{"id":1515,"date":"2019-07-02T15:33:38","date_gmt":"2019-07-02T14:33:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.manchester.ac.uk\/sci\/?p=1515"},"modified":"2022-05-20T11:41:20","modified_gmt":"2022-05-20T10:41:20","slug":"new-net-zero-emissions-target-wont-end-uks-contribution-to-global-warming-heres-why","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.manchester.ac.uk\/sci\/2019\/07\/02\/new-net-zero-emissions-target-wont-end-uks-contribution-to-global-warming-heres-why\/","title":{"rendered":"New net zero emissions target won\u2019t end UK\u2019s contribution to global warming \u2013 here\u2019s why"},"content":{"rendered":"

[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” fullwidth=”on” next_background_color=”#000000″ global_module=”322″][et_pb_fullwidth_menu global_parent=”322″ _builder_version=”3.0.106″ menu_id=”7″ submenu_direction=”downwards” fullwidth_menu=”off” background_layout=”dark” module_class=”main-navigation” \/][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ fullwidth=”off” specialty=”on” prev_background_color=”#000000″ next_background_color=”#1d1d1d”][et_pb_column type=”2_3″ specialty_columns=”2″][et_pb_row_inner locked=”off”][et_pb_column_inner type=”4_4″ saved_specialty_column_type=”2_3″][et_pb_post_title _builder_version=”3.0.106″ title=”on” meta=”on” author=”on” date=”on” categories=”on” comments=”on” featured_image=”on” featured_placement=”above” text_color=”dark” text_background=”off” locked=”on” parent_locked=”off” \/][et_pb_text _builder_version=”3.17.6″ background_layout=”light” parent_locked=”off”]<\/p>\n

Six months on from the UN\u2019s landmark 1.5\u00b0C report, which urged immediate global action to prevent global warming from rising beyond this dangerous level, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has advised the UK government to go zero-carbon by 2050. The committee\u2019s report asserts that the target constitutes the country\u2019s \u201chighest possible ambition\u201d and that it is not credible to aim for an earlier date.<\/p>\n

We disagree. While the report does challenge the government to step up its climate ambition, our view is that creative carbon accounting and an unwillingness to prioritise\u00a0the planet\u2019s health<\/a>\u00a0over economic growth leaves the committee\u2019s target lacking the urgency truly required to combat the climate emergency recently\u00a0declared<\/a>\u00a0by even the government itself.<\/p>\n

Before assessing whether 2050 is an appropriate date, its important to unpack exactly how the committee defines net zero. Based on\u00a0international guidance<\/a>\u00a0from the UN\u2019s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UK\u2019s target only includes territorial carbon emissions \u2013 those that are emitted directly within the country\u2019s borders.<\/p>\n

The committee\u2019s\u00a0report<\/a>\u00a0highlights that the country\u2019s territorial carbon footprint has fallen by 30% from 2008. But as Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg highlighted to parliament, using this figure as a mark of the country\u2019s climate leadership amounts to nothing more than\u00a0creative carbon accounting<\/a>, glossing over the UK\u2019s role in emissions that occur outside its borders.<\/p>\n

The UK economy is\u00a0primarily driven<\/a>\u00a0by its service sector, and the value of its imports is roughly\u00a0triple<\/a>\u00a0that of its exports. The production and transport of these imported goods are a direct consequence of the UK\u2019s consumption habits, but these emissions aren\u2019t counted by the committee because they occur beyond its shores. Including these emissions and excluding emissions from exports to other countries, the UK\u2019s carbon footprint is\u00a070% higher<\/a>\u00a0than the figure used by the committee.<\/p>\n

Crucially, this alternative definition shows that emissions are still closely tied to the UK\u2019s GDP, only notably reducing during the most recent\u00a0financial crisis<\/a>\u00a0and remaining steady in recent years. The CCC does say that it will monitor the UK\u2019s consumption-based emissions, and highlights that the country must avoid \u201coffshoring<\/a>\u201d its territorial emissions by importing more goods. But it stops well short of addressing the fundamental elephant in the room \u2013 that to seriously tackle emissions, the UK must\u00a0move away<\/a>\u00a0from an economy that prioritises short-term growth over radical emission reductions.<\/p>\n

