No sign of decrease in global CO2 emissions, say researchers – is anyone surprised?

Posted: November 11, 2022 by oldbrew in climate, COP27, Emissions, Energy, net zero, research
Tags: , ,

US coal train [credit: Wikipedia]


The pretentious-sounding ‘Global Carbon Project science team’ (80 names) confirms the fairly obvious: the world is using at least as much fuel power as ever. A recent stat from Goldman Sachs’ Jeff Currie: ‘$3.8 Trillion of Investment in Renewables Moved Fossil Fuels from 82% to 81% of Overall Energy Consumption’ in 10 Years. More misery for climate obsessives. No sign of fear of climate retribution to be seen in the data.
– – –
Global carbon [dioxide] emissions in 2022 remain at record levels — with no sign of the decrease that is urgently needed to limit warming to 1.5°C, according to the Global Carbon Project science team.

If current emissions levels persist, there is now a 50% chance that global warming of 1.5°C will be exceeded in nine years, claims Science Daily.

The new report projects total global CO2 emissions of 40.6 billion tonnes (GtCO2) in 2022.

This is fuelled by fossil CO2 emissions which are projected to rise 1.0% compared to 2021, reaching 36.6 GtCO2 — slightly above the 2019 pre-COVID-19 levels[1]. Emissions from land-use change (such as deforestation) are projected to be 3.9 GtCO2 in 2022.

Projected emissions from coal and oil are above their 2021 levels, with oil being the largest contributor to total emissions growth. The growth in oil emissions can be largely explained by the delayed rebound of international aviation following COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

The 2022 picture among major emitters is mixed: emissions are projected to fall in China (0.9%) and the EU (0.8%), and increase in the USA (1.5%) and India (6%), with a 1.7% rise in the rest of the world combined.

The remaining carbon budget for a 50% likelihood to limit global warming to 1.5°C has reduced to 380 GtCO2 (exceeded after nine years if emissions remain at 2022 levels) and 1230 GtCO2 to limit to 2°C (30 years at 2022 emissions levels).

To reach zero CO2 emissions by 2050 would now require a decrease of about 1.4 GtCO2 each year, comparable to the observed fall in 2020 emissions resulting from COVID-19 lockdowns, highlighting the scale of the action required.

Land and ocean, which absorb and store carbon, continue to take up around half of the CO2 emissions. The ocean and land CO2 sinks are still increasing in response to the atmospheric CO2 increase, although climate change reduced this growth by an estimated 4% (ocean sink) and 17% (land sink) over the 2012-2021 decade.

This year’s carbon budget shows that the long-term rate of increasing fossil emissions has slowed. The average rise peaked at +3% per year during the 2000s, while growth in the last decade has been about +0.5% per year.

The research team — including the University of Exeter, the University of East Anglia (UEA), CICERO and Ludwig-Maximilian-University Munich — welcomed this slow-down, but said it was “far from the emissions decrease we need.”

The findings come as world leaders meet at COP27 in Egypt to discuss the climate crisis.

“This year we see yet another rise in global fossil CO2 emissions, when we need a rapid decline,” said Professor Pierre Friedlingstein, of Exeter’s Global Systems Institute, who led the study.

Full article here.
– – –
Study: Global Carbon Budget 2022

Comments
  1. […] No sign of decrease in global CO2 emissions, say researchers – is anyone surprised? — Tallbloke&… […]

  2. JB says:

    A 10% chance is a century. Still plenty of opportunity to get in on the Scam, er, scheme and makes some buckaroos off the gullible.

  3. catweazle666 says:

    “Land and ocean, which absorb and store carbon, continue to take up around half of the CO2 emissions.”

    Henry’s law says that’s BS.

  4. oldbrew says:

    Nature Controls CO2 – Not Man: Op-Ed
    By Tom Tamarkin -November 4, 2022

    In collaboration with Mr. Bud Bromley, and with the kind financial support of actor/singer Pat Boone, we engaged two Stanford-educated Ph.D.s, Dr. Shahar Ben-Menahem a physicist, and Dr. Abraham Ishihara, a high-level mathematician and control theory expert, to design an experiment using the Mauna Lao Keeling data which is considered by all leading scientists as the “gold standard” of the available CO2 monitoring data sets.
    . . .
    What we proved was that:

    5. Following Henry’s Law, human-produced CO2 can only temporarily change CO2 concentration in the air and ocean surface. Our results, confirming NOAA-Scripps results, suggest that human CO2 emissions are a temporary perturbation to an ongoing CO2 trend, like the perturbation caused by the Pinatubo volcanic eruption and its aftermath, but much smaller. Perturbation by human emissions will be rapidly returned to the CO2 trend. CO2 concentration in air is controlled by the CO2 solubility on the water’s surface. More than 90% of Earth’s water is in the ocean, and the ocean is 70% of earth’s surface.
    . . .
    The bottom-line results of our experiment and analysis of the NOAA Scrips Keeling data conclusively proves that “the net amount of equilibrated carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere is the same as if human beings never existed.” Climate Change is a natural phenomenon, and not manmade.

    https://shalemag.com/nature-controls-co2-not-man-op-ed/

    Quoted no. 5 of 8 points there.

  5. Gamecock says:

    ‘with no sign of the decrease that is urgently needed to limit warming to 1.5°C, according to the Global Carbon Project science team’

    Whah! Whah! Whah!

    One suspects that the Global Carbon Project science team is not global, and not scientific. Maybe just a millennial in his mother’s basement with a Twitter account.

