1
00:00:04,900 --> 00:00:06,400
You're listening to the 
reversing climate change, 

2
00:00:06,400 --> 00:00:09,500
podcast by the team at Nori. 
The carbon removal Marketplace. 

3
00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:12,100
This is a show about the 
innovators and entrepreneurs 

4
00:00:12,100 --> 00:00:14,100
developing solutions to climate 
change. 

5
00:00:16,400 --> 00:00:18,400
Hello and welcome to the 
reversing climate change 

6
00:00:18,400 --> 00:00:20,600
podcast. 
I'm Ross Kenyan I'm the creative

7
00:00:20,600 --> 00:00:22,900
editor at Nori's carbon removal 
Marketplace. 

8
00:00:23,100 --> 00:00:26,200
Today, I have with me Eli 
Mitchell, Larson, researcher and

9
00:00:26,200 --> 00:00:29,800
PhD candidate at the University 
of Oxford and the corresponding,

10
00:00:29,800 --> 00:00:32,400
oh, Author of The Oxford 
offsetting principles advisor to

11
00:00:32,400 --> 00:00:35,400
carbon direct, and he is leading
the scope and group for a new 

12
00:00:35,400 --> 00:00:38,200
carbon removal, advocacy 
organization in Europe, a 

13
00:00:38,200 --> 00:00:40,700
parallel to carbon 180, welcome 
to the show. 

14
00:00:40,700 --> 00:00:45,100
You lie, thanks Ross, good to be
here, so happy to have met you. 

15
00:00:45,200 --> 00:00:47,600
So happy to be engaging with 
your ideas, the Oxford, 

16
00:00:47,600 --> 00:00:50,400
offsetting principles made a big
splash, and I've been thinking 

17
00:00:50,400 --> 00:00:53,300
about them quite a lot lately. 
So I'm happy to have a chance to

18
00:00:53,300 --> 00:00:56,700
dive in more fully here. 
How did you get involved in 

19
00:00:56,700 --> 00:00:59,800
their composition? 
What led to them and why you 

20
00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:02,200
Personally, Eli. 
What how did your career and you

21
00:01:02,200 --> 00:01:04,000
up here, thanks. 
Yeah, sure. 

22
00:01:04,000 --> 00:01:07,300
So, the ox are principles for 
NetZero aligned carbon 

23
00:01:07,300 --> 00:01:10,000
offsetting which is a bit of a 
mouthful, but we like to belabor

24
00:01:10,000 --> 00:01:12,900
the title because it really is 
about that NetZero alignment 

25
00:01:12,900 --> 00:01:16,000
piece, not so much about the 
offsets themselves was a 

26
00:01:16,008 --> 00:01:19,700
document that was initiated by 
been Caldecott at the University

27
00:01:19,700 --> 00:01:21,900
of Oxford. 
And his goal was really to bring

28
00:01:21,900 --> 00:01:24,700
people together around this 
issue because everybody is 

29
00:01:24,700 --> 00:01:27,100
making NetZero claims. 
I often think that we've just 

30
00:01:27,100 --> 00:01:29,500
passed through the sort of 
honeymoon phase where everybody 

31
00:01:29,500 --> 00:01:31,500
makes it. 
At zero claim and says mission 

32
00:01:31,500 --> 00:01:33,100
accomplished. 
But now we're starting to enter 

33
00:01:33,100 --> 00:01:36,600
into the execution phase where, 
you know, CFOs sustainability 

34
00:01:36,600 --> 00:01:39,600
officers, mayors of towns, 
whatever it may be, they're 

35
00:01:39,600 --> 00:01:41,100
starting to realize. 
Oh shoot. 

36
00:01:41,100 --> 00:01:43,500
We've got to actually do this 
and we're going to need to buy 

37
00:01:43,500 --> 00:01:45,400
carbon credits. 
Or carbon offsets. 

38
00:01:45,800 --> 00:01:49,000
How do we do that in a way that 
allows us to make the claim I 

39
00:01:49,000 --> 00:01:50,700
have achieved? 
Net zero emissions. 

40
00:01:50,700 --> 00:01:53,900
It's all about that claim. 
And so what been Caldecott and 

41
00:01:53,900 --> 00:01:56,800
others did Steve Smith's they 
brought together a group of 

42
00:01:56,800 --> 00:01:59,500
academics at Oxford who covered 
a lot of different areas. 

43
00:01:59,500 --> 00:02:02,300
So people Who had deep 
experience of nature based 

44
00:02:02,300 --> 00:02:04,400
Solutions like you had been 
doing while he and Natalie said,

45
00:02:04,400 --> 00:02:06,900
in people that had more 
experience on the governance 

46
00:02:06,900 --> 00:02:09,000
issues. 
The the economic pieces that 

47
00:02:09,000 --> 00:02:12,400
sort of geophysics of climate 
change itself, bringing them all

48
00:02:12,400 --> 00:02:16,100
together and see if with such a 
diverse group of folks, we could

49
00:02:16,100 --> 00:02:18,800
come to a consensus around. 
What does NetZero aligned 

50
00:02:18,800 --> 00:02:21,900
offsetting look like? 
And how can we make that useful 

51
00:02:22,100 --> 00:02:23,900
to all the people that are out 
there making at your 

52
00:02:23,900 --> 00:02:26,700
commitments? 
In terms of me specifically, I 

53
00:02:26,700 --> 00:02:29,700
started out in geology, 
geophysics and paleo climates, 

54
00:02:29,700 --> 00:02:32,200
but I ended up going into the 
private sector and doing some 

55
00:02:32,500 --> 00:02:35,300
first, some impact investing at 
New Island capital, and then I 

56
00:02:35,300 --> 00:02:38,300
co ran a start-up in Nepal, 
doing off-grid solar. 

57
00:02:38,800 --> 00:02:41,600
And I came to the kind of carbon
management carbon offsetting 

58
00:02:41,700 --> 00:02:43,600
world through a kind of funny 
way. 

59
00:02:43,600 --> 00:02:47,800
I actually helped a charter 
Cruise Company, of all of all 

60
00:02:48,100 --> 00:02:50,600
Industries, execute their carbon
management plan. 

61
00:02:50,600 --> 00:02:53,300
So I was brought in to consult 
for something called the 

62
00:02:53,300 --> 00:02:56,300
Jonathan Coulton cruise to 
actually, you know, help them 

63
00:02:56,300 --> 00:02:58,100
come up with a carbon fund. 
And that's when I really had to 

64
00:02:58,100 --> 00:03:00,900
dive deep into what are called 
Even offsets, you know all the 

65
00:03:00,900 --> 00:03:05,400
way back to George mombi has 
2006 piece around carbon offsets

66
00:03:05,400 --> 00:03:09,200
being indulgences and really 
just tracing the history of how 

67
00:03:09,200 --> 00:03:11,900
that all came about. 
And then it was really my time 

68
00:03:11,900 --> 00:03:15,200
at Oxford working with Professor
miles Allen and others to really

69
00:03:15,200 --> 00:03:18,600
understand these issues from 
atmospheric standpoint and from 

70
00:03:18,600 --> 00:03:20,700
the standpoint of what the 
planet actually needs. 

71
00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:22,700
How can we make carbon offset 
incredible? 

72
00:03:23,100 --> 00:03:27,000
I think we've had more critics 
of offsetting on, then people 

73
00:03:27,000 --> 00:03:29,800
who think that they can be made 
credible. 

74
00:03:29,900 --> 00:03:32,000
Also, I think this is going to 
be a really important Guy saying

75
00:03:32,000 --> 00:03:34,500
discussion. 
I like to say this that Venn 

76
00:03:34,500 --> 00:03:37,400
diagram, where you've got the 
circle of people who want carbon

77
00:03:37,400 --> 00:03:40,800
markets, voluntary, carbon 
offsetting to explode and scale,

78
00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:44,000
and you've got the circle of 
people that are critics of the 

79
00:03:44,000 --> 00:03:46,600
voluntary carbon market. 
And I think I would actually sit

80
00:03:46,600 --> 00:03:49,000
at the overlap of the two. 
I think there's problems with 

81
00:03:49,000 --> 00:03:51,300
the market, but I think we can 
save it. 

82
00:03:51,800 --> 00:03:53,500
We can make it, we can make it 
work. 

83
00:03:54,000 --> 00:03:56,300
Does everyone like and trust you
as the Arbiter? 

84
00:03:56,300 --> 00:03:59,800
Does everyone hate you? 
Well, I definitely. 

85
00:03:59,900 --> 00:04:02,200
They wouldn't consider myself 
the Arbiter. 

86
00:04:02,200 --> 00:04:07,700
I'm definitely trying to be as I
guess diplomatic is as I can be.

87
00:04:07,700 --> 00:04:10,900
And all of us are to make sure 
that we're here to kind of make 

88
00:04:11,300 --> 00:04:14,700
carbon offsetting a means of 
actually achieving real climate 

89
00:04:14,700 --> 00:04:17,800
outcomes and calling it. 
Like it is there's instances 

90
00:04:17,800 --> 00:04:20,399
where maybe carbon offsetting 
isn't the right mechanism to 

91
00:04:20,399 --> 00:04:22,900
support certain practices and 
there's certainly room for all 

92
00:04:22,900 --> 00:04:24,600
solutions and we'll talk about 
that more later in the 

93
00:04:24,600 --> 00:04:26,900
conversation. 
Definitely. 

94
00:04:27,300 --> 00:04:30,400
Well, since you made such a 
point of framing this discussion

95
00:04:30,500 --> 00:04:33,500
around NetZero, I think it might
be most productive to start 

96
00:04:33,500 --> 00:04:35,800
there. 
What exactly is a net zero 

97
00:04:35,800 --> 00:04:38,500
commitment, but our companies 
trying to lock themselves into 

98
00:04:38,500 --> 00:04:40,500
right now. 
Excellent question. 

99
00:04:40,600 --> 00:04:42,500
You're right. 
So I mean I think the useful 

100
00:04:42,500 --> 00:04:46,000
thing is that the concept of Net
Zero essentially has a 

101
00:04:46,000 --> 00:04:48,300
geophysical definition or at 
least it has a definition. 

102
00:04:48,300 --> 00:04:51,300
The ipcc that we can all the 
intergovernmental panel on 

103
00:04:51,300 --> 00:04:53,800
climate change, the ipcc that we
can all agree on. 

104
00:04:53,800 --> 00:04:56,300
And that is a balance of store. 
Dishes in the sink. 

105
00:04:56,300 --> 00:04:59,800
So a balance of emissions 
essentially with carbon removal.

106
00:04:59,800 --> 00:05:03,600
So the nice thing about Net Zero
is that it encompasses a lot of 

107
00:05:03,600 --> 00:05:06,800
sort of different end States. 
You can be Net Zero and be 

108
00:05:06,800 --> 00:05:09,700
emitting no carbon or you can be
Net Zero and be emitting quite a

109
00:05:09,707 --> 00:05:12,800
bit of carbon as long as those 
missions are balanced with 

110
00:05:12,800 --> 00:05:17,100
removals and so when companies 
or entities non-state actors are

111
00:05:17,100 --> 00:05:19,400
committing to NetZero. 
What they're doing is they are 

112
00:05:19,407 --> 00:05:22,800
basically putting themselves in 
line with what we know has to 

113
00:05:22,800 --> 00:05:26,700
happen to stop climate change 
because as a cumulative In CO2 

114
00:05:26,700 --> 00:05:30,000
is just going to keep building 
up and building up and warming 

115
00:05:30,000 --> 00:05:32,800
will continue until we reach Net
Zero and Net Zero can only be 

116
00:05:32,800 --> 00:05:36,800
achieved when many many and 
eventually all sub entities 

117
00:05:36,800 --> 00:05:40,800
countries, cities and companies 
themselves are Net Zero or at 

118
00:05:40,800 --> 00:05:43,700
least collectively our Net. 
Zero is there some difference 

119
00:05:43,700 --> 00:05:46,400
between maybe a decade or more 
ago? 

120
00:05:46,400 --> 00:05:50,200
People were talking about being 
carbon neutral or climate 

121
00:05:50,200 --> 00:05:52,400
neutral. 
What's the relationship between 

122
00:05:52,400 --> 00:05:54,500
all of these? 
A lot of its designs like 

123
00:05:54,500 --> 00:05:56,600
corporate speak and it's hard. 
To know which one is which and 

124
00:05:56,600 --> 00:05:59,300
what it actually refers to. 
I think that's right. 

125
00:05:59,300 --> 00:06:01,900
There's still some ambiguity 
around that. 

126
00:06:01,900 --> 00:06:04,500
There's an effort known as the I
think it's the United Nations. 

127
00:06:04,500 --> 00:06:07,200
Climate Champions and Thomas 
Hale at Oxford. 

128
00:06:07,200 --> 00:06:10,200
Has been really instrumental in 
leading this effort called the 

129
00:06:10,200 --> 00:06:13,500
race, 20 criteria. 
And the idea there is you know 

130
00:06:13,500 --> 00:06:16,600
we love lexicons. 
How can we make sure as 

131
00:06:16,600 --> 00:06:18,700
academics that these individual 
terms are? 

132
00:06:18,700 --> 00:06:21,000
Well, defined and that was 
really around Net Zero. 

133
00:06:21,000 --> 00:06:24,000
So the idea with the race is 
your criteria is, let's have an 

134
00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:27,300
umbrella set of criteria. 
Yeah, that can be applied to all

135
00:06:27,300 --> 00:06:29,600
the other efforts, like the 
science-based targets, 

136
00:06:29,600 --> 00:06:33,200
initiative or other people who 
are opining on what Net Zero 

137
00:06:33,200 --> 00:06:34,700
means. 
Let's make sure they're all 

138
00:06:34,700 --> 00:06:38,500
aligned with this one thing. 
So I think that carbon-neutral I

139
00:06:38,500 --> 00:06:40,900
was surprised to learn that. 
I think it basically means the 

140
00:06:40,900 --> 00:06:43,200
same thing. 
I think it basically also refers

141
00:06:43,200 --> 00:06:45,600
to a balance of sources and 
sinks removals. 

142
00:06:45,800 --> 00:06:48,100
There's some I think usage of 
that term. 

143
00:06:48,100 --> 00:06:51,900
That might mean I think 
colloquially NetZero probably 

144
00:06:51,900 --> 00:06:56,200
means balancing emissions with 
removals whereas carbon Neutral 

145
00:06:56,400 --> 00:06:59,600
perhaps just because it's an 
older and Legacy term seems to 

146
00:06:59,600 --> 00:07:03,700
be a slightly less ambitious 
claim that often refers to. 

147
00:07:03,700 --> 00:07:07,600
Well you use offsets use avoided
emission offset specifically in 

148
00:07:07,600 --> 00:07:09,700
order to achieve carbon 
neutrality. 

149
00:07:09,700 --> 00:07:13,300
So it seems like Net Zero is a 
more ambitious claim but there's

150
00:07:13,300 --> 00:07:15,800
still some ambiguity around what
those specific things mean. 

151
00:07:15,800 --> 00:07:18,200
And I think that's frustrating 
for corporates, but the good 

152
00:07:18,200 --> 00:07:21,700
news is Nazi, era, has a 
definition, and we can be very 

153
00:07:21,700 --> 00:07:25,200
confident of that. 
I want to talk a little bit 

154
00:07:25,200 --> 00:07:27,800
about that. 
Yeah, the famous George mom Bo 

155
00:07:28,000 --> 00:07:32,600
indulgences offsets comparison, 
which if you're talking about 

156
00:07:32,600 --> 00:07:37,200
removals, that sounds like an 
Indulgence that might work and 

157
00:07:37,200 --> 00:07:40,200
be okay. 
If it's just avoided emissions 

158
00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:43,300
or some sort of other type of 
offset, I can see why that would

159
00:07:43,300 --> 00:07:45,500
rub people the wrong way and not
be as accurate. 

160
00:07:45,800 --> 00:07:50,000
But could you say that carbon 
removal under NetZero, might be 

161
00:07:50,000 --> 00:07:52,100
indulgences. 
That actually work, is that 

162
00:07:52,100 --> 00:07:54,000
appropriate? 
It's fascinating. 

163
00:07:54,000 --> 00:07:57,100
I wish I could remember. 
A who to credit this next piece 

164
00:07:57,100 --> 00:07:59,600
to because what I really liked 
about one of the responses to 

165
00:07:59,600 --> 00:08:02,900
the mombi apiece was basically, 
you know, well actually, if you 

166
00:08:02,900 --> 00:08:06,300
believe that the Catholic Church
does have a monopoly on the 

167
00:08:06,300 --> 00:08:09,900
Absolution of sin and if they're
capable of accurately measuring 

168
00:08:10,000 --> 00:08:12,700
who has sinned more and, and 
less than actually offsets were 

169
00:08:12,700 --> 00:08:15,700
an incredibly efficient means of
allocating. 

170
00:08:15,900 --> 00:08:18,400
But no, I'm really joking. 
Because of course they weren't. 

