Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is very much in the news right now, so I think it's time to review what the @IPCC_CH says about CDR in SR 1.5.

First: they say that CDR "deployed at scale" is speculative or "unproven"and relying on it to halt warming at 1.5C is a "major risk."👇

🧵
You'll often hear energy experts and the people who listen to them say that "we need CDR," as if this were a scientific fact about the carbon system or a level of emissions to which we are already locked in.

This is not true.

2/n
If we halted all GHG pollution within the next year or two, say, we would not need CDR to halt warming at 1.5C.

3/n
Saying we "need" CDR is an ideological judgement call about the political feasibility of deep decarbonization and our willingness to temporarily halt activities that cannot yet be decarbonized.

4/n
Political feasibility may well be as hard a constraint as physics, that's certainly possible, but let's at least be clear about what we're doing when we say we "need" CDR: turning politics into scientific destiny.

5/n
OK, back to the IPCC.

This is why SR 1.5 explains that the models use CDR "to neutralize emissions from sources for which no mitigation measures have been identified."

The models assume that those activities will continue despite global warming.

6/n
But let's look at the second part of that sentence, that the models include CDR "to achieve net negative emissions to return global warming to 1.5°C following a peak."

Why would the IAMs model decarbonization in this way?

7/n
They model decarbonization in this way because their job is to model the most "cost-effective" pathways to a particular temperature target, not because there is some physical reason that we need CDR to save ourselves from climate breakdown.

8/n
Now, you could argue about the cost assumptions that go into these models, but here let's just concede that it will be better for the economy to keep emitting now and deploy "unproven" CDR at scale later.

The point is that CDR is about *the economy* & not about the planet.

9/n
Ok, let's just quote some more.

"The longer the delay in reducing CO2 emissions towards zero, the larger the likelihood of exceeding 1.5°C, and the heavier the implied reliance on net negative emissions after mid-century to return warming to 1.5°C (high confidence)."

10/n
"The faster reduction of net CO2 emissions in 1.5°C compared to 2°C pathways is predominantly achieved by measures that result in less CO2 being produced and emitted."

11/n
Also important to note that even *if* we do manage to develop the tech to work at scale, people may not want huge machines sucking CO2 out of the air everywhere—& we may not be able to build the infrastructure (big again as the fossil fuel system itself) fast enough in any case👇
And, finally, and probably most importantly, we don't even know if CDR is going to fucking work.

We don't know if we can overshoot 1.5C and then return to a lower temperature using CDR.

13/n
So, in short, any time you hear or read someone say that we "need" CDR (or discuss "net zero" without hearing them define "net" or acknowledge all these issues) your ideological spidey sense should start tingling.

14/n
Screenshots taken from here, Chapter 2 of SR 1.5.

/fin

• • •

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

Keep Current with Dr. Genevieve Guenther

Dr. Genevieve Guenther 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 @DoctorVive

21 Dec 20
Now that @JoeBiden has made #ClimateAction his priority, the political press is going to spend the next few months asking his administration "tough questions" along two separate, quasi-denialist lines.

Let's take a look...

[thread]
First, they're going ask how his climate plan will make life tougher for "ordinary Americans." They're going to ask whether families are going to be forced to "sacrifice"—or they're going to ask what "enforcement mechanisms" the administration is going to put in place.

2/n
These sorts of questions obviously pick up on the right-wing talking point that Democrats want to outlaw hamburgers and forbid you from flying to see Grandma for the holidays.

3/n
Read 22 tweets
4 Dec 20
This is a LONG thread composed of screenshots of the entire first chapter of Kim Stanley Robinson's novel *The Ministry for the Future*.

Please read it all.

Don't look away.

#climatechange #ClimateAction #ClimateEmergency

—————————

"It was getting hotter."

1/n
"Here there was no escaping it."

2/n
"All over town the stressed hum of windowbox air conditioner fans buzzed like giant mosquitos."

3/n
Read 42 tweets
9 Nov 20
If this is how @SpeakerPelosi and @TheDemocrats are going to message climate change—"framed" or *hidden behind marginal issues like "habitat" or "clean air, clean water" or even "health" or "morals"—we are going to get KILLED once the fight begins.

THREAD
I know these "frames" poll well in focus groups. But in the field they are ineffective, as experience has shown time and time again.

They are ineffective because they are *decontextualized*. They fail to account for political opposition and the effects of disinformation.

2/n
Even selling climate action as a jobs creator, while powerful in political campaigns (which are largely won and lost on promises of increasing prosperity), will fail once the policy fight begins.

Why?

Again, because it fails to account for opposition and disinformation.

3/n
Read 17 tweets
23 Sep 20
Guys, this is really, really bad. Our message is not getting through.

In a new @YaleClimateComm @ClimateNexus poll, #ClimateChange came in 13th out of 18 issues "most important" to respondents' votes in November.

People STILL don't understand the urgency.

1/n
If we are not half-way to zero emissions in the next ten years, we are fucked. (Not doomed, of course, but fucked—important distinction.)

Half-way to 0 emissions means we must start NOW.

This is the most consequential election in human history due to THE #CLIMATECRISIS.

2/n
Everyone who follows me on Twitter knows this, of course.

But voters still don't.

We are failing.

3/n
Read 10 tweets
18 Sep 20
📢BIG NEWS📢

@EndClimtSilence has teamed up with @DataProgress to poll voters about their attitudes to climate media coverage.

Did previous findings replicate?

✨YES✨

💥Americans want to hear about the #ClimateCrisis in the broadcast news!💥

🧵 Image
💥A MAJORITY OF VOTERS FOLLOW CLIMATE CHANGE CLOSELY IN THE NEWS💥

(2) Image
💥A MAJORITY OF VOTERS THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE NEWS MEDIA TO CONNECT CLIMATE CHANGE AND EXTRME WEATHER EVENTS💥

(3) Image
Read 12 tweets
31 Jul 20
"If this president makes good on his threats to undermine [the] election...many of us will be called to pour into the streets and face the brutality of Trump’s goons. This thought makes me feel ground down and frightened, not brave and defiant."

nytimes.com/2020/07/30/opi…

1/n
"In middle age I’ve started to envy those like Lewis who are able to believe in God.

But something I take from reading about the lives of civil rights heroes is that confidence didn’t always precede action. Sometimes it was action’s result."

2/n
"The first time Lewis was arrested, 'a lifetime of absorbed taboos against any kind of trouble with the law quickened into terror.' But on the ride to jail, 'dread gave way to an exhilaration unlike any he had ever known.'"

3/n
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!