1 00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:02,680 You have found yourself at the Reversing Climate Change 2 00:00:02,680 --> 00:00:04,880 podcast. I'm Ross Kenyon, I'm the host. 3 00:00:05,040 --> 00:00:06,760 Before we get started today, I want to tell you about the 4 00:00:06,760 --> 00:00:09,560 sponsors of this episode. I'm so grateful we have a new 5 00:00:09,560 --> 00:00:12,520 one, which is cool. Cdr Jobs, surely if you work in 6 00:00:12,520 --> 00:00:16,320 carbon removal or aspire to, you have been on the Cdr Jobs 7 00:00:16,320 --> 00:00:19,640 website. They are the place to find all 8 00:00:19,640 --> 00:00:24,520 of the Cdr jobs. No adulteration, no other 9 00:00:24,640 --> 00:00:26,520 adjacency. It's carbon removal. 10 00:00:26,720 --> 00:00:29,920 So that's the place to look. One of the things that is very 11 00:00:29,920 --> 00:00:34,240 cool about being ACDR job posting site is that they get a 12 00:00:34,240 --> 00:00:40,360 lot of data on employment in Cdr and they have not slept on their 13 00:00:40,360 --> 00:00:43,560 data duties. In fact, last year they did ACDR 14 00:00:43,560 --> 00:00:48,160 salary report, which details how much people make in the space, 15 00:00:48,160 --> 00:00:52,280 if there's any discrepancies across gender or race, of which 16 00:00:52,280 --> 00:00:55,360 countries, where are jobs being created in carbon removal. 17 00:00:55,520 --> 00:00:59,080 They gathered over 800 data points, 400 individual 18 00:00:59,080 --> 00:01:02,360 responses, and 400 salaries from job openings, which represents 19 00:01:02,360 --> 00:01:05,239 only a partial sample size. But even still, that report was 20 00:01:05,239 --> 00:01:08,480 generated A4 figure amount, which is a lot of times to 21 00:01:08,480 --> 00:01:11,080 download a report. People want this information and 22 00:01:11,080 --> 00:01:12,800 they're doing another survey this year. 23 00:01:12,800 --> 00:01:14,440 They're doing another survey this year. 24 00:01:14,640 --> 00:01:18,320 So recently I put out a small episode about why I think this 25 00:01:18,320 --> 00:01:21,920 kind of work is important, about HR decisions, about pay 26 00:01:21,920 --> 00:01:24,960 transparency. Why I think that's on net a good 27 00:01:24,960 --> 00:01:27,920 strategy if you are an employer and also if you're an employee, 28 00:01:27,920 --> 00:01:31,080 why you should talk to your colleagues about salary and 29 00:01:31,360 --> 00:01:34,080 destigmatize conversations around that topic and why they 30 00:01:34,080 --> 00:01:38,240 can be really useful. And I think the Cdr Jobs 2025 31 00:01:38,240 --> 00:01:41,280 salary survey is a really powerful way to anchor that 32 00:01:41,280 --> 00:01:44,040 conversation, to give you something to talk about because 33 00:01:44,040 --> 00:01:47,880 it makes sure that employers are creating a trustful environment. 34 00:01:48,600 --> 00:01:52,040 And it's also making sure that employees are not being taken 35 00:01:52,040 --> 00:01:54,480 advantage of in any way. I don't suspect that is 36 00:01:54,480 --> 00:01:56,560 happening. Cdr is a small place that is 37 00:01:56,560 --> 00:01:59,960 very mission driven, but it is beneficial for us to work 38 00:01:59,960 --> 00:02:02,760 together to make sure that, you know, our peers are taken care 39 00:02:02,760 --> 00:02:04,600 of or we ourselves are taken care of. 40 00:02:04,840 --> 00:02:07,560 And if you are in a position of power, that you are creating a 41 00:02:07,560 --> 00:02:10,880 kind of environment where people really want to love the company 42 00:02:10,880 --> 00:02:12,800 that they're at. And this is potentially one way 43 00:02:12,920 --> 00:02:15,640 that you can do that. So I would say if you are 44 00:02:15,640 --> 00:02:18,560 already working inside of carbon removal, please go fill out the 45 00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:21,400 2025 salary survey. The link is in the show notes. 46 00:02:21,520 --> 00:02:24,720 And also if you're looking for a job in carbon removal, Cdr jobs 47 00:02:24,720 --> 00:02:26,480 dot Earth, that's where they are. 48 00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:29,120 Go look through them, go apply for them. 49 00:02:29,120 --> 00:02:31,240 If you're at a company and you want to sponsor their work, 50 00:02:31,400 --> 00:02:34,560 that's also a possibility where you can get better visibility 51 00:02:34,560 --> 00:02:36,800 for your jobs. So thank you. 52 00:02:36,960 --> 00:02:39,640 New sponsor means a lot. Thank you, Cdr jobs team. 53 00:02:39,720 --> 00:02:42,280 I appreciate your work and hope it continues for a long time. 54 00:02:42,560 --> 00:02:46,280 We also have our beloved longtime sponsor, Arbonics is 55 00:02:46,280 --> 00:02:48,880 back again. Arbonics is fascinating forestry 56 00:02:48,880 --> 00:02:51,920 work in the EU, primarily in the Baltic States, and they just 57 00:02:51,920 --> 00:02:54,400 released a new report on the state of European forest carbon 58 00:02:54,400 --> 00:02:57,600 credits in 2025. It's a practical guide to how 59 00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:00,120 forest credits are generated, verified, and how developers 60 00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:03,640 handle permanence, leakage, and social integrity in a European 61 00:03:03,640 --> 00:03:05,720 context. What's cool about it is that it 62 00:03:05,720 --> 00:03:08,200 also breaks down how methodologies differ and how 63 00:03:08,200 --> 00:03:11,280 pricing differs between these methodologies and why the timing 64 00:03:11,280 --> 00:03:12,960 matters in the supply constrained market. 65 00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:16,920 Unless you are a deep, very special type of nerd, this 66 00:03:16,920 --> 00:03:20,800 content is hard to parse, but I think the work that Arbonics is 67 00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:25,440 doing to try to make this easily graspable by busy people is 68 00:03:25,440 --> 00:03:27,000 really important. And you know, there's. 69 00:03:27,080 --> 00:03:30,120 Really just not that many European horse carbon credits. 70 00:03:30,360 --> 00:03:33,440 With demand rising and a four station projects taking years to 71 00:03:33,440 --> 00:03:36,600 mature, many high quality credits are sold out before 72 00:03:36,600 --> 00:03:38,960 issuance, which I'm sure you've seen this or at least heard 73 00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:41,520 about it. This report is a timely overview 74 00:03:41,520 --> 00:03:43,720 of bottlenecks in the space and the actors who are looking to 75 00:03:43,720 --> 00:03:45,560 solve it. You can find this report in the 76 00:03:45,560 --> 00:03:47,840 show notes. In any case, thank you Cdr Jobs 77 00:03:47,840 --> 00:03:50,600 and our Bionics for your sponsorship means so much to me, 78 00:03:51,400 --> 00:03:54,960 and now we will allow the show to begin in earnest. 79 00:04:02,960 --> 00:04:05,560 Hey, thanks for listening to the reversing climate change 80 00:04:05,600 --> 00:04:08,200 podcast. This is Ross Kenyon speaking. 81 00:04:08,200 --> 00:04:11,240 I am the host of the reversing climate change podcast. 82 00:04:11,520 --> 00:04:14,360 Been involved in climate tech and carbon removal for nearly a 83 00:04:14,360 --> 00:04:17,560 decade now. No intention of leaving despite 84 00:04:17,920 --> 00:04:24,120 the winds of change a blowing. Today's show is complex. 85 00:04:24,560 --> 00:04:27,640 Lot of big questions about conflict of interest. 86 00:04:27,960 --> 00:04:31,120 We get into the differences between the common law and civil 87 00:04:31,120 --> 00:04:35,320 law traditions and which route carbon removal should take as we 88 00:04:35,320 --> 00:04:38,560 move ahead. My guest today is Peter Miner, 89 00:04:38,560 --> 00:04:41,240 who is the Co founder and CEO of Absolute Climate. 90 00:04:41,680 --> 00:04:44,480 Absolute Climate made a fascinating design decision 91 00:04:44,480 --> 00:04:47,440 where most people think that registries produce 92 00:04:47,440 --> 00:04:50,400 methodologies. A registry in carbon markets is 93 00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:53,840 where the carbon credits actually live, where the status 94 00:04:53,840 --> 00:04:57,880 of those credits are tracked. It's the source of truth, and 95 00:04:57,880 --> 00:05:01,360 registries often also have scientific teams that develop 96 00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:04,840 methodologies through which carbon credits can be issued and 97 00:05:04,840 --> 00:05:07,520 then be on that registry. Those are functions that have 98 00:05:07,520 --> 00:05:11,400 historically been combined. That isn't always the case. 99 00:05:11,400 --> 00:05:14,720 They're often consultancies that will work with project or tech 100 00:05:14,720 --> 00:05:18,240 developers to develop new methodologies to serve them and 101 00:05:18,240 --> 00:05:21,000 then look for them to have a home on a registry. 102 00:05:21,400 --> 00:05:24,000 That's a nice happens too. But overall, methodologies are 103 00:05:24,000 --> 00:05:26,960 developed by registries, and that's true both in legacy 104 00:05:26,960 --> 00:05:30,280 carbon market and also new ones that focus on carbon removal. 105 00:05:30,720 --> 00:05:36,760 The contrarian take here is what if registries actually didn't do 106 00:05:36,840 --> 00:05:41,120 methodology development because they're always trying to attract 107 00:05:41,120 --> 00:05:43,640 project developers to work with them. 108 00:05:43,800 --> 00:05:47,280 And registries therefore will face downward pressure to reduce 109 00:05:47,280 --> 00:05:51,360 quality to attract more project developers who don't necessarily 110 00:05:51,360 --> 00:05:55,400 want the extra work or expense or both of developing higher 111 00:05:55,400 --> 00:05:58,880 quality credits. And so Absolute Climate's thesis 112 00:05:58,880 --> 00:06:03,480 is that if methodology development could be done by an 113 00:06:03,480 --> 00:06:07,920 entity that is not the registry, this potentially creates a 114 00:06:07,920 --> 00:06:10,760 better system of checks and balances to make sure that we 115 00:06:10,760 --> 00:06:14,800 are scientifically on track to develop meaningful carbon assets 116 00:06:15,000 --> 00:06:17,840 independently of whether this works or not. 117 00:06:18,160 --> 00:06:21,440 It's the kind of thing that I I like. 118 00:06:22,400 --> 00:06:24,880 I like platform and format innovation. 119 00:06:25,360 --> 00:06:30,880 I think being able to relax restrictions or add new ones and 120 00:06:30,880 --> 00:06:34,560 having enough room to operate in this space is very valuable. 121 00:06:34,800 --> 00:06:38,560 I'm not sure that we have found the ideal configuration of all 122 00:06:38,560 --> 00:06:41,280 of the parties within carbon removal and carbon markets. 123 00:06:41,480 --> 00:06:46,360 I think we need more space to explore those ideas openly and 124 00:06:46,360 --> 00:06:49,720 make sure that we're doing it in a way that it gets us where 125 00:06:49,720 --> 00:06:53,840 we're going, increases trust, makes it easier to develop high 126 00:06:53,840 --> 00:06:57,760 quality carbon assets, and make sure that what we're doing is 127 00:06:57,760 --> 00:07:00,360 actually meaningful. I'll put some links in the show 128 00:07:00,360 --> 00:07:03,240 notes if you'd like to learn more about the civil law and 129 00:07:03,240 --> 00:07:04,960 common law traditions if you want to read about the 130 00:07:04,960 --> 00:07:05,880 Napoleonic. Code. 131 00:07:05,880 --> 00:07:07,160 Well, you're. Listening to Reversing Climate 132 00:07:07,160 --> 00:07:09,440 Change, so presumably you're at least half interested in some of 133 00:07:09,440 --> 00:07:11,040 the weird crap that comes up on this show. 134 00:07:11,040 --> 00:07:13,280 So I'll put a little link if you want to. 135 00:07:13,440 --> 00:07:17,880 If you want a tiny taste to dive further into legal history and 136 00:07:17,880 --> 00:07:20,080 if you love things like that, if you can't get it anywhere else 137 00:07:20,080 --> 00:07:22,480 and that's why you're here, a great rating and review on Apple 138 00:07:22,480 --> 00:07:24,960 Podcast or Spotify would be amazingly helpful. 139 00:07:25,200 --> 00:07:28,200 Also, it's $5 a month through Spotify, and you actually don't 140 00:07:28,200 --> 00:07:32,320 need to be on Spotify to get it, but $5 a month gets you ad free 141 00:07:32,320 --> 00:07:34,160 listening. Except for the sponsorships by 142 00:07:34,160 --> 00:07:36,760 paid sponsors that I read myself at the beginning of the show. 143 00:07:37,240 --> 00:07:40,440 You can get away from the programmatic ads that Spotify 144 00:07:40,880 --> 00:07:43,240 puts into the show. Thank you for listening. 145 00:07:43,240 --> 00:07:44,480 You have a lot of choices out there. 146 00:07:44,480 --> 00:07:46,360 The fact that you're spending time with me honors me 147 00:07:46,360 --> 00:07:48,000 immensely. I'm so happy that you're here. 148 00:07:48,160 --> 00:07:50,200 Thanks for listening and here is your show. 149 00:07:57,680 --> 00:08:00,680 Thanks for being here, Peter. My pleasure. 150 00:08:00,680 --> 00:08:03,040 Always great to see you, Ross. Yeah, it's good. 151 00:08:03,280 --> 00:08:05,680 Is there some what? Is there some clicking noise? 152 00:08:06,240 --> 00:08:08,040 Oh, does that mean? Is it this thing? 153 00:08:08,440 --> 00:08:10,200 Oh, is it like a fidget spinner friend? 154 00:08:10,200 --> 00:08:12,000 Yes. It's literally a fidget spinner 155 00:08:12,000 --> 00:08:13,920 thing. I just I'm a fidgeter and so I 156 00:08:13,920 --> 00:08:16,360 like play with this, but I will not do that for the extent of 157 00:08:16,360 --> 00:08:17,320 the podcast. I didn't hear it. 158 00:08:17,320 --> 00:08:18,920 That's that's. Good, the good. 159 00:08:18,920 --> 00:08:23,440 Audio that's impressive. Oh yeah, that's OK, That's fun. 160 00:08:24,200 --> 00:08:27,520 Well, you're, you're a fidgeter, which means you want to do the 161 00:08:27,520 --> 00:08:32,200 most detail oriented, laborious task possible in your life. 162 00:08:32,280 --> 00:08:34,840 So you're writing carbon removal standards? 