COP28 & The Climate Reality

?For a while, I was reluctant to write something about COP28. Although some analysts have considered some progress, I evaluate it as a?fiasco, an actual demonstration that the?Business as Usual,?or?Old Deal, will continue to prevail.

?

The lack of coherence in the speeches was almost unanimous, to the point that until the Brazilian government - represented by Lula, received the Fossil of the Day Award.

?

The "Fossil of the Day Award" is granted to the legislation, country, or politician that made little progress or did not act constructively about environmental and climate issues.

?

This award is organized by non-governmental organizations and is granted based on a series of criteria, such as a lack of action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, blockage of negotiations, or proposals against the objectives of the global climate agreement.

?

The Fossil of the Day Award aims to draw attention to environmental issues and pressure countries and politicians to take more concrete and practical measures regarding the fight against climate change. Generally, the award is granted symbolically, using the irony to highlight the lack of commitment of certain actors to the environment.

?

Two reasons led President Lula to receive this symbolic but significant trophy:

?

1. The commitment to approve oil exploration blocks at the mouth of the Amazon River;

2. Accept the invitation to enter the OPEC+group precisely during COP! Has no one had the decency and strategic vision to at least warn you about the possible consequences of this movement at that time?

?

In one of the blocks, FZA-M-59, which covers the coast of Amapá, any spill has a potential impact in eight countries.

?

Anyway ... Let's look at the main facts.

?

We have reached a hazardous level of carbon concentration in the atmosphere because even if net CO2eq emissions reach zero (balance between what is emitted and what is captured), the central objective established by the Paris Agreement, it will not happen overnight to the day we will see results in reducing this concentration.

?

We realized this during the COVID-19 pandemic.

During this period, air quality improved significantly in several cities worldwide. Still, the CO2eq concentration measurements remained the same.

It takes time for a process lasting millions of years and whose reserve is gigantic to take effect.

Below is a graph that makes the evolution pattern of CO2eq clear.

Source: Earth's CO2 Home Page. https://www.co2.earth/

Specifically, we know that we must pursue a concentration of 350-380 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere. This number would reflect the negative net balance of CO2eq; we would have achieved the capacity to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than is emitted by human activities.

?

Reaching this concentration level will require an enormous collective effort, as we must present a negative balance for decades before we measure any reduction in these values.

?

Studies indicate, just as a parameter, that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was 280 ppm at pre-industrial levels. From the industrial revolution and the growing demand for energy to meet human activities driven by the burning of fossil fuels, we began to release more, much more, than the capacity to remove and incorporate carbon into biomass.

?

But in terms of emissions, what does it mean to have and maintain 350-380 ppm in the atmosphere? Today, the Biosphere, in its incorporation processes into the construction of organic matter, can capture the equivalent of 2.6 GTon? (billions of Tons) of CO2 per year. This is the current limit that we have to pursue.

?

But how much do we actually release into the atmosphere annually?

?

We launched something around 53.5 GTon per year. From the Paris Agreement - 2015 until COP28, little to practically nothing was done to achieve zero carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (CO2eq) by 2050. In principle, the few actions taken to reduce CO2eq emissions from human activities by global leaders today reach a level of just 2% reduction.

Under the Paris Agreement, emission reduction targets until 2050 were generally established to achieve this objective without specific targets for each country.

?

However, signatory nations would have to set their own targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

?

Each country should submit its emissions reduction targets every five years, with a global review process to assess progress and the need to increase targets. Emissions reduction targets by 2050 would be determined collectively by countries, taking into account common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, that is, considering the different conditions and capabilities of each nation to reduce their emissions.

?

It is essential to highlight that countries' goals and commitments to the Paris Agreement are constantly being reviewed and updated. Discussions on specific targets for reducing emissions by 2050 continue to be part of international negotiations on climate change.

?

Therefore, based on the last COP and thinking about the challenges that the planet needs to achieve by 2050, in 2030, we would have to reach something around a 40% reduction in 2035 to 65% and achieve a 100% reduction in 2050 so as not to exceed 2.0oC, with the effort not to exceed 1.5oC of the global average temperature recorded before the industrial revolution.

?

I need to see how such milestones can be achieved at our current rate. The COPs have proven to be an economic event with little effective action on the climate crisis.

