Of course, this isn't what private jet users normally look like at all: the lack of a red carpet and paparazzi is the point. Many of the websites offering private jet services around New Zealand instead quietly mention their privacy and discretion. Read more

But what will happen under more advanced climate change? How will vegetation respond to projected changes in atmospheric CO₂, temperatures and rainfall? Our study, published today in Science Advances, shows plants might take up more CO₂ than previously thought.

We found climate modelling that best accounted for the processes that sustain plant life consistently predicted the strongest CO₂ uptake. The most complex model predicted up to 20% more than the simplest version.

Our findings highlight the resilience of plants, and the importance of planting trees and preserving existing vegetation to slow climate change.

While this is good news, it doesn't let us off the hook in the fight against climate change. The rapid increase in atmospheric CO₂ means we must still cut emissions.

What happens to the CO₂ plants take up?

Plants take up CO₂ through photosynthesis. This process uses the Sun's energy to convert - or "fix" - CO₂ from the air into the sugars plants use for growth and metabolic activity.

Plants release around half of that CO₂ back to the atmosphere via respiration relatively quickly. The other half is used for growth and stays in the plant biomass for longer - months to centuries.

That biomass will eventually die and decompose. Part of the carbon will be released again to the atmosphere, but other parts will enter the soil where it can stay for hundreds of years.

So, if plants take up more CO₂, it's likely more carbon will be stored in vegetation and soils. This "land sink" of carbon has indeed increased over the past few decades as the annual global carbon budget assessment has shown.

What's more, the increasing land carbon sink has largely been attributed to the beneficial effects of rising atmospheric CO₂ on plant photosynthesis. This is important because that carbon stored in plants and soils slows the increase in atmospheric CO₂ and therefore global warming.

A gap in current climate models

But how do we know how much carbon is taken up and stored on land? Even more challenging, how can we predict what happens in the future?

One attempt to answer these questions is to use so-called terrestrial biosphere models. These models encapsulate our understanding of how plants function and how they respond to changes in climate.

For example, we know from experiments that plants photosynthesise more under higher CO₂ concentrations but less when they don't have enough water. Models translate all this knowledge into mathematical equations and allow them to interact with each other.

All this knowledge? Well, not really, and that was the motivation for our research.

While today's terrestrial biosphere models include a plethora of processes, they do not necessarily account for all mechanisms and processes that we know exist.

There might not be enough data or information available to confidently represent a process across the entire globe, or it might just be difficult - conceptually or technically - to include it in models.

What did the study look at?

We included three of those neglected processes into the well-established Australian terrestrial biosphere model. We accounted for:

• how efficiently CO₂ can move inside the leaf
• how plants adjust to changes in their surrounding temperature
• how they distribute nutrients most economically.

We used the most recent data and research publications to include the processes as realistically as possible. We then confronted the model with a strong climate change scenario and looked at how much CO₂ plants will take up until the end of this century.

We repeated this experiment with eight different versions of the model. The simplest version did not account for any of the three physiological mechanisms. The most complex version accounted for all three.

The results were surprisingly clear: the more complex the model, the higher the predicted CO₂ uptake by plants.

Model versions that accounted for at least two mechanisms (those with greater ecological realism) consistently predicted the strongest CO₂ uptake - up to 20 percent more than the simplest version.

What does this mean for climate action?

For modellers this is important news. It tells us our current models, which are usually at the lower end of this complexity range, likely underestimate future CO₂ uptake by plants.

These results suggest plants could be pretty resilient to even severe climate change.

However, we only looked at this from a plant physiological angle. Other processes in models are still oversimplified, such as the impacts of, and recovery from, fires and droughts.

We clearly need to better capture these processes to get a more complete picture of how effectively plants will absorb CO₂ in the future.

And last but not least, because plants help fight climate change, it's essential to conserve existing plant biomass and restore lost vegetation.

But while plants might even be more industrious helpers than previously assumed, they will never do the heavy lifting for us. It is still up to us humans to fight climate change by drastically cutting fossil fuel emissions. There is no shortcut.

• Jürgen Knauer is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University. He is an environmental modeler interested in vegetation responses to ongoing environmental and climate change.
• First published in The Conversation

Despite this, trucking accounts for nearly 80% of New Zealand's heavy goods transport, and a 94.5% share of the total emissions from heavy freight transport.

