Fast to Slow
During my time at Running Tide, I developed the Fast to Slow framework to ground carbon removal in an Earth-systems-based approach that could support a consistent and scalable market. It wasn’t rocket science—just a matter of applying first principles. I started with NASA’s straightforward explainer of the carbon cycle and used it to evaluate the dominant narrative in the carbon market, which focuses narrowly on atmospheric CO₂. It quickly became clear that the atmospheric approach not only overlooked the realities of how carbon moves through the Earth’s natural cycles but also distracted from the ultimate goal: rebalancing the system.
The atmospheric framing has become so entrenched in our thinking that it’s treated as an untouchable truth, even though it lacks a foundation in first-principles reasoning. Instead of addressing this foundational problem, the gatekeepers of the market have tried to solve for the internal inconsistencies in the logic by piling on complexity—elaborate accounting schemes, counterfactuals, round number durability targets like 1000 years, and a proliferation of non-profits, methodologies, and middlemen that make carbon removal less scalable, less transparent, and functionally non-existent.
This isn’t just semantics; it’s about building a market from first-principles that are rooted in the way the world actually works.
What is Carbon Removal?
Carbon removal is the intentional process of transferring carbon from the fast carbon cycle—which includes the atmosphere, biosphere, and surface ocean—and transferring it into slow carbon reservoirs like deep oceans, sediments, and geological formations.. This process is essential to rebalancing the Earth’s carbon system, which has been disrupted by human activities that transfer massive amounts of slow-cycle carbon (e.g., fossil fuels) into the fast carbon system.
When we burn fossil fuels, we create a carbon liability—a debt to the system. As shown in the image above, human activities have led to total emissions of 40.7 gigatons of CO₂ in 2023, primarily from fossil fuels and industrial activities (36.3 Gt) and land-use changes (4.4 Gt). This liability doesn’t remain solely in the atmosphere; it spreads across the fast carbon system, moving into the biosphere and the surface ocean.
The objective of carbon removal is to reverse this flow, pulling fast carbon from wherever it resides—be it the atmosphere, biosphere, or ocean—and moving it into slow-cycle reservoirs in a durable, quantifiable, and efficient manner. This systemic approach ensures we address the root cause of climate instability: the imbalance between the fast and slow carbon cycles.
Using the Fast to Slow framework, we can clearly distinguish carbon removal from restoration activities, which primarily aim to enhance the capacity of fast-cycle reservoirs like forests and soils. Restoration is vital for ecosystem health but does not address the systemic imbalance caused by the transfer of slow-cycle carbon into the fast cycle.
This illustration of the global carbon budget highlights how human activities create the carbon liability and why carbon removal must focus on net transfers to slow-cycle reservoirs to truly rebalance the system.
Atmospheric Framing
The prevalent atmospheric framing focuses on CO₂ levels in the air, leading to solutions that prioritize measurable reductions in atmospheric CO₂. While well-intentioned, this approach often emphasizes short-term gains and complicated accounting tricks without addressing the underlying systemic imbalance. Restorative efforts like reforestation, for example, rebuild fast-cycle sinks like forests and soils by pulling CO₂ out of the air. These are crucial but insufficient because they don’t address the root cause: the excess carbon in the fast cycle.
The core concept of the Fast to Slow framework is that the objective of carbon removal is to rebalance the system. This means moving fast carbon—whether it is in the atmosphere, biosphere, or surface ocean—into slow-cycle reservoirs as efficiently as possible. It isn’t just about pulling CO₂ out of the atmosphere; it’s about targeting fast carbon wherever it resides and transferring it to slow reservoirs that can lock it away for millennia.
An atmospheric framing leads to suboptimal outcomes such as:
Fast Cycle Storage: Many solutions store carbon in fast-cycle reservoirs like soils or forests, where it remains vulnerable to re-release through disturbance or decay. The Fast to Slow framework ends the long-standing debate on how to handle planting trees or restoring ecosystems. These are critically important restoration exercises for the fast carbon cycle system, but they are not carbon removal and this has led to an endless debate and too much talk on how to deal with planting trees.
Suboptimal Measurement: Atmospheric framing often mischaracterizes the point of carbon removal. For example, in ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE), carbon removal occurs when fast carbon in the surface ocean is chemically transferred into the slow bicarbonate reservoir. Atmospheric-focused frameworks, however, often prioritize secondary interactions between the ocean and atmosphere, leading to delayed or inaccurate accounting of carbon removal.
Counterfactuals: To make up for a flawed accounting framework, we’ve adopted layers of complex counterfactuals—hypothetical scenarios of “what would have happened otherwise.” These are nonsensical bandaids on a broken system, introducing uncertainty, complexity, and opportunities for gaming the system. Instead of focusing on direct, measurable outcomes, counterfactuals force us to build frameworks around unprovable hypotheticals, making carbon removal accounting frameworks unworkable and inefficient.
