There was uncertainty about the total climate impact of flying, with IPCC cautiously estimating it at double the impact of the CO2 emissions alone.
The EU now concludes its probably more like three times the CO2 impact.
So if you'd consider a CO2 price for aviation, better make it 3 times as high as for other emitters, to reflect total climate damage done. Same for personal carbon footprints, by the way.
On the solutions side, this underlines the importance of reducing the non-CO2 climate impact of flying as well, e.g. when developing zero-CO2-emission jet fuels. The report (link in article) discusses that as well.
On aviation's share in causing climate change:
It causes 2.4% of CO2 emissions (the number you'll mostly see)
That's 1.7% of all greenhouse gas emissions.
But including indirect warming effects, aviation already causes 5% of climate damage.
(Less now, due/thx to Covid-19)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
EU still aiming to upgrade its 2030 climate change target next month. Emission reduction target to be raised from its current -40% to -55%. reuters.com/article/us-cli…
We were at -24% in 2019, so the -55% target means a reduction of 40% between 2019 and 2030:
From an index value of 76 to 45.
So after achieving a 24% reduction in 29 years (benchmark is 1990), wel now have to 40% in 11 years.
Like most of the world, we've been dragging our feet, with grave consequences to climate. This is now what needs to be done. And it can be done.
“India has become one of the top renewable energy producers globally, with a plan to achieve 175GW by 2022 and 500GW by 2030 as part of its climate commitments.”
It’s hard to explain how cheap solar electricity has become. I’ll try though:
This means that you can drive 1,000 km on €4 ($4.75) of solar electricity! Yes, I know you need a battery and all that. But you’d need 50 liters of gasoline to drive the same distance.
OK, that still doesn’t work for US readers. Full conversion:
This means you can drive 1,000 miles for $7.60 of solar electricity! Yes, I know you need a battery and all that. But you’d need 21 gallons of gasoline to drive the same distance, at 47 mpg.
The EC’s impact assessment for its proposed 55% emission reduction target for 2030 projecte that by then, over 80% of Europe’s electricity should be generated by renewable sources.
The strategy sets an aim of 60 GW of EU offshore wind by 2030, up from 12 GW now. In my count, that 60 GW was already largely covered by national targets of member states. I’d say it’s on the conservative side.
Dutch journalist @danielverlaan took part in a meeting of EU defense ministers, after the Dutch minister tweeted a picture with the meeting ID and 5 out of 6 digits of her pincode. User name 'admin' did the job. Such digital incompetence in 2020 is unbelievable.
This was obviously a major blunder by NL minister of defense Bijleveld, but who the heck organizes a secret EU defense meeting in this way? We're 8 months into the corona crisis here.
The text has to be legally scrubbed to ensure there are no hidden irregularities; it has to be translated into 23 official languages by so-called lawyer-linguists so that the treaty means the same thing in all languages.
Capitals also have to approve a Decision on Signature and a Decision on Conclusion, allowing member states to register their own observations, principles, declarations and guidelines about how the treaty will work, what cannot be a precedent for future treaties etc.