Measure, reduce, and remove your organization's carbon footprint all in one place.

Climate Solutions Platform

Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) standards are a set of protocols and procedures used to systematically measure, document, and confirm the performance of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) activities. MRV provides a structured and reliable framework for ensuring that CDR activities are accurately measured, transparently reported, and independently verified. This in turn enhances the CDR project’s credibility and provides assurance for its effectiveness in addressing climate change for organizations hoping to leverage CDR as part of their climate action strategy. MRV is increasingly important for CDR because it:

  • Bolsters the accuracy and credibility of CDR projects
  • Facilitates compliance with applicable laws and regulations
  • Enhances transparency and accountability of project management and reporting
  • Drives improvement and standardization in CDR approaches
  • Supports funding and investment in CDR technologies and related research initiatives

The US Government’s Federal Marine CDR Plan

Recently, I had the pleasure of collaborating with Climate Vault’s Tech Chamber of subject matter experts to compose Climate Vault’s feedback to the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) request for information (RFI) to gather feedback on what it calls the “Marine CDR Plan” to advance critical marine CDR (mCDR) research.  

When it comes to combating climate change, the ocean is one of our greatest resources. Novel mCDR technologies have an important role to play in leveraging the ocean’s natural CO2 sequestration capabilities to safely and effectively reduce atmospheric CO2 levels.

A key component of our feedback to the NSF focused on MRV, and there’s a lot to unpack there – so much so that the topic deserved its own blog post. For mCDR projects in particular, it is critical for the government to clearly outline its requirements (or range of acceptable approaches) under the Marine CDR Plan. In this blog, I’ve outlined the four areas where clarity and decisiveness could make or break MRV under the Marine CDR Plan. Let’s dive in! 

1 – A Need for Consensus and Standardization
The mCDR space is still developing and our oceans are vast and extremely complex. These two challenges combined together is why establishing MRV standards and regulations early will be crucial to building confidence in mCDR solutions. While there are some mCDR protocols out there that have been developed by various standards bodies, there is still no industry-wide consensus on how mCDR solutions should be  implemented and managed.  

Adding to the challenge, there isn’t much agreement at the federal level either on:

  • What MRV approaches for mCDR are acceptable
  • How to demonstrate carbon sequestration, and 
  • Where research should be allowed to take place 

Given these challenges, aligning perspectives among the scientific community will be critical to advancing standardization of mCDR approaches.

2 – Demonstrate Carbon Sequestration Potential
The question of carbon sequestration potential is a major one for all mCDR projects. There are three main approaches that have been discussed by the scientific community, but there is no consensus regarding which should be deemed acceptable or required to demonstrate sequestration. This means it will need to be clarified whether mCDR projects and research should: 

  1. Demonstrate carbon sequestration potential and environmental impacts collectively (often referred to as “environmental MRV”, or simply, “eMRV”)
  2. Demonstrate carbon sequestration potential first, after which environmental impacts can be researched and factored into decision-making; or
  3. Deem both approaches acceptable for demonstrating sequestration potential. 

Each method raises the question of whether carbon sequestration should be demonstrated by directly measuring sequestered CO2, measuring ocean oxygen levels, or relying on modeled results for some parameters. Despite extensive discussions, there’s no consensus on the best way to demonstrate sequestration, so this is a major question that will need answering.

3 – Define Suitable Research Locations
Another vital point is determining where mCDR research can even take place. Although some small-scale projects have been conducted in territorial waters, it will need to be decided if mCDR projects will be allowed in the economic exclusion zone (EEZ). And if so, a  framework will need to be created for  identifying optimal test sites. 

If projects are permitted in the EEZ, it’s also important for the government to clarify whether it will indemnify federally-funded project developers and researchers in case of any negative impacts from the tests. This type of protection could help to build confidence and support for the scaling well-considered mCDR projects. Some mCDR techniques might not be testable in the EEZ due to unsuitable conditions, however, so it’s important to note that restricting research locations to the EEZ could eliminate some mCDR approaches from consideration. 

4 – Ensure Community Engagement

Stakeholder engagement is a critical component of any project planning process. For mCDR projects in particular, public acceptance can be a roadblock to advancing further research and testing. Engaging in intentional and continuous dialogue that prioritizes equity, with relevant stakeholders, and implementing feedback accordingly, is important to obtaining what is often referred to as the “social license” to operate. It’s also a critical component to developing MRV standards that prioritize the environmental, social, and economic factors that are most important to the communities in which the projects are taking place. 

Moving Forward: Harnessing the Ocean’s Potential

Establishing clear and comprehensive MRV standards is essential for the development and scaling of credible mCDR projects. Getting this right – and doing so in a timely manner – could make or break the advancement of critical mCDR technologies that are needed to address the worst impacts of climate change. We are excited about the impact that the federal Marine CDR Plan can have in driving this agenda forward. By fostering consensus and standardization, addressing critical issues like carbon sequestration potential and research locations, and ensuring robust community engagement, the United States can be a powerful advocate for effective mCDR solutions that harness the ocean’s potential. 

At Climate Vault, we are committed to advancing these discussions and advocating for policies that support the development and scaling of thoughtful and innovative CDR technologies. There is still much work to be done in the mCDR space and I believe that the Marine CDR Plan is an important and exciting step forward in supporting and scaling these promising mCDR technologies. We’ll keep you updated as we continue to monitor this important federal initiative.

This post was guest-written by Brynn Esterly, Climate Vault’s Head of Carbon Removal Solutions. 

About Brynn Esterly

Brynn Esterly is a climate and sustainability professional with 10+ years of experience within the financial services industry. In her current role as Head of Carbon Removal Solutions at Climate Vault, she is responsible for leading the annual RFP process for innovative CDR solutions. Her expertise spans environmental markets, product management, investor relations and corporate communications. She received a Masters in Sustainability Management from Columbia University. Connect with Brynn on LinkedIn here.