Another issue: You should include a slide explaining what "net zero CO2" means. I have always assumed it means cutting current emissions of CO2 by roughly 50%, given that nature sequesters about 50%.
Another issue: You should include a slide explaining what "net zero CO2" means. I have always assumed it means cutting current emissions of CO2 by roughly 50%, given that nature sequesters about 50%.
The sequestered CO2 can be estimated as the difference between total anthropogenic CO2 emissions and the change in CO2 atmospheric concentration. The number oscillates, and total CO2 emissions estimates are a rough number. But claiming that 80% is sequestered sure sounds like an exaggeration. Don't forget emissions include sources other than fossil fuel combustion and cement manufacturing.
Another issue: You should include a slide explaining what "net zero CO2" means. I have always assumed it means cutting current emissions of CO2 by roughly 50%, given that nature sequesters about 50%.
Tom Wigley had a guest post on this not long ago, he argues it is more like 80%.
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/net-zero-does-not-mean-what-you-think
He makes a strong point, but it is not widely accepted.
The sequestered CO2 can be estimated as the difference between total anthropogenic CO2 emissions and the change in CO2 atmospheric concentration. The number oscillates, and total CO2 emissions estimates are a rough number. But claiming that 80% is sequestered sure sounds like an exaggeration. Don't forget emissions include sources other than fossil fuel combustion and cement manufacturing.