The dominance of trucking follows the expansion of the road network, which enables trucks to move relatively fast, travel to hard-to-reach locations and adjust routes to meet the flexibility required for just-in-time deliveries.

But despite its advantages, trucking is associated with external costs, including higher carbon emissions than other modes of transportation.

This study represents the most comprehensive comparison of freight emissions for different carriers to date for Aotearoa New Zealand.

Before we evaluate decarbonisation pathways, we need to have a solid understanding of the freight system. To this end, we have created a transport dashboard to visualise the carbon footprint of freight movements within New Zealand.

With decarbonisation commitments firmly locked into legislation, we have hard deadlines to cut emissions. Failure to do so will represent a risk to New Zealand's economy and likely require taxpayer money to buy expensive international carbon offsets.

We need to reconsider how we operate

A shift to less energy-intensive freight transport modes like coastal shipping and rail represents a possible pathway to reducing fossil-fuel dependency.

But despite the benefits of sea and rail transport, it remains unclear how to achieve the shift to new infrastructure and technologies. A key requirement is access to an efficient multi-modal network that integrates ports, inland terminals, distribution hubs, roads and railways.

Lyttelton Harbour is one of the starting points for freight shipping to other parts of New Zealand. Transport Dashboard, CC BY-ND

We can achieve economies of scale by transporting larger volumes of goods, which would lead to cheaper costs per unit. As the European Commission noted:

The challenge is to ensure structural change to enable rail to compete effectively and take a significantly greater proportion of medium and long-distance freight.

Our research was focused on creating a detailed understanding of New Zealand's current heavy-freight system. Emissions reporting extended beyond the direct combustion of fuels and accounted for vehicle-embedded emissions. We also consolidated data from multiple sources, which helped with calculating energy demand and direct and indirect emissions for every freight mode.

For example, we found the majority of a truck's lifetime emissions (almost 80%) come from the fuel it consumes. This is why it's important to prioritise operational aspects and switch to non-fossil propulsion technologies.

Where to from here?

It will take considerable investment to expand or upgrade transport networks and optimise freight corridors in terms of energy use and emissions. Beyond our research, we'll need complementary work to investigate the technical and economic feasibility of non-fossil propulsion technologies.

We'll have to take a holistic approach to map feasibility hurdles (technical challenges, material needs, system architecture and integration) that must be overcome.

The ultimate goal is to decrease fossil fuel demand and emissions while ensuring long-term economic and trading resilience.

Equally crucial is the participation and support from stakeholders. Freight transport is a complex system characterised by multiple interests (policymakers, shippers, freight forwarders, port and rail representatives) with sometimes conflicting views. Strategic planning must also acknowledge consumer preferences and their impacts on energy use.

The latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) elaborates on this:

Drawing on diverse knowledges and cultural values, meaningful participation and inclusive engagement processes—including Indigenous knowledge, local knowledge, and scientific knowledge—facilitates climate-resilient development, builds capacity and allows locally appropriate and socially acceptable solutions.

Beyond the focus on emissions cuts, we need to engineer freight systems with a high capacity to adapt to sustain trade and well-being while operating at much lower energy levels. The notion of adaptation also has to extend further than the current focus on physical protection against extreme weather events.

The tools and technologies to decarbonise freight transportation in New Zealand are available now. The problem lies in their integration and the understanding of the trade-offs at stake. Freight transport emissions can be reduced through cost-effective investments in multi-modal infrastructure and alternative propulsion technologies.

However, it is essential for future initiatives to operate within the biophysical limits of our planet, as emphasised in the IPCC's report:

Technological innovation can have trade-offs such as new and greater environmental impacts, social inequalities, overdependence on foreign knowledge and providers, distributional impacts and rebound effects, requiring appropriate governance and policies to enhance potential and reduce trade-offs.

• Patricio Gallardo - Researcher in Transition Engineering, University of Canterbury.
• First published in The Conversation. Republished with permission.

Dancers' heat is piped via a carrier fluid to 200m (650ft) boreholes that can be charged like a thermal battery.

The energy then travels back to the heat pumps, is upgraded to a suitable temperature and emitted back into SWG3.

The owners say this will enable them to completely disconnect the venue's gas boilers, reducing its carbon emissions by about 70 tonnes of CO2 a year.