163 00:08:35,559 --> 00:08:37,240 That sounds about right. Yeah, Yeah. 164 00:08:37,400 --> 00:08:40,799 I mean, I think carbon removal standards are going to be the 165 00:08:40,799 --> 00:08:44,440 rules under which we decide whether carbon removal has the 166 00:08:44,440 --> 00:08:46,760 impacts that it wants or it doesn't. 167 00:08:47,200 --> 00:08:50,120 And so I think, yeah, but my team tends to be very detail 168 00:08:50,120 --> 00:08:53,480 oriented and a little bit OCD that kind of makes us good at 169 00:08:53,480 --> 00:08:56,320 what we do. But yeah, I mean, I feel like 170 00:08:56,480 --> 00:08:59,360 the mission of carbon removal is so much about impact, right? 171 00:08:59,480 --> 00:09:02,000 And so how we measure those impacts is paramount to whether 172 00:09:02,000 --> 00:09:07,000 we're successful or not. And it sounds like absolute the 173 00:09:07,000 --> 00:09:12,320 climate started because of a concern that we've lost sight of 174 00:09:12,320 --> 00:09:15,040 this or maybe commercial interests are distorting what 175 00:09:15,040 --> 00:09:18,840 you view as the correct way to set standards and methodologies. 176 00:09:18,880 --> 00:09:21,040 Is that a quick read of of your take on this? 177 00:09:21,800 --> 00:09:23,560 It's definitely something I've been concerned about. 178 00:09:23,560 --> 00:09:25,960 I think it all started when I was at carbon 180. 179 00:09:25,960 --> 00:09:27,840 I was the director of science and innovation there. 180 00:09:27,840 --> 00:09:30,880 And this is like a little bit before DAC hubs were about to be 181 00:09:30,880 --> 00:09:32,680 announced. We had heard about the program 182 00:09:32,680 --> 00:09:35,920 and we were thinking through like, OK, 4 facilities, 183 00:09:35,920 --> 00:09:38,960 1,000,000 tons per year each. Like that's real carbon, right? 184 00:09:38,960 --> 00:09:41,080 Like this is not just an idea anymore, but we're doing it at a 185 00:09:41,080 --> 00:09:43,120 scale where it's actually being something. 186 00:09:43,440 --> 00:09:46,560 And so the question of how do we actually measure success? 187 00:09:46,560 --> 00:09:48,760 How do we decide, you know, whether it's being done in an 188 00:09:48,760 --> 00:09:50,840 accountable way? Like how do we think about how 189 00:09:50,840 --> 00:09:53,520 we connect the projects to the atmospheric impacts that they're 190 00:09:53,520 --> 00:09:56,320 going to have all of a sudden became very clearly important 191 00:09:56,680 --> 00:09:59,320 and the sort of best practices are on MRV, what it should look 192 00:09:59,320 --> 00:10:02,120 like, what how it should be done hadn't really been established 193 00:10:02,120 --> 00:10:03,680 yet. And so that was something that 194 00:10:03,680 --> 00:10:06,480 me and my team decided to dig into and we put out some sort of 195 00:10:06,480 --> 00:10:08,960 what we thought were best practices around accountable 196 00:10:08,960 --> 00:10:11,520 carbon removal from an MRV perspective. 197 00:10:11,520 --> 00:10:13,760 But I think what really struck me in getting to your point is 198 00:10:13,760 --> 00:10:17,680 that, you know, we think of carbon removal as this distinct 199 00:10:18,080 --> 00:10:21,720 industry compared to avoidance or distinct from forestry who 200 00:10:21,720 --> 00:10:23,360 put, you know, both of which have had some pretty high 201 00:10:23,360 --> 00:10:25,640 profile failures. And that's true to some extent, 202 00:10:25,640 --> 00:10:27,800 right? Like Cdr fixes some issues 203 00:10:27,800 --> 00:10:30,080 around durability in some cases. And you know, there are others. 204 00:10:30,080 --> 00:10:32,840 But but the conflict of interest part like the the incentive 205 00:10:32,840 --> 00:10:35,960 design piece, which I would argue has actually been the core 206 00:10:35,960 --> 00:10:37,920 failure points of those other industries. 207 00:10:38,920 --> 00:10:40,720 He's no different in carbon gleanable that they'll still 208 00:10:40,720 --> 00:10:42,440 same failure mechanism still exist. 209 00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:46,360 And So what I think the core concern that I had was how do we 210 00:10:46,360 --> 00:10:49,800 build MRV in a way that is not accountable just today, but over 211 00:10:49,800 --> 00:10:51,720 the long term, right? How do we make sure that at the 212 00:10:51,720 --> 00:10:54,400 million and billion ton scale, you're still accounting for this 213 00:10:54,400 --> 00:10:57,800 in a way that means something you know is accurately tied to 214 00:10:57,800 --> 00:11:01,960 what the atmosphere is seeing. And I think the system as 215 00:11:02,080 --> 00:11:04,720 designed today is not set up for that, that I think it tends to 216 00:11:04,720 --> 00:11:09,960 be a race to the bottom. Two big points I want to respond 217 00:11:09,960 --> 00:11:12,200 with. The first one I don't know if 218 00:11:12,200 --> 00:11:15,040 it's as. Important as the second, should 219 00:11:15,040 --> 00:11:21,240 a system be built at its early stages to accommodate million or 220 00:11:21,240 --> 00:11:26,440 billion ton pass through? Is it appropriate to design all 221 00:11:26,440 --> 00:11:31,200 of that so far in advance? Maybe I'll just let you answer 222 00:11:31,200 --> 00:11:33,120 that because I want to ask about this topic, this question. 223 00:11:33,120 --> 00:11:34,440 I think that's going to drive a lot of the show. 224 00:11:36,480 --> 00:11:38,000 No, I mean, I think you're asking a really important 225 00:11:38,000 --> 00:11:39,480 question. I think that's one that is part 226 00:11:39,480 --> 00:11:41,800 of the challenge that we need to try to solve today, because 227 00:11:42,000 --> 00:11:44,280 there's a tension between these two things that we need to be 228 00:11:44,480 --> 00:11:46,040 somehow solving. I mean, I think in most 229 00:11:46,040 --> 00:11:48,600 industries, what's going to happen is you're doing a bunch 230 00:11:48,600 --> 00:11:50,640 of R&D, you're doing innovation. We're trying to figure out like 231 00:11:50,720 --> 00:11:52,480 what's this great new problem that we're going to solve, this 232 00:11:52,480 --> 00:11:53,720 new technology we're going to solve it with? 233 00:11:54,280 --> 00:11:56,160 Once I kind of figure out how it works, then I build it, then I 234 00:11:56,160 --> 00:11:57,640 scale it, then I make it happen, right? 235 00:11:57,880 --> 00:12:01,360 In Cdr, we have the unenviable position where we need to do the 236 00:12:01,360 --> 00:12:04,600 science, understand how it works and scale it exactly the same 237 00:12:04,600 --> 00:12:06,840 time, which is not a situation that I would recommend to 238 00:12:06,840 --> 00:12:09,160 literally anyone else. But that is the situation that 239 00:12:09,160 --> 00:12:11,280 we're in. And so there is a tension 240 00:12:11,280 --> 00:12:15,840 between how do we think about building IMRB and building 241 00:12:15,840 --> 00:12:17,400 credibility for the long term, right? 242 00:12:17,400 --> 00:12:19,800 What how do we create a North Star so we can make sure the 243 00:12:19,800 --> 00:12:22,920 industry is going in the right direction while simultaneously 244 00:12:23,160 --> 00:12:25,200 dealing with the fact that we're not there today. 245 00:12:25,200 --> 00:12:28,000 And actually, in many cases for some of these early and first of 246 00:12:28,000 --> 00:12:31,560 a kind projects, it probably doesn't make sense to deploy 247 00:12:31,760 --> 00:12:34,560 requirements around MRV that are needed for the ability to on 248 00:12:34,560 --> 00:12:36,600 scale, right? Like that's a waste of resources 249 00:12:36,600 --> 00:12:39,080 and time. But I think without that, what 250 00:12:39,080 --> 00:12:42,960 happens is if you allow just for the lowest common denominator, 251 00:12:43,120 --> 00:12:45,440 you remove all incentive to do better, right? 252 00:12:45,440 --> 00:12:48,200 They, there's so much work that we need to do around better 253 00:12:48,200 --> 00:12:50,360 quantification methods, better sensing, better models. 254 00:12:50,360 --> 00:12:53,000 And if the standards don't require that, if there isn't 255 00:12:53,000 --> 00:12:56,200 value in doing better, then there's going to be very little 256 00:12:56,200 --> 00:12:59,000 incentive for people to actually invest the time and resources. 257 00:12:59,520 --> 00:13:01,840 And actually what happens is almost literally the opposite, 258 00:13:01,840 --> 00:13:05,640 where if you are a project developer, your incentives are 259 00:13:05,640 --> 00:13:08,680 to go with the standard that gives you the most credits, 260 00:13:08,680 --> 00:13:10,040 right? Like that's, that's why you're 261 00:13:10,040 --> 00:13:11,720 doing this. Like there has to be an economic 262 00:13:11,760 --> 00:13:14,120 incentive for them. And so they're going to pick the 263 00:13:14,120 --> 00:13:15,480 thing that gives them the most credits. 264 00:13:15,720 --> 00:13:18,200 And if, you know, let's say 1 standard is low, has low 265 00:13:18,200 --> 00:13:20,680 requirements and gets away with it, then every other standard 266 00:13:20,680 --> 00:13:22,640 needs to meet that because they need to stay competitive in this 267 00:13:22,640 --> 00:13:24,200 market. And so you're sort of ratcheting 268 00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:27,080 down piece by piece lower and lower and to the point where it 269 00:13:27,080 --> 00:13:28,720 doesn't mean anything at all anymore. 270 00:13:29,040 --> 00:13:31,160 And so that's the challenge is like without that North Star 271 00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:35,040 clarity on in in an ability to measure when something is truly 272 00:13:35,040 --> 00:13:37,800 better than MRV inherently will fall apart. 273 00:13:37,800 --> 00:13:39,440 It's just a question of when, not if. 274 00:13:42,360 --> 00:13:46,640 I have some anecdotal experience of project developers choosing 275 00:13:46,640 --> 00:13:50,480 registries and methodologies not based upon the number of credits 276 00:13:50,480 --> 00:13:54,760 that they would earn and the revenue, but also the speed of 277 00:13:54,760 --> 00:13:58,720 issuance. I've seen him decide upon just 278 00:13:58,720 --> 00:14:01,840 general reputational effects of choosing one registry over 279 00:14:01,840 --> 00:14:04,160 another. It hasn't purely been about 280 00:14:04,320 --> 00:14:08,720 short term revenue based thinking, but it sounds like 281 00:14:08,720 --> 00:14:11,920 you're making a very conceptual A prioritistic argument about 282 00:14:11,920 --> 00:14:16,320 self interested people choosing low effort high reward. 283 00:14:16,320 --> 00:14:18,440 The tendency is towards that way of decision making. 284 00:14:18,440 --> 00:14:23,120 Is that how you see it? I'd be more just like tasks we 285 00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:25,160 have in front of us is incredibly hard, right? 286 00:14:25,160 --> 00:14:28,240 I mean, like scaling up this industry that is the equivalent 287 00:14:28,240 --> 00:14:31,560 of Lito taking a few drops of ink into a pool and then trying 288 00:14:31,560 --> 00:14:33,240 to remove those drops of ink again. 289 00:14:33,440 --> 00:14:36,080 That isn't an incredibly difficult technical challenge, 290 00:14:36,640 --> 00:14:39,400 especially considering we're in an industry where cost is the 291 00:14:39,400 --> 00:14:42,840 driver of almost everything. And so any sort of efficiencies 292 00:14:42,840 --> 00:14:44,800 you can gain any way that you can sort of simplify the 293 00:14:44,800 --> 00:14:47,480 problem, make it easier to scale, that's incredibly 294 00:14:47,480 --> 00:14:48,920 important for for project developers. 295 00:14:48,920 --> 00:14:51,720 Like I think it's a good thing that we are seeking what is most 296 00:14:51,720 --> 00:14:53,840 efficient. I think that's important, but we 297 00:14:53,840 --> 00:14:56,720 also need to realize that there's sometimes when we do 298 00:14:56,720 --> 00:14:59,320 create efficiencies that are reducing the quality of the 299 00:14:59,320 --> 00:15:03,160 outcome, that the atmospheric impacts are less certain or 300 00:15:03,160 --> 00:15:06,080 there are more risks involved and that needs to be accounted 301 00:15:06,080 --> 00:15:07,880 for also. And that's just something that 302 00:15:07,880 --> 00:15:10,800 the voluntary market and in some cases I think compliance markets 303 00:15:10,920 --> 00:15:13,840 are just not good at value that I think that we tend to want to 304 00:15:13,840 --> 00:15:16,360 just treat these things all the same and say like, hey, this is 305 00:15:16,360 --> 00:15:18,120 Best Buy. And so, you know, that's good 306 00:15:18,120 --> 00:15:20,640 enough. Actually, no other industry in 307 00:15:20,640 --> 00:15:23,240 the world operates that way. That when any industry that 308 00:15:23,240 --> 00:15:26,160 cares about quality, quality assurance processes are designed 309 00:15:26,160 --> 00:15:29,360 for very specific performance outcomes, like they're trying to 310 00:15:29,360 --> 00:15:32,080 measure a thing. You know, if I'm trying to say I 311 00:15:32,080 --> 00:15:34,400 am going to build a new wind turbine, I'm not going to say, 312 00:15:34,400 --> 00:15:36,240 oh, I only can use this one grade of steel. 313 00:15:36,320 --> 00:15:39,400 I'm going to say it has to have this yield strength and this 314 00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:42,040 sort of, you know, you know, toughness, basically these 315 00:15:42,040 --> 00:15:43,840 different types of performance specifications. 316 00:15:43,960 --> 00:15:45,120 And I can use different grades of steel. 317 00:15:45,120 --> 00:15:46,760 I can use aluminium, I can use carbon fiber. 318 00:15:46,880 --> 00:15:49,440 There's lots of materials I can use as long as they meet these 319 00:15:49,440 --> 00:15:51,840 requirements. It's based on the outcomes that 320 00:15:51,840 --> 00:15:54,600 we measure success. And Cdr is maybe the only 321 00:15:54,600 --> 00:15:56,480 industry in the world where that is actually not the case. 322 00:15:58,520 --> 00:16:01,840 It's possible that we're just at the stage 1 rocket scale or 323 00:16:01,840 --> 00:16:04,680 we're just trying to get off the ground and then maybe some of 324 00:16:04,680 --> 00:16:07,840 the stuff can come later. Like do I need to have the soil 325 00:16:07,840 --> 00:16:10,840 water measurements for enhanced weathering fully thought through 326 00:16:10,840 --> 00:16:12,960 before we start commercializing enhanced weathering? 327 00:16:13,000 --> 00:16:15,560 Might not be what you're you're arguing for potentially. 328 00:16:16,160 --> 00:16:18,600 I have seen people argue that we shouldn't be commercializing 329 00:16:18,600 --> 00:16:21,080 tech like this until we really know answers to those questions. 