Paul Price

@swimsure

Research: climate change science & policy. Blog: –Adjunct faculty Dublin City University ORCID: 0000-0002-7995-6712; –eNGO research & An Taisce member; MSc. Sus Dev & BSc(Hon) Geology 30 yrs pro carpentry. 🚲 🏊

1396 Siguiendo2796 Seguidores910 Publicaciones

YouTube Bluesky

¿Es tu perfil?Reclámalo y swimsure.dirty.social es tuyo.Reclamar perfil

Paul Price@swimsure· Jul 3

Get out the canoe – climate adaptation Canadian-style. (My sister's Canada Day photo from downtown Ottawa at Gladstone and Bronson.)

Colour photo, Canada Day at Gladstone and Bronson in downtown Ottawa, July 1st 2026.
During a heavy storm downpour, two shirtless men, one with a yellow sunhat, set out in an open canoe alongside traffic on a flooded roadway, with moving cars pushing aside water.

Paul Price@swimsure· Mar 1

So, v rapid cuts in fossil fuel use (CO2&CH4) AND deep cuts in intensive animal agriculture (CH4&N2O) are crucial to limit overshoot & enable early return from it. Analysis of Ireland's carbon budgeting shows this. Substantial, early cut in CH4/yr greatly cuts CDR "need". ejni.net/publications...

Cover graphic The cover graphic illustrates a CCAC 2021 Paris Test assessment (GWP* analysis) of three alternative emissions scenarios for Ireland: Current Policies (from EPA data for the With Existing Measures scenario); “Climate Neutrality”, meeting the 2024 CCAC Proposal’s temperature neutrality by 2050 definition; and Scenario 1, the deepest mitigation option within the CCAC Proposal’s 15 scenario Shortlist. According to the CCAC, Scenario 1 is practicable given sufficient effective Government policies and significantly increased sectoral ambition to cut energy, agriculture and land emissions from now onward. Early, deep, and sustained cuts in annual in agri-methane emissions are crucial to net temperature return from overshoot.

Line chart comparing two warming pathways (using GWP* calculation and using FaIR climate model output) for the same mitigation scenario, Scenario 1 in the Climate Change Advisory Council (Ireland) shortlist underpinning its 2031–2040 carbon budget Proposal recommendations.

From: Price, Paul R, 2026. Consistent Paris Test assessment of the 2024 Proposal for Ireland’s 2031–2040 carbon budgets. Environmental Justice Network Ireland.

Figure 1 shows GWP* (forcing) and FaIR (warming) [overshoot] pathways for Scenario 1’s combined [CO2,N2O,CH4] emissions. As per the CCAC 2021 test definition, the pathways are upscaled to global level by Ireland’s global population share and using a global equal per capita remaining warming to 1.5ºC (based on a 50:50 chance of meeting that limit).
• Point (A) is the CCAC’s Uncorrected CCAC 2021 Paris Test forcing threshold for GWP* scenario assessment, as per the 2021 Carbon Budget Technical Report10: maximum upscaled 0.23oC (downscaled 0.15 oC) by the end of 2050.
• Point (B) is the Corrected 2021 Paris Test forcing threshold for GWP* scenario assessment, adjusted as per quantitative adjustments A–C in the McMullin et al. 2024 journal paper [16]. Scenario 1 almost exactly meets this GWP* test in 2050.
• Point (C) is the FaIR warming value at 0.15 ºC for Scenario 1, corresponding to point (B). As Scenario 1 meets the GWP* forcing test in 2050, (C), an upscaled 0.15 ºC (downscaled, equivalent to 0.10 mºC) can therefore be used to approximate a 2021 Paris Test warming threshold test for FaIR scenario pathways. This gives a 2089 time horizon for the 0.15oC Corrected 2021 Paris Test.
• Point (D), 0.23 ºC at end of 2100, separately indicates the Letter’s “Paris Test” of warming contribution. However, this test horizon does not consistently relate to the 2021 Paris Test definition, using a 2050 time horizon, and does not acknowledge the journal paper corrections reducing the 0.23 ºC temperature commitment to 0.15 ºC.

