recovered from any Carbon Major would be deducted from that Carbon Major’s overall proportionate liability49 for the 100 GtC of carbon sequestration necessary to restore the atmospheric resource to below 350 ppm atmospheric CO2 by 2100. Third, the amounts recovered would be applied to fund the implementation of the carbon sequestration projects identified in the Philippines. 50 An accurate carbon and financial accounting must be maintained for each of the projects to ensure that the implementation of the projects is accomplished in a transparent and effective manner. Moreover, all States, including the Philippines, must ensure that they respect, promote, and consider their human rights obligations during the implementation of such projects. If other sovereign co-trustees also seek Natural Resource Damages for damage to the atmosphere and climate system public trust resources, the Philippines should consider taking a leadership role in the implementation of a Planetary Atmospheric Recovery Plan51 to recover and effectively utilize the Natural Resource Damages in a coordinated and efficient manner, much as it has exercised leadership within the Climate Vulnerable Forum. By setting the scientific standard for climate recovery (limiting long-term climate warming to a maximum of 1°C) and establishing the Carbon Majors’ responsibility for the substantial impairment of the atmosphere and climate system public trust resources, the Commission will support the Philippines’ ability to seek Natural Resource Damages from the Carbon Majors and fulfill its constitutional and public trust obligations to the Filipino people. IV. CLIMATE CHANGE DISPROPORTIONATELY THREATENS CHILDREN Current and future generations of Filipino children will disproportionately experience the harms of climate change, due to the progressive nature of climate change impacts and the unique life phase of childhood. Furthermore, given the nature of the climate threat, children and their caregivers have no meaningful way of protecting themselves from the dangerous situation in which States and Carbon Majors have placed them. The harms of climate change start at the emissions level and impact all aspects of a child’s life, as well as the rights held by children specifically52, and humans generally, under international law (see Table 1 on pg. 13). Children are more vulnerable than adults to pollution For an initial formulation of the Carbon Majors’ proportionate liability, see R. Heede, Carbon Majors: Accounting for Carbon and Methane Emissions 1854-2010, Methods and Results Report, 5 (2014), http://climateaccountability.org/pdf/MRR%209.1%20Apr14R.pdf (last visited Dec. 1, 2016). 50 Given these substantial co-benefits of atmospheric and climate recovery and the limited (albeit large) financial reserves of the Carbon Majors, it is possible that sovereign co-trustees might compete for the recovery of NRDs once recovery suits are initiated. However, careful attention must be paid to how NRD recovery funds are spent. Carbon sequestration, rather than climate adaptation, must be the primary focus if we are to achieve climate recovery and long-term climate stability by the end of this century. Achieving long-term climate stability is necessary to prevent continued human right violations and threats of human right violations. Of course, there will be climate adaptation benefits with many carbon sequestration projects (as discussed above), especially if the projects are designed thoughtfully, but it is important that adaptation to the present and projected impacts of climate change be conceptually separate from the use of NRD recovery for carbon sequestration. 51 See supra, note 48. 52 For a comprehensive discussion of children’s rights under international law, and how climate change threatens those rights, see Children’s Rights and Climate Change, supra note 40. 49 Our Children’s Trust Amicus Curiae Brief 10