Delaney Pues, Director of Solutions, Equity & Stewardship
Climate change is a universal problem that has already and will continue to be felt earliest and hardest by those individuals with the least means to confront the intersectional crises it exacerbates and whose actions contributed the least to the problem. As stated in the 2022 IPCC Report, “Vulnerability of ecosystems and people to climate change differs substantially among and within regions, driven by patterns of intersecting socio-economic development, unsustainable ocean and land use, inequity, marginalization, historical and ongoing patterns of inequity such as colonialism, and governance.”[2] While solutions to the climate crisis have the potential to remediate these problems, their implementation also has the potential to threaten the livelihoods of climate vulnerable populations and nearby communities if not addressed in a way that considers patterns of inequity.
Delaney Pues, Director of Solutions, Equity & Stewardship
One of the world’s best-kept secrets to sustaining life on this planet has been right under our feet. As practiced by communities of color for thousands of years, regenerative agriculture has risen to popularity again, and this time as a potential climate solution. The IPCC released a series of alarming reports, revealing that our food systems contribute to an estimated 21% to 37% of total greenhouse gas emissions. These emissions stem from agriculture and land use, storage, transport, packaging, processing, retail, and consumption.
So it’s not surprising that climate conversations around the world are focusing on agriculture and soil. But is there potential to reverse climate change through soil carbon sequestration and regenerative agriculture?
The EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants was a big setback for climate goals. The politicization of the Supreme Court and its recent decision to hamstring the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions is a big step in the wrong direction. GreenTV’s Betsy Rosenberg interviews Rick Wayman, the CEO of the Foundation for Climate Restoration, says it was not a fatal blow for efforts to keep warming below two degrees thanks to promising new technology capable of removing carbon from the atmosphere.
This summer, be sure to stay on top of all the hottest trends. Climate restoration is the new net-zero emissions! Zero warming is the new 1.5°! And, most importantly, greenhouse gas removal (GGR) is the new carbon dioxide removal (CDR).
Is your climate action portfolio (or closet?) full of CDR? Don’t worry! Your well-constructed CDR ensembles will match perfectly with new GGR styles.
Why the shift to GGR?
It’s widely accepted that carbon dioxide is the most important greenhouse gas (GHG) to address in order to avert a climate catastrophe, but it’s far from the only one. In particular, the scientific community has been increasingly concerned about atmospheric methane levels given that methane, while relatively short-lived in our atmosphere, has over 84 times the heat-trapping power of CO2 over a 20-year period. Research indicates that atmospheric methane is responsible for about one-third of radiative forcing (warming) from greenhouse gases.
Methane sources
Atmospheric methane comes from both manmade and natural sources. The main sources of methane emissions from human activity are agriculture (especially cattle and rice paddies), fossil fuels (extraction, transport, and use), and the waste sector (landfills, municipal waste, etc.). Fossil methane is emitted from coal mines, fracking, gas leaks and venting of oil wells. Together, fossil fuels and agriculture account for about 60% of methane emissions. Burning biomass, whether naturally or from human activity, also contributes moderately to methane emissions.
Natural sources of atmospheric methane account for the remaining 40%. But that “natural” source of methane is at risk of rising fast. A massive quantity of methane is stored beneath Arctic ice and permafrost, which release the gas as they melt, and tropical swamps also appear to be a growing source of “natural” methane as the planet warms. In addition, recent research suggests climate-induced forest fires may be depleting the atmosphere of the hydroyxl radical, which is a key chemical in the Earth’s atmosphere that helps break down methane into less potent greenhouse gases, contributing to methane’s longer lived residence in the atmosphere. As our climate continues to warm, we are seeing a steep increase in methane emissions, a possible vicious cycle where methane’s warming causes natural methane releases and warming, which in turn releases yet more methane.
Methane’s role in climate restoration
Climate restoration focuses on restoring safe and healthy atmospheric conditions, and methane could have an outsized impact on getting us there. Just as methane emissions can accelerate warming, its removal can make a major difference in reversing climate change. While methane removal solutions are still in their infancy, a growing number of scientists and policymakers are realizing that greenhouse gas removal can and should help mitigate warming. Watch this presentation from COP26 in Glasgow hosted by the European Commission and Methane Action for more information on why we need to both cut methane emissions and scale up methane removal.
