Climate target organisation faces staff revolt over carbon-offsetting plan theguardian.com/environment/20…

Please vote today!

Are you curious about the latest initiative from #DrawdownStories , The Global Solutions Diary? Check out Matt Scott (He/Him)'s latest Insights piece to learn more about the project and how you can get involved! 🎤

bit.ly/4aSTeUJ

Project Drawdown's storytelling team just launched a new initiative called the Global Solutions Diary!

Learn more about it – and how you can get involved – in this Q&A with Matt Scott.

bit.ly/3JcsWkj

Yikes. This is important to watch.

If you claim be using a “science based” target, and the actual scientists don’t agree, you have some serious, serious problems…

reuters.com/sustainability…

No, we do not have only '2 years left to save the earth'.

As the science says,

x.com/KHayhoe/status…

Project Drawdown's storytelling team just launched a new initiative called the Global Solutions Diary!

Learn more about it – and how you can get involved – in this Q&A with Matt Scott.

bit.ly/3JcsWkj

Our comment in Nature Food was picked up by the Guardian. Food and Agriculture Organization's 1.5 °C roadmap lacks methods/data & omits findings that plant-rich diets in richer countries are needed to reach climate targets. Their response to our critique is even more perplexing 🧵 theguardian.com/environment/20…

Important thread.

I think the FAO needs to respond to this better, and answer some big questions.

Really proud of the work we are doing at Project Drawdown.

Check it out. And perhaps consider supporting our work to bring trusted, science-based information to the world of climate action. Thanks!

Vibes are not data.

And the data are clear: EVs are winning

Important thread.

I think the FAO needs to respond to this better, and answer some big questions.

Also 'balance' has nothing to do with science, which shows we need to aggressively reduce & sequester GHGs. Staying below 1.5°C is nearly impossible now. We shouldn't care about 'balance' more than accurately & clearly showing the numbers & ambitious work it takes to get there.

One good way for Food and Agriculture Organization to get back to transparency & balance is to publish their methods immediately, not months after a report. We should at least see their math behind omitting diet changes from their list of *120 other interventions* to stay under 1.5°C rdcu.be/dBBx7

Whistleblowers say they were blackballed after being critical of livestock impacts. I'd be ashamed if my colleagues with differing views felt that unwelcome. Food and Agriculture Organization should start an internal investigation, instead of smearing good-faith external critiques theguardian.com/environment/20…

The FAO says our critiques are 'deliberately disingenuous for the sake of feeding vested interests narratives.” Well, FAO, you're allowing industry to fund rushed and opaque reports, thanking them for their reviews, and issuing joint press releases with them. If the shoe fits...

Maybe the FAO is feeling a bit self-conscious that they now are blatantly allowing industries to influence their research. Another recent report thanked major meat & dairy trade groups for being reviewers of their report twitter.com/matthewhayek/s…

The Food and Agriculture Organization omitted droves of evidence that plant-rich diet shifts can meaningfully reduce emissions & protect human health. Instead of a careful, methodical response to our comment led by Cleo Verkuijl, they've opted to to rant about 'vested interest narratives' desmog.com/2024/04/08/us-…

We feed chicken waste, including body parts and excreta, to cows. It's environmentally friendly (seriously)! But surely a disease risk, banned in UK after mad cow. I've written about sustainability/health tradeoffs before, but I never thought of THIS one telegraph.co.uk/global-health/…

Why on earth is #IEA going on about #nuclear when it's apparent that it's absolutely marginal ?

Well, could be a backhanded way of pointing out exactly how marginal nuclear really is ...

#renewables #climate