Paul Price@swimsure· Feb 25

2. The CCAC 2021 Paris Test of [CO2,N2O,CH4] scenarios was 0.23 ºC in 2050 for GWP* (forcing) used by CCAC in 2021 & in the CCAC July 2025 letter. BUT, as per our 2024 journal article review ,the Corrected Paris Test value is 0.15ºC. This is only met by the Shortlist’s Scenario 1. 4/n

The cover [line chart] graphic of warming vs time for 2020 to 2050, illustrates a CCAC 2021 Paris Test assessment (GWP* analysis) of three alternative emissions scenarios for Ireland: Current Policies (from EPA data for the With Existing Measures scenario); “Climate Neutrality”, meeting the 2024 CCAC Proposal’s temperature neutrality by 2050 definition; and Scenario 1, the deepest mitigation option within the CCAC Proposal’s 15 scenario Shortlist. According to the CCAC, Scenario 1 is practicable given sufficient effective Government policies and significantly increased sectoral ambition to cut energy, agriculture and land emissions from now onward. Early, deep, and sustained cuts in annual in agri-methane emissions are crucial to net temperature return from overshoot.

Paul Price@swimsure· Feb 20

🇮🇪 Well worth a read for anyone interested in outside expert's view on environmental & climate issues on the island of Ireland: End of [visit to Ireland] Mission Statement, by Astrid Puentes Riaño, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

Highlighted text from p.2 of the End of Mission Statement at the conclusion of the country visit to Ireland, by Astrid Puentes Riaño, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

Text reads:
"Even though express recognition of the right to a healthy environment nationally is pending, Ireland has played an active role in advancing its international recognition, including through its support for UN resolutions recognizing this right. Also worth mentioning is that both the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women through General Comments have interpreted that the right to a healthy environment is fundamental and included in the human rights of children and women, respectively. I strongly recommend using these as interpretation criteria nationally. The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) advisory opinion on the Obligations of States with regards to climate change, rendered in July 20256 is key for clarifying and advancing Ireland’s obligations on climate change. It concludes that the human right to a healthy environment is a precondition for the enjoyment of all other human rights, including the right to life and health, and that the right to a healthy environment is a result of the interdependence between human rights and the environment. The ICJ also clarified that all States have the obligation under customary international law to protect the environment and the climate system, and thus, to implement effective actions to avoid harms, including transboundary ones, related to mitigation, adaptation and restoration. It highlights that States must act with strict due diligence in relation to the environment and the climate system, derived from the high risk that harm to it can imply. Ireland’s upcoming Presidency of the Council of the EU (July–December 2026) presents a key opportunity to influence EU priorities on environmental,…

Paul Price@swimsure· Feb 4

imho, s.118(viii) is just plain wrong. Climate Minister has admitted carbon budgets not being met, so current plans/strategies are NOT consistent with the climate Act. Thus it's absurd to suggest compliance with a plan is sufficient. What matters is decisions' CUMULATIVE impact on carbon budgets.

Paul Price@swimsure· Dec 21

Happy Solar New Year!! Winter solstice morning, crashing surf, sun rise at the beach, chilly blue clouds, wave smoothed sand, swimmers' footprints, after a sea dip, ice blocks for feet. Time for hot drinks! #HSNY

Looking across swimmers' footprints in the beach out over the sea to sun-pierced chilly blue clouds at Killiney Bay, Co. Dublin and Wicklow, soon after Winter solstice sun rise.

Paul Price@swimsure· Dec 17

In a 2020 report we had a similar indicative chart for global economic growth vs warming, w/ future pathways: "there is little coherent research assessing such potentially highly disorderly outcomes; but it would be unwise to simply discount or ignore such possibilities" doras.dcu.ie/25144/1/SSEC...

Figure 3.1. Stylised possibility space of future global scenarios for climate change (warming over preindustrial) interacting with economic activity.

Global warming (via CO2) since 1950 continues to be linearly related to global economic growth. Future possibility space showing four scenarios: Green growth, limit to 1.5ºC with continued economic growth; BAU, continued economic growth and warming (questionably without serious climate impacts); BAU then disorderly economic collapse with large damages due to climate and other pressures; and, Managed degrowth, equitably limiting economic growth and warming to limit potential for disorderly collapse.

