10/ 🔥Judge Iwasawa Yuji quotes straight from the IPCC: "Warming of 1.5°C is not considered 'safe' for most nations, communities, ecosystems and sectors, and poses significant risks to natural and human systems." - this is a very strong basis for the Court's legal conclusions!

💨The analysis, co-authored by Imperial scientists @rubenpruetz.bsky.social & @joerirogelj.bsky.social, finds substantial ambiguities in states' plans, with a heavy reliance and dependence on novel and conventional carbon dioxide removal, with its associated risks.

Our new article is available open access here: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

@smithschool.ox.ac.uk @oxfordgeography.bsky.social @oxfordlawfac.bsky.social @pik-potsdam.bsky.social @granthamicl.bsky.social

Legal analysis, in conjunction with the risks associated with CDR-dependent targets assessed here, could clarify states’ mitigation obligations under international law and facilitate progression past a risk-blind and indiscriminate use of scientific pathways in assessing states’ targets. More soon!

That previous work was published in @science.org and can be found here: www.science.org/doi/full/10....

To minimise risks associated with reliance on CO2 removal, states should prioritise pathways that minimise overshoot and dependence on removals to reach net-zero. Risks associated with high CDR dependence might render state action inconsistent with norms and principles of international law.

-- Reliance on international cooperation to deliver CO2 removal (e.g. via carbon trading mechanisms) is also common in states' plans and amplifies these risks.

-- Non-delivery of planned CO2 removal would raise global temperatures further, worsening the impacts of climate change.