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?
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?
June 4, 2025 at 9:48 AM
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?
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?
Reposted by Harry Smith
I’ll says this once:
We’re spending a lot more on mitigation (e.g., renewables) than on CDR research. A lot more.
It could simultaneously be true that CDR research acts as mitigation deterrence and we need to do CDR research.
Trees will not be enough to reduce atmospheric CO₂.
We’re spending a lot more on mitigation (e.g., renewables) than on CDR research. A lot more.
It could simultaneously be true that CDR research acts as mitigation deterrence and we need to do CDR research.
Trees will not be enough to reduce atmospheric CO₂.
May 21, 2025 at 1:18 PM
I’ll says this once:
We’re spending a lot more on mitigation (e.g., renewables) than on CDR research. A lot more.
It could simultaneously be true that CDR research acts as mitigation deterrence and we need to do CDR research.
Trees will not be enough to reduce atmospheric CO₂.
We’re spending a lot more on mitigation (e.g., renewables) than on CDR research. A lot more.
It could simultaneously be true that CDR research acts as mitigation deterrence and we need to do CDR research.
Trees will not be enough to reduce atmospheric CO₂.
In short, net zero by 2050 is far from arbitrary and the Conservatives supported the scientific rationale underpinning net zero until late.
Now they are walking away from the cross-party consensus and their legacy of leadership on the matter.
Now they are walking away from the cross-party consensus and their legacy of leadership on the matter.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
In short, net zero by 2050 is far from arbitrary and the Conservatives supported the scientific rationale underpinning net zero until late.
Now they are walking away from the cross-party consensus and their legacy of leadership on the matter.
Now they are walking away from the cross-party consensus and their legacy of leadership on the matter.
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%.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
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%.
On whether net zero would leave us reliant on foreign interests, simply put, decarbonisation is the route to national security.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
On whether net zero would leave us reliant on foreign interests, simply put, decarbonisation is the route to national security.
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.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
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.
and that 'the UK would see approximately 2% additional growth in GDP, through the benefits from new jobs, increased economic activity, reduced fossil fuel imports and cost savings'.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
and that 'the UK would see approximately 2% additional growth in GDP, through the benefits from new jobs, increased economic activity, reduced fossil fuel imports and cost savings'.
On 2. Bowie praised in Parliament the 2023 Independent Net Zero Review, carried out by Conservative MP Chris Skidmore. This claimed that 'net zero is the economic opportunity of the 21st century'...
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
On 2. Bowie praised in Parliament the 2023 Independent Net Zero Review, carried out by Conservative MP Chris Skidmore. This claimed that 'net zero is the economic opportunity of the 21st century'...
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.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
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.
May 13, 2025 at 7:01 AM
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.