 I hesitate to go too much into data about how much carbon can be stored through regenerative practices, holistic grazing. These numbers can be helpful to give permission to the inner bean counter that wants to do these things anyway. To fit it into the language of policy, which prides itself so much on being scientific, what do we really mean by scientific? We mean quantitative reasoning, doing things by the numbers, and that has its place. But to paraphrase Einstein in his over quoted saying, we cannot solve the problems that face us today from the same level of thinking that created them. So to extend quantitative reasoning, to extend financial incentives to a new level isn't going to bring us to the place of love that we need to occupy to really do what we need to do. Not necessarily to save the planet, not because bad things are going to happen to us, but because we love this place. What if we could, what if we could, through geoengineering, through carbon sucking machines, through algae pools to make oxygen, bleaching the sky with sulfur aerosols. What if we could endlessly engineer our way out of each crisis and end up on a concrete world where all human beings still survive and in fact have rising incomes. And every measure and are better off by every measure. What if we could achieve that at the expense of all the rest of life on earth? Would we want to do that? This is the transition that's upon us into a different set of values, a different set of motivations.