?

Several cities are fighting to host such an event, and those included in the program celebrate the expected increase in revenue in their respective economy.

?

This past year, 2023, and under the effect of El Ni?o, we will have the hottest year on the planet. But we shouldn't blame temperature extremes on El Ni?o. The five hottest years on record are precisely in the last five years.

?

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO), a United Nations climate body, announced this Friday, 01/12/24, that the global average temperature was 1.45 ± 0.12 °C above pre-industrial levels (check the official report release at https://wmo.int/media/news/wmo-confirms-2023-smashes-global-temperature-record ). Only in November/2023, the hottest November in the entire historical series, the average recorded was 1.69oC.

?

Even with the forecast for the end of El Ni?o and the emergence of the opposite phenomenon - La Ni?a, which is the cooling of the waters of the Pacific, from the second half of 2024 onwards, it is still expected that 2024 will be warmer than 2023.

The consequence is clear: more extreme weather events worldwide.

?

Below is one of the graphs generated by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which records and monitors global temperature anomalies.

My certainty that governments present a beautiful, sustainable speech, but in the end, they act under the economic baton is the discrepancy in public subsidies and decrees that encourage the exploration of fossil fuels and projects that support this chain that generates financial resources, jobs, and greenhouse gases - GHG.

?

In the world, and in this sector, we have subsidies and incentives of around USD7 trillion, around 7.1% of global GDP, according to an International Monetary Fund – IMF, report published on 08/24/2023.

?

See the graph from this report below:

The same report shows that the elimination of explicit subsidies, plus the imposition of a corrective tax, like what has already been discussed in many COPs, such as the carbon tax, would cause a re-accommodation in the price of these derivatives sufficient to reduce the CO2eq emissions around 43% by 2030, i.e., the recommended/suggested level to limit the increase in global average temperature to 1.5oC - 2.0oC, based on pre-industrial limits. Therefore, forgive me, parliament representatives, legislators, ministers, and world governments; what is missing is solely and exclusively the attitude and courage to be a global leader and to be remembered and immortalized in world history.

?

I unfortunately consider the World Climate Conferences a true example of dystopia.

?

The list of countries that contribute the most to fossil fuel subsidies are, in absolute terms, China, the United States, Russia, the European Union, and India.

?

Do you understand the reason for dystopia?

?

Furthermore, with just this attitude - carbon tax, the world GDP would grow by 3.6%, and we would avoid more than 2 million deaths per year, directly and exclusively due to air pollution.

?

The report can be read and downloaded directly from the International Monetary Fund - IMF Portal via the link: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2023/08/22/IMF-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Data-2023-Update-537281 . ?

For this reason, if we want to see the necessary changes, they will come from civil society, mainly companies involved in concrete ESG actions.

?

To take a step in this direction, is critical to understand how carbon emissions are distributed globally across sectors of the economy.

?

Through the Our World in Data portal - we have the following stratification of this information (2020 values):

It is important to note that the aviation and maritime segments are not in the global transport sector, which gathers the impact of total emissions from land transport, the second sector that emits the most CO2eq, and, indeed, is the segment that most developed, applied and incorporated low carbon solutions into the market.

?

In absolute values, in billions of tons (GTons) of CO2eq, we have the following breakdown figures:

In another graph released by the same global data source, we have the percentage of emissions by each sector.

Based on this data, the aviation and maritime segment, in 2020, was one of those that emitted the least carbon. Air transport alone is responsible for 2.0% of CO2eq emissions, but that doesn't mean they stop working on new technologies and innovations contributing to GHG reductions. SAF - Sustainable Aviation Fuel, is a fuel generated from various organic wastes, see the list below, and can be mixed in a proportion of 50% with aviation fuel, largely aviation kerosene, without requiring any change in the aircraft turbines.

Its use can reach an 85% reduction in CO2eq emissions, which, among other gases, drastically reduces the emissions of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, which, in addition to also contributing to global warming, are incredibly harmful to public health.

As it is cleaner, the SAF's chemical transformation into energy for the jets is much more efficient, delivering outstanding performance to the aircraft.

?

SAF can be produced from the following organic materials:

? Forest residues, such as wood waste and energy crops, including fast-growing plants and algae;

? Corn grain;

? Oilseeds and other fats, oils and greases;

? Agricultural waste;

? Slurry and other liquids generated from landfills; It is

? Wet waste such as manure and wastewater treatment sludge.

