In a recent peer-reviewed article published in Nature Portfolio NPJ Climate Action, Noah Planavsky, a professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences and a member of the YCNCC Scientific Leadership Team, highlighted the urgent need for “radical transparency” to successfully scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) efforts. The commentary outlines the necessity of transparent practices in order to effectively combat climate change and achieve substantial reductions in atmospheric carbon levels.
Planavsky stated that to meet global climate objectives by mid-century, CDR must scale to billions of tons annually. He emphasized that while current initiatives are in their early stages, the next decade is crucial for identifying effective, safe, and affordable CDR solutions that also provide benefits to communities. “The goal for the carbon dioxide removal community is to learn and build capacity for future scale,” he explained. “Transparency is essential for us to be successful in making this happen.”
Understanding Radical Transparency in CDR
The concept of “radical transparency” refers to the comprehensive sharing of data regarding the processes and costs associated with carbon removal efforts. Planavsky pointed out that most current investments in CDR are funneled into commercial enterprises aiming for profit, rather than advancing the scientific understanding necessary for effective carbon removal. He argues that for the field to progress, companies must disclose detailed information about their carbon removal methodologies, including carbon removal rates and financial expenditures.
“If we want to learn from this ongoing investment in carbon removals, we need to ensure that companies share data about their full process,” said Planavsky.
He emphasized that achieving multi-gigatonne scale carbon removal requires a diverse array of solutions, which are all currently works in progress. From reforestation and regenerative agriculture to coastal restoration projects, there is significant learning to be done to ensure these methods are effective and sustainable. For instance, enhanced weathering and ocean alkalinity enhancement, which are among the geochemical CDR strategies Planavsky researches, necessitate high-integrity monitoring and verification that can operate at large scales.
Balancing Confidentiality with Collective Benefit
While acknowledging the importance of intellectual property and confidentiality for businesses, Planavsky argued that transparency should not be seen as a hindrance to commercial success. He has co-founded two CDR startups, Lithos Carbon and CREW Carbon, and understands the pressures venture capitalists face to protect their investments. “I refuse to accept that transparency is a flawed business strategy,” he stated. “If you have robust removals with documented benefits, that should garner investment.”
Ultimately, he believes that fostering transparency will not only enhance trust among stakeholders but also facilitate the scaling of CDR initiatives. Planavsky noted that meaningful policy support will be necessary to ensure corporations engage effectively in purchasing carbon credits. He urged that the next decade will depend heavily on collaboration between corporate participants and government bodies to drive investment in CDR.
Data sharing and transparency have emerged as consistent themes for the YCNCC, with collaborations such as those led by Mark Bradford and Sara Kuebbing through the Yale Applied Science Synthesis Program (YASSP) and SHIFT-CM. These initiatives rely on real-world project data at scale, which can only be provided by commercial project developers.
Planavsky concluded by emphasizing that achieving radical transparency requires a concerted effort from the CDR research community. “Transparency isn’t popular at the moment; we will need to fight for it,” he stated, underscoring the necessity of collective action to ensure that carbon removal strategies are both effective and trustworthy.