By embracing a Fast to Slow framework, we can move beyond temporary fixes and inefficient solutions, focusing instead on scalable and efficient carbon removal systems.
The Volatility Framework: Reducing Systemic Risk
To take the Fast to Slow framework a step further, we need to think about carbon removal in terms of the volatility it introduces or mitigates within the carbon system. Imagine the carbon cycle as a spectrum of volatility:
Fast Carbon: Highly dynamic and volatile, akin to equity markets. Carbon in the atmosphere, biosphere, and surface ocean moves rapidly, influenced by seasonal cycles, ecological processes, and human activities.
Slow Carbon: Stable and predictable, akin to bonds. Carbon stored in deep ocean reservoirs, sediments, and geological formations remains locked away for millennia, reducing system volatility.
Over the past two centuries, humanity has effectively been “borrowing to buy equity.” By extracting slow-cycle carbon (bonds) and injecting it into the fast cycle (equity), we’ve dramatically increased the volatility of the entire system. This volatility manifests as climate instability—unpredictable weather, ocean acidification, habitat loss, and more.
To stabilize the system, we need to reverse this trend. Carbon removal is not just about reducing CO₂ levels but about shifting the balance back toward slow carbon reservoirs, thereby reducing systemic volatility.
Not All Carbon is Created Equal: Volatility Within Fast and Slow Carbon
Just as not all equities or bonds carry the same risk or volatility, not all fast or slow carbon has the same volatility. The Fast to Slow framework isn’t just about categorizing carbon; it’s about understanding the relative stability of different forms of carbon within and across these cycles.
For example:
Methane vs. Atmospheric CO₂: Capturing methane (a highly potent greenhouse gas) and storing it in geological formations delivers a far greater reduction in system volatility than removing atmospheric CO₂ and storing it temporarily in the biosphere. Methane is 80 times more effective at trapping heat than CO₂ over a 20-year period, so neutralizing its impact immediately reduces systemic risk more dramatically.
Biosphere Carbon: Carbon stored in the biosphere (e.g., forests, soils) remains highly volatile, vulnerable to release through disturbances like wildfires, pests, or land-use changes. Moving this carbon into more stable reservoirs, such as deep geological formations or deep ocean sediments, results in a measurable reduction in system volatility.
Oceanic Carbon: Fast carbon in the surface ocean remains dynamic, constantly cycling with the atmosphere. Transforming this into slow-cycle bicarbonate through processes like ocean alkalinity enhancement locks it into a more stable reservoir, reducing volatility while also helping to buffer ocean acidification.
This nuanced understanding of carbon volatility highlights why a dynamic system for pricing carbon removal based on net reductions in system volatility is essential.
Pricing Volatility Reduction as a Service
To align market incentives with systemic impact, the carbon removal market must evolve to recognize and reward net reductions in carbon system volatility. This means moving beyond simple metrics like tons of CO₂ removed and designing systems that price removal efforts based on their contribution to system stability.
In practice, this could look like:
Dynamic Volatility Pricing: Removal efforts that target highly volatile forms of carbon—such as capturing methane and storing it in geological formations—would command higher market prices due to their greater systemic impact. Similarly, projects that move carbon from highly volatile reservoirs (e.g., the biosphere) into highly stable reservoirs (e.g., geological formations) would be rewarded over those that simply cycle carbon within the fast system.
Holistic Metrics: A volatility-based framework eliminates the need for arbitrary durability thresholds (ie. 1000 years) and instead incorporates metrics like reservoir stability, likelihood of re-release, and overall system impact. This provides a more comprehensive and accurate assessment of a project’s value.
Incentivizing Innovation: By valuing volatility reduction, markets would incentivize the development of technologies and strategies that target the most impactful forms of carbon removal, accelerating progress toward systemic stability.
Carbon Removal is About Stabilizing the System
The goal of carbon removal isn’t simply to reduce atmospheric CO₂; it’s to stabilize the entire carbon system. By shifting the balance back toward slow reservoirs and targeting the most volatile components of the fast cycle, we can reduce the systemic risks that drive climate instability.
The Fast to Slow framework, paired with a volatility-focused market structure, creates a powerful roadmap for achieving this stability. It moves beyond simplistic metrics and flawed counterfactuals to embrace the full complexity of the carbon cycle, ensuring that removal efforts are both effective and scalable.
Just as investors balance risk and reward to build resilient portfolios, we must now manage the Earth’s carbon system with the same sophistication—reducing volatility and increasing stability to ensure a future for our planet and humans who live on it.
