Glossary

Carbon Capture & Storage: The Need, The Landscape, The Opportunity

by: Jessica Campbell | April 26, 2023

The Need

The scaling of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) globally is now widely accepted as necessary (rather than desired) when it comes to achieving net-zero commitments and the targets set out in the Paris Agreement. McKinsey & Company estimated that we need to reach at least 4.2 gigatons of storage per annum (GTPA) by 2050, which represents a growth of 120 times current activity level [1]. Estimates by other groups, including the International Energy Agency (IEA), place the volumetric need anywhere between 3 – 10 GTPA to get us 5 – 10% of the way to net-zero. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has indicated that under ideal economic conditions, CCS has the potential to contribute between 15–55% of the cumulative mitigation efforts required to stay within 1.5 degrees. However, for this economic potential to be reached (i.e., to achieve economies of scale), “several hundreds of thousands of [carbon dioxide] CO₂ capture systems would need to be installed over the coming century, each capturing some 1 – 5 MTCO2 per year” [2]. This represents a deployment of projects and technology that is unprecedented in its rate and scale. All this to say, no matter which source you look at, the message is clear; we need tremendous amounts of geologic CO2 storage, and we need it at pace.

The Landscape

Despite the scientific consensus on the need for CCS, the path to implementing projects at scale comes with challenges. For one, the regulatory landscape of countries and jurisdictions to deploy CCS at scale are at varying readiness levels, with most falling in the ‘dismally unprepared’ category. Fortunately, there are many regions throughout Europe, the US, and Canada, where the regulatory frameworks are well developed due to decades-long oil and gas activity, including some dedicated geologic CO₂ storage and its relative – Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). Even with more advanced regulatory frameworks, CCS projects still face a series of other challenges, including (but not limited to): 1. mineral rights ownership and disputes, 2. back-logs and long lead times for appropriate well permitting (i.e., Class VI in the US), 3. lack of CO₂ transport and pipeline infrastructure, and 4. public opinion/acceptance.

The last one, ‘public opinion and acceptance’, often does not receive the attention it deserves as a potential disruptor and real threat to progress on scaling CCS. In just one example, an open letter to the US and Canadian governments was signed by over 500 groups in 2021, calling for a halt to all support for CCS projects [3]. Due to the complex nature of our energy systems, how they interface with society, and an unfortunate history of ecosystem and environmental justice abuses, it should not come as a surprise that CCS is caught in the crosshairs given the size and the wide variety of potential applications for the projects, cross-sectoral and economy-wide. It will take a cohesive, patient, and relationship-based approach to help educate and repair some of the damage done. Unfortunately, it is a common misconception that CCS is a band-aid solution that will distract from the energy transition and investment in alternate fuels. The reality is that CCS will enable the energy transition, with the key word being transition. CCS will allow the production of lower-cost low-CI hydrogen and other alternate fuels needed to reduce emissions in hard-to-abate sectors. Short-term access to these fuels is critical to achieving emission reductions now and allows time for the supply of renewable fuels and energy sources to ramp up to meet the ever-growing demand.

Regarding environmental markets, CCS projects are considered an emissions avoidance rather than a removal since the CO₂ never actually enters the atmosphere. Logically, the prevention emissions should be valued equally compared to removing them after the fact. Nevertheless, a false dichotomy occurs in the market, where removal-based credits are viewed as superior to (i.e., trading at 2–3 times the price) avoidance credits and activities. The value differential is a function of capital cost – direct air capture (DAC) and other carbon removal technologies and activities are currently more expensive to implement. Still, there is also a component associated with optics, which is unfortunate. Analogous to a bathtub full of water, the bath would never drain if one pulled the plug but kept the tap running. Removals are an exciting technology development associated with vital natural system restoration projects and activities. However, we are still too early in the energy transition to focus our attention too squarely on removals – we still need high-quality avoidance projects that have the potential to mitigate emissions on the gigaton scale, which includes CCS. As is a common theme throughout this blog, we need more of both, not either/or.