David Townsend, founder of geothermal energy consultancy TownRock Energy, who designed the system, Bodyheat, told BBC News: "When you start dancing, medium pace, to the Rolling Stones or something, you might be generating 250W.

Read More

The "unprecedented" reduction in emissions volume followed Chinese attempts to contain the virus. Entire cities have been locked down, highways emptied, airplanes grounded, factories shuttered and millions of people confined to their homes.

Finland-based climate researcher Lauri Myllyvirta has calculated the epidemic's impact on emissions from real time industry and financial data sources and satellite imagery.

Emissions have decreased about 25% in three weeks, he says.

In his work as a climate analyst, Myllyvirta keeps a close eye on China's economic activity.

He says reduced demand for coal from Chinese power plants combined with the slowing of production in oil refineries and steel plants have created a decline in the country's major industrial sectors.

"In terms of global emissions, it's the biggest story of the year. There's no question about that," he says.

He also studied satellite images of China's nitrogen dioxide (NO2) emissions - this pollutant is emitted through burning fossil fuels.

"That actually showed an even larger reduction of around 35 per cent in NO2 levels".

There has also been a major decline in China's domestic and international air traffic since the COVID-19 outbreak was announced.

Over the past three weeks there have been 13,000 fewer domestic and international flights per day - accounting for about 15 per cent of global air travel emissions.

In total, air traffic originating in China has been calculated to be down 80 per cent since the beginning of the year.

Ann Dale, who is the director of the School of Environment and Sustainability at Royal Roads University in Victoria, says the COVID-19 epidemic raises some challenging questions for global environmental sustainability.

"We've got a virus that is spreading more rapidly because of our advances in airline travel. Ironically, it's also resulting in a decrease in that airline travel."

This raises questions about how much international travel is sustainable.

"What are the limits and optimal scale of travelling?"

"How many greenhouse gas emissions do you want to consume?"

"Maybe it's time we started addressing questions about limits and scale on human consumption," she said.

An economic shock that affects carbon emissions this dramatically is rare.

"What it shows is that emissions are closely linked to economic growth," an ecological economist at the University of Groningen, Netherlands says.

"Once economic activities decline, you have a reduction of associated emissions."

Decoupling economic activity and carbon emissions is one of the most vexing aspects of climate change mitigation.

The task of decoupling is complicated by the challenge of lifting much of the world out of poverty while trying to reduce emissions.

Some academics are also studying the concept of degrowth, a school of thought where economic activity is deliberately reduced to slow climate change.

Source

• CBC
• Image: Daily Mail

The Synod is expected to generate carbon emissions of 572,809kg. The forestry licenses for the reforestation of ​​50 hectares in the Amazon basin will offset the emissions.

Baldisseri says air travel accounts for about 438,373kg of the carbon emissions, with 134,435kg being generated through other activities.

These measurements have been based on the anticipated consumption of energy, water and travel by participants. They include the production of waste and promotional materials.

Bishops from the nine South American countries that share the Amazon are taking part in the Synod.

They aim to highlight the serious threat of destruction hanging over the world's largest rainforest.

One of two Irish participants, Columban missionary Fr Peter Hughes, says he hopes the synod will set out a new view of ecology.

This would be based on Christian faith in God as the creator of a "common home", he says.

Hughes says the Church should firmly place itself alongside the region's indigenous people. This includes defending their territorial rights and way of life.

"The life of the [Amazon] people is intrinsically, inherently part of the territory. If the territory is injured, the people are injured," he says.

In August, as fires blazed across the Amazon, Pope Francis described the forest as vital for the Earth.

He appealed for prayers that the fires would be brought under control.

At that time, Francis told pilgrims in St Peter's Square that the Amazon's green "lung of forest is vital for our planet".

Deforestation would have grave repercussions on the world's environmental health, he said.

Source

• Catholic Ireland
• Image: DW

The study considered the production of batteries as well as the German electricity mix in making this determination.

Germany spent thousands of euros on electric car subsidies per vehicle to put a million electric vehicles on the road, but those subsidies have done nothing to reach the country's greenhouse gas emission targets.

This is just the latest example of government programs expecting one outcome and getting quite another, instead.

To some it is ironic; to others it is funny.

At IER, we believe it to be sad, as it is a waste of time and money that could be better put to use solving real problems.

