Thread by @globalhlthtwit

Y'day BBC + Guardian gave two hugely different assessments of the impact on warming from #COP26Glasgow negotiations. @BBCNews reported an IEnergyA prediction of 1.8 degs. Guardian a Climate Action Tracker estimate of 2.4degs. Both are WRONG. Why? (1) theguardian.com/environment/20…

1. The IEA estimate assumes that all promises made by all countries will be fully met. This has never happened in the past. The Guardian CAT estimate of 2.4 degs is at least more realistic. (2)

2. The International Panel on Climate Change scientists always ask for a range of estimates, not a single figure.
3. Country estimates of their carbon performance are deeply flawed. washingtonpost.com/climate-enviro… (3)

4. Many sectors base their forecasts on completely unrealistic measures of 'offsetting' i.e burning fossil fuels but compensating by planting trees or buying 'carbon credits' from others. The COP negotiations need to address the problem of offsetting in 'net zero' estimates. (4)

5. On the optimistic side, big financial institutions are at COP26, and must realise the threats to their own survival and to the world economy. They ought to see the importance of keeping fossil fuels in the ground rather than relying on flaky estimates of net zero. (5)