Читать книгу The Climate City - Группа авторов - Страница 25

City mayors have been stepping up and leading through a variety of fora, most notably the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy, C40, and the International Council for Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). In the former, 9,000 municipalities could potentially achieve savings of 1.4–2.8 GtCO₂e versus “business as usual” if their combined pledges are achieved. C40’s “Deadline 2020” is a commitment from the world’s leading cities to urgently pursue high-ambition climate and has attracted 119 committed cities at time of writing.

Where and how does “net-zero” appear in these commitments? Some of these commitments clearly articulate goals, techniques, and timing. Many do not. Some of the commitments include room for flexibility, often by design, to create a wide net of inclusivity and attract more signatories. Well and good; but with four UN climate conferences behind us since Paris and COP26 in Glasgow this year (2021), it is time to tighten definitions – especially concerning the mid-century destination of net-zero. For the “Race to Zero”, 449 cities have already joined this campaign.

The risk is that these campaigns are intentionally broad and open-sided tents. Only 12 of the 119 committed cities to C40’s Deadline 2020 have Paris-Agreement-compatible climate action plans.¹⁴

Race to Zero lists a “Minimum Criteria for participation in Race to Zero”¹⁵ but does not display as obviously a vanguard of bold, best-in-class targets and a “lead peloton” willing to show others how this is done.

Ultimately, the hope is that a clear, bold, ubiquitous definition will empower the world’s most progressive cities to lead the world’s just transition past “Net-Zero” to true sustainability and a climate-positive, restorative back-half of the century. So how can we describe “net-zero” better to be both clear and bold?