171
00:08:18,400 --> 00:08:20,100
It was a, it was a really 
terrible system. 

172
00:08:20,100 --> 00:08:23,100
And I think what, the point that
Mambo was making or one of the 

173
00:08:23,108 --> 00:08:25,500
many points he was making, and 
it's interesting how so many of 

174
00:08:25,600 --> 00:08:28,800
Critiques of offsetting kind of 
persistent are still relevant 

175
00:08:28,800 --> 00:08:31,700
today and actually I've spoken 
with him and tried to sort of 

176
00:08:31,700 --> 00:08:33,900
see if his his views have 
shifted on that. 

177
00:08:33,900 --> 00:08:36,100
And I think, you know, he really
sticking to his guns because a 

178
00:08:36,100 --> 00:08:38,600
lot of what he says, you know, 
is still valid in some sense and

179
00:08:38,600 --> 00:08:41,400
I think what he's really saying 
there with the Indulgence piece 

180
00:08:41,400 --> 00:08:44,000
is you're paying to get out of 
something, right? 

181
00:08:44,000 --> 00:08:47,100
And that's the idea that every 
offset every carbon credit it's 

182
00:08:47,100 --> 00:08:50,400
a two-sided transaction. 
We always focus on one end of 

183
00:08:50,400 --> 00:08:52,800
it. 
One of the transaction is money 

184
00:08:52,800 --> 00:08:56,500
moves from someone that has 
money to some in Project often 

185
00:08:56,500 --> 00:08:58,700
in the developing World. 
Often doing some really 

186
00:08:58,700 --> 00:09:01,500
excellent work either to 
sequester carbon or to have some

187
00:09:01,500 --> 00:09:05,500
other benefit and that's almost 
invariably a good thing. 

188
00:09:05,500 --> 00:09:07,900
There's obviously concerns 
around that in some instances, 

189
00:09:07,900 --> 00:09:10,500
how that money is spent. 
But you know, that's the side of

190
00:09:10,500 --> 00:09:12,700
the transaction. 
We focus on on the other end of 

191
00:09:12,700 --> 00:09:15,600
the transaction, the offset 
buyer, the person who ends up 

192
00:09:15,600 --> 00:09:18,900
with the carbon credit, they now
have the opportunity to not 

193
00:09:18,900 --> 00:09:23,300
Abate, they get to basically for
go reducing their emissions by 

194
00:09:23,300 --> 00:09:26,200
one ton in exchange, for getting
this carbon I think that's 

195
00:09:26,200 --> 00:09:29,200
really the Crux of his critique,
where if you're paying for 

196
00:09:29,200 --> 00:09:32,200
something that doesn't actually 
have that carbon benefit, then 

197
00:09:32,300 --> 00:09:34,100
you're actually generating more 
emissions. 

198
00:09:34,300 --> 00:09:37,200
Then how do you done nothing and
not bought the offset. 

199
00:09:37,400 --> 00:09:41,500
Now, your point about carbon 
removals being kind of the, the 

200
00:09:41,500 --> 00:09:43,900
ultra effective Indulgence. 
I think it's really that 

201
00:09:44,000 --> 00:09:46,200
actually avoided emissions are 
emission. 

202
00:09:46,200 --> 00:09:48,700
Reductions. 
So, sort of the one side of the 

203
00:09:48,700 --> 00:09:52,800
coin and carbon removal both of 
these techniques are capable of 

204
00:09:52,800 --> 00:09:55,100
generating a carbon credit that 
is legitimate. 

205
00:09:55,200 --> 00:09:57,800
It's just that you need to prove
something called additionality, 

206
00:09:57,800 --> 00:10:00,000
right? 
You need to actually prove that 

207
00:10:00,400 --> 00:10:03,500
but for the purchase of the 
carbon credit, the mitigating 

208
00:10:03,500 --> 00:10:06,400
action, the the reduction of 
carbon or the removal of carbon 

209
00:10:06,400 --> 00:10:09,000
would never have happened and I 
think really what we're saying 

210
00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:11,300
when we're saying that removals 
are superior. 

211
00:10:11,300 --> 00:10:14,200
I mean first of all, removals 
are the only thing you can use 

212
00:10:14,200 --> 00:10:17,500
to balance the residual 
emissions in the end State when 

213
00:10:17,500 --> 00:10:20,900
you're at Net Zero, but in the 
lead-up to that avoided 

214
00:10:20,900 --> 00:10:24,000
emissions or emission reductions
are a bit problematic because 

215
00:10:24,000 --> 00:10:25,400
it's just really hard to prove 
Edition. 

216
00:10:25,600 --> 00:10:29,100
They also permanent sort of 
other criteria that you would 

217
00:10:29,100 --> 00:10:31,200
evaluate have issues too, but I 
think additionality 

218
00:10:31,200 --> 00:10:33,500
specifically. 
And that's why even in advance 

219
00:10:33,500 --> 00:10:36,000
of Net Zero, which is kind of 
the drop-dead date when we need 

220
00:10:36,000 --> 00:10:39,100
to be removing everything. 
We put up, even in advance of 

221
00:10:39,100 --> 00:10:43,100
that, there's plenty of reasons 
to be skeptical of avoided 

222
00:10:43,100 --> 00:10:44,700
Mission, emission, reduction 
offsets. 

223
00:10:45,000 --> 00:10:47,300
And so I think your point does 
stand. 

224
00:10:47,700 --> 00:10:50,300
Okay, that's good. 
I like about my points stand, 

225
00:10:50,300 --> 00:10:52,800
that's always nice. 
I'm trying to think about the 

226
00:10:52,900 --> 00:10:56,300
maybe I'm overdoing this 
comparison, but I think what 

227
00:10:56,300 --> 00:10:58,400
people don't like the Indulgence
aspect of it either. 

228
00:10:58,400 --> 00:11:01,500
It's because it's not supposed 
to allow you to commit 

229
00:11:01,500 --> 00:11:04,600
additional sins. 
I think like it's Ivy by the 

230
00:11:04,600 --> 00:11:08,200
Catholic Church's case on 
indulgences or the Absolution of

231
00:11:08,200 --> 00:11:10,300
sins. 
I don't think it except maybe 

232
00:11:10,300 --> 00:11:12,700
the case of going to war. 
I think that you can be absolved

233
00:11:12,700 --> 00:11:15,000
ahead of time but you can't say 
like I'm going to cheat on my 

234
00:11:15,000 --> 00:11:18,300
wife tomorrow. 
Like here's here's some money to

235
00:11:18,300 --> 00:11:23,600
pay for a new baptistry font or 
something like you can do that 

236
00:11:23,600 --> 00:11:25,800
right? 
Yeah it's it's funny that Almost

237
00:11:25,800 --> 00:11:28,800
getting into this idea of ex 
post and ex ante accounting 

238
00:11:28,800 --> 00:11:31,700
ex-anti being when you pay for a
carbon credit, where the 

239
00:11:31,700 --> 00:11:34,300
sequestration hasn't taken place
yet you're paying you're paying 

240
00:11:34,300 --> 00:11:37,900
for someone to do that in the 
future ex post being where the 

241
00:11:37,900 --> 00:11:39,900
sequestration of the action has 
already taken place. 

242
00:11:39,900 --> 00:11:41,600
So maybe there's some analogy 
there. 

243
00:11:41,600 --> 00:11:44,300
I bet we could write something 
something, I think forgiveness 

244
00:11:44,300 --> 00:11:46,700
has to be exposed. 
I think you can't say, I'm going

245
00:11:46,700 --> 00:11:49,000
to send and be forgiven ahead of
time. 

246
00:11:49,200 --> 00:11:51,800
So I do ex ante offsets are 
also. 

247
00:11:51,800 --> 00:11:54,400
Additionally controversial. 
Right. 

248
00:11:54,400 --> 00:11:56,100
That's like a big fights. 
And over there. 

249
00:11:56,500 --> 00:11:58,200
That's right. 
I think a lot of people would 

250
00:11:58,200 --> 00:12:00,900
say, you know, it's important 
that if you're going to have 

251
00:12:00,900 --> 00:12:03,700
some lead time between when you 
pay for the carbon sequestration

252
00:12:03,700 --> 00:12:06,400
and when it actually takes place
that lead time needs to be 

253
00:12:06,400 --> 00:12:08,900
fairly short because obviously 
the longer it goes, the more 

254
00:12:08,900 --> 00:12:11,800
uncertainty there is and I think
there's some great precedence we

255
00:12:11,800 --> 00:12:14,700
can take from financial markets 
and also project Finance for 

256
00:12:14,700 --> 00:12:17,300
wind and solar where there you 
can contract these things and 

257
00:12:17,300 --> 00:12:19,200
you can reduce the risk of 
non-performance. 

258
00:12:19,200 --> 00:12:21,900
In other words, reduce the risk 
that the person from whom you're

259
00:12:21,900 --> 00:12:25,200
buying an ex ante carbon credit.
Won't deliver that credit or you

260
00:12:25,200 --> 00:12:28,800
can Say, let's just get delivery
of the credits, only as they're 

261
00:12:28,800 --> 00:12:31,100
generated almost like vesting 
into a stock. 

262
00:12:31,100 --> 00:12:34,100
Would it be helpful to kind of 
go into the doctor principles 

263
00:12:34,100 --> 00:12:35,600
themselves? 
I know you've talked about them 

264
00:12:35,600 --> 00:12:38,100
in the past on the program, but 
whatever it would be useful. 

265
00:12:38,100 --> 00:12:40,100
You think to the listeners, and 
to you too? 

266
00:12:40,400 --> 00:12:43,200
Yeah, I think this is a nice 
place to break in because 

267
00:12:43,200 --> 00:12:46,400
otherwise, we'll just, we'll 
Just Dance all around this. 

268
00:12:46,800 --> 00:12:49,900
So many complex issues that 
surround this entire discussion.

269
00:12:50,300 --> 00:12:54,300
So of the for Oxford offsetting 
principles and we're going to 

270
00:12:54,300 --> 00:12:56,900
work our way through all of 
these He's the first one is cut 

271
00:12:56,900 --> 00:12:59,200
emissions. 
Use high-quality offsets and 

272
00:12:59,200 --> 00:13:01,600
regularly revised. 
Offsetting strategy as best 

273
00:13:01,600 --> 00:13:05,200
practice of Olives. 
So this sounds like something. 

274
00:13:05,200 --> 00:13:10,000
We say a Nori is emit less and 
remove the rest, but why have a 

275
00:13:10,008 --> 00:13:13,200
decarbonization first strategy 
and then negate your missions 

276
00:13:13,200 --> 00:13:15,300
after that? 
Why can't someone just, you 

277
00:13:15,300 --> 00:13:18,900
know, do business as usual and 
use credible carbon removals and

278
00:13:18,900 --> 00:13:21,400
then get met zero. 
That way, what's wrong with 

279
00:13:21,400 --> 00:13:23,500
that? 
Great question and I love the 

280
00:13:23,500 --> 00:13:26,800
mitigation hierarchy you alluded
to from Nori and just a note to 

281
00:13:26,800 --> 00:13:28,500
our listeners. 
There are only four principles 

282
00:13:28,500 --> 00:13:32,100
so this won't be a sort of 99 or
95 Theses, whatever it was that 

283
00:13:32,100 --> 00:13:34,800
Martin Luther Nails in my door. 
It's to happen. 

284
00:13:34,800 --> 00:13:37,400
That yeah, to extend the 
religious analogy. 

285
00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:39,400
But yeah, there's four 
principles and principle one. 

286
00:13:39,400 --> 00:13:42,700
Let's take the three components 
in turn, so the idea of cutting 

287
00:13:42,700 --> 00:13:44,500
emissions. 
I mean, this is really simple 

288
00:13:44,500 --> 00:13:47,000
stuff and this goes back to this
idea of a mitigation hierarchy. 

289
00:13:47,000 --> 00:13:50,100
And I think the easiest way for 
me to think about it, is, you 

290
00:13:50,100 --> 00:13:53,800
know, we've got some subset of 
emissions that we consider what 

291
00:13:53,800 --> 00:13:57,300
we say is hard to abate. 
Or hard to eliminate and our 

292
00:13:57,300 --> 00:14:00,200
understanding of which emissions
are hard to Abate, is always 

293
00:14:00,200 --> 00:14:02,100
shifting. 
For example, for a long time, 

294
00:14:02,100 --> 00:14:05,100
we've just stubbornly included 
steel production in there and 

295
00:14:05,100 --> 00:14:07,800
certainly the process emissions 
from Iron oxides. 

296
00:14:07,800 --> 00:14:10,100
That's something that, you know,
it's really difficult to get rid

297
00:14:10,100 --> 00:14:11,700
of its fundamental for the 
process. 

298
00:14:11,700 --> 00:14:14,100
It's not even an admission from 
the fuel, but like that's an 

299
00:14:14,100 --> 00:14:16,600
example, of a big chunk of a 
missions that we've always 

300
00:14:16,600 --> 00:14:19,000
considered hard or impossible to
Abate. 

301
00:14:19,100 --> 00:14:20,600
We're going to need CCS or 
something. 

302
00:14:20,800 --> 00:14:23,500
Well, actually, there's been a 
lot of talk and progress around,

303
00:14:23,600 --> 00:14:26,600
you know, using blue and green 
hydrogen, or Any other sort of 

304
00:14:26,600 --> 00:14:28,200
green fuels to do that same 
process. 

305
00:14:28,200 --> 00:14:32,300
So our definition of what hard 
to Abate is, is always changing.

306
00:14:32,300 --> 00:14:36,100
But if we take it at any given 
point, if your organization, 

307
00:14:36,100 --> 00:14:39,300
your country, your city, or 
company, some portion of its 

308
00:14:39,300 --> 00:14:42,200
missions often, it's in the 
range of 15 to 30 percent that's

309
00:14:42,200 --> 00:14:44,800
sort of economy or Global wide, 
right? 

310
00:14:44,800 --> 00:14:48,700
If you include, if you add up 
cement steel, Maritime transport

311
00:14:48,700 --> 00:14:51,500
Long, Haul, Aviation 
agriculture. 

312
00:14:51,500 --> 00:14:53,900
You know, these buckets, 
whatever those are. 

313
00:14:53,900 --> 00:14:56,200
That's probably what. 
It's Priya to offset. 

314
00:14:56,200 --> 00:14:59,000
So we're kind of Beyond this 
point where it's really 

315
00:14:59,000 --> 00:15:01,800
permissible or appropriate to be
offsetting your scope one 

316
00:15:01,800 --> 00:15:04,900
emissions your scope to 
emissions and just to cover what

317
00:15:04,900 --> 00:15:06,200
those are cscope, one emissions,
right? 

318
00:15:06,200 --> 00:15:09,200
The direct stuff coming out of 
your Smoke Stack. 

319
00:15:09,200 --> 00:15:12,100
If you will or from your factory
scope, to emissions, being the 

320
00:15:12,100 --> 00:15:14,800
emissions associated with your 
energy procurement, which often 

321
00:15:14,800 --> 00:15:17,500
you can address through 
renewable energy credits, a 

322
00:15:17,508 --> 00:15:19,700
little, there are some issues 
there that does that actually 

323
00:15:19,700 --> 00:15:21,500
Advanced decarbonization of the 
grid. 

324
00:15:21,600 --> 00:15:24,700
Maybe maybe not. 
So it's really these scope three

325
00:15:24,700 --> 00:15:28,400
or sort of Direct emissions that
are typically the ones that are 

326
00:15:28,400 --> 00:15:30,800
most readily off. 
Settable unless, of course, you 

327
00:15:30,808 --> 00:15:33,700
know, for some organizations, 
their scope one emissions are 

328
00:15:33,700 --> 00:15:35,800
hard to Abate. 
If you're a cement factory, you 

329
00:15:35,800 --> 00:15:38,400
don't have a lot of options 
other than carbon capture and 

330
00:15:38,400 --> 00:15:41,000
storage. 
And so I think that's kind of a 

331
00:15:41,008 --> 00:15:42,600
good way. 
A good rule of thumb, to figure 

332
00:15:42,600 --> 00:15:44,200
out what you should be 
offsetting. 

333
00:15:44,600 --> 00:15:47,300
Now, your question is, basically
your challenging that and 

334
00:15:47,300 --> 00:15:50,200
saying, well, why bother? 
And I think that that's in a 

335
00:15:50,200 --> 00:15:53,500
sense, true, if you had 
extremely high quality removal, 

336
00:15:53,500 --> 00:15:57,200
if you had, you know, extremely 
Only high durability of storage.

337
00:15:57,200 --> 00:16:00,000
Removing carbon from the air 
with very low energy penalty, 

338
00:16:00,200 --> 00:16:04,000
storing it in a geological 
formation in perpetuity then why

339
00:16:04,000 --> 00:16:04,700
not? 
I think. 

340
00:16:04,700 --> 00:16:07,200
Absolutely because the reality 
is the cost of doing that, at 

341
00:16:07,200 --> 00:16:09,600
least right now is so high, 
seven hundred dollars a ton. 

