"The reason we’re net zero is that we have this enormous renewables business ... all the avoided emissions that come with that" compensate for emissions in other investments.
Houston, we have a problem... This from climate finance champion Carney.
2. "Most large asset managers have a renewable energy fund. Simply having one does not make you net zero. ... Such commitments are not credible & represent greenwashing" @bencaldecott
3. "It’s virtually impossible for a company to be a net-zero company now" @FarsanAlexander
"It won’t matter how many solar panels one installs if we don’t reduce actual CO₂ emissions." @UlfErlandsson
4. This is perhaps a problem with a company / individual focus for net-zero.
In the short-term, it is virtually impossible to be true net-zero. It is more important that companies have a credible pathway to true net-zero.
5. If a company or individual says to me they are net-zero I know it is complete crap. I wish our climate leaders would say the same. Demonstrate the climate challenge, not the art of the greenwash.
2. There are a range of scenarios spanning the high-end (>5°C in 2100) to the low-end (<1.5°C in 2100). This shows the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (one of many scenario intercomparisons).
Out of these scenarios, which ones should be used for analysis?
Here is a Kaya based projection we did 7 years ago. If a country continues along historical trends, the method is ok. If the country changes trends, the method is useless. See China. We were way out.
Though, for the EU, we will much better than the other study..
The Paris Agreement asked IPCC do to a Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5C. This was done in the Paris Agreement "decision" text. This was why there was a 1.5°C report (interestingly not a "well below 2°C" report)
2. Why not put praise on the earlier Paris Agreement, which has a legal form & is the text countries agree to adhere too?
🤔 Perhaps many just do not know about the Paris Agreement (or was it Accord?), or confuse IPCC SR15 and Paris?
3. Scientists have been on net-zero for years. So have policy makers. The Paris Agreement did not happen in a vacuum, nor IPCC SR15, it built on the work over years, even decades.
IPCC SR15 is an assessment of the literature, not new science. Or is it?