The word “abated” is the focus of much debate in the context of carbon dioxide emissions. World leaders have this year been underlining their commitment to phase out the use of unabated fossil fuels: that is, where emissions from their combustion are not mitigated through offsets or carbon capture technologies.
The final text of the COP28 statement called for “abatement, and removal technologies, such as carbon capture and utilisation and storage, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors.” Meanwhile the G7 group of nations last year called for “a global effort to accelerate the phase-out of unabated fossil fuels to achieve net zero in energy systems by 2050.” Such commitments are important in the race to decarbonize traditional energy sources, but they raise an important question: How exactly should we define “abated” emissions?
Currently, there is no widespread agreement on the answer, specifically on how much carbon dioxide should be removed for emissions to be classed as “abated”. Some scientists argue this lack of definition risks hampering decarbonization efforts. “The term ‘unabated’, if left unchecked and poorly defined, could leave the interpretation of the commitment wide open,” said a 2023 working paper by a group of scientists at Columbia University cited by Reuters.