330 00:16:21,440 --> 00:16:23,720 But we don't really have a lot of time to be dealing with this 331 00:16:23,720 --> 00:16:26,600 for carbon removal. We're we're in overshoot 332 00:16:26,600 --> 00:16:28,200 territory. Like we're people I know are 333 00:16:28,200 --> 00:16:30,360 talking very seriously about solar radiation management 334 00:16:30,520 --> 00:16:33,560 coming online like, so we don't have a lot of time to get things 335 00:16:33,560 --> 00:16:36,360 perfect. How should we be thinking about 336 00:16:36,360 --> 00:16:38,160 that? This is why it's so tricky 337 00:16:38,160 --> 00:16:40,000 because that's absolutely right, you know, like we do need to be 338 00:16:40,000 --> 00:16:41,960 building and scaling. We can't let the perfect be the 339 00:16:41,960 --> 00:16:43,840 enemy of the good. And there are just some of these 340 00:16:43,840 --> 00:16:46,760 questions that are going to just take time for us to develop the 341 00:16:46,760 --> 00:16:48,640 technology to solve or the science to solve. 342 00:16:48,640 --> 00:16:51,160 And we, you know, we need the time to do it while scaling. 343 00:16:51,160 --> 00:16:54,040 So that's right. And so I think, but I don't 344 00:16:54,040 --> 00:16:56,320 think that's incompatible with sort of the other side of this, 345 00:16:56,320 --> 00:17:00,080 which is I think one thing we forget is we're not just scaling 346 00:17:00,520 --> 00:17:03,680 projects and technologies, we're also scaling political economies 347 00:17:03,680 --> 00:17:04,640 with this. Like we need to convince 348 00:17:04,800 --> 00:17:06,359 lawmakers this is worth investing in. 349 00:17:06,359 --> 00:17:09,760 We need to build, you know, jobs that and create workforces. 350 00:17:09,960 --> 00:17:12,800 And these are things that are very hard to change afterward 351 00:17:13,000 --> 00:17:15,040 that once you actually convince something someone that we should 352 00:17:15,040 --> 00:17:17,240 build this, you get the political economies going, going 353 00:17:17,240 --> 00:17:18,760 back later, you're saying, OK, we're going to increase the 354 00:17:18,760 --> 00:17:20,800 standards. And now this whole segment of 355 00:17:20,800 --> 00:17:23,160 this industry, oops, like those all have to go away. 356 00:17:23,160 --> 00:17:25,760 Now we got the fire, all those people and all of a sudden this 357 00:17:25,760 --> 00:17:27,520 thing that made sense doesn't make sense anymore. 358 00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:29,840 It's just not things that you can walk back afterward. 359 00:17:29,920 --> 00:17:32,400 And this has been a the classic challenge that we've had in in 360 00:17:32,440 --> 00:17:35,600 in climates where we assume we can do what's directionally 361 00:17:35,600 --> 00:17:39,080 correct and then not think about the longer term repercussions 362 00:17:39,080 --> 00:17:41,080 and think longer, you know, think have a North Star that 363 00:17:41,080 --> 00:17:42,200 we're really trying to shoot for. 364 00:17:42,400 --> 00:17:46,400 And that's been us on the butts almost every single time. 365 00:17:47,800 --> 00:17:50,360 There's an example I've heard this might be apocryphal. 366 00:17:50,360 --> 00:17:52,920 I'm not even sure if it's true, but whatever the the point 367 00:17:52,920 --> 00:17:55,360 behind it is is true even if the example's false. 368 00:17:55,720 --> 00:17:59,680 But after the Clean Air Act passed under Nixon, there was a 369 00:18:00,240 --> 00:18:04,240 specific filter or a scrubber for exhaust coming out of 370 00:18:04,560 --> 00:18:07,160 manufacturing facilities. Because it was named 371 00:18:07,160 --> 00:18:10,040 specifically in the legislation or or the administrative policy 372 00:18:10,040 --> 00:18:12,320 that came afterwards. It just stayed there for decades 373 00:18:12,320 --> 00:18:14,360 longer than it needed to, even though the tax surpassed. 374 00:18:14,440 --> 00:18:15,600 It. Did that actually happen? 375 00:18:15,600 --> 00:18:18,000 That that is a true story, Yeah. I mean. 376 00:18:18,680 --> 00:18:20,880 If that is true or not true, there are plenty of examples of 377 00:18:20,880 --> 00:18:24,280 that ethanol in our gasoline. The whole intention originally 378 00:18:24,280 --> 00:18:26,960 was that cars tended to run rich, which means they had more 379 00:18:26,960 --> 00:18:28,960 fuel. So to do combustion you need a 380 00:18:28,960 --> 00:18:30,680 mixture of air and fuel you want. 381 00:18:30,680 --> 00:18:32,320 So there's like a perfect ratio where you get perfect 382 00:18:32,320 --> 00:18:34,480 combustion. Usually cars would run a little 383 00:18:34,480 --> 00:18:36,040 bit rich, which means they have more fuel than air. 384 00:18:36,040 --> 00:18:38,120 And it was more of like a safety thing. 385 00:18:38,360 --> 00:18:41,760 And so the idea was if you take ethanol, it has more like 386 00:18:41,760 --> 00:18:44,320 oxygenation in it than it would normal gasoline does. 387 00:18:44,320 --> 00:18:46,840 So you're basically like tricking the engine to absorbing 388 00:18:46,840 --> 00:18:48,320 or, you know, having more oxygen in there. 389 00:18:48,320 --> 00:18:50,640 So it would run leaner, so more efficiently. 390 00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:52,640 So they're like, yeah, this is so smart, like basically going 391 00:18:52,640 --> 00:18:54,600 to trick it. It was like literally a few 392 00:18:54,600 --> 00:18:57,800 years later car manufacturers built and introduced oxygen 393 00:18:57,800 --> 00:19:00,400 sensors into the combustion process so they could detect 394 00:19:00,400 --> 00:19:03,680 this and then immediately correct for it. 395 00:19:04,200 --> 00:19:06,360 So why do we still have ethanol in our gasoline? 396 00:19:07,280 --> 00:19:09,720 Political Economy. Political economies, political 397 00:19:09,720 --> 00:19:11,960 capture, We decided this is something we want to support and 398 00:19:12,040 --> 00:19:15,880 it's been impossible to change. Ever since this has been my long 399 00:19:15,880 --> 00:19:19,960 standing anxiety about policy because I've slept on policy for 400 00:19:19,960 --> 00:19:23,520 a long time and Nori was not a very policy forward company. 401 00:19:23,520 --> 00:19:25,680 We're very much BCM is the way to go. 402 00:19:25,960 --> 00:19:28,760 And part of it was knowing that no matter how policy gets 403 00:19:28,800 --> 00:19:31,480 written from these political economies will be established. 404 00:19:31,480 --> 00:19:33,840 There's vested interest. They're very hard to change once 405 00:19:33,840 --> 00:19:35,560 people are are making money off of something. 406 00:19:35,560 --> 00:19:38,320 And we are not an industry that can lobby successfully against 407 00:19:38,320 --> 00:19:41,040 Agri business or oil and gas or other people that have a lot of 408 00:19:41,040 --> 00:19:43,000 influence. So I've always been very 409 00:19:43,240 --> 00:19:46,960 cautious about how much policy we want for that reason. 410 00:19:47,480 --> 00:19:48,800 It's not like you're saying there's no way out of it 411 00:19:48,800 --> 00:19:50,480 basically. But should we be setting those 412 00:19:50,480 --> 00:19:52,640 up for carbon removal now? Like, do you want that kind of 413 00:19:52,640 --> 00:19:54,600 power in your own hands? A lot of responsibility. 414 00:19:54,600 --> 00:19:56,200 It's kind of scary saying, oh wow. 415 00:19:57,400 --> 00:20:00,160 I mean, yes, I think so. I mean, I think the reason why 416 00:20:00,160 --> 00:20:02,640 this matters is because I think there is a better way to set 417 00:20:02,640 --> 00:20:04,960 standards than we do today. Like today, like you sort of are 418 00:20:04,960 --> 00:20:09,360 choosing between either maximum flexibility or I can have like 419 00:20:09,360 --> 00:20:11,920 some say more rigor, but then usually gets hard coded on 420 00:20:11,920 --> 00:20:14,560 specific approaches like if you use this sensor, if you use this 421 00:20:14,600 --> 00:20:16,440 like. Modeling approach or you have to 422 00:20:16,440 --> 00:20:18,480 gather this kind of data. And I actually think there's a 423 00:20:18,480 --> 00:20:20,640 way that you can kind of bridge the gap between those two things 424 00:20:20,640 --> 00:20:24,000 where, you know, our standard, the way it applies is we have 425 00:20:24,000 --> 00:20:27,440 one single assessment approach for all types of CARP that we do 426 00:20:27,440 --> 00:20:28,680 the exact same way for everybody. 427 00:20:28,680 --> 00:20:31,160 And one of the big advantages there is that we can set what 428 00:20:31,160 --> 00:20:33,480 that sort of quality requirements are in terms of 429 00:20:33,480 --> 00:20:36,200 like what data you capture, baselines need to be what best 430 00:20:36,200 --> 00:20:38,680 practices, even the definition of storage is not, is not 431 00:20:39,760 --> 00:20:41,840 compatible for pretty much any other standard. 432 00:20:42,000 --> 00:20:43,520 We have a consistent way of approaching that. 433 00:20:43,960 --> 00:20:46,440 What's nice is you can say like, OK, you need to meet this 434 00:20:46,440 --> 00:20:48,640 quality bar, and this is how you actually measure that 435 00:20:48,640 --> 00:20:53,160 specifically with data. But now how you do that, what 436 00:20:53,160 --> 00:20:54,320 models do you use, what sensors use? 437 00:20:54,440 --> 00:20:56,800 That's up to you. You can now decide on a project 438 00:20:56,800 --> 00:20:58,360 scale, like what works best for you. 439 00:20:58,360 --> 00:21:00,880 And we're just going to measure you against how you meet our 440 00:21:01,080 --> 00:21:03,360 criteria. And so there's a way that we can 441 00:21:03,360 --> 00:21:06,080 build better policy that historically has been sort of 442 00:21:06,080 --> 00:21:09,840 hard coded to types of Cdr or types of approaches which tend 443 00:21:09,840 --> 00:21:12,200 to be very brittle. And we can design it based on 444 00:21:12,200 --> 00:21:14,400 performance because that's what the thing we care about, right? 445 00:21:14,680 --> 00:21:17,480 What we care about is how many carbon dioxide molecules are in 446 00:21:17,480 --> 00:21:20,240 the atmosphere and how many of them are we actually moving and 447 00:21:20,240 --> 00:21:22,880 putting into durable storage to, you know, long enough time that 448 00:21:23,000 --> 00:21:24,360 it actually has an impact on climates. 449 00:21:24,480 --> 00:21:26,160 Like that's the only thing that actually matters. 450 00:21:26,400 --> 00:21:28,880 And so if we put the requirements on that, then you 451 00:21:28,880 --> 00:21:30,640 don't have to have that same problem that we've seen in the 452 00:21:30,640 --> 00:21:33,320 past. Do you feel pressure to? 453 00:21:33,320 --> 00:21:38,040 Get to 100% perfection and what you're doing, no. 454 00:21:38,080 --> 00:21:41,480 No, I think. You might be distorting it if 455 00:21:41,480 --> 00:21:44,320 you if you don't get there though, in a way that is likely 456 00:21:44,320 --> 00:21:47,320 to persist because you'll make people very angry if they have 457 00:21:47,320 --> 00:21:51,560 to change, I think. I think, I think there's. 458 00:21:52,000 --> 00:21:54,920 So are you talking specifically about how do we set the right 459 00:21:54,920 --> 00:21:57,640 standards for the future long term or just how are we 460 00:21:57,640 --> 00:22:00,000 assessing it today and making sure that it is accurate in 461 00:22:00,000 --> 00:22:02,640 terms of what impacts it has on climate? 462 00:22:04,280 --> 00:22:08,480 I think it relates to both of those questions essentially, 463 00:22:08,680 --> 00:22:10,080 basically. The. 464 00:22:10,200 --> 00:22:13,240 Example I come back to often is I would not want to be at SBTI. 465 00:22:13,400 --> 00:22:15,880 Whatever you do is going to make someone really mad. 466 00:22:16,400 --> 00:22:20,400 Depending on how you determine the LCA project boundaries in a 467 00:22:20,400 --> 00:22:23,360 general way is going to, you know, if you're really strict 468 00:22:23,360 --> 00:22:26,000 about it, some companies are going to love you because you're 469 00:22:26,000 --> 00:22:28,120 going to harm their rivals and others are going to be really 470 00:22:28,120 --> 00:22:29,520 upset because you harmed their business. 471 00:22:29,920 --> 00:22:34,440 Like how, how are you able to? I don't know the tough position 472 00:22:34,440 --> 00:22:37,000 to be in, but I wouldn't want to that seat personally is what I'm 473 00:22:37,000 --> 00:22:39,000 trying to say. I mean, I think that's actually 474 00:22:39,000 --> 00:22:42,240 what we're trying to to fix here, which is not just like, 475 00:22:42,520 --> 00:22:45,240 like right now, what the right boundary is or what is the 476 00:22:45,240 --> 00:22:46,760 right, you know, level of quality. 477 00:22:46,760 --> 00:22:48,600 That's basically just someone's opinion, right? 478 00:22:48,600 --> 00:22:51,000 Like someone is deciding that some hopefully very smart 479 00:22:51,000 --> 00:22:52,960 scientist is saying like, this is what we think is the best 480 00:22:52,960 --> 00:22:55,600 practice or here's what we think is, is rational or makes sense. 481 00:22:55,920 --> 00:22:57,840 But then a completely different scientist does that for a 482 00:22:57,840 --> 00:23:00,560 different project, even in the same pathway or certainly does 483 00:23:00,560 --> 00:23:01,760 it differently for a different pathway. 484 00:23:01,760 --> 00:23:04,960 And so we just have basically a mix of different opinions and we 485 00:23:04,960 --> 00:23:07,680 can spend all day long arguing who's right, who's wrong, and 486 00:23:07,800 --> 00:23:09,760 you're right, Like we're never going to make progress there. 487 00:23:09,760 --> 00:23:13,040 Like ultimately just becomes a series of of political 488 00:23:13,040 --> 00:23:15,880 arguments. And I do think like there is 489 00:23:15,960 --> 00:23:17,720 that we're never going to be able to get away from all of 490 00:23:17,720 --> 00:23:19,280 those. Like some things are going to be 491 00:23:20,320 --> 00:23:22,120 completely subjective and that, you know, we'll have to deal 492 00:23:22,120 --> 00:23:24,560 with that in the political ways. But I think there are ways that 493 00:23:24,560 --> 00:23:27,000 we can be not just more objective, but maybe more 494 00:23:27,000 --> 00:23:30,680 importantly more consistent where if we're at least applying 495 00:23:30,680 --> 00:23:33,440 the same rules for everybody, maybe the rules are right, maybe 496 00:23:33,440 --> 00:23:35,000 they're wrong. Like maybe you could argue that, 497 00:23:35,160 --> 00:23:37,960 but if they're at least consistent for everybody, like 498 00:23:37,960 --> 00:23:40,720 everyone is, we're measuring quality and we're measuring 499 00:23:40,720 --> 00:23:44,160 success exactly the same way for everybody, then at least you can 500 00:23:44,160 --> 00:23:45,720 say like everyone has the fair chance. 