And that's really going to be the thing, I think, or we think at Blue Green Future, that opens up this market to really make it a big mover in carbon sequestration and climate change.Really interesting. Yeah, so what you're talking about is literally an open market where we would all know what the price is whether--
up more than 30% of the capacity of a coal plant just doing the sequest sequestration and then you hope it stays there for 50years or 100 years or 500 years uh uh this person said to me I'd like to use
in the amount of carbon captured. It's equivalent to sequestration , even though we won't call it that, because sequestration has a very specific scientific definition. Let me branch out from there.
Some companies are looking at this, not just planting trees or buying offsets, but actually figuring out how do you invest in carbon sequestration . And then certainly something that Google and many other large players are doing, just buying historic amounts of renewable electricity,
And when you say fossil, that's with sequestration or something novel or new? Could be sequestration , but it could be a new kind of combined heat and power, for example. So it's anything using fossil.
regulation um so this is a a second topic that's particularly important um focus on is building capacity for carbon sequestration and and carbon reduction
When I've been talking to scientists, they have a very strict definition of sequestration , which is basically a 1,000-year minimum. So when we think about certain types of carbon sequestration , we're thinking about burying that carbon and it not coming back into activity, so to speak, for another 1,000 years.
maybe don't exist. It is going to be partnering with lots of different companies across the field to help deploy solutions that are not in place today. It's going to be investing in carbon extraction and sequestration methods. Some companies are looking at this, not just planting trees or buying offsets, but actually figuring out how do you
And that can affect the ability to make fair judgment of justice in the room. And I think we all know in this audience that sequestration from information in today's age is nearly impossible. Are our peers still capable of forming juries that can deliver justice for us?
percent of our power is nuclear. What are we going to do with those? And of course if you're going to do things like biofuels or continue to use fossil fuels thinking about carbon sequestration is critical. But one of my main points here is that every one of these is not a done deal yet. None of these are major adoption. Except for nuclear, none of these have been adopted in a major way into our system. What makes the game change with any of
so much in the forefront of the conversation is it can, is it happens very fast, right? So, carbon sequestration certainly lowers the amount of carbon going into the atmosphere, but it doesn't really help if you were thinking about how do we cool things off if we needed to quickly, that part of it, conversation. So, carbon sequestration is something I thought a lot about because that is the central idea with coal; is what are we gonna do, how are
almost ridiculous we could take that much material and heat it to that temperature just to make C well the Stamford Professor came to me said carbon sequestration everybody's working on CCS capture the carbon now when you look at a gas like that the
increases the amount of phytoplankton, which then captures carbon. And that's one of the big ways that whales contribute to potential carbon sequestration . You know, whales have been decimated so that there really are-- there are about 10% to 20% of the whale population that there was before industrial whaling.
So we really are projecting out population growth back up to what we would consider to be carrying capacity for an ecosystem or even the entire planet and then seeing what kind of increase in carbon sequestration services we would get over that long haul. I mean, we're doing projections that are not just a few years.
I mean it currently isn't, isn't it? The way their hoofs would cut through the grass would encourage the sequestration of carbon into the soil.
with clean alternatives, reducing consumption, protecting land and ecosystems, and/or they bring carbon dioxide back home to earth through, turns out, the ultimate carbon capture and sequestration technology of photosynthesis-- the world has actually already really figured this out-- and bringing carbon back home and storing it in plants, soil, biomass. So we often tend to get into this trap of talking about carbon as bad, carbon as evil, when actually carbon is
Absolutely. Speaking of movements, I know we're all looking for farm-to-table 2.0-- like, the new name. And the whole thing has a certain amount of scientific rigor and peer-reviewed carbon sequestration assigned to each action for each area.
Then, we have $8 billion in fossil. And when you say fossil, that's with sequestration or something novel or new? Could be sequestration , but it could be a new kind of combined heat and power, for example.
Yeah. So there are lots of ways that nature can actually store carbon for long periods of time. When I've been talking to scientists, they have a very strict definition of sequestration , which is basically a 1,000-year minimum. So when we think about certain types of carbon sequestration , we're thinking about burying that carbon and it not coming back into activity, so to speak,
If we think about carbon capture, there can be carbon capture for long periods of time. And one of the ways that we've been advocating to turn carbon capture into actual long-term effective sequestration is by increasing the steady state populations of different types of living ecosystems.
The hope is that if we restore whale populations, then we're going to get a big increase or a significant increase in the amount of phytoplankton, which, again, is going to yield this more or less permanent sequestration of carbon in the ocean. From that we did some calculations that put a price tag on whales ranging from about $2 million for, say, a humpback whale-- so these are really just the great baleen
But really, we're saying, OK, if we understand the science really well and we see that a country has had, say, seagrass resources that have been depleted or forest elephants that have been depleted, or any other resource that contributes to carbon sequestration that's been depleted, we say, OK, we can try to put together a conservation restoration program and then build that out, plan it out, and show what kinds of carbon sequestration
And that's part of the science too. And so what we're really betting on is that the plus side of the carbon sequestration that we get from increasing the population is going to offset any of those detriments.
