Pleased to see this paper out!

Are the values in Table 8 on the RCB correct? Subtracting a correction of 370 GtCO2 from the 83% percentile of AR6 would give -70?

Given we will move from importing fossil fuels from a handful of countries, to minerals and metals from a large number of countries, decarbonisation reduces trade risks. By some estimates, net zero reduces trade risks by 25%.

Modelling by the CCC since has confirmed that costs have got lower since Skidmore's report, and net zero likely results in net savings across the economy as early as 2042 onwards. Net zero pays off quite quickly.

The report itself was requested in 2018 by a Conservative minister, Conservative ministers spoke at the launch of the report, and lobbied for it in Parliament. Bowie previously praised the target himself in the past.

On 1. the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), led then by Conservative peer, Lord Deben, published in 2019 'Net Zero: The UK’s contribution to stopping global warming', a 277 page report on the proposed net zero target. Around 111 pages of the report are dedicated to explaining the science behind it.

Andrew Bowie MP, the Shadow Energy Minister, quoted in today's Guardian, claims:

1. 'There’s no scientific rationale for choosing 2050 as the point to which we should reach net zero', that Theresa May's 2019 net zero target was 'arbitrary', ❌

Question about overshoot: Can C2 scenarios in AR6 be used to imply a limit on peak warming in the case of overshooting 1.5°C?

If so, this implies only an overshoot of 0.1 - 0.2°C?

@chrisbataille.bsky.social / @jeffrissman.bsky.social

Looking to update the figures below!

Understand the split is part based WEO energy balances? Any advice on how to reproduce given IEA's output is now behind a paywall (www.iea.org/data-and-sta...)?

Seen on LinkedIn from a 'sustainability thought leader'.

35mm film of the Helston Estuary, Cornwall, Southwest UK.