Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
...the World needs EMC!
The Persistence of Cement's CO2 Outputs...
No one knows for sure its true scale — except that it really is truly enormous and persistent!
Let's Put This All Together So Far:
Benjamin Franklin: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"
Starting point. It's simple. Cutting CO2 emissions does not mean removing CO2. No. It means not emitting CO2 in the first place. Which is why we got reminded of Benjamin Franklin's famous words. And as Prof. David Ho stated in April 2023's Nature: "Decarbonization must come first, or CO2 removal will be next to useless" (PDF here).
The diagram above? The diagram above showing how Net-Zero Climate Action is to rank is lifted from an academic piece published in the leading journal Nature in 2021 (PDF here), building on the so-called "Oxford Principles" that are taken by many as a blueprint towards effective Climate Action. That 2021 monograph, "recapitulates the scientific logic behind net zero".
Ready-to-go? The diagram above ranks the priorities for "Net Zero" from #1 to #7 (in red).
Reduction ranks #1? That's right. And so was Benjamin Franklin. Reduction's #1 (not removal). And what's more, EU legislation has said that too by limiting removals per Art.4(1) of EU Regulation 2021/1119 (here) to 225 million tonnes CO2 in total to its 2030 target – that's only 2% of the EU's overall reduction burden.
Why? In contrast to CO2 reduction (where emissions are not generated in the first place), CO2 removal requires more than a like-for-like "swap". Simply: putting a tonne of CO2 into the atmosphere, requires more than a tonne of removal to compensate for having done that (here). And, in the case of the EU, it was felt that to not limit reduction measures would have risked moving the focus away from cuts: "In order to ensure that sufficient mitigation efforts are deployed until 2030, it is appropriate to limit the contribution of net removals to the Union 2030 climate target to that level" (Recital (27) of The European Climate Law).
Net Zero as the U.N. Climate Action normal? Yes. The concept of "Net Zero" is recognised by the U.N. for the purposes of assisting the aims of the Paris Accord. It might be said that its concept is so central to Climate Action, that the Paris Accord's sole core purpose is to deliver Net Zero. However, in strict terms this is not true, because the Paris Accord does not mention the term once. In turn, a lot has been written and said already about what "Net Zero" is (and isn't). In legal terms, CO2 abatement pledges made at national levels (called NDCs) form the common requirement of all signatories to the Paris Accord, to meet the goal of effective U.N. Climate Action. Net Zero simply assists in this.
So, what does Net Zero mean? The term Net Zero means achieving a balance between the CO2 emitted into the atmosphere, and the CO2 removed from it. This balance—net zero—will happen when the amount of CO2 added to the atmosphere is no more than the amount removed. Hence, cutting CO2 outputs (i.e., rather than emitting CO2 in the first place) becomes centre-stage crucial.
Action, not delay? Yes. There are also those for whom Net Zero is not enough. Some may believe also that Net Zero will be exploited by polluters to defer Climate Action to a later date, or that in any event Net Zero will not be met in time to prevent climate change disaster. Nonetheless, all these views agree on one "bedrock" item: switching to low CO2-output production methods, without delay.
We already have the technology to reduce cement's emissions. We're ready. Are you?
The so-called Oxford Principles (PDF)
News Items — Click image to download (PDF):
