Net Zero: Myth or Reality?

The concept of net zero greenhouse gas emissions was first popularised by the Paris Agreement, a landmark deal that was agreed at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) to limit the impact of greenhouse gas emissions. At the watershed meeting, nearly 200 countries agreed “to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century.” In other words, hit net zero emissions by around mid-century.

Global net zero emissions, or simply net zero, is a state in which human-caused emissions are balanced by human-caused carbon dioxide removals over a specified time period.

Net Zero is where EMISSIONS=REMOVALS.

To understand the concept better, we'll divide this edition into Past, Present and Future to highlight the importance of each phase on marching towards Net Zero.

PAST

In discussions on climate change, we tend to focus on carbon dioxide (CO2) – the most dominant greenhouse gas produced by the burning of fossil fuels, industrial production, and land use change. But CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas that is driving global climate change. There are a number of others – methane, nitrous oxide, and trace gases such as the group of 'F-gases' – which have contributed a significant amount of warming to date.

Here we look at total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across the world,

The exponential rise of GHG emissions post the industrialization era is clearly highlighted in the above graph. The rise is alarming with no signs of halt or reverse except a minor dip during the pandemic.

In 2023, the global population surpassed 8 billion. With 1 billion people projected to be added to our human ranks by 2040 and an additional 1 billion more by 2060, demographic trends and variables play an important role in understanding and confronting the world’s climate crisis. Population growth, along with increasing consumption, tends to increase emissions of climate-changing greenhouse gases. Rapid population growth worsens the impacts of climate change by straining resources. It also exposes more people to climate-related risks.

There has been a reluctance to integrate discussions of population into climate education and advocacy. Yet climate change is tightly linked to population growth. For example, the United States represents just over 4% of the global population but accounts for 17% of the world’s energy use. Per person carbon emissions in the U.S. are among the highest in the world. People living in the United States, Australia, and Canada have carbon footprints close to 200 times larger than people in some of the poorest and fastest-growing countries in sub-Saharan Africa, such as Chad, Niger, and the Central African Republic.

Historical Emissions

Historical Emissions refer to the cumulative emissions a country produced until today since the dawn of industrialization in 1750. Historical emissions make it impossible to compare each country's overall contribution to global climate change.

For example, historical emissions of UK (10% of global historical emissions) are greater than China's (7%). However, China's current share of global GHG emissions (25%) far outweighs that of UK's 1%.

To date, only Tuvalu, Burundi and Paraguay have included historical emissions in their climate pledges.

When ranked in terms of annual emissions, countries like China, India rank among the top 5 largest emitters. China is now world's largest emitter (25.2% of total global emissions in 2021) followed by USA (12.1%) and India (7%).

We have 11x more fossil fuel reserves in the ground than we can afford to burn.

PRESENT

We currently release twice the GHG emissions the Earth can absorb. At the same time, the ability of natural ecosystems and oceans to capture and store carbon is being diminished by human activity. The result is that between 20-30 gigatons of excess GHG emissions are accumulating each year that cannot be absorbed by natural processes.

Humanity has a global carbon budget and the aim of the Net Zero laws and targets is to keep humanity within that budget. The IPCC concludes that global temperature rise must be kept to under 1.5 degree C of warming to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Global average temperature rise has already exceeded 1 degree C.

Carbon Budget refers to the amount of CO2 emissions (or CO2 equivalent) humanity can release while keeping the global temperature increase within a given range.

As per the above research, just 6 years is the remaining time period on current trends, for 1.5 degree C target to be breached.

WHERE WE STAND

Limiting warming to 1.5 and 2 degree C involves deep, rapid and in most cases immediate GHG reductions across all sectors. As per IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report, implemented policies result in projected emissions that lead to warming of 3.2 degree C, with a range of 2.2 and 3.5 degree C (medium confidence).

WHERE ARE THE EMISSIONS COMING FROM?

The energy sector is the largest source with 74.4% contribution to global GHG emissions, consisting of Electricity & Heat 31.8%, Buildings 6.2%, Manufacturing & Construction 12.7%, Transportation 14.3%, International Bunker 2.6% and Fugitive emissions 6.8%.