From: Page 6 in McMullin, Barry, and Paul Price. TECHNICAL REPORT Society-Wide Scenarios for Effective Climate Change Mitigation in Ireland (Grant Number 2018-CCRP-DS.14). EPA Research Report. Dublin City University, 2020. http://doras.dcu.ie/25144/1/SSECCM-TR-2018-CCRP-DS.14_Final%20Technical%20Report.pdf.

Paul Price@swimsure· Nov 20

Higher coastal walls & much rock armour are planned to protect Ireland's east coast railway, south from Dublin, against sea level rise. Trouble is, the engineers are only allowing 0.5m SLR by 2070. As Prof. Richard Alley explains, worst-case is more like >1.0m. So using 0.5m is poor engineering.

Line chart of sea-level rise projections to 2100 IPCC, showing about 0.5m rise by 2070. However, IPCC shows worst case scenario of about 0.9m by 2070; Richard Alley annotation states "This is NOT a worst-case scenario..."

Slide at 18min28sec in presentation by Prof. Richard Alley, April 11, 2025. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dleFnFwraE

Paul Price@swimsure· Nov 13

Yes. A couple more reasons: ➡️ CO2-only global warming continues strongly correlated with global economic activity – an emergent human-climate system quality. ➡️ Multi-GHG forcing remains close to worst-case, as per Hansen – CH4 & N2O increases adding to CO2. Hard to square with improved projections.

Figure showing two scatter-line charts from Price, 2023, Carbon Budgets to Inform Climate Action: A society-wide, integrated GHG quota and accounting perspective.
https://www.climatecouncil.ie/councilpublications/councilworkingpaperseries/Paul%20R%20Price%20Working%20Paper%20No%2019.pdf

Figure 25. Cumulative CO2 emissions (warming) relative to Gross World Product (PPP).
Left: Own chart of cumulative GtCO2e vs. annual GWP Purchasing Power Parity charts for 1850– 2018, time progresses along the graphed black line with one red dot per year.
Right: Chart, using same data as at left, but with a vertical axis converted to warming oC via TCRE and a horizontal axis stated in cumulative GWP (PPP) from 1850.
Data: CO2 from CDIAC (2017) and Global Carbon Project (Friedlingstein et al., 2022), GWP data derived from Bolt and van Zanden (2020).

Annual growth of global climate forcing by greenhouse gas from presentation by James Hansen, November 7, 2025.

Stacked area chart shows GHG forcing remains close to worst case.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NGOp39Ui7UiteVds85mFkY-9NdwoiyDZ/view?usp=sharing

Paul Price@swimsure· Nov 4

I agree. That indicative chart comes from a non-peer reviewed Oxford Martin briefing not including later GWP* update adjustments to better match methane flow change outcomes. The exact basis of that chart is not given. My indicative version below, via GWP* updates, supports @hannahdaly.ie's point.

Annotated version by Paul Price of the original CO2 vs CH4 indicative chart in 2017 Oxford Martin briefing. Annotation lines labelled "Actual" follow the GWP* update (Cain et al. 2019).

The Smith et al 2021 update to GWP* further (not included in the annotation) increases the stock and flow effects of methane emissions by adding a g-value multiplier of 1.13 to the GWP* calculation.

Oxford Martin 2017: https://oms-www.files.svdcdn.com/production/downloads/academic/Climate_Metrics_%20Under_%20Ambitious%20_Mitigation.pdf

Cain et al. 2019: Cain, Michelle, John Lynch, Myles R. Allen, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, David J. Frame, and Adrian H. Macey. ‘Improved Calculation of Warming-Equivalent Emissions for Short-Lived Climate Pollutants’. NPJ Climate and Atmospheric Science 2, no. 1 (2019): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-019-0086-4.

