Crucial lines on updating NDCs next year are still in. Enough to let Presidency say 1.5C is still just about alive?
Totemic lines on phasing out unabated coal and inefficient subsidies remains, but with crucial additional reference to support for a 'just transition'.
Lines on nature and methane remain, and I think look stronger than before?
There's still a placeholder on climate finance...
There is going to be a new dialogue on loss and damage - name TBC. Is there enough in the text on loss and damage or is this going to be the flashpoint for the talks today given the G77 were adamant yesterday the text was too weak.
The section on common timeframes is in square brackets, suggesting agreement not yet reached.
I may be wrong on this (it has been a long week), but the section on the crucial role of non-state actors (i.e. business, civil society, indigenous groups, etc) looks like it may be a bit stronger.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Arguably the most granular analysis to date of future economic impacts from climate change estimates we will knock 19% off anticipated incomes by 2050 even if we slash emissions. If we don't we'll knock 60% off incomes and enter an era of global austerity. businessgreen.com/news-analysis/…
This is against a baseline without climate impacts, so we would still be richer in 2050 than we are now. But development would be significanly slower and the authors reckon their estimates are conservative. Tipping points could make things far worse.
Anyone doubting the scale of these projected impacts needs to look at the headlines from the last few days alone on failing harvests and record rainfall, and honestly ask themselves if they are that implausible.
Fair play to the government, this is a good package of measures. More funding for energy efficiency, local authority-led schemes, a big boost for heat pumps, and new carbon border tariffs. This is what a transition away from fossil fuels looks like. businessgreen.com/news/4157529/n…
(They'll be furious when they find out who oversaw the previous collapse in insulation rates, etc)
Worth noting that the caveat to this hugely welcome package is there is still a very big hole where green finance schemes, EPC reform, and decent efficiency standards should be.
It’d be wrong to say it’s being underestimated, as I don’t doubt Number 10 fully comprehends how horrendously bad it is, but you could hardly make up a story more perfectly designed to achieve cut through than this concrete crisis.
We had a birthday party for one of the boys today, and every single parent in attendance brought it up completely unprompted, all with a combination of disbelief and fear it could be about to ruin their autumn.
And there’s just no counter narrative. It’s so obviously the result of incompetence and underinvestment. There’s no ‘woke’ culture war angle for the government and its outriders to work.
Four separate reports today all raising the alarm over worsening water insecurity, all of which beg the question 'if we can 'just adapt' to climate change, why aren't we?' BG+businessgreen.com/news-analysis/…
Why are those who argue we should 'just adapt' to climate change so intensely relaxed at our failure to do so?
So very strange that the 'we should just adapt' columns are only written after climate records get toppled or when concerns are raised over decarbonisation policies, and not when reports reveal parts of the UK literally nearly ran out of water last summer.
Every time I tweet something like this that is positive about net zero my mentions are now flooded with people (mostly blue ticks) telling me why its bullshit/a con/doomed to failure/a global conspiracy (thanks, Elon).
What's interesting is the 'critiques' always fall into three categories:
1. The scientific 'analysis', which continues to insist climate change isn't happening, CO2 is good for us, etc. Am still waiting for someone to put their hypothesis up for peer review and win a Nobel.
2. The cultural/political 'analysis', which recycles the populist playbook to allege net zero is some vast elite conspiracy. Details on how this conspiracy works remain somewhat hazy.
Bit of a long read on today's @RockyMtnInst report on how clean tech deployment is going exponential and as such net zero is closer than you think. BG+businessgreen.com/news-analysis/…
Now, as a cynical hack I am inclined to think this analysis is almost certainly overly optimistic. Clean tech deployment is happening faster than you think, but the idea it can keep on accelerating at the required pace feels Panglossian when there are so many obstacles. But...
... this is a serious analysis from serious people and they address a lot of the likely barriers that could put the brakes on the transition.