Scientists behind ‘net zero' concept say nations are getting it wrong
Diplomats from 197 countries agreed earlier this month to new rules governing how they can buy and sell credits to neutralize carbon emissions. But while they were deliberating, some of the biggest names in climate science, who defined "net zero' in 2009, found something wrong with the math underlying those debates.
"Achieving 'net zero' no longer means what we meant by it,' said Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at University of Oxford, one of the authors of a new paper published last month in the journal Nature.
Their new analysis skewers an assumption at the heart of how countries and companies track emissions — that a ton of carbon dioxide is the same everywhere, whether it's dispersed in the atmosphere, embedded in forest wood or pulled from the air and pumped deep underground forever. That fungibility is the foundation of carbon markets. It lets a ton of CO2 in a forest stand as a fair trade for a ton put in the atmosphere.
That rule-of-thumb turns out to be a vast oversimplification that could render many well-meaning net-zero efforts meaningless.
The confusion stems from a basic fact about how the Earth's carbon cycle works: Scientists know what humanity emits into the atmosphere doesn't entirely stay in the atmosphere. Less than half of that total stays in the atmosphere on average. The rest flows into the land and ocean. To keep track of all that carbon — and how they assign responsibility for removing it — scientists keep two ledgers, one for nature and one for humanity. All the CO2 absorbed every year into land, trees and water is a service the planet offers to wash humanity's past CO2 emissions out of the air. So, these carbon drawdowns go into the nature ledger.
It's important to emphasize that land and oceans are drawing down past emissions. That means they cannot be relied on to also neutralize future emissions. This is where the revelation comes in: Countries may have been double counting.
In other words, it's redundant for countries to claim credit for CO2 for work already being done by land and oceans. Those emissions are already spoken for.
"We can't count on them (emissions) to do two jobs at once. That's the point,' Allen said. "If we're going to count on them to mop up our historical emissions ... we can't at the same time use them to offset future fossil fuel emissions.'
These differences between natural and industrial bookkeeping add up. For example, Allen said, consider a situation in which — using current carbon accounting — the world was expected to stay below 1.5 degrees Celsius. The flaws in accounting are so significant that they could be concealing another 0.5 C rise. (Allen is also chair of the advisory board of Puro.earth, a carbon registry.)
There are consequences of this accounting mismatch. The first is, it increases the urgency to stop burning fossil fuels, the authors write, or to capture and bury pollution with emerging methods. The climate that humanity grew up in relied on millions of years of coal, oil and gas sitting underground. The main solution therefore is to leave it there, capture the carbon from smokestacks and permanently bury it, or clean it out of the open air.
Returning carbon underground is "geological net zero,' and it's what the authors originally had in mind in 2009. No countries are currently pursuing it.
Separate from fossil fuel burning and carbon capturing, they write, nature must be left alone, to passively soak up history's CO2. And all that land needs to be conserved, undeveloped, to keep the carbon out of the atmosphere and pull down even more. Rich countries bear historic responsibility for ensuring that happens, they write.
As if this weren't complicated enough, there is more to the story than two ledgers, with past carbon falling into nature and future carbon captured and stashed underground. That's because there is value to human management of land that reduces atmospheric CO2. In other words, if "managed land' is proven to take down CO2 then those tons can be counted against emissions, the scientists say.
What "managed land' means is a headache to pin down. Countries have no uniform standard, and often claim all of their land as managed. In fact, so much land is claimed that their combined pledges are virtually impossible to foresee happening. They may be taking credit for emissions already in nature's ledger.
There are other reasons why storing carbon in the biosphere is inferior to geological storage, they write. As wildfires continue to show every year, there's nothing permanent about living things. In 2023, the hottest year on record, trees and land absorbed virtually no carbon. Any potential slowdown in the land and ocean carbon sponges would leave a greater amount sitting in the atmosphere, further aggravating warming.
Scrutiny of private carbon markets has led noteworthy players to exit and others to focus on cutting emissions directly. Those speed bumps mean that voluntary carbon markets are ahead of governments in thinking about the problem in some ways, according to Sassan Saatchi, co-founder and CEO of CTrees, a scientific nonprofit that wants to "track carbon in every tree on the planet.'
Saatchi called the paper "a timely warning' even as fixing the problem "is a difficult thing to ask countries to really abide by. The scientific community has to have much better recommendations.'
The paper pulls together into one place a number of concerns scientists have accumulated about land use and carbon accounting, said Pamela McElwee, a Rutgers University professor and contributor to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. That includes separating how everyone accounts for natural and industrial CO2 drawdown. Countries should be able deduct CO2 that's drawn down permanently, back into the Earth, from their gross fossil-fuel emissions. But carbon absorbed by land and oceans doesn't count as "geological net zero,' and should not be credited against emissions.
