Turn to the nation's most objective and informative daily environmental news resource to learn how the United States and key players around the world are responding to the environmental...
By Bryce Baschuk and Eric J. Lyman
Feb. 10 — Opposition to language proposing worldwide “net-zero” greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century surfaced Feb. 10, immediately after the language was added to the draft negotiating text that will be the basis for this year's Paris global climate agreement.
The net-zero 2050 proposal, offered by Switzerland at the United Nations climate talks in Geneva, would allow countries and companies to offset greenhouse gas emissions with controversial or relatively unproven carbon reduction technologies such as capturing and storing carbon dioxide underground, “biochar” initiatives that involve absorbing greenhouse gases into burned biomass, and genetic engineering technologies.
Any plan to reduce carbon emissions to zero will require offsets. But opponents of the new language fear a direct reference such as the “net-zero” proposal would promote the use of potentially disruptive types of offsets and slow the transition away from fossil fuels by making them more viable. Environmental groups also said the inclusion of the language in the negotiation text could harm developing nations and undermine the credibility of the Paris climate accord.
A global goal of phasing out the use of fossil fuels by 2050 was first raised at the Conference of the Parties summit in Lima last December, where it was hailed as one of the main accomplishments of the talks.
Various drafts of the negotiating text and other proposals since then have referred to “climate neutrality,” “carbon neutrality,” “near zero emissions,” “zero emissions” and “decarbonization” of the world economy by 2050.
Whatever the term, the concept remained the same: Countries and companies would strive to reduce emissions as much as possible while using offsets to balance out the rest.
“The long-term goal is to re-establish the balance of greenhouse gas emissions to a level the planet can naturally absorb,” Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, told Bloomberg BNA. “That balance has been catastrophically disturbed.”
Figueres said she uses the term “climate neutrality” to refer to the 2050 goal.
The idea of advancing a “net-zero” 2050 proposal has found support among some of the world's top business leaders, according to a recent letter to Figueres.
The letter, dated Feb. 5, urged policy-makers to ensure that such a goal “becomes the foundation upon which countries build the text of the final agreement.”
“A global commitment to net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050 is what the world needs to avoid catastrophic impacts of climate change and is what governments, businesses, investors and communities need to plan and invest for the future,” the letter said.
The letter was signed by influential business leaders including Virgin Group founder Richard Branson; Huffington Post Media chair Arianna Huffington; Francois-Henri Pinault, the chief executive officer of Kering SA; Unilever Plc CEO Paul Polman; Nigerian Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala; former Tata Group Chairman Ratan Tata; and Nobel Laureate Muhammad Yunus, the founder of Grameen Bank.
Environmental groups and delegates from African countries such as Tanzania and Kenya have pushed back on the inclusion of net-zero language, saying its implementation could burden developing countries.
“If we are talking about planting more trees in Africa, that creates a problem where there is less arable land for farming,” said Augustine Bantar Njamnshi, the chairman of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance.
“Competition for the remaining arable land in Africa for food is increasing and this will only aggravate the problem,” Njamnshi said in an interview on the sidelines of the Geneva talks. “Poor people won't have enough land to grow the crops that they need to eat.”
“If these CEOs are serious about their urgency in addressing this global crisis they would not be talking about 2050,” Njamnshi said. “Their real intention is to provide more time to invest in business as usual and make profits.”
Net-zero language would ultimately fuel a land grab, said Kate Dooley a climate activist and doctoral candidate at the University of Melbourne.
“Most of the technologies they are looking at is simpler stuff like growing trees, sequestering carbon dioxide in soil, biochar, and bioenergy carbon capture and storage,” she told Bloomberg BNA. “That implies use of land—extremely large amounts of land—and it immediately raises the issue of food security.”
The idea of planting more trees to offset carbon emissions on such a large scale is “science fiction,” said Ulriikka Aarnio, a senior policy officer with the Climate Action Network. “This would require a huge amount of land.”
As for carbon capture and sequestration options, it would be very difficult to monitor polluters, Aarnio said. “You would have to have a monitor at every power plant. The viability of a net system is just not doable.”
The Swiss proposal came on the same day as the U.S. government-funded scientific report said such efforts to intervene in climate change could work, but they need to be studied and tested more before they are widely deployed.
The language will almost surely be left in the negotiating text when it is finalized at the end of the Geneva negotiations Feb. 13, according to Figueres. The text will be finalized, translated, and distributed to parties by the end of May and will act as the basis for the global climate agreement scheduled to be finalized at the Paris summit in December.
To contact the reporter on this story: Bryce Baschuk and Eric J. Lyman in Geneva at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Greg Henderson at firstname.lastname@example.org
Switzerland's net-zero proposal is available at http://bit.ly/1xVtCvW.
The business leaders' letter supporting such a policy is available at http://bteam.org/the-b-team/b-team-open-letter-calls-for-bold-climate-action-at-cop21-in-paris/.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)