342
00:16:09,800 --> 00:16:12,700
Let's say it got down to a 
hundred dollars a ton even. 

343
00:16:12,700 --> 00:16:17,200
So if everybody were holding 
themselves accountable to offset

344
00:16:17,200 --> 00:16:19,900
all of their scope 1 and 2 
emissions with that expensive 

345
00:16:19,900 --> 00:16:23,500
solution, that would have the 
effect of a carbon price and it 

346
00:16:23,508 --> 00:16:25,900
would it would force them to 
mitigate because they The saying

347
00:16:26,000 --> 00:16:28,800
why are we paying so much? 
Gosh, darn money to address 

348
00:16:28,800 --> 00:16:30,600
these group one emissions when 
we could just eliminate them. 

349
00:16:30,700 --> 00:16:33,900
Most people's cost of abatement 
will be lower, not necessarily. 

350
00:16:33,900 --> 00:16:37,600
But I think the bigger question 
is, you know, how long can we 

351
00:16:37,600 --> 00:16:40,000
afford to keep filling up carbon
stocks? 

352
00:16:40,200 --> 00:16:42,400
And that's a nice way to think 
about, you know, what, the Earth

353
00:16:42,400 --> 00:16:44,300
can do for us? 
I guess, I mean, we're really 

354
00:16:44,400 --> 00:16:47,800
relying heavily on the biosphere
and lithosphere. 

355
00:16:47,800 --> 00:16:51,700
Meaning, the sort of, you know, 
layer of geology the subsurface.

356
00:16:52,100 --> 00:16:55,300
And I think we have a good sense
of how big, those carbon stocks.

357
00:16:55,400 --> 00:16:57,600
Are and how much Headroom they 
have, how much more carbon can 

358
00:16:57,600 --> 00:16:59,800
we stuff in there? 
And I think there's been some 

359
00:16:59,800 --> 00:17:02,400
good work to think about that in
terms of terrestrial carbon 

360
00:17:02,400 --> 00:17:04,500
storage, right? 
How much carbon can be put in 

361
00:17:04,500 --> 00:17:08,400
soils and in vegetation and 
there's also some sense of how 

362
00:17:08,408 --> 00:17:11,099
much carbon we can put into 
geological storage. 

363
00:17:11,099 --> 00:17:13,300
It's you know orders of 
magnitude bigger in fact than 

364
00:17:13,300 --> 00:17:16,200
the terrestrial storage. 
And so the real answer to your 

365
00:17:16,200 --> 00:17:18,900
question is, well, you know, 
sure why not. 

366
00:17:18,900 --> 00:17:20,800
Somebody can keep buying 
high-quality removal for all 

367
00:17:20,800 --> 00:17:22,400
their emissions. 
It's just that we're going to 

368
00:17:22,400 --> 00:17:25,700
eventually fill up these stocks 
that the Earth has Actually 

369
00:17:25,700 --> 00:17:30,100
provided for us these sinks. 
And when we do, so we're out of 

370
00:17:30,100 --> 00:17:32,100
luck. 
So we need to be thinking about 

371
00:17:32,100 --> 00:17:35,300
moving towards absolute zero. 
I often say the race to Net. 

372
00:17:35,300 --> 00:17:38,600
Zero is just you know, that's 
just a Finish Line that 

373
00:17:38,600 --> 00:17:41,000
immediately starts a new race to
absolute zero. 

374
00:17:41,900 --> 00:17:46,200
And and that that sort of global
rate is going to repeat itself 

375
00:17:46,200 --> 00:17:47,500
within many organizations, 
right? 

376
00:17:47,500 --> 00:17:50,300
They might achieve Net Zero or 
at least NetZero aligned 

377
00:17:50,300 --> 00:17:53,700
offsetting before they achieve 
anything close to absolute zero 

378
00:17:53,700 --> 00:17:56,100
missions, but they still need to
be Thinking about that and 

379
00:17:56,100 --> 00:17:58,200
that's what I think. 
Science-based targets has been 

380
00:17:58,200 --> 00:18:00,900
really helpful at doing is 
saying we got to focus on what 

381
00:18:00,900 --> 00:18:04,200
that actual emission. 
Reductions plan is not ski to 

382
00:18:04,200 --> 00:18:08,000
principal one. 
I think the Headroom case for 

383
00:18:08,000 --> 00:18:11,100
decarbonizing first and the 
getting admission second is 

384
00:18:11,100 --> 00:18:13,700
really intriguing. 
I hardly ever hear anyone make 

385
00:18:13,700 --> 00:18:16,200
it though and I think it's 
because I'm speculating here, 

386
00:18:16,200 --> 00:18:20,200
and you can tell me if this is 
wrong, in your opinion, but that

387
00:18:20,200 --> 00:18:22,900
I don't think there's a lot of 
faith and offsetting as a 

388
00:18:22,908 --> 00:18:24,000
strategy. 
I feel. 

389
00:18:24,100 --> 00:18:28,000
Most people think it's Grounded,
in some cases of abuse or 

390
00:18:28,000 --> 00:18:33,200
greenwashing and rather than 
putting you know a $700 per ton 

391
00:18:33,200 --> 00:18:37,000
into geological sequestration, 
it'll be some dubious 

392
00:18:37,000 --> 00:18:41,300
three-dollar buck-fifty, sort of
like avoided deforestation thing

393
00:18:41,300 --> 00:18:43,000
and you're like they're going to
claim it. 

394
00:18:43,000 --> 00:18:44,800
They're going to shout it from 
the rooftops and no one's going 

395
00:18:44,800 --> 00:18:46,300
to call him on it in a 
meaningful way. 

396
00:18:46,400 --> 00:18:48,800
Am I reading too much into that?
No, it's a good point. 

397
00:18:48,800 --> 00:18:51,200
I mean, principal one here where
we're saying use, high-quality 

398
00:18:51,200 --> 00:18:53,700
offsets, we're relying. 
Very heavily on those four. 

399
00:18:53,700 --> 00:18:55,300
Words. 
Use high quality offset. 

400
00:18:55,400 --> 00:18:58,800
Because the reality is it's a 
bit of a wake-up call that the 

401
00:18:58,800 --> 00:19:01,400
voluntary carbon Market. 
Meaning the collection of carbon

402
00:19:01,400 --> 00:19:04,500
credits that are available the 
state of the voluntary carbon 

403
00:19:04,500 --> 00:19:06,600
Market is not good. 
It's quite dire. 

404
00:19:06,600 --> 00:19:10,100
In fact, I mean so many of the 
credits that you would go out 

405
00:19:10,100 --> 00:19:13,800
and buy right now. 
Don't meet the minimum criteria 

406
00:19:13,800 --> 00:19:15,900
that would allow you to say that
their high-quality offsets. 

407
00:19:15,900 --> 00:19:18,700
That's this thing of this 
question about additionality, 

408
00:19:18,700 --> 00:19:20,800
right? 
Would the carbon benefit have 

409
00:19:20,800 --> 00:19:23,900
occurred but for your purchase 
is the carbon stored. 

410
00:19:23,900 --> 00:19:25,300
Permanently is the carbon 
benefit? 

411
00:19:25,500 --> 00:19:29,000
Achieved in perpetuity, right? 
Are you ensuring that you 

412
00:19:29,000 --> 00:19:31,700
haven't had any sort of 
secondary unintended 

413
00:19:31,700 --> 00:19:34,400
consequences on local 
communities or ecosystems. 

414
00:19:34,400 --> 00:19:37,800
There's so many elements there 
and the reality is, if you look 

415
00:19:37,800 --> 00:19:40,900
at what's out there, it's you 
know, 80% of avoided emissions. 

416
00:19:40,900 --> 00:19:43,500
First of all, it's very 
difficult to see what's avoided 

417
00:19:43,500 --> 00:19:45,300
emissions and what's carbon 
removal and we'll get to that in

418
00:19:45,300 --> 00:19:46,600
a minute. 
When we talk about principle to 

419
00:19:46,600 --> 00:19:48,700
which is, you know, we've got to
be shifting towards carbon 

420
00:19:48,700 --> 00:19:50,200
removal. 
How the heck can we do that? 

421
00:19:50,200 --> 00:19:52,600
If we don't even know what is a 
removal and what isn't? 

422
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:55,900
But the reality is so much of 
what's out there, really Is hot 

423
00:19:55,900 --> 00:19:58,600
air and I think that's why we 
have an uphill battle. 

424
00:19:58,900 --> 00:20:02,000
But it's a battle worth fighting
to actually regain trust and 

425
00:20:02,000 --> 00:20:04,800
build credibility. 
And that requires that, you 

426
00:20:04,800 --> 00:20:09,200
know, people be honest and open 
and transparent about the data. 

427
00:20:09,200 --> 00:20:12,600
They're collecting their need to
also be ex-post analyses. 

428
00:20:12,600 --> 00:20:16,200
In other words, retrospective 
analyses, Barbara, hiya at 

429
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:18,000
Berkeley is really prominent 
person. 

430
00:20:18,000 --> 00:20:20,400
That's been doing excellent work
on that front to basically say, 

431
00:20:20,700 --> 00:20:22,300
you know, here's a carbon 
Market. 

432
00:20:22,400 --> 00:20:25,200
Here's a specific protocol that 
was used to generate credits did

433
00:20:25,200 --> 00:20:26,500
it. 
You what it said it was going to

434
00:20:26,500 --> 00:20:29,900
do. 
And if not why not, how can we 

435
00:20:30,000 --> 00:20:31,600
tweak the protocol and improve 
it? 

436
00:20:31,600 --> 00:20:34,000
So that the carbon credits that 
are getting approved are 

437
00:20:34,000 --> 00:20:36,300
actually additional. 
The actually doing something for

438
00:20:36,300 --> 00:20:38,300
the atmosphere. 
So that's this piece about 

439
00:20:38,300 --> 00:20:41,000
maintaining transparency. 
But yeah, what's out there is 

440
00:20:41,000 --> 00:20:44,400
not great and I think having a 
higher threshold for what we 

441
00:20:44,400 --> 00:20:47,800
accept as NetZero aligned right.
You mentioned proclaiming it 

442
00:20:47,800 --> 00:20:49,800
from the rooftops. 
That is what we want to do. 

443
00:20:49,800 --> 00:20:53,400
We want to declare Victory. 
We want to say I am Net Zero, we

444
00:20:53,400 --> 00:20:55,300
can't do that. 
That's the entire purpose. 

445
00:20:55,400 --> 00:20:59,100
Purpose of the Oxford principles
was to set out a perspective for

446
00:20:59,300 --> 00:21:02,800
what you need to do in order to 
allow yourself to shout from the

447
00:21:02,800 --> 00:21:04,400
rooftops. 
And and what we're going to talk

448
00:21:04,400 --> 00:21:06,500
about that in a minute with 
principles two and three, it's 

449
00:21:06,500 --> 00:21:08,900
got to be this shift to removals
and Long Live storage and it's 

450
00:21:08,908 --> 00:21:12,300
got to be ultra high quality 
offsets, then you can credibly 

451
00:21:12,300 --> 00:21:14,400
say you know, I'm on a journey 
to NetZero, right? 

452
00:21:14,400 --> 00:21:17,100
We're using offset skin and 
NetZero aligned way. 

453
00:21:18,800 --> 00:21:19,700
Great! 
Thank you. 

454
00:21:19,700 --> 00:21:21,400
Make my job easy. 
Why don't you just take us into 

455
00:21:21,400 --> 00:21:24,500
the second principle here? 
Okay, shift to carbon removal. 

456
00:21:24,500 --> 00:21:26,900
Offsetting Why? 
Why do that? 

457
00:21:26,900 --> 00:21:29,500
Why not avoided emissions? 
What is your motivation for this

458
00:21:29,500 --> 00:21:31,100
section? 
Sure. 

459
00:21:31,100 --> 00:21:33,500
And I guess I'll just add one 
little thing on principle one 

460
00:21:33,500 --> 00:21:36,200
which kind of segments in which 
is this idea of maintaining 

461
00:21:36,200 --> 00:21:38,800
transparency. 
And that means you as a company.

462
00:21:38,800 --> 00:21:41,600
As a buyer of offsets are being 
extremely transparent, about 

463
00:21:41,600 --> 00:21:44,200
what types of offsets you buy. 
And one of the key figures that 

464
00:21:44,200 --> 00:21:46,700
we've gotten a lot of feedback 
on from the Oxford principles. 

465
00:21:46,700 --> 00:21:50,900
Is this carbon credit taxonomy? 
So it's a figure in the 

466
00:21:50,900 --> 00:21:54,200
principles that gives you a flow
chart that divides up, the 

467
00:21:54,208 --> 00:21:57,700
different carbon At types. 
And there's really just five 

468
00:21:57,700 --> 00:22:00,000
that we were able to identify 
and we can actually put all the 

469
00:22:00,000 --> 00:22:01,900
different carbon projects into 
those different buckets. 

470
00:22:02,300 --> 00:22:04,400
So, when we say, be transparent 
about what offsets you're 

471
00:22:04,400 --> 00:22:07,700
buying, what we mean, is be 
clear about what percentage of 

472
00:22:07,700 --> 00:22:10,200
your offsets come from, which 
bucket, so that you can be in 

473
00:22:10,200 --> 00:22:15,200
compliance with principle to, 
which says You must shift your 

474
00:22:15,200 --> 00:22:19,900
offsets towards carbon removal. 
So, there's this concept that 

475
00:22:19,900 --> 00:22:23,100
every carbon credit every carbon
offset is either an emission 

476
00:22:23,100 --> 00:22:26,700
reduction, sometimes referred to
as an avoided Chicken or it is a

477
00:22:26,700 --> 00:22:30,000
carbon removal the former 
obviously requiring a Baseline 

478
00:22:30,000 --> 00:22:33,000
and sort of a counter factual 
assessment of what the world 

479
00:22:33,000 --> 00:22:34,300
would have been. 
If you hadn't had the current 

480
00:22:34,300 --> 00:22:36,900
project of course that same kind
of you have to do that same 

481
00:22:37,100 --> 00:22:39,100
counter factual analysis for 
carbon removal as well. 

482
00:22:39,100 --> 00:22:42,200
It's just that it's a lot easier
because the Baseline was doing 

483
00:22:42,200 --> 00:22:45,300
nothing and the action is to 
actually take carbon out of the 

484
00:22:45,300 --> 00:22:48,400
air and store it someplace and 
that's going to be really 

485
00:22:48,400 --> 00:22:49,500
important. 
I think we talked about 

486
00:22:49,500 --> 00:22:52,400
principle 3. 
Is this piece about storage. 

487
00:22:52,400 --> 00:22:53,900
You have to be storing the 
carbon somewhere. 

488
00:22:54,200 --> 00:22:56,700
But anyway principle to Says, 
You must shift towards carbon 

489
00:22:56,700 --> 00:22:59,600
removal and this gets back to 
what you brought up very early 

490
00:22:59,600 --> 00:23:01,800
in the conversation, you know, 
what is net 0? 

491
00:23:02,300 --> 00:23:05,300
And that 0 is when you balance 
any remaining emissions with 

492
00:23:05,300 --> 00:23:07,800
removals. 
And so that's the end State. 

493
00:23:07,800 --> 00:23:11,700
There's no other end State other
than one in which everybody 

494
00:23:11,700 --> 00:23:14,800
who's still buying carbon 
credits is buying all carbon 

495
00:23:14,800 --> 00:23:18,000
removal credits now, does that 
transition have to happen 

496
00:23:18,000 --> 00:23:20,500
tomorrow? 
I mean, it would be great if it 

497
00:23:20,500 --> 00:23:25,000
could but as will get into the 
supply of removals is quite 

498
00:23:25,000 --> 00:23:27,900
scary. 
And also a lot of carbon credits

499
00:23:28,200 --> 00:23:32,100
are Ambiguously, neither fully 
avoided emissions nor removals. 

500
00:23:32,500 --> 00:23:34,400
But the key here is that 
transparency. 

501
00:23:34,400 --> 00:23:36,400
So you're actually publishing 
and sharing to your 

502
00:23:36,400 --> 00:23:40,800
stakeholders, what the breakdown
of your offsets are and that way

503
00:23:40,800 --> 00:23:43,500
any sort of Watch Dogs can 
actually observe and hold you 

504
00:23:43,508 --> 00:23:45,500
accountable and say, you know, 
you're making progress but not 

505
00:23:45,500 --> 00:23:48,200
fast enough. 
If organizations, like Microsoft

506
00:23:48,200 --> 00:23:50,100
that we work with, you know, one
of our clients are coming 

507
00:23:50,100 --> 00:23:51,900
direct. 
They have basically gone 

508
00:23:51,900 --> 00:23:54,800
straight to 100% removals, and 
that's been really challenging, 

509
00:23:54,800 --> 00:23:57,000
but really were Awarding also to
sort of prove that that's 

510
00:23:57,000 --> 00:24:02,600
possible and the point behind 
the second principle is 

511
00:24:03,000 --> 00:24:06,600
equivalence here being set up 
between if you mobilize a ton of

512
00:24:06,600 --> 00:24:11,300
carbon dioxide you are obligated
to pull it out of the atmosphere

513
00:24:11,300 --> 00:24:13,800
and store it somewhere. 
You can't just avoid future 

514
00:24:13,800 --> 00:24:16,100
emissions. 
You have to actually remove in a

515
00:24:16,100 --> 00:24:19,300
very clear demonstrable way. 
Is that what it is trying to be 

516
00:24:19,300 --> 00:24:21,900
done here in the section? 
Yeah, exactly. 