The researchers compared the carbon dioxide output for a Tesla Model 3 (electric) and a Mercedes C220d sedan (diesel).

• The Mercedes releases about 141 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer driven, including the carbon emitted to drill, refine, and transport its fuel.
• The Tesla releases between 156 and 181 grams, including battery production.

Mining and processing the lithium, cobalt, and manganese used for batteries consume a lot of energy.

A Tesla Model 3 battery, for example, represents between 11 and 15 metric tons of carbon dioxide.

Given a battery lifetime of 10 years and an annual travel distance of 15,000 kilometers, 73 to 98 grams of carbon dioxide are emitted per kilometer.

Germany's growing reliance on coal for electricity generation was also considered in the study.

The country relies on coal when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. As a result, charging a Tesla in Bavaria releases about 83 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer driven.

The European Union also provides benefits for manufacturers of electric vehicles, by allowing them to claim zero emissions under its strict emissions limits.

Not all European countries may emit more carbon dioxide from electric vehicles than from diesel or gasoline vehicles, however.

In France, for example, electric vehicles may emit less carbon dioxide than diesel vehicles because France gets the majority of its electricity from nuclear power.

But in many other European countries, that is certainly not the case.

Other Alternatives

According to the German researchers, the European Union target of 59 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer by 2030 corresponds to a "technically unrealistic" consumption of 2.2 liters of diesel or 2.6 liters of gasoline per 100 kilometers.

The researchers believe it would be preferable to look at other sources of power for automobiles—for example, methane engines, "whose emissions are one-third less than those of diesel motors."

Other Studies

A study in 2017 by researchers at the University of Michigan found that the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by electric cars varied wildly by country. Continue reading

Image: Money Control

Correction

Since publication, it has been ponted out the study has faced a raft of criticism over selective use of data, reports German press.

According to "WirtschaftsWoche" the study contradicts "in a blatant manner as well as all serious, international studies in recent months," while mobility expert Don Dahlmann explains that the study is counting on wrong numbers. The Federal Environment Agency points to an extensive earlier study, according to which e-cars perform better than diesel cars.

The point has also been raised that in the calculations of the production of electricity, other emissions involved in the production of the cars were not taken into account, reports Spiegel.

The Vatican joined oil companies, investors and environmentalists in signing a statement endorsing "carbon pricing" and so-called "climate disclosures" to shareholders.

Francis, oil giants and others endorsed carbon pricing — usually in the form of taxes or cap-and-trade schemes — at the end of a closed-door meeting at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

During the summit preceding the meeting, Francis had explained to them and other participants that climate change "threatens the very future" of humanity.

The "doomsday predictions" can no longer be met with disdain. "Time is running out!" he urged.

"Deliberations must go beyond mere exploration of what can be done and concentrate on what needs to be done.

"We do not have the luxury of waiting for others to step forward, or of prioritising short-term economic benefits.

"The climate crisis requires our decisive action, here and now, and the Church is fully committed to playing her part," he said.

This is the second year that oil executives have gathered in Rome at the invitation of the Vatican's Dicastery for Integral Human Development and Notre Dame University's Mendoza College of Business.

The theme of this year's meeting is "The Energy Transition and Care for our Common Home".

Francis said a significant development in this past year was the release of a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

This warns that effects on climate will be catastrophic if the threshold of 1.5ºC outlined in the Paris Agreement goal is crossed.

"The report warns ... that only one decade or so remains in order to achieve this confinement of global warming," Francis said.

"We must take action accordingly, in order to avoid perpetrating a brutal act of injustice towards the poor and future generations.

"The poor bear the brunt of the climate crisis," he noted.

Francis said courage will be needed to respond to "the increasingly desperate cries of the earth and its poor".

He also said a just transition to cleaner energy, which is called for in the Preamble to the Paris Agreement, could generate new jobs, reduce inequality and improve the quality of life for those affected by climate change.

In addition, carbon pricing is "essential if humanity is to use the resources of creation wisely".

Finally Francis said that, in relation to transparency in reporting climate risk, "open, transparent, science-based and standardized reporting is in the common interests of all".

He finished on an optimistic note saying: "there is still hope and there remains time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change provided there is prompt and resolute action…"

Source

• Axios
• Vatican News
• Crux Now
• Global Citizen
• The Western Journal
• Images:TED.com