Smith et al. 2021: Smith, M. A., M. Cain, and M. R. Allen. ‘Further Improvement of Warming-Equivalent Emissions Calculation’. Npj Climate and Atmospheric Science 4, no. 1 (2021): 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-021-00169-8.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 28

In their Letter to the Editor published in the Irish Times @irishtimes.com, the scientists set the record straight by rebutting multiple errors in John FitzGerald's opinion piece last week: "Framing the debate as a false dichotomy...distracts from the real choices" www.irishtimes.com/opinion/lett...

Screenshot of the first half of a letter published in the Irish Times – Letters to the Editor, October 26th, 2025.

Text reads:
"Climate change and farming

Sir, – In his recent article “Cutting the entire cattle herd to reduce emissions makes no economic sense,” Prof John FitzGerald usefully acknowledges the scale of change required in the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector.

However, his article misrepresents our recent study, National temperature neutrality, agricultural methane and climate policy: reinforcing inequality in the global food system.

First, FitzGerald writes that “some of these scientists also argue that Ireland should essentially end all livestock production”, and implies that this is advocated in our study. That is incorrect.

Our study does not call for ending livestock farming. Nor does it make any recommendations about its future structure or scale.

Second, FitzGerald suggests our work advocates a per-capita methane quota. It does not. We presented per-capita methane as a diagnostic to illustrate disparities in methane emissions across countries.

The study does not propose a quota or trading scheme. Our study highlights the risks and uncertainties created for Irish society by the Climate Change Advisory Council’s (CCAC) proposed “temperature neutrality” approach to carbon budgets, which defines climate ambition around a moving target that depends on uncertain future global emissions.

It also exposes the underlying value judgments embedded in this framing, which undermine climate ambition, global fairness, food security and land use policy.

Arguments that hide the scale of the climate challenge behind a flawed national “temperature neutrality” target, and the false premise that Ireland’s agricultural sector is economically optimised and feeding the world, have become increasingly common.

However, they avoid the clear-headed, strategic decisions needed to set Irish farmers up for success in a rapidly changing world.

2 Text:
"From a global food security perspective, Ireland exports around 90 per cent of its animal-sourced food products, yet less than 1 per cent of those exports reach low-income, food-insecure countries.
Domestically, fewer than half of Irish farms are economically viable, despite the sector receiving billions in public subsidies.
Post-2030, Irish taxpayers will be paying billions of euro to purchase carbon credits from overseas to compensate for missing EU climate targets. Continuation of business-as-usual sells both Irish farmers & society short by failing to invest in our land’s potential to deliver healthy & sustainable food, bio-based materials, energy, carbon removals & ecosystem services.
Our study does not present an extreme position. Instead, it calls for ambitious, Paris Agreement-aligned land use policy with clear targets, enabling Irish society to steer the AFOLU sector toward a sustainable transition pathway.
The potential for a positive, resilient, & diversified AFOLU sector is clearly shown in scenario modelling contained in the yet-to-be-released Land Use Review Phase 2 report completed in May this year.
The question is not whether farming will dramatically change over the coming decades, but how that change can be managed to deliver the most robust, sustainable, & secure outcomes for Irish society.
Framing the debate as a false dichotomy between a flawed climate target and an “end to livestock farming” distracts from the real choices involved in shaping a more sustainable, resilient, & vibrant AFOLU sector.
The climate, Ireland’s farmers, & society as a whole, are best served by ambition, scientific rigour & robust debate on real choices, not by shifting goalposts, or the mischaracterisation of legitimate research & researchers as extreme or anti-farming. – Yours, etc,

Dr COLM DUFFY
University of Galway,

Dr RÓISÍN MORIARTY
University College Cork,

Prof HANNAH DALY,
University College Cork

DAVID STYLES
associate professor, University of Galway

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 24

Roger Hallam, speaking today by video link to the very good TU Dublin Climate MESS conference. RH: "Seeding pro-social connectivity is crucial to counter rising fascist influence." Excellent discussions this morning on data centres and doughnut ecomomics in the Irish climate action context.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 17

"Unfortunately..." Here are my slides for yesterday's Trinity symposium, sharing the Environmental Justice Network Ireland (EJNI) @ejni.bsky.social learning from engaging Govmt & EU toward Ireland's National Energy and Climate Plan and national Long Term Strategy. drive.google.com/file/d/150Kw...