517
00:24:21,900 --> 00:24:25,200
It's basically saying you can 
avoid emissions or pay someone 

518
00:24:25,400 --> 00:24:28,200
To reduce their emissions in 
advance of NetZero. 

519
00:24:28,700 --> 00:24:33,200
But once you get to Net Zero by 
definition, that means globally.

520
00:24:33,200 --> 00:24:37,500
We're removing just as much 
carbon as we are emitting. 

521
00:24:37,800 --> 00:24:40,800
So that's sort of the physical 
balance that needs to be 

522
00:24:40,800 --> 00:24:43,300
achieved. 
Now, in that global net zero 

523
00:24:43,300 --> 00:24:47,200
state, it is possible that some 
well, it's actually certain that

524
00:24:47,200 --> 00:24:50,600
some people will be gross 
positive emitters, and other 

525
00:24:50,600 --> 00:24:54,600
people will be net - emitters 
and those on the whole will 

526
00:24:54,600 --> 00:24:56,900
balance out. 
So, there might be a form of 

527
00:24:56,900 --> 00:25:00,000
Aviation that still has some 
emissions that need to be 

528
00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:01,900
addressed by removals on the 
ground. 

529
00:25:02,400 --> 00:25:05,600
There may be some agricultural 
processes that we choose to 

530
00:25:05,608 --> 00:25:09,100
continue in the same way and we 
counteract them with 

531
00:25:09,700 --> 00:25:11,700
commensurate storage of carbon 
somewhere else. 

532
00:25:11,700 --> 00:25:14,500
And I think you also hit on this
point that some avoided a 

533
00:25:14,508 --> 00:25:16,600
mission. 
Carbon credits don't seem to 

534
00:25:16,600 --> 00:25:19,200
involve the apparent storage of 
carbon and that would be 

535
00:25:19,500 --> 00:25:22,500
something like methane or n2o 
destruction. 

536
00:25:22,800 --> 00:25:26,100
It's a bit mysterious. 
You kind of destroyed the Where 

537
00:25:26,100 --> 00:25:28,600
is the carbon being stored? 
Well, it's not really being 

538
00:25:28,600 --> 00:25:31,800
stored, except perhaps, in this 
sort of uncombusted fossil fuel 

539
00:25:31,800 --> 00:25:34,800
that you didn't buy in the case 
of clean cook stoves, which is a

540
00:25:34,808 --> 00:25:37,700
bit of a weird, weird thing to 
wrap your head around. 

541
00:25:37,700 --> 00:25:40,800
But all the other carbon credits
do involve carbon storage and 

542
00:25:40,800 --> 00:25:44,100
this is where we have this this 
2 by 2 Matrix on one axis, you 

543
00:25:44,100 --> 00:25:47,100
can ask is the carbon credit 
removing carbon from the 

544
00:25:47,100 --> 00:25:50,300
atmosphere, or is it avoiding 
emissions to the atmosphere on 

545
00:25:50,300 --> 00:25:53,600
the other axis of this Matrix? 
You can ask is the place where 

546
00:25:53,600 --> 00:25:57,100
you're putting the carbon. 
Very, very safe place with a low

547
00:25:57,100 --> 00:26:01,000
risk of reversal or a less safe 
place with a higher risk of 

548
00:26:01,000 --> 00:26:02,700
higher, physical risk of 
reversal. 

549
00:26:03,100 --> 00:26:06,100
Both of those buckets have value
and actually really it's a 

550
00:26:06,108 --> 00:26:08,300
spectrum, right? 
It's a spectrum of different 

551
00:26:08,600 --> 00:26:11,800
degrees of risk and permanence 
but I think that's what we're 

552
00:26:11,800 --> 00:26:14,300
trying to identify as there's 
this Matrix and we need to be 

553
00:26:14,300 --> 00:26:17,200
shifting towards the removal 
side because that's the only way

554
00:26:17,200 --> 00:26:20,400
we can actually balance 
remaining emissions and 

555
00:26:20,400 --> 00:26:21,900
principle 3 which we'll talk 
about soon. 

556
00:26:22,200 --> 00:26:26,100
We need to be shifting towards 
that long live storage that Risk

557
00:26:26,100 --> 00:26:28,800
storage. 
I think we should go there now. 

558
00:26:28,900 --> 00:26:32,200
Principle 3 is shift to 
long-term Long Live storage 

559
00:26:32,300 --> 00:26:34,800
which is something that we spend
a lot of time thinking about it 

560
00:26:34,800 --> 00:26:36,800
Nori. 
Permanence is obviously very 

561
00:26:36,800 --> 00:26:38,500
important. 
You definitely don't want 

562
00:26:38,500 --> 00:26:40,700
leakage. 
There are also limits to how 

563
00:26:40,700 --> 00:26:44,500
much you can reasonably offer in
terms of permanence to a 

564
00:26:44,500 --> 00:26:47,800
prospective buyer of negative 
emissions when they're buying 

565
00:26:47,800 --> 00:26:50,200
from you. 
What should we be doing with 

566
00:26:50,200 --> 00:26:51,300
permanent? 
We think it's important, we 

567
00:26:51,300 --> 00:26:54,900
don't want leakage, but we also 
don't want to make it 

568
00:26:54,900 --> 00:26:56,400
impossible. 
Possible for anything in the 

569
00:26:56,400 --> 00:26:58,700
ecosphere to be considered 
carbon removal. 

570
00:26:58,700 --> 00:27:01,200
I think there's a lot of 
important scale it's cheap right

571
00:27:01,200 --> 00:27:02,400
now. 
I think there's a lot of 

572
00:27:02,408 --> 00:27:04,700
interesting work being done to 
make carbon removal in the 

573
00:27:04,700 --> 00:27:08,000
natural environment, more and 
more productive and trustworthy.

574
00:27:08,400 --> 00:27:11,300
But if all you care about is 
permanence and maybe Stripes 

575
00:27:11,300 --> 00:27:13,700
thousand your permanence is a 
good example of this. 

576
00:27:13,900 --> 00:27:17,000
Does that rule out the ecosphere
and is that good or bad? 

577
00:27:17,000 --> 00:27:18,600
How should we be thinking about 
permanence? 

578
00:27:18,800 --> 00:27:22,300
No small questions? 
No, well I mean this point 

579
00:27:22,300 --> 00:27:24,700
about, does that rule out the 
nature based Solutions? 

580
00:27:25,300 --> 00:27:28,800
We're not and I think, the first
point I'll make there is that we

581
00:27:28,800 --> 00:27:32,100
need to be, maximally deploying 
nature based Solutions. 

582
00:27:32,200 --> 00:27:35,200
No matter what, particularly 
when they have co-benefits 

583
00:27:35,200 --> 00:27:37,900
around, ecosystem restoration 
and biodiversity. 

584
00:27:37,900 --> 00:27:40,400
So I think this is some really 
important work that not only 

585
00:27:40,400 --> 00:27:42,700
said in and Steve Smith. 
Others have done to kind of talk

586
00:27:42,700 --> 00:27:47,000
about how do we think about the 
role of nature in solving our 

587
00:27:47,000 --> 00:27:49,100
climate goals, but also our 
biodiversity goals and all these

588
00:27:49,100 --> 00:27:52,100
other goals we may have, I 
mentioned earlier that an offset

589
00:27:52,100 --> 00:27:55,100
is a two-sided transaction. 
So we don't have to necessarily 

590
00:27:55,200 --> 00:27:58,100
Ali fund all of these 
conservation outcomes using a 

591
00:27:58,108 --> 00:28:01,000
carbon credit as soon as we 
choose to use a carbon credit. 

592
00:28:01,000 --> 00:28:05,000
We have to remember that that 
requires that, we hold the 

593
00:28:05,000 --> 00:28:07,900
carbon benefit that we are 
claiming is happening to a very 

594
00:28:07,900 --> 00:28:10,900
high standard. 
If we're going for NetZero 

595
00:28:10,900 --> 00:28:12,900
aligned offsetting, which we are
because we're talking about the 

596
00:28:12,900 --> 00:28:15,400
principles and that's you know, 
everybody wants to do the most 

597
00:28:15,400 --> 00:28:18,700
people want to do things. 
The right way is what your maybe

598
00:28:18,700 --> 00:28:22,400
trying to get out here that 
carbon removal in the natural 

599
00:28:22,400 --> 00:28:25,700
world or nature, based Solutions
are important but perhaps, Oops,

600
00:28:25,700 --> 00:28:29,200
they are not as appropriate for 
a carbon Market or for carbon 

601
00:28:29,200 --> 00:28:31,900
Financial assets to be utilized.
Is that sort of what you're 

602
00:28:31,900 --> 00:28:33,200
driving at. 
Exactly. 

603
00:28:33,200 --> 00:28:36,500
I mean it's possible to support 
these outcomes in their own, 

604
00:28:36,500 --> 00:28:37,700
right? 
And that's the piece that we 

605
00:28:37,700 --> 00:28:38,800
talked about in principle of 
for. 

606
00:28:38,800 --> 00:28:42,400
But, you know, it's important to
Value the benefits that these 

607
00:28:42,500 --> 00:28:45,200
projects provide in and of 
themselves rather than tying 

608
00:28:45,200 --> 00:28:48,500
everything to a carbon benefit 
first and having a co-benefits 

609
00:28:48,500 --> 00:28:51,500
second, what we refer to, as a 
co-benefit in a lot of cases 

610
00:28:51,500 --> 00:28:53,700
with nature based Solutions. 
Particularly project-based 

611
00:28:53,700 --> 00:28:55,100
read/write avoided 
deforestation. 

612
00:28:55,200 --> 00:28:57,800
Station where it's very 
difficult to determine 

613
00:28:57,800 --> 00:29:00,100
additionality. 
It's very difficult to control 

614
00:29:00,100 --> 00:29:03,200
for indirect carbon leakage. 
By that, I don't mean physical 

615
00:29:03,200 --> 00:29:06,200
reversal but carbon I mean this 
fact that it's a bit of a 

616
00:29:06,200 --> 00:29:08,800
waterbed, you start carbon at 
one location but you haven't 

617
00:29:08,800 --> 00:29:11,700
changed fundamental demand for 
food and fiber. 

618
00:29:11,700 --> 00:29:13,900
Somebody is going to grow that 
palm oil somewhere else. 

619
00:29:13,900 --> 00:29:17,300
So that issue of the carbon 
basically being reshuffled 

620
00:29:17,300 --> 00:29:19,800
around on the Earth's surface. 
But on net, you're not actually 

621
00:29:19,800 --> 00:29:21,000
increasing it. 
That's one issue. 

622
00:29:21,000 --> 00:29:23,400
And then third, and finally this
permanence right? 

623
00:29:23,400 --> 00:29:26,500
Like you mentioned, how do we 
think about I think it's 

624
00:29:26,500 --> 00:29:30,000
unreasonable to always think 
about permanence as wherever you

625
00:29:30,000 --> 00:29:32,800
physically stored. 
The carbon that specific parcel 

626
00:29:32,800 --> 00:29:34,400
of carbon must remain there 
forever. 

627
00:29:34,700 --> 00:29:37,700
Because that's a good level of 
guarantee that frankly nature 

628
00:29:37,700 --> 00:29:39,100
based Solutions, just could 
never provide. 

629
00:29:39,100 --> 00:29:43,700
We can never say that a given 
acre of forest or a given plot 

630
00:29:43,700 --> 00:29:45,600
of Farmland that Nori works 
with, right? 

631
00:29:45,600 --> 00:29:47,900
We can never say that. 
That's going to stay stored in 

632
00:29:47,900 --> 00:29:52,000
perpetuity inevitably pests 
disease natural disasters, 

633
00:29:52,000 --> 00:29:54,900
changes in management human 
intervention, whether legal or 

634
00:29:54,900 --> 00:29:55,500
illegal. 
Eagle. 

635
00:29:55,500 --> 00:29:58,400
Something will happen at some 
point to cause the physical 

636
00:29:58,400 --> 00:30:00,800
re-release or reversal that 
carbon and that's okay. 

637
00:30:00,800 --> 00:30:03,200
That's just what we have to 
accept for that kind of 

638
00:30:03,200 --> 00:30:05,100
solution. 
So that's why I prefer to talk 

639
00:30:05,100 --> 00:30:08,500
about the risk of reversal. 
When you put lots of carbon in 

640
00:30:08,500 --> 00:30:12,400
terrestrial stuff, it sinks when
you sort of add more and more 

641
00:30:12,400 --> 00:30:14,900
carbon two, soils. 
And vegetation, what you have to

642
00:30:14,900 --> 00:30:17,300
recognize you're doing is you're
actually sort of stacking up 

643
00:30:17,300 --> 00:30:19,400
risk. 
You're putting more and more of 

644
00:30:19,400 --> 00:30:21,500
that carbon at risk. 
Because remember what you're 

645
00:30:21,508 --> 00:30:24,300
doing, you're actually moving. 
We're always moving carbon from 

646
00:30:24,300 --> 00:30:26,800
one sphere to Other. 
We've got the lithosphere, all 

647
00:30:26,800 --> 00:30:30,000
the subsurface we've got, let's 
call it the anthropocene fear, 

648
00:30:30,000 --> 00:30:33,300
the place where we live, and all
of our oil tanks and are places 

649
00:30:33,300 --> 00:30:36,500
where we start carbon, and then 
we've got the biosphere and also

650
00:30:36,500 --> 00:30:39,900
the oceans and the atmosphere. 
But essentially when we offset 

651
00:30:39,900 --> 00:30:44,400
fossil emissions, we are 
actively converting fossil CO2 

652
00:30:44,400 --> 00:30:48,400
from the lithosphere into 
trishul carbon in the biosphere 

653
00:30:48,700 --> 00:30:51,300
and and that's a riskier place 
for it to be now. 

654
00:30:51,300 --> 00:30:53,000
That's okay. 
But we just have to recognize 

655
00:30:53,000 --> 00:30:57,100
that that if the biosphere Your 
flips from being a net sink, to 

656
00:30:57,100 --> 00:30:59,300
be to being in that source. 
And there's a lot of work that's

657
00:30:59,300 --> 00:31:03,900
shown that even in response to 
1.5 degrees of warming globally,

658
00:31:04,300 --> 00:31:07,300
which, you know, at this rate 
it's looking like, it will be 

659
00:31:07,300 --> 00:31:10,000
difficult to avoid. 
That will have impacts on the 

660
00:31:10,000 --> 00:31:12,100
biosphere, right? 
That's going to kick into gear, 

661
00:31:12,400 --> 00:31:15,300
various amplifying effects. 
This is this ecosystem climate 

662
00:31:15,300 --> 00:31:17,200
response. 
Some of these feedback loops 

663
00:31:17,200 --> 00:31:20,000
that aren't necessarily aren't 
yet. 

664
00:31:20,000 --> 00:31:22,500
I should say incorporated into 
the carbon budgets. 

665
00:31:22,500 --> 00:31:26,000
And so, if that's the case, if 
these places We started carbon 

666
00:31:26,000 --> 00:31:29,400
start to release it on mass 
who's responsible for that the 

667
00:31:29,400 --> 00:31:30,800
person who paid for the storage 
in. 

668
00:31:30,800 --> 00:31:33,400
The first place is a company 
that may or may not even exist 

669
00:31:33,400 --> 00:31:35,500
anymore. 
And if it's been this hard for 

670
00:31:35,500 --> 00:31:38,000
us to hold fossil fuel companies
and others accountable for their

671
00:31:38,000 --> 00:31:39,600
past contributions to climate 
change. 

672
00:31:39,700 --> 00:31:42,000
I don't see how it's going to 
get any easier to hold a 

673
00:31:42,008 --> 00:31:44,000
company, who is trying to do the
right thing. 

674
00:31:44,000 --> 00:31:47,500
Let's be honest, accountable, 
for a leakage event and no 

675
00:31:47,500 --> 00:31:48,800
company wants out on their 
balance sheet. 

