In the past decade, global climate policies have focused on achieving net-zero emissions. The premise here is not to bring emissions to zero but rather to achieve a balance in which the amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere is no greater than what we remove. In this way, we can prevent further global warming. On paper, this looks like a splendid approach. But does it hold water in the real world? Let’s take a look.
How Are We Achieving Net Zero?
In a bid to support global climate policies, various industries have come together to identify where they are going wrong and how they can help improve the future. Take the aviation industry as an example. By acknowledging that ill-maintained engines contribute to air pollution not only through carbon dioxide emissions but also through nitrogen oxides, contrails, and induced cloud formation, more airlines are partnering with companies like Magnetic Engines to repair and maintain their engines. And with more efficient fuel use, they significantly reduced their emissions.
Aviation is not the only industry throwing its hat in the ring. In fact, the quest for net-zero emissions has emerged across sectors.
To start with, we have seen the adoption of renewable energy, such as solar and wind, in place of fossil fuels. This adoption has not just been on the part of organisations but also of individuals, as more people have embraced smart homes and systems while being conscious of their waste.
At the same time, more countries have planted more trees, restored mangroves, and reclaimed their peatlands to absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Carbon capture and storage has also been key in scrubbing carbon dioxide emissions from factories and power plants before these have the chance to enter the atmosphere. And for the carbon dioxide that has already been emitted, we have seen the adoption of direct air capture, in which large fans draw carbon dioxide from the air, which is then buried underground or turned into rock.
These are but a generalisation of the many ways that people and industries are working together to achieve these global climate policies before 2050.
Can It Work?
As with all global issues, we have people on both sides of this argument, as well as some who are on the fence. Why is this?
The sceptics argue that we are betting our future on unproven and expensive technologies that have not been scaled to the extent required to offset all global emissions. Direct air capture has been at the forefront of these arguments. We have also seen concerns that some organisations are using net-zero emissions as a way to avoid taking accountability for their actions. Since they can pay for forests or other natural resources elsewhere to offset their own emissions, they do not have to change what they are doing, even if it may be harming the environment. There is also the issue of procrastination. Given that we are working with a 2050 deadline, there has been a tendency for organisations to make promises of future changes without taking any steps towards them, leaving the world in a precarious situation if they do not keep their word.
While the sceptics have been clear about where they stand, we have also seen the optimists supporting these global climate policies. For one, they argue that the cost of renewable energy has dropped significantly over the last decade, making these resources more accessible and encouraging more people to adopt them. They have also pointed out that much of the world’s GDP now reflects the net-zero target, indicating that nations are taking it seriously.
At the end of the day, net zero is theoretically possible. But whether it becomes a reality largely depends on the measures we take to achieve it, including those we take in our individual capacities.