Despite the regulatory challenges and bumpy road ahead, hundreds of companies have either proposed CCS projects or are evaluating opportunities, including many of ClimeCo’s clients. In this valiant pursuit, ClimeCo has accepted the challenge and is working to support our clients through strategic advisory services and de-risking investment through partnerships and optimization of multiple potential revenue streams.

The Opportunity

The recent changes to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the opportunities it has created for CCS are generally understood – albeit in theory. Projects that plan to sequester CO₂ in secure, geologic formations can receive up to $85 per tonne of CO₂ injected under the 45Q tax credit. What is often less clear are the opportunities for additional revenue streams, specifically within the voluntary carbon market (VCM), and the rules around stacking the various available incentives. Opportunities for value creation outside of the VCM arise from low-carbon fuel markets and green premiums for low-carbon products. How these fit together within an optimized organizational strategy while achieving broader emission reduction goals can be challenging to navigate. Although ClimeCo takes a holistic approach to value creation via all channels, the paragraphs below will highlight the recent developments that will open pathways in the VCM.

Historically, North America’s only VCM methodologies for generating carbon credits from CO₂ sequestration activities were specifically designed for and limited to EOR. The absence of a methodology for geologic storage was just a symptom of the economic realities of pure geological storage projects – most would just not pencil at previous incentives levels, even with stackable carbon credits. However, the new IRA is a game changer, placing hundreds of millions more tonnes per annum within the realm of potentially economical or marginal. The VCM is ramping up to help projects falling in the ‘uneconomic’ or ‘marginal’ categories to be economic and to de-risk the investments by diversifying the revenue streams. The cost of CCS projects varies widely by industry. Those in hard-to-abate sectors have a particularly high cost of capture to low purity and/or concentration of CO₂ streams. Fortunately, there will be at least one, if not two, new VCM methodologies available in the near term that will allow for the creation of voluntary carbon credits from CCS. This opportunity will be particularly advantageous for those in hard-to-abate sectors where the $85 per tonne alone is not enough.

The American Carbon Registry (ACR) is in the process of finalizing its methodology that would allow for carbon credits created from the following activities: geologic storage, direct air capture (DAC), EOR, and bioenergy with CCS (BECCS). We expect the methodology to be available by the end of 2023.

Verra is working with the CCS+ Initiative to develop a series of modules for CCS projects for credit creation in the VCM. Verra has indicated that the first module will allow for crediting of the same activities as under the ACR methodology; however, it needs to be clarified as to whether any negative emissions (i.e., removals) associated with BECCS will be included in the first release.

For organizations at various stages in the CCS project development journey, it will be necessary to understand all the potential revenue streams associated with the project, including voluntary carbon credits as well as other value-creation opportunities in low-carbon fuel markets, compliance markets, and additional government grants and funding and the associated value, risks, challenges, and optimization opportunities. It is also important to understand how utilizing the VCM fits within the broader organizational strategy, emission reduction targets, and a product’s value in the market (i.e., green premiums).

[1] McKinsey & Company, Scaling the CCUS Industry to Achieve Net-Zero Emissions
[2] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage
[3] Oil Change International, Open Letter to US and Canadian Governments

About the Author

Jessica Campbell, Director of Energy Innovations, leads ClimeCo’s CCS and Low Carbon Fuels Program. She is passionate about the power of utilizing environmental markets to expedite decarbonization goals and supporting our clients through the energy transition.

Blue Carbon 101

by: David Chen and Daniel Frasca | September 29, 2022

Blue carbon includes important coastal and marine ecosystems such as mangroves, seagrass meadows, and tidal marshes.

What is Blue Carbon?

On the fringes of Earth’s continents lies one of nature’s greatest climate regulation mechanisms: vast reserves of organic carbon known as blue carbon. “Blue carbon” refers to the organic carbon captured and stored in coastal and marine ecosystems and can be used to refer to the marine habitats that sequester and store carbon dioxide.