How does this shift affect CDR efforts?
Just as working on CDR does not detract from the importance or attention to CO2 emissions reduction, GGR will not detract from CDR, nor from the necessary emissions reductions of other GHGs (such as methane, nitrous oxide, and halogenated gases). Rather, it will broaden the tent under which CDR sits, allowing for a larger and more powerful portfolio of climate-fixing solutions. For those of you following the work of the Foundation for Climate Restoration (F4CR), you’ll see us begin to use GGR in place of CDR in our communications. Much of our work will still center around awareness and advocacy for CDR, but with this new broader focus, we will begin bringing other GGR approaches into the fold.
Where can I learn more?
F4CR will be providing information and updates to our community as our GGR work expands. You can also visit methaneaction.org for more information.
Solution Series: Soil Carbon Practices
At F4CR, we’re often asked, “What are the solutions that can restore the climate?” In the coming months, we will attempt to answer this question (and more!) as they relate to nine categories of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) solutions. In this third month of our Solution Series, we examine the potential of soil carbon practices to contribute to climate restoration. Our new soil carbon white paper looks in greater detail at this solution’s climate restoration potential in terms of durability, financeability, scalability, and equity. This blog post gives a brief overview of some key points.
What are soil carbon sequestration and regenerative agriculture?
Soil carbon sequestration is a natural process where CO2 is captured by plants via photosynthesis and then stored as carbon in the plant’s leaves, stems, and roots.
Regenerative agriculture refers to processes and outcomes related to increasing soil carbon content and health. Processes include integrating crops and animals, using no-till agriculture, stopping or reducing the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, and planting cover crops. Outcomes include enhancing carbon sequestration, improving soil health, increasing biodiversity, improving water resources, and increasing the social and economic wellbeing of communities.
Collectively, we refer to these as soil carbon practices.
Can soil carbon practices restore the climate?
Soil carbon practices vary in their durability, financeability, scalability, and equity. Each of these factors plays a key role in soil carbon’s capacity to contribute to climate restoration.
As a result, a considerable share of the carbon burden depends on such variables, which we describe below.
Durability: The timescale for carbon soil sequestration depends on the storage method used and the continuation of carbon-enhancing practices. On the high end, soils can store carbon for hundreds of thousands of years, and on the low end, captured carbon can be released immediately if practices are not maintained (e.g., if a farmer starts tilling soil that had previously been managed with no-till practices).
Scalability: Global estimates of the maximum scale of soil carbon sequestration range from 1 to 22 Gt annually by 2050. There are many factors determining the scale soil carbon practices can reach, and measuring the amount of carbon stored in soils over time is a major obstacle to refining these estimates. Further research is needed to learn which practices are most effective at boosting soil carbon, as well as measuring, reporting, and verifying the results.
Financeability: Depending on physical and socio-economic conditions, costs can range from $45 to $100/tCO2. Funding for these practices can come from federal and state governments, carbon markets, and the private sector.
Equity: The regenerative agriculture and soil carbon movement will need a reckoning before it can be implemented equitably on a global scale. These techniques have been practiced by BIPOC communities for generations, but past policies prevented them from acquiring government support and secure land tenure. Therefore, it is essential that these communities not only be engaged in the work of scaling up the processes, but also receive tangible benefits and reparations for past injustices.
Interested in learning more about soil carbon practices? Download our Soil Carbon White Paper and register for our soil carbon expert panel on Tuesday, June 28 at 1:00 pm Pacific.
The Most Effective Way To Fight Climate Change
According to an article in The Atlantic, “Climate-concerned donors should focus on helping to pass climate policy, not offset their emissions,” Economist Daniel Stern argues that supporting advocacy groups for climate policy is ten times more effective than giving to organizations that are working directly on emissions reduction.
Photo by Katie Rodriguez on Unsplash
Why support advocacy?
While reducing emissions is a critical piece of the climate puzzle, it is not the whole picture. Long past are the days where we could cut down our CO2 emissions and declare a win. We have reached disastrous levels of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. The latest IPCC report unequivocally states that carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies are now critical to staying below 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming — but even 1.5 degrees of warming is still likely unsafe. At such a level, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere would be around 460 parts per million (ppm), an increase from the ~419 ppm we are experiencing today, according to Peter Fiekowsky, author of Climate Restoration: The Only Future That Will Sustain The Human Race.