"It really needs to be apples to apples and so let's treat it that way,' she said.
It's difficult to contemplate any reforms that might take already limited funding away from forest management. "If I could be assured that we could do both those things simultaneously' — reach geological net zero and preserve natural drawdown — "that would be ideal.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
a day ago
- The Mainichi
Sunrise at Stonehenge draws druids, pagans and revelers to celebrate the summer solstice
LONDON (AP) -- As the sun rose Saturday on the longest day of the year in the Northern Hemisphere, a crowd erupted in cheers at Stonehenge where the ancient monument in southern England has clocked the summer solstice over thousands of years. The orange ball crested the northeast horizon behind the Heel Stone, the entrance to the stone circle, and shone its beam of light into the center of one of the world's most famous prehistoric monuments. The solstice is one of the few occasions each year when visitors are allowed to walk among the stones, which are otherwise fenced off. The crowd gathered before dawn at the World Heritage Site to mark the start of summer in the Northern Hemisphere, beating the heat during the U.K.'s first amber heat-health alert issued since September 2023. Temperatures later topped 33 degrees Celsius (91.4 degrees Fahrenheit) in Surrey, 80 miles (128 kilometers) east of Stonehenge, the hottest temperature recorded in the U.K. so far this year. About 25,000 sun devotees and other revelers, including druids, pagans, hippies, locals and tourists, showed up, according to English Heritage which operates the site. More than 400,000 others around the world watched a livestream. "This morning was a joyous and peaceful occasion with the most beautiful sunrise," said Richard Dewdney, head of operations at Stonehenge. "It is fantastic to see Stonehenge continuing to enchant and connect people." Stonehenge was built in stages 5,000 years ago on the flat lands of Salisbury Plain approximately 75 miles (120 kilometers) southwest of London. The unique stone circle was erected in the late Neolithic period about 2,500 B.C. Some of the so-called bluestones are known to have come from the Preseli Hills in southwest Wales, nearly 150 miles (240 kilometers) away, and the altar stone was recently discovered to have come from northern Scotland, some 460 miles (740 kilometers) away. The site's meaning has been vigorously debated. Theories range from it being a coronation place for Danish kings, a druid temple, a cult center for healing, or an astronomical computer for predicting eclipses and solar events. The most generally accepted interpretation is that it was a temple aligned with movements of the sun -- lining up perfectly with the summer and winter solstices.
Yomiuri Shimbun
4 days ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Scientists Warn That Greenhouse Gas Accumulation Is Accelerating and More Extreme Weather Will Come
AP file photo The Gibson Power Plant operates April 10, 2025, in Princeton, Ind. WASHINGTON (AP) — Humans are on track to release so much greenhouse gas in less than three years that a key threshold for limiting global warming will be nearly unavoidable, according to a study to be released Thursday. The report predicts that society will have emitted enough carbon dioxide by early 2028 that crossing an important long-term temperature boundary will be more likely than not. The scientists calculate that by that point there will be enough of the heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere to create a 50-50 chance or greater that the world will be locked in to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of long-term warming since preindustrial times. That level of gas accumulation, which comes from the burning of fuels like gasoline, oil and coal, is sooner than the same group of 60 international scientists calculated in a study last year. 'Things aren't just getting worse. They're getting worse faster,' said study co-author Zeke Hausfather of the tech firm Stripe and the climate monitoring group Berkeley Earth. 'We're actively moving in the wrong direction in a critical period of time that we would need to meet our most ambitious climate goals. Some reports, there's a silver lining. I don't think there really is one in this one.' That 1.5 goal, first set in the 2015 Paris agreement, has been a cornerstone of international efforts to curb worsening climate change. Scientists say crossing that limit would mean worse heat waves and droughts, bigger storms and sea-level rise that could imperil small island nations. Over the last 150 years, scientists have established a direct correlation between the release of certain levels of carbon dioxide, along with other greenhouse gases like methane, and specific increases in global temperatures. In Thursday's Indicators of Global Climate Change report, researchers calculated that society can spew only 143 billion more tons (130 billion metric tons) of carbon dioxide before the 1.5 limit becomes technically inevitable. The world is producing 46 billion tons (42 billion metric tons) a year, so that inevitability should hit around February 2028 because the report is measured from the start of this year, the scientists wrote. The world now stands at about 1.24 degrees Celsius (2.23 degrees Fahrenheit) of long-term warming since preindustrial times, the report said. Earth's energy imbalance The report, which was published in the journal Earth System Science Data, shows that the rate of human-caused warming per decade has increased to nearly half a degree (0.27 degrees Celsius) per decade, Hausfather said. And the imbalance between the heat Earth absorbs from the sun and the amount it radiates out to space, a key climate change signal, is accelerating, the report said. 