Are we truly grasping the full extent of greenhouse gas emissions? It appears that our previous calculations, particularly regarding methane, may have been significantly underestimated.

Graphs similar to the one above, which many have seen if they follow environmental issues, tend to convey a sense of certainty about future warming trends. Current models suggest that without changes, we could see an increase of 2.5 to 2.9 degrees Celsius in global temperatures. However, if countries fulfill their pledges, we might limit warming to about 2.1 degrees Celsius.

While these charts are invaluable and stem from dedicated efforts by knowledgeable individuals, they also rely on numerous uncertain variables. For example, predicting how consumers and corporations will respond to initiatives like carbon taxation is fraught with unpredictability. Will people swiftly transition to electric vehicles and other technologies? The impact of cultural attitudes versus economic incentives remains uncertain.

Moreover, there's contention among scientists regarding how natural systems will react to rising greenhouse gas levels. Some, like Zeke Hausfather and James Hansen, argue that warming is occurring at an accelerated pace, while others, including Michael Mann, contend that there isn't sufficient evidence to support this view.

The complexity deepens when examining the record heat experienced in 2023. How much of this was influenced by carbon emissions versus other factors, such as a strong El Niño or even volcanic activity? The contributions of melting Antarctic ice to feedback loops accelerating warming are also still unclear.

One significant challenge lies in understanding our current emission levels. Although researchers present seemingly definitive graphs detailing carbon outputs, these figures are largely educated estimates. They form the foundation of projections and policy decisions, yet if these estimates are flawed, our understanding of greenhouse gas emissions may be fundamentally flawed as well.

Take carbon emissions from coal as a case in point. Despite the extensive history of coal combustion, accurately quantifying emissions is complex. A key variable is the emissions from coal plants in China, where rapid development continues. The Chinese government’s reporting practices raise questions about the true extent of emissions, as national statistics may not accurately reflect regional data.

Interestingly, the type of coal used can also affect emissions, complicating the issue further. The challenges in estimating emissions from this single industry illustrate the broader difficulties researchers face in understanding emissions across different sectors.

Recent reports have cast doubt on our ability to measure greenhouse gases accurately. A notable focus has been on methane, a greenhouse gas significantly more potent than carbon dioxide. New findings suggest that sources of methane emissions are often overlooked.

For instance, a study revealed that methane emissions from decomposing landfill waste could be up to 40% higher than earlier estimates. The U.S. government’s methodology, which relies on the volume of waste entering landfills, fails to capture actual emissions effectively. Many landfills exhibit concentrated plumes of methane emissions that account for a large portion of total emissions.

Similarly, assessments of methane emissions from oil drilling sites reveal discrepancies. New aerial studies indicate that emissions are often higher than previously reported by companies or governments. In Nevada, it was discovered that over 9% of natural gas produced is vented into the atmosphere, and oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico were found to emit three times more methane than federal estimates suggested.

Whether this underreporting is intentional or a result of flawed assumptions remains uncertain, but it indicates a significant underestimation of methane emissions.

As we delve deeper into these findings, it becomes increasingly plausible that our understanding of greenhouse gas emissions could be drastically underestimated.

Issues extend beyond merely measuring emissions; they also encompass our assumptions about climate solutions. A major strategy for climate mitigation involves replacing gasoline-powered vehicles with electric or hybrid alternatives. However, do we truly understand the real-world performance of these vehicles?

A recent EU study comparing real-world emissions to manufacturers’ claims yielded alarming results. Car manufacturers often rely on idealized conditions for their projections, leading to significant discrepancies. On average, actual emissions from plug-in hybrids were found to be 238% higher than manufacturers estimated. This discrepancy can largely be attributed to consumers not using these vehicles as intended, resulting in emissions comparable to conventional gasoline cars.

Other assumptions may also be misguided. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act aimed to boost solar and wind energy installations through incentives. While projections for solar energy have proven accurate, the wind energy sector has faced delays due to regulatory and land-use challenges, falling short of expectations.

This is not to diminish the efforts of scientists and economists striving to accurately measure climate change. However, given the vast number of factors contributing to atmospheric pollution, obtaining an accurate assessment remains an immense challenge.

The concerning takeaway is that upon closer examination, it often appears we are contributing more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than previously believed. The silver lining is that refining our measurement techniques could ultimately lead to better models of the climate crisis.

Thank you for reading! If you’d like to be notified via email when I publish new articles, click here. I also write a newsletter, Looking Through the Past, focused on historical artifacts and images — check it out! You can support my work by buying me a coffee here.