Climate advocacy encourages the adoption of robust policies that can have a greater impact than simply reducing emissions in any one sector.
Opportunities for advocacy to advance climate restoration
One sector where policy can have an exponential impact on reducing emissions and shifting current industry practices is the construction industry. To date, effective advocacy has prompted state legislators to implement numerous policies limiting the amount of CO2 emitted from concrete use in construction projects.
Portland cement, also known as clinker, is a key ingredient in concrete. According to the BBC, clinker was responsible for “2.2 billion tonnes of CO2 — equivalent to 8% of the world’s total [emissions]. More than half of that came from the calcination process.” When combined with emissions from thermal combustion, 90% of emissions from the concrete industry can be attributed to the production of clinker alone.
Thanks to advocacy efforts, U.S. state policies have been adopted with astounding speed to address this big emission contributor. There are laws that require that CO2 be sequestered within concrete, and additional laws that require the concrete industry to reduce its overall carbon footprint.
Advocacy for these types of impactful policies has incredible potential given that local, state, and national governments procure a staggering amount of concrete each year. Convincing governments to require low-carbon or carbon-negative concrete in infrastructure projects can have a significant impact on global CO2 levels in a relatively short period of time.
Contribute to F4CR’s Local Chapters
The Foundation for Climate Restoration’s Local Chapter program focuses on achieving these types of changes. Our volunteers are located in strategic areas around the United States, and the world, and are engaged in dialogue with elected officials who are positioned to adopt climate-positive policies.
Your financial contribution to the Foundation for Climate Restoration will help us to scale our Local Chapter network. The clock is ticking for humanity to dramatically reduce carbon emissions and remove vast amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. F4CR Local Chapters’ early successes in promoting climate restoration policies on the state level shows that significant change can indeed happen in a short period of time.
Solution Series: Forest Carbon Practices
At F4CR, we’re often asked, “What are the solutions that can restore the climate?” In the coming months, we will attempt to answer this question (and more!) as they relate to nine categories of CDR solutions. In month 2 of our Solution Series, we examine the potential of forest carbon practices to contribute to climate restoration. Our recently released forest carbon white paper looks in greater detail at forest carbon practices’ climate restoration potential in terms of durability, financeability, scalability, and equity. This blog post gives a brief overview of some key points.
What are forest carbon practices?
Forest carbon practices encompass afforestation, reforestation, improved forest management, and sustainable forest management practices. These practices each take a slightly different approach to increasing the amount of CO2 absorbed by and stored in forests.
Afforestation is the process by which trees are planted in an area that has not been inhabited by trees for at least 50 years.
Reforestation involves replanting trees in an area that recently housed trees.
Improved forest management refers to the active modification of forestry practices to promote greater forest biomass and carbon storage.
Sustainable forest management aims to maintain and enhance the economic, social and environmental values of all forests for the benefit of present and future generations.
Can forest carbon practices restore the climate?
Forest carbon practices vary in their durability, financeability, scalability, and equity. These practices undoubtedly have a role to play in climate restoration, but their capacity to shoulder a considerable share of the carbon burden depends on many variables.
Durability: Biological CDR approaches like forest carbon practices work to both absorb carbon and store it. However, the durability of storage depends largely on the way forests are managed. For example, improved forest management can include regulating areas where logging occurs, protecting some areas from logging, and incorporating silvicultural practices to improve growth. Improved and sustainable forest management can also increase forests’ resilience to climate change impacts like wildfires and pests that can cause widespread tree death and release of carbon. If all goes well, trees can durably store carbon, but it is less certain and harder to measure than many other approaches.
Financeability: Forest carbon practices are relatively inexpensive, and more funding already exists for these initiatives than for most other CDR approaches. Some forest carbon practices can be free to implement, like allowing forests to regenerate naturally. Others can cost upwards of $50/ton of CO2, like afforestation in areas where significant land preparation is needed (e.g., draining a bog to plant trees).
