Associate Professor and Georgia Power Chair, Georgia Tech School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences — co-founder of Lithos Carbon, Senior Scientist at CREW, Senior Contributing Scientist at Cascade Climate, and co-author of the 2026 npj Climate Action paper that anchors this portfolio.
Christopher T. Reinhard is an Associate Professor and the Georgia Power Chair in the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech. His research operates at the intersection of biogeochemistry, carbon-cycle modelling, and the engineering of scalable natural carbon removal. He is a co-founder of Lithos Carbon, senior scientist and scientific advisor to CREW, and a Senior Contributing Scientist at Cascade Climate. Across these roles he moves fluently between foundational earth-science research (Earth-system redox evolution, biological pump, carbon-cycle modelling) and the applied question of how carbon removal can be deployed — and verified — at agricultural scale.
Reinhard's 2025 Nature paper, Transforming US agriculture for carbon removal with enhanced weathering, is the current reference for continent-scale enhanced rock weathering on US cropland. His 2024 Environmental Science & Technology paper with Beerling, Taylor, Raymond, and Suhrhoff provides the environmental-impact and MRV framework that any serious ERW crediting system must internalise. He is a frequent co-author with Noah Planavsky at Yale, and with David Beerling and Lyla Taylor at Sheffield.
A non-exhaustive selection drawn from public records through April 2026. Emphasis on carbon-removal and enhanced-weathering work relevant to proof-pack MRV schema design.
Reinhard's active collaboration graph connects directly into the Tier 3 nature-based MRV cohort we already track, and into multiple institutional hubs:
Four of these names — Planavsky, Beerling, Renforth, Hartmann — are already on Trellison's Tier 1/3 carbon capture roster. Cultivating Reinhard opens the cluster.
Reinhard co-authored the January 2026 npj Climate Action paper that publicly argues for radical transparency on CDR data and dollar-per-ton costs. His own empirical work on agricultural enhanced weathering provides the field cases that proof packs are most likely to be tested against first. We map alignment on four axes:
| Their methodology | What proof packs provide |
|---|---|
| Field-trial MRV for ERW (2022 Corn Belt; 2024 Env. Sci. Tech. monitoring framework) | Per-tonne methodology attestation record with source-traceable sensor streams, rock-application logs, and soil-chemistry time series |
| Environmental-impact disclosure for ERW (2024 framework) | Proof-pack co-benefit and counter-factual ledger — surfaces nickel/chromium loading, pH shifts, and runoff risks alongside the carbon claim |
| Continent-scale deployment modelling (2025 Nature) | Proof-pack aggregation layer — roll up per-field proof packs into region-level evidence bases without losing source integrity |
| Radical-transparency thesis (2026 npj Climate Action) | Proof pack IS the reference implementation of the paper's prescriptions: open methodology, open cost stack, independent verifiability |
Five specific joint-paper concepts, ordered by likelihood of Reinhard engagement and strategic value to Trellison / LedgerWell:
Joint paper that documents the proof-pack open-data schema as a reference implementation of the Reinhard & Planavsky 2026 thesis. Venue target: npj Climate Action (same journal), Nature Climate Change, or Environmental Research Letters. Trellison contributes tooling + replication dataset; Reinhard contributes methodology framing.
Side-by-side MRV case studies of the two Reinhard/Planavsky ventures using a common proof-pack schema. Demonstrates that radical transparency is operationally achievable without compromising commercial viability. Target: Environmental Science & Technology or Earth's Future.
Operationalises the paper's cost-transparency call. Proof-pack cost decomposition fields (capex, opex, energy source + intensity, feedstock, logistics, MRV cost) documented as a shared schema. Target: Joule, Energy & Environmental Science, or Environmental Research Letters.
Specifies how proof packs interoperate with Verra, ICVCM Core Carbon Principles, SBTi, and VCMI claim codes. Planavsky's Verra scientific-advisor role provides standing. Target: Science perspective, Nature Climate Change commentary, or ICVCM white paper.
Extends the proof-pack schema beyond the carbon-only claim into co-benefit fields (soil health, water quality, yield, biodiversity) — the agenda of the Yale Center for Natural Carbon Capture. Target: Nature Sustainability.
Approach Planavsky first, then Reinhard as a paired follow-up. Planavsky sits at more boundary points (Verra, Ceezer, EDF, Cascade, YCNCC steering committee) and is more likely to reply to a first-time contact. Once Planavsky engages, Reinhard can be introduced through the Cascade or Lithos vector.
A letter from Rob Stillwell as Trellison director, citing the January 2026 npj Climate Action paper as explicit design inspiration. Plain text, signed. Sent from the Trellison Institute domain (not DaedArch). CC: Trellison methodology board (when seated).
Subject: A reference implementation for the radical-transparency agenda Dr. Reinhard, We read your January 2026 npj Climate Action paper with Dr. Planavsky as a design specification rather than an opinion piece. Trellison Institute has been building a per-tonne open-data verification instrument — we call the artefact a "proof pack" — that tries to implement the framework you argue for: methodology attestation, dollar-per-ton cost decomposition, co-benefit ledger, independent-audit hooks. I'd welcome a 30-minute call to show you the current alpha. We're not looking for endorsement; we're looking for methodology critique and, if it's useful to you, an offer of alpha access tied to the Lithos Carbon field programme. Independent negative evaluations would be published alongside positive ones. A one-page methodology brief that maps your paper's prescriptions to the proof-pack schema is attached. With respect, Rob Stillwell Director, Trellison Institute
A one-page Trellison methodology brief that maps each prescription from the paper to a proof-pack field (or acknowledges a gap). The brief should be explicit where the current implementation falls short of the paper's ambition — that honesty is the reputational asset.
← Tier 1 — Integrity Critics · Planavsky profile → · Anchor publication
Feedback from visitors, translated into business terminology and listed below. Use the assistant in the corner to add a comment.