*[Enwl-eng] Will COP28 kick fossil fuels?
enwl
|
No images? Click here  Humanity is burning more fossil fuel right now than it has at any time during its roughly 300,000-year history. According to the latest estimates, global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂) will increase by 1.1% in 2023 and reach a record 36.8 billion tonnes. Earth's temperature is rising as our atmosphere absorbs more and more of this heat-trapping gas, and it now threatens the conditions which keep the planet habitable. A new study claims that we are on the verge of triggering five sudden and irreversible changes in the Earth system, including the collapse of ice sheets and ocean currents which regulate Earth's temperature and ecosystems like coral reefs which shelter much of its biodiversity. Crossing these tipping points would plunge our world into a dangerous and desperate state. "The need to cut emissions has never been so urgent," says a research team led by Pep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project. With 90% of all CO₂ emissions originating from coal, oil and gas, scientists, campaigners and even some delegates at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai are converging on a solution: ban the burning. You're reading the Imagine newsletter – a weekly synthesis of academic insight on solutions to climate change, brought to you by The Conversation. I'm Jack Marley, energy and environment editor. This week we're discussing the prospects and implications of a fossil fuel phase-out. But first, a note about our campaign this month. The Conversation is a charity, an independent source of facts and expert insight available for free to all. We believe that important decisions – such as those we face due to climate change – are best made with the most accurate and independent information to hand. The Conversation provides accurate and clear information for readers, whether as an individual, for companies large and small, or for governments making policy that will affect the lives of millions, to help ensure the right decisions get made. If you value what we do, please consider a donation today. Considering the vast majority of climate change to date is a consequence of humans digging up and setting fire to fossil sources of energy, the solution is fairly simple: stop using combustion to power daily life. "The danger of wildfires will only grow as climate change dries out ecosystems, effectively turning vegetation into potential fuel," says Simon Dalby, professor emeritus of geography and environmental studies at Wilfrid Laurier University. "This same combustion within engines and furnaces, meanwhile, is also the source of a sizeable percentage of climate changing gases in the atmosphere. Both involve burning fuel." Alternatives which run on renewable electricity, such as electric vehicles and heat pumps, use energy more efficiently and the supply of this energy isn't buffeted by war or international tensions, Dalby adds. Yet COP28 president (and oil firm executive) Sultan Al Jaber is unconvinced. In a live recording in which he discussed climate policy with Ireland's former president Mary Robinson, Al Jaber said that there is "no science" indicating a phase-out of fossil fuels is necessary to restrict heating to the internationally agreed guardrail of 1.5°C. "There is a wealth of scientific evidence demonstrating that a fossil fuel phase-out will be essential for reining in the greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change," says Steve Pye, an associate professor in energy systems at UCL. "I know because I have published some of it." A paper Pye wrote in 2021 claimed 90% of the world's coal and 60% of its oil and gas needed to remain underground to have a 50:50 shot at 1.5°C. "Crucially, our research also highlighted that the production of oil and gas needed to start declining immediately (from 2020), at around 3% each year until 2050," he says. Since then, sterner estimates have surfaced. These account for the unproven ability of carbon capture and storage technology to offset emissions from the continued burning of fossil fuels. They maintain that the world's supply of coal in 2050 must be 99% smaller than what it was in 2020, Pye says. For oil and gas: 70% and 84% lower respectively. But Pye argues that even these figures underestimate the speed at which oil and gas must be eliminated. He points to research that claims rich nations must dump these fuels faster to buy time for poor countries to quit coal. Regardless, planned fossil fuel production in 2030 is set to be 110% above the level needed to keep the world on track for 1.5°C. "The evidence for a fossil fuel phase-out is clear," Pye says. "The debate should now turn to executing it." That debate has at least begun at COP28. So far, 26 countries have declared their support for a complete phase-out of all fossil fuels. Only one however, Colombia, has any significant oil and gas reserves. Fossil fuel fallacies Al Jaber later claimed his comments had been misrepresented, though he did not retract his previous statement that phasing out coal, oil and gas risks taking "the world back into caves". The argument that abandoning fossil fuels to preserve a liveable climate endangers living standards has been taken up by right-wing politicians, including UK prime minister Rishi Sunak. A new analysis suggests the opposite is true. Prolonging the use of fossil fuels, as some countries are arguing for at the conference, using technology like carbon capture and storage (CCS) to "abate" emissions, will be considerably more expensive than rapidly replacing them with renewable energy. Unlike solar panels and other renewable technologies, CCS technology has not become significantly cheaper in the last 40 years the report notes. Andrea Bacilieri, Richard Black and Rupert Way are economists working across Oxford University and Imperial College London. They compared two scenarios for reaching net zero emissions by 2050: one in which fossil fuel use is virtually ended by mid-century, and another in which power stations, factories and other industrial units keep burning lots of it but attempt to capture the emissions using CCS. In addition to that, a vast array of negative-emissions technologies would be necessary in a world determined to keep burning the fuels heating the planet. Think sprawling plantations of energy crops and labyrinths of carbon-sucking machines. The team calculated that a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels would instead save approximately US$30 trillion (US$1 trillion a year) by 2050 and spare an area of land equivalent to Saudi Arabia. The record number of delegates representing the fossil fuel industry at COP28 will be working hard to bury evidence like this. The result may be a phase-out agreement that protects "abated" fossil fuel use. In their report, Bacilieri, Black and Way are clear about what that would mean, saying: "Using [carbon capture and storage] to facilitate business-as-usual fossil fuel use, even if feasible, would be highly economically damaging." - Jack Marley, Environment commissioning editor Was this email forwarded to you? Join the 20,000 people who get one email every week about the most important issue of our time. Subscribe to Imagine.  COP28 president is wrong – science clearly shows fossil fuels must go (and fast) To avert climate breakdown, most of the world's coal, oil and gas must stay underground.  Fossil CO₂ emissions hit record high yet again in 2023 Record emissions are fast shrinking the remaining amount of carbon dioxide we can emit if we are to limit global warming. At current rates, we'll use up the budget for a 1.5°C outcome in seven years.  Climate tipping points are nearer than you think – our new report warns of catastrophic risk Coral reefs are already being lost, and four other vital climate systems may tip soon.  COP28: Why we need to break our addiction to combustion Tackling the climate crisis starts with breaking our addiction to fuel. A task complicated by fuels essential role in both promoting and threatening global human security.  The idea that harm done today can be offset in the future is based on a basic misunderstanding of the carbon cycle. Planting more trees is important – but it's no substitute for cutting emissions.  Why are people still flying to climate conferences by private jet? Private jet from London to COP28 in Dubai is 11 times more polluting than a commercial aircraft. Latest from The Conversation on climate change
From: Imagine newsletter
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2023 10:03 PM
Subject: Will COP28 kick fossil fuels? |
------------- * ENWL * ------------
Ecological North West Line * St. Petersburg, Russia
Independent Environmental Net Service
Russian: ENWL (North West), ENWL-inf (FSU), ENWL-misc (any topics)
English: ENWL-eng (world information)
Send information to en...@enw.net.ru
Subscription,Moderator: en...@enw.net.ru
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/enwl/
New digests see on https://ecodelo.org
(C) Please refer to exclusive articles of ENWL
-------------------------------------