676
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:52,500
That's why these protocols have 
in place these limits to 

677
00:31:52,500 --> 00:31:54,800
permanence and you probably know
more about this than I do it 

678
00:31:54,800 --> 00:31:56,700
special. 
With soil carbon where you know,

679
00:31:56,700 --> 00:31:58,600
you have these sort of 
hundred-year guardrails in the 

680
00:31:58,608 --> 00:32:02,100
California cover Market, where 
you say listen if you can 

681
00:32:02,100 --> 00:32:04,100
guarantee this for 100 years 
that's good enough for our 

682
00:32:04,100 --> 00:32:06,000
purposes. 
What I want to say I'm 

683
00:32:06,000 --> 00:32:09,700
permanence is that it's really 
about recognizing that the only 

684
00:32:10,200 --> 00:32:14,100
enduring sustainable and state. 
The only sort of sustainable 

685
00:32:14,100 --> 00:32:16,400
NetZero. 
And by that, I mean a net, zero 

686
00:32:16,400 --> 00:32:17,800
state that you can keep going 
in. 

687
00:32:17,800 --> 00:32:21,200
Perpetuity is one in which 
you're putting the carbon in a 

688
00:32:21,200 --> 00:32:24,400
safe place and you're doing so 
commensurate with whatever 

689
00:32:24,400 --> 00:32:27,200
you're admitting, and Is where 
this idea of sort of like, for 

690
00:32:27,200 --> 00:32:29,800
like so matching terrestrial 
carbon carbon emissions that 

691
00:32:29,800 --> 00:32:33,100
come from soils, that come from 
vegetation with storage in 

692
00:32:33,100 --> 00:32:34,700
those. 
Same or similar, soils, 

693
00:32:34,700 --> 00:32:38,100
vegetation and matching 
geosphere fossil carbon 

694
00:32:38,100 --> 00:32:42,400
extraction from under the ground
with geological storage of CO2. 

695
00:32:42,700 --> 00:32:44,900
We think that's a really useful 
framing because that allows you 

696
00:32:44,900 --> 00:32:48,700
to basically match like, for 
like, that's fascinating. 

697
00:32:48,700 --> 00:32:52,100
So if you're an oil and gas 
major, you're expected to fund, 

698
00:32:52,300 --> 00:32:54,300
climb works or something like 
that. 

699
00:32:54,500 --> 00:32:57,400
You're actually Sending the 
captured CO2 back into a 

700
00:32:57,400 --> 00:33:01,700
geological storage environment. 
Yes, absolutely. 

701
00:33:02,000 --> 00:33:04,500
I think holding the oil and gas 
companies accountable and 

702
00:33:04,500 --> 00:33:07,500
basically harnessing this margin
that they're making when they 

703
00:33:07,500 --> 00:33:11,000
take you know essentially 
mineral wealth out of the ground

704
00:33:11,000 --> 00:33:13,800
and turn it into money. 
There's a big margin that's 

705
00:33:13,800 --> 00:33:16,300
taken out and actually a lot of 
it is royalties and taxes. 

706
00:33:16,300 --> 00:33:19,300
But you know what? 
If we held the extractors of 

707
00:33:19,300 --> 00:33:22,100
fossil carbon responsible for 
putting carbon back into the 

708
00:33:22,100 --> 00:33:26,300
ground equivalent with what they
dug up it, Security says, let's 

709
00:33:26,300 --> 00:33:28,700
leave the most expensive stuff 
to the people who are most 

710
00:33:28,700 --> 00:33:32,900
actively making use of fossil 
carbon and let's leave the 

711
00:33:32,900 --> 00:33:37,400
cheapest stuff like avoided. 
Deforestation to the emissions 

712
00:33:37,400 --> 00:33:39,800
that really have no one to speak
for it for them. 

713
00:33:40,000 --> 00:33:42,400
So these emissions that are 
going to sort of start burping 

714
00:33:42,400 --> 00:33:43,900
out of the biosphere in a 
decade. 

715
00:33:43,900 --> 00:33:47,000
Or so, let's say, you know, 
who's responsible for those, 

716
00:33:47,000 --> 00:33:49,100
it's really hard. 
We're not good as a species that

717
00:33:49,100 --> 00:33:50,700
solving this Collective action 
issue. 

718
00:33:50,700 --> 00:33:53,500
And so, if we don't know who's 
responsible for those, it's 

719
00:33:53,500 --> 00:33:56,300
safer to match those against the
sort of low-hanging fruit and 

720
00:33:56,300 --> 00:33:58,900
say, you know, while we have 
you, while we have your 

721
00:33:58,900 --> 00:34:00,600
attention, fossil fuel 
companies, while you're still 

722
00:34:00,600 --> 00:34:03,400
making money, while we're still 
using fossil fuels at all. 

723
00:34:03,700 --> 00:34:05,900
Let's take advantage of that and
let's make sure that you are 

724
00:34:06,200 --> 00:34:09,900
contributing to storing a 
initially small, but growing 

725
00:34:10,300 --> 00:34:14,500
fraction of the carbon and this 
is a policy proposal from Miles 

726
00:34:14,500 --> 00:34:16,000
Alan. 
That's referred to as the carbon

727
00:34:16,000 --> 00:34:17,900
take back obligation. 
This is something. 

728
00:34:17,900 --> 00:34:19,800
We've been working on, we can 
add the link in the show notes 

729
00:34:19,800 --> 00:34:24,199
but it's essentially a policy 
that would make companies do 

730
00:34:24,199 --> 00:34:26,400
exactly that. 
Say anybody who's digging up 

731
00:34:26,400 --> 00:34:29,500
carbon or bringing carbon into a
given region? 

732
00:34:29,800 --> 00:34:32,400
Is responsible for cleaning it 
up at the Wellhead at the 

733
00:34:32,400 --> 00:34:35,699
beginning of the process and 
that doesn't let the emitters 

734
00:34:35,699 --> 00:34:38,800
Downstream off the hook. 
But it actually forces the 

735
00:34:38,800 --> 00:34:41,300
extractors to have what we call 
Extended producer 

736
00:34:41,300 --> 00:34:45,199
responsibility, the same way 
producers of paper packaging or 

737
00:34:45,400 --> 00:34:48,800
car tires, have to pay for the 
costs that their product 

738
00:34:48,800 --> 00:34:51,600
creates. 
Why would we treat oil and gas 

739
00:34:51,600 --> 00:34:55,699
products any differently? 
No, I think carbon take back 

740
00:34:55,699 --> 00:34:59,200
obligations require a separate 
show entirely because there's so

741
00:34:59,200 --> 00:35:02,200
much there to are. 
You also saying though, that if 

742
00:35:02,200 --> 00:35:05,400
you're involved in agricultural 
emissions, then you should focus

743
00:35:05,400 --> 00:35:08,600
on soil, sequestration or Land 
Based mechanisms for carbon 

744
00:35:08,600 --> 00:35:10,800
removal or is that an 
appropriate application. 

745
00:35:11,300 --> 00:35:14,100
I think perhaps that could be 
the conclusion but I think we 

746
00:35:14,100 --> 00:35:16,600
want to keep it with the Oxford 
principles one to keep it high 

747
00:35:16,600 --> 00:35:20,400
level and say look we can't you 
know all we can really say with 

748
00:35:20,400 --> 00:35:23,400
confidence is you've got to 
shift towards removals and 

749
00:35:23,500 --> 00:35:25,200
You've got to shift towards Long
Live storage. 

750
00:35:25,400 --> 00:35:27,400
Now how fast you make that 
transition? 

751
00:35:27,500 --> 00:35:29,900
There is some evidence to back 
up how fast that transition 

752
00:35:29,900 --> 00:35:31,200
should happen and we can talk 
about that. 

753
00:35:31,200 --> 00:35:33,800
But, you know, it's going to 
ultimately be up to individual 

754
00:35:33,800 --> 00:35:36,400
companies and this is a 
voluntary market after. 

755
00:35:36,400 --> 00:35:38,100
All right. 
I mean, I think we all 

756
00:35:38,200 --> 00:35:40,600
understand that this needs to be
a compliance Market. 

757
00:35:40,700 --> 00:35:43,600
We need to make this stuff 
regulated and we need to make 

758
00:35:43,600 --> 00:35:47,100
this stuff mandatory and in the 
interim because it's voluntary 

759
00:35:47,100 --> 00:35:48,600
carbon Market. 
There's only so much we can ask.

760
00:35:48,600 --> 00:35:51,500
I think what we have to do is 
hold companies accountable and 

761
00:35:51,500 --> 00:35:55,500
say you know your Anger aligned 
with the oxidizing principles 

762
00:35:55,700 --> 00:35:59,900
but the rate with which you're 
shifting towards removals and 

763
00:35:59,900 --> 00:36:03,200
Long Live storage after let's 
say, three or four years is way 

764
00:36:03,200 --> 00:36:05,300
too slow. 
Look at go look at Microsoft go.

765
00:36:05,300 --> 00:36:07,200
Look at this other company. 
They've already made a 

766
00:36:07,200 --> 00:36:10,000
transition to 100% removals, you
know, get with the program it 

767
00:36:10,000 --> 00:36:12,600
allows us to kind of separate 
the high ambition, folks, from 

768
00:36:12,600 --> 00:36:15,100
the low ambition, folks, and 
that's probably the most we can 

769
00:36:15,100 --> 00:36:17,300
ask for now. 
There is this point about 

770
00:36:17,300 --> 00:36:19,600
matching like-for-like, and I 
think that's right. 

771
00:36:19,600 --> 00:36:23,600
That, you know, we should be 
always cognizant of the When 

772
00:36:23,600 --> 00:36:26,500
we're making when we're moving 
carbon from the lithosphere into

773
00:36:26,500 --> 00:36:29,600
the biosphere or vice versa. 
Right now, we're doing a lot of 

774
00:36:29,700 --> 00:36:33,600
converting fossil fuels into 
trees and we can only do that 

775
00:36:33,600 --> 00:36:36,100
for so long. 
And really, to my point earlier,

776
00:36:36,200 --> 00:36:39,500
we should get the folks who are 
most able to pay for the more 

777
00:36:39,500 --> 00:36:41,400
permanent storage, which we know
we're going to have to do 

778
00:36:41,400 --> 00:36:43,500
eventually. 
Anyways, it's just a question 

779
00:36:43,500 --> 00:36:45,600
of, who do we hold responsible 
for doing it. 

780
00:36:46,100 --> 00:36:51,600
And when mmm, but you lie, since
I have you here, can I ask you 

781
00:36:51,607 --> 00:36:56,100
for some free business advice? 
I'll see if I have anything to 

782
00:36:56,100 --> 00:36:59,800
offer about everything dry with 
soil, sequestration of farmers 

783
00:36:59,800 --> 00:37:03,400
that we work with the only 
required 10-year contracts for 

784
00:37:03,400 --> 00:37:06,900
permanence and there's so much 
that goes into these permanence 

785
00:37:06,900 --> 00:37:09,000
discussions. 
Because as you noted in other 

786
00:37:09,000 --> 00:37:12,400
markets, were 100 years, is the 
norm that's off-putting to a 

787
00:37:12,400 --> 00:37:16,300
number of farmers and Growers 
because that's ultimately an 

788
00:37:16,300 --> 00:37:18,800
obligation that will fall on 
their grandchildren or maybe 

789
00:37:18,800 --> 00:37:22,100
even great-grandchildren and who
knows what is going to happen to

790
00:37:22,100 --> 00:37:25,300
their farming practices in. 
At time, it's it's scary to lock

791
00:37:25,300 --> 00:37:28,600
yourself into a deal like that. 
So we've gone for something 

792
00:37:28,600 --> 00:37:32,100
shorter thinking that once that 
land is converted it is no more 

793
00:37:32,100 --> 00:37:34,700
naturally fertile and valuable. 
And so there's some inertia 

794
00:37:34,700 --> 00:37:37,300
we're hoping plays out in that 
it remains that way, right? 

795
00:37:37,300 --> 00:37:40,700
But we can't but we tell buyers 
of these nrt's Nori removal 

796
00:37:40,700 --> 00:37:43,000
times. 
We don't we'd say like we can 

797
00:37:43,000 --> 00:37:46,400
only specify for this amount of 
time beyond that you need 

798
00:37:46,400 --> 00:37:48,800
greater permanence that you 
either need to buy more or 

799
00:37:48,800 --> 00:37:51,700
something differently. 
Ultimately Nori is not a soiler 

800
00:37:51,700 --> 00:37:53,300
ad company. 
We want to be involved in 

801
00:37:53,500 --> 00:37:56,000
Removals broadly in our thinking
about permanence and if and how 

802
00:37:56,000 --> 00:37:57,800
these assets are fungible 
against each other. 

803
00:37:57,800 --> 00:38:00,200
In terms of permanence I'll put 
a pin in that let sauce. 

804
00:38:00,200 --> 00:38:02,600
It went to you next. 
But how should we be approaching

805
00:38:02,600 --> 00:38:04,200
soil? 
Is this an okay way to think of 

806
00:38:04,200 --> 00:38:06,700
it? 
I think you're absolutely right 

807
00:38:06,700 --> 00:38:09,800
that you can't get somebody to 
sign on to a hundred year 

808
00:38:09,800 --> 00:38:11,300
agreement. 
That's unreasonable, and it 

809
00:38:11,300 --> 00:38:13,400
wouldn't make sense but the 
reality was a lot of 

810
00:38:13,700 --> 00:38:16,600
regenerative agriculture and 
soil, carbon project types. 

811
00:38:16,600 --> 00:38:20,400
As I understand it is, you're 
basically paying for a behavior 

812
00:38:20,400 --> 00:38:23,100
change and repairing the paying 
to kind of build up that carbon 

813
00:38:23,400 --> 00:38:26,400
In the soil but it is vulnerable
to being re-released. 

814
00:38:26,400 --> 00:38:29,500
If the land ownership changes 
the management practices change.

815
00:38:29,600 --> 00:38:32,900
So it's probably most accurate 
to think of it in this sort of 

816
00:38:32,900 --> 00:38:36,100
ton year framing. 
As in, you're paying to keep one

817
00:38:36,100 --> 00:38:38,900
ton of carbon in the ground for 
one year, that's what you're 

818
00:38:38,900 --> 00:38:41,200
paying for your not, right. 
And so, I think that's an 

819
00:38:41,200 --> 00:38:43,400
interesting model that Zach 
Parisa. 

820
00:38:43,400 --> 00:38:47,500
From Soviet era has pioneered 
and it's it's a difficult thing 

821
00:38:47,500 --> 00:38:50,200
to wrap your head around and 
I've even struggled to because I

822
00:38:50,200 --> 00:38:52,700
think it doesn't really fit into
this framework. 

823
00:38:52,700 --> 00:38:55,800
And, and it's Result, it would 
only be appropriate to have 

824
00:38:55,800 --> 00:38:59,800
those sort of short-lived carbon
storage methods in the interim, 

825
00:38:59,800 --> 00:39:02,900
as a transition towards more 
permanent removals. 

826
00:39:03,200 --> 00:39:05,700
Now, again, back to my point 
about, you know, there are 

827
00:39:05,700 --> 00:39:08,600
plenty of reasons to be doing 
regenerative agriculture to be 

828
00:39:08,600 --> 00:39:11,400
storing carbons in soils and 
enhancing our soils and we 

829
00:39:11,400 --> 00:39:14,100
should be doing those and 
there's no reason why, you know,

830
00:39:14,100 --> 00:39:17,000
there can't be additional claims
that that buyers of credits 

831
00:39:17,000 --> 00:39:20,900
would make like if I wanted to 
have a net zero commitment and a

832
00:39:20,900 --> 00:39:25,000
net positive impact on soil. 
Ation, I could do that and then 

833
00:39:25,000 --> 00:39:28,900
I could go out and fund 
regenerative agriculture on its 

834
00:39:28,900 --> 00:39:32,600
own Merit, not asking for any 
sort of carbon Credit in return.

835
00:39:32,900 --> 00:39:34,900
So we have to think about models
like that because that might be 

836
00:39:34,900 --> 00:39:38,000
an additional way to fund that 
behavior but it's definitely 

837
00:39:38,000 --> 00:39:41,100
difficult and I understand 
because, you know, we need to be

838
00:39:41,100 --> 00:39:44,800
doing these things and yet they 
don't fit neatly into what we 

839
00:39:44,800 --> 00:39:47,500
know needs to happen from a 
geophysical standpoint in terms 

840
00:39:47,500 --> 00:39:50,800
of actually managing the carbon 
that's coming out and the carbon

841
00:39:50,800 --> 00:39:54,300
that's going back in. 
I have this this Idea and feel 

842
00:39:54,300 --> 00:39:56,200
free to dunk on me. 
If you think I've made a wrong 

843
00:39:56,200 --> 00:40:01,100
turn that even if sort of the 
worst case here, the worst case 

844
00:40:01,100 --> 00:40:05,700
Beyond premature leakage for 
soil, carbon is that it only 

845
00:40:05,700 --> 00:40:08,400
lasts for ten years. 
And then the land is plowed up 

846
00:40:08,400 --> 00:40:10,600
and turned into a subdivision or
something like that. 

