In 2021 the U.S. congress passed the bipartisan Infrastructure bill, which alongside funding for roads and bridges, included $3.5 billion for 4 DAC demonstration hubs. Each will be a large-scale DAC facility, and they may be the first engineered CDR built at scale in the U.S.
Since the bill was passed, DAC-watchers and interested entrepreneurs have been waiting for more information on what the funding would be spent on and who would be eligible to receive it.
In the meantime, the DOE under the Biden administration has been filling out its DAC expertise with industry experts such as Jen Wilcox, Noah Deich, and Rory Jacobson, among others joining the department. This has led to anticipation and expectations that the DOE’s planning for the DAC hubs projects would be sophisticated and well thought-out.
DOE gave the most in-depth look yet at the DAC hubs program last month with the release of a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).
On this show we speak with Jason Hochman, Co-founder and Senior Director of the DAC Coalition, a group” bringing together diverse, leading global innovators…to educate, engage, and mobilize around Direct Air Capture”. Chris Barnard is also on this episode's policy panel.
On This Episode
Chris Barnard
Jason Hochman
Radhika Moolgavkar
Resources
Subscribe to Climate Workers Anonymous
My other show, Reversing Climate Change
Books referenced in the podcasts, at Bookshop
Full Transcript
Announcer: You’re listening to Carbon Removal Newsroom, a weekly show about current events in the world of carbon removal, from technology and innovation to policymaking and job growth. Brought to you by Nori, the carbon removal marketplace.
Radhika Moolgavkar: All right. Hello, everybody, and welcome to the January 12th, 2023 event. Policy episode of Carbon Removal Newsroom, we are talking about direct air capture today. And with me, I have Jason Hochman, co-founder and senior director of the DAC Coalition, which is a group that’s bringing together diverse, leading global innovators to educate, engage, and mobilize around direct air capture. Jason, welcome.
Jason Hochman: Thank you very much for having me.
Radhika Moolgavkar: And then we also have Chris Barnard, VP of External Affairs at the American Conservation Coalition. Chris, I noticed a little bit of an upgrade to your title this week. Congratulations.
Chris Barnard: Thank you very much.
Radhika Moolgavkar: And as always, with no upgrade to my title, Radhika Moolgavkar, Head of Supply and Methodology here at NORI. So in 2021, the U. S. Congress passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, which alongside funding for roads and bridges included $3. 5 billion for four DAC demonstration hubs. Each will be a large-scale DAC facility, and they may be the first engineered CDR built at scale in the U. S. Since the bill was passed, DAC watchers and interested entrepreneurs have been waiting for more information on what the funding would be spent on and who would be eligible to receive it.
In the meantime, the DOE under the Biden administration has been filling out its DAC expertise with industry experts such as Jen Wilcox, Noah Deitch, and Rory Jacobson, among others, joining the department. This has led to anticipation and expectation that the DOE’s planning for the DAC hub projects would be sophisticated and well thought out. Finally, towards the middle to end of last month, the DOE announced its funding opportunities. And today we’ll be talking to Jason and Chris about this huge announcement from at least a CDR perspective. So first off though, Jason, I wanted to give you a chance to let us know a little bit more about the DAC coalition.
So can you tell us what inspired you to start it, what the organization’s goals are, and kind of an overview of who the members are too?
Jason Hochman: Yeah, absolutely. So the Direct Air Capture Coalition is a global multi-stakeholder coalition organization with the goal of helping advance and accelerate the deployment of Direct Air Capture Technology to help address climate change in a manner that is timely, effective, responsible, equitable, and sustainable. My co-founder, Nicholas Eisenberger, and I began the effort to Build the Direct Air Capture Coalition in mid-2021 because we saw that there was a real need to have a nonprofit, non-commercial entity That will had a 100% focus and deep expertise and understanding of the director capture space. There are a number of organizations doing terrific work advancing carbon removal more broadly, but there hadn’t been any, and those organizations have Director capture within their broader umbrella, but there was no organization solely focused on the DAC space and given the role that it will need to play in the bigger picture of carbon removal solutions that the UN has termed essential and unavoidable.
It wasn’t going to happen on the backs of a small but growing Cohort of early stage startups. And what we’re trying to do is be a platform for education, for collaboration and connectivity throughout this emerging market ecosystem. So we wanna be a resource for folks who want to learn more about, who want to get educated on, who want to understand how to engage with the folks in this space We launched publicly in May, in late May 2022, with at the time 22 director of capture technology companies and 10 aligned stakeholder partner organizations.