The United Nations first used the term “blue carbon” in a 2009 report that recognized the critical role some coastal and marine ecosystems play in drawing down carbon from the atmosphere. The United Nations Framework Committee on Climate Change defines blue carbon as mangroves, seagrass meadows, and tidal marshes. As the field of blue carbon grows, additional ecosystems will likely be recognized as blue carbon, a topic we will discuss in an upcoming blog.

As of late, blue carbon has become a hot topic due to the immense capacity of these ecosystems to draw down atmospheric carbon levels and provide irreplaceable ecosystem services.

The intricate root systems of mangroves on the Indonesian island of Nias provide protection from storm surge and coastal erosion for local communities.

Blue Carbon as a Climate Solution

What makes coastal and marine ecosystems different than their terrestrial equivalents? After all, aren’t all plants capable of sequestering carbon? While that may be true, blue carbon ecosystems can capture 10-50 times more carbon per unit than their land-dwelling counterparts. In fact, every year, blue carbon ecosystems bury underground a comparable amount of carbon as terrestrial forests despite occupying less than 3% of the global forest area. The open ocean is also no match for the carbon-capturing powers of coastal blue carbon ecosystems. For reference, coastal habitats represent about 2% of the oceans’ surface area yet are responsible for nearly 50% of carbon sequestered in marine sediments. These blue carbon ecosystems, nestled between the endless ocean and vast landmasses, represent a thin slice of Earth working overtime to regulate the climate.

Local Indonesian fisherman sourcing fish and shellfish in a pristine blue carbon ecosystem

How Blue Carbon Ecosystems Sequester Carbon

Coastal habitats capture carbon more effectively than their terrestrial counterparts due to their higher efficiency in converting solar energy into organic matter – often described as a high primary productivity rate. More importantly, blue carbon ecosystems trap sediment and organic matter such as leaf litter in their roots and allow that carbon to accumulate in the seabed. This process is known as “sedimentation” and accounts for 50 – 90% of all the carbon sequestered in these coastal ecosystems.

This ability to store carbon underground in soils and sediment is one of blue carbon’s most unique and essential functions. Aboveground biomass, such as the trees in a forest, will sequester and store carbon over its lifetime. However, at the end of the tree’s lifecycle, the tree will die and release carbon back into the atmosphere during the decomposition process. In contrast, belowground carbon sequestered by blue carbon ecosystems can remain undisturbed for hundreds or even thousands of years. A prime example is a seabed meadow off the coast of Spain that has accumulated over a 35-foot-thick carbon deposit over the span of 6,000 years. The stable and enduring nature of these reserves is created by the seabed’s saltwater and oxygen-deprived conditions, which slow the pace of decomposition and effectively trap carbon underground. Belowground carbon also represents a more resilient store of carbon stock as it is insulated against natural disturbances, such as fire and heavy rainfall, which are expected to become more frequent and intense as the climate continues to warm. Not only can carbon stored underground reduce the symptoms of the climate crisis, but it can also endure the worst effects of climate change.

Mangrove restoration site at a local village in Aceh, Indonesia

Beyond Carbon

For the people connected to these ecosystems, the benefits of blue carbon extend far beyond combating climate change. Blue carbon habitats provide extensive benefits to biodiversity, local communities, and the millions of people dependent on them for their food supply. Aquatic plants found in these coastal blue carbon environments provide the shelter, nutrients, and water filtration services on which aquatic animals depend- simply put, many forms of animal life cannot survive without these foundational habitats. Flourishing coastal habitats increase food security and provide coastal communities with fishery and ecotourism opportunities. Mangroves and tidal marshes mitigate coastal erosion and insulate coastal communities from storm surges during extreme weather events. It’s been estimated that the annual value of the ecosystem services provided by blue carbon habitats hovers around $190 billion.

The world’s blue carbon ecosystems have a fundamental role in addressing climate change. Focusing our attention on the conservation and restoration of these precious ecosystems will have an immense impact in returning life to coastal waters and uplifting surrounding communities.