  6. Graeme No.3 says:

    What increase in temperature? Is this from the same 64 (or whatever) models that have been predicting lots more warming than has occurred? Or is it from the UN prediction of 1990 that the world would be 3℃ warmer by 2020? Or the one that warming would occur at 0.3℃ per decade and that by 2018 The Maldives (and other islands) would be under water?
    Perhaps they could start with an explanation as to when the level of CO2 has affected the Earth’s temperature in the past 500 million years?

  7. This was written:
    The 2022 picture among major emitters is mixed: emissions are projected to fall in China (0.9%) and the EU (0.8%), and increase in the USA (1.5%) and India (6%), with a 1.7% rise in the rest of the world combined.

    China is building more Coal Power Plants constantly, the EU, especially Germany are going back to Coal, there is no reason to believe the fall in China (0.9%) or the EU (0.8%)

  8. ivan says:

    Why do we need a decrease, or are they aiming for a non green dust bowl Earth in which nothing lives? The fact is we could do with a little more warmth to make life comfortable but then the idiots would have nothing to pontificate about and so make money off the public.

  9. oldbrew says:

    The projection of 40.6 GtCO2 total emissions in 2022 is close to the 40.9 GtCO2 in 2019, which is the highest annual total ever.

    So the ‘transition’ to renewable energy is totally failing to achieve the result they want. As populations and energy consumption per head increase (more transport, more aircon, more industry, etc.), how is the situation supposed to change?

    Climate logic can’t be overthrown by a UN panel…

    *Dependence* of CO2 on SST.

    [note – this is the anomaly, as stated]

  10. Gamecock says:

    “The projection of 40.6 GtCO2 total emissions”

    It’s amazing how accurate projections are! They use a decimal point to show they have a sense of humor.

    80 geniuses signed on to a false precision fallacy.

  11. oldbrew says:

    26 Climate Conferences Have Failed to Halt Emissions. Do We Need a New Strategy?

    Viewed soberly, the results have been catastrophic: After 26 UN climate conferences, greenhouse gas emissions have not only not fallen, but have risen by almost 60 percent, while the climate crisis continues to escalate virtually unchecked.

    With COP27 (“Conference of the Parties”) underway in Egypt, no one seriously expects a sudden turnaround from the international climate meeting, even though such an outcome would be crucial for the survival of the human species.

    https://truthout.org/articles/26-climate-conferences-have-failed-to-halt-emissions-do-we-need-a-new-strategy/

    ‘Soberly’ and ‘crucial for the survival of the human species’ don’t belong in the same article 🙄

  12. Gamecock says:

    “Viewed soberly, the results have been catastrophic: After 26 UN climate conferences, greenhouse gas emissions have not only not fallen, but have risen by almost 60 percent, while the climate crisis continues to escalate virtually unchecked.”

    “Look around, leaves are brown, there’s a patch of snow on the ground.” – Hazy Shade of Winter, 1966

    As they embrace failure, they can rejoice that the weather is no different. An ‘unchecked climate crisis’ looks like the weather we have always had.

  13. oldbrew says:

    Telegraph today…

    Net zero evangelists need a reality check
    There is a crying need for a more pragmatic and planned approach to achieving climate goals

    JEREMY WARNER
    12 November 2022

    As things stand, we remain stuck with the fantasy target of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. Everyone knows that there is not a snowball’s chance in Hades of this being met, and yet no-one dares admit it for fear of the condemnation it invites.

    So we have a problem; all the political pressure on chief executives and those who finance them is to stop all new investment in fossil fuels so as to meet decarbonisation goals. Yet global demand for hydrocarbons shows no sign of abating, and in many parts of the world it continues to rise strongly.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/12/net-zero-evangelists-need-reality-check/
    – – –
    There is a crying need for a more pragmatic and planned approach to achieving climate goals

    Pragmatism is unlikely in the make believe world of so-called climate crisis. With their ‘fantasy targets’ and ‘climate goals’ they’re just wallowing in their own BS, and it’s so obvious to outsiders but not to them — or at least, their mask slipped after Climategate and they pretended not to notice.

  14. Gamecock says:

    Well said, oldbrew.

    I would add that ‘target of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees’ is silly. They act like they know what Global Mean Temperature was a hundred years ago. They don’t know what it is today.

    One could argue that today’s is less of a fabrication, but it’s still a fabrication. There are no degrees of fake. Fake is fake. To which they add a decimal point.

  15. stpaulchuck says:

    another bunch or rent seeking climate clowns spewing climate panic pron theater science fiction. Meh.

  16. Nine years. No wonder Climate Change alarmists are economic idiots. They’ve been saying “9” years left (or 4 years , or 5 years ….) since 1988. Apparently “9” and other numbers are not numbers but references to a mystical time when unicorns fly in a sky of rainbows. So the numbers in budgets and costs are really just chapters in the unravelling story of a Green Utopia that’s just around the bend, obviously.

  17. cognog2 says:

    This Obsession with CO2 Emissions has turned into a Fetish. Why are we all, Sceptics and Alarmunists alike, bothering with it? It was a dead duck yonks ago yet continues to relentlessly infest the airwaves.

    Maybe it’s the Alarmunists stuck gramophone record that is the culprit.

  18. oldbrew says:

    If we stick to hundredths of one per cent the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere reads:
    1990 – 0.04%
    2022 – 0.04%

    Sound the alarm 🤪

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s