So with that influx of more funds, there'll be more opportunities to really innovate. We're working with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, looking at how the carbon sequestration is happening with the application of cover cropping on our fields.
But the point of the insulation wasn't-- oh, my god, plastics are taking over the world. Like, if you look at some of the carbon sequestration metrics, it's like, oh, if we plant another five trees, we're going to get there.
You know, whales have been decimated so that there really are-- there are about 10% to 20% of the whale population that there was before industrial whaling. So we're hoping that if we could contribute to restoring those populations, particularly in the southern oceans around Antarctica, that that would contribute greatly to carbon sequestration globally. So that's one of the big ways that we've been focused on, but it's certainly not the only way.
or forest elephants that have been depleted, or any other resource that contributes to carbon sequestration that's been depleted, we say, OK, we can try to put together a conservation restoration program and then build that out, plan it out, and show what kinds of carbon sequestration is going to result from successful execution of that program, and then take that information back to the markets and say, OK, we have this plan in place
But they have measured some of those things. So what we're doing is we're hoping that, for example, with the forest elephants, they're going to contribute-- they contribute about 7% of carbon sequestration to late succession trees in the rainforest, which, given the amounts of trees and the amount of space we're talking about, is really a massive amount of carbon.
That looks really good by the way. But if we start paying attention to where our food comes from, we help our farmers with soil health, which is critical to sort of carbon sequestration ,
Pollinators, all the kind of basic engine of our food supply, of our whole sustenance, of air pollution, purifying air, purifying water, controlling disease, climate change sequestration -- everything is dependent on our ecosystems and their services. And we're hammering them.
Three of the top 20 solutions fall into what we call land use, so non-agricultural land use. And these are solutions that are focused on restoring, protecting, and harnessing the power of land and ecosystems for carbon sequestration . We're really just going through a lot of my personal favorites from the book.
his answer was, I don't know that we'll ever see the end of the age of oil, but I do know that the Stone Age didn't end And so this idea, I think, of actually being able to do five economic strains at once-- fiber, food, water retention, carbon sequestration ,
the path between where things are today and commercialization for something that's a little more out of the box? and for the next 20 years, do you tend to put more of a heavy focus on things like coal or natural gas with sequestration
Yeah, we had prize winning projects from the JFK school in rain forests in Bolivia, with carbon sequestration .
male: Jeff: Right. male: Jeff: Right. Right. male: Jeff: Right, right. No, I totally understand. Carbon sequestration is really important. It's, as I said, there's two kinds of geoengineering in the beginning; the sunlight blocking and carbon sort of sucking part of it. And the first thing to point out about carbon sequestration
male: Jeff: Right, right. No, I totally understand. Carbon sequestration is really important. It's, as I said, there's two kinds of geoengineering in the beginning; the sunlight blocking and carbon sort of sucking part of it. And the first thing to point out about carbon sequestration is it doesn't get away; it doesn't have the benefit of being, of working immediately, right? I mean, one of these reasons that this geoengineering of blocking the sunlight is
So, carbon sequestration certainly lowers the amount of carbon going into the atmosphere, but it doesn't really help if you were thinking about how do we cool things off if we needed to quickly, that part of it, conversation. So, carbon sequestration is something I thought a lot about because that is the central idea with coal; is what are we gonna do, how are we gonna keep burning coal? There's a strong argument to be made that developing nations--well, they're obviously going to continue burning coal-- but they should that there's a economic
of it is really happening. I've been watching the coal industry now, very closely, for ten years and it's one of these things that the industry loves to talk about, but doesn't really wanna do because we'll raise the price of electricity. And just for those of you who don't know carbon sequestration is, I should make it very clear. It's capturing the CO2 gases out of the smokestack of a coal plant, most of the time. You can do it on other types of things, but capturing CO2, compressing into a super critical liquid and
I mean, one of the reasons we don't have a cap on carbon, one of the reasons Obama cannot get anything done on this is because of the coal industry. Those are the, then the Democrats in the coal states, who are against any kind of real cap because it will mean having to put basically, carbon sequestration on coal plants which will raise the price, which will make people go to natural gas and make them, make renewable energy more affordable and all the things the coal industry doesn't want. So, one of the virtues of that air capture
be a lot of progress that can be made. It's just a lot of headroom in development of this technology. It doesn't fight an entrenched industry; it's separate. It's a thing that is built on its own. It's doesn't, you don't have to have; the coal guys are not necessarily going to be fighting against this. It can be put in places where the sequestration is good. We, all you have to do, it doesn't matter where it is cause when you take a molecule of CO2 out of the air and the planet, it doesn't matter where you take it out; it's not like