847
00:40:10,900 --> 00:40:14,900
I think even buying us 
additional time of less carbon 

848
00:40:14,900 --> 00:40:18,300
in the atmosphere over the 
course of a decade or two or 

849
00:40:18,300 --> 00:40:20,400
three. 
While the more permanent 

850
00:40:20,400 --> 00:40:23,200
solution scale up, that still 
seems very valuable. 

851
00:40:23,400 --> 00:40:25,800
To me, I'm not sure exactly how 
it should be valued and maybe 

852
00:40:25,800 --> 00:40:29,200
it's not my place to judge. 
That's more of a, the market and

853
00:40:29,300 --> 00:40:32,300
information needs to flow 
between parties to prevent out. 

854
00:40:32,400 --> 00:40:35,600
But is that right or wrong or 
some mix? 

855
00:40:36,200 --> 00:40:37,600
I think you're right that it has
value in. 

856
00:40:37,600 --> 00:40:41,000
The big question is how much 
value and there is a way of kind

857
00:40:41,000 --> 00:40:44,500
of quantitatively comparing the 
value of permanent storage to 

858
00:40:44,500 --> 00:40:48,400
the value of temporary storage 
and involves invoking a discount

859
00:40:48,400 --> 00:40:49,900
rate. 
So it involves the terrifying 

860
00:40:49,900 --> 00:40:53,200
Prospect of deciding the degree 
to which we value. 

861
00:40:53,300 --> 00:40:56,300
True Generations, less than 
current Generations. 

862
00:40:56,700 --> 00:40:58,700
Well, with that, if you are 
capable of making those 

863
00:40:58,700 --> 00:41:01,000
diversions, I think it 
definitely has value. 

864
00:41:01,000 --> 00:41:04,000
And in the Oxford principles 
framing, what we're saying is 

865
00:41:04,400 --> 00:41:07,200
you know, it's important to keep
escalating that percentage of 

866
00:41:07,200 --> 00:41:10,200
removals that you're buying and 
that percentage of long-lived or

867
00:41:10,200 --> 00:41:12,500
low risk storage that you're 
putting carbon into. 

868
00:41:12,900 --> 00:41:15,700
And as long as you're on that 
quadratically increasing pathway

869
00:41:15,700 --> 00:41:19,400
all the way to 100% by 2045. 
Because as I think, we'll see 

870
00:41:19,400 --> 00:41:23,500
with the new ipcc report, it's 
not 2050 anymore to get It's a 

871
00:41:23,508 --> 00:41:26,400
net zero for 1.5 it's probably 
something more like 2045. 

872
00:41:26,500 --> 00:41:29,900
So by the time we get to 2045 
mid-century, we've really got to

873
00:41:29,900 --> 00:41:33,100
be storing carbon permanently. 
We've got to be removing it from

874
00:41:33,100 --> 00:41:36,100
the air rather than the 
accounting element of paying 

875
00:41:36,100 --> 00:41:39,200
others to avoid. 
So it does have value but it's 

876
00:41:39,200 --> 00:41:42,800
only part of the transition, it 
plays a role and we can't expect

877
00:41:42,800 --> 00:41:44,200
organizations to only rely on 
that. 

878
00:41:44,200 --> 00:41:47,600
They need to show in good faith,
if they're scaling up those 

879
00:41:47,600 --> 00:41:50,800
other Solutions at the same 
time, indeed, in this tinier 

880
00:41:50,800 --> 00:41:55,100
thing you bring up to, we have 
Thinking a lot about that as 

881
00:41:55,100 --> 00:41:59,600
well, because we think if 
permanence is the most important

882
00:41:59,600 --> 00:42:03,200
factor about a given carbon 
removal, sort of being able to 

883
00:42:03,200 --> 00:42:06,400
compare against the amount of 
permanence that can reasonably 

884
00:42:06,400 --> 00:42:10,800
be guaranteed allows for some 
fungibility between these 

885
00:42:10,800 --> 00:42:12,500
different types of carbon 
removals. 

886
00:42:12,600 --> 00:42:15,600
I think I mean that's ignoring 
all the co-benefits and other 

887
00:42:15,600 --> 00:42:17,900
reasons someone might prefer to 
support blue carbon or something

888
00:42:17,900 --> 00:42:21,500
else for their own reasons. 
But I also have this worried 

889
00:42:21,500 --> 00:42:26,400
that already took this Amount of
time to educate policymakers and

890
00:42:26,400 --> 00:42:29,900
buyers of offsets and negative 
emissions to think in terms of 

891
00:42:29,900 --> 00:42:32,700
tons. 
But now you've added temporal 

892
00:42:32,700 --> 00:42:36,700
Dimension to every asset to it 
kind of hurts my brain to think 

893
00:42:36,700 --> 00:42:38,200
about it. 
And I work on this on a daily 

894
00:42:38,200 --> 00:42:41,000
basis. 
So is it worth the cost to 

895
00:42:41,000 --> 00:42:43,900
re-educate Consumers and 
policymakers about thinking in 

896
00:42:43,900 --> 00:42:45,600
terms of ten years rather than 
tons? 

897
00:42:45,600 --> 00:42:46,800
Is it more trouble than it's 
worth? 

898
00:42:46,800 --> 00:42:48,600
Or is that the best way that we 
should go? 

899
00:42:49,000 --> 00:42:50,700
I would not embark on that 
project. 

900
00:42:50,700 --> 00:42:55,300
I would keep it rooted in the 
You know, races Euro criteria, 

901
00:42:55,300 --> 00:42:58,100
for what Net, Zero means things 
like the Oxford principles. 

902
00:42:58,100 --> 00:43:01,100
Other guidance that says, what 
does NetZero aligned offsetting?

903
00:43:01,100 --> 00:43:05,900
Look like, it looks like using 
very high quality, offsets that 

904
00:43:05,908 --> 00:43:07,900
have a high certainty of carbon 
benefit. 

905
00:43:07,900 --> 00:43:10,200
It looks like shifting your 
carbon offsetting practices 

906
00:43:10,200 --> 00:43:11,900
towards removals. 
It looks like shifting your 

907
00:43:11,900 --> 00:43:14,200
practices towards Long Live 
storage, eventually achieving 

908
00:43:14,200 --> 00:43:18,700
100% And finally and so you got 
to do that, right? 

909
00:43:18,700 --> 00:43:21,800
But that's only a portion that's
that's the sort of fraction that

910
00:43:21,800 --> 00:43:23,800
you're escalating. 
There's there's There's some 

911
00:43:23,800 --> 00:43:27,000
leeway perhaps in what else? 
You're buying and maybe that's 

912
00:43:27,200 --> 00:43:30,400
where carbon credits that offer 
a carbon benefit. 

913
00:43:30,400 --> 00:43:33,500
But one that has less certainty 
or one that lasts for a short 

914
00:43:33,500 --> 00:43:35,200
amount of time. 
I think another way to think 

915
00:43:35,200 --> 00:43:38,700
about it is we should think 
about carbon stocks and sinks as

916
00:43:38,700 --> 00:43:42,100
things that people need Steward.
And so if you put carbon in the 

917
00:43:42,100 --> 00:43:45,300
soil and it comes back out, 
well, someone should be 

918
00:43:45,300 --> 00:43:47,700
responsible for when that carbon
comes back out. 

919
00:43:47,700 --> 00:43:50,200
It's like think about the 
example of a lot of the 

920
00:43:50,500 --> 00:43:53,200
reforestation that she'll is 
doing in Southeast Asia. 

921
00:43:53,400 --> 00:43:56,800
Where they'll buy up degraded 
palm oil Plantation. 

922
00:43:56,800 --> 00:44:01,000
Well 20 years ago, that palm oil
Plantation was a tropical forest

923
00:44:01,300 --> 00:44:04,700
and it was destroyed and the 
carbon was released who was 

924
00:44:04,700 --> 00:44:08,300
responsible for that when they 
go back and re Forest that plot,

925
00:44:08,800 --> 00:44:10,600
they want to sell you a carbon 
credit. 

926
00:44:10,600 --> 00:44:13,300
That says when you pump their 
fuel out of the pump the petrol 

927
00:44:13,300 --> 00:44:17,100
station depending on which 
country you live in you are 

928
00:44:17,100 --> 00:44:18,900
doing so with carbon neutral 
gas. 

929
00:44:19,000 --> 00:44:22,000
But they're basically matching 
that reforestation that carbon 

930
00:44:22,000 --> 00:44:24,900
sequestration with this. 
Carbon when in fact you could 

931
00:44:24,900 --> 00:44:26,700
argue it should go towards 
counteracting. 

932
00:44:26,700 --> 00:44:29,000
The original deforestation that 
took place 20 years ago. 

933
00:44:29,000 --> 00:44:33,600
So similarly if you pile up 
carbon in the soil carbon sink 

934
00:44:34,100 --> 00:44:36,000
and then it gets released, 
someone should be responsible 

935
00:44:36,000 --> 00:44:39,200
for cleaning up that mess. 
You know, you should have to 

936
00:44:39,200 --> 00:44:42,700
store an equivalent amount of 
carbon to what was leaked out. 

937
00:44:42,700 --> 00:44:46,000
And I think this can be 
accomplished with jurisdictional

938
00:44:46,000 --> 00:44:48,500
based programs that cover, you 
know, not just an individual 

939
00:44:48,500 --> 00:44:52,200
project, but many, many projects
where you say, you know, on the 

940
00:44:52,200 --> 00:44:55,400
whole To make sure that the 
carbon stock retains its value 

941
00:44:55,400 --> 00:44:58,200
and just keeps escalating up and
up and up and if we ever have a 

942
00:44:58,200 --> 00:45:01,800
shortfall maybe there's a maybe 
there's a buffer pool that kicks

943
00:45:01,800 --> 00:45:05,000
in but even better there's 
somebody who's on the hook to 

944
00:45:05,000 --> 00:45:08,800
actually go out and let's say 
top up the carbon storage back 

945
00:45:08,800 --> 00:45:10,600
to the value that it's supposed 
to be at. 

946
00:45:11,700 --> 00:45:16,500
Hmm, so that sort of thing about
this this time, your thing about

947
00:45:16,500 --> 00:45:19,300
then. 
So it sounds like, if we 

948
00:45:19,300 --> 00:45:22,300
shouldn't try to re-educate 
people in terms of the tinier. 

949
00:45:22,700 --> 00:45:26,500
And we also accept that a ton is
not a ton is not a time. 

950
00:45:27,100 --> 00:45:31,200
So then are we giving up the 
dream of fungibility is that may

951
00:45:31,200 --> 00:45:33,500
be a hurdle. 
Do you think that we should no 

952
00:45:33,500 --> 00:45:37,900
longer try to make carbon 
removal somewhat equivalent in 

953
00:45:37,908 --> 00:45:40,200
this in this way? 
Yeah. 

954
00:45:40,800 --> 00:45:43,500
I think what? 
We need to be focusing on is 

955
00:45:43,900 --> 00:45:46,300
honesty and credibility around 
carbon benefits. 

956
00:45:46,700 --> 00:45:50,000
And at this stage, you know, 
we're facing a market that's 

957
00:45:50,400 --> 00:45:52,800
voluntary, carbon Market, where,
you know, maybe 80% of the 

958
00:45:52,800 --> 00:45:55,400
credits are renewable energy and
avoided deforestation. 

959
00:45:55,400 --> 00:45:58,200
And these carbon project types 
that really just frankly can't 

960
00:45:58,200 --> 00:46:00,500
demonstrate that. 
They really did anything in the 

961
00:46:00,500 --> 00:46:02,300
atmosphere to a high degree of 
certainty. 

962
00:46:02,300 --> 00:46:05,200
So we're starting from a very 
low level so I think the battles

963
00:46:05,200 --> 00:46:10,100
to fight now are to tighten the 
rules so that we actually have 

964
00:46:10,100 --> 00:46:14,200
to demonstrate Bill changes in 
the atmosphere due to the carbon

965
00:46:14,200 --> 00:46:14,700
project. 
No. 

966
00:46:14,700 --> 00:46:18,200
Actual carbon benefits and 
that's those are the battles to 

967
00:46:18,200 --> 00:46:21,800
be fighting. 
I think introducing ton years is

968
00:46:21,800 --> 00:46:23,200
possible. 
I think we just have to 

969
00:46:23,200 --> 00:46:27,900
recognize that the simplest 
formulation here is to basically

970
00:46:27,900 --> 00:46:31,700
say, one out, one in if you're 
taking carbon out of a stock 

971
00:46:31,900 --> 00:46:33,900
which is what you're doing, 
whenever you dig up, some fossil

972
00:46:33,900 --> 00:46:37,400
fuels, you've got to put carbon 
back in and if we actually have 

973
00:46:37,400 --> 00:46:41,100
those physical flows matched and
we can we can ensure that I mean

974
00:46:41,100 --> 00:46:43,700
there's a huge role for soil 
carbon there because there's 

975
00:46:43,700 --> 00:46:48,000
plenty of carbon belching out of
soils all over the world at any 

976
00:46:48,000 --> 00:46:50,700
given time. 
And so why don't we match that 

977
00:46:50,700 --> 00:46:54,200
physical outflow with physical 
inflow? 

978
00:46:54,200 --> 00:46:56,000
Adding carbon two similar 
stocks. 

979
00:46:56,500 --> 00:46:59,000
So I think that that physical 
balance is really important 

980
00:46:59,000 --> 00:47:04,800
because the more we abstract 
away from that, with, with these

981
00:47:04,800 --> 00:47:07,600
credits, we come into more 
danger around creating 

982
00:47:07,600 --> 00:47:09,100
situations where there's not 
fungibility. 

983
00:47:09,100 --> 00:47:11,300
I think a ton is not a ton right
Frankie. 

984
00:47:11,800 --> 00:47:13,700
Carbon credits are extremely 
different, they're quite 

985
00:47:13,700 --> 00:47:16,200
heterogenous and I think maybe 
that's what we tried to do with 

986
00:47:16,200 --> 00:47:20,000
the Oxford principles, taxonomy 
is say there's fundamentally 

987
00:47:20,000 --> 00:47:22,800
different buckets of carbon 
projects and and they have 

988
00:47:22,800 --> 00:47:27,100
different roles to play and 
companies need to be clear about

989
00:47:27,100 --> 00:47:28,900
what they're buying. 
They need to make sure that 

990
00:47:28,900 --> 00:47:31,000
they're on the right. 
Trajectory they need to 

991
00:47:31,008 --> 00:47:34,500
publicize that and share that, 
it's maybe not the most direct 

992
00:47:34,500 --> 00:47:36,900
answer your question. 
Because, you know, I think 

993
00:47:36,900 --> 00:47:40,600
there's a lot we need to educate
and assist on when it comes to 

994
00:47:40,600 --> 00:47:42,800
high quality. 
Eating because if somebody just 

995
00:47:42,800 --> 00:47:45,300
goes out to the market and they 
just buy whatever they see 

996
00:47:45,300 --> 00:47:48,600
first, it's probably not going 
to be good and and are they even

997
00:47:48,600 --> 00:47:51,400
going to know that? 
So I applaud the work of, you 

998
00:47:51,400 --> 00:47:54,100
know, a lot of journalists that 
I've seen who are writing these 

999
00:47:54,400 --> 00:47:57,300
up frankly, almost expose is 
where they sort of say, look at 

1000
00:47:57,300 --> 00:48:00,400
this current project like, if 
whether you're a scientist or a 

1001
00:48:00,400 --> 00:48:03,300
lay person like, does this does 
this hold water like it clearly 

1002
00:48:03,300 --> 00:48:06,800
doesn't, you know a common sense
can go a long way if you really 

1003
00:48:07,000 --> 00:48:09,700
you know shine a light on some 
of these practices and people 

1004
00:48:09,700 --> 00:48:12,500
say you know what this is just 
not It clearly, it needs to be 

1005
00:48:12,508 --> 00:48:14,700
tightened. 
Well, how about you take us to 

1006
00:48:14,700 --> 00:48:16,800
this fourth? 
Principal support the 

1007
00:48:16,808 --> 00:48:20,700
development of NetZero aligned 
offsetting how might that 

1008
00:48:20,700 --> 00:48:23,800
proceed, right? 
So fourth and final yeah, this 

1009
00:48:23,800 --> 00:48:27,100
is really saying, in addition to
making these transitions in your

1010
00:48:27,100 --> 00:48:31,000
offsetting portfolio, it's 
important that you as a credible

1011
00:48:31,000 --> 00:48:34,900
actor as a NetZero and actor are
actually pushing off setting as 

1012
00:48:34,900 --> 00:48:36,800
a practice in the right 
direction. 

1013
00:48:36,800 --> 00:48:40,300
This mostly comes in the form of
setting up long-term agreements.

