if negative emissions technologies become technically viable and safe, then emissions prioritarianism should be adopted. Each state should have a basic emissions quota, and those that developed and used negative emissions technologies should have their emissions quota increased, proportional to the increase in sink capacity that the technology provides. However, such a state’s quota should increase by allow a proportion: the remainder should be distributed among all states in order to raise their basic emissions quota. This reflects the differential capacities of each state to develop and use such technologies and strikes a balance between the idea that the global climate system isa common concern of human kind and the idea that the distribution of sinks is territorialised, rather than all being common property.