Scalability: One of the key constraints in scaling forest carbon practices is the limited supply of land. Not all land is suitable for forests, much of our land area is needed for agriculture, and many areas store more carbon through existing ecosystems (e.g., peat bogs) than they would if they were converted into forests. Even if all available and appropriate land were converted to forests, it’s unlikely that forests could reach 10 Gt CO2 removal per year.
Equity: Forest carbon practices can be implemented equitably, but doing so requires careful consideration of risks and participation of potentially impacted communities. In particular, impacted communities should be at the decision-making table when new projects are being planned, and special care should be taken to ensure that benefits of forests — like creating local jobs and preventing erosion — are distributed equitably. When possible, land for forests should be returned to the Indigenous communities who originally held them, as they have been shown to outperform government agencies and conservation organizations in supporting biodiversity, sequestering carbon, and generating other ecological benefits on their land.
It was a great pleasure and honor to have been asked by the Foundation for Climate Restoration to moderate an expert panel on Direct Air Capture (DAC) at the end of April as part of the Foundation’s Solution Series.
Last weekend, I had the opportunity to participate in this year’s EarthX Convention in Dallas. Since 2011, EarthX has hosted annual events that represent the largest Earth Day gatherings in the U.S. These events create environmental awareness and invite the public to make sustainability a part of their everyday lives. The Expo allows businesses, government agencies, and nonprofits to showcase their initiatives and their positive impact on the environment.
Delaney Pues (seated), F4CR’s Director of Solutions, Equity & Stewardship, talks about climate restoration with a visitor at the EarthX Expo
In addition to musical performances, innovative displays, panel discussions, and face painting for kids, the weekend was full of dynamic conversations and extensive networking opportunities. My top takeaway from the busy weekend was that we ARE restoring the climate.
The words “climate restoration” may not have always been mentioned, and the means by which we can return the planet to a healthy climate may differ, but it was very clear. Many people ARE working in many ways to restore the climate to healthy levels of carbon.
I was struck by the widespread understanding that we have far too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and need to work on bringing it down to safer levels as soon as possible.
With a primarily local audience, it is no surprise that natural solutions, including regenerative agriculture, reforestation, and coastal preservation, were shared as favored techniques to restore the climate. Notably, there was also some hesitancy around some of the technological solutions in development, but after discussion of testing, researching, and the undeniable need for guardrails, I found that many attendees left our Expo booth more informed about the broad array of solutions available to us.
I appreciated the opportunity to listen and speak to an audience of interested climate activists that brought unique personal stories to support their passion to reverse the negative impacts climate change has had on the planet. At the Foundation for Climate Restoration, we often discuss the need for inclusivity, diversity, and the centering of underrepresented communities, and EarthX helped uncover the areas we need to consider and improve upon.
Delaney Pues (seated), F4CR’s Director of Solutions, Equity & Stewardship, talks about climate restoration with a visitor at the EarthX Expo
Following a presentation from F4CR’s Founder, Peter Fiekowsky, who discussed his new book, I met a lovely woman who was struck by the message of climate restoration. She equated learning about our movement to the joy of tending to her personal garden, where she revives the native plants and observes the local insects that inhabit her yard. She understands her backyard joy is her small part in restoring the natural world. After showing me pictures of her yard and her favorite bugs, she went on to share that this thriving yard is located at her new home — a home she established with her family after her previous home was destroyed by Hurricane Harvey. Her positivity and hope despite the most adverse circumstances really hit home for me. The natural disaster turned her life upside down, yet she still looks to the natural world to spark joy and bring restoration to her life.
Her story embodies what the climate restoration movement is all about: through positivity and individual action, we all have a role to play to restore the climate.
This weekend provided me an exceptional opportunity to engage with a large and passionate group that brought this important perspective to the discussion. It wasn’t just local Dallas citizens that provided a view that the natural world is critical to climate restoration. Regional academics, local policymakers, international NGOs, and youth groups all shared their commitments to preserving and conserving the natural world, and they widely understood the promise and benefits of climate restoration.
I look forward to continuing to embrace conversations and learning about the many ways we can ensure that future generations on this planet thrive. I left the weekend recognizing that storytelling and unique perspectives are going to really advance our hopeful message and encourage more people to act in their own way. Together, we ARE restoring the planet.
