Next week, representatives of government will be in Glasgow to attend the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26). This is the latest meeting in a series of increasingly hectic meetings that humanity has been attending as it runs out of time for drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Everyone agrees carbon is harmful. Everyone agrees that carbon dioxide is bad. It can last up to 1,000 years in the atmosphere. The goal of the world is to keep global temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. This is the Paris Climate Agreement boundary.
However, nations are not united in their efforts to get there. To stop climate change from becoming worse, we need to reduce carbon emissions and find ways of removing them from the atmosphere. These are some options that delegates may be considering as COP26 goes on.
The Problem with Net Zero
Net-zero emissions is a tricky little concept. If you emit any carbon into the atmosphere you must also remove the same amount. India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced Monday at COP26 that India would achieve this goal by 2070. In a similar announcement earlier this year, President Joe Biden stated that the United States would achieve the same goal by 2050. This is a goal also set out by the UK.
Although it is a popular idea, it is based on only achieving the minimum. The main reason that we will likely see a lot more discussion at COP26 and going forward is because the world continues to lip service to the idea to limit warming to one-and-a-half degrees, according to Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist who is also the director of the Breakthrough Institute's climate and energy advocacy group.
Net zero doesn't necessarily mean these countries will stop emitting greenhouse gases by the target dates. They won't be adding any greenhouse gases to the atmosphere by that time. It is possible for Net-zero to be used as a ploy, since it allows countries to continue polluting while also capturing the pollution. It's like trying to drain the bathtub while the tap is still on full blast.
This might encourage countries to continue releasing greenhouse gases as long as they are also sequestering them. A country could make a huge deal about moving its carbon-intensive industries, such as steel production offshore, then disavow all emissions and just import the materials. Corporates are not incentivised to reduce their emissions if it is possible to buy carbon credits. Angela Anderson, director for industrial innovation and carbon reduction at the non-profit World Resources Institute, said that it is a reasonable concern. She also warned against the temptation, and perhaps the desire, of some fossil fuel industry interests to reduce their emissions in order to maintain their business plans.
