"Net-zero emissions targets are vague: three ways to fix"
In a new @Nature piece we explain how countries & companies can set rigorous, fair and transparent net-zero targets.
Countries and companies around the world are declaring net-zero targets - all in their own way, often in vague terms, and mostly without considering what it means for others or where it leads to. (2/n)
The inadequacy of these individual targets lulls the world into missing the global climate goals of the @UNFCCC Paris Agreement. (3/n)
We provide 3 ways to fix these vague targets.
Net-zero targets should cover aspects related to:
- their scope
- their adequacy and fairness
- a roadmap towards net-zero and beyond
(4/n)
How can this be implemented?
In the supplementary information to the @Nature piece, we provide 10 detailed guidelines for countries and companies to follow. (end)
#NetZero targets are key benchmarks towards a world where we avoid the worst of climate change. But if defined vaguely, they leave a lot of wiggle room and can compromise achievement of the #ParisAgreement
Global warming is proportional to the total cumulative amount of CO2 we emit. Halting global warming thus means we have to stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere.
Rigorous net-zero CO2 targets achieve at least that, but also more...
#COVID19 recovery stimulus dwarfs green energy investment needs for a 1.5°C-compatible world
A thread on our new scientific analysis published in @ScienceMagazine
In the wake of the economic crisis caused by the #COVID19 pandemic, governments have pledged unprecedented amounts of economic recovery and stimulus.
We tally up all pledges and compare them to what we would need to transform the global energy system to #netzero by 2050 (2/n)
We show that the 12.2 trillion USD in pledged #COVID19 recovery is roughly double the amount of all low-carbon energy investments required globally over the next five years to put the world on track for a 1.5°C pathway. (3/n)
THREAD: In a new study in @nature we present a way to avoid the bias that burdens future generations and the risky strategies that current #climate change mitigation pathways suffer from.
Existing #ClimateChange scenarios focus on reaching a target in 2100
but by doing so weirdly suggest that the best way to achieve a #climate target is to delay action first, miss it over the next decades, and then to try to make up for it later
(2/n)
This puts put a disproportionate burden on future generations, who:
-will suffer higher #climate impacts in their lives
-are burdened with later cleaning up the mess by actively pulling #CO2 out of the air