Russia’s plan to reach net zero by 2060 relies on existing forests to absorb ongoing carbon emissions.
VarnakovR/Shutterstock
Countries are taking a shortcut to net emissions by including forests and other “passive” carbon sinks in their climate plans, in a tactic that will derail global efforts to halt climate change, leading researchers have warned.
Relying on natural carbon sinks to absorb the ongoing carbon emissions from human activity will doom the world to continued warming. That’s according to the researchers who developed the science behind net zero emissions, and have now launched a highly unusual intervention to call out nations and companies for misusing the concept.
“This article is a call to explain to people what net zero originally meant.” Myles Allen He said at a press conference at the University of Oxford on November 14.
Natural sinks such as forests and peatlands play an essential role in the Earth’s natural carbon cycle, absorbing some of the carbon from the atmosphere. But existing landfills cannot be relied upon to offset ongoing greenhouse gas emissions.
If used in this way, global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide will remain stable once “net zero” is reached, and warming will continue for centuries. because of the way the oceans absorb heat, Allen warned. “You might think you’re on a 1.5°C path and end up with more than 2°C of warming,” he said. “This ambiguity actually cost us the goals of the Paris Agreement.”
To stop global temperatures from rising, emissions must reach net zero without relying on passive absorption by land and oceans. This allows existing natural sinks to continue absorbing excess CO2, lowering atmospheric concentrations of the gas and offsetting ongoing warming from the deep ocean.
However, many countries already consider passive land sinks, such as forests, as greenhouse gas sinks in their national carbon accounts. Some, Bhutan, Gabon and Suriname also have it they declared themselves to be already net zerothanks to the extensive forest cover.
Others have set zero long-term goals based on this approach. Russia, for example, It has promised to reach net zero emissions by 2060but the plan relies on using its forests to absorb ongoing carbon emissions.
“Maybe you’ll get some countries to use it in a deliberately mischievous way.” Glenn Peters He spoke at the CICERO International Center for Climate Research in Oslo (Norway). “This will be more problematic in countries with large areas of forest as part of their total land.”
The group fears that this problem will increase as carbon markets develop and pressure on nations increases. “As carbon becomes more valuable, the pressure to define any possible reduction as negative emissions so that it can be sold in carbon offset markets will become much stronger,” Allen said.
Nations and companies with net zero goals should revise their approach to exclude passive carbon consumption from their accounts, the group says.
Natural sinks can be counted as carbon removal if they are complementary to an existing one: for example, a new forest is planted or a peatland is re-wetted. However, these types of natural carbon sinks are vulnerable to climate impacts such as fires, droughts and the spread of invasive species, and are unreliable for long-term sequestration.
This has not prevented nations from leaning heavily on these natural sinks in their zero strategies. One 2022 exam many countries, including the US, France, Cambodia and Costa Rica, rely on forest carbon or other nature-based removals to offset ongoing emissions. “Many national strategies favor increasing carbon sinks in forests and soils as a means of achieving long-term goals,” the study’s authors write.
Natural carbon sinks should be conserved, but not relied upon to offset ongoing emissions, Allen stressed. Instead, it calls on nations to aim for “geological net zero,” which would ensure that all ongoing carbon emissions are balanced. long-term carbon sequestration in underground shops.
“Countries must recognize the need for geological net zero,” he said. “That means if you’re still producing carbon dioxide by burning fossil fuels by the middle of the century, you need to have a plan to put the carbon dioxide they produce back into the earth.”
“Geologic zero seems like a reasonable global goal for countries,” he says Harry Smith at the University of East Anglia, UK. “It helps clear up a lot of the ambiguity caused by the way countries account for land grants today.”
But this could have detrimental effects on climate ambition, he warned. “What could be the new geological zero policy? How might this affect governments’ climate ambitions if geological net zero moves their climate strategy goals?
Topics:
