THREAD: Is this time different?

Over 10 years ago we had the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), we discussed recovery funds & rebounds at length.

But 10 years later, the context is different. Pre-COVID growth in global CO₂ emissions was slowing…

nature.com/articles/s4155…
2. The GFC came after 10 years of strong growth. There was a 𝐦𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 5% rebound in 2010…

Then from around 2012 emissions growth started to slow. Could this GFC recovery funds, GFC after effects, climate policy working, ...? (we don't know)

rdcu.be/bOUaB
3. Comparing 2011-2015 with 2016-2019 (global stocktake), CO₂ emissions have
* Declined in 64 countries: -0.16GtCO₂/yr
* Increased in the remainder: 0.37GtCO₂/yr
* Net increase: 0.21GtCO₂/yr

But emission reductions need to ramp up to 1-2GtCO₂/yr 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫...
4. The drop in 2020 was unprecedented, but it is a one off.

The thing with 1.5-2°C pathways, is that emission reductions of the size seen in 2020 need to happen 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 (& be done via means other than lockdowns).

We need a radical departure from the status quo.
5. Interlude: You can play around with the changes between countries (high, upper-middle, lower income) over five year periods, & see how growth rates are changing.

Growth rates are declining, but they need a 2020 like step change!

enactivescience.com/gcp/
6. What happens in 2021?

GDP is forecast to grow at 5.5%.

If CO₂/GDP improves as in the 10 year trend, that would lead to a 3% rebound.

If CO₂/GDP doesn’t improve (aka, GFC in 2010), emissions will growth 5.5%! We could wipe 2020 out in one year!

7. We expect some rebound in 2021, it is hard to avoid.

But, governments do have some control over how recovery money is spent & that is critical.
8. Even if all recovery funds went to renewables, active mobility infrastructure (walking, bikes), electric vehicles, service sectors (hit the hardest), etc, we still expect a rebound in 2021, but emissions may level out & decline soon after. There are some upfront "costs".
9. The worst outcome is to just press reset and go back to 2019, as if 2020 never happened. This would be a lost opportunity.

10. Fossil industries were hit hard in 2020.

In contrast, solar, wind, & electric vehicles did well & grew. They were resilient.

Do governments support the industries that suffered or accelerate the resilient ones?
11. It is not as if we are starting flat footed.

The @IEA had an entire report on a sustainable recovery, we are not short of policy options or ideas.

These ideas don't just appear, they have been around for years. 2020 just gave a new opportunity.

iea.org/reports/sustai…
12. The article (Brief Communication) is currently free access, so go download your copy & read nature.com/articles/s4155…

/end

• • •

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

Keep Current with Glen Peters

Glen Peters 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 @Peters_Glen

2 Mar
1. The @IEA is out with estimates of fossil energy CO₂ emissions for 2020:
* Primary energy down ~4%
* CO₂ emissions down 5.9% or 2GtCO₂
* Coal down 4%
* Oil down 8.6%

iea.org/articles/globa…
2. Our latest estimate (from yesterday) is 4.9% down. The main difference is in oil. Our method may not have picked up the drop in international bunkers. Time will tell...

3. The drop in monthly CO₂ emissions was greatest in April during the first COVID19 wave.

CO₂ emissions recovered throughout the year to end higher than levels in 2019, despite 2nd & 3rd & ... waves of COVID19.
Read 10 tweets
26 Feb
"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.

1/

bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
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
Read 6 tweets
16 Feb
THREAD: A critical look at baseline scenarios

I did a presentation for the @Tekna group on Energy, Industry, & Environment.

Presentation: slideshare.net/GlenPeters_CIC…

Video: tekna.no/fag-og-nettver…
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?

carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-…
3. Baseline scenarios assume no climate policy. Essentially, integrated assessment models (IAMs) apply no carbon price (or emission constraint).

Baseline scenarios range from emissions peaking & declining (<3°C in2100) to a high-end outlier (by choice) RCP8.5 (>5°C in 2100).
Read 25 tweets
15 Feb
IPCC: By 2050 a Brazil-sized area of new forests and/or crops may be needed to meet 1.5°C climate goal…

No, this is not the new Shell scenario, this is the IPCC SR15 Summary for Policy Makers. These are scenarios with no or limited overshoot...

ipcc.ch/sr15/

1/
Shell requires some “700m hectares of land would be required over the century, an area approaching that of Brazil”.

[Why Brazil, that is 850Mha, Australia 770Mha?]

This is a similar area to the favoured “Low Energy Demand” (LED) scenario.

carbonbrief.org/analysis-shell…
2/
Ok, people like spruiking the Low Energy Demand (LED) scenario. I am fine with that.

Despite the title, LED uses just as much land for forests as Shell.

It is a case of low energy demand AND carbon dioxide removal (not either/or). Do people get this?

nature.com/articles/s4156…
3/
Read 10 tweets
13 Feb
Fossil CO₂ emissions are likely to remain flat through 2100 leading to ~2.8°C warming if countries continue historical CO₂/GDP trends.

If countries meet emission pledges & continue reductions, then ~2.3°C.

Not RCP8.5, nor RCP1.9 or RCP2.6...

nature.com/articles/s4324…
Though, note that these sorts of methods are very sensitive to assumptions (played with this before).

They had a similar study a few years back, some thoughts here
medium.com/@Peters_Glen/w…

And here is how the method performed...
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..
Read 5 tweets
12 Feb
"If you gave the average CEO a multiple-choice question whether the Paris Agreement goal is 2°C or 1.5°C, I wonder what they would write"

Let's see... bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
According to @CFigueres chatting to @MLiebreich

The hard target in the Paris Agreement is “well below 2°C” (you have to do this). The soft target is 1.5°C (the aspiration, we would like to do this).

Listen to the whole Episode 6 liebreich.com/cleaning-up/
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)

unfccc.int/process-and-me…
Read 6 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!