501 00:23:45,960 --> 00:23:47,840 And I think maybe part of what I'm getting to with this, and 502 00:23:47,840 --> 00:23:50,880 maybe what you're getting to is I think Cdr has had this belief 503 00:23:50,880 --> 00:23:53,200 that, you know, we we need all solutions, like we should do 504 00:23:53,200 --> 00:23:55,000 everything and there's going to be room for everything. 505 00:23:55,400 --> 00:23:56,920 I'm not sure that's actually true long term. 506 00:23:57,760 --> 00:23:59,240 In the short term, absolutely true. 507 00:23:59,240 --> 00:24:01,440 We have no idea which is going to be the type of technology 508 00:24:01,440 --> 00:24:03,840 that scales and is going to be the thing that we should really 509 00:24:03,840 --> 00:24:06,920 be doing and getting just a gigaton scale, I certainly don't 510 00:24:06,920 --> 00:24:08,920 have the answer to that. I think all of them have a fair 511 00:24:08,920 --> 00:24:11,520 shot at that today. But if you look at how we build 512 00:24:11,520 --> 00:24:18,440 and deploy technologies in the world, you need to have a point 513 00:24:18,440 --> 00:24:21,720 in which you have consolidation, where the supply chains need to 514 00:24:21,720 --> 00:24:24,960 be, you know, invested in and grown to be able to get to the 515 00:24:24,960 --> 00:24:26,720 scale that we need. That doing the, you know, 10 516 00:24:26,720 --> 00:24:29,040 different supply chains to 10 different methods and, you know, 517 00:24:29,400 --> 00:24:31,720 across different jurisdictions. It's a point it's not going to 518 00:24:31,720 --> 00:24:37,520 make sense forever. Wow, Peter, are you allowed to 519 00:24:37,600 --> 00:24:40,520 break with Canon on that? You know what? 520 00:24:41,560 --> 00:24:45,080 I often hear people say that in public and then privately I'll 521 00:24:45,080 --> 00:24:47,840 hear someone be like, I'll be like, what? 522 00:24:50,040 --> 00:24:51,480 I'm like you just. Said you just said we already 523 00:24:51,480 --> 00:24:52,840 got solutions. What does that? 524 00:24:52,840 --> 00:24:58,880 Mean, I'm obviously gonna have to bleep that out, but I'll and 525 00:24:58,960 --> 00:25:01,520 then I'll hear them be like, it's all it's all nonsense that 526 00:25:01,520 --> 00:25:03,400 doesn't even work. I'm just like, OK. 527 00:25:03,720 --> 00:25:06,000 I will be honest about this and you can actually put this on the 528 00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:07,280 podcast. I'm actually happy with this. 529 00:25:07,280 --> 00:25:09,280 I will always be honest about this and I will be consistent 530 00:25:09,280 --> 00:25:11,080 about this. Like, I genuinely don't know 531 00:25:11,080 --> 00:25:13,320 what the answer is. Like I think what's so amazing 532 00:25:13,320 --> 00:25:17,800 about Cdr is that our capacity for innovation is still massive, 533 00:25:17,840 --> 00:25:18,840 right? Like not just because we have 534 00:25:18,840 --> 00:25:21,000 such smart people, but because we aren't really, there's so 535 00:25:21,000 --> 00:25:22,800 much room to continue to make improvements. 536 00:25:22,800 --> 00:25:26,760 Like I was actually at this technical webinar today where 537 00:25:26,760 --> 00:25:29,600 folks were talking about new modeling approaches in marine 538 00:25:29,600 --> 00:25:32,320 Cdr where they solve on some fundamental problems. 539 00:25:32,320 --> 00:25:34,840 Like how do you actually get things like uncertainties, like 540 00:25:34,840 --> 00:25:37,040 how do you measure, like how good the model is in a case 541 00:25:37,040 --> 00:25:39,400 where you have, you're sort of over constrained the problem, 542 00:25:39,400 --> 00:25:41,280 like you have too much data and you're not sure like which is 543 00:25:41,280 --> 00:25:43,160 the right data to use. Like historically, what that 544 00:25:43,160 --> 00:25:45,240 means, it's like, OK, we don't really know what kind of model 545 00:25:45,240 --> 00:25:46,960 to you is. We just have to rely back on 546 00:25:46,960 --> 00:25:49,840 experts, you know, like who's opinion is that 1 is better than 547 00:25:49,840 --> 00:25:51,480 the other? And this is a new approach that 548 00:25:51,480 --> 00:25:53,200 says no, no, no, no. Like we can actually propagate 549 00:25:53,200 --> 00:25:55,480 those uncertainties through. And we have a way for actually 550 00:25:55,480 --> 00:25:58,840 like calculating a score of how well the model works based on 551 00:25:58,840 --> 00:26:02,240 that set of data. And that is transformational for 552 00:26:02,240 --> 00:26:03,200 Marines here. That's something that they 553 00:26:03,200 --> 00:26:06,560 haven't really had. And so that's just one of many 554 00:26:06,560 --> 00:26:09,280 examples where the type of innovation that we're going to 555 00:26:09,280 --> 00:26:12,200 need to build more trust, to build more certainty to scale 556 00:26:12,240 --> 00:26:14,280 Cdr, a lot of it doesn't exist today. 557 00:26:14,400 --> 00:26:16,360 And that's a good thing. It means that we the fact that 558 00:26:16,360 --> 00:26:18,280 we don't know which is the solutions that are going to 559 00:26:18,280 --> 00:26:19,840 actually really work long term is a good thing. 560 00:26:20,040 --> 00:26:22,520 It means our capacity for improvement is still massive. 561 00:26:23,560 --> 00:26:28,400 Maybe just set out the vision for absolute climate and restate 562 00:26:28,400 --> 00:26:31,520 the problem that you're trying to solve and why you think, 563 00:26:31,520 --> 00:26:34,480 Especially if you're expressing doubt about your ability to 564 00:26:34,480 --> 00:26:36,800 know, which is a characteristic I respect. 565 00:26:37,600 --> 00:26:40,160 But the job that you've undertaken is seemingly to be 566 00:26:40,160 --> 00:26:42,840 the knower and something. Maybe you disagree with that, or 567 00:26:42,840 --> 00:26:46,680 maybe maybe you don't, but how do you feel about that? 568 00:26:47,240 --> 00:26:49,600 I think my job, the job that I think we should have, and I 569 00:26:49,600 --> 00:26:52,800 think I personally think the entirety of the MRV field should 570 00:26:52,800 --> 00:26:55,400 have, and I don't think everyone takes this in the same way. 571 00:26:55,400 --> 00:26:57,800 May disagree with me, but I think I feel pretty strongly 572 00:26:57,800 --> 00:27:00,520 about this is our job is not to make a determination of what's 573 00:27:00,520 --> 00:27:02,400 good and what's not. Like there are going to be some 574 00:27:02,400 --> 00:27:03,880 decisions that society needs to make. 575 00:27:03,880 --> 00:27:05,800 I'm like, where do we want to allocate resources? 576 00:27:05,960 --> 00:27:08,440 How much certainty or uncertainty are we comfortable 577 00:27:08,440 --> 00:27:10,720 with? And, and just are there other 578 00:27:10,720 --> 00:27:13,200 reasons that we may want to scale some solutions or others? 579 00:27:13,360 --> 00:27:15,360 Like those are societal decisions that I think live 580 00:27:15,360 --> 00:27:19,800 should should live outside of the purview of MRV, defeat 581 00:27:19,800 --> 00:27:22,200 conflicts of interest to make sure the incentives are aligned 582 00:27:22,200 --> 00:27:24,000 and to make sure that I think we're doing our job well. 583 00:27:24,200 --> 00:27:27,960 MRV should be purely about how are we accurately and 584 00:27:27,960 --> 00:27:30,800 transparently assessing what the atmospheric impacts are of these 585 00:27:30,800 --> 00:27:33,640 projects. And there may be a political 586 00:27:33,640 --> 00:27:36,240 decision after that of like, okay, we understand this and we 587 00:27:36,240 --> 00:27:37,720 don't care. We're gonna do this anyway 588 00:27:37,720 --> 00:27:40,760 despite this uncertainty or this is something that we think is 589 00:27:40,760 --> 00:27:41,960 important. And so let's go forward. 590 00:27:42,080 --> 00:27:45,200 Despite what we understand about how the minister is being 591 00:27:45,200 --> 00:27:48,240 impacted, Like maybe we decide, okay, we know that it takes 1000 592 00:27:48,240 --> 00:27:51,240 years for the removal to really match the emissions damage that 593 00:27:51,240 --> 00:27:53,720 is being caused, but maybe we don't care about that. 594 00:27:53,720 --> 00:27:55,520 Like we should just do 100 years. 595 00:27:55,720 --> 00:27:57,760 I think it doesn't mean we don't think about the thousand year 596 00:27:57,760 --> 00:27:59,800 time frame. We should still be evaluating 597 00:27:59,800 --> 00:28:01,360 the atmospheric impacts from that perspective. 598 00:28:01,560 --> 00:28:03,600 But then there could be a political decision after that 599 00:28:03,600 --> 00:28:04,920 that says like, OK, but you know what? 600 00:28:05,080 --> 00:28:07,080 We're going to do this anyway, even though we know this isn't a 601 00:28:07,080 --> 00:28:09,400 perfect match. Interesting. 602 00:28:09,600 --> 00:28:12,160 So your attempt is to be values neutral. 603 00:28:12,560 --> 00:28:17,360 Otherwise, without that, then my incentives are going to be to 604 00:28:17,960 --> 00:28:22,240 change the rules and change my standards to be as attractive as 605 00:28:22,240 --> 00:28:25,280 possible to project developers or governments even right, who 606 00:28:25,280 --> 00:28:27,280 actually struggle from the same incentive problems. 607 00:28:27,560 --> 00:28:31,400 Like the only way I think for us to keep the standards honest and 608 00:28:31,400 --> 00:28:34,120 to make sure that MRV is giving us the information we need is to 609 00:28:34,120 --> 00:28:35,480 take them out of the political process. 610 00:28:35,640 --> 00:28:37,160 Like they should be tools for policy. 611 00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:38,720 They should not be dictating for policy. 612 00:28:42,440 --> 00:28:45,560 Interesting. Do you know much about the 613 00:28:45,560 --> 00:28:47,920 common versus civil law traditions? 614 00:28:48,040 --> 00:28:50,520 Is this familiar ground for you? I don't think so. 615 00:28:51,320 --> 00:28:53,800 So OK, I'll probably have to do this in the intro just so people 616 00:28:53,800 --> 00:28:56,440 can get a good basis for understanding it. 617 00:28:56,440 --> 00:28:59,800 But the Anglo American tradition is primarily a common law, which 618 00:28:59,800 --> 00:29:02,160 is judge made law. People would bring cases to 619 00:29:02,160 --> 00:29:06,320 judges, judges with discover new law, they would apply it in new 620 00:29:06,320 --> 00:29:08,520 ways. And we build on it on precedent 621 00:29:08,520 --> 00:29:13,120 and stereo diseases where you're building up a case history, that 622 00:29:13,120 --> 00:29:14,560 of decisions that can be pointed back to. 623 00:29:14,920 --> 00:29:18,800 But the civil law tradition is famous from Napoleon of coming 624 00:29:18,800 --> 00:29:22,480 in and trying to state by statute basically everything. 625 00:29:22,480 --> 00:29:24,840 And so rather than trying to find and discover new precedents 626 00:29:24,840 --> 00:29:27,280 or, or go back to older precedents, that's very much 627 00:29:27,280 --> 00:29:29,920 about referring to statute in textual analysis. 628 00:29:31,440 --> 00:29:35,400 And I tend to have more faith in the common law tradition because 629 00:29:35,400 --> 00:29:37,760 I like the ability and the flexibility of working from 630 00:29:37,760 --> 00:29:39,400 general principles and and learning. 631 00:29:39,400 --> 00:29:42,160 In law in that way that always. Intuitively, that makes sense to 632 00:29:42,160 --> 00:29:43,080 me. Where is that? 633 00:29:43,080 --> 00:29:44,920 The Napoleonic Code and civil law? 634 00:29:45,520 --> 00:29:48,360 The goal was to take legal discretion out and to make it 635 00:29:48,360 --> 00:29:51,520 all about technicians of merely applying the law. 636 00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:55,360 There are trade-offs, of course, because there are trade-offs and 637 00:29:55,360 --> 00:29:59,000 everything. And I'm wondering to what degree 638 00:29:59,280 --> 00:30:03,240 do you prefer something like how the civil law tradition was just 639 00:30:03,240 --> 00:30:07,240 described or if like me, there is some value in maintaining a 640 00:30:07,240 --> 00:30:09,160 common law tradition within carbon removal. 641 00:30:09,160 --> 00:30:12,040 Or maybe maybe we don't know exactly how alkalinity and 642 00:30:12,040 --> 00:30:13,960 wastewater treatment should be dealt with right now. 643 00:30:13,960 --> 00:30:16,120 We're going to adjudicate it and then we're come to a general 644 00:30:16,120 --> 00:30:18,120 principle and that will come into it later. 645 00:30:18,400 --> 00:30:21,080 But not everything needs to be decided as early as possible for 646 00:30:21,080 --> 00:30:25,920 a generalizable totalizing standard, which I face a serious 647 00:30:25,920 --> 00:30:28,040 risk of the political economies that you mentioned. 648 00:30:28,760 --> 00:30:30,400 Yeah, I think that's generally true. 649 00:30:30,560 --> 00:30:34,040 I think there's one sort of, at least for me, like this driving 650 00:30:34,040 --> 00:30:35,720 challenge that makes the common law. 651 00:30:35,720 --> 00:30:37,960 I think it's actually a really good example that makes that a 652 00:30:37,960 --> 00:30:39,960 challenge, which is tell me if I'm wrong about this. 653 00:30:40,040 --> 00:30:42,720 I'm not a legal expert, but my understanding of common law is 654 00:30:42,720 --> 00:30:46,160 that the challenges to it are driven by farms, right? 655 00:30:46,200 --> 00:30:49,000 Like if someone has been hurt, that is the basis for how you 656 00:30:49,000 --> 00:30:53,600 challenge a common law, you know, an existing common law, it 657 00:30:53,600 --> 00:30:56,160 was priority, right? Like you say, like, hey, this 658 00:30:56,160 --> 00:30:57,800 isn't working. Here are examples of how that's 659 00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:00,400 not working. That is generally the process we 660 00:31:00,400 --> 00:31:01,640 use across a lot of society, right? 661 00:31:02,320 --> 00:31:04,440 That is uniquely challenging in carbon markets. 662 00:31:04,600 --> 00:31:07,320 And that's because the harms are extremely diffuse. 