The case for bolder climate philanthropy
Why philanthropy needs to fund the next frontier, not just what’s familiar. A joint piece with Giana Amador, Executive Director of Carbon Removal Alliance.
Imagine this: After decades of investment in renewable technologies, international agreements, and sustainability pledges, we finally drastically reduce our emissions to near zero. The path was hard-won, marked by economic and social shifts, political wins, and technological breakthroughs.
But even after all that progress, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels would remain catastrophically high if we weren’t simultaneously removing carbon at the gigaton scale. The greenhouse gases we’ve emitted did not vanish. They’re still in the atmosphere—heating the planet, fueling disasters, and endangering large swaths of the global population. We would have slowed the flow of new emissions, but ignored the carbon that’s already destabilizing the climate.
This is the challenge that too few philanthropists and funders are willing to confront.
There is a different path forward.
That future we opened with is not the one we need to accept, but it’s the one we will get if we don’t chart a new course. To put us on a more sustainable trajectory, we need to remove five-to-ten gigatons of atmospheric carbon dioxide per year by 2050. Today, we’re removing about 0.01 gigatons. The gap isn’t just large—it’s existential.
Over the last few decades, philanthropy has played a pivotal role in addressing climate change—supporting advocacy, advancing clean energy, and shaping landmark policy wins. But when it comes to early-stage, complex technologies like carbon removal, most funders are sitting on the sidelines. Why? Because these solutions are still developing. They carry perceived risk. And they lack the straightforward appeal of planting trees or electrifying school buses.
As a result, while 2% of philanthropic dollars go to climate efforts overall, less than 0.1% supports carbon removal. Funders have supported solar panels, electric vehicles, and reforestation efforts. These are essential, but they’re not enough. And they don’t need philanthropic capital in the same way that early-stage carbon removal does.
Approaches like direct air capture, mineralization, and marine- and biomass-based removals are scientifically sound, increasingly commercializing, and already delivering verified tons. They don’t compete with nature-based or renewable solutions, they complement them. But they require a different kind of support: long-term, risk-tolerant capital that only philanthropy can provide at this early stage.
Bold progress demands bold action.
It took years of strategic, bold bets, often backed by philanthropy, to push solar and wind technologies to market and bring them to price parity with fossil energy. The good news is those bets paid off, and solar is now one of the cheapest energy sources in the world.
Carbon removal is at a similar inflection point. A new wave of innovators is tackling some of the most complex engineering, policy, and infrastructure challenges of our time. Companies like Planetary, which partners with coastal communities to restore the ocean’s ability to absorb carbon and reduce acidification, and Vaulted Deep, which permanently stores biomass underground, are showing that durable removal is both real and on a clear path to scale. Both are part of Terraset’s portfolio and are already delivering measurable climate impact today with steep cost declines ahead if we can accelerate demand.
The problem isn’t whether the solutions exist. It’s whether we’ll back them in time.
Durable, scalable carbon removal isn’t a luxury, it’s a necessity. And philanthropy must play a role in this moment of transformation by moving capital where others can’t.
Innovative approaches to deploying capital are helping to close the gap. For example, The Schmidt Family Foundation seeded Terraset’s Revolving Fund, to create evergreen capital for carbon removal pre-purchases. It also underpinned a project finance loan for Carba in collaboration with Structure Climate and The Venn Foundation. These emerging models show what’s possible and help recycle capital, send strong demand signals, and help de-risk a pipeline of permanent, high-quality projects. It’s exactly what this sector needs to reach commercial lift-off.
We are at a moment of decision.
Will philanthropy continue to fund what’s familiar? Or step up to build the next frontier?
Developing a gigaton-scale carbon removal industry is one of the most consequential challenges of our lifetime. It requires the same kind of bold, calculated risk-taking that drove breakthroughs in medicine, aerospace, and clean energy.
Inaction is the real gamble. Either we fund the difficult work of carbon removal now—or we live with the consequences of failing to try.