In the 21st century, the earth's climate and its energy policy interact and their relationship is studied and governed by a variety of national and international institutions.

The relationships between energy-resource depletion, climate change, health resources and the environment, and the effects that they have on each other, have been subject to numerous scientific studies and research efforts. As a result, a majority of governments see climate and energy as two of the most important policy goals of the twenty first century

The correlation between climate and energy rests on known causal relationships between human population growth, rising energy consumption and land use and the resulting greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

The energy sector is responsible for?75%?of global greenhouse gas emissions, making decarbonization in the sector an important opportunity to fight climate change. Moving the energy system away from fossil fuels — combined with increasing investment in and deploying renewable energy — is ?critical to achieving a low-carbon future.?

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EMISSIONS?

When we think about carbon footprints, we usually think about measuring discrete actions, like driving a new car, taking a flight or eating a meat-heavy diet. The connection between consumer choices, lifestyle consumption patterns and emissions has been a point of interest for decades, but there’s comparatively little research focused on the emissions that arise from producing income itself.

Just 15 days of income generation for the top 0.1 percent of wealthy households in the United States creates as much carbon pollution as the income earned by the poorest 10 percent of the population over the course of a lifetime.

In 2010, the most affluent 10% of households emitted 34% of global CO2, while the 50% of the global population in lower income brackets accounted for just 15%. By 2015, the richest 10% were responsible for 49% of emissions against 7% produced by the poorest half of the world’s population.

Price mechanisms may force low-income households to cut back consumption to dangerous levels. Moreover, high consumption and large carbon footprints are spatially concentrated in high-income cities and suburbs – while their negative effects, such as air pollution, typically spill over into less affluent areas.

FUTURE

The global energy mix is shifting from fossil fuels to renewables. There are abundant examples of both public and private organizations working hard to decarbonize the economy. As this energy transformation or “Green Deal” gains momentum, new ecosystems are forming and new technologies are emerging. These developments are helping to grow renewables, develop new energy carriers, improve energy efficiency, reduce emissions and create new markets for carbon and other by-products as part of an increasingly circular economy. At the same time many of these commonly pursued steps to decarbonization, such as increased electrification, wide-scale use of renewable energy and intensifying energy efficiency measures pose unique challenges.

The above graph is released by IEA, which shows 3 scenarios and their electricity generation mix respectively. The 3 scenarios namely Stated policy(STEPS), Announced Pledges(APS) and Net Zero Emission(NZE) propose different electricity mix that has to be followed to reach the desired objectives.

With the STEPS scenario requiring a minimum change in the mix, the NZE scenario proposes a drastic shift from the current trend.

The final goal is to reach net zero by 2050 for most countries, which requires rapid, deep and immediate actions in terms of emission reductions. The above graph clearly depicts that a tectonic shift is required to change the trajectory that the world is currently following. The shift is super ambitious keeping in mind the 1.5 degree C target.

Just this year we’ve seen the increasingly devastating effects of climate change—human tragedy and economic upheaval with typhoons in Bangladesh, unprecedented floods in Pakistan, heatwaves in Europe, wildfires in North America, dry rivers in China, and droughts in Africa.

This will only get worse if we fail to act.

If global warming continues, scientists predict even more devastating disasters and long-term disruption to weather patterns that would destroy lives and livelihoods and upend societies. Mass migration could follow. And, failure to get emissions on the right trajectory by 2030 may lock global warming above 2 degrees Celsius and risk catastrophic tipping points—where climate change becomes self-perpetuating.

If we act now, not only can we avoid the worst, but we can also choose a better future. Done right, the green transformation will deliver a cleaner planet, with less pollution, more resilient economies, and healthier people.

Getting there requires action on three fronts: steadfast policies to reach net zero by 2050, strong measures to adapt to the global warming that’s already locked in, and staunch financial support to help vulnerable countries pay for these efforts.

Here, I would like to conclude this edition and would like to hear your thoughts on the same.

Let us learn and grow together!