On the surface, the most glaring omission in past carbon budgets at least appears to have been addressed. Emissions from international aviation and shipping have long been excluded from national targets in favour of international reduction efforts such as\u00a0the UN\u2019s CORSIA<\/a>\u00a0or the\u00a0EU\u2019s Emissions Trading Scheme<\/a>. The committee now argues that \u201cemissions from international aviation and shipping cannot be ignored\u201d.<\/p>\n

But it only recommends their inclusion in the UK\u2019s carbon budget from 2033. This is 14 years too late. UK aviation emissions\u00a0must not grow<\/a>\u00a0in the next decade if it is to prevent the worst effects of global warming. The time to act on aviation and shipping is now.<\/p>\n

Highest possible ambition?<\/h2>\n

Even placing accounting issues aside, the 2050 target is unambitious and gives a false impression that there is time to play with.\u00a0Lord Deben<\/a>, chair of the committee, is almost certainly right that Extinction Rebellion\u2019s\u00a0demand<\/a>\u00a0that the country reaches net zero by 2025 is physically impossible. Shedding the country\u2019s attachment to growth\u00a0does not on its own<\/a>\u00a0lead to a neutral carbon ledger. The massive amounts of investment, innovation and infrastructure required to get there would not take full effect within six years.<\/p>\n

But to say that anything earlier than a 2050 target isn\u2019t credible is a grave and dangerous mistake. At current levels of emissions, the world will reach 1.5\u00b0C of warming in\u00a012 years<\/a>. Each year that the UK delays radical action, the necessary yearly emissions cuts to hit net zero become greater, making it\u00a0ever harder<\/a>\u00a0to avoid catastrophic warming. Even with immediate action, the world is still pinning hopes on carbon capture and storage technologies that\u00a0may never<\/a>\u00a0work at scale. Working towards an earlier target with steeper emissions cuts would require initial uncomfortable changes, but would massively lower our reliance on these incredibly uncertain technologies.<\/p>\n

The report\u2019s claim that the 2050 target represents the UK\u2019s \u201chighest possible ambition\u201d speaks more to\u00a0the country\u2019s economic priorities<\/a>\u00a0than to reality. Ten years ago, the committee wrote that an\u00a080% reduction<\/a>\u00a0in emissions by 2050 (against 1990 levels) was at the limit of feasibility.<\/p>\n

Now, the committee has changed its mind, stating that net zero can be achieved by the same date, for the same price: 1-2% of GDP. This small percentage is seen as the maximum acceptable cost of mitigating climate change, even in the face of the\u00a0trillion-pound<\/a>\u00a0losses that are forecast if we do not take sufficient action. Is this really all the fate of present and future generations at risk of climate change is worth?<\/p>\n

The report does hold some positives. It is unequivocal that current policy is insufficient to achieve even the UK\u2019s existing targets and urges a ramping up in actionable efforts. It criticises\u00a0plans to phase out fossil fuel powered cars by 2040<\/a>\u00a0as too late and too vague, and calls for the government to confront failures to plant enough carbon-absorbing trees and decarbonise heating systems.<\/p>\n

But in focusing on what is \u201cfeasible\u201d rather than necessary, the committee\u2019s trajectories simply do not reflect the radical carbon reductions the UK can make, and will only end the UK\u2019s contribution to global warming on paper.<\/p>\n

The year 2025 may be an unrealistic target, but missing that by a few years is much less dangerous than hitting a 2050 target comfortably. We need to take every leap we can and fast, even if it is into the dark. As Greta Thunberg\u00a0says<\/a>, if your house is on fire, you don\u2019t tell people that the fire brigade will be along in a few hours \u2013 you act.<\/p>\n

Joe Blakey<\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00a0is a Lecturer in Human Geography. <\/em>Marc Hudson<\/em><\/strong><\/a> is a researcher at the Sustainable Consumption Institute (SCI). Both Joe and Marc recently completed their PhDs at the SCI. <\/em><\/p>\n

