WHAT IS TRUE NET ZERO?

From the Guardian 19/11/2024

Under the “true” net zero definition, the natural world’s vast carbon-absorbing capabilities must only be put to work to remove historical emissions so that the planet can slowly cool over time, the net zero researchers say – not to cancel out future fossil fuel pollution.
“It is a common assumption that removing carbon from the atmosphere to offset burning of fossil fuels is as effective as not burning fossil fuels in the first place. It is not. Offsetting continued fossil fuel use with carbon removal will not be effective if the removal is already being counted on as part of the natural carbon cycle and if the carbon is not permanently stored,” says Prof Kirsten Zickfeld of Canada’s Simon Fraser University, a co-author and leader of one of the 2009 net zero papers.
The intervention comes at a time of increasing concern about the Earth’s carbon sinks, one of the least understood parts of the climate change equation. During record temperatures in 2023, new research shows that the amount of carbon absorbed by the land fell dramatically due to wildfires and drought turbocharged by El Niño. Many European countries – including Finland, Germany, France, Estonia and Sweden – are experiencing large declines in their land sinks, imperilling their national climate targets in some cases. This is giving researchers cause for concern.
“Unrealistically optimistic estimates of land-based removal potential by climate models is giving us a false sense of the capacity for land to absorb our future emissions, potentially locking us into scenarios where we greatly overshoot our temperature targets – which comes with various risks and uncertainties,” says Joanne Bentley, an analyst for Zero Carbon Analytics, who has recently reviewed how nature is being used to meet the Paris agreement.
Zero Carbon Analytics found that countries are using different methods for reporting their land-based carbon removal to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, making countries appear to be further ahead of climate progress than they truly are. When harmonised, the budget for limiting warming falls by as much as 18%, they say.
“How land is classified in national climate commitments is a critical blind spot in carbon accounting. It allows vast emissions from wildfires and natural disturbances in forests to go uncounted, ultimately misrepresenting the emissions accounting process.