About the Authors

David Chen is passionate about nature-based solutions and developing carbon offset projects that protect and restore native ecosystems. From replanting bald cypress trees in the Mississippi River delta to reestablishing mangroves forests in international countries, David understands the positive impact these projects have on biodiversity, coastal resiliency and improving local livelihoods. David is a Program Development Manager at ClimeCo and has a Master of Environmental Management from Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment and received his Bachelor of Science from the University of California, Riverside.

Daniel Frasca is an Associate on the Program Development Team specializing in nature-based solutions. He joined the team with previous business development, finance, and sales experience in the residential solar industry and leadership experience in the nonprofit sector. Daniel earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Management from Boston College, with a concentration in Finance and a minor in Environmental Studies.

ClimeCo Partners with Aclymate, a Software Solution for Small Businesses Interested in Making Climate Impacts

NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION
CONTACT
Nancy Marshall, Vice President, Marketing
+1 484.415.7603 or nmarshall@climeco.com

ClimeCo Partners with Aclymate, a Software Solution for Small Businesses Interested in Making Climate Impacts

Boyertown, Pennsylvania (September 8, 2022) – ClimeCo, a global company that focuses on developing and trading environmental commodities and advising clients on sustainability and emerging environmental markets, announces a partnership with Aclymate.

Aclymate is a web-based application solution for small and medium-sized businesses that desire to address their climate footprint but are otherwise unable to do so in a practical or economical manner. They offer users a robust, intuitive, and friendly way to transform their best climate intentions into climate action so that any business can become a climate leader.

“There are more than 30 million small businesses in the United States alone. Small business owners are passionate about being part of the solution to environmental problems,” says Derek Six, Chief Operating Officer at ClimeCo. “Still, there were not any affordable and effective tools for these business owners to begin their sustainability journey. Aclymate empowers small businesses, and ClimeCo is excited to support this effort.”

Aclymate provides carbon footprint and certification services to smaller companies at a cost-effective price, allowing them to show their customers, employees, and stakeholders that they are taking action in the fight against climate change.

“I have been fortunate to know a great many players in carbon markets, and I can say, unequivocally, that Derek and the ClimeCo team are amongst the best,” says Mike Smith, CEO of Aclymate. “I am very excited about this partnership and how we can bring the power of ClimeCo to the small and medium-sized business space.”

ClimeCo will participate on the Board of Directors and support Aclymate in maintaining a great selection of high-quality offset projects. This collaboration will provide Aclymate’s clients with expanded services, including expert ESG Advisory from ClimeCo. The partnership will also strengthen Aclymate’s carbon accounting and carbon offset offerings to a market segment that is generally underserved.

About ClimeCo

ClimeCo is a respected global advisor, transaction facilitator, trader, and developer of environmental commodity market products and related solutions. We specialize in voluntary carbon, regulated carbon, renewable energy credits, plastics credits, and regional criteria pollutant trading programs. Complimenting these programs is a team of professionals skilled in providing sustainability program management solutions and developing and financing of GHG abatement and mitigation systems.

For more information or to discuss how ClimeCo can drive value for your organization, contact us at +1 484.415.0501, info@climeco.com, or through our website climeco.com. Be sure to follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter using our handle, @ClimeCo.

About Aclymate

Aclymate empowers small and medium-sized businesses to become Climate Leaders. With no special knowledge required, our customers can determine their emissions footprint in under 10 minutes per month, find ways to reduce their impact, and offset what cannot be eliminated – all leading to our Climate Leader certification. For more information or to sign up for a free consultation, please go to aclymate.com.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022: Tipping the Scale Toward Clean Energy

NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE DISTRIBUTION
CONTACT
Nancy Marshall, Vice President, Marketing
484.415.7603 or nmarshall@climeco.com

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022: Tipping the Scale Toward Clean Energy

by: Erica Lasdon | August 30, 2022

Boyertown, Pennsylvania (August 30, 2022) – Sweeping legislation signed into law this month by President Biden will allow for unprecedented investments to decarbonize the nation’s economy. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) earmarks the bulk of its $490 billion spending on clean energy and climate change mitigation initiatives.

