I am interested in learning more about your methodology for evaluating carbon capture projects. Thank you for posting this article -- please continue to provide more info about your decisions and strategy.
For example, it seems you primarily invest in early stage tech solutions. Is this because you think they will scale to lower $ per ton than e.g. REDD-type projects?
Thanks for your note, Conor! We assess all potential solutions against seven criteria to guide our purchase of high-quality carbon removals: Additional, Verifiable, Long-term, Ethical, Scalable, Validated, and Catalytic. Since we aren’t constrained by the need to issue a certain number of credits back to our donors, our approach allows for long-term thinking, including supporting organizations with higher initial costs per ton but great potential to scale. As part of that scaling, you are correct that we believe the price per ton of different CDR solutions will (and must) move to a much lower number - and that philanthropic capital can help drive that shift. We appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts as we work to catalyze permanent carbon removal.
I hope as these start ups get field experience - you evaluate their 3rd party life cycle assessments and ensure that 3rd party has verified their CO2 capture amount claims. hi probability that many will not work well enough and will go out of business. so pls compare costs per ton also.
also ck out Graphyte. very inexpensive & minimal energy used.
Thanks for the note, William! We’re regularly evaluating projects against strict criteria to ensure donations drive real impact on the planet, and verification is at the core of those principles. We appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts as we work to catalyze permanent carbon removal.
I am interested in learning more about your methodology for evaluating carbon capture projects. Thank you for posting this article -- please continue to provide more info about your decisions and strategy.
For example, it seems you primarily invest in early stage tech solutions. Is this because you think they will scale to lower $ per ton than e.g. REDD-type projects?
Thanks for your note, Conor! We assess all potential solutions against seven criteria to guide our purchase of high-quality carbon removals: Additional, Verifiable, Long-term, Ethical, Scalable, Validated, and Catalytic. Since we aren’t constrained by the need to issue a certain number of credits back to our donors, our approach allows for long-term thinking, including supporting organizations with higher initial costs per ton but great potential to scale. As part of that scaling, you are correct that we believe the price per ton of different CDR solutions will (and must) move to a much lower number - and that philanthropic capital can help drive that shift. We appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts as we work to catalyze permanent carbon removal.
I hope as these start ups get field experience - you evaluate their 3rd party life cycle assessments and ensure that 3rd party has verified their CO2 capture amount claims. hi probability that many will not work well enough and will go out of business. so pls compare costs per ton also.
also ck out Graphyte. very inexpensive & minimal energy used.
Thanks for the note, William! We’re regularly evaluating projects against strict criteria to ensure donations drive real impact on the planet, and verification is at the core of those principles. We appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts as we work to catalyze permanent carbon removal.