663 00:31:07,640 --> 00:31:09,960 They're not felt by any specific individuals. 664 00:31:09,960 --> 00:31:14,360 And the lag in which we we experience them is extreme in in 665 00:31:14,360 --> 00:31:17,000 very hard to attribute to one source or another, right? 666 00:31:17,000 --> 00:31:19,000 Like the harms we're going to see will be decade. 667 00:31:19,000 --> 00:31:21,560 If we're wrong, let's say we are massively over credited, we're 668 00:31:21,560 --> 00:31:23,720 getting this wrong. We're not going to really know 669 00:31:23,720 --> 00:31:26,800 from a first principles perspective until a decade or 670 00:31:26,800 --> 00:31:30,240 more later after we've had so much unbelievable harm that is 671 00:31:30,680 --> 00:31:33,800 accumulated from this mistake that we're actually seeing it in 672 00:31:33,800 --> 00:31:36,720 global models or, or our experience in how the climate is 673 00:31:36,720 --> 00:31:39,720 changing. And so now attributing that that 674 00:31:39,720 --> 00:31:43,360 that harm to now an individual or a specific action becomes 675 00:31:43,360 --> 00:31:45,240 almost impossible. Like we can't get around the 676 00:31:45,240 --> 00:31:47,800 fact that CO2, like you and I are both sitting in rooms that 677 00:31:47,800 --> 00:31:50,360 are filled with carbon dioxide and it's invisible and it's a 678 00:31:50,360 --> 00:31:54,360 nerd and it's highly diffuse. And so if we could do a better 679 00:31:54,360 --> 00:31:57,520 job of establishing those harms and then saying like, hey, like 680 00:31:57,680 --> 00:32:00,400 we see this problem and now we need to change it, then that 681 00:32:00,400 --> 00:32:03,800 would work better. But I think alkalinity is a 682 00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:05,880 great example where right now, if you look at how most 683 00:32:05,880 --> 00:32:08,080 standards are built and how we deal with those uncertainties, 684 00:32:08,080 --> 00:32:10,720 it's we'll do something like make your best guess. 685 00:32:11,160 --> 00:32:14,920 And in some cases, like maybe discount away what we think is 686 00:32:14,920 --> 00:32:18,120 sort of a conservative confidence interval. 687 00:32:18,320 --> 00:32:20,000 But in many cases, we're not sure if that actually is 688 00:32:20,000 --> 00:32:22,040 conservative or not. And then we're going to pretend 689 00:32:22,040 --> 00:32:24,880 like it's not a problem anymore where that actually isn't the 690 00:32:24,880 --> 00:32:27,360 scenario where it gives us much room to say like, yeah, like 691 00:32:27,560 --> 00:32:29,680 this actually is a problem. Like we need to keep innovating 692 00:32:29,680 --> 00:32:31,560 on this. Like this, our certainty around 693 00:32:31,560 --> 00:32:34,160 this is not enough for us to actually really build the whole 694 00:32:34,160 --> 00:32:36,600 industry on top of this. And so we should be transparent 695 00:32:36,600 --> 00:32:38,000 about that. We should be clear that this is 696 00:32:38,000 --> 00:32:41,280 an unknown and not pretend like we can sort of deal with it even 697 00:32:41,280 --> 00:32:43,440 though we don't have the solution today. 698 00:32:45,840 --> 00:32:49,640 They're good points and the the point you make about torts and 699 00:32:49,640 --> 00:32:53,800 tortious claims are why regulation tends to step in in 700 00:32:53,800 --> 00:32:56,320 place of torts in common law tradition, because it's too 701 00:32:56,320 --> 00:32:59,040 diffuse and it cannot be proven in court. 702 00:32:59,040 --> 00:33:01,680 And it's not the same as so and so dumped something terrible on 703 00:33:01,680 --> 00:33:05,080 your property and you can point to that doesn't work that way. 704 00:33:05,680 --> 00:33:09,640 And so yeah, something something more statue based may just make 705 00:33:09,640 --> 00:33:11,600 more sense for this. Just. 706 00:33:11,640 --> 00:33:14,760 Given the the vested interest portion of this, just like how 707 00:33:14,760 --> 00:33:17,200 do you build in a system that has some amount of flexibility 708 00:33:17,800 --> 00:33:22,160 that we don't end up with ethanol or that GE filter or 709 00:33:22,160 --> 00:33:25,960 scrubber, but also allows people to plan very far in the future. 710 00:33:25,960 --> 00:33:29,640 Because we don't want to be like decide right now that OK, Fikers 711 00:33:29,640 --> 00:33:34,720 is the most important or the worst of all Cdr methods and 712 00:33:34,720 --> 00:33:37,320 we're just now stuck in that forever. 713 00:33:39,200 --> 00:33:41,440 How do we learn and grow in a system that does have a 714 00:33:41,440 --> 00:33:44,920 totalizing impact? I think from my perspective, 715 00:33:44,920 --> 00:33:46,320 there's only one answer to that question. 716 00:33:46,320 --> 00:33:48,960 I think it's just we should based on performance, like a lot 717 00:33:48,960 --> 00:33:51,200 of policy today has been based on like, I want to support this 718 00:33:51,200 --> 00:33:53,240 pathway, a lot of it going to direct air capture. 719 00:33:54,200 --> 00:33:55,960 Is that right? Is that not, I don't know. 720 00:33:56,440 --> 00:33:59,000 I can tell you that a lot of it was designed based on like that 721 00:33:59,000 --> 00:34:01,600 pathway specifically. And if what we care about is 722 00:34:01,600 --> 00:34:03,920 really climate impacts, then what we should care about is 723 00:34:04,040 --> 00:34:05,960 climate impacts and how we measure those. 724 00:34:06,200 --> 00:34:09,400 And so why not build policy, build approaches, build MRV 725 00:34:09,400 --> 00:34:12,320 based on performance. And what's nice is like, yes, 726 00:34:12,320 --> 00:34:14,120 you do have to set sort of like here's the bar, right? 727 00:34:14,120 --> 00:34:15,840 Like here's what we think is the right performance. 728 00:34:16,120 --> 00:34:18,560 But if we're wrong about that, that is something that can be 729 00:34:18,560 --> 00:34:20,600 adjusted over time, right? We can decide like actually 730 00:34:20,800 --> 00:34:23,719 maybe we're overzealous or maybe we weren't tight enough, but we 731 00:34:23,719 --> 00:34:28,199 are clear about what is needed and how it was needed and a 732 00:34:28,199 --> 00:34:29,800 project has flexibility in how we get there. 733 00:34:29,800 --> 00:34:31,840 We don't have to hard code that to any specific pathway or 734 00:34:31,840 --> 00:34:33,960 approach. You might have to choose some 735 00:34:33,960 --> 00:34:39,320 things like if the ultimate determinant would be success or 736 00:34:39,320 --> 00:34:42,880 failure being linked to parts per million in the atmosphere 737 00:34:43,080 --> 00:34:46,639 versus radiative forcing or something is is determined to 738 00:34:46,639 --> 00:34:48,480 success. Granted, these two things are 739 00:34:48,560 --> 00:34:50,560 there's a relationship between them and ideally you could 740 00:34:50,560 --> 00:34:53,600 specify that and convert. But is there not some sort of 741 00:34:54,080 --> 00:34:57,400 fundamental like disagreement that people could go one way or 742 00:34:57,400 --> 00:35:00,320 another on a certain issue like that that will distort the 743 00:35:00,360 --> 00:35:02,800 outcomes of what kind of carbon removal is built or not built, 744 00:35:03,160 --> 00:35:04,360 right? There are probably some cases of 745 00:35:04,360 --> 00:35:06,600 that. Yes, definitely. 746 00:35:06,600 --> 00:35:08,640 And this is gonna be a situation where it's gonna be impossible 747 00:35:08,640 --> 00:35:10,280 for us to find some perfect solution. 748 00:35:10,880 --> 00:35:13,320 Unfortunately, across all climate, including an MRV, there 749 00:35:13,320 --> 00:35:15,600 are no silver bullets. There are only more lead 750 00:35:15,600 --> 00:35:18,320 bullets. And so I think there is a way 751 00:35:18,320 --> 00:35:20,200 that there are always gonna be cases where we have to just sort 752 00:35:20,200 --> 00:35:23,480 of do our best and try our best to may changes later. 753 00:35:23,480 --> 00:35:25,600 But I think we should just acknowledge how hard that is. 754 00:35:25,800 --> 00:35:27,240 But that's not a simple trivial thing. 755 00:35:27,240 --> 00:35:30,080 And if there are opportunities for us to be looking at the 756 00:35:30,080 --> 00:35:32,640 bigger picture, creating consistency and setting the 757 00:35:32,640 --> 00:35:35,880 north star of what we think good looks like today and making that 758 00:35:35,880 --> 00:35:38,520 very clear to projects like, hey, it's okay that you can't 759 00:35:38,520 --> 00:35:40,760 meet this today, but probably at some point you're gonna need to. 760 00:35:40,760 --> 00:35:42,880 And if you can't, that's gonna be a problem. 761 00:35:43,480 --> 00:35:45,560 But if we don't make that clear today, we build that into 762 00:35:45,560 --> 00:35:50,120 policy, we are likely to get that lock in on subpar solutions 763 00:35:50,120 --> 00:35:53,200 that are politically popular for one reason or another, but 764 00:35:53,200 --> 00:35:55,480 actually may not help us get to what the climate impacts we're 765 00:35:55,480 --> 00:36:00,720 looking for. I'm so intrigued by you and this 766 00:36:00,720 --> 00:36:05,520 approach, Peter. I like that you're trying to not 767 00:36:05,840 --> 00:36:08,920 add in more judgment that is necessary to your job. 768 00:36:09,040 --> 00:36:12,840 Well, because if you had very strong opinions about some of 769 00:36:12,840 --> 00:36:15,720 these matters, it might feel just as political or 770 00:36:15,720 --> 00:36:18,200 self-serving as as many others who are trying to set their own 771 00:36:18,200 --> 00:36:20,680 standards. But it doesn't feel like that is 772 00:36:21,160 --> 00:36:23,480 as prominent here. And I think now is the 773 00:36:23,480 --> 00:36:25,680 appropriate time to get into conflict of interest. 774 00:36:25,800 --> 00:36:28,240 Question. Everyone talks about it. 775 00:36:28,760 --> 00:36:30,920 It's either not that big of a deal or they made some 776 00:36:30,920 --> 00:36:33,040 innovation so that it's less of a big deal. 777 00:36:34,920 --> 00:36:36,880 How should we be thinking about conflict of interest in carbon 778 00:36:36,880 --> 00:36:39,680 removal? It's maybe the hardest problem 779 00:36:39,680 --> 00:36:41,360 that we need to solve. I think actually much harder 780 00:36:41,360 --> 00:36:43,600 than the science or the engineering or anything else. 781 00:36:43,600 --> 00:36:47,640 Like I think like we are in this, I think like difficult 782 00:36:47,640 --> 00:36:49,800 position where when we're removing carbon dioxide from the 783 00:36:49,800 --> 00:36:52,920 atmosphere, whoever's buying that is not getting an Amazon 784 00:36:52,920 --> 00:36:55,320 package filled with CO2, you know, like they can then measure 785 00:36:55,320 --> 00:36:57,240 and check on afterward. Like there actually really is no 786 00:36:57,240 --> 00:36:59,280 products. Like what you're getting is the 787 00:36:59,280 --> 00:37:02,200 data, The M, you know, the MRV truly is the products. 788 00:37:02,480 --> 00:37:05,400 And so all they can really assess is, you know, what that 789 00:37:05,400 --> 00:37:08,160 data looks like in the back. The reason it very rarely is 790 00:37:08,160 --> 00:37:10,600 this the source of truth. And that just makes our job 791 00:37:10,600 --> 00:37:13,120 really hard. I think where, you know, it 792 00:37:13,120 --> 00:37:16,320 makes it much easier to be in a situation where now, again, to 793 00:37:16,320 --> 00:37:19,440 be competitive, you might have folks who degrade standards to 794 00:37:19,440 --> 00:37:22,080 just make it sort of more attractive or, you know, making 795 00:37:22,080 --> 00:37:25,160 mistakes and then, you know, maybe even like unintentional 796 00:37:25,160 --> 00:37:27,200 mistakes. But then not wanting to have to 797 00:37:27,200 --> 00:37:30,000 look your customers or your stakeholders in the eye and say, 798 00:37:30,400 --> 00:37:32,520 oh, yeah, I made a mistake here. And, you know, now I'm going to 799 00:37:32,520 --> 00:37:33,760 do this hard thing around fixing it. 800 00:37:33,760 --> 00:37:37,080 I mean, won't have any names, but there was recently a big 801 00:37:37,400 --> 00:37:41,080 registry who had an issue with, you know, one class of their 802 00:37:41,080 --> 00:37:45,200 credits that, you know, academia had pointed out. 803 00:37:45,520 --> 00:37:48,600 And it took them half a decade to acknowledge and, and actually 804 00:37:48,600 --> 00:37:50,680 fix it. It took a really long time. 805 00:37:51,040 --> 00:37:53,880 And why did it take long? Like, why did they not fix it 806 00:37:53,880 --> 00:37:56,160 sooner? There is no reason to, there's 807 00:37:56,160 --> 00:37:58,160 no incentive. There's nothing that held them 808 00:37:58,320 --> 00:38:00,840 to make that change. There's no there was no downside 809 00:38:00,840 --> 00:38:03,480 to being wrong. And so I think the unfortunate 810 00:38:03,480 --> 00:38:06,360 challenge is like, I would love to say like again, silver bullet 811 00:38:06,520 --> 00:38:09,000 if we just fix this one, You know, this one little trick like 812 00:38:09,320 --> 00:38:11,440 negative incentives hate when you do this. 813 00:38:11,680 --> 00:38:14,880 It's just not like that. Like incentives are like every 814 00:38:14,880 --> 00:38:19,040 organization has incentives for profit, nonprofit, academic, 815 00:38:19,280 --> 00:38:22,280 civil society, governments, everyone has incentives. 816 00:38:22,480 --> 00:38:25,920 And so the trick is, is how do you build a system that aligns 817 00:38:25,920 --> 00:38:27,800 those incentives in all the right ways? 818 00:38:27,800 --> 00:38:30,640 So that's, you know, hopefully one definitely the climate is 819 00:38:30,640 --> 00:38:32,880 getting what they're paying for, but also, you know, like the 820 00:38:32,880 --> 00:38:35,160 people, whoever's purchasing, purchasing this is getting what 821 00:38:35,160 --> 00:38:37,480 they're paying for. And so it's a it's a complex 822 00:38:37,480 --> 00:38:39,160 challenge. I don't think no one for being 823 00:38:39,160 --> 00:38:41,600 honest with each other. No one has the full solution to 824 00:38:41,600 --> 00:38:46,160 yet. Can't you undermine my follow up 825 00:38:46,160 --> 00:38:47,560 question? I was hoping you were going to 826 00:38:47,560 --> 00:38:49,880 tell me what's the point of this conversation, people? 827 00:38:49,880 --> 00:38:52,200 I mean, I can tell you ideas. I can tell you how we think 828 00:38:52,200 --> 00:38:53,920 about this. What do we do about this? 829 00:38:54,160 --> 00:38:56,720 Absolutely be friendly. This is an incomplete solution. 