Combined with other recent spending bills, the U.S. government is set to begin a period of transformative investments. The Rocky Mountain Institute, a clean energy think tank, notes that the combined bills will more than triple annual real federal spending compared with recent years, which was already elevated from levels of the 1990s and early 2000s.

While the IRA is far from perfect, advocates say it provides extraordinary opportunities for the conservation of our nation’s lands and waterways and includes significant resources for restoring wildlife habitats and forests.

The legislation is expected to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to approximately 40%, compared to 2005-levels, by 2030. Without enactment of the IRA, the U.S. was on course to reduce its GHG emissions to only 26%, compared to 2005-levels, over this period, according to an analysis from the World Economic Forum.

For the U.S. to reach its emissions-reduction targets, it’s imperative that we begin to take action across the entire technology adoption curve. This means exploring: 

Existing technologies that are ready for market but not deployed. 
Solutions that require some further development to be market ready. 
Technologies that are only prototypes and need significant development.

Importantly, IRA resources will focus on the most hard-to-abate industrial sectors, such as electric power generation.

As widely reported, the IRA is projected to drive significant emissions reductions in the electric power sector. To a certain extent, this can lower production emissions in steel, cement, and other carbon-intensive industries. However, practical options to capture carbon from industrial processes and traditional energy production require substantial investment to help meet climate goals. The IRA addresses these challenges by creating incentives through a system of grants, loans, and tax credits, including making certain existing credits larger and more durable.

Here are a few key IRA provisions for companies and investors to be aware of:

Changes to 45Q, the existing tax credit for carbon capture and storage (CCS), make it more profitable and easier to access. Companies will be able to earn $85 for every metric ton of CO2 sequestered, rather than $50/ton previously. (The amount earned is less if the CO2 is buried during oil extraction.) The timeline is more favorable too. Previously, a company had to start building capture equipment by 2026. Now it’s 2033. The IRA also significantly lowers the minimum capture requirement.
Methane emissions are an urgent issue for many industries, as this type of emission is far more potent than carbon dioxide and hard to detect. For the oil and gas industry, investments in methane detection and a first-time federal fee on methane emissions will amplify existing initiatives within industry to tackle this problem. The IRA also funds grants, rebates, loans, and other assistance to facilities subject to the methane fee for a variety of measures, including adding or improving equipment and processes that reduce methane emissions.
Other long-term tax credits include clean hydrogen fuel development, direct-air-capture deployment, and advanced nuclear projects for heavy industry.

By driving down the cost of clean energy and other climate solutions, this approach may make it easier for companies and local governments to increase their climate ambitions. 

Regardless of your business’s sector, you will feel the impact of the IRA and related legislation. As the landscape shifts, companies and investors should factor an increasing rate of technological and systems change into their future plans.

Deep decarbonization is complex work that requires a diverse set of policy, legal, technology, and market solutions. Forthcoming investments by the U.S. government seek to put the country on a net-zero pathway. Importantly, investors and corporations have many tools available to assess their pathways to net-zero.

Since our founding, ClimeCo has been a leading transformation partner to companies, investors, and governments pursuing a low-carbon future.  As a vertically integrated sustainability solutions provider, we have enabled our clients to go beyond business as usual. By developing frontier technology- and nature-based carbon-reduction projects, transacting voluntary and compulsory environmental credits, and advising on climate risk and disclosure, our team is dedicated to implementing decarbonization pathways tailored to our clients’ specific sectors, business models, and balance sheets.

Please get in touch with us if you want to learn more about our:

Complete range of ESG Advisory solutions that help companies improve readiness and resilience in the ever-changing regulatory environment. 
Project Development capabilities around high-quality carbon projects that feature strong engagement with our project partners, local stakeholders, carbon registries, and credit buyers.
 
Environmental Credit offerings from projects we develop and projects we invest in.

About ClimeCo

For more information or to discuss how ClimeCo can drive value for your organization, contact us at 484.415.0501, info@climeco.com, or through our website climeco.com. Be sure to follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter using our handle, @ClimeCo.

