Take life seriously, but not too seriously—especially when discussing a colorless gas that both feeds forests and warms the planet.
1) The molecule that does (almost) everything
Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is essential for life: plants use it to photosynthesize; oceans exchange it with the air; rocks slowly lock it away. But CO₂ is also a greenhouse gas that traps heat near Earth’s surface. In moderation, that greenhouse effect makes the planet habitable; in excess, it drives warming. Authoritative syntheses (IPCC, NASA, national meteorological services) conclude that the recent, rapid warming is chiefly caused by human-emitted greenhouse gases—especially CO₂ (Sources: ipcc.chNASA Science+1).
2) The three main narratives you’ll hear
A. Anthropogenic warming (scientific consensus).
Human activities (primarily burning fossil fuels) have raised atmospheric CO₂ by ~50% in under two centuries, and it is “unequivocal” that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Fingerprints include a warming lower atmosphere combined with cooling higher layers (a greenhouse signature), rising ocean heat content, and retreating ice (Sources: NASA Scienceipcc.chMet Office).
B. “It’s natural cycles.”
Earth’s climate does vary over millennia due to orbital (Milankovitch) cycles and over decades due to volcanic aerosols and solar changes. But these natural drivers operate on much longer timescales or do not match the observed vertical temperature pattern of today’s warming. Satellite records show no long-term solar increase that could explain recent trends. Volcanic CO₂ is <1% of human emissions (Sources: Met Office+1NASA Scienceusgs.gov).
C. “CO₂ is good; the rest is a scam.”
It’s true that elevated CO₂ can stimulate plant growth (the “CO₂ fertilization” effect), contributing to a satellite-observed global “greening.” But the boost is uneven, often temporary, and constrained by water and nutrients; quality and micronutrients can decline; and heat or drought can erase gains. That reality doesn’t make climate policy a “scam”—it means we must be precise about what works, where, and with what verification (Sources: NatureNASApmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.govFrontiers).
3) What the weight of evidence says (in plain language)
Physics is not in doubt. CO₂ absorbs and re-emits infrared radiation; add more and you trap more heat. Observations match this mechanism across the atmosphere and oceans (Sources: NASA Science).
Recent warming is too fast and too vertically patterned to be solar cycles or volcanoes. The lower atmosphere warms while the stratosphere cools—classic greenhouse behavior—not a Sun-driven uniform warming. Human emissions dwarf volcanic CO₂ annually by a factor of dozens (Sources: Met Officeclimate.gov).
CO₂ has real upsides for plants in some settings, but those gains are conditional and saturating; water, nitrogen, heat stress, and pests decide whether “more CO₂ = more yield” holds. (Sources:pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).
4) CO₂ fertilization: benefits, limits, and the nuance
Satellite and field evidence show global greening with CO₂ playing a major role, but FACE experiments and meta-analyses reveal diminishing returns under nutrient and water constraints, and sometimes lower nutritional quality in staple crops at elevated CO₂. In short: CO₂ helps plants until other bottlenecks dominate. That nuance matters for any solution premised on land, crops, or forests alone (Sources: Naturepmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).
5) Carbon markets: necessary, imperfect, being rebuilt
Critics point to over-crediting in parts of the voluntary market (especially avoided-deforestation baselines). Multiple independent studies find that some credits overstated climate benefits, prompting standards bodies to tighten rules (e.g., the Integrity Council’s Core Carbon Principles). The lesson is not “abandon all markets,” but “raise integrity—additionality, quantification, permanence, and transparency—or don’t claim climate impact” (Sources: science.orgNatureICVCM).
6) A practical middle path: reduce, then remove (with proof)
All credible scenarios say deep emissions cuts are non-negotiable. Where emissions remain, measured removal helps. One option under active research is Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW)—spreading finely ground silicate rocks (e.g., basalt) on soils to speed natural CO₂ capture into dissolved bicarbonate and, eventually, stable carbonates. Peer-reviewed work suggests meaningful removal potential if deployed carefully, alongside rigorous monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) to confirm real drawdown and guard against side effects (Sources: eprints.whiterose.ac.ukFrontiers).
7) Our working hypothesis (evidence-based, testable)
Hypothesis: CO₂ is both life-enabling and, in excess, a planetary thermostat. The dominant driver of recent warming is human-emitted greenhouse gases, primarily CO₂. CO₂ fertilization yields local, conditional benefits that do not cancel systemic warming risks. Therefore, the most credible path is to cut emissions quickly and pair them with measurable, verifiable CO₂ removal—such as well-monitored basalt weathering—implemented transparently, reported conservatively, and never used to excuse ongoing pollution. ipcc.chNASA Scienceeprints.whiterose.ac.uk
8) What FYT will (and won’t) claim in Phase 1
FYT today is a utility token used for access/payments inside the FYT network (e.g., buying basalt in the FYT Shop; selected third-party goods/services).
We do not claim to issue carbon credits or offsets in Phase 1, and we avoid “backed,” “stable,” or “redeemable” language.
Where we support ERW pilots, we will share transparent updates and follow the evolving best practices in MRV; we’ll never present pilot data as certified offsets. (See our ART roadmap for how stronger claims would require stronger controls.)
9) Why this matters for investors, partners, and the public
Investors: integrity reduces regulatory and reputational risk.
Partners: transparent logistics (bailment, stock records, quality certificates) produce real-world audit trails if you’re testing basalt-based applications.
Public: skepticism is welcome; we’ll publish what we measure, and we’ll label uncertainty as uncertainty.
Key sources (primary/authoritative)
IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report (2023): human influence on recent warming is unequivocal. ipcc.ch+1
NASA & Met Office explainers: greenhouse physics, CO₂ rise, and why natural cycles cannot explain current trends. NASA Science+1Met Office+1
USGS/NOAA: human CO₂ emissions far exceed volcanic sources; sun’s variability doesn’t match observed warming. usgs.govclimate.govNASA Science
CO₂ fertilization literature: global greening is real but constrained; FACE studies show context-dependent gains. Naturepmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Carbon markets integrity: evidence of over-crediting and the Core Carbon Principles reform pathway. science.orgNatureICVCM
Enhanced Rock Weathering: potential and MRV challenges under active, peer-reviewed study. eprints.whiterose.ac.ukFrontiers
Final word
CO₂ is not a cartoon villain or a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s powerful, measurable, and—handled badly—destabilizing. At FYT we’ll use CO₂ science, not slogans: cut where we can, measure what we claim, and publish the results. If the data contradict us, we’ll show you that too. That’s how science—and trust—work.
