Talk:Project Vesta

Proposals for Jan. 2023
Update: User:Cjcogan has implemented all the below except #5. But a more experienced editor may want to review everything as Cjcogan appears to be a new user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 10martin01 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I’m on the staff of Project Vesta, the subject of the article. Updates are needed because the company has gone from the research phase to execution of the research. Significant top-tier reliable sourcing supports the updates.

This proposal also requests moving the article from stub format to a standard article format with a lead, followed by sections for History and Activity. Sorry there are a bunch of requests but re-organizing this into a standard article format requires a bunch of text shifting around.

1. Please add an infobox. (Please see the suggested text on the flush right of this page.)

2. For the first paragraph, first sentence, I’d request updating/replacing “non-profit” with “Public-benefit corporation” to reflect the company’s current official classification. I would also replace the verb “promotes” carbon capture with “researches and carries out” because this isn’t an advocacy organization; they actually do carbon capture projects. I also suggest replacing “in order to capture…” because it suggests the process is capturing carbon that has been absorbed in the ocean. In fact, the process causes carbon in the atmosphere to be captured by the ocean.

Here’s the sentence I’m suggesting be replaced (for reference):

Project Vesta is a non-profit promoting accelerated weathering of volcanic olivine as a climate drawdown strategy in order to capture carbon absorbed in the world's oceans.

Suggested new first sentence:

Project Vesta is a public benefit corporation that researches and carries out accelerated weathering of the mineral olivine as a climate drawdown strategy to capture carbon in the world’s oceans.

3. I suggest deleting the current second sentence of the first paragraph about the company’s HQs. I will propose adding it back to a new History section later on.

Current second sentence to be deleted:

The organization is headquartered in San Francisco and founded in 2019.

4. After the first paragraph, please add a new History section and the following two sentences. The sentences are new information that seems standard for History sections and is backed by high-quality press coverage; I had to use one primary source in sentence two from a government record, but only to establish the date WP: PRIMARY. Please note that the first of these sentences is a rewrite and update of the current article’s second sentence, which I requested be deleted above in request 3.

Suggested new sentences:

In 2019, Kelly Erhart co-founded the company as a nonprofit headquartered in San Francisco. In 2021, the organization changed from a non-profit to public benefit corporation.

5. In the newly added History section, as the new second paragraph, please add the sentence below. Please note that the sentence rewrites the current 4th sentence of paragraph 2. I’ve removed statements about “crowdfunding” and “grants” as these are not found in the sources.

First two sentence of the second paragraph as it exists now:

Vesta announced in May 2020, that they began a controlled trials of the approach in two private beaches in the Caribbean and are looking for other sites to experiment. The experiment was funded by a mix of crowdfunding, grants and carbon capture credits by companies like Stripe who purchased 3,333 tons of carbon sequestration for $75 a ton.

Suggested new 2nd and 3rd paragraphs:

In 2019, the online payment company Stripe prepaid Project Vesta $75 per ton to remove 3,333 tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

6. In the newly added History section, as the new third and fourth paragraphs, please add additional details about the effectiveness of the process, including details supporting the criticism sentence in the lead.

Suggested new sentence[s]:

In 2009, one paper contended that the process is not economically viable at the scale needed to make a meaningful impact in carbon dioxide sequestration. In 2020, the director of Project Vesta said that if the process could be done for $10 a ton, the project would be widely accepted by the markets and the public, especially as climate change became worse.

In 2021, the company calculated that spreading olivine in 0.25% of the world's shelf seas will remove one billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The company said in 2022 it could remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at a rate of $35 a ton if the process is scaled up to the gigatonnes.

7. In the History section as the new fifth paragraph, please add the following new sentences. The new first two sentences provide information about important new developments and projects the company is undertaking. The 2nd sentence is a slight rewrite of the current 5th (and last) sentence of the article’s current 2nd paragraph - it should be deleted from there and moved here.

Suggested new sentence[s]:

In 2022, the town of Southampton, New York, in collaboration with Stony Brook University, and   Cornell University’s Cooperative Extension, and Project Vesta, began a pilot project to place 500 cubic yards of olivine on a Southampton beach that has been eroding as sea levels rise. As part of the pilot and other experiments, the company monitored whether their approach releases concentrations of toxins from the olivine.

8. After the History section, please add a new section entitled Process and underneath it place the current first three sentences from the second paragraph.

The Project Vesta process mimics natural weathering processes to transform the olivine into stable molecules, like calcium carbonate, which precipitate to the oceans’ bottoms as marine organisms consume the naturally occurring chemicals and die (see Carbon in the water cycle for further info). The wave action of beaches on crushed olivine allows for more rapid weathering than other natural deposits of olivine, which only absorb limited amounts of carbon dioxide.

9. In the new Process section, I suggest adding a new sentence to create a new 2nd paragraph. The sentence talks about other benefits of the company’s strategy that have been prominently covered in the press.

Suggested new sentence:

Project Vesta is testing whether the olivine weathering process will mitigate [| coastal recession] and reduce ocean acidification.

10. In the new Process section, please add the following two sentences as a new third paragraph. These provide further details and clarification of the company’s main activities. For purposes of neutrality WP: NPOV these sentences also mention potential unknowns and drawbacks. The last of the three sentences is a modified version of the final sentence of the first paragraph, rewritten for more of a WP: NPOV. I added a date to the “open source” claim because this is no longer completely true, though there’s no source to support an update yet. It should be moved here.

Suggested new sentence[s]:

Since the olivine weathering process creates molecular byproducts such as calcium carbonate that could alkalinize acidifying seawater or release metals such as bioavailable nickel, the organization also researches chemical composition and toxicology of affected water and aquatic life. Project Vesta publishes their scientific findings and as of May 2020 made their methods open source.

Thanks10martin01 (talk) 21:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC) 10martin01 (talk) 21:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)