Dispatches from the Nature-Based Solutions Conference

by: Emily Romano | August 25, 2022

Site visit by ClimeCo at a reforestation project in Louisiana

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are an important part of the work we do at ClimeCo, and they are a growing sector of carbon markets. NBS are defined as actions that restore, manage, and protect natural habitats for societal benefit, including mitigation and adaptation to the effects of climate change. These activities, such as reforestation, peatland rewetting, or grassland management, have received extensive media coverage in recent years and months as they play an increasingly important role in many corporate and national climate plans. Successful NBS projects have the potential to achieve a trifecta of climate, community, and biodiversity benefits, while poorly designed projects are rightfully criticized as a step backward for climate goals, human rights, and ecosystem health.

With this context in mind, I attended the Nature-based Solutions Conference in Oxford, UK, in July 2022, hosted by researchers at the Nature-based Solutions Initiative. Held in the beautiful Oxford University Museum of Natural History, the conference attracted a wide range of researchers, policymakers, activists, NGO members, and practitioners. Sessions addressed topics such as the global status and criticisms of NBS, inclusive project governance and narratives, improved biodiversity outcomes, the economics of NBS, and applications for urban environments.

I learned a lot from the speakers, whose presentations addressed the conference’s central question: “How can we ensure that NBS support thriving human and ecological communities?” In this blog, I summarize and share the key messages I took home from this conference.

Bodleian Library, Oxford University

Key Takeaways

Concern for Low-Quality NBS

With careful planning and consideration, NBS projects can provide powerful, sustainable, and cost-effective benefits to their host communities. Unfortunately, a number of low-quality NBS projects around the world have failed in recent decades. These failures are almost always due to protocols with inadequate provisions for permanence and additionality or a lack of robust safeguards of human rights and biodiversity.

The conference explored numerous concerns surrounding low-quality NBS, primarily those voiced by Indigenous and local communities regarding projects that have caused and perpetuated human rights abuses. These include land tenure injustice, displacement of people and livelihoods, and denial of community access to natural resources. This sort of project is often characterized by a top-down design without the active participation of the local community, prioritization of western value systems, and a lack of transparency or long-term monitoring requirements. Low-quality projects often result in ecosystem failures due to inappropriate species selection or project location or the establishment of monoculture plantations without regard for local biodiversity.

An additional concern voiced at the conference was that NBS not be used in greenwashing schemes by polluters to replace decarbonization efforts. While ecosystems play an important role in climate change mitigation and adaptation, they are not capable of compensating for delayed emissions reductions in other sectors. Speakers also highlighted the moral hazard of entities from the Global North who might seek to export the responsibility and the work of decarbonization to the Global South.

These concerns are critically important for improving NBS project outcomes. The conference’s primary focus was on how to address these concerns and included many examples of current best practices from around the world.

Tradeoffs, Inclusive Project Design and Governance, and Narratives

While many NBS projects generate desirable co-benefits or “win-win” results for society and biodiversity, projects may also generate tradeoffs that create tension between competing project goals. For example, biophysical tradeoffs might occur if a project prioritizes one ecosystem service at the expense of another. Social tradeoffs might occur between stakeholders with different cultural or spiritual valuations of nature or between those with scientific knowledge and those with Indigenous knowledge. Project developers must acknowledge and mitigate these tradeoffs in partnership with local stakeholders to account for the full range of project impacts.

One strong message from the conference was the critical role that Indigenous and local community members must play in all stages of NBS projects and the importance of free, prior, and informed consent. Numerous speakers pointed out that many Indigenous groups have traditionally implemented successful NBS within their own communities, and their knowledge can fill critical gaps in scientific understanding. The inclusion of these groups from the design to the implementation to the monitoring stage of a project is not only a basic indicator of respect but can also tangibly improve project outcomes.

Indigenous and community leaders from numerous countries, including Zambia, China, Tanzania, Peru, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, presented case studies illustrating successful NBS outcomes in their communities. These presentations called for projects to distribute benefits equitably among community members, ensure a living wage, and create sources of long-term finance controlled by the local community. Finally, the speakers emphasized the critical importance of land tenure for Indigenous peoples.