Image of a slide from the presentation "In-practice engagement with EU climate action: Reflections on Ireland’s National Energy and Climate
Plan and Long Term Strategy updates" by Paul Price, as presented to the Symposium: 'Climate Change from An EU Perspective' at Trinity College Dublin, Thursday, 16 October 2025, Panel 1: EU Climate Governance, Regulation & Accountability. The presentation is based on Environmental Justice Network Ireland (EJNI) engagement with the NECP and LTS update process.

Slide image shows the front cover of the engagement summary EJNI report from @ejni.bsky.social, see link: https://ejni.net/publications/engaging-with-the-update-of-irelands-national-energy-and-climate-plan-reflections-from-a-civil-society-perspective/

The main slide text reads:
"“Unfortunately...”
● No clear path to climate neutrality or just transition.
● Does not meet several mandatory requirements of
Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 on the Governance of the
Energy Union and Climate Action
● Failed to align with multiple EU directives – including the
Effort Sharing Regulation, and the Strategic
Environmental Assessment Directive.
In addition to very significant issues with the NECP text:
● the update process “unveiled not only noncompliance
with public participation requirements, but also exposed
the challenges that face civil society when trying to
engage with the production of a highly complex plan
spanning a broad array of policy areas.”

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 17

Homemade crab apple jelly.

Photo of crab apple jelly, freshly made, in a pyramidal arrangement of nine faceted glass jars, gleaming a translucent red-orange due to using Red Sentinel fruits and backlighting from sunny daylight.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 14

As below, one can use the GWP* method to give an indicative view of the crucial importance to New Zealand minimal fair share action of early, deep and sustained methane mitigation (in addition to net zero to net -ve CO2e for CO2+N2O).

Chart showing an indicative GWP* method warming analysis (cumulative CO2we from 2015 to 2100) illustrating the crucial importance to New Zealand minimal fair share action of early, deep and sustained methane mitigation (in addition to net zero to net -ve CO2e for CO2+N2O).

Chart shows horizontal brown dotted line for a New Zealand population share (via global equal per capita) of remaining warming to 1.5ºC. Note, this is minimally equitable at best.
- Blue lines show different agri methane scenarios, all cutting -10% by 2030, and then to -14%. -24%, -35% or -47% by 2050.
- CO2 and N2O to net zero CO2e/yr by 2050.
- Red lines show total GHG warming for each agri methane scenario.

GWP* indicates forcing, whereas the associated warming commitment shown lags by 10 to 20 years. Therefore, although the GHG for -35% Ag CH4 scenario does just reach the 1.5ºC level by 2100 in the chart, earlier mitigation would be required.

As shown the "climate neutral: -14% Ag CH4 scenario merely stabilises New Zealand's temperature contribution in permanent substantial overshoot of the 1.5ºC goal.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 8

For sure! Even so, getting past wrongly equating AI Mode with genAI was a still mental block that kept me from looking at it 🙄 I hadn't realised that it could integrate our usage, battery in/out with low cost night grid, and solar forecast. Or, as surprisingly, how it would solve for these.

Sigen AI Mode screenshot of Production & Consumption Forecast (kW) for load consumed, PV solar produced, sell battery to grid, and charge battery from grid.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 8

As with this switch possibility, we are still trying to understand our 5-mo old PV-battery system & future options. Partly by not knowing what questions to ask. – eg we did not turn on "AI" (offputting name!) until 2 weeks ago, turns out its adding ~€1+/day revenue & saving more grid FF via battery.

Sigen app screenshot of AI Mode versus standard self-consumption.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 7

🇮🇪Out Now: Good new science-informed "Report on proposed Carbon Budgets" from (parliamentary) Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy'. Recommendations 1-10 echo scientific & eNGO concerns for CB transparency in meeting Paris Agreement goals. data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachta...

Title page Ireland JCCEE Report on the proposed Carbon Budgets:

An Comhchoiste um Aeráid, Comhshaol agus Fuinneamh Tuarascáil maidir leis Buiséid Charbóin atá beartaithe Deireadh Fómhair 2025

Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy Report on the proposed Carbon Budgets October 2025

34/CEE/02

Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy Report on the proposed Carbon Budgets October 2025, p 13-14.