1014
00:48:40,500 --> 00:48:43,900
So we Them as a bit earlier. 
But, you know, actually being 

1015
00:48:43,900 --> 00:48:46,500
willing to engage with some 
carbon projects who are going to

1016
00:48:46,500 --> 00:48:50,200
need to show that they have a 
buyer for their carbon credits 

1017
00:48:50,200 --> 00:48:52,300
over a period of time. 
So you can actually be very 

1018
00:48:52,300 --> 00:48:55,100
supportive. 
Some of these nascent earlier 

1019
00:48:55,100 --> 00:49:00,200
stage Technologies, by pooling 
Demand with other buyers and 

1020
00:49:00,200 --> 00:49:02,600
actually engaging in one of 
these long-term off take 

1021
00:49:02,600 --> 00:49:05,000
agreements. 
There's also this idea around 

1022
00:49:05,100 --> 00:49:08,400
forming alliances with your 
industry. 

1023
00:49:08,400 --> 00:49:10,200
Whether you're a group of 
lawyers or group of 

1024
00:49:10,200 --> 00:49:13,100
universities, you're a group of 
some Producers who have kind of 

1025
00:49:13,100 --> 00:49:16,000
common problems frankly and 
maybe common Solutions you have 

1026
00:49:16,000 --> 00:49:19,400
a similar mix of emissions and 
and you can pull together and 

1027
00:49:19,400 --> 00:49:23,000
actually maybe have strength in 
numbers and maybe have 

1028
00:49:23,300 --> 00:49:26,400
principles across your industry 
that you can decide on together.

1029
00:49:27,000 --> 00:49:29,500
And then there's this idea 
around, supporting the 

1030
00:49:29,500 --> 00:49:32,800
preservation of Nature and 
Restoration in its own right. 

1031
00:49:32,800 --> 00:49:35,500
When we talked about this 
earlier, we're part of 

1032
00:49:35,800 --> 00:49:40,500
participating in in a NetZero. 
Aligned trajectory is making 

1033
00:49:40,500 --> 00:49:42,700
sure that all All of these 
different environmental crises 

1034
00:49:42,700 --> 00:49:45,000
are addressed. 
And, although you need to be 

1035
00:49:45,000 --> 00:49:48,000
certain and sure that if you 
want to declare net zero 

1036
00:49:48,000 --> 00:49:51,600
emissions, the offsets you're 
using are actually producing a 

1037
00:49:51,600 --> 00:49:53,600
tangible effect on the 
atmosphere, they're increasingly

1038
00:49:53,600 --> 00:49:56,800
only removals and they're 
increasingly only Long Live 

1039
00:49:56,800 --> 00:49:59,000
storage. 
Now that is going to start to 

1040
00:49:59,000 --> 00:50:02,800
limit the degree to which some 
companies in the 20. 

1041
00:50:02,800 --> 00:50:07,200
You know, late 2020s 2030 2040. 
S can rely on some nature based 

1042
00:50:07,200 --> 00:50:11,200
Solutions but again, that's no 
reason not to continue to 

1043
00:50:11,200 --> 00:50:12,900
support. 
Those Solutions in their own 

1044
00:50:12,900 --> 00:50:15,200
right and find ways. 
That governments companies, 

1045
00:50:15,200 --> 00:50:17,700
everybody can make sure that 
enough money is going to 

1046
00:50:17,700 --> 00:50:19,900
preserve what ecosystems we have
left. 

1047
00:50:19,900 --> 00:50:23,500
And also, after we achieve what 
I often call Peak Farm, in other

1048
00:50:23,500 --> 00:50:26,400
words, the peak amount of land 
under agricultural management 

1049
00:50:26,400 --> 00:50:29,200
and we start to shrink that 
whether that's through more 

1050
00:50:29,200 --> 00:50:32,100
efficient production or, you 
know, changes in diets that free

1051
00:50:32,100 --> 00:50:35,700
up land, we're going to start 
to, we hope have free land that 

1052
00:50:35,700 --> 00:50:38,100
we can use to free from a carbon
standpoint. 

1053
00:50:38,100 --> 00:50:40,100
Right? 
Not not necessarily free free 

1054
00:50:40,100 --> 00:50:43,200
lands to store carbon. 
Carbon on to allow, ecosystems 

1055
00:50:43,200 --> 00:50:45,100
to flourish all of us. 
And we have to make sure that we

1056
00:50:45,100 --> 00:50:49,600
do that, even if it's no longer 
necessarily part of, or as 

1057
00:50:49,600 --> 00:50:52,000
explicitly, part of a carbon 
Market as before. 

1058
00:50:53,400 --> 00:50:55,700
Okay. 
Well, what do you think has 

1059
00:50:55,700 --> 00:50:59,300
changed since the publication of
these principles, Eli has 

1060
00:50:59,300 --> 00:51:03,400
anything out of complexity or 
Nuance here, thinking, or have 

1061
00:51:03,400 --> 00:51:06,100
you personally ditched any of 
these and said I do longer 

1062
00:51:06,300 --> 00:51:09,400
support this principle? 
I doubt that's the case, but 

1063
00:51:09,400 --> 00:51:11,000
what's happened to your thinking
on it? 

1064
00:51:11,600 --> 00:51:14,000
Well, we've gotten some great 
feedback and I think one of the 

1065
00:51:14,008 --> 00:51:16,200
pieces that we've realized is 
this point that I just made 

1066
00:51:16,200 --> 00:51:19,100
about really needing to 
emphasize the importance of 

1067
00:51:19,200 --> 00:51:23,000
nature based Solutions as a 
means of solving, the sort of 

1068
00:51:23,000 --> 00:51:25,700
dual crises of, you know, the 
biodiversity crisis. 

1069
00:51:25,700 --> 00:51:28,900
And the climate crisis, I think 
we're seeing a couple of things 

1070
00:51:28,900 --> 00:51:31,900
we're seeing in a sense, the 
principles were quite timely, 

1071
00:51:32,000 --> 00:51:36,100
because a lot of entities are 
claiming to be Net Zero and 

1072
00:51:36,100 --> 00:51:37,700
they're not. 
In other words, they're still 

1073
00:51:37,700 --> 00:51:40,700
using avoided emission. 
Offsets, we saw a little Twitter

1074
00:51:40,700 --> 00:51:43,400
storm. 
Erupt a few weeks ago, when Mark

1075
00:51:43,400 --> 00:51:46,600
Carney, I think innocently but 
it accidentally tweeted that 

1076
00:51:46,700 --> 00:51:48,900
Brookfield, asset management was
not zero. 

1077
00:51:48,900 --> 00:51:51,800
And of course it's not they, 
they buy avoided emission 

1078
00:51:51,800 --> 00:51:54,100
offset. 
So I think we're seeing a rise 

1079
00:51:54,100 --> 00:51:57,000
of people making claims that 
need to be pushed back against 

1080
00:51:57,100 --> 00:52:00,300
whereas we've exited the 
honeymoon, phase of NetZero. 

1081
00:52:00,300 --> 00:52:02,400
Commitments. 
Now we're in a period where we 

1082
00:52:02,400 --> 00:52:03,600
actually have to hold 
accountable. 

1083
00:52:03,600 --> 00:52:05,600
People that are making these 
claims and make sure that 

1084
00:52:05,600 --> 00:52:07,200
they're actually aligned with 
the science. 

1085
00:52:07,200 --> 00:52:10,300
And with things like the Oxford 
principles and science-based 

1086
00:52:10,300 --> 00:52:13,200
targets guidelines and other Our
other got forms of guidance. 

1087
00:52:13,600 --> 00:52:15,000
So that's something we're 
seeing. 

1088
00:52:15,400 --> 00:52:20,000
I think we've also witnessed a 
big Push by the fossil fuel 

1089
00:52:20,000 --> 00:52:22,800
companies to support nature 
based Solutions. 

1090
00:52:22,800 --> 00:52:25,600
But I think this we have to 
observe with great caution 

1091
00:52:26,200 --> 00:52:29,800
because again I think we might 
be playing into their hands if 

1092
00:52:29,800 --> 00:52:32,500
we're if we're supporting 
nature-based Solutions at the 

1093
00:52:32,500 --> 00:52:35,500
expense of supporting some of 
the costs earlier but more 

1094
00:52:35,700 --> 00:52:38,400
secure forms of storage with 
engineered Solutions. 

1095
00:52:38,600 --> 00:52:42,500
I do worry about that that we're
losing our Opportunity to 

1096
00:52:42,500 --> 00:52:46,200
harness the ability to pay of 
these companies who are 

1097
00:52:46,200 --> 00:52:48,100
profiting from from climate 
change. 

1098
00:52:48,100 --> 00:52:50,100
Essentially, who are profiting 
from fossil fuels. 

1099
00:52:50,400 --> 00:52:53,700
Hold them responsible for 
helping the development and the 

1100
00:52:54,000 --> 00:52:56,500
evolution of these nascent 
removal Technologies. 

1101
00:52:56,900 --> 00:53:00,600
Yeah, maybe that's a good segue 
to to share a little bit about 

1102
00:53:00,800 --> 00:53:03,500
some some work I've been doing 
it and some thinking that we've 

1103
00:53:03,500 --> 00:53:06,300
been doing around what does 
carbon Removal really need to 

1104
00:53:06,308 --> 00:53:10,400
get up to speed because if you 
wanted to go full steam ahead on

1105
00:53:10,400 --> 00:53:12,700
the Oxford principles. 
Auro, where are you going to 

1106
00:53:12,700 --> 00:53:14,600
find all that removal, right? 
There's definitely some 

1107
00:53:14,600 --> 00:53:17,600
reforestation you can buy, but 
in terms of mineralization 

1108
00:53:17,600 --> 00:53:21,100
enhanced weathering direct are 
capture biomass carbon removal 

1109
00:53:21,100 --> 00:53:24,000
and storage. 
These frankly, quite expensive, 

1110
00:53:24,000 --> 00:53:27,700
engineered solutions that 
deliver that higher degree of 

1111
00:53:27,700 --> 00:53:30,400
confidence in terms of 
permanence, where you going to 

1112
00:53:30,400 --> 00:53:32,200
get those, how are you going to 
develop that market? 

1113
00:53:32,400 --> 00:53:33,800
Do you know, are you putting 
that on me? 

1114
00:53:35,900 --> 00:53:37,900
We're trying man. 
Come on, yeah. 

1115
00:53:37,900 --> 00:53:42,000
No, yeah, so I think we've done 
a I hope that is a useful 

1116
00:53:42,000 --> 00:53:44,500
overview of the Oxford 
principles and kind of how they 

1117
00:53:44,500 --> 00:53:47,400
came to be and where they are. 
I don't know if, if we miss 

1118
00:53:47,400 --> 00:53:50,800
anything there, but yeah, one 
thing that's become clear since 

1119
00:53:50,800 --> 00:53:52,000
the Oxford principles were 
published. 

1120
00:53:52,000 --> 00:53:54,400
One thing that's certainly 
clear, is that removals need 

1121
00:53:54,400 --> 00:53:57,100
help, right? 
First of all, organizations, 

1122
00:53:57,100 --> 00:53:59,100
like carbon 180, have done an 
excellent job. 

1123
00:53:59,100 --> 00:54:02,800
This is an independent advocate 
in the US who have really become

1124
00:54:02,800 --> 00:54:07,100
the locus of knowledge and 
support for carbon removal and 

1125
00:54:07,100 --> 00:54:08,900
really a place for people to go 
and understand. 

1126
00:54:08,900 --> 00:54:10,900
There's also something called 
the CD, our primer, the carbon 

1127
00:54:10,900 --> 00:54:13,600
dioxide If a primer, which we 
can put in the show notes, which

1128
00:54:13,600 --> 00:54:16,100
is an excellent resource, I'm 
sure you've already talked about

1129
00:54:16,100 --> 00:54:18,900
that a bit in the podcast, but 
we're realizing is, you know, 

1130
00:54:18,900 --> 00:54:20,100
I'm Bates, at the University of 
Oxford. 

1131
00:54:20,100 --> 00:54:23,100
And so I'm exposed to kind of 
what's happening in Europe, but 

1132
00:54:23,100 --> 00:54:25,500
also a little bit as an 
American, what's happening 

1133
00:54:25,500 --> 00:54:29,300
across the pond and what we're 
seeing is that, you know, CDR 

1134
00:54:29,300 --> 00:54:32,600
carbon dioxide Removal really 
needs Europe, and Europe, needs 

1135
00:54:32,600 --> 00:54:35,000
CDR as well. 
And that is a piece of the 

1136
00:54:35,000 --> 00:54:36,400
puzzle that isn't really 
happening. 

1137
00:54:36,400 --> 00:54:40,000
So if you look back at the 
evolution of solar and wind some

1138
00:54:40,000 --> 00:54:43,100
of these other climate Ins, you 
know, Europe, played a massive 

1139
00:54:43,100 --> 00:54:45,200
role in providing those 
deployment incentives. 

1140
00:54:45,200 --> 00:54:48,600
The German feed-in, tariff. 
Other things that really allowed

1141
00:54:48,600 --> 00:54:51,100
these Technologies to flourish 
and develop. 

1142
00:54:51,300 --> 00:54:54,800
And so I'm actually in the 
process of helping launch an 

1143
00:54:54,800 --> 00:54:57,300
advocacy organization that will 
play this role in Europe that 

1144
00:54:57,300 --> 00:55:00,500
will actually bring the 
conversation on carbon removal 

1145
00:55:00,700 --> 00:55:03,500
in Europe to a healthier place. 
Because I think right now 

1146
00:55:03,700 --> 00:55:05,400
there's a lot of concerns with 
carbon removal. 

1147
00:55:05,400 --> 00:55:07,700
I think when people hear the 
word carbon removal, even in the

1148
00:55:07,700 --> 00:55:09,800
context of the Oxford principles
when they hear that. 

1149
00:55:10,000 --> 00:55:11,700
Oh wow. 
We have to switch all our Start 

1150
00:55:11,700 --> 00:55:14,400
removals, I don't know. 
What do you think grass like to 

1151
00:55:14,400 --> 00:55:16,500
be? 
I think people hear that word 

1152
00:55:16,500 --> 00:55:18,600
removal and they think of the 
engineered solutions, they think

1153
00:55:18,600 --> 00:55:20,600
of direct are capturing these 
kind of new technologies. 

1154
00:55:20,600 --> 00:55:23,900
When in fact removal 
encompasses, many many 

1155
00:55:23,900 --> 00:55:26,300
Technologies and Pathways 
including the nature based 

1156
00:55:26,300 --> 00:55:29,100
Solutions. 
Yeah, thanks for sharing all 

1157
00:55:29,100 --> 00:55:30,700
that. 
And I'm so happy to hear about 

1158
00:55:30,700 --> 00:55:34,400
there being more organizations 
dedicated to thinking about 

1159
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:36,500
carbon removal. 
I think it's specialized enough 

1160
00:55:36,500 --> 00:55:41,000
that it really needs this level 
of care, and it is strange that 

1161
00:55:41,000 --> 00:55:42,400
there. 
There's a lot happening in 

1162
00:55:42,400 --> 00:55:45,400
Europe, but a lot of the 
discourse I see in Europe. 

1163
00:55:45,400 --> 00:55:47,600
It feels more closely. 
Linked to geoengineering 

1164
00:55:47,600 --> 00:55:50,100
debates. 
Maybe then exists only United 

1165
00:55:50,100 --> 00:55:52,200
States. 
The might just be my perception,

1166
00:55:52,200 --> 00:55:53,700
that maybe it, maybe it's yours 
too. 

1167
00:55:54,100 --> 00:55:57,000
I think that's, that's right. 
That the idea of removals is 

1168
00:55:57,000 --> 00:55:59,400
somewhat frightened, people are 
concerned that there's going to 

1169
00:55:59,400 --> 00:56:02,100
be some, you know, industrial 
capture or Industries are going 

1170
00:56:02,100 --> 00:56:05,700
to use removals as an excuse to 
sort of lock in behaviors that 

1171
00:56:05,700 --> 00:56:08,700
we don't want to perpetuate. 
And so we know at this point 

1172
00:56:08,700 --> 00:56:12,100
that removals are a compliment, 
not it, Placement for emission 

1173
00:56:12,100 --> 00:56:15,200
reduction and so their role is 
critical, not just for 

1174
00:56:15,200 --> 00:56:18,400
eliminating those hard to Abate 
emissions but also, I really 

1175
00:56:18,400 --> 00:56:21,500
like Polly Jean bucks point 
about, you know, Carbon removal 

1176
00:56:21,500 --> 00:56:23,600
is a means of decolonizing the 
atmosphere. 

1177
00:56:23,600 --> 00:56:26,500
In other words, it's a means of 
holding accountable those 

1178
00:56:26,500 --> 00:56:28,700
entities and countries who put 
all the carbon in the air in the

1179
00:56:28,700 --> 00:56:31,100
first place. 
So I don't think really anybody 

1180
00:56:31,100 --> 00:56:34,500
should be afraid of carbon 
removal as a concept because you

1181
00:56:34,508 --> 00:56:36,700
know, at this point it's very 
clear from the ipcc and other 

1182
00:56:36,700 --> 00:56:38,900
sources that we're going to need
it to achieve our temperature 

1183
00:56:38,900 --> 00:56:41,700
goals, but there might be some 
very legitimate Emmett, fears 

1184
00:56:41,700 --> 00:56:43,800
and concerns. 
So what we're trying to do is 

1185
00:56:43,800 --> 00:56:48,500
launch a vehicle in organization
and NGO, that's we call it, you 

1186
00:56:48,500 --> 00:56:52,200
know, Carbon 180s little sister 
European sister because what we 

1187
00:56:52,200 --> 00:56:55,600
want to do is three things, 
really support policy advocacy. 

