{"id":1553,"date":"2018-04-17T16:27:42","date_gmt":"2018-04-17T15:27:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.manchester.ac.uk\/sci\/?p=1553"},"modified":"2022-05-20T11:45:23","modified_gmt":"2022-05-20T10:45:23","slug":"can-a-city-ever-be-truly-carbon-neutral","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.manchester.ac.uk\/sci\/2018\/04\/17\/can-a-city-ever-be-truly-carbon-neutral\/","title":{"rendered":"Can a city ever be truly \u2018carbon neutral\u2019?"},"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

Greater Manchester was initially aiming to be carbon neutral by 2050, but Mayor Andy Burnham has suggested this should be brought forward by at least a decade. Nonetheless, the SCI researchers suggest that the \u2018carbon neutral\u2019 goal risks obscuring other levers of environmental action.<\/p>\n

Upon becoming Greater Manchester\u2019s first elected mayor, Andy Burnham announced his ambition to make the city-region one of the greenest in Europe. In his\u00a0Mayor\u2019s manifesto, the former MP and Labour leadership candidate, committed to \u201ca new, accelerated ambition for Greater Manchester on the green economy and carbon neutrality\u201d. If achieved, Manchester would be transformed from one-time poster city for Britain\u2019s dirty past to a decarbonised oasis in the post-industrial north-west of England. What it will take to realise this vision was the topic of a \u201cGreen Summit\u201d, held in Manchester on March 21.<\/p>\n

The\u00a0Green Summit website\u00a0claimed the event would see the best minds from Greater Manchester\u2019s universities and businesses, local activists and residents brought together to debate how to \u201cachieve carbon neutrality as early as possible\u201d, ideally by 2038. Leading up to the summit, expert workshops and \u201clistening events\u201d were held across the region, in order to inform a forthcoming\u00a0Green Charter, the plan for how the city will become \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d.<\/p>\n

We argue that the concept of \u201ccarbon neutrality\u201d is a lofty ambition, but it needs unpacking before anyone gets too excited about its potential. The idea that a zero-carbon target is the best driver for creating a city-region and planet that\u2019s inclusive and liveable for all raises important questions.<\/p>\n

Understanding carbon<\/h2>\n

Carbon neutrality, or \u201czero-carbon\u201d, is a curious term.\u00a0NASA remarks that<\/a>\u00a0\u201ccarbon is the backbone of life on Earth. We are made of carbon, we eat carbon, and our civilisations \u2013 our homes, our means of transport \u2013 are built on carbon\u201d. Even\u00a0our bodies are 18.5% carbon<\/a>. Ridding our cities of carbon suddenly seems absurd. Removing the \u201cbackbone of our life on Earth\u201d is surely not on Burnham\u2019s eco-agenda. So what does \u201ccarbon neutral by 2050\u201d actually mean? Understanding a little about carbon footprinting helps to expose the nuances and silences behind the ambition.<\/p>\n

Carbon is emitted at various points within the production, transportation and consumption of goods and services, but establishing responsibility for these emissions depends on your standpoint. Is it the consumer, the manufacturer, the haulage firm, the investor, the source country or the destination country? Our actions and impacts do not respect political boundaries.<\/p>\n

Governments typically count carbon emissions following guidelines from the\u00a0Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)<\/a>. Taking a \u201cterritorially-based\u201d approach, only the direct carbon emissions (and removals) taking place within a certain city or a country are counted, along with those from the production of the energy consumed. \u201cCarbon\u201d stands for a whole raft of greenhouse gases, including CO?. This approach underpins\u00a0declarations of successes<\/a>\u00a0and failures worldwide, but it\u2019s just one way to allocate carbon emission. And herein lies the issue.<\/p>\n

An alternative \u201cconsumption-based\u201d accounting is more often used by environmental NGOs such as the\u00a0WWF<\/a>\u00a0or\u00a0some parts<\/a>\u00a0of the\u00a0UK government<\/a>. This approach counts the total emissions from goods and services (including travel) consumed by a person, city or country, regardless of where they occurred. Under consumption-based accounting, eating an imported steak means factoring in shipping emissions, the plastic used in packaging, and the\u00a0emissions from the cow itself<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 all of which take place far outside of the typical \u201cfootprint\u201d. One recent analysis found a group of large cities across the world\u00a0emitted 60% more carbon<\/a>\u00a0when considered like this.<\/p>\n

But will Greater Manchester, the aspiring \u201cNorthern Powerhouse\u201d, really want to include emissions from such key drivers of economic growth? The city-region has a\u00a0busy airport<\/a>, for instance, that it might be convenient to exclude under \u201czero carbon\u201d. Greater Manchester\u2019s ambition may be laudable, but the zero-carbon definition risks\u00a0side-lining much-needed action<\/a>\u00a0in other areas.<\/p>\n

There is some degree of hope. Greater Manchester is implementing\u00a0a new standard\u00a0which extends the IPCC\u2019s approach, also considering emissions from residents\u2019 travel beyond Greater Manchester and waste disposed of beyond the city-region. This is significantly more ambitious than a territorial-based approach. But, even if \u201czero-carbon\u201d was defined under this approach, there would still be difficult questions as to what extent aviation emissions would be included \u2013 if at all \u2013 not to mention other consumption-based emissions, such as those from imported food.<\/p>\n

Cleaner, greener, and lower carbon<\/h2>\n

In any case, the city\u00a0needs environmental policies<\/a>\u00a0beyond the focus on becoming \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d.\u00a0Litter<\/a>\u00a0is one of the top resident concerns about environmental quality, for instance, while a\u00a0recent study by MMU\u2019s Gina Cavan<\/a>\u00a0found many people in the city have limited access to green and blue spaces. Research by\u00a0our colleagues<\/a>\u00a0found the greatest level of microplastics ever recorded anywhere on the planet in Manchester\u2019s very own River Tame.<\/p>\n

No doubt the mayor and his team will be concerned about these other problems too. But the pollution crises and the lack of access to green spaces are questions of environmental injustice, and their root causes will not necessarily be addressed by carbon neutrality. To avoid obscuring other areas of action, it\u2019s vital that claims about a \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d future clearly state what they are referring to.<\/p>\n

Carbon neutrality doesn\u2019t cover everything \u2013 it might only be concerned with decarbonising energy and in-boundary emissions. If Greater Manchester is serious about becoming greener, cleaner and inclusive, then there needs to be accountability for other perspectives on emissions responsibility, including those associated with consumption and aviation.<\/p>\n

People:<\/h2>\n