Net zero clarity

Globally, we need to rapidly reduce carbon emissions stabilise the concentration of atmospheric CO2 and prevent increasingly dangerous climatic changes. It is not possible all though, so there a balance greenhouse gas sources sinks. To achieve this goal, many countries, cities, companies have committed high-level aspiration reach Net Zero by certain date. zero implies that removals should has become central aspect climate discourse. A new report from Energy Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) on global state net targets finds that, taken together, jurisdictions with represent at least 61% emissions, 68% GDP (measured as purchasing power parity) 56% world's population. The majority these commitments were put in place just last 18 months, response UN Race campaign. Both scale existing rate increase are encouraging, but such promises be interpreted care. When examined closely, plans can hard interpret compare because definitions used often loose variable. For example, some concern others gases, or cases remains unspecified. Additionally, accounting consider direct emissions—for example airports considering buildings ground operations excluding aircraft emissions—or pledges include wider associated supply chains product use disposal. extent which rely offsetting also contentious unstated inadequately constrained. This variable quality captured ECIU only about 20% currently meet minimum set robustness criteria, “starting line” out Campaign. In recent comment, Joeri Rogelj co-authors call governments (national regional) clarify three aspects their targets: scope; how they deemed adequate fair; concrete road maps towards beyond zero. Of three, adequacy fairness perhaps most interesting. comment authors explain setting net-zero targets, countries generally assume will goals Paris agreement. However, involves assumptions what fair contribution would contribute. These ethical judgments unavoidable, remain tacit. Such judgements imply very different levels responsibility mitigation effort, see for shares approach national Jason Hickel. Sectors nations do capacities decarbonise rates progress expected. But while sectors quick argue more time, well removal and/or offsetting, yet easily fully ambitious early indeed negative commitments. Clarity transparency around involved planning needed counter propensity select criteria favour given actors particular circumstances. course, any real-world value when acted upon, high level useful, much believable if backed up near-term an implementation plan. lead Summit Glasgow press those making clear framing problem, included excluded, justified context do. We cutting. Heavy reliance particularly other warning signs real expected elsewhere. Recent done us Agreement compliance. Continuing scrutiny pressure improve reporting vital (and net-negative) meaningful terms.