Real Zero, Not ‘Net Zero’ Is What's Important

Two things happened yesterday on opposite sides of the world that demonstrated the urgency and importance of taking real climate action. Over in Europe, France's Minister for Ecological Transition declared that the world should be preparing for temperatures up to 4°C higher than pre-industrial levels. Meanwhile, here in Australia, Minister for the Environment Tanya Plibersek was publicy tweeting bilby selfies while quietly approving an additional 1.3 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions through three coal mine expansions. Time is clearly well overdue to move on from fuzzy 'net zero' goals that permit continued emissions increased. We must embrace real zero emissions reduction targets as quickly as possible.

The Illusion of Net Zero

Net zero has become a cornerstone of climate pledges. The idea is that carbon emissions can be balanced by removals or offsets, theoretically neutralising their impact. I bought into it all when I was a public servant and senior climate negotiator for Australia. But the reality is that the focus on balancing emissions rather than eliminating them outright creates a false sense of security. It allows people like Tanya Plibersek to kid themselves that it's OK to approve massive coal mining projects. The three mines that she approved yesterday will release more emissions than 65 million Australian households.

While our politicans allow corporations to continue to pollute, they rely on the hope that carbon capture technologies or reforestation might later absorb the damage. The reality, however, is that many of these solutions either don't exist at scale or fail to deliver the promised reductions. Worse, they push meaningful action further into the future while allowing emissions growth to persist.

Net zero goals, often set for 2050, also allow for decades of delay, all while the climate crisis worsens. What’s more, with virtually no carbon budget left, these goals are incompatible with the rapid emissions cuts needed to avoid climate collapse.

Carbon offsets, central to the net zero framework, are marketed as a way to neutralise ongoing emissions. But the efficacy of many offset projects is highly questionable. Planting trees, for example, is no guarantee of lasting carbon removal. Forests face increasing threats from drought, fires, and pests, all exacerbated by climate change itself. Other offsets involve financing carbon reduction projects elsewhere, often in poorer countries, while the high-emitting industries that fund them continue to pollute. This allows wealthy nations and companies to export rather than address their own contributions to the climate crisis. Commodification of carbon is thus a dangerous distraction from the real goal: eliminating greenhouse gases at the source.

Real Zero: Immediate and Direct Action

Real zero focuses on what matters - cutting emissions now and at the source. This means transitioning away from fossil fuels and unsustainable industries without offsets and ASAP. It’s about transforming the energy sector and housing, revolutionising transportation, and decarbonising industries like cement, steel, and agriculture.

Real zero doesn’t allow for the luxury of delay which we can't afford. With technologies like solar, wind, and electrification already advancing rapidly, we have the tools to do it. But governments must prioritise policies and investments that support a just transition to renewable energy and zero-carbon infrastructure. Every tonne of CO₂ avoided today is critical.

We're already nearing tipping points that will make large parts of our planet uninhabitable. The difference between limiting warming to 1.5°C and 2°C is staggering. And exceeding 2°C will be even worse. A world 4°C warmer, as France has warned, is a scenario of societal breakdown, forced migration, and global instability. This future is not theoretical - it is becoming more probable as the climate crisis escalates and politicians like Tanya Plibersek fail to take responsibility. There’s no time left for half measures, and the focus must shift from long-term targets to immediate, drastic emissions cuts. We need to move from 'net' to real emissions reductions. And ASAP. The technology exists, but as Tanya Plibersek's continued coal mine approvals show, the political will and urgency are lacking.