Scientists Behind ‘Net Zero’ Concept Say Nations Are Getting It Wrong | In a new study, high-profile climate scientists say countries are using flawed carbon accounting by relying too heavily on trees and oceans to absorb new carbon emissions.

5 comments

1. The paper is [here](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08326-8.epdf?sharing_token=85z94CvYKoShhQ9xmYqC2tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0NuMG48PKRkU4tDRMTQfFvZgnOwik-v3850eCevXpgvM3GmuUUDuhcaO5o8UgASOlHSGyySrMwu1p8WPHGGuUdMV6nhm_ZYE7Boc2aoMbPxkQ8mpcOSmAf7yomLT8-qzBnqOP84Q0bbwa5LXuzGwFGuyq9I1QiVUIuGnglQyZPN0LKyvixYHFzxyUX43wMR7RY%253D) but somewhat mangled during this stage of publication.

2. Yeah this was always going to be the problem, bad faith actors latching on to buzz phrases and concepts the Public dont understand to derail meaningful action and refocus away from genuine steps. From “Net Zero by some date way down the track” to technocratic phrasing like “climate change”, to sexy feel-good tech fixes like “Carbon captured”. Away from “reduce, reuse, sustainable economy, within our means, just transition, make the rich pay” on top of solid concrete measurable science-backed yearly sectoral targets.

3. All of the “net zero” and “carbon offset” things are complete bullshit. All of them. The same tree is counted 92 times as a carbon removal device, and then we cut down the tree anyway. There are just too many incentives to game the accounting and too many ways to do it. These will always be bullshit. Someone will just say “what if we pencil in that the ocean absorbs ten times more CO2 than it ever has before, then we’re at net zero!” and then the report goes out, “WORLD REACHES NET ZERO” and then we all die because it was bullshit.

   The only meaningful metric is “how much CO2 are humans putting into the atmosphere by their actions” and that number needs to be zero for human advanced technological civilization to have any chance of survival. Not “net zero”. Actual zero. Really we need it to be negative, as the current CO2 numbers are too high already. But actual zero would be a good start.

4. Actually neither net-zero or zero is enough – we have to bring the numbers down to at least 320-350 ppm to get the temprature stabelised below 1.5 celcius above the pre-industrial level.

5. In other words we’re more screwed than we thought we were…

Comments are closed.