Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(20,869 posts)
Thu Oct 10, 2024, 10:06 PM Oct 10

The New Republic: Whatever Happened to "Net-Zero"?

https://newrepublic.com/article/186883/bp-oil-production-emissions-net-zero
Kate Aronoff / October 8, 2024
predictable
Whatever Happened to “Net-Zero”?
Once, these sorts of corporate pledges were all the rage. Now companies are starting to admit they weren’t serious.

In 2020, BP unveiled a plan to cut oil and gas production 40 percent by 2030 as part of the company’s goal to reach “net-zero” emissions by 2050 or sooner. This February, the company announced it’d instead seek a 25 percent reduction by the end of the decade. Then, on Monday, Reuters reported that BP intends to abandon that pledge altogether and instead expand production in the Middle East and the Gulf of Mexico.

BP wasn’t alone in making such a pledge in 2020, although its version was considered more ambitious than the plans put forward by its peers. Four years on, it’s joined the pack of oil and gas producers who’ve dramatically scaled back their more concrete net-zero plans. Shell, for instance, ditched its pledge to reduce oil and gas production by 2030 last year. The company then dropped its 2035 emissions-reduction pledge entirely this past March. Leading up to the U.N. climate talks in Glasgow in 2020, COP26—held just as the world started to emerge from Covid-19 lockdowns—governments and corporations alike fell over themselves to announce shiny new plans for reaching net-zero. Those promises have mostly fallen out of fashion among the politicians and executives who once championed them. So whatever happened to net-zero? What’s replaced it, and is the world any closer to getting there?

“Net-zero” was always a pretty vague slogan. In general, it implies reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. But there are some complications: The planet-heating effects of greenhouse gases are cumulative, meaning that we’ll be feeling the impact of carbon dioxide spewed decades ago for decades to come. Every additional ton of CO2 emitted now means more warming down the line. Limiting warming along the lines laid out in the Paris climate agreement, to “well below” two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), is generally understood to mean stopping those emissions by 2050. In most scenarios scientists have modeled for reaching the Paris Agreement goals, though, limiting warming to two degrees or less also entails some amount of so-called “negative emissions” beyond that point. That will theoretically be accomplished by drawing greenhouse gases down from the atmosphere through direct air capture technologies or by creating additional carbon sinks, including via carbon offsets. That’s where the “net” of net-zero pledges comes in: An oil company that pledges to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, for example, might still plan to be emitting carbon by then but also plans at some point to capture all of the emissions it produces—or, audaciously, more—by deploying technologies to capture carbon.



Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»The New Republic: Whateve...