Using land alone to remove the world’s carbon emissions to achieve ‘net zero’ by 2050 would require at least 1.6 billion
hectares of new forests, equivalent to 60 times the size of New Zealand or more than all the farmland on the planet,
reveals a new Oxfam report today.
Oxfam’s report “Tightening the Net” says that too many governments and corporations are hiding behind unreliable, unproven and unrealistic ’carbon
removal’ schemes in order to claim their 2050 climate change plans will be ‘net zero’. At the same time, they are
failing to cut emissions quickly or deeply enough to avert catastrophic climate breakdown. Their sudden rush of ‘net
zero’ promises are over-relying on vast swathes of land to plant trees in order to remove greenhouse gases from the
atmosphere.
To limit warming below 1.5°C and prevent irreversible damage from climate change, the world collectively should be on
track to cut carbon emissions by 45 percent by 2030 from 2010 levels, with the sharpest being made by the biggest
emitters. Countries’ current plans to cut emissions will achieve only around 1 percent reduction in global emissions by
2030.
The climate crisis is already devastating agriculture globally. It is driving worsening humanitarian crises, hunger and
migration. Poor and vulnerable people, particularly women farmers and Indigenous people, are being affected first and
worst. It is undermining all efforts including Oxfam’s to tackle inequality and poverty around the world.
Nafkote Dabi, Climate Change Lead for Oxfam, said: “’Net zero’ should be based on ‘real zero’ targets that require
drastic and genuine cuts in emissions, phasing out fossil fuels and investing in clean energy and supply chains.
Instead, too many ‘net zero’ commitments provide a fig leaf for climate inaction. They are a dangerous gamble with our
planet’s future.”
“Nature and land-based carbon removal schemes are an important part of the mix of efforts needed to stop global
emissions, but they must be pursued in a much more cautious way. Under current plans, there is simply not enough land in
the world to realise them all. They could instead spark even more hunger, land grabs and human rights abuses, while polluters use them as an alibi to keep polluting.”
Oxfam recently reported that global food prices have risen by 40 percent in the past year, which has contributed to 20
million more people falling into catastrophic conditions of hunger and a six-fold increase in famine-like conditions. If used at scale, land-based carbon removal methods such as mass tree planting could see global food prices surging by
80 percent by 2050.
In the run-up to the Glasgow COP this year, more than 120 countries, including the world’s top three emitters the US,
China and the EU have pledged to reach ‘net-zero’ by mid-century. Most of these pledges are vague and not backed by
measurable plans.Even a country as small as Switzerland could need land nearly equivalent to the entire island of Puerto Rico to plant
enough trees to meet its ‘net zero’ target. Switzerland has recently struck carbon-offsetting deals with Peru and Ghana.Colombia has a ‘net zero’ target that requires reforesting over one million hectares of land by 2030, even though rates
of deforestation continue to climb.One-fifth of the world’s 2,000 largest publicly listed corporations now also have ‘net-zero’ goals that are similarly
dependent upon land-based carbon sinks.The ‘net-zero’ climate promises of four of the world’s largest oil and gas corporations BP, Eni, Shell and TotalEnergies
could require them foresting an area of land equivalent to more than twice the size of the UK to achieve net zero by
2050.Oxfam’s report shows that if the entire energy sector whose emissions continue to soar were to set similar ‘net-zero’
targets, it would require an area of land nearly the size of the Amazon rainforest, equivalent to a third of all
farmland worldwide.Shell alone will need land the size of Honduras by 2030.
Dabi added: “‘Net-zero’ might sound like a good idea, but the oil majors’ climate plans reveal just how much land these
distant ‘net-zero’ targets are banking on. Over-relying on planting trees and as-yet-unproven technology instead of
genuinely shifting away from fossil fuel-dependent economies is a dangerous folly. We are already seeing the devastating
consequences of climate delay. We will be hoodwinked by ‘net zero’ targets if all they amount to are smokescreens for
dirty business-as-usual.”
With less than 100 days left until the UN climate talks in Glasgow, governments and corporations need a much stronger
focus on swiftly and deeply cutting carbon emissions in the near-term, starting at home and with their own operations
and supply chains. If ‘net-zero’ targets are used, they should be measurable, transparent and prioritise dramatically
slashing emissions by 2030. Removing emissions is not a substitute for cutting emissions, and these should be counted
separately.
“Land is a finite and precious resource. It is what millions of small-scale farmers and Indigenous people around the
world depend upon for their livelihoods. We all depend upon the good stewardship of land and for our own food security.
The whole world benefits from protecting forests and safeguarding the land rights of farmers and Indigenous peoples,”
said Dabi.