So environmental NGOs, advocacy groups, such as Clean Air Task Force, And research and academic institutions, like the University of Michigan Global CO2 Initiative, among others. Since that time, over the past seven and a half months, we’ve more than doubled the number of companies and organizations that are part of the Director of Capture Coalition, including NORI, which are joined over And now we number over 30 direct air capture technology companies, over 20 of the nonprofit partner organizations, and a number of other companies in the broader direct air capture market ecosystem or value chain.
And I will pause there.
Radhika Moolgavkar: Yeah, Jason, I’m sort of curious. Obviously, you’ve seen a lot of growth in a pretty short period of time. So it sounds like there was a lot of interest, but what are the typical questions a DAC startup is coming to you to help you, you know, to hope that you can help them answer or work on, you know, what are the needs?
Jason Hochman: Yep. So I think there’s a massive need for just broad education, awareness raising, clearing up or explaining the need for this technology clearing up confusion or conflation or misperceptions about direct air capture and carbon removal, the difference with point source carbon capture, addressing some concerns that folks might have, some may be well intentioned, but not well grounded, for lack of a way to put it, but it is about Being a resource for educational informational content materials, as well as helping to support the capacity to help build and support the capacity of those Who are in the space trying to get this technology developed and deployed.
So we have a jobs board on our website, for example, for openings at member companies and partner organizations. We try to, we have monthly convenings where we have key actors in the space present to and interact with our growing direct air capture coalition community and trying to help Build awareness, educate folks, help to both build out and to a degree serve as the connective tissue that any healthy, robust market ecosystem needs in order to thrive. And we need this one to thrive to help address the climate crisis.
Radhika Moolgavkar: So Chris, as a veteran of Washington DC, What would you suggest a DAC trade group be focused on to compete against all the different interests out there?
Jason Hochman: I will interject quickly, though. We don’t consider ourselves a traditional trade association or industry lobbying group. This is a public spirited, climate focused effort with the understanding that There is a need for this technology to be deployed in a responsible, equitable, sustainable way for the benefit of the planet, of the economy, of communities, and of course, of the companies themselves. But this isn’t an effort to protect the narrow interest of a small cohort of companies. This is going to be a massive sector, and we want it to be developed in a way that is Inclusive of the broader stakeholder landscape.
And so that’s why Rocky Mountain Institute, Planet Task Force, World Resources Institute, are part of our coalition, are engaged in this effort. And you can go to our website, DACcoalition.org, click on coalition and see all of the companies and organizations that are part of this. So I’m sorry for interjecting. I just wanted to make that clear.
Radhika Moolgavkar: I didn’t want to make you sound narrow. I’m just wondering from Chris’s perspective, how a small technology currently gets the attention of Washington lawmakers, as obviously the DAC hubs have started to show they have. So Chris, curious about your perspective.
Chris Barnard: Yeah, I mean, I think I would definitely say Jason probably in general has kind of more knowledge about the direct process that’s involved here. But what I would say is that First of all, DAC and carbon capture technology in general has really gotten a lot of attention in DC recently, as we see by the very fact that we’re talking about this. I think there’s like a few interesting dynamics that have to be navigated Like when you look at the website where they announced all of this, it’s kind of interesting how they kind of emphasize the responsible aspect of this, because obviously there’s certain people, part of the environmental justice community that are skeptical of the fact that direct air capture or carbon capture technology might be used as a way for fossil fuels to extend their lifeline or whatever it is.
And so that’s kind of probably what they’re hinting at when they say responsible, Jason, you might disagree, but that’s kind of my reading of it. And then also, I think just in general, obviously, when it comes to agencies, when it comes to kind of getting that funding, you have kind of the bureaucratic processes that you have to go through. So trying to be as kind of having your I’s dotted and your T’s crossed to be able to get that, I think, is really important. And finally, I think one interesting thing is that we have to think about this also beyond DC when those hubs are being built, when that infrastructure is being developed.
That will obviously be in the backyards of communities. And one of the biggest things that I foresee right now being potential problems is community pushback because they might not want this in their backyard or they have to be brought on board and so I think. I think companies thinking about the way that would be relevant to them to make this process as seamless and painless as possible to bring community input on board very early on, I think will also be really important to the long-term success of these kinds of projects.