"18. Expert scientists who subsequently presented to the Committee acknowledged the Council’s responsiveness however, having reviewed the CCAC’s cycle 2 ‘Paris Test’ analysis, held the view that it remains unsatisfactory, highlighting several concerns, particularly in relation the statutory requirement for consistency with Article 2 of the Paris Agreement. The Committee heard that for the purpose of the test, the Council chose not to compare the peak of Irish warming contribution to the peak of global warming around 2050, but rather compare the significantly lower Irish warming contribution as of 2100 to the projected global peak in 2050. Experts warned the Committee that this approach ‘amounted to comparing apples and oranges’, and if adopted, would allow collective global scenarios where the temperature peak could substantially exceed the 1.5°C limit. In addition, the test relies on the reference year of 2020 as a basis for equitable differentiation. It was noted by Professor McMullin that this “directly conflicts with the professional ethical advice commissioned by the council itself” which found that choice of year “lay well outside the climate ethics consensus”. Professors McMullin and Sweeney noted that 2015, the year the Paris Agreement was signed, is the latest possible “defensible” year for determining differentiated responsibilities and capacities Report on the proposed Carbon Budgets under Article 2 of that agreement. The Committee also notes from its submissions, other analysis which demonstrate that none of Council’s recommended temperature neutrality scenarios would pass the CCAC 2021 ‘Paris Test.’. Professor John Sweeney emphasised that equity principles and climate justice demand more ambitious mitigation or more limited budgets from countries such as Ireland."

Ireland JCCEE Report on the proposed Carbon Budgets, Recommendations 1-4:

1. The Committee recommends that the Council’s carbon budget proposal and reports are subjected to an open and independent peer review process. The Committee is of the view that the Minister and Government should consider, following the conclusion of the independent peer review, aligning targets in line with the previous ‘Paris Test’ and not temperature neutrality as proposed in the draft budget. The adoption of 2015 as the year of reference for the basis of equitable differentiation is also encouraged, as is the use of a comparable reference year of 2050 to measure Ireland’s contribution to peak global warming. 2. The Committee recommends that prior to finalisation of the Carbon Budgets for 2030-2025 and 2035-2040, the Minister should request that CCAC review their final carbon budget proposals to ensure that they are consistent with; - The achievement of the National Climate Objective including climate neutrality, defined as net-zero all GHG emissions by 2050. - Article 2 of the Paris Agreement, including both the temperature goals and the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capacities”. 3. The Committee notes the importance of gaining insights from those with specific expertise and for providing opportunities for wider societal engagement. Acknowledging witness approval of the IPCC open peer review process, the Committee recommends that the CCAC engage an open-access system whereby people can volunteer to provide comments and feedback on the development of carbon budget proposals. Such system would require the CCAC to publish draft forms of ongoing reports, making them available for peer review. 4. The Committee recommends the clear identification of major barriers inhibiting the achievement of Ireland’s climate goals and resulting in the exceedance and rollover

Ireland JCCEE Report on the proposed Carbon Budgets, Recommendations (4 continued to 10).

4 continued: of the carbon budgets, noting that failure to meet targets in each budgetary cycle will have a carry-over impact on subsequent budgets and does not adhere to the principle of fairness between global north and south. 5. The Committee recommends that while finalising or revising the carbon budgets, and subsequent sectoral allocations, the Government immediately prepare credible measures to ensure a Just Transition across all sectors of society. 6. The Committee recommends that the Government immediately conduct a review into the efficacy and adequacy of the Just Transition measures employed during the first carbon budget and to produce a report and recommendations within 6 months. 7. The Committee recommends that the Council’s carbon budget proposal and reports are subjected to an open and independent socio-economic analysis. 8. The Committee recommends that while finalising or revising the carbon budgets and subsequent sectorial emissions ceilings, the Government immediately prepares credible measures to ensure the carbon budgets are delivered without undermining with other priorities that have a mandate from the public, including critical infrastructural and strategic priorities. 9. The Committee recommends that, in light of the projected exceedance of the first two carbon budgets, there should be an urgent review and increase of actions to facilitate the just transition to a sustainable low-carbon economy and society. The scale of the challenge and ambition must be communicated effectively and clearly to all sectors of society. 10. The Committee recommends the phase out of fossil fuels at the earliest possible date and their replacement with sustainable energy produced in Ireland, to form the central part of the state’s energy strategy.