830 00:38:56,720 --> 00:38:57,760 There's more that needs to be done. 831 00:38:57,760 --> 00:39:00,480 But for example, like, you know, I think one of the core 832 00:39:00,480 --> 00:39:03,680 challenges we have is who is actually designing and building 833 00:39:03,880 --> 00:39:07,000 these, these standards or who's deciding what quality is right? 834 00:39:07,040 --> 00:39:11,400 Like in, in a lot of cases, it's singular organizations, right? 835 00:39:11,440 --> 00:39:14,440 I mean, and we are definitely in that bucket right now too, where 836 00:39:14,440 --> 00:39:18,640 I, I think like, you know, there's one person's opinion on 837 00:39:18,640 --> 00:39:20,200 what you think is right or wrong. 838 00:39:21,240 --> 00:39:23,560 And I think that problem actually gets compounded in 839 00:39:23,560 --> 00:39:25,640 this, in this scenario, the sort of market that we have today 840 00:39:25,640 --> 00:39:27,600 where the folks who are generally building these 841 00:39:27,600 --> 00:39:30,520 standards are also the folks who are running registries or 842 00:39:30,600 --> 00:39:33,920 selling or brokering credits. And from our perspective, that's 843 00:39:33,920 --> 00:39:35,200 just a massive competitive interest. 844 00:39:35,200 --> 00:39:38,160 It's the same people who are deciding what's good enough or 845 00:39:38,280 --> 00:39:40,320 the same people who are then, you know, issuing or selling 846 00:39:40,320 --> 00:39:41,480 credit. It's like, it's sort of like if 847 00:39:41,480 --> 00:39:43,480 you were in school. And it's like I write the test 848 00:39:43,480 --> 00:39:45,200 and I grate myself against that test. 849 00:39:46,120 --> 00:39:47,680 It's like, you know, like it's a single point of failure. 850 00:39:47,680 --> 00:39:50,160 Like one organization could decide I want to reduce quality 851 00:39:50,160 --> 00:39:52,200 in order to issue more credits. And there's just no check and 852 00:39:52,200 --> 00:39:54,920 balance against that. And so we're trying to fix that. 853 00:39:54,920 --> 00:39:58,400 For example, where we are intentionally deciding to not 854 00:39:58,400 --> 00:40:00,200 have a registry. We're not obviously doing 855 00:40:00,200 --> 00:40:01,760 anything around selling or broking credits. 856 00:40:02,000 --> 00:40:04,080 You know, we are specifically quality assurance. 857 00:40:04,160 --> 00:40:06,360 That's our job. Our job is to think through and, 858 00:40:06,360 --> 00:40:09,360 and you know, be accountable for how we just determine whether 859 00:40:09,360 --> 00:40:10,880 the atmospheric impacts are happening. 860 00:40:11,440 --> 00:40:13,600 And then we partner with registry, we partner with other 861 00:40:13,600 --> 00:40:15,080 folks who can then adopt our standard. 862 00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:17,040 And so. Well, again, acknowledging that 863 00:40:17,040 --> 00:40:19,800 that is not a perfect solution, but it does create now a 864 00:40:19,800 --> 00:40:22,560 separation of power without there's not one organization if 865 00:40:22,560 --> 00:40:24,920 you just decide to make a change and they're not accountable to 866 00:40:24,920 --> 00:40:27,080 anyone, there is at least one layer of accountability. 867 00:40:27,080 --> 00:40:29,000 And so that's an example of something that we're doing that 868 00:40:29,000 --> 00:40:31,440 we think will hope hopefully put us in in the right direction. 869 00:40:34,080 --> 00:40:36,800 I have so much. To say and to ask about this and 870 00:40:36,800 --> 00:40:39,920 I suspect much of it will find its way into the introduction. 871 00:40:39,920 --> 00:40:44,120 But so with Nori, we were vertically integrated and we're 872 00:40:44,200 --> 00:40:45,440 a registry. We developed our own 873 00:40:45,440 --> 00:40:48,280 methodologies. We're like a quasi project 874 00:40:48,280 --> 00:40:51,560 developer too because we had credits being issued and also 875 00:40:51,560 --> 00:40:55,880 just obviously a marketplace. This type of integration put us 876 00:40:55,880 --> 00:40:59,800 out of step with ICRO and ICDCM. So we could just not qualify for 877 00:40:59,800 --> 00:41:02,520 those stamps. And then very famously, Puro was 878 00:41:02,920 --> 00:41:05,680 originally a competitor of ours, but then disaggregated. 879 00:41:06,240 --> 00:41:09,440 And I'm wondering because if you are a registry and if you choose 880 00:41:09,440 --> 00:41:13,560 to remain only a registry, the only Moat that you have is the 881 00:41:13,560 --> 00:41:16,480 methodologies that you develop and issue credits through. 882 00:41:17,160 --> 00:41:22,320 And that is a direct response to ICROA setting these ex ante 883 00:41:22,320 --> 00:41:24,560 rules. Or maybe it's better to even say 884 00:41:24,560 --> 00:41:28,280 a prioritistic rather than ex ante, sort of like precautionary 885 00:41:28,280 --> 00:41:31,560 principle based rules of this is just an incorrect format. 886 00:41:31,760 --> 00:41:34,480 In order to legitimately do this activity, you cannot do both of 887 00:41:34,480 --> 00:41:36,480 these things. Unfortunately, it means that 888 00:41:36,480 --> 00:41:40,520 registries have to own methodologies and pay well them 889 00:41:40,560 --> 00:41:42,600 and issue credits through them. So one of the things that we 890 00:41:42,600 --> 00:41:45,880 were able to brag about is that we released our methodologies 891 00:41:45,880 --> 00:41:48,680 under a very permissive Creative Commons license because we are 892 00:41:48,680 --> 00:41:51,480 vertically integrated and did not need to pay well the 893 00:41:51,480 --> 00:41:53,840 methodology portion to run a successful business. 894 00:41:55,480 --> 00:41:57,160 It about. I mean there's conflicts of 895 00:41:57,160 --> 00:42:00,200 interest in any type of organizational structure, but 896 00:42:00,200 --> 00:42:02,920 the one that you're describing is basically baked in by the 897 00:42:02,920 --> 00:42:06,240 quasi regulatory bodies that oversee BCM. 898 00:42:06,960 --> 00:42:08,800 Do you agree with that characterization and how much of 899 00:42:08,800 --> 00:42:11,600 a problem is it actually? I think that is how things have 900 00:42:11,600 --> 00:42:13,920 worked out. And yeah, maybe those have come 901 00:42:13,920 --> 00:42:16,360 through these these accreditation bodies like they 902 00:42:16,360 --> 00:42:19,320 had sort of led the way. I think, I don't think I have 903 00:42:19,320 --> 00:42:20,440 enough information to say either way. 904 00:42:20,440 --> 00:42:24,360 It's certainly like sort of the, the, the business model first 905 00:42:24,360 --> 00:42:28,360 choice for a registry is like we build proprietary systems and to 906 00:42:28,360 --> 00:42:31,160 use our systems you need to live in our all wild card, right? 907 00:42:31,160 --> 00:42:33,520 That's just the way it works. But I don't think it has to be 908 00:42:33,680 --> 00:42:35,120 done. And I think we're trying to 909 00:42:35,120 --> 00:42:37,280 demonstrate a way that's different because if you really 910 00:42:37,280 --> 00:42:39,760 think about it, what are the roles and responsibilities that 911 00:42:39,760 --> 00:42:42,880 exist when you're talking about credit certification? 912 00:42:43,520 --> 00:42:46,360 I think there are sort of two very distinct roles that usually 913 00:42:46,360 --> 00:42:49,320 a registry plays both roles. You know, 1 is the quality 914 00:42:49,320 --> 00:42:51,440 assurance, like how do we assess like whether this is actually a 915 00:42:51,440 --> 00:42:53,240 quality thing and, you know, buyers getting what they're 916 00:42:53,240 --> 00:42:54,760 paying for it. And then the second step is 917 00:42:54,760 --> 00:42:56,880 credit issuance. It's running a registry, making 918 00:42:56,880 --> 00:42:58,520 sure there isn't double accounting, you know, make sure 919 00:42:58,520 --> 00:43:01,720 that the tool is in place so buyers can, you know, retire 920 00:43:01,720 --> 00:43:03,760 them and, you know, make that process really easy. 921 00:43:03,880 --> 00:43:06,440 And these really are actually like very different skill sets, 922 00:43:06,440 --> 00:43:08,960 like the two, like being great at one doesn't necessarily make 923 00:43:08,960 --> 00:43:11,720 you create at the other one, but both are creating very specific 924 00:43:11,720 --> 00:43:13,120 value. Like those are both important to 925 00:43:13,120 --> 00:43:14,760 the process. And So what we're doing is 926 00:43:14,760 --> 00:43:16,960 actually quite simple. It's just we're going to split 927 00:43:16,960 --> 00:43:20,080 those up where for the quality assurance part like we do that 928 00:43:20,080 --> 00:43:22,280 and and there we get paid for that work because it is 929 00:43:22,280 --> 00:43:23,520 important work that needs to be done. 930 00:43:23,800 --> 00:43:27,120 And then our registry partners do the credit issuance and 931 00:43:27,120 --> 00:43:29,760 credit management and that's also important work and they get 932 00:43:29,920 --> 00:43:32,000 paid for that. And so I think we just, we've 933 00:43:32,000 --> 00:43:34,840 gotten comfortable in the in a model where we take these two 934 00:43:34,840 --> 00:43:36,960 very different things, smash them together and we expect that 935 00:43:36,960 --> 00:43:39,640 they should be together. But but why is that? 936 00:43:39,640 --> 00:43:42,000 Like is there a reason why they're somehow actually better 937 00:43:42,000 --> 00:43:44,120 or more efficient when they're actually put together? 938 00:43:44,400 --> 00:43:46,840 And would love to hear counter arguments if you have them, but 939 00:43:47,000 --> 00:43:48,400 it's not clear to me that they are better. 940 00:43:49,400 --> 00:43:51,840 Oh no, I, I it's very empirical for me. 941 00:43:51,920 --> 00:43:55,520 I, I don't love the a prioritistic saying that certain 942 00:43:55,520 --> 00:43:59,400 business models are inherently unworkable necessarily because 943 00:43:59,400 --> 00:44:02,840 there are also cases where vertical integration works very 944 00:44:02,840 --> 00:44:05,000 successfully and has very high quality. 945 00:44:05,440 --> 00:44:09,040 And I, I tend to for the same common law type of evolutionary 946 00:44:09,440 --> 00:44:11,560 faith. I, I think I want to make sure 947 00:44:11,560 --> 00:44:15,120 that we don't winnow out too many design pathways that might 948 00:44:15,120 --> 00:44:17,280 lead to things that are unexpected in the future where, 949 00:44:17,600 --> 00:44:20,800 oh, I wish we didn't just say that this is just inherently 950 00:44:20,800 --> 00:44:22,000 wrong. We, no one should ever 951 00:44:22,000 --> 00:44:23,960 investigate this or build a business in this way. 952 00:44:24,240 --> 00:44:26,240 I like that you're doing things differently. 953 00:44:26,520 --> 00:44:30,320 I also like that it's because you are a commercial entity. 954 00:44:30,920 --> 00:44:33,880 Yeah, correct is to to make some money and good for you. 955 00:44:33,880 --> 00:44:39,520 I hope you hope you all do. That's a really interesting 956 00:44:39,520 --> 00:44:41,800 thing. I imagine though your thesis is 957 00:44:41,800 --> 00:44:46,040 is very antagonistic to the way things are done now, which is 958 00:44:46,040 --> 00:44:48,400 neither good or bad and something about your disposition 959 00:44:48,400 --> 00:44:51,120 or how you're presenting this. It's because your business is 960 00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:54,720 inherently a criticism of the way things in carbon markets are 961 00:44:54,720 --> 00:44:55,480 done. Which is fine. 962 00:44:55,480 --> 00:44:57,320 I mean, Nori wouldn't exist if that weren't the case too. 963 00:44:57,320 --> 00:44:59,080 In fact, you probably shouldn't start a business if you don't 964 00:44:59,080 --> 00:45:00,680 have a criticism of the way things are done now. 965 00:45:00,680 --> 00:45:04,120 What would even be the point? Yeah, but I imagine it probably 966 00:45:04,120 --> 00:45:06,400 doesn't always win you the most friends, especially when people 967 00:45:06,680 --> 00:45:08,760 like Isometric. I've heard them talk about the 968 00:45:08,760 --> 00:45:12,480 way they structure who pays for the registry services as 969 00:45:12,680 --> 00:45:16,480 deconflicting the process to an acceptable amount, and it sounds 970 00:45:16,480 --> 00:45:19,680 like your business is inherently a challenge to that saying No 971 00:45:19,680 --> 00:45:23,080 it's not. I mean, I mean, I think there is 972 00:45:23,080 --> 00:45:24,920 no one solution. It's probably going to be a 973 00:45:24,920 --> 00:45:27,400 series of a multiple different changes made to be made. 974 00:45:27,720 --> 00:45:30,920 But I think the proof is in the pudding, right? 975 00:45:30,960 --> 00:45:34,520 Like I think a model where we connect the registry and the 976 00:45:34,520 --> 00:45:37,440 standards is one that we've tested many times and it is 977 00:45:37,560 --> 00:45:39,080 effectively always been the point of failure. 978 00:45:39,280 --> 00:45:42,280 Like that is where it has fallen down every single time. 979 00:45:42,720 --> 00:45:45,640 And so to think that somehow Cdr is going to be magically 980 00:45:45,640 --> 00:45:48,640 different, I think that is just, it is magical, is magical 981 00:45:48,640 --> 00:45:50,280 thinking. And so I think there are 982 00:45:50,280 --> 00:45:51,520 structural changes that need to be made. 983 00:45:51,520 --> 00:45:53,320 And we obviously have very strong opinions on those. 984 00:45:53,520 --> 00:45:54,680 People may have different opinions. 985 00:45:54,680 --> 00:45:55,920 And I don't think it's clear what's right. 986 00:45:55,920 --> 00:45:57,680 Like, I think it's good for us to try different things. 987 00:45:57,920 --> 00:46:00,840 I guess I would maybe challenge anyone who said like, hey, we do 988 00:46:00,840 --> 00:46:02,840 this one thing and all of a sudden everything's better. 989 00:46:03,000 --> 00:46:05,960 Like I think the challenge would be like, show us that's better. 990 00:46:06,200 --> 00:46:07,440 Like show us that that's the case. 991 00:46:07,440 --> 00:46:09,560 And in my experience, like there's so many different 992 00:46:09,560 --> 00:46:12,120 dimensions to conflicts of interest that are just, it's 993 00:46:12,120 --> 00:46:14,320 hard to say like one thing is going to somehow fix anything. 994 00:46:14,600 --> 00:46:16,840 Maybe it makes it better and, you know, maybe it's good enough 995 00:46:16,840 --> 00:46:20,040 for now, but with a separate argument. 