Is current global instability slowing the transition to a net-zero emissions future?

Carli Sylvestre

Class of 2018 Litigation Associate at Pelletier Litigation, Alberta, Canada.

At the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties, there was significant commitment to achieving a net-zero future. What could not have been accounted for in achieving this objective was the severity of global instability resulting from the Covid19 pandemic, increased global public debt, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, growing interest rates, disrupted supply chains, exponentially higher rates of inflation, and stalling growth in the world’s largest economies. Thus, achieving a net-zero emissions future may prove much more complex than originally anticipated. Prior to the Ukraine invasion, even with significant commitments by the private and public sectors, efforts proved insignificant in meeting the ambition of net-zero by 2050, much less achieving significant emissions reductions targets by 2030. Even if all current commitments were executed, efforts to stabilise global warming temperatures below the Paris Agreement’s decade-long goal of 1.5C still would not be achievable. Most commitments also did not have the required financial support and lacked a plan for implementation. With only eight years left in the decade and the historically unambitious implementation of emissions reduction measures, it is possible there will be a late and rapid policy shift forcing businesses and governments to implement harsh interventions and impracticable policies to meet fast-approaching commitment deadlines. This is likely to result in severe job loss, supply chain issues in carbonintensive sectors, and further economic volatility. Therefore, it is likely current global instability will contribute in some degree to the slowing of the transition to a net-zero emissions future. However, the trend of unambitious commitments and insufficient action over the past few decades will likely be the cause for missing the net-zero by 2050 target. A rush to make up for lost time may prove to have serious consequences, so our next steps must consider whether a disorderly transition to meet the 2050 goal is the most effective way to achieve long-term climate change ambitions or if a potential extension of this deadline is necessary.

Dr Damien Lockie Kate Vidgen

Class of 2008 Honorary Adjunct Professor at Bond University, Executive Director of the Centre for International Emissions Trading Law, worldleading expert on carbon market integrity. Class of 1991 Head of Industrial Transition and Clean Fuels, Senior Managing Director, Green Investment Group, Macquarie.

In the short term, global instability giving rise to increased oil, gas and coal pricing is a backward step for the Australia, alongside many other nations, energy transition. However, unlike other periods of high has a target to reduce net greenhouse pricing, this is not universally translating to a surge in gas emissions to zero by 2050. What new development of large-scale fossil fuel projects. More exactly is ‘net-zero emissions’? importantly, global instability has increased the focus on

Net zero does not mean zero pollution in the both energy security and energy independence which should atmosphere. Rather, net zero is an aspiration. At inevitably lead to an acceleration of the energy transition. best it means cutting greenhouse gas emissions The clear area of focus on this is in Europe. European to as close to zero as possible, with any remaining nations have implemented a range of measures to move emissions re-absorbed from the away from Russian pipeline gas. These atmosphere by oceans and forests. include significant energy efficiency

Notwithstanding how net-zero initiatives which will take some time to take may be defined, this much is clear: effect, but are a positive from a net-zero lens. transitioning to a future in 2050 The impact of the Ukraine conflict is with much lower emissions will being felt much further afield. The move mean changes to business (life) by Russia to nationalise the Sakhalin-2 as usual, by all of us, as quickly gas project will impact on Japan given as possible. We can’t wait until its substantial Japanese ownership. This 2050 when it will be too late. has forced Asia to relook at where its

All of us - nations, governments, dependencies lie. India and China both corporations and individuals – have means to substantially reduce their need to be seized with a sense reliance on energy imports as each has of urgency to transform. strong domestic renewable resources. It is

However, I suggest that for no coincidence that both have introduced any of us to leave the ways wide-ranging policies in recent months to we are currently locked into - ramp up the production of green hydrogen, which are responsible for our which is often referred to as the 'Swiss army emissions yet which underpin knife' of energy because of its versatility. our current prosperity - we In addition, while climate change has need stable global economic, instigated a growing sense of urgency since social and political frameworks the Paris agreement, the unfortunate reality that allow us the promise, is that high energy prices and looming if we change, of continued prosperity. shortages are much more pressing. With real urgency comes

So, yes, current global instability is slowing the innovation and there is a renewed rush to find solutions transition to a net-zero emissions future. For if we across the energy spectrum. Governments are reacting to continue as we are, we lack the stability needed this urgency by increasing mandates and subsidy pools to to embrace and action urgent transformation. accelerate a cleaner and more diverse set of energy sources.

Global emissions continue to rise, and as noted There is no doubt that the last six months have in the State of Climate Action 2021 report, ‘the caused significant suffering and uncertainty for many hard truth is that for … (needed) transformations, across the globe. However, it may just have finally action is incremental at best, and headed in fired the starting gun in the race to net zero. the wrong direction altogether at worst’.