ClimeCo meeting indigenous workers at a mangrove reforestation project in Indonesia

How to Prioritize and Adequately Represent Biodiversity

Another conference theme was the need for better metrics of biodiversity, so that progress can be adequately represented in project designs and monitoring plans. Speakers highlighted several scientific and technological advances, such as ecosystem DNA and high-resolution carbon mapping tools, which would facilitate project area prioritization and robust biodiversity assessment if implemented at scale.

However, some speakers quickly pointed out that “technology is not the solution. We are the solution.” In this vein, multiple speakers recommended that biodiversity monitoring plans utilize community monitoring approaches, including input from local and Indigenous groups regarding biodiversity metric selection.

Mangrove nursery managed and developed by the local community near the reforestation site

Creating High-Quality NBS

The conference delivered a crystal-clear message that projects that do not include robust provisions for human rights and biodiversity do not fall under the umbrella of the NBS term.

To avoid the pitfalls of low-quality projects, reputable carbon offset registries have developed meaningful standards for additionality and permanence and protocols that include protections for human rights and biodiversity. The most important feature of these protocols is that registries update them when a loophole is identified. Although these updates require months or even years to go into effect, this process allows registries to enforce ever-evolving concepts of “best practice.” For this reason, carbon offsets generated using the protocols of reputable registries, such as the Climate Action Reserve, Verra, the American Carbon Registry, and Gold Standard, are categorically distinct from low-quality offsets.

Regardless of protocol requirements, project developers are responsible for designing projects that adhere to best practices and meaningfully address the concerns of Indigenous and local stakeholders. Within the voluntary carbon market, project developers and carbon credit end-users must be able to recognize the indicators of a high-quality project and must be selective in the projects they choose to support.

ClimeCo’s NBS Approach

As offset project developers, the ClimeCo team always listens for new perspectives on best practices. We believe that NBS projects have enormous potential when they are designed carefully to empower and give voice to local communities. As sustainability advisors, we also feel a keen responsibility to help clients decarbonize wherever possible. Our ESG Advisory team provides many services essential to clients at any stage of their decarbonization journey. We encourage the use of offsets to address emission sources that are difficult or impossible to abate as a part of a larger decarbonization plan.

Most importantly, we understand there is no one-size-fits-all approach to NBS project development. We are grateful for each opportunity to earn a community’s trust and seek partners who share our accountability and responsible stewardship values.

ClimeCo’s Dr. Scott Subler observing freshly planted Bald Cypress saplings

Conclusion

I left the conference inspired by the incredible work being done worldwide to improve the implementation of NBS. ClimeCo will continue to listen and apply the guidance and feedback of the global NBS community, and I cannot wait to see the good our projects can do. ClimeCo is committed to informing you of new information discovered as we continue to explore in-depth NBS concerns. We welcome comments or questions surrounding this topic.

Anyone interested in watching conference sessions can access recordings and PDFs of presentations on the conference website (I recommend Session 4 and Session 9A). For those curious to see examples of high-quality projects, the Nature-based Solutions Initiative’s organizers directed us to their Case Study Platform, a map-based tool with over 100 examples of projects from around the world that meet the researchers’ quality standards.

About the Author

Emily Romano is a Project Manager at ClimeCo based in San Francisco. Within Project Development, she applies a background in climate, ecosystem, and soil science to her work managing NBS projects. She holds a Master of Science in Environmental Science and Policy from Northern Arizona University and a Bachelor of Science in Geology from Syracuse University.

« Older Entries

Glossary

Carbon Capture & Storage: The Need, The Landscape, The Opportunity

Carbon Capture & Storage: The Need, The Landscape, The Opportunity

Blue Carbon 101

Blue Carbon 101

ClimeCo Partners with Aclymate, a Software Solution for Small Businesses Interested in Making Climate Impacts

ClimeCo Partners with Aclymate, a Software Solution for Small Businesses Interested in Making Climate Impacts

Sources

Additional Resources