Implementing the radical-transparency agenda published in a Nature Portfolio journal
carbon_outreach_targets record is populated. See the personalisation standard.
Nature is where the scientific community adjudicates methodological arguments. A Nature News feature on proof-pack-adjacent architectures is the fastest path to broad scientific legitimacy.
Dear Editor,
In January 2026, npj Climate Action — a Nature Portfolio journal — published a paper by Christopher Reinhard and Noah Planavsky titled 'The importance of radical transparency for responsible carbon dioxide removal'. The paper argued for open data on methodology, open data on dollar-per-ton costs, and an independent verification pathway for every tonne of carbon removal claimed.
The paper was presented as an argument, not a specification. In the six weeks since publication, multiple implementation projects have begun treating it as exactly that: a specification.
Trellison Institute has been building a reference implementation — a signed per-tonne record that binds methodology attestation, sensor data, cost decomposition, environmental-impact disclosure, and audit hooks. We call it a proof pack. Planavsky's work at the Yale Center for Natural Carbon Capture, Reinhard's field work at Lithos Carbon, the Woodwell soil-carbon programme under Jonathan Sanderman, the Colorado State COMET-Farm programme under Keith Paustian, and the Oxford Net Zero programme under Stephen M. Smith each touch adjacent parts of the same architecture.
We are writing to suggest a Nature News feature arc that treats the implementation of the Reinhard & Planavsky paper as a scientific methodology story. The arc has the shape of a good Nature feature: a published principle, a community implementing it, a set of testable claims about whether the implementation can actually deliver what the principle calls for, and an open question about how the scientific community should adjudicate the result.
The Trellison alpha implementation is open for evaluation by any researcher who wants access. Negative evaluations will be published on the Trellison surface alongside positive ones. We can provide Nature News with the roster of evaluators, the timeline, and the methodology.
This is a slow-burn story rather than a breaking one. We think it deserves the Nature feature-length treatment.
— Rob Stillwell
Director, Trellison Institute
[email protected]