What does net-zero actually mean?

From COP: we won't get anywhere by relying on offsetting. Plus a campaign to follow in Venice's footsteps and ban cruise ships in La Paz, MX.

🌏 Thanks for signing up to engage with small, purpose-driven media. If you get value from what we’re doing, please consider supporting us by becoming a paid subscriber. This will ensure we can keep publishing forward-thinking environmental journalism. 🌏

Net-zero is not enough. What is? 

Reporting from COP, Nina Hanna argues that recourse to ‘net-zero’ might be doing more harm than good – and offers an alternative way to think about climate goals. 

At COP26, the ongoing UN Climate Summit in Glasgow, countries have dutifully presented net-zero pledges. This is, famously, their last chance to prevent the worst effects of climate change. And net-zero has fast become the standard to which all climate planning is held. 

However, even a surface-level analysis of this term reveals that it may not necessitate climate action – but rather climate experimentation, and even distraction.

Net-zero combines the calculation of urgently-needed ‘reductions in emissions’ with the calculation of ‘negative emissions’ – meaning: the amount of carbon drawn down by, for example, tree planting or soil management. It first entered the UN climate negation space as a method in around 2001 – when the USA proposed it should be permitted excess emissions due to its vast, natural carbon sinks.

COP26 promises rely heavily on the buffer net-zero provided – in allowing pollution to continue, with assurance it will be mitigated via carbon offsets in a simple zero-sum game. 

Climate scientists are sounding the alarm, as this game is high-risk. James Dyke, Senior Lecturer in Global Systems at the University of Exeter, has described it as a ‘burn now, pay later approach’ – one that allows ‘emissions to soar’. 

Several of the carbon offset technologies written into ‘net zero’ pledges are unproven and unscalable. One example is BioEnergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). Theoretically, this works by burning biomass – such as trees – for energy, and then deploying unproven carbon capture methods to push carbon deep into the earth’s geology. 

Regardless of whether the BECCS process works, enforcing it at scale would require more land space and underground storage than is available. Offsetting the pollution of all the countries and corporations relying on it would, it is predicted, take several times the capacity of our planet. 

Environmental activists and indigenous groups are already warning the push for BECCS may result in land grabs and displacements. 

The problem with the logic of carbon offsetting, upon which net-zero relies, is that it sees planetary resources and landscapes in infinite, unshared terms. This is the very logic that has led to environmental breakdown.

By framing net-zero as the goal to be worked towards, policy-makers are degrading our expectations of what is possible – while lowering the standard of action being taken. The solution to this is for the environmental movement to interrogate net-zero promises, ensuring they are only policy stepping-stones. We then need to demand decarbonisation for real zero. 

Nature-based carbon drawdown methods can replace the ideology of carbon offsets. These ought to come in the form of ecosystem restoration, rewilding, and the protection of the essential carbon sinks that do remain and the land stewarded by indigenous people. 30% of our planet, after all, remains as wilderness.

Nature protection is the solution to nature exploitation - which is what net-zero pledges are unfortunately proposing.


Nina Hanna is a press assistant for the COP26 Coalition.

Share Ours to Save


Venice banned cruise ships after a make-or-break warning from UNESCO. Can it happen again in this Mexican city?

With a new megaport threatening marine life in the UNESCO-protected Gulf of California, La Paz conservationists are mounting resistance to overtourism. By Caitlin Cooper.

Throughout 2020, travel carriers of all types were grounded, lodged, and docked for abnormal periods of time. Planes sat on taxiways; trains in stations; cruise ships on water. As time went by, the bay of La Paz became the Gulf of California’s newest parking lot.

“It was announced that La Paz would temporarily harbour a couple of cruise ships at the beginning of the pandemic,” says Jacqueline Valenzuela of the Centre for Renewable Energy and Environmental Quality (CERCA). 

“But when we realised there was investment in the works for a cruise ship megaport, that’s when all the alarm bells went off.” 

Long described as the aquarium of the world, the Gulf of California is an aquamarine jewel set between Mexico’s mainland coast and Baja California peninsula. Home to 39% of the world’s species of marine mammals, the Islands and Protected Areas of the Gulf of California have held UNESCO World Heritage status since 2005. 

In 2019, however, the Gulf was placed on UNESCO’s “list of World Heritage in danger,” for the site’s failure to protect the vaquita marina – an endemic species of porpoise. Now, La Paz – the capital of Baja California Sur – is the latest front in the fight to protect this “global conservation gem” from cruise industry development.

What’s the issue? 

“Aside from the air and water pollution observed from these ships when anchored for extended periods in the bay,” Valenzuela says, “cruise terminals require energy, water, and waste management.”

With attractions, hotels, and restaurants, the planned megaport could host up to 150 ships in a year, and each ship would bring between 3,000 and 6,000 people. “These are demands on the environment that extend to the entire region,” she urges, “both in terms of marine habitats and coastal communities.” 

Baja California Sur, for example, is currently the most water-stressed state in all of Mexico, with over half of its aquifers at levels of overuse. “The civic and scientific response is simply, ‘we don’t have the resources for tourism like this’”, says Valenzuela.

Ikal Hernández, organiser with the local group Defensa del Territorio BCS, said he was able to get a resistance movement together in three days, due in part to mounting environmental concern from La Paz’s residents. “The idea that tourism is a necessary pillar of economic diversity is dangerous,” says Hernández, “if it is not organised, its effects can be extreme.”

Learnings from Venice 

La Paz’s predicament has a fair deal in common with happenings in Venice, Italy. Following years of social and environmental degradation, the Floating City finally banned cruise ships from its port after receiving an over-tourism warning from UNESCO.

As with Venice, UNESCO lists “plans for large-scale tourism development” as an identified threat to the Gulf’s World Heritage. But whereas Venice’s port, lagoon and city are all designated World Heritage, only one quarter of the Gulf’s heritage is terrestrial. 

According to César Moreno-Triana, programme specialist for UNESCO’s Latin America and Caribbean Unit, UNESCO does not currently develop management plans for coastal cities that border marine World Heritage sites. That responsibility falls on their own governments. 

In the experience of Hernández, “if local political interests are otherwise, World Heritage status doesn’t matter.”

“Oftentimes, our politicians are not very well informed of international obligations, so they promote projects without knowing how it might impact them,” says Jorge del Angel-Rodriguez, Vice President of the Collective of Academics from Baja California Sur (CAS). 

“We, as civil society, have to learn all of these norms and rights in order to urge compliance not only from our political leaders, but also from businesspeople,” he says.


Caitlin Cooper is a freelance journalist and documentary filmmaker originally from Amish country, Pennsylvania. She is currently based in Mexico City.

Share this story


👋 See you next week!