What a gift that scientists based in our coastal community are studying the conditions under which kelp forests can thrive (“Seeing the Kelp Amid the Forest at UC Santa Barbara”). I’m all for better ice cream and better toothpaste to clean my teeth afterward. But what has me so enthusiastic about kelp is its ability to sequester massive amounts of excess carbon dioxide that humans have released into the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
The report also highlights that CDR must not be a substitute for deep emissions reductions (see the moral hazard argument). Rather, it can play a complementary role in further reducing emissions in the near-term, counterbalancing emissions from hard-to-transition sectors (like aviation), and achieving net-negative emissions in the long-term. The report also notes that we must urgently phase out fossil fuels in order to sustain life on this planet.
A range of CDR solutions will be needed
Notably, the report mentions various solutions that could remove CO2, all of which we will be featuring in our Solution Series. Like our Solution Series, the report highlights how options differ from one another based on processes, timescales for durability, cost, risks and impacts, co-benefits, trade offs and spillover effects, and the technology readiness level. Constraints on deploying these methods will include the rate of emissions reductions, political preferences, and social acceptability.
CDR implementation requires social acceptance and equity considerations
Building social acceptance of a CDR solution requires:
research and education on the potential climate and non-climate risks and benefits of implementation,
building trust with stakeholders and local communities, and
showcasing the way CDR works in tandem with mitigation, rather than detracting from it.
These factors emphasize the need for procedural justice processes and distributive justice to remain central to any project design or implementation. These principles and processes have been baked into climate restoration through the addition of our fourth pillar of Equity.
To promote distributive justice, local and regional CDR projects will need to consider air and water quality, impacts on human health, energy needs, land-use, and ecological integrity to ensure that the burdens of these projects are equitably distributed. To promote procedural justice, implementers will need to engage with local communities to ensure the scale up of CDR is done responsibly. The report confirms the importance of bottom-up and community-driven strategies for equitable carbon removal projects.
Finally, the report emphasizes that the engagement of civil society organizations and the public will be important in shaping CDR policy and deployment. This confirms the approach we have taken at the Foundation for Climate Restoration through our Local Chapters Program and Youth Leaders for Climate Restoration Program to engage with a wide array of stakeholders and mobilize the public. Deploying CDR at the gigaton scale will require that the global community demonstrate that climate restoration is the future we want. Now is the time for us to partner together to educate, advocate, and build the ecosystem needed to create a habitable planet for each other and future generations.
Prominent Liberian youth climate activist, Ezekiel Nyanfor and his team mate, Kadiatu A. Sheriff have been selected as recipients for the first-ever Youth Leaders for Climate Restoration (YL4CR) Innovator Award 2021.
Aiyesha Swarnn, Youth Leader for Climate Restoration
Climate change has always been a pressing issue since the 1980s, yet it is only now that it is being taken more seriously by governments and high-ranking politicians around the world. But is it enough?
On a bad day, I can’t fight the feelings of frustration and anxiety about the climate catastrophe humans have brought about. Even on my good days, I know that the big polluters are still running amok.
The Foundation for Climate Restoration (F4CR) is one institution focused on emerging CDR companies that hold the potential for creating breakthrough technologies capable of bringing atmospheric carbon concentration levels down to safer levels. I have found F4CR to be a great resource for identifying nascent CDR companies that have great potential. Another excellent source of information on CDR companies is OpenAir Collective, which offers webinars led by entrepreneurs working on innovative CDR ideas.
The New IPCC Report: Prepare Now for the Future that Lies Ahead
By Delaney Pues
“Technology-led, market-led or state-led transitions aimed at meeting Paris Agreement and SDGs may fail without integrating dimensions of social justice and addressing the social and political exclusion that prevent the disadvantaged from accessing such improvements and increasing their incomes.” (1)
On February 28, the IPCC Working Group II report was released. With a particular focus on “transformation and system transitions in energy; land, ocean, coastal and freshwater ecosystems; urban, rural and infrastructure; and industry and society,” it also assesses “economic and non-economic losses and damages.” Working Group II focuses on the vulnerability of socio-economic and natural systems to climate change, negative and positive consequences of climate change, and options for adapting to it. (2)
Undoubtedly, the report serves as another wake-up call to mobilize the masses towards transformative and immediate action. It reaffirms that “the ambitious temperature targets agreed upon in Paris in 2015 will require at least some carbon dioxide removal (CDR), i.e. all 1.5°C pathways feature annual removals at Gigaton level.” (3) However, it also warns of risks including maladaptation, adverse side effects, and tradeoffs associated with reliance on CDR. While showcasing the increasing negative impacts of burning fossil fuels on both people and the planet, it acknowledges how these impacts disproportionately burden already disadvantaged groups: “Vulnerability of ecosystems and people to climate change differs substantially among and within regions (very high confidence), 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.” (4)
The report looks at placing an emphasis on Indigenous and local knowledge to “ensure that climate action not only does not cause further harm, but also addresses historical injustices committed against Indigenous Peoples and other marginalized social groups.” This affirms F4CR’s recent addition of equity as the fourth criteria to climate restoration. Learn more about this in the F4CR White Paper, and stay tuned as we dig deeper in our upcoming Solution Series, which launches in April.
As we highlighted last year, we’re not waiting for the IPCC to call for climate restoration, as it is a scientific and political goal. With CDR being one of the main pathways towards any potential for a restored climate, we did look for the most up-to-date research, science, and data within the report. There were mentions of negative-emission technologies, carbon sequestration, and carbon removals. These solutions remove and/or store carbon dioxide somewhere other than the atmosphere, which is critical given that atmospheric carbon is what continues to warm our planet.
