I discovered Project Drawdown during my Terra fellowship in 2023, during which I did a group project based on its solutions. Naturally, the book Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming (by Paul Hawken, the founder and author) is on my reading list this year.

Come 2024, I was happy to attend Dr. Jonathan Foley‘s keynote for the Climatebase fellowship kickoff! Dr Foley is the executive director of Project Drawdown, the world’s foremost source of climate solutions.

I want to highlight specific points that struck a chord with me:

Fossil Fuel-Funded Media and the Climate Denial Drama

Eunice Newton Foote 1853 published a report/book stating that rising CO₂ and certain other gases can potentially warm the planet (the proponent of the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Effect). We are living in the 21st century, and ironically, we are STILL battling Climate denial and apathy, thanks to the fossil industry with power and money at its disposal to strengthen its propaganda. Check out DeSmog’s Climate Disinformation Database. 

Yet, we have SO many solutions to climate change that we are facing a decision paralysis with polarised factions defending THIS or THAT solution, which could be the silver bullet to everything given how geopolitical the whole thing has become.

How do we find the most effective solutions to focus on the present and urgent climate change crisis? That’s where Project Drawdown comes into play. 

Viable Solutions versus Fanciful Tech

The project proposed about 100+ viable solutions: actual tech that cuts emissions and levers that move solutions into the world. These are backed by data & research — HARD evidence! For instance, nuclear fusion or carbon removal tech like Direct Air Capture (DAC) solutions aren’t on the list as they are still in the experimental stages.

The project’s done a profit versus loss scenario analysis for adopting these solutions — get this — only 20% of these solutions are costly, but they would get cheaper through ecosystem changes. The funny part is that the project has not even considered the costs we would bear if we don’t address climate change with these solutions. The cost of NOT adopting these solutions is EXPENSIVE— check out how the World Economic Forum claims Climate change costs the world $16 million per hour!

The Time Value of Carbon & Carbon Abatement

When thinking about climate solutions, we must take into account the Time Value of Carbon, which means that cutting CO₂ or other GHG emissions now will have a bigger positive impact than cutting the same amount or rate of emissions later on.

Because of the growing risks connected to the scope and speed of climate action, reducing GHG emissions now is more valuable than promising to do so in the future. As years or decades go by, the amount of harm the embedded carbon (historically accumulated carbon) could do to the atmosphere will increase.

So, rather than focusing on current /operational carbon removal and carbon offsets, we must figure out ways to amplify embodied/accumulated carbon removal and execute drastic measures to stop emitting GHGs in the first place (carbon abatement). Check out how the timing of the solution is as important as the tech!

Emissions Cuts and Carbon Abatement Versus Carbon Removal

The main goal of emission cuts is to stop fresh CO₂ from ever entering the atmosphere (i.e.) shifting from fossil fuels to renewable energy and enhancing the energy efficiency of industry, transportation, and buildings.

Carbon removal concentrates on removing CO₂ that’s already present in the atmosphere. Several technologies are being developed, such as growing trees that naturally absorb CO₂ or utilising devices to directly harvest CO₂ from the air.

Dr Foley says that meaningful levels of carbon removal have yet to be achieved. A CBC News report with David Ho (a professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and co-founder of [C]Worthy, a nonprofit that verifies CO₂ removal from the ocean) provides a deep dive into the matter. 

Over a year, Climateworks’ Orca in Iceland (the world’s largest direct air capture demonstration plant) has eliminated 4,000 tonnes of CO₂ from the environment. 

According to Ho, ‘that takes us back three seconds… that’s the atmosphere you had three seconds ago if you had 4,000 tonnes less CO₂’.

Do note that this is about the present emissions levels. 

To effectively eliminate CO₂ emissions from the atmosphere, nations must ‘decarbonise everything possible’—meaning, emissions from previous decades must be eliminated instead of counterbalancing current emissions, claims Ho. 

And if we need to bend the Emissions Curve and stick to our ‘below 2°C pathway’ to control Global warming, Dr Jonathan says that emission cuts provide 96% of the solution while carbon removal offers only 4% because of the impact of the Time value of Carbon. 

Project Drawdown’s Propositions for the Climate Urgency

Apply emergency brakes: Preventing deforestation is our number one priority. Land use change, principally deforestation, contributes 12–20% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Addressing potent issues like methane emissions is the second urgency. CO₂ sticks around for quite a while, accounting for almost 80% of global human-caused emissions. Once it’s emitted into the atmosphere, 40% remains after 100 years, 20% after 1,000 years, and 10% for 10,000 years or more. Methane stays in the atmosphere only for around 12 years as opposed to CO₂, but it has 30 times more global warming potential (GWP) than CO₂. Also, black Carbon is fast-acting in the atmosphere. That’s why we need to think about climate solutions that impact us now instead of waiting for new fancy solutions to get deployed cause they will lose potency later anyway, considering the Time Value of Carbon. 

Embrace learning curves: big, centralised, engineering and lumpy solutions are slow. But smaller, modular, granular solutions are fast! For instance, solar panels, heat pumps, battery tech, LEDs, and EVs are faster, cheaper, and better. These can be deployed across borders and assembled anywhere in the world. Geographically targeted solutions like satellites monitoring where carbon emissions happen the most are also reasonable solutions.

Climate solutions improve human lives. Why? Fossil fuels lead to air pollution and constantly threaten human health killing about 5 million people every year. So, we are addressing equity and justice issues by adopting climate solutions. Climate solutions benefit nature and people.

As per Project Drawdown’s research, we must allocate funds in the following ways for climate solutions to work: Electricity (21%), Food and agriculture (20%), Industry (22%), Transport (13%), Buildings 5% etc. However, the estimated allocation of funds for the transport sector by US VCs has been about 66% and the US government, through the Inflation Reduction Act, has allocated about 66% for electricity alone. This disproportionate allocation of funds is not getting us anywhere. 

So, in essence, climate solutions need to be evidence-based, ready to go now (so they can start cumulating impact in the next 2 to 3 decades), geographically targeted, granular (cheap and scalable), benefit nature and people besides the atmosphere, and aligned with what the atmosphere truly needs (and not profits).

Parting Notes

We need our average Joe.

Finally, Dr Foley says we need ‘everyday superheroes’ doing blue-collar jobs fixing leaks or solar panels and retrofitting solutions for energy efficiency, doing extraordinary things daily. But we tend to glorify the next-big-what that will save us from our dystopian doom. 

Social Tipping Points Can Counter Climate Doom

Individual behaviours (like what one consumes or buys) create social tipping points, sending out a political and economic message. If our neighbours and peers see us adopting a solution, they will follow suit. That’s how revolutions start with small changes.

Credits:

The article is written by Deepa Sai, the founder of ecoHQ