Radhika Moolgavkar: So Chris just did a nice job of segueing us into talking about the DAC Hub. So Jason, maybe you can give us a quick overview of what the DAC Hub program is and why It is such a big deal.
Jason Hochman: So thank you, the director capture hubs program which, as we alluded to, was signed in was created as part of the bipartisan infrastructure law. Which was enacted in November of 2021 and it established this three and a half billion dollar program. To establish four regional direct air capture ups. And it is a massive deal. It is by far the largest investment in human history by any government or other entity in the development of this technology. And I think that it is going to be massively impactful in terms of the growth and evolution of this sector, which needs to, as all the science has indicated, needs to grow at a dramatic, drastic rate to be able to reach the scale that climate science has told us quite starkly is going to need to be required.
So the Department of Energy and the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management has is responsible for designing and implementing this program and in late this in mid December just a about a month ago they put out the initial funding opportunity announcement the foa which. Made available the first tranche of the $3. 5 billion. It made available about $1. 24 billion. And a second FOA will be coming out in 2024 or perhaps later, which will make the remainder available. And it’s really going to help set the stage and the foundation for the development of this sector in the United States, that alongside the enhancements to an existing tax credit, the 45Q credit, which was a part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which increased the value of tonne of CO2 taken from direct air capture And store geologically from $50 a tonne to $180 a tonne.
So the combination of these things, along with a number of other enhancements that were part of the Inflation Reduction Act, have really made the United States the ground zero for the deployment of this technology and the growth of this sector.
Radhika Moolgavkar: So Chris, the funding for this bill was passed In a popular bipartisan bill, as we kind of alluded to earlier, but the planning is done within the DOE. So, you know, what are you going to be keeping an eye out on as they deploy the DAC hubs? And what role do you envision the DOE and bureaucracy playing in either making this better or making this harder?
Chris Barnard: Yeah, I mean, ultimately, obviously, that’s kind of the way it happens when when this money gets appropriated. And so I think as much as possible, if the DOE can, kind of streamline it, streamline its processes and not be bogged down by bureaucracy to get this funding out as quickly as possible. So we can start building this as quickly as possible, I think is really important. And then also just having a really collaborative process with the companies to kind of make sure that those needs are met and that this is as efficient as possible, I think will be important to kind of get past some of the red tape and make sure that these DAC hubs are really deployed as quickly as we can get them to.
Radhika Moolgavkar: So Jason, you know, kind of building on Chris’s answer there, I’m curious what the reaction was with it from the small, you know, DAC companies. As big as this announcement is, most DAC companies are small startups and how they feel like the working with the government has been going so far.
Jason Hochman: So the reaction that I’ve heard is that they think that the Department of Energy has been very thoughtful in doing a really good, thorough, thoughtful job of balancing the state of where the technology is today and with the opportunity to grow that technology. The fact is that as you alluded to, The vast majority of innovators and startups in the director of capture space are still young. They still are nascent. This technology isn’t where it will be in five to 10 years. It is extraordinarily promising and we’re beginning to see commercial deployments, but the largest plant that exists today is Has the capacity to do 4,000 tonnes annually, which is a drop in the ocean, but it’s a critical first step to developing the technology to improving it and to realizing that the potential that It does have.
So a lot of these technologies are at different TRLs, technological readiness levels. And what this can do is be a huge accelerant for many of them and making available the funds to help design and implement feasibility studies and to work with others throughout the value chain to help accelerate the Development of this technology.
Radhika Moolgavkar: And one thing, you know, you we’ve talked about a lot, obviously, is the need to reform or revamp permitting for class, you know, the class six wells and other things. Did you see any hint of their looking into that or thinking about that in this funding announcement?
Chris Barnard: I think most of the kind of permitting stuff will have to come through. I think that at the end of the day, and this is an argument I’ve made a few times already is it doesn’t matter how much money we have to pour into this doesn’t matter like how excited we are about it if we don’t actually. Reform the regulations and streamline the process to get these this kind of infrastructure builds then then that money really won’t matter, and I mean the studies showing how like. 90% of the emissions reductions benefits from the IRA will be wasted if we don’t perform permitting, I think, are to an extent applicable to this as well.