A key element of climate restoration is nature-based solutions that include reforestation, coastal blue carbon, regenerative agriculture, and soil carbon sequestration practices. The report highlights the increasingly harmful environmental impacts of climate change, such as wildfires and natural disasters, which will be continually at odds with nature-based solutions. Wildfires account for “up to one-third of annual average ecosystem carbon emissions, while major fire seasons can emit up to two-thirds of global ecosystem carbon emissions.” (5)
When thinking about our criteria of scalability and permanence, it’s increasingly clear that focusing on nature-based solutions has a number of limitations and risks. For example, the storage capacity of large-scale afforestation and soil carbon sequestration techniques levels off over time, and the permanence of these solutions is contingent upon the maintenance of the area, (6) which will become increasingly difficult as climate change-driven disturbances fuel wildfire, drought, and insects. (7)
Technology-based solutions
Direct air capture (DAC) and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) are emphasized as technology-based solutions. These approaches were showcased for both their potential and their limitations, depending on associated incentives, policies, and governance that guide their deployment.
One estimate suggested, “Negative-emission technologies, such as direct air capture (DAC) of CO2, could reduce emissions up to 3GtCO2/year by 2035, equivalent to 7% of 2019 global emissions. However, they can increase net water consumption by 35 km3/year in 2050 (Fuhrman et al., 2020) under the low-overshoot emissions scenario” while “[d]eveloping countries are projected to witness the highest increase in future energy demand under 2°C global warming leading to significant increases in water use for energy production.” (8)
Each solution brings its own set of risks, uncertainties, and unforeseen consequences, especially at the scale needed to restore the climate. The community also has a role in educating and advocating for approaches to implementation that address deeply entrenched inequities, consider potential benefits and/or consequences, and prioritize the robust research and development needed to bring technologies to restoration-scale deployment.
What’s next?
While the focus on CDR was minimal in comparison to previous reports, it is not to say that we should cease all planning, research, development, and mobilization of these technologies. As mentioned, Working Group II focused on climate vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation, but Working Group III, which focuses on climate change mitigation, assessing methods for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and removing greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere, will release their contribution in April 2022. (9)
This report showed that we must minimize risks while maximizing both climate and non-climate benefits in accordance with mitigation strategies. Stopping emissions as soon as possible will lead to less CO2 in the atmosphere and prevent us from continually increasing the scale of removal needed to reach pre-industrial levels of CO2.
Additionally, F4CR Local Chapter volunteers and Youth Leaders for Climate Restoration must advocate for the research and development of potential solutions while collaborating with groups that are ensuring the phase-out of fossil fuels. Failing to prepare for the future and not meeting the Paris Agreement targets places a risk on both people and the environment to rely on underdeveloped and potentially risky climate interventions. We must act now to prepare for the future that lies ahead.
_________________
Endnotes
(1) IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.
(3) IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.
(4) IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.
(5) IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.
(6) Buck, H. J. (2020). After Geoengineering: Climate tragedy, repair, and restoration. Verso.
(7) Anderegg, W. R. L., Chegwidden, O. S., Badgley, G., Trugman, A. T., Cullenward, D., Abatzoglou, J. T., Hicke, J. A., Freeman, J., & Hamman, J. J. (2021). Climate risks to carbon sequestration in US forests. BioRxiv, 2021.05.11.443688. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.11.443688
(8) IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.
Like a seed sows the roots of a tree, so does one individual idea ripple through society. Art breeds ideas at exponential rates. With this in mind, I made “Mona” to inspire others to live sustainably — “Mona” (abbreviated ‘Mother Nature’) is the leading single from About You’s upcoming album and is a personification of the climate crisis.
There are points in history when collective consciousness shifts, most often out of necessity. Like the most recent pandemic, the dawn of the internet, and when electricity was invented — society at-large shifts to embrace change. Our next big societal shift will be due to the effects of climate change and its impact on our food supply, the water we drink, the air we breathe, and places we can live. The once symbiotic relationship between humankind and Mother Nature is now completely out of balance.
Our film “Mona” aims to entice the audience through sensual and seductive imagery — to engage with the true narrative of our story: humankind’s apathetic abuse of the earth. The story is depicted through a human relationship between two people: Mona (Mother Nature) and Mortal (Man’s Ego). Throughout the song and film, Mortal’s abuse and lack of concern slowly seals his fate. An unsustainable relationship ultimately leaves Mona as the last one standing. By telling this story, we seek a deeper understanding of our own relationship with Mother Earth.
I chose music and film as a medium to convey this message because at the heart of present-day culture are those two art forms. Culture informs community, and community creates our future. This song and film is for the collective culture. I don’t think “Mona” will be the one thing that changes everyone’s mind, nor do I think any one piece of art can do that. But as a collective of pieces, informing culture, informing our treatment of the planet, every contribution counts and “Mona” is mine.
Check out the one-on-one interview with Max Poscente and F4CR Director of Donor Relations, Delaney Pues, here.
“Mona”, the single, is set to release on April 6, 2022, and the film set to music releases on Earth Day, April 22. In partnership with the Foundation for Climate Restoration, a portion of all proceeds will be donated to support the climate restoration movement. Please donate today.
The world today faces a mounting environmental crisis. Rising levels of CO2 are leading to global warming, the acidification of our oceans, and the destruction of ecosystems worldwide. Worse yet, these changes have led to feedback mechanisms that are making the situation worse. In short, Climate Change constitutes an existential threat that demands action.
The extent of Climate Change and the dangers it poses are regularly cataloged by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This United Nations body was created to provide policymakers with regular scientific assessments, notify them of the implications for future changes, and recommend adaptation and mitigating options.
But is this enough? Adaptation and mitigation mean focusing on limiting the extent of the damage and dealing with whatever comes our way. In response, there is a growing movement to introduce a third priority to Climate Change action – restoration. Rather than merely limiting or absorbing the damage, we should reverse it.