'It's quite a depressing picture unfortunately, where if you look across the indicators, we find that records are really being broken everywhere,' said lead author Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate Futures at the University of Leeds in England. 'I can't conceive of a situation where we can really avoid passing 1.5 degrees of very long-term temperature change.' The increase in emissions from fossil-fuel burning is the main driver. But reduced particle pollution, which includes soot and smog, is another factor because those particles had a cooling effect that masked even more warming from appearing, scientists said. Changes in clouds also factor in. That all shows up in Earth's energy imbalance, which is now 25% higher than it was just a decade or so ago, Forster said. Earth's energy imbalance 'is the most important measure of the amount of heat being trapped in the system,' Hausfather said. Earth keeps absorbing more and more heat than it releases. 'It is very clearly accelerating. It's worrisome,' he said. Crossing the temperature limit The planet temporarily passed the key 1.5 limit last year. The world hit 1.52 degrees Celsius (2.74 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming since preindustrial times for an entire year in 2024, but the Paris threshold is meant to be measured over a longer period, usually considered 20 years. Still, the globe could reach that long-term threshold in the next few years even if individual years haven't consistently hit that mark, because of how the Earth's carbon cycle works. That 1.5 is 'a clear limit, a political limit for which countries have decided that beyond which the impact of climate change would be unacceptable to their societies,' said study co-author Joeri Rogelj, a climate scientist at Imperial College London. The mark is so important because once it is crossed, many small island nations could eventually disappear because of sea level rise, and scientific evidence shows that the impacts become particularly extreme beyond that level, especially hurting poor and vulnerable populations, he said. He added that efforts to curb emissions and the impacts of climate change must continue even if the 1.5 degree threshold is exceeded. Crossing the threshold 'means increasingly more frequent and severe climate extremes of the type we are now seeing all too often in the U.S. and around the world — unprecedented heat waves, extreme hot drought, extreme rainfall events, and bigger storms,' said University of Michigan environment school dean Jonathan Overpeck, who wasn't part of the study. Andrew Dessler, a Texas A&M University climate scientist who wasn't part of the study, said the 1.5 goal was aspirational and not realistic, so people shouldn't focus on that particular threshold. 'Missing it does not mean the end of the world,' Dessler said in an email, though he agreed that 'each tenth of a degree of warming will bring increasingly worse impacts.'
Japan Today
11-06-2025
- Japan Today
May was world's second-hottest on record, EU scientists say
A woman sunbathes at Retiro Park in Madrid, Spain, on May 31. By Kate Abnett The world experienced its second-warmest May since records began this year, a month in which climate change fueled a record-breaking heatwave in Greenland, scientists said on Wednesday. Last month was Earth's second-warmest May on record - exceeded only by May 2024 - rounding out the northern hemisphere's second-hottest March-May spring on record, the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said in a monthly bulletin. Global surface temperatures last month averaged 1.4 degrees Celsius higher than in the 1850-1900 pre-industrial period, when humans began burning fossil fuels on an industrial scale, C3S said. That broke a run of extraordinary heat, in which 21 of the last 22 months had an average global temperature exceeding 1.5C above pre-industrial times - although scientists warned this break was unlikely to last. "Whilst this may offer a brief respite for the planet, we do expect the 1.5C threshold to be exceeded again in the near future due to the continued warming of the climate system," said C3S director Carlo Buontempo. The main cause of climate change is greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels. Last year was the planet's hottest on record. A separate study, published by the World Weather Attribution group of climate scientists on Wednesday, found that human-caused climate change made a record-breaking heatwave in Iceland and Greenland last month about 3C hotter than it otherwise would have been - contributing to a huge additional melting of Greenland's ice sheet. "Even cold-climate countries are experiencing unprecedented temperatures," said Sarah Kew, study co-author and researcher at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute. The global threshold of 1.5C is the limit of warming which countries vowed under the Paris climate agreement to try to prevent, to avoid the worst consequences of warming. The world has not yet technically breached that target - which refers to an average global temperature of 1.5C over decades. However, some scientists have said it can no longer realistically be met, and have urged governments to cut CO2 emissions faster, to limit the overshoot and the fueling of extreme weather. C3S's records go back to 1940, and are cross-checked with global temperature records going back to 1850. © Thomson Reuters 2025.