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 3

So for decline phase, near-term early/deep/sustained cutting CH4/yr (FF *&* agri) is crucial high-certainty action lever to limit 1.5 fair share overshoot magnitude & duration. Ireland's expert body scenarios show this: without deep agri CH4/yr cut, return post-2050 requires BIG ?? afforestn CDR.

Figure 4 from Climate Change Advisory Council (2024) Carbon Budgets Working Group Outputs Report.

p.44 "In the strongest agricultural mitigation scenarios (labelled d, S2_P2 and e in Figure 4), agricultural GHG emissions contribute little to no net additional warming, or even a slight cooling, between 2021 and 2050. This contrasts with 0.15–0.25°C of warming from FFI gases, depending on the CO2 scenario."

Figure 4: Median Irish warming impact in m°C for 2020–2100 for 13 agricultural gas mitigation scenarios. S1, S3 and S2 refer to FAPRI-Ireland constant, higher and lower agriculture activities, and P1 and P2 refer to the level of abatement measure adoption; a, b, d, and e refer to GOBLIN scenarios. In all cases, net zero CO2 occurs in 2043 with 2021–2050 emissions of 440 Mt. Cases where warming peaks before 2050 are indicated by blue bars. The background global pathway is shared socioeconomic pathway SSP1-26.

https://www.climatecouncil.ie/media/CCAC%20CBWG%20Outputs%20Report-FINAL.pdf

Paul Price@swimsure· Oct 2

Bark beetle only adds to plantation forestry's increasing climate change vulnerability from storms & fire. And yet, Advisory Council (CCAC) carbon budget alignment with Ireland's commitments to the Paris Agreement is hugely dependent on assuming big *permanent* carbon storage via afforestation...

Preliminary warming analysis (GWP*) by Paul Price showing Ireland's annual and cumulative warming contribution in a CCAC shortlisted scenario passing the "Paris Test". Highly questionably, the L4 scenario for LULUCF (land) assumes annual carbon negative land use by 2040 and permanent CDR in afforestation of over 400 MtCO2 by 2100.

Paul Price@swimsure· Sep 16

Wednesday 17 Sep 2025, 12:30, CR3, LH 2000 "Engagement with Climate Experts on the Carbon Budgets" in Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy Online live CR3: www.oireachtas.ie/en/oireachta...

Houses of the Oireachtas (Parliament) Ireland

Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy

Live CR3 online: https://www.oireachtas.ie/public/_resources/themes/oireachtas/hourly/live.php?cr3&audio

Next meeting: 17 Sep 2025, 12:30, CR3, LH 2000

12:30
Engagement with Climate Experts on the Carbon Budgets
- Professor Barry McMullin, Professor (Emeritus), Dublin City University

- Mr. Paul Price, Researcher, Dublin City University

- Professor John Sweeney, Professor Emeritus, Maynooth University

- Professor Hannah E. Daly, Professor in Sustainable Energy and Energy Systems Modelling, University College Cork

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/committees/34/climate-environment-and-energy/

Paul Price@swimsure· Sep 11

Oops, mislabelled y-axis in the chart, should be "Mt CO2we from start 2021".

Line chart:
Ireland Paris Test: GWP* cumulative Mt CO2fe from 2021–2100.
GWP* warming analysis of 2021 core scenarios and 2025 shortlist scenarios.
Base data: Climate Change Advisory Council.
Chart: Paul Price, September 2025.

Only the deepest agri methane mitigation scenarios meet the CCAC's 2050 Paris Test.

