{"id":1497163,"date":"2024-02-13T09:30:00","date_gmt":"2024-02-13T09:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/grist.org\/?p=629768"},"modified":"2024-02-13T09:30:00","modified_gmt":"2024-02-13T09:30:00","slug":"taylor-swifts-super-bowl-flight-shows-whats-wrong-with-carbon-removal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2024\/02\/13\/taylor-swifts-super-bowl-flight-shows-whats-wrong-with-carbon-removal\/","title":{"rendered":"Taylor Swift\u2019s Super Bowl flight shows what\u2019s wrong with carbon removal"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
To get to the Super Bowl on time, Taylor Swift took a private jet from Tokyo to Los Angeles and then hustled to Las Vegas. The carbon removal company Spiritus estimated that her journey of roughly 5,500 miles produced about 40 tons of carbon dioxide<\/a> \u2014 about what is generated by charging nearly 5 million cell phones. But don\u2019t worry, the company assured her critics: It would take those emissions right back out of the sky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSpiritus wants to help Taylor and her Swifties \u2018Breathe<\/a>\u2019 without any CO2 \u2018Bad Blood<\/a>,\u2019\u201d it said in a pun-laden pitch to reporters. \u201cIt\u2019s a touchdown for everyone.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The startup is among dozens, if not hundreds, of businesses trying to permanently remove climate-warming gases from the atmosphere. Its approach involves drawing carbon directly from the air and burying it, but others sink it in the ocean. Last week, Graphyte, a venture backed by Bill Gates, began compacting sawdust and other woody waste that are rich in carbon into bricks <\/a>that it will bury deep underground. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Spiritus says \u201csponsoring carbon offsets is a step toward environmental responsibility, not an endorsement of luxury flights\u201d and added that \u201ccelebrities are going to take private jets regardless of what Spiritus does.\u201d Even before the company stepped in, Swift reportedly planned to purchase offsets that more than covered her travel. But some climate experts say moves like Spiritus\u2019 illustrate the dangerous direction the rapidly growing carbon dioxide removal, or CDR, industry is headed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe worry is that carbon removal will be something we do so that business-as-usual can continue,\u201d said Sara Nawaz, director of research at American University’s Institute for Carbon Removal Law and Policy. \u201cWe need a really big conversation reframe.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says carbon removal will be \u201crequired<\/a>\u201d to meet climate targets, and the United States Department of Energy has a goal of bringing the cost down to $100 per ton<\/a> (a price point Spiritus claims it wants to deliver as well<\/a>). What concerns Nawaz is the outsize role that private companies are currently playing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt’s very market-oriented: doing carbon removals for profit,\u201d Nawaz said. That reliance on the market, she elaborated, won\u2019t necessarily lead to the just, equitable, and scalable outcomes that she hopes CDR can achieve. \u201cWe need to take a step back.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nawaz co-wrote a report released today titled \u201cAgenda for a Progressive Political Economy of Carbon Removal.<\/a>\u201d In it, she and her co-authors lay out a vision for carbon removal that shifts away from market-centric approaches to ones that are government-, community-, and worker-led.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWhat they suggest is quite radical,\u201d said Lauren Gifford, associate director of the Soil Carbon Solutions Center at Colorado State University who was not involved in the research. She supports the direction the authors advocate, adding, \u201cThey actually give us a roadmap on how to get there, and that in itself is progressive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nawaz compared carbon removal\u2019s current trajectory to the bumpy path that carbon offsets has followed. That industry, in which organizations sell credits to offset greenhouse gas emissions, has been plagued by misleading claims<\/a> and perverse incentives<\/a>. It has also raised environmental justice concerns where offsets are disproportionately impacting frontline communities and developing nations. For example, Blue Carbon, a company backed by the United Arab Emirates, has been buying enormous swaths of land<\/a> in Africa to fuel its offsets program. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe don’t want to do that again with carbon removal,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Philanthropy is one possible alternative to corporate carbon removal. The report cites a nonprofit organization called Terraset<\/a> that puts tax-deductible donations toward CDR projects (including Spiritus\u2019). But, Nawaz says, that approach won\u2019t grow quickly or sustainably enough to remove the many gigatons of emissions needed to meaningfully address climate change. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThat’s not a scalable approach,\u201d she said. \u201cWe’re going to need so much more money.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The report argues that communities and governments must play a central role in the industry. Nawaz cites community-driven carbon removal efforts out West, such as the 4 Corners Carbon Coalition<\/a>, as examples<\/a> of what might be possible on the local level. Nationally, she points to Germany\u2019s transition away from coal<\/a> as a way that governments can not only fund but fundamentally drive clean energy policy that puts workers at the fore.<\/p>\n\n\n