996 00:46:20,040 --> 00:46:23,160 But the idea that this is not a problem, I think is a mistake. 997 00:46:23,160 --> 00:46:24,960 I think this is something that'll be a problem for the 998 00:46:24,960 --> 00:46:26,760 duration of this market even exists. 999 00:46:28,440 --> 00:46:32,840 OK, let's put on our white hat hacker hats for a second. 1000 00:46:33,040 --> 00:46:35,880 How do we break absolute? Like how do we thoroughly 1001 00:46:35,880 --> 00:46:38,240 corrupt your institution and ruin what you're trying to 1002 00:46:38,240 --> 00:46:39,120 achieve? Like what's the weak? 1003 00:46:40,640 --> 00:46:44,040 Great question. I think one weak point that we 1004 00:46:44,040 --> 00:46:48,200 have is that we are still as of now, like the sole primary 1005 00:46:48,200 --> 00:46:51,960 authors of, of our standards obviously work with academia, we 1006 00:46:51,960 --> 00:46:55,120 work with experts, you know, you know, we gauge with those folks 1007 00:46:55,120 --> 00:46:56,680 too. And so, you know, the end result 1008 00:46:56,680 --> 00:47:00,120 is something that we, we feel is, is the culmination of 1009 00:47:00,200 --> 00:47:02,120 expertise and, and knowledge across the industry. 1010 00:47:02,360 --> 00:47:04,680 But like, we are the sole, like we, we decide, you know, like 1011 00:47:04,680 --> 00:47:06,680 what's good enough, like we are the sole decision makers there. 1012 00:47:06,960 --> 00:47:09,000 And I think very likely that's something that's gonna have to 1013 00:47:09,000 --> 00:47:11,720 change at some points. And so like, you know, from a 1014 00:47:11,720 --> 00:47:14,640 corruption perspective, like we could decide like, hey, we don't 1015 00:47:14,640 --> 00:47:16,400 really care about climate anymore more. 1016 00:47:16,400 --> 00:47:19,120 We want to now just make a Better Business and be more 1017 00:47:19,120 --> 00:47:20,440 attractive to project developers. 1018 00:47:20,440 --> 00:47:23,520 Like there's a lot that we could change to corrupt the way that 1019 00:47:23,520 --> 00:47:26,280 we think about creating, you know, quality outcomes and 1020 00:47:26,280 --> 00:47:29,000 consistent outcomes that would be much better from a commercial 1021 00:47:29,000 --> 00:47:30,560 perspective. And so that is, and there's 1022 00:47:30,560 --> 00:47:32,760 literally just a decision that we could make at some point. 1023 00:47:33,080 --> 00:47:35,040 We are not making that decision and we have no intention to make 1024 00:47:35,040 --> 00:47:37,840 that decision, but we could. And so that is like, you know, a 1025 00:47:37,840 --> 00:47:40,360 fifth failure report that exists across the entire industry where 1026 00:47:40,360 --> 00:47:43,120 like there are these single points of failure where it's 1027 00:47:43,120 --> 00:47:45,920 very difficult for there to be checks and balances in place. 1028 00:47:46,120 --> 00:47:48,640 I mean, we recently saw this. I also won't name any names. 1029 00:47:48,640 --> 00:47:51,480 Like we saw a situation recently where there was an NGO who 1030 00:47:51,480 --> 00:47:55,680 called out an issue with a specific set of standards and 1031 00:47:56,160 --> 00:47:59,680 nothing happened basically that that sort of warning was ignored 1032 00:48:00,000 --> 00:48:02,560 and credits were issued anyway and buyers accepted the credits. 1033 00:48:02,960 --> 00:48:06,600 And so just like for me, it was like such a example of where 1034 00:48:06,600 --> 00:48:09,280 this can go wrong, where if we can, you know, if the industry 1035 00:48:09,280 --> 00:48:11,200 itself decides like, hey, we don't care about this problem, 1036 00:48:11,360 --> 00:48:13,040 we think this is good enough, we're going to move forward. 1037 00:48:13,800 --> 00:48:17,120 What's the stop then? I mean, that's a question for 1038 00:48:17,120 --> 00:48:20,880 you. I mean, I don't know, really 1039 00:48:20,880 --> 00:48:23,080 hard question. I'm sort of surprised whenever I 1040 00:48:23,080 --> 00:48:26,600 hear things like that, that buyers aren't more persnickety 1041 00:48:26,600 --> 00:48:27,520 about it. You would think they would 1042 00:48:27,520 --> 00:48:29,200 defend their interest more because they're going to be the 1043 00:48:29,200 --> 00:48:31,120 ones left holding the bag if it falls apart. 1044 00:48:31,280 --> 00:48:33,200 I mean, for some of these things that are more innovation 1045 00:48:33,200 --> 00:48:35,320 oriented that are small numbers of credits, you can just say 1046 00:48:35,320 --> 00:48:37,440 like it's a write off, write our best. 1047 00:48:37,560 --> 00:48:39,080 It's an early industry kind of thing. 1048 00:48:39,080 --> 00:48:41,560 We're not using it against our fossil emissions or something 1049 00:48:41,560 --> 00:48:44,040 like that. But I don't know, that's like 1050 00:48:44,640 --> 00:48:47,520 partially OK, I guess. It's tricky, right? 1051 00:48:47,520 --> 00:48:50,640 I mean, in some cases, I think there are unfortunately I think 1052 00:48:50,720 --> 00:48:52,080 a problem that we have in the space right now. 1053 00:48:52,120 --> 00:48:55,440 There's a small number of buyers who have the technical capacity 1054 00:48:55,440 --> 00:48:59,840 and time honestly to do enough diligence to say what's right or 1055 00:48:59,840 --> 00:49:02,240 what's wrong right. Like they're very, very small 1056 00:49:02,240 --> 00:49:04,080 number of buyers who have very strong opinions. 1057 00:49:04,480 --> 00:49:05,800 And that's, that's actually a problem, right? 1058 00:49:05,800 --> 00:49:07,520 Like, again, that doesn't exist in any other industry. 1059 00:49:07,520 --> 00:49:10,640 We're like, if you go to, I was in Zurich, Switzerland last 1060 00:49:10,640 --> 00:49:12,640 summer, Lint, you know, lint chocolates. 1061 00:49:12,800 --> 00:49:15,120 They had a little a factory there, like a factory tour where 1062 00:49:15,120 --> 00:49:16,360 you can go as a, as a, a visitor. 1063 00:49:16,360 --> 00:49:18,640 It's very cool. Like it's very cool to see a lot 1064 00:49:18,640 --> 00:49:20,680 of the Swiss engineering, you get to eat a lot of chocolate. 1065 00:49:20,880 --> 00:49:22,840 One of the things that I love the most is they had a whole 1066 00:49:22,840 --> 00:49:25,480 little section on effectively like their version of MRV. 1067 00:49:25,560 --> 00:49:28,000 So quality assurance. And they talk about like, how do 1068 00:49:28,000 --> 00:49:31,400 we make sure that we, you know, from a, a, a very wide variety 1069 00:49:31,400 --> 00:49:33,280 of different inputs, like different feedstocks that come 1070 00:49:33,280 --> 00:49:34,400 in from different parts of the world. 1071 00:49:34,920 --> 00:49:37,480 How do we make sure that our chocolate is great every single 1072 00:49:37,480 --> 00:49:41,080 time, that every single bar meets our quality criteria and 1073 00:49:41,080 --> 00:49:43,320 that our, our, you know, our customers are going to going to 1074 00:49:43,320 --> 00:49:44,880 love and enjoy it. How do we make sure? 1075 00:49:45,160 --> 00:49:48,800 And they do an intense number of different things, but a lot of 1076 00:49:48,800 --> 00:49:51,960 it is that they are not, they rely on standards, but they 1077 00:49:51,960 --> 00:49:54,080 don't rely on them entirely. Like they make sure that they 1078 00:49:54,080 --> 00:49:56,600 are double checking the results like they are in some cases, 1079 00:49:56,600 --> 00:50:00,000 like checking every bag of cacao beans with sensors to make sure 1080 00:50:00,000 --> 00:50:01,480 that it meets their bar of quality. 1081 00:50:01,840 --> 00:50:04,720 And so I think there's a sort of a problem here where the buyers 1082 00:50:04,720 --> 00:50:05,840 don't get to see what they're getting. 1083 00:50:05,840 --> 00:50:08,440 It's really hard for them to check to make sure that like the 1084 00:50:08,440 --> 00:50:10,040 quality has been delivered as promised. 1085 00:50:10,240 --> 00:50:14,080 And it gives a lot of leeway to Sanders organizations to project 1086 00:50:14,080 --> 00:50:16,400 developers, to the industry as a whole to kind of do what they 1087 00:50:16,400 --> 00:50:20,760 think is best. Surprising though, where it 1088 00:50:21,000 --> 00:50:24,880 carbon Plan or any of the various watchdog organizations 1089 00:50:24,880 --> 00:50:26,640 write a. Piece about something like that. 1090 00:50:28,280 --> 00:50:31,240 And you would expect some of the big buyers to take that pretty 1091 00:50:31,240 --> 00:50:32,480 seriously. Or maybe they just have. 1092 00:50:32,920 --> 00:50:35,920 Maybe it's like the British royal family where you never, 1093 00:50:35,920 --> 00:50:38,080 never complain, never explain. And you're just sort of like, I 1094 00:50:38,080 --> 00:50:40,600 don't want to Streisand affect this and draw more attention to 1095 00:50:40,640 --> 00:50:43,800 it by referencing it. Like, maybe maybe it's better 1096 00:50:43,800 --> 00:50:47,040 for the company to take this one on the chin, but also also not 1097 00:50:47,040 --> 00:50:48,680 to draw too much attention to it. 1098 00:50:48,680 --> 00:50:51,800 That might be the charitable explanatory way of behaving. 1099 00:50:52,600 --> 00:50:54,640 I mean, it's a challenge, right? Like I don't think we're in this 1100 00:50:54,640 --> 00:50:56,920 situation right now. Like the buyers are all doing 1101 00:50:57,000 --> 00:50:59,160 like are all very thoughtful. We're very lucky to have this 1102 00:50:59,160 --> 00:51:01,480 set of buyers who are thinking so critically about this. 1103 00:51:02,160 --> 00:51:04,760 And a lot of them I think are are willing to take risks like 1104 00:51:04,760 --> 00:51:07,480 they are intentionally doing this really hard, really risky 1105 00:51:07,480 --> 00:51:09,560 thing because I think it's they think it's better for the world. 1106 00:51:09,800 --> 00:51:11,760 And so we're very lucky. Like it's like that could maybe 1107 00:51:11,760 --> 00:51:14,200 explain a lot of it, but I think there's this other part where 1108 00:51:14,200 --> 00:51:16,800 like I think long term we also need to recognize that the 1109 00:51:16,800 --> 00:51:19,960 buyers incentives, you're right or not to hold the bag, but 1110 00:51:20,160 --> 00:51:22,160 there's lots of different ways to not to hold the bag. 1 is 1111 00:51:22,160 --> 00:51:24,120 like make sure you're buying stuff that's unassailable. 1112 00:51:24,360 --> 00:51:27,720 But the other way is buy stuff that's really hard to prove that 1113 00:51:27,720 --> 00:51:29,920 it's low quality. It is shown to be low quality. 1114 00:51:29,920 --> 00:51:32,760 Like don't talk about it. Like like that also allows them 1115 00:51:32,760 --> 00:51:36,120 to not hold the bag. And so I think like instead they 1116 00:51:36,120 --> 00:51:37,960 get back to the incentives being really complex. 1117 00:51:37,960 --> 00:51:40,480 There isn't just like a people have this one very clear 1118 00:51:40,480 --> 00:51:42,000 incentive. There can be multiple different 1119 00:51:42,000 --> 00:51:44,320 shades of that, some of which are great, some of which can be 1120 00:51:44,320 --> 00:51:45,120 disastrous. Yeah. 1121 00:51:47,760 --> 00:51:49,880 There's, there's so much here, Peter. 1122 00:51:49,880 --> 00:51:51,800 You're working with the registry right now though. 1123 00:51:51,960 --> 00:51:54,400 Yeah, you're commercializing. How's that going? 1124 00:51:54,840 --> 00:51:57,200 It's going amazingly. We feel really lucky to have 1125 00:51:57,200 --> 00:51:58,920 them as a partner. So they're a company called 1126 00:51:58,920 --> 00:52:01,520 Evidence. They are historically coming 1127 00:52:01,520 --> 00:52:04,560 from the renewable energy credit REC space where they've been 1128 00:52:04,560 --> 00:52:07,160 operating for two decades. They've issued more than a 1129 00:52:07,160 --> 00:52:10,160 billion credits in 60 countries on thousands of projects. 1130 00:52:10,160 --> 00:52:12,120 So they're one of the big players there. 1131 00:52:12,120 --> 00:52:14,920 And I think an organization that really understands how to do 1132 00:52:15,120 --> 00:52:17,160 credit issuance and certification incredibly well 1133 00:52:17,160 --> 00:52:19,240 and they end up really trustworthy, high accountability 1134 00:52:19,240 --> 00:52:22,920 way and they now are expanding into carbon removal. 1135 00:52:23,200 --> 00:52:25,480 And so to do that, you know, I think they share a lot of the 1136 00:52:25,480 --> 00:52:28,200 values that we have around the importance of trust and 1137 00:52:28,480 --> 00:52:30,600 consistency. And so they've adopted our 1138 00:52:30,600 --> 00:52:32,600 standards. So they're using our quality 1139 00:52:32,600 --> 00:52:35,200 assurance approach, our standards and modules to you 1140 00:52:35,720 --> 00:52:37,960 know do that the credit issuance on their registry. 1141 00:52:39,000 --> 00:52:41,440 Is direct our capture and storage going to be the first 1142 00:52:41,440 --> 00:52:43,800 methodology? That has been our first 1143 00:52:43,800 --> 00:52:46,880 methodology. So actually the we just released 1144 00:52:46,880 --> 00:52:49,520 it for public consultation that just closed and we now need to 1145 00:52:49,520 --> 00:52:52,400 do all the responses to the great comments that we got. 1146 00:52:52,400 --> 00:52:54,600 So that's kind of the next big thing on our list, but we're 1147 00:52:54,600 --> 00:52:56,560 actually already working on other pathways. 1148 00:52:56,760 --> 00:52:58,600 So I think one we can mention because we've made the 1149 00:52:58,600 --> 00:53:00,800 announcement publicly, we're going to be doing coastal 1150 00:53:00,800 --> 00:53:02,880 alkalinity enhancement with a company called Besta. 1151 00:53:03,400 --> 00:53:06,400 So I think one of the sort of most interesting ways for adding 1152 00:53:06,400 --> 00:53:09,840 alkalinity to the ocean in a way that like is actually quite 1153 00:53:09,840 --> 00:53:12,000 measurable. I think Besta has some really 1154 00:53:12,080 --> 00:53:14,280 interesting innovations around how they can get better data 1155 00:53:14,280 --> 00:53:16,040 that aligns for really well with our standard. 1156 00:53:16,520 --> 00:53:19,440 But we're actually already now starting more than one other 1157 00:53:19,440 --> 00:53:22,400 pathway in parallel that we'll be hopefully really seeing in 1158 00:53:22,400 --> 00:53:26,360 the next. Several months and those will 1159 00:53:26,400 --> 00:53:30,720 have credits issued through them on evidence is the plan. 1160 00:53:31,240 --> 00:53:33,600 So, yes, the plan right now, so right now they're the only 1161 00:53:34,000 --> 00:53:35,280 registry that we are partnered with. 1162 00:53:35,280 --> 00:53:37,400 But that is that is not our model. 