This article is republished from <\/em>The Conversation<\/em><\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <\/em>original article<\/em><\/a> here. <\/em><\/p>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_post_nav _builder_version=”3.0.106″ in_same_term=”off” show_prev=”on” show_next=”on” prev_text=”Previous” next_text=”Next” locked=”on” parent_locked=”off” \/][et_pb_comments _builder_version=”3.0.106″ show_avatar=”on” show_reply=”on” show_count=”on” background_layout=”light” header_font_size_tablet=”51″ header_line_height_tablet=”2″ custom_button=”on” button_icon_placement=”right” button_text_color=”#ffffff” button_use_icon=”off” locked=”on” parent_locked=”off” button_text_size__hover_enabled=”off” button_text_size__hover=”null” button_one_text_size__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_text_size__hover=”null” button_two_text_size__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_text_size__hover=”null” button_text_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_text_color__hover=”null” button_one_text_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_text_color__hover=”null” button_two_text_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_text_color__hover=”null” button_border_width__hover_enabled=”off” button_border_width__hover=”null” button_one_border_width__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_border_width__hover=”null” button_two_border_width__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_border_width__hover=”null” button_border_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_border_color__hover=”null” button_one_border_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_border_color__hover=”null” button_two_border_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_border_color__hover=”null” button_border_radius__hover_enabled=”off” button_border_radius__hover=”null” button_one_border_radius__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_border_radius__hover=”null” button_two_border_radius__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_border_radius__hover=”null” button_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=”off” button_letter_spacing__hover=”null” button_one_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_letter_spacing__hover=”null” button_two_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_letter_spacing__hover=”null” button_bg_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_bg_color__hover=”null” button_one_bg_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_one_bg_color__hover=”null” button_two_bg_color__hover_enabled=”off” button_two_bg_color__hover=”null” \/][et_pb_text admin_label=”Related posts” _builder_version=”3.0.106″ background_layout=”light” locked=”on” parent_locked=”off”]<\/p>\n

Related<\/h1>\n

Related posts:<\/h3>
<\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div>

Following the Fibre: South-South Innovation Exchange between Nepal and Kenya<\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/a>
<\/div>

Who holds the power? The state, corporations, and the regulatory turn in governance<\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/a>
<\/div>

The European Sociological Association 2017<\/h2><\/div><\/div><\/a><\/div>
<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column_inner][\/et_pb_row_inner][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_3″][et_pb_sidebar _builder_version=”3.0.106″ area=”sidebar-1″ orientation=”left” show_border=”off” background_layout=”light” locked=”on” \/][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”Connect Title” custom_padding=”0px||0px|” _builder_version=”3.0.90″ background_color=”#1d1d1d” module_class=”footer-section” prev_background_color=”#ffffff” global_module=”380″][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” global_parent=”380″ locked=”off” allow_player_pause=”off” parallax=”off” parallax_method=”on” parallax_1=”off” parallax_method_1=”off” parallax_2=”off” parallax_method_2=”off” parallax_3=”off” parallax_method_3=”off” make_fullwidth=”off” use_custom_width=”off” width_unit=”on” use_custom_gutter=”off” make_equal=”off” module_id=”footer-row” _builder_version=”3.0.89″][et_pb_column type=”1_3″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Contact Us Title” global_parent=”380″ background_layout=”dark” text_text_color=”#ffffff” parent_locked=”off” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial”]<\/p>\n

Contact Us<\/h4>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text admin_label=”Contact Us” global_parent=”380″ text_text_color=”#aaaaaa” parent_locked=”off” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” module_class=”contact-us” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial”]<\/p>\n

+44 (0) 161 306 6000<\/p>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_3″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Find Us Title” global_parent=”380″ background_layout=”dark” text_text_color=”#ffffff” parent_locked=”off” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial”]<\/p>\n

Find Us<\/h4>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text admin_label=”Address” global_parent=”380″ background_layout=”dark” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” module_id=”address” parent_locked=”off” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial”]<\/p>\n

The University of Manchester
Oxford Rd
Manchester
M13 9PL
UK<\/a><\/p>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_3″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Connect Title” global_parent=”380″ background_layout=”dark” text_text_color=”#ffffff” parent_locked=”off” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” background_size=”initial”]<\/p>\n

Connect With Us<\/h4>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_code admin_label=”Social Media” global_parent=”380″ parent_locked=”off” _builder_version=”3.17.6″]<\/p>\n