If it takes too long to build it, then we won’t see the benefits fast enough that really what we should be talking about is. There is a funding now we got to get that out the door, but we also got to make sure that when these people start building these actual projects that they can do it quickly, painlessly and without getting bogged down in red tape and all that taxpayer money ending up in the pockets of the lawyers that are having to navigate those labyrinths.
Radhika Moolgavkar: What do you have against lawyers, Chris? OK, so, Jason, I do want to bring this back a little bit. To more of the level of the size of the CDR companies, because obviously this is a vast amount of money. And so when you’re at the companies you talk to are thinking about it, how are they thinking about approaching the funding and what are the things that they are concerned about and how do they navigate such a huge amount of requirements as small companies?
Jason Hochman: Very careful. That was one reaction I had. I got when talking to some folks as to what they thought or how they reacted to the FOA, which was to read it very carefully. It’s almost 270 pages of very detailed requirements plus detailed guidance on community benefits plans. And I think one thing that some companies are struggling with is which topic area, which is basically the terminology for which Tranche of funding they would be eligible for what qualifications they meet or do not meet because there is an initial tier topic area one which makes which will have 12 awards of up to $3 million for really the feasibility level.
Then there’s Topic Area 2, which makes $100 million available over eight awards, so $12. 5 million cap of the award there for more design or feed studies that And then the topic area three is really for the building and that makes the vast majority of that 1. 2 million available. And the reality is that there may be one or two companies at this point in time that are at the point where they would be able to reasonably apply for that topic area for that third level. And it’s something that I think the DAC community Understands and appreciates the job that DOE has done in meeting the field where it is in a way that enables companies to be engaged to benefit from this program at the different stages of readiness that they may have.
Because the fact is that we don’t know which technologies are going to be the winners and losers. And being able to create a playing field where more of these technologies are able to be tested, be developed, be deployed is going to enable this space to have the most effective impact.
Radhika Moolgavkar: So one last question about the funding and then we’ll move on to a different part of the of the discussion, which is, you know, my understanding is that any type of ocean based CDR was excluded from this funding. And so I’m curious why, Jason, you think that happened? Because, you know, there are some ocean-based companies that like to think of themselves as DAC on water, if you will.
Jason Hochman: So in the initial notice of intent to issue this funding opportunity, which was released in May, they had a broader definition or broader definition Eligibility for DAC hubs, which included direct ocean capture, which included biomass carbon removal and storage, among other CDR approaches, basically broadened the definition of DAC. And as a result of that, there was some congressional pushback who Did not wanted this to be defined in the language that was in the statute that was in the law that was passed. And as a result of that, the funding is now only available for what is more traditionally defined as director capture engineered.
Approaches for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, as opposed to some of the nature based or hybrid approaches at the same time, though. Those other carbon removal approaches can be part of DACA, can be part of DACA applications. They just aren’t eligible for the government funding or cost share for that. But there was a letter over the summer from, I believe, 10 senators who were supporters of direct air capture that basically influenced the way that the funding opportunity announcement was developed. Or at least that’s my understanding of it.
Radhika Moolgavkar: Politics at work. So let’s turn a little bit to kind of the community benefits of this or the community benefit requirements of this announcement as kind of has been you both alluded to. So this is to you both. And I’ll start with Chris and then move over to you, Jason. So this announcement was for the first funding phase as As was mentioned, 1. 2 billion of the total 3. 5 will go to the program. This funding will go towards conceptualizing, designing, planning, constructing, and operating direct air capture hubs. So first off, how far do we have to go and what are some of the milestones to watch for as signs of success?
And how early do you think we need to engage the community in these conversations to make sure that they are accepted?
Chris Barnard: Broadly speaking, obviously, we know the science kind of works. We know like what we need to do to build these and like you say, conceptualize, design, plan, construct and operate. But then there’s a step further there, which means like, which is actually commercializing and making this like widespread available and scaling this up. And I mean, the UN climate report is clear that we need to do this at scale to remove carbon from the air and It’s not just going to be enough to have a few demonstration projects. We need to actually be able to scale this up.
So I think really the next step eventually here is kind of proving the full commercialization and cost effectiveness of this technology so that we can actually cost effectively take carbon out of the air. In terms of community engagement, like I mentioned earlier, a lot of this we might have to think about Like pipelines that will have to transport captured carbon or all kinds of other infrastructure and that will require local communities to be bought in, at least to some extent. Hopefully the permitting reform push that’s happening right now will address some of those issues, especially around litigation and whatnot.
