This article by @jtemple that came out just prior to the election should be essential reading for all sustainability officers trying to figure out how to achieve their CEO's net zero pledges. Companies need to learn from past experience with offsets.

technologyreview.com/2020/11/02/101…
Avoiding a repeat of past missteps with offsets means having a red team of experienced offset critics; this should be a priority for any firm aiming for net-zero and to actually have that claim stick. It's great to work with nature-based CDR providers. But that's not sufficient.
And the risks are very real. There are risks in terms of what "counts" towards achievement of a net-neutral goal. There are risks in terms of reputation and brand that are incredibly important. And there may be real missed opportunities to find reductions in other sectors.
The fact that this learning does not appear to be happening should be a real concern. For the firms. For the groups advocating for nature-based CDR. And for climate advocates that don't want to see the current moment of corporate climate engagement wasted.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Michael Wara

Michael Wara 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 @MichaelWWara

4 Nov
It seems increasingly likely that Biden will win the presidential election but that democrats will not secure a majority in the senate. That means action on climate and energy will almost certainly have to proceed via regulation using existing authority. A thread...
President Biden won't be able to rely on CRA to quickly revoke problematic rules but will be able to rescind or revise them. He will face a much less friendly Supreme Court when his rules are challenged. What does this all mean, practically speaking?
For oil and gas methane, §111b and d rules that dramatically reduce emissions - especially important now that so many wells have been idled by falling oil prices.
Read 19 tweets
29 Sep
I just got asked for the nth time about what I think about the comparison between CA wildfire CO2 emissions in 2018 and our state's climate goals. I think the comparison is misguided in at least two important respects.
First, fossil fuels are largely carbon from plants that grew and were buried in the Cretaceous. Forest carbon is cycling between plants and the atm on a timescale of decades. There's no putting the Cretaceous CO2 back in the ground. Not true for forests that burn - they regrow.
Second, the way the forest CO2 emissions data is presented implies that emissions could/should be zero. But that's just totally wrong. The reason wildfire emissions are high is that we didn't allow "good" fire for too long. The baseline isn't zero; it should be prescribed fire.
Read 5 tweets
11 Oct 19
I've been thinking a lot (in the dark) about what to take away from the last couple days of safety blackouts (aka PSPS) in Northern California and have a few thoughts about what this means for our thinking about wildfire and energy in California.
My basic take is that any proposed solution to wildfire risks from the electric system needs to meet two key criteria.
(1) it has to insure that CA doesn't walk away from its commitment to equity in provision of electricity services. We need to insure that whatever solution we implement provides affordable abundant energy to low income Californians. It should improve equity, not make it worse;
Read 10 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!