1188
00:56:55,600 --> 00:56:58,300
So be an independent 
philanthropic, Lee funded 

1189
00:56:58,300 --> 00:57:02,300
Advocate, who can actually you 
know 10x the research budget for

1190
00:57:02,300 --> 00:57:04,700
carbon removal. 
Who can push for that deployment

1191
00:57:04,700 --> 00:57:06,300
funding? 
I mentioned deployment 

1192
00:57:06,300 --> 00:57:07,700
incentives. 
That really kind of get these 

1193
00:57:07,700 --> 00:57:13,100
things moving and developing and
also Providing fair and safe 

1194
00:57:13,100 --> 00:57:15,100
rules of the road because I 
think, you know, if you're 

1195
00:57:15,100 --> 00:57:17,500
concerned about carbon removal, 
if you're, if you're concerned 

1196
00:57:17,500 --> 00:57:20,400
about the idea of direct air 
capture a geological storage or 

1197
00:57:20,400 --> 00:57:23,700
some of these Solutions, you 
know, the right solution I would

1198
00:57:23,700 --> 00:57:26,400
say is not to fight against them
but to engage with them and say,

1199
00:57:26,700 --> 00:57:29,300
you know, who should be setting 
the rules to make sure that 

1200
00:57:29,300 --> 00:57:32,000
they're done safely. 
I think it's really a matter of 

1201
00:57:32,300 --> 00:57:35,200
society acknowledging that we 
will need to remove carbon and 

1202
00:57:35,200 --> 00:57:38,600
that it's an important piece of 
the puzzle and that the mix of 

1203
00:57:38,600 --> 00:57:43,200
carbon removal Pathways that we 
deploy Is really something we 

1204
00:57:43,200 --> 00:57:46,500
need to decide as a society. 
But right now, we're at risk of 

1205
00:57:46,500 --> 00:57:50,100
making that decision based on a 
lack of knowledge, a sense of 

1206
00:57:50,100 --> 00:57:52,900
fear and and just simple 
heuristics like, what's the 

1207
00:57:52,908 --> 00:57:54,900
cheapest thing? 
So, we want to change that. 

1208
00:57:54,900 --> 00:57:57,400
We want to change the narrative 
and so that's why another thing 

1209
00:57:57,400 --> 00:58:01,200
that this organization will do 
is convenient, EOS environmental

1210
00:58:01,200 --> 00:58:04,800
groups and help to are some of 
those concerns start to build a 

1211
00:58:04,808 --> 00:58:07,300
coalition that's something that 
we've seen happen in the US, the

1212
00:58:07,300 --> 00:58:10,100
u.s. you can really build a 
coalition around the concept of 

1213
00:58:10,107 --> 00:58:13,500
carbon removal and make sure. 
It's done responsibly and then 

1214
00:58:13,600 --> 00:58:16,100
third and finally this idea of 
fund your education. 

1215
00:58:16,300 --> 00:58:18,700
We think there needs to be a 
place for philanthropists and 

1216
00:58:18,700 --> 00:58:21,400
funders to go to get up to speed
with carbon removal and 

1217
00:58:21,400 --> 00:58:24,300
understand how it fits into 
their strategy and how they can 

1218
00:58:24,600 --> 00:58:28,800
actually support, not just 
fundamental basic research but 

1219
00:58:28,800 --> 00:58:31,300
also lab exit, right? 
Getting Technologies out of the 

1220
00:58:31,300 --> 00:58:35,200
lab and into the marketplace and
supporting all these other forms

1221
00:58:35,200 --> 00:58:37,800
of advocacy and convening and 
the things that need to happen 

1222
00:58:37,800 --> 00:58:40,900
to build a thriving ecosystem. 
So I'll just close with. 

1223
00:58:41,400 --> 00:58:44,400
What the status of this 
organization is, we are 

1224
00:58:44,400 --> 00:58:46,800
attending to be, you know, very 
collaborative and complementary 

1225
00:58:46,800 --> 00:58:49,000
with other efforts that are at 
play in Europe. 

1226
00:58:49,000 --> 00:58:50,300
So we're just trying to fill 
gaps here. 

1227
00:58:50,300 --> 00:58:52,200
We're not trying to do anything 
that others are doing. 

1228
00:58:52,500 --> 00:58:55,100
We've received some anchor 
support from the Grantham 

1229
00:58:55,100 --> 00:58:57,200
Foundation from the climate 
Pathfinders foundation. 

1230
00:58:57,200 --> 00:58:59,800
So we have an initial pool of 
funding to go out. 

1231
00:58:59,800 --> 00:59:03,100
And so right now what we're 
looking for what I'd encourage 

1232
00:59:03,200 --> 00:59:05,600
listeners to check out. 
Is we have a posting for an 

1233
00:59:05,600 --> 00:59:08,000
executive director. 
So we're looking for somebody to

1234
00:59:08,300 --> 00:59:11,000
lead this organization to take 
on this budget. 

1235
00:59:11,200 --> 00:59:13,900
You've raised these Partners 
Partnerships that we formed but 

1236
00:59:13,900 --> 00:59:16,600
really build an organization 
that will be a champion for 

1237
00:59:16,600 --> 00:59:19,100
carbon removal and in a way 
it's, you know, the face of 

1238
00:59:19,100 --> 00:59:21,900
carbon removal for Europe, 
something that the u.s. already 

1239
00:59:21,900 --> 00:59:26,400
has in some ways through Noah 
digestion and other excellent 

1240
00:59:26,500 --> 00:59:29,400
members of the CDR ecosystem but
doesn't really exist in Europe 

1241
00:59:29,400 --> 00:59:31,800
yet. 
So your app needs CDR, CDR needs

1242
00:59:31,800 --> 00:59:33,900
Europe and we'll put in the show
notes. 

1243
00:59:33,900 --> 00:59:38,400
A link to CDR advocacy 
Europe.com where people can 

1244
00:59:38,400 --> 00:59:41,500
check out the Ed listing and see
if they if they they want to 

1245
00:59:41,500 --> 00:59:44,500
support and get involved. 
I think there's going to be a 

1246
00:59:44,500 --> 00:59:47,400
lot in the show notes today so 
you should definitely check that

1247
00:59:47,400 --> 00:59:49,500
out if you're listening last. 
I heard. 

1248
00:59:49,500 --> 00:59:52,700
Yeah, you were looking for an 
executive director to lead this 

1249
00:59:52,700 --> 00:59:54,500
new effort. 
What's the latest? 

1250
00:59:54,500 --> 00:59:56,700
How's it been going? 
Absolutely. 

1251
00:59:56,700 --> 00:59:58,000
Yeah. 
We've had some, some really 

1252
00:59:58,000 --> 01:00:01,900
strong applicants from from 
really all across industry. 

1253
01:00:01,900 --> 01:00:05,700
Climate activists, people that 
have worked in policy positions.

1254
01:00:05,800 --> 01:00:08,300
So it's been, it's been really 
exciting to see and we're just 

1255
01:00:08,300 --> 01:00:10,700
going through that process now, 
but we're definitely still 

1256
01:00:10,900 --> 01:00:14,200
looking for additional 
candidates who are Didn't, you 

1257
01:00:14,200 --> 01:00:17,000
know, the reality is carbon 
removal is a relatively new 

1258
01:00:17,000 --> 01:00:20,800
space and so the ecosystem 
doesn't really exist. 

1259
01:00:20,800 --> 01:00:22,900
And so there aren't necessarily 
A lot of people that have deep 

1260
01:00:22,900 --> 01:00:25,500
knowledge of carbon removal and 
all these things. 

1261
01:00:25,500 --> 01:00:28,000
So we're looking farther afield.
We're definitely looking for 

1262
01:00:28,000 --> 01:00:31,200
people that have, you know, 
built organizations, people who 

1263
01:00:31,200 --> 01:00:34,800
are able to set a vision and be 
a charismatic leader that can 

1264
01:00:34,800 --> 01:00:37,800
inspire people and who are 
willing to be flexible 

1265
01:00:37,800 --> 01:00:41,000
diplomatic, and thoughtful in 
how they learn about. 

1266
01:00:41,000 --> 01:00:44,300
And then communicate the need 
for urban removal because it is 

1267
01:00:44,300 --> 01:00:46,900
a very difficult topic. 
Its complex covers, a lot of 

1268
01:00:46,900 --> 01:00:49,900
different areas of science. 
It has engendered controversy 

1269
01:00:49,900 --> 01:00:53,900
and so we need someone that's 
able to speak to different 

1270
01:00:53,900 --> 01:00:56,900
audiences and really help bring 
in the concerns and the 

1271
01:00:57,000 --> 01:01:01,300
supporters and Skeptics of CDR 
from from very different walks 

1272
01:01:01,300 --> 01:01:03,500
and areas. 
Are you guys going to start a 

1273
01:01:03,508 --> 01:01:06,400
podcast? 
We could pick something up for 

1274
01:01:06,400 --> 01:01:08,700
us, that would be fun. 
I there's a lot, right? 

1275
01:01:08,800 --> 01:01:11,400
There's a lot to talk about. 
I think we're close to 200 

1276
01:01:11,400 --> 01:01:16,100
episodes deep of this on Al You 
feel like I have a, had the 

1277
01:01:16,100 --> 01:01:18,300
final say on anything. 
At this point I feel like at the

1278
01:01:18,308 --> 01:01:20,500
complexity is only increasing. 
Yeah. 

1279
01:01:20,500 --> 01:01:23,700
But no I mean at least that's 
one of the reasons why it's not 

1280
01:01:23,700 --> 01:01:26,300
that difficult to keep the show 
going is because they're 

1281
01:01:26,300 --> 01:01:28,500
genuinely interesting and 
difficult problems. 

1282
01:01:28,500 --> 01:01:30,800
And there's so many angles and I
just discover new ones all the 

1283
01:01:30,800 --> 01:01:33,400
time, but specifically for your 
efforts in Europe. 

1284
01:01:33,400 --> 01:01:36,900
I wish you lots of success. 
I'm happy to see more people 

1285
01:01:36,900 --> 01:01:39,000
thinking about this. 
I love seeing more people enter 

1286
01:01:39,000 --> 01:01:43,200
carbon removal as a career. 
I love seeing thoughtful people.

1287
01:01:43,300 --> 01:01:45,700
Try to make some of these 
conversations happen. 

1288
01:01:46,000 --> 01:01:48,000
I think it's really important. 
I get kind of discouraged 

1289
01:01:48,000 --> 01:01:51,400
sometimes of the Timbre of the 
conversation gets a little too 

1290
01:01:52,000 --> 01:01:54,600
aggressive or down area. 
And I like that. 

1291
01:01:54,600 --> 01:01:56,500
There's an attempt to elevate 
it. 

1292
01:01:56,900 --> 01:02:00,600
But anyways, not the not to go 
back to that familiar territory 

1293
01:02:00,600 --> 01:02:03,300
that for as much as I talk 
about, not wanting to do it. 

1294
01:02:03,300 --> 01:02:05,000
I have meta comments on it all 
the time. 

1295
01:02:05,100 --> 01:02:10,500
I should stop doing that. 
Anyways though links all those 

1296
01:02:10,500 --> 01:02:13,200
things are in the show notes, 
you'll have someone to follow. 

1297
01:02:13,300 --> 01:02:16,100
Your work, personally, where's 
the best place for them to do? 

1298
01:02:16,100 --> 01:02:17,800
So, yeah. 
Thanks, Ross. 

1299
01:02:18,100 --> 01:02:21,400
Well, first of all, encourage 
anyone to check out the Oxford 

1300
01:02:21,400 --> 01:02:24,300
principles for, that's your line
carbon offsetting and actually 

1301
01:02:24,300 --> 01:02:26,800
another paper that we're about 
to put out that I'd love to also

1302
01:02:26,800 --> 01:02:29,900
share in the show notes where we
actually show a vision for how 

1303
01:02:29,900 --> 01:02:32,100
you can operationalize, those 
principles, how you can actually

1304
01:02:32,100 --> 01:02:36,200
have an offset that has baked 
into it all of the things that I

1305
01:02:36,207 --> 01:02:38,100
just talked about. 
So if that sounds appealing, 

1306
01:02:38,500 --> 01:02:41,900
this paper is for you. 
But in terms of following me, 

1307
01:02:42,000 --> 01:02:44,300
I'm at Eli. 
I am Larson on Twitter. 

1308
01:02:44,400 --> 01:02:48,200
You can check me out there. 
And yeah, I'd be Keen to hear 

1309
01:02:48,200 --> 01:02:50,500
from anyone. 
So we'll include some ways to 

1310
01:02:50,500 --> 01:02:52,800
reach me in the show notes and I
really look forward to 

1311
01:02:53,200 --> 01:02:55,800
continuing these conversations, 
me too. 

1312
01:02:55,900 --> 01:02:58,800
Happy to have you back some time
to talk about future papers and 

1313
01:02:58,800 --> 01:03:01,400
research, Etc. 
There's clearly a lot here. 

1314
01:03:01,500 --> 01:03:05,100
I left a lot of comments of 
yours go by without responding. 

1315
01:03:05,100 --> 01:03:07,800
Even though I wanted to, I don't
know if you knew that Eli was 

1316
01:03:07,800 --> 01:03:11,200
like, oh I know that comment the
comment has four or five 

1317
01:03:11,200 --> 01:03:14,500
noteworthy things now that I 
didn't monologues through them. 

1318
01:03:14,500 --> 01:03:16,300
So I'd love to. 
I wasn't good. 

1319
01:03:16,900 --> 01:03:20,600
It wasn't, it wasn't a factor of
the way in which you speak so 

1320
01:03:20,600 --> 01:03:22,500
much as the content is 
important. 

1321
01:03:22,500 --> 01:03:24,400
And there's a lot to say about 
all of it. 

1322
01:03:24,600 --> 01:03:26,600
Anyways, it's a good sign. 
There's more to talk about and 

1323
01:03:26,600 --> 01:03:27,900
we'll have to do more in the 
future. 

1324
01:03:28,100 --> 01:03:30,800
But in the meantime, thank you 
so much for coming on the show. 

1325
01:03:30,800 --> 01:03:33,100
It was a lot of fun and I'm 
grateful for having you here. 

1326
01:03:33,700 --> 01:03:36,800
Thank you Ross. 
My pleasure, thank you. 

1327
01:03:36,900 --> 01:03:38,700
And thank you for listening to 
if you like what we're doing 

1328
01:03:38,700 --> 01:03:39,900
here. 
Please rate and review us on 

1329
01:03:39,900 --> 01:03:43,500
iTunes or a podcast. 
Tell your friends have a Nuanced

1330
01:03:43,500 --> 01:03:48,200
discussion about offsetting and 
carbon markets, try and bring 

1331
01:03:48,200 --> 01:03:51,100
that and shoehorned out into 
your weekend, I'm sure your 

1332
01:03:51,100 --> 01:03:52,700
friends will love it. 
Hopefully you have friends who 

1333
01:03:52,700 --> 01:03:56,300
will love it whatever? 
Okay, thanks for listening and 

1334
01:03:56,300 --> 01:04:03,800
good, bye for now. 
Thank you so much for listening.

1335
01:04:03,800 --> 01:04:06,200
If you like the show, please 
rate and review it in apple 

1336
01:04:06,200 --> 01:04:09,400
podcast and or Stitcher. 
It really helps us a lot to get 

1337
01:04:09,400 --> 01:04:11,100
this content to a wider 
audience. 

1338
01:04:11,300 --> 01:04:13,100
If you think what we're doing is
useful, interesting. 

1339
01:04:13,200 --> 01:04:14,900
I'm fun. 
Hopefully, all three. 

1340
01:04:15,100 --> 01:04:16,800
We certainly appreciate your 
rating and review. 

1341
01:04:17,100 --> 01:04:19,600
You can keep up with Nori at nor
e.com where there is a 

1342
01:04:19,607 --> 01:04:23,200
newsletter that's nor e.com. 
Subscribe, there's podcast. 

1343
01:04:23,200 --> 01:04:25,500
There's a whole bunch else or 
you can send us an email at 

1344
01:04:25,500 --> 01:04:29,100
podcast at nor e.com. 
We are also now on patreon at 

1345
01:04:29,100 --> 01:04:32,600
patreon.com slash Nori podcasts,
if you'd like more content 

1346
01:04:32,600 --> 01:04:35,400
engagement and community and 
thank you so much for your 

1347
01:04:35,400 --> 01:04:36,000
support.