Kate's Cliffnotes is Back!

New location, same honest commentary on energy, climate, & economics

Hello Kate’s Cliffnotes fans! I just moved over here from TinyLetter, which is (sadly) being discontinued. I hope you’ll continue to find my occasional observations useful, occasionally funny, and alway honest (to a fault!).

I’m heading to Merced next week to talk about something that gets a LOT of air time here in California, which is CARBON REMOVAL (or carbon dioxide removal/CDR to you wonks out there). I’ve been on the carbon removal train for quite some time, starting with work on CCS back when I was at the Center on Wisconsin Strategy, and continuing as a founding board member of Carbon 180. It’s a controversial subject, especially for those of us focused on ensuring real community benefits from our climate and energy policy work. Here’s why I’m still on the bandwagon, and why I’m speaking on March 1 at the UC Merced Roads to Removal event. Hope to see you there!

Climate change can feel like an esoteric issue: global temperatures measured in Celsius! Far-off negotiations over wording in non-binding treaties! But in the past few years, nearly every human has directly experienced severe climate impacts. While these are far more dramatic in certain geographies and communities, no place is fully immune to wildfires, floods, storm damage, extreme heat, or other climate-related disasters. Our friends in the plant and animal community are similarly affected: each year that goes by, we look around us and notice fewer birds, flowers blooming at strange times, or the absence of fish in our streams and lakes.
 
The cause of all these disasters? Increasing concentrations in the atmosphere of carbon dioxide (CO₂), produced over decades from industrial activity that powered our transmission grid, transportation systems, and supply chains.
 
No one wants to live in constant fear of climate catastrophe.  Significant government action and funding over the past two years is delivering historic infrastructure investments, tax credits and rebates for energy efficiency, and massive renewable energy investments. Many of us are doing our part at home, too. But these forward-looking strategies aren’t enough. Even if we stopped emitting all carbon today, our atmosphere would still contain billions of tons of carbon pollution.
 
Carbon Removal is Key to Climate Clean Up
Carbon removal approaches are critical to protecting the places and people we love. If we combine these strategies with increased investment into lowering current emissions, we can prevent a climate meltdown while ushering in a more sustainable, resilient, and equitable future.  A new report from one of our premier national labs shows us how that can happen in every community in the United States.
 
Recently released by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and funded by the Department of Energy (DOE), Roads to Removal answers a critical and actionable question: How much carbon can be removed from the air using U.S.-based technologies, and at what cost? This analysis, conducted by 68 authors across 13 academic and scientific institutions, takes a “place-based” approach to carbon removal–looking at the specific technologies and strategies that make sense for individual geographies and economies.
 
Four specific and well-understood pathways comprise the ‘roads’ that can be traveled successfully to reach the U.S. climate goal of reaching a net-zero emissions goal by 2050: 1) forest management, 2) managed cropland soils, 3) biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS), and 4) Direct Air Capture (DAC). After careful benefit and risk considerations, the authors conclude that using these four approaches, the U.S. can remove one billion metric tons of CO₂ per year at a cost of roughly $130 billion in 2050. That amounts to about 0.5% of current GDP.
 
Here in California, there are some strong, immediate opportunities to use carbon removal solutions to improve short-term economic and environmental impacts.  In the agricultural mecca of Merced, for example, planting cover grasses between orchard rows could remove 0.76 million tons of CO₂ by 2050. In addition, identifying affordable alternatives for crop residue across the Central Valley, so that farmers don’t have to burn their agricultural waste, could avoid an estimated 3800 tons of air pollution annually.  In a region with some of the worst air quality in the U.S., stopping this pollution would go a long way in addressing the adverse public health impacts of fine particulate matter.        
 
Taking a Place-Based and Community Benefits Approach
Local carbon removal solutions--combined with a first-of-its-kind requirement to include Community Benefits Plans (CBP) in DOE-funded energy projects--mean carbon removal projects can be designed from the start to deliver tangible economic and environmental benefits to communities. A CBP has four parts: Community and Worker Engagement, Good Jobs, Justice 40, and DEIA. The CBP asks companies to ensure meaningful conversation with communities, high-quality jobs with clear pathways to those jobs (including and especially for those historically locked out), and a laser focus on providing benefits and mitigating harms in those “disadvantaged communities” identified through the Justice 40 initiative. It’s important to note that Community Benefits Plans now make up 20 percent of the overall score for most DOE grant and loan applications, including for major carbon removal programs like the DAC Hubs.
             
Companies pursuing energy projects must pay attention to the unique attributes of a community, especially any historic inequities, environmental issues, and wage inequality. Bringing technology out of the lab and into project implementation using a place-based approach is key to ensuring an energy evolution with tangible benefits to workers and community residents. I admit that I’m biased on this point: my role at the Department of Energy was specifically to help the agency evolve from its science and research origins to focus on the people and places most affected by the energy technologies it supports. With historic investments from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, DOE funding is already putting steel in the ground and people to work in communities across the U.S. Taking a place-based approach entails looking at the unique assets and opportunities for each community, whether it’s the geology, infrastructure, workforce, or strong civic organizations that will create the backbone of the new energy economy. It also means carefully evaluating the potential benefits and possible risks in locating new carbon removal solutions. Roads to Removal helps paint this picture.
 
Roads to Removal Enables Local Decision Making
Evaluating local assets and challenges is one of the reasons the Roads to Removal report is so relevant. By providing a granular, layered look at carbon removal opportunities in every county in every state across the United States, the report can assist in local and regional decision making, weighing community, labor, storage, and transportation considerations.
 
Roads to Removal points the way toward climate solutions that usher in a more sustainable, resilient, and equitable future. But these investments won’t automatically create stronger communities and more equitable working conditions without collaboration, conversations, and thoughtful implementation on the ground.  During 2024, the Roads to Removal author team will take to the road to spread the word about how cities, counties and states can help clean up our climate.  Symposiums currently are scheduled in Oklahoma, Indiana, Wyoming, and Pennsylvania.  The first one will be held at UC Merced on February 29 and March 1. I’ll be there addressing how California can lead the way. Hope to see you there!!