Autor
Mariano Marzo
Emeritus Professor of the University of Barcelona
Five years ago, the United Nations Paris Agreement established a global warming cap "well below" 2°C, and ideally 1.5°C, with respect to pre-industrial levels. World leaders also agreed to balance greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by the second half of the century so that the sum of all GHGs emitted by human activities would be zero. As a result, an increasing number of countries, institutions and companies are announcing net-zero emission goals. However, these good intentions raise doubts.
Firstly, the plans for achieving said goals are inaccurately defined and are difficult to compare, particularly because the details underlying the "net-zero emissions" label show significant discrepancies. Thus, for example, while some plans focus exclusively on carbon dioxide, others encompass all GHGs. Furthermore, in some cases, companies consider only emissions under their direct control, and others include the emissions from their supply chains and emissions from the use or elimination of their products. And, on other occasions, the goals are not aimed at reducing emissions but rather offsetting them through different mechanisms.
Moreover, many plans overlook important issues. Should some industries achieve net-zero emissions sooner to counteract emissions from other industries more difficult to decarbonise? Is it fair to expect emerging economies to achieve net-zero emissions by the same date as industrialised countries? If special attention is not paid to such issues, there is a risk that individual achievements will not suffice to meet the collective goals of the Paris Agreement.
It could be argued that having vague and imprecise goals is always better than having none. However, what is at stake is too important to settle for mere pronouncements. It is not a question of all the actors in the fight against climate change necessarily following the same course of action, but rather, without greater clarity and specificity, the strategies for achieving net-zero emissions may not be understood, nor their actual impact evaluated.
In this context, countries and companies must inexcusably detail three aspects in their net-zero emission plans: their scope (because such plans are considered suitable and fair) and a roadmap that specifies how the goals pursued will be achieved. The next United Nations Climate Summit, which will take place in Glasgow in November, could be the best place and time to present such clarifications.
Research can bring improvements in the three aspects mentioned above. For example, concerning scope, nature-based carbon sinks can be used to eliminate or offset emissions; therefore, it is essential to have a better understanding of the risks related to the future reliability of such sinks, their potential change in role in response to climate change, as well as their social and environmental consequences. The aspect of suitability and equity requires carrying out multidisciplinary research. Natural scientists or economists should exclusively draw up the net-zero emission plans of countries and companies. This also requires the participation of social scientists, clarifying, for example, how equity concepts are applied in the case of multinational companies that encompass different countries and sectors, involving populations whose levels of development may differ widely. Regarding the requirement of precise roadmaps, the process used by the United Nations to evaluate and monitor Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) is a starting point that may be extended to include longer-term net-zero emission goals. And companies could do the same, applying standardised procedures.
The long march towards net-zero emissions has only just begun.
Article published in El Periódico.