1163 00:53:37,440 --> 00:53:39,800 Our model is that we think competition is generally very 1164 00:53:39,800 --> 00:53:42,440 good in our industry, like we should be competing on price and 1165 00:53:42,440 --> 00:53:45,400 we should be competing on scale. So one thing that we think is 1166 00:53:45,400 --> 00:53:47,440 bad, that this is where the race to the bottom comes in. 1167 00:53:47,440 --> 00:53:49,320 We don't think we should be competing on the definition of 1168 00:53:49,320 --> 00:53:51,240 quality, that we think that should be something that is 1169 00:53:51,240 --> 00:53:54,160 consistent across all industry. And so our model and our 1170 00:53:54,160 --> 00:53:56,440 registry partners know this and are actually quite appreciative 1171 00:53:56,440 --> 00:53:58,760 of this is that we want to partner with other registries 1172 00:53:58,760 --> 00:54:01,440 too and in other types of organizations that we think that 1173 00:54:01,640 --> 00:54:03,800 sort of this quality layer should be the thing that is 1174 00:54:03,800 --> 00:54:06,400 ubiquitous and consistent across all the different market 1175 00:54:06,400 --> 00:54:08,800 mechanisms that we'll be dealing with with Cdr. 1176 00:54:11,280 --> 00:54:13,200 Did you ever read the book The Wide Lens? 1177 00:54:13,560 --> 00:54:15,280 Do you know about this? No. 1178 00:54:15,880 --> 00:54:18,360 Just pick up a copy. If it's, it's a, it's a 1179 00:54:18,360 --> 00:54:22,760 collection of case studies about ecosystem plays and when they 1180 00:54:22,760 --> 00:54:25,720 succeed and when they fail. And what you're doing is so 1181 00:54:25,760 --> 00:54:30,560 interesting because it's one of those things where I could see 1182 00:54:30,560 --> 00:54:33,520 project developers not necessarily wanting to flock to 1183 00:54:33,520 --> 00:54:36,240 you for their own reasons. The registry that you compete 1184 00:54:36,240 --> 00:54:39,920 with don't necessarily want to fire their science teams in and 1185 00:54:39,920 --> 00:54:42,840 outsource a lot of that responsibility to you and pay 1186 00:54:42,840 --> 00:54:45,480 you as well. And then they have less assets 1187 00:54:45,480 --> 00:54:48,120 that are valuable in case of line down. 1188 00:54:48,120 --> 00:54:49,280 What do you do in a case like that? 1189 00:54:49,320 --> 00:54:51,680 You can see you start over with a new registry that's looking to 1190 00:54:51,680 --> 00:54:53,320 break into it. I mean, they're old, but like 1191 00:54:53,400 --> 00:54:54,960 they're breaking into carbon removal. 1192 00:54:55,440 --> 00:55:00,160 But is the goal to have pureo and isometric and reverse come 1193 00:55:00,160 --> 00:55:02,600 come hang with you? I'm not sure that's your goal, 1194 00:55:02,600 --> 00:55:04,440 but tell you, is that a likely outcome? 1195 00:55:05,440 --> 00:55:07,840 I mean, I think definitely like we want to work with everyone 1196 00:55:07,840 --> 00:55:09,320 eventually. That is definitely our goal. 1197 00:55:09,320 --> 00:55:12,840 And I think like the way I think about this is there's sort of 1198 00:55:12,840 --> 00:55:15,280 short term benefits in competition and there's long 1199 00:55:15,280 --> 00:55:17,320 term benefits in competition and the short term, sure. 1200 00:55:17,360 --> 00:55:19,120 Like we're in the industry that we are today. 1201 00:55:19,120 --> 00:55:22,160 It's a sort of this dogfight in the Wild West of like, oh, mine 1202 00:55:22,160 --> 00:55:24,120 is better than yours, except I can't prove that. 1203 00:55:24,120 --> 00:55:26,360 And you know, like just my opinions are smarter than you're 1204 00:55:26,360 --> 00:55:29,960 better than your opinions. So fine, like that is where we 1205 00:55:29,960 --> 00:55:31,600 are today. But if you don't take this 1206 00:55:31,600 --> 00:55:34,600 approach and you send it out to where we are likely to be going, 1207 00:55:34,720 --> 00:55:38,520 which is I think integrating Cdr into governments and cap and 1208 00:55:38,520 --> 00:55:41,360 trade in compliance markets, then you can sort of better see 1209 00:55:41,360 --> 00:55:43,200 what the challenge that we're going to be facing there where 1210 00:55:43,200 --> 00:55:45,360 like we have the same dynamic that's happening. 1211 00:55:45,640 --> 00:55:47,440 There's two sort of outcomes that happen here that I think 1212 00:55:47,440 --> 00:55:51,520 I'm deeply afraid of personally. 1 is we're going to see the same 1213 00:55:51,520 --> 00:55:54,200 sort of like mindset of like everything needs to be built one 1214 00:55:54,200 --> 00:55:56,720 off, get custom in house. We do it our way because like 1215 00:55:56,720 --> 00:55:57,760 we're smarter than everyone else. 1216 00:55:57,760 --> 00:56:00,480 And we're going to end up with this 100 different countries who 1217 00:56:00,480 --> 00:56:03,080 have integrated Cdr to their, you know, government structure 1218 00:56:03,120 --> 00:56:05,040 rates, but they're all going to do it differently. 1219 00:56:05,320 --> 00:56:08,080 And that's not just bad from like a climate perspective, Like 1220 00:56:08,080 --> 00:56:10,600 we'll have actually no idea how much climate progress we're 1221 00:56:10,600 --> 00:56:12,440 happening because everyone's going to be measuring this 1222 00:56:12,440 --> 00:56:14,440 completely differently. But now imagine that from a 1223 00:56:14,440 --> 00:56:16,760 project developer's perspective, like imagine you have to comply 1224 00:56:16,760 --> 00:56:18,800 with 100 different types of standards. 1225 00:56:19,000 --> 00:56:21,400 It's insanity. And you know, there are 1226 00:56:21,400 --> 00:56:24,520 mechanisms for maybe fixing that like Arc 6 and and and whatnot, 1227 00:56:24,680 --> 00:56:27,880 and you know, maybe even SPTI. But they're not 1010. 1228 00:56:28,000 --> 00:56:29,520 They're not moving in the direction where actually it 1229 00:56:29,520 --> 00:56:30,840 looks like they're actually try to solve this. 1230 00:56:30,840 --> 00:56:32,520 So that's the one thing I'm really afraid of. 1231 00:56:32,800 --> 00:56:36,080 The second thing is we forget that Article 6 isn't just about 1232 00:56:36,360 --> 00:56:38,920 how we measure quality, but also has other things, for example, 1233 00:56:39,200 --> 00:56:41,600 builds, things like emissions training capabilities, which I 1234 00:56:41,600 --> 00:56:43,000 think can actually be a really good thing. 1235 00:56:43,440 --> 00:56:45,840 There should be certain types of jurisdictions or certain parts 1236 00:56:45,840 --> 00:56:48,520 of the world where they might be better at director Capture, they 1237 00:56:48,520 --> 00:56:50,160 might be better at Hanford Weather. 1238 00:56:50,640 --> 00:56:52,720 They see this as an opportunity to build new industry, which I 1239 00:56:52,720 --> 00:56:54,680 think it's good. Like that's the way we're going 1240 00:56:54,680 --> 00:56:58,080 to actually get adoption of Cdr. The challenge though, is that 1241 00:56:58,080 --> 00:57:00,680 same race to the bottom mechanic that we've seen in the voluntary 1242 00:57:00,680 --> 00:57:03,600 market without really rigorous consistent standards across 1243 00:57:03,600 --> 00:57:06,160 governments and across like how we think about this, that could 1244 00:57:06,160 --> 00:57:09,480 actually replicate itself at national scales where countries 1245 00:57:09,480 --> 00:57:12,280 will want to compete to bring product developers and bring 1246 00:57:12,280 --> 00:57:14,640 economic opportunities. And they might think like, hey, 1247 00:57:14,640 --> 00:57:17,280 maybe I'll just make slightly weaker standards because they'll 1248 00:57:17,280 --> 00:57:18,800 make an issue more credits and that'll look great. 1249 00:57:19,800 --> 00:57:21,320 And all of a sudden, like that same race to the bottom 1250 00:57:21,320 --> 00:57:24,480 mechanic, he's spread across the globe at gigatons. 1251 00:57:25,200 --> 00:57:27,640 That is the nightmare scenario that I really spend time 1252 00:57:27,640 --> 00:57:31,520 thinking about, worrying about. Dang, this one really made me 1253 00:57:31,520 --> 00:57:32,960 think. Peter, I asked you hard 1254 00:57:32,960 --> 00:57:34,800 questions too. I hope you don't feel on the 1255 00:57:34,800 --> 00:57:36,880 defensive, No. These are great questions, I 1256 00:57:36,880 --> 00:57:39,040 love them. Yeah, I'm fascinated by what 1257 00:57:39,040 --> 00:57:41,400 you're trying to build. I'm glad there's more people 1258 00:57:41,400 --> 00:57:43,680 thinking about this. I also just respect that you 1259 00:57:43,680 --> 00:57:45,360 took an orthogonal view to everyone. 1260 00:57:45,560 --> 00:57:47,720 Else like. Do you even have any competitors 1261 00:57:47,720 --> 00:57:50,120 besides just the registries who are integrated in the way that 1262 00:57:50,120 --> 00:57:52,640 you describe? Even them like I, I imagine that 1263 00:57:52,640 --> 00:57:54,920 they are not our competitors, like we are happy to be partners 1264 00:57:54,920 --> 00:57:55,920 with them. Like, you know, like we're 1265 00:57:55,920 --> 00:57:58,360 effectively like they are our customers, like that's how we 1266 00:57:58,360 --> 00:58:00,120 integrate. And so we're happy to work with 1267 00:58:00,120 --> 00:58:02,280 them when they are ready. I think you're probably 1268 00:58:02,280 --> 00:58:05,000 generally right that right now it's sort of hard to say like we 1269 00:58:05,000 --> 00:58:07,000 don't, we have a, we used to have opinions on this, but maybe 1270 00:58:07,000 --> 00:58:09,200 we don't anymore. Like I think we have more work 1271 00:58:09,200 --> 00:58:11,320 to do to demonstrate that like there's value in this and 1272 00:58:11,520 --> 00:58:13,840 creating consistency across the industry is going to be 1273 00:58:13,840 --> 00:58:15,280 beneficial. And I think that's absolutely 1274 00:58:15,280 --> 00:58:17,000 true. Like, you know, one of the sort 1275 00:58:17,000 --> 00:58:19,760 of hard facts that we need to grapple with in this industry is 1276 00:58:20,080 --> 00:58:23,240 we effectively have like 2, you know, maybe if you want to be 1277 00:58:23,240 --> 00:58:25,920 generous, like 5 buyers and that's it. 1278 00:58:26,160 --> 00:58:27,960 Like, you know, those five buyers are basically putting the 1279 00:58:27,960 --> 00:58:30,040 entire industry on their shoulders. 1280 00:58:30,200 --> 00:58:33,960 And that is really problematic. Like that's a, that should be, I 1281 00:58:33,960 --> 00:58:35,880 think it is like, like it is alarm bells for almost 1282 00:58:35,880 --> 00:58:37,480 everybody. But I think one thing that we 1283 00:58:37,480 --> 00:58:40,080 need to do a better job of is asking ourselves this question 1284 00:58:40,080 --> 00:58:42,440 of why, why are there not more buyers? 1285 00:58:42,880 --> 00:58:44,640 And I think part of it is definitely like cost, it's 1286 00:58:44,640 --> 00:58:46,960 expensive and there's sort of no reason to do this. 1287 00:58:46,960 --> 00:58:49,040 We know until we have regulation, that's not going to 1288 00:58:49,040 --> 00:58:50,600 happen. So I think another thing that 1289 00:58:50,600 --> 00:58:52,840 has been highlighted to me in the conversations I've had with 1290 00:58:52,840 --> 00:58:57,280 buyers is also that they've seen this rodeo before that like when 1291 00:58:57,280 --> 00:59:00,960 they bought forestry, when they bought avoidance and had that go 1292 00:59:00,960 --> 00:59:03,040 wrong for them, have to go poorly for them. 1293 00:59:03,280 --> 00:59:06,760 It's because they, it was the MRV wasn't sorted because it 1294 00:59:06,760 --> 00:59:09,480 wasn't consistent, because it was very clear that they weren't 1295 00:59:09,480 --> 00:59:11,440 able to get, they weren't necessarily going to get what 1296 00:59:11,440 --> 00:59:13,720 they were paying for. They can see the complexity in 1297 00:59:13,720 --> 00:59:16,160 trying to determine whether I should support one project or 1298 00:59:16,160 --> 00:59:18,680 another. And they're not fools. 1299 00:59:18,680 --> 00:59:21,360 They're actually quite smarts. And so if you're going to be 1300 00:59:21,360 --> 00:59:24,040 putting down millions of dollars, do you want to do that 1301 00:59:24,040 --> 00:59:26,080 in a situation where you like, you're confident that you're 1302 00:59:26,080 --> 00:59:28,200 actually going to be able to make a claim in the long term? 1303 00:59:28,600 --> 00:59:31,800 Or, you know, are you OK with massive uncertainties? 1304 00:59:32,000 --> 00:59:33,800 And it turns out we're very lucky to have a small number who 1305 00:59:33,800 --> 00:59:35,160 are OK with massive uncertainties. 1306 00:59:35,320 --> 00:59:38,000 But actually maybe that's not the model for the larger market 1307 00:59:38,000 --> 00:59:38,920 that we're going to have to build. 1308 00:59:40,160 --> 00:59:42,560 Very rarely do I come away from a show with more questions than 1309 00:59:42,560 --> 00:59:45,080 I started. There's so much to talk about 1310 00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:46,240 here. We'll pick another one of you 1311 00:59:46,240 --> 00:59:48,640 some other time. Peter, thanks for being on. 1312 00:59:48,800 --> 00:59:51,480 Thanks for enduring the the barrage of questions for for 1313 00:59:51,480 --> 00:59:55,160 waiting in the legal theory I'm trying to compare to legal 1314 00:59:55,160 --> 00:59:56,160 reviews. Thank you. 1315 00:59:57,080 --> 00:59:59,160 It's been my pleasure, Ross, like always fun to talk to you. 1316 00:59:59,160 --> 01:00:01,200 I think this has been one of the more stimulating conversations 1317 01:00:01,200 --> 01:00:02,760 I've had in a while. And like, getting this level of 1318 01:00:02,760 --> 01:00:04,240 complexity is how we should think about this. 1319 01:00:04,240 --> 01:00:07,000 Like, if we want to succeed in Cdr, it's the question we should 1320 01:00:07,000 --> 01:00:09,600 be asking ourselves is how do we make it more like legal theory 1321 01:00:09,600 --> 01:00:11,040 in law? How do we make it more like, you 1322 01:00:11,040 --> 01:00:13,240 know, financial regulation? How do we make this a system 1323 01:00:13,400 --> 01:00:15,720 that the the rest of the world has already shown us is needed 1324 01:00:15,920 --> 01:00:18,400 to build scale, to build trust? We should be thinking more in 1325 01:00:18,400 --> 01:00:19,960 those terms. And that's how we solve this 1326 01:00:19,960 --> 01:00:20,600 larger problem.