Share this page!

Oliver Geden Profile picture
Twitter logo
22 Oct, 7 tweets, 7 min read
Major step forward for German #climate debate today, with study from @Prognos_AG, @oekoinstitut & @Wupperinst, The first report on net zero GHGs based on sound modelling
A quick look at Carbon Dioxide Removal
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
@AgoraEW, @agoraverkehr @StiftungKlima
[1/n]
Study assumes 95% conventional mitigation, making it one of the more ambitious for industrialized countries (CCC for UK & COM for EU: ~90%, see swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2020R…)
Residual emissions mainly from agriculture & industry, aviation already at zero
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
[2/n]
Carbon Dioxide Removal is slightly higher than residual emissions (64 vs, 62 Mt), mainly consisting of Bioenergy with CCS (mostly in industry, not in power sector) and Direct Air Capture with CO2 storage
Scenario does not rely on LULUCF sink
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
[3/n]
Report takes the criticism around accounting and permancence of land-based 'natural' CO2 sinks rather seriously. It calls for greater attention and reversing the current trend of decreasing sink capacity, continues to account for LULUCF seperately
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
[4/n]
Not surprisingly, study also indicates need for conventional CCS (beyond generating negative emissions), not for power sector but industrial process emissions and waste sector, starting as early as 2030 (for cement)
Total CCS to reach 73 Mt by 2050
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
[5/n]
Since people at @AgoraEW, @agoraverkehr & @StiftungKlima have been an integral part of German #climate debate for some time, they of course know that implementing this 'final step' will be quite controversial
(hm, the ones before probably as well)
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
[6/n]
Finally, some numbers.
Of course, many of the assumptions can be contested. We need an informed debate
But it's remarkable that even the 30p summary (full #klimaneutral2050 report only in Nov) is much better than any net-zero study on Germany so far
agora-energiewende.de/en/press/news-…
[end]

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Oliver Geden

Oliver Geden Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Oliver_Geden

Oliver Geden Profile picture
5 Oct
Good that Fridays for Future activists start dealing more and more with the nitty-gritty details of EU #climate policymaking. But with several factual errors and questionable claims in this article, they are risking their credibility.
A short thread [1/n] #EUClimateLaw
You can of course criticize EU #climate policy for not being ambitious enough, but claiming that "the EU is cheating with numbers" needs to be backed up with very strong arguments.
medium.com/@GretaThunberg…
[2/n] #EUClimateLaw
Let's start with FFF authors' core argument that EU is cheating because the 55% are counted from 1990 onwards not from 2018
The EU has never claimed otherwise. 1990 has always been the base year for EU headline #climate targets (as for many others in #UNFCCC)
[3/n] #EUClimateLaw
Read 7 tweets
Oliver Geden Profile picture
23 Sep
Certainly a major step forward that China now aims to achieve 'carbon neutrality' by 2060, but it can't be directly compared to EU's and UK's targets for 'climate neutrality' by 2050.
Net zero GHG harder to achieve than net zero CO2, takes 10-20 yrs more
bbc.com/news/science-e…
The main reason is that non-CO2 emissions like nitrous oxide (N20) and methane (CH4) are much harder or impossible to mitigate, so they'll need to be offset by CO2 removal, which takes longer. Below global pathways. For countries, it depends on their specific emissions profile
Confusion around net-zero CO2 & net-zero GHG is widespread (see thread below)
Rule of thumb: whenever you hear 'net zero', ask "CO2 or GHG"? If only CO2, then add 10-20 years if you compare to EU or UK
Usually, national climate targets are in GHG, not CO2

Read 6 tweets
Oliver Geden Profile picture
19 Sep
A bit disturbing that #showyourbudgets contributes to ongoing confusion abt net-zero targets
Net zero CO2 ≠ net zero GHG ('climate neutral'), the latter reached 10-20 yrs later in scenarios due to harder-to-abate non-CO2, offset by CDR
National targets usually set in GHG not CO2
As you can see in global #IPCC pathways, most of the residual emissions at the time of net-zero (and later) are non-CO2, mainly methane and nitrous oxide from agriculture
swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2020R… Image
The same applies to the European Union's emissions trajectory towards net zero.
Residual emissions are to a large extent non-CO2 from agriculture
swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2020R… Image
Read 8 tweets
Oliver Geden Profile picture
17 Sep
EU #Climate Target Plan 2030 and accompanying impact assessment now out
ec.europa.eu/clima/policies… Image
Scanning for removals-related issues in #EU2030 impact assessment...
This - creating an AFOLU pillar (LULUCF + agricultural non-CO2 emissions) - seems a sensible approach. Could help to clearly distinguish roles of ecosystem-based & technological CO2 removal in EU #climate policy Image
Why suddenly all the talk about non-CO2 from agriculture? That's because these are projected to form the largest bloc of remaining ('residual') emissions in 2050 (if everything else - in power, transport, industry sectors - works out as planned) Image
Read 6 tweets
Oliver Geden Profile picture
14 Sep
Leaked #EU2030 #climate target plan indicates that @EU_Commission wants to fully integrate LULUCF into target accounting and enhance land-use and forestry sink t by 2030.
A sensible step, but it gives EU ~5 percentage points on the 2030 balance sheet without additional action Image
We anticipated this move already in our SWP Research Paper "Unconventional Mitigation: Carbon Dioxide Removal as a New Approach in EU Climate Policy"
swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2020R… Image
background info: It's a little known fact that LULUCF emissions and removals are measured/accounted and reported, but not (fully) included in overall EU target achievment calculations
swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2020R… Image
Read 5 tweets
Oliver Geden Profile picture
9 Sep
Future discourse analyses will find ample material how civil society orgs tried to link #ParisAgreement's bottom-up pledges w/ global temperature outcomes
[Spoiler Alert: 40% by 2030 insufficient for net-zero GHG 2050, but there's no "science-based EU target", it's all political] Image
The "7.6% p.a. reduction" claim comes from UNEP Emissions Gap Report, based on IPCC pathways with lots of CDR, going 'net negative' after 2065 (not shown in EGR 2019).
Does that mean European NGOs finally came to accept a net negative emissions strategy - in line with science? Image
If you don't want to opt for massive amounts of 'net negative emissions' in 2nd half of century, your global pathway changes, with steeper annual reductions.
If you're against massive net negative (as those advocating 65% for EU 2030 usually are) then you need to aim for ~80%
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get email notifications when new thread is out from this Author!

Check out other threads from this Author!

Read all threads by @Oliver_Geden