top of page
Color logo - no background.png

Policy Pulse

Thanks for subscribing

Join our readership of thought leaders and policy makers by subscribing to Policy Pulse, an update on trending policy issues in climate change, international conflict economics and infrastructure. 

Policy Pulse - Madhumita Varma - 29 January 2020

Last week, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Microsoft pledged $1 billion in an Innovation Fund aimed to promote carbon removal technology. This fund is part of Microsoft’s climate action plan in which they would reduce their emissions by half before 2030 and draw out all of the carbon they have ever emitted by 2050.


Microsoft’s carbon negative plan points to a crucial element of climate action that is too often overlooked – carbon drawdown. Carbon drawdown – also known as carbon sequestration – refers to the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. While the focus of climate action has been to reduce emissions, which is an indispensable step, carbon drawdown has gained little attention though it has been just as essential as cutting emissions. This is due to the fact that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide have a long atmospheric life and trap heat for many years. Therefore, even if all greenhouse gas emissions are stopped right away, we are still committed to the rise in average temperature over the next few decades. Consequently, climate action can no longer stop at reducing emissions; carbon sequestration is now an obligation.


While Microsoft and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are considering carbon capture and storage technologies, the agriculture and forestry sector is not to be overlooked when considering carbon drawdown. When it comes to natural forms of carbon drawdown, trees and other land-based plantations gain most attention. Nonetheless, the oceans are impressively capable of capturing and storing atmospheric carbon. This can be done through seaweed. Certain species such as giant kelp, can grow up to two feet a day. Such growth requires intensive photosynthesis, which the entire body of the kelp plant is capable of. Once the kelp plant sinks about a kilometer deep into the ocean, the carbon it has captured stays in the ocean for centuries. It has been stipulated that a hundred square metres of seaweed can capture 16 tonnes of carbon a year. Thus, if approximately 9% of the world’s oceans can be covered in seaweed farms, climate change can be reversed.

This chart shows that seaweed is more efficient at absorbing CO2 than rainforests.

Source: “What is Marine Permaculture?,” Climate Foundation.


South Korea’s seaweed farms, which are some of the largest in the world, provide hope that carbon drawdown can be expanded to large scales. These farms produce seaweed, which are used for human consumption. While this method draws down atmospheric carbon, it does not sequester it in the deep oceans. Therefore, while Microsoft’s Innovation Fund can be used to scale-up land-based air capture and carbon storage technologies, it can also be used to fund initiatives that place seaweed in the deep oceans.


Dr Brian von Herzen and his team are working on a marine permaculture project, in which kelp is grown in the open ocean. With the help of wave- and solar-deep water pumps, nutrients are provided to the seaweed. The regeneration of kelp forests in ocean deserts attracts various species of fish. Both kelp and fish can then be used for human consumption. The kelp could be harvested to be used as biofuel, feedstock, superfood, to name a few. Investing into kelp forest regeneration would help provide food, fertilizer and fuel for 9 billion people who are likely to inhabit the planet by 2040. After high-value extraction, the kelp could be sunk into the deep ocean where it locks away 90% of the sequestered carbon for millennia. Dr Herzen estimates that with an initial investment of $5 million, yields of $1 million per year for the kelp and another million per year for the fish can be expected. Thus, opportunities for Microsoft to clean out its emissions lie not only on land, but also in the deep oceans. By contributing a part of its $1 billion fund to open ocean permaculture, Microsoft would not only be setting an example for other firms by cleaning up its emissions, it would also be investing into feeding the world.



About the author: Madhumita has research interests in climate, environment and conservation issues, as well as impact evaluation of policies and practices related to security and development.


About Veritas Global: Our vision is to have a positive impact on the world through truthful advice informed by robust analysis. We are a premier provider of tailored solutions on climate change, international conflict economics and infrastructure.

 
 
 

Policy Pulse - 15 August 2019 - George Anjaparidze

Last week, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a report on land. Highlighting that land is a critical resource. The report indicates that about 23% of all human-caused greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are attributed to land, or those related to agriculture, forestry and other land uses. However, agriculture and forestry are even more important to climate policy than their relative share of global GHG emissions. The next wave of opportunities for scaling-up climate action are in agriculture and forestry.[i]


Achieving the current targets communicated through Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) implies reducing the 2030 GHG emissions trajectory by 4.8 Gt CO2e or about 8%.[ii] Countries can largely achieve this trajectory by focusing on win-win solutions, where GHG abatement measures create cost savings. Within the basket of such cost-effective measures, agriculture and forestry can contribute about 11% of all GHG abatement potential. However, if countries start raising the level of ambition, they will increasingly need to rely on agriculture and forestry. A more “ambitious NDC” scenario that targets reducing the 2030 GHG emissions trajectory by 9.6 Gt CO2e or about 16%, would result in 49% of all cost-effective abatement potential to be in agriculture and forestry (see chart above). In fact, nearly 70% of all additional cost-effective abatement measures, beyond those in the NDC scenario, would be in the agriculture and forestry sector.


Even the more “ambitious NDC” scenario, presented above, falls short of the effort needed to limit global warming to 1.5° to 2°C. The “1.5° to 2°C” scenario would imply reducing the 2030 GHG emissions trajectory by 27 Gt CO2e or about 44%. Under this scenario, agriculture and forestry would also be a major source of abatement potential, with over 33% of all cost-effective abatement measures.


Targeting agriculture and forestry for GHG emission reductions is also attractive because approaches used generally rely on proven technology and are relatively less capital intensive.[iii] This means that these measures are more conducive to be taken up in developing countries and can more rapidly be deployed at scale. In many cases, there are also significant co-benefits that could be generated beyond climate change mitigation.


The IPCC report on land concludes that, despite human activity, this sector managed to on net remove 6 Gt CO2e from the atmosphere between 2007 and 2016. Increasing international support for mitigation measures in agriculture and forestry, channeled through development banks and others, can serve as a catalyst to realizing potential opportunities. Companies involved in producing agricultural products and managing large areas of land would stand to benefit from this additional support. The world as a whole would also benefit. Agriculture and forestry offer an opportunity to scale-up action on climate change by leveraging a natural advantage.


[i]SeeMcKinsey analysisof global GHG abatement costs (version 2.1).

[ii]See earlier analysis from Veritas Global Paris Agreement: the inconvenient gap between ambition and reality

[iii]SeeMcKinsey analysisof global GHG abatement costs (version 2.0).



About Veritas Global: Our vision is to have a positive impact on the world through truthful advice informed by robust analysis. We are a premier provider of tailored solutions on climate change, international conflict economicsand infrastructure



 
 
 
bottom of page