But I think still companies will have to be careful to engage local communities. But I’d be curious to hear what Jason thinks of that.
Jason Hochman: Well, for one thing, one of the advantages or one of the At least theoretical advantages of direct air capture is that you can site it in the area that you will either utilize, sequester or store it. So you might not need as much of a pipeline infrastructure as traditional point source where you can’t really, you don’t have that flexibility in terms of location or siting. But to the question of when do you need to begin engaging with communities on these projects, the answer is yesterday, really. They need to be a part of this from the beginning so that it is developed hand in hand in a way that is broadly accepted, operates with social license.
And that isn’t just a check the box exercise. That isn’t some paying lip service. That is critical to the success of these programs in the long run. For a bunch of reasons, these need to be accepted and embraced By the communities where they will be located. There are going to be a lot of benefits that come from scaling this technology. There are going to be a lot of jobs. There’s going to be a lot of economic development. This is going to be a massive sector. It simply needs to be one.
And I think that forward-looking policymakers and community leaders understand that and can benefit from the jobs that will be created from the economic development opportunities that will come from that. At the same time, they need to have the stakeholders in those communities need to be engaged from the beginning because if there is broad-based community pushback or opposition to these projects, it can really harm the long-term sustainability of this program in particular and the sector as a whole. You can imagine if one Major risk to this program to the broader sector is high profile failures at the beginning because the hubs weren’t designed or didn’t operate in a way that was inclusive and incorporated the feedback and engaged with the communities where they will be located.
So for that reason, it really, Needs to be done thoughtfully, it needs to be done comprehensively, it needs to be done in a sustained manner such that these are thought of as part of the fabric of local economies, of local communities, and that there could be a sense of pride about it, that this community, that these regions are helping to solve the problem and helping to be a part of an innovative, Climate solution.
Radhika Moolgavkar: It’s sort of turning the coal mining identity on its head and being like a deck community.
Jason Hochman: I’m very glad you brought that up because it’s also just such a great opportunity for the just transition. A lot of workers from the fossil fuel sectors, from coal mine, from oil and gas, might just happen to have the precise set of skills and expertise and knowledge to be able to build, operate and maintain direct air capture systems. And we shouldn’t be dismissive of that or treat them like they have a scarlet letter. We should be operating with the point of view that there is a need to embrace folks who want to be a part of the solution.
Radhika Moolgavkar: So Jason, you clearly are passionate about this and I appreciate that. I’m wondering how you balance what has to be a time consuming process to do it right, which is this community engagement you described with sort of the urgency of the problem. How do you think about that and move that kind of conversation forward quickly?
Jason Hochman: Yeah, that’s a great point. Well, for one thing, I think that it is important for folks to manage expectations as to The timeline and timeframe for scaling this technology. I think that one risk, another risk that exists is that things get overhyped and people aren’t realistic as to when these plants will actually be up and running. We are at the very early stages of what will need to be a marathon run at a sprinter’s pace. So in that regard, I think everyone needs to just be cognizant that this is going to take some time and that we can’t expect this bill passed, these tax credits exist, things will be popping up.
All across the landscape. This technology still needs to be improved. These plants still need to be built. The work still needs to be done to develop a workforce, develop a talented labor pool to maintain and operate and build these programs, to educate folks about what this means to get investors and project financers on board, to build the voluntary carbon market and get more corporate buyers off the sideline and supporting the development and deployment of these critical climate solutions. I do think, though, that there is an urgency to this, that what we are seeing is very encouraging, but we need more of it.
Three and a half billion dollars is by far the largest investment ever In direct air capture or carbon removal. Frontiers, the Stripe, Shopify, Meta, Google, McKinsey, Frontier fund for advanced market commitment for carbon removal totals $925 million through 2030. And it is a wonderful first step, but again, it’s a fraction of where we need it to be to reach the scale that all of the science has told us will be required. Getting from a few thousand tonnes to a couple hundred thousands to a million tonnes will take time. Getting to gigatonne scale will take time, will take resources, will take patience, and will take a lot of talented, dedicated people to be a part of that effort.
And it’s a necessary and exciting challenge to be a part of.
