LunarCrush LLM | post/tweet::1945504367353958627

[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]

![ChrisMartzWX Avatar](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:24/cr:twitter::1060632416434434049.png) Chris Martz [@ChrisMartzWX](/creator/twitter/ChrisMartzWX) on x 139.9K followers
Created: 2025-07-16 15:22:41 UTC

Net zero is a scam.

Let’s do some math:

The U.S. emits ~5 billion metric tons (Gt) of carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the air per year according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

🔗

That is ~13.5% of global emissions, which amount to ~37 Gt / year.

🔗

If we assume CO₂ emissions drop linearly between now and 2050, that requires a XXX Gt (4%) reduction per year. This forms a triangular-shaped area, 𝑨, under the curve, representing cumulative emissions between 2025 and 2050 under “net zero” policies, where,

𝑨 = 𝟏/𝟐 × 𝒃𝒂𝒔𝒆 × 𝒉𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕

Therefore,

𝑨 = 1/2 × XX years × X GtCO₂ / year

𝑪𝒖𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟎𝟓𝟎 (𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 “𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝒛𝒆𝒓𝒐”) = XXXX GtCO₂

Extending this to 2100 yields the same.

𝑪𝒖𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 (𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 “𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝒛𝒆𝒓𝒐”) = XXXX GtCO₂

Without “net zero,” the U.S. would emit XXX GtCO₂ by 2100, meaning that XXXXX GtCO₂ are avoided under this policy. 

𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒂𝒗𝒐𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 = (375 - 62.5) GtCO₂ = XXXXX GtCO₂

If no other countries reduce emissions, that leaves the rest of the world emitting ~32 GtCO₂ / year (we’ll assume constant rates for simplicity). Cumulatively, other counties would emit XXXXX GtCO₂ by 2100, a ~13% cut.

𝑮𝒍𝒐𝒃𝒂𝒍 𝒄𝒖𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 (𝑼.𝑺. 𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝒛𝒆𝒓𝒐) = XX GtCO₂ × XX years = XXXXX GtCO₂

𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒂𝒗𝒐𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 (𝒂𝒔 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒄𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒈𝒍𝒐𝒃𝒂𝒍) = (312.5 / 2,400) GtCO₂ × XXX% ≈ XX%

Now, let’s relate U.S. emissions cuts to global mean surface temperature (GMST) change.

IPCC AR6 estimates the transient climate response to cumulative emissions (TCRE)—the ratio of GMST change per unit of CO₂ emitted—to be ~1.8 ± 0.4°C per XXXXX GtC (or petagrams, Pg C) (Table 7.14) [or per XXXXX GtCO₂ given XXX GtCO₂ ≈ X GtC].

🔗

🔗

So, given the TCRE ranges from IPCC AR6, the global warming avoided by 2100 if the U.S. achieves “net zero” by 2050 is XXXX ± 0.03°C.

• 𝐋𝐎𝐖: (312.5 / 3,700) GtCO₂ × 1.4°C ≈ 0.12°C

• 𝐁𝐄𝐒𝐓 𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐄: (312.5 / 3,700) GtCO₂ × 1.8°C ≈ 0.15°C

• 𝐇𝐈𝐆𝐇: (312.5 / 3,700) GtCO₂ × 2.2°C ≈ 0.18°C

Thus, based on my calculations, even if the U.S. reduced its emissions by X% per year through 2050—the required minimum amount to achieve “net zero”—it would barely make a dent in the global average temperature trajectory.

However, this linear scaling does induce some uncertainties.

The point is that unless we begin to have a serious conversation about China, then whatever the U.S. does will be largely irrelevant. What China pledges to do and what they actually do are two different things.

![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gv_JAEEXoAEgj4m.jpg)

XXXXXX engagements

![Engagements Line Chart](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:600/p:tweet::1945504367353958627/c:line.svg)

[Post Link](https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1945504367353958627)

[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]

Chris Martz @ChrisMartzWX on x 139.9K followers Created: 2025-07-16 15:22:41 UTC

Net zero is a scam.

Let’s do some math:

The U.S. emits ~5 billion metric tons (Gt) of carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the air per year according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

🔗

That is ~13.5% of global emissions, which amount to ~37 Gt / year.

🔗

If we assume CO₂ emissions drop linearly between now and 2050, that requires a XXX Gt (4%) reduction per year. This forms a triangular-shaped area, 𝑨, under the curve, representing cumulative emissions between 2025 and 2050 under “net zero” policies, where,

𝑨 = 𝟏/𝟐 × 𝒃𝒂𝒔𝒆 × 𝒉𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕

Therefore,

𝑨 = 1/2 × XX years × X GtCO₂ / year

𝑪𝒖𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟎𝟓𝟎 (𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 “𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝒛𝒆𝒓𝒐”) = XXXX GtCO₂

Extending this to 2100 yields the same.

𝑪𝒖𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 (𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 “𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝒛𝒆𝒓𝒐”) = XXXX GtCO₂

Without “net zero,” the U.S. would emit XXX GtCO₂ by 2100, meaning that XXXXX GtCO₂ are avoided under this policy.

𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒂𝒗𝒐𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 = (375 - 62.5) GtCO₂ = XXXXX GtCO₂

If no other countries reduce emissions, that leaves the rest of the world emitting ~32 GtCO₂ / year (we’ll assume constant rates for simplicity). Cumulatively, other counties would emit XXXXX GtCO₂ by 2100, a ~13% cut.

𝑮𝒍𝒐𝒃𝒂𝒍 𝒄𝒖𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 (𝑼.𝑺. 𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝒛𝒆𝒓𝒐) = XX GtCO₂ × XX years = XXXXX GtCO₂

𝑼.𝑺. 𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒂𝒗𝒐𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒃𝒚 𝟐𝟏𝟎𝟎 (𝒂𝒔 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒄𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒈𝒍𝒐𝒃𝒂𝒍) = (312.5 / 2,400) GtCO₂ × XXX% ≈ XX%

Now, let’s relate U.S. emissions cuts to global mean surface temperature (GMST) change.

IPCC AR6 estimates the transient climate response to cumulative emissions (TCRE)—the ratio of GMST change per unit of CO₂ emitted—to be ~1.8 ± 0.4°C per XXXXX GtC (or petagrams, Pg C) (Table 7.14) [or per XXXXX GtCO₂ given XXX GtCO₂ ≈ X GtC].

🔗

So, given the TCRE ranges from IPCC AR6, the global warming avoided by 2100 if the U.S. achieves “net zero” by 2050 is XXXX ± 0.03°C.

• 𝐋𝐎𝐖: (312.5 / 3,700) GtCO₂ × 1.4°C ≈ 0.12°C

• 𝐁𝐄𝐒𝐓 𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐄: (312.5 / 3,700) GtCO₂ × 1.8°C ≈ 0.15°C

• 𝐇𝐈𝐆𝐇: (312.5 / 3,700) GtCO₂ × 2.2°C ≈ 0.18°C

Thus, based on my calculations, even if the U.S. reduced its emissions by X% per year through 2050—the required minimum amount to achieve “net zero”—it would barely make a dent in the global average temperature trajectory.

However, this linear scaling does induce some uncertainties.

The point is that unless we begin to have a serious conversation about China, then whatever the U.S. does will be largely irrelevant. What China pledges to do and what they actually do are two different things.

XXXXXX engagements

Engagements Line Chart

Post Link