?

The opportunities for investors are excellent. In 2020, the global SAF market, valued at USD72.1 million, has grown at an annual rate of more than 50%, projecting for 2030 a market of USD6 billion.

?

Why doesn't this transition happen more quickly? Simply because there are no incentives, subsidies, or interest from governments to increase SAF production.

?

There is no regular production and, at this moment, more stock is needed for a change, even with the airlines' appeal.

?

Lufthansa, which already uses SAF on some routes, if it wanted to use SAF on all of its flights, the worldwide stock would only last for a week.

?

Still talking about aviation fuel, green hydrogen, which is already a possibility, still needs some essential steps to become a reality for use in aviation, but significant innovations come from this segment.

?

In this sense, research involving alternative and more efficient methods than the traditional one, which concentrates the process on the electrolysis of water and which requires a tremendous amount of energy, is advancing the production of liquid aviation fuels from direct solar radiation. Development research is highly advanced in the European Union, where consortia, industries, and companies already have viable prototypes and launch targets for these products.

?

We cite the case of Synhelium - https://synhelion.com/ , whose objective is to produce green liquid fuels for the transport sector, primarily in aviation.

?

In this case, Synhelion uses solar energy to convert CO2 and water into carbon-neutral solar fuels, the synthetic fuel cell.

?

And how does this work? Solar radiation is reflected in a concentrated form by mirrors and converted into heat at very high temperatures. The heat generated is directed to the thermochemical reactor, which produces synthetic gas, a mixture of H2O and CO2, captured directly from the air.

This gas is then processed by standard technology to change state, i.e., from gas to liquid, and thus transformed into synthetic aviation fuels - kerosene, gasoline, or diesel.

Notably, the emissions balance is zero.

?Excess heat from the entire process is saved in thermal energy storage to enable continuous 24/7 operation.

https://youtube.com/@Synhelion?si=Qd8I_aDPEK9MezBz

Another major innovation and reality concern a film developed by Lufthansa's technological unit with BASF, which imitates shark skin. This is the Aeroshark product.

Its application has the potential to save fuel close to 3%. Today, on the points applied to its long-haul flight aircraft have saved 1.1% in fuel consumption.

?What I mean by this is that initiatives are underway by civil society. However, there still needs to be more global representation. Taking the fundamental pillars of Exponential Organizations - ExO, the only products or solutions that will prosper and survive the New Deal market must fulfill or deliver three principles: Massive - Transformative - Purpose.

?

The data shows that the technological advances already achieved did not reach the market at the necessary speed due to a lack of government support and discrepant subsidies for fossil sources.

?

Our focus needs to adjust and pursue the following technological themes if we want to avoid Climate Chaos and accelerate the energy transition, stimulating the growth and maturation of a Green Economy:

?

1. Green Hydrogen

2. High-capacity energy storage batteries, capable of lasting a full season and capable of connecting to the grid

3. Zero-Carbon Fuel Cell

4. State-of-the-art Bio Fuels

5. Green cement (Zero-Carbon)

6. Green Steel (Zero-Carbon)

7. Zero-Carbon Agribusiness Products

8. Zero-Carbon Fertilizers

9. Next Generation Nuclear Fission

10. Nuclear Fusion

11. Carbon capture, direct and punctual

12. Underground Electrical Network

13. Geothermal Energy

14. Production of flood and drought-tolerant crops

15. Zero-Carbon Refrigerant Gases replacing Fluorine Gases used in air conditioners

16. Development of zero-carbon alternatives to the use of Palm Oil

If we maintain the focus on research and technological development above, if governments adjust fiscal mechanisms, gradually eliminate subsidies for carbon-positive projects, impose a carbon tax, and create a carbon credit currency – Carbon Coin, based on the amount of carbon sequestered/captured, by proportionally increasing the subsidy for carbon neutral or negative products and businesses, we will undoubtedly slow down the increase in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, until its stabilization and the beginning of its reduction.

?

I say again, the change we need to see in the entire world is inside each one of us.

?

Jo?o Gabriel Diniz??

https://www.dhirubhai.net/in/jgdinizbr/