Radhika Moolgavkar: All right, Chris, last question for you in this topics. So obviously, as Jason was alluding to and mentioned, this is a new concept for a lot of people. I mean, there’s education, there’s also fear. I mean, it’s just a whole bunch of things when you have something so new. So What are the challenges and opportunities the government will face as it tries to build new large-scale infrastructure in or near communities? And I’m thinking both at the federal and the state and local level. And how do you think they should address it?
Chris Barnard: I mean, it was something that Jason said that was really interesting and something I’ve thought a lot about as well is kind of this just transition angle. That this really will hopefully provide kind of a renewed industrial base and opportunities for communities that otherwise risk being left behind in this energy transition. But another one is something that we’re very interested in at ACC is having traveled to communities across the US. I mean, coal communities in Utah to oil and gas communities in Texas. They’re actually quite excited about this. I mean, the coal community we visited in Utah, they were actually looking for funding themselves from the federal government to be able to build a carbon capture facility in Texas.
There’s also a lot of excitement, and you see that kind of being reflected in some of the private sector investment there as well. And I think ultimately, my hope is that This will show that tackling climate change doesn’t have to be like a blue state thing right, a lot of red states will benefit from the funding and the infrastructure that is being built and all this kind of stuff. And not just for direct air capture but also when solar more generally and other kinds of technologies that. As we’re talking about this, I think it’ll show those kinds of areas, especially the ones that have kind of heavy fossil fuel traditions, that they can be a part of a new technology base that is crucial to this country that can be exported to other countries that can be a contributor to prosperity, etc, etc.
So I think that’s a major opportunity and I hope the government kind of is aware of that and messages in that way. And I think, I mean, I don’t need to kind of talk more about the challenges. I think Jason did a great job of like the importance of making sure that we have that community buy-in because if you have failed projects at the local level, then that is potentially the nail in the coffin for this technology in this industry. So I think those are some of the main challenges and opportunities there.
Jason Hochman: Just as we were discussing The risk of potential failed projects harming the long-term sustainability of these programs. I think that successful projects can really set in motion a virtuous cycle wherein communities are benefiting. They are building a broad-based constituency of support that will filter up and filter down in terms of sustained policy support. Because if there are communities that are Benefiting from having built and are operating and maintaining large scale carbon removal sites, then I don’t think that will be easy to unwind. And I think for good reason, people will want to expand that for the benefit of the communities, of the companies and employees involved and for the environment and meeting our climate goals.
So I think that for that reason, these first of a kind projects are going to be really important. And we want to help make them successful. And I think that this model can be a replicable one as well around the world among in other jurisdictions and localities that want to build out their own domestic carbon removal carbon management sectors.
Radhika Moolgavkar: Well, Jason, that was well put. Thank you. And I am going to now pivot to good news, which I’m going to hand over to Chris to discuss something I feel like we’ve been talking about since the first show, but maybe that’s a little unfair. So, Chris, you’re on.
Chris Barnard: Yeah, I never thought this moment would arrive, but here we are. Kind of out of nowhere, we found out that the Growing Climate Solutions Act, a bill that I’ve talked a lot about, that It was one of the most bipartisan bills ever to pass the Senate, which would basically empower farmers and ranchers and landowners and foresters across this country to use their lands to sequester carbon and participate in carbon markets, which had stalled in the House for a long time, actually passed as part of the omnibus bill at the end of last Congress and just kind of snuck its way in there.
Which is really exciting because it’s something that we’ve really advocated for. Our activists have sent tonnes of emails. We published op-eds, done media around this. So it’s just very exciting that passed. It was bipartisan and also that at the end of the day, it will empower farmers and American landowners to be a part of the climate solution.
Radhika Moolgavkar: Well, Chris, congratulations to you and the ACC. That’s big news, and I’m glad it’s off the checklist finally because it’s lingered for too long. With that, Jason, thank you so much for joining us. I really appreciated your insight and knowledge about the direct air capture industry.
Jason Hochman: Thank you for having me. It’s been a pleasure.
Radhika Moolgavkar: And Chris, as always, great to have you, and we’ll see you next month.
Announcer: Thanks so much for listening to Carbon Removal Newsroom. If you like the show, the best way you can help us is by giving us a great rating and review in Apple Podcasts, following the show on Spotify, and by sharing the show on social media. Tell your friends and help us spread the word about what’s happening in the world of carbon removal.