For more on the CCAC Paris Test, see:
McMullin, Barry, Paul R Price, and Aideen O’Dochartaigh. ‘Defining a “Paris Test” of National Contribution to Global Climate Mitigation: The Irish Exemplar’. Environmental Research Letters 19, no. 4 (2024): 041006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad3660.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ad3660

Paul Price@swimsure· Sep 11

It's Irish Govmt & livestock interests trying to avoid cutting agri CH4 emissions – misusing GWP* as distraction. *BUT* in Irish expert body (CCAC) carbon budget assessments (2021 GWP* & 2024 FaIR), only its emission scenarios incl. the deepest agri methane reduction meet its 2050 Paris Test.

Paul Price@swimsure· Sep 9

Yes, more clarity needed eg. graphics comparing GWP100 vs GWP* output, esp. annual vs cumulative. –Here are my charts for agri CH4 scenarios used by Ireland's expert Council in recent carbon budgeting proposals. –Only deepest agri CH4 cuts make Council's shortlist meeting "Paris Test" fairshare ºC.

Charts showing four agricultural methane emission pathways used in Ireland's 2024 carbon budget analysis.
– Left chart shows annual emissions pathways based on GWP100 (ktCO2e/yr) and GWP* (ktCO2fe/yr) values.
–Right chart shows the corresponding pathways using cumulative emissions from 2021, using GWP100 (ktCO2e) and GWP* (ktCO2fe/yr).

GWP100 usefully identifies mitigation quantification as it directly relates to GHG emission quantity. Cumulative GWP* shows warming impact relative to the start year (2021 in this case).

GWP* calculation usefully approximates mitigation warming-commitment impact from a specified date, especially usefully in integrating impact with CO2 and N2O. GWP* approximates forcing impact, with warming lagging by about 20 years.

Ireland's "Paris Test" carbon budget is based on a global equal per capita share of remaining global warming up to 1.5ºC, assuming a 50% chance of limiting to that temperature. Multiplying that global equal per capita value by a nation's 2020 population gives a nations from-2021 carbon budget in ºC. This does provided a common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR) basis for defining a fair-share. However, it is very generous definition for a wealthy developed nation: it omits historical responsibility prior to 2021, it chooses a late year, it does not allow for aviation and shipping, and equal per capita is a questionable equity basis.

Paul Price@swimsure· Aug 23

"The world is in the grip of an existential crisis, in the form of the climate emergency. Isn't it time that mainstream media took some responsibility for this man-made problem? At the very least, please stop making it worse."

Paul Price@swimsure· Aug 15

Ireland's govmt & agencies have made VERY slow recent progress toward GHG data transparency: ➡️ SEAI good, EPA & CCAC ok; DeptCEE worse, Teagasc still dreadful. Yet, @robbieandrew.bsky.social: comparable charts *with data/image downloads* for 🇮🇪 & every country! robbieandrew.github.io/country/?cou...

GHG emissions charts for Ireland 1990-2025 from Robbie Andrew, CICERO, Country energy and emissions charts.
https://robbieandrew.github.io/country/?country=IRL

All charts enable data transparency & rapid sharing: data download, image enlarge & download, clip to key board, and Alt text.

Paul Price@swimsure· Aug 13

Also (😀), your article's Figure 1(c) indicates that TN, & the lower ambition AFOLU scenario (SG2-IE), both FAIL to achieve any return to below CCAC Paris Test ~0.1mºC threshold for [CO2,N2O,CH4]. So, likely not Paris-aligned by CCAC's own test. SG1 & NZ appear to pass the PT. [Now, CCAC 2024?]

Figure 1(c) Ireland’s contribution to global mean temperature change under different emissions scenarios. BAU-IE: business-as-usual reference scenario with existing mitigation measures. TN-IE: temperature neutrality by 2041–2045 with a 39% CH4 and 48% N2O reduction by 2050 (vs. 2020). SG1-IE: higher-ambition split-gas approach with a 50% CH4 and 71% N2O reduction by 2050 (vs. 2020). SG2-IE: lower-ambition split-gas approach with a 32% CH4 and 57% N2O reduction by 2050 (vs. 2020). NZ-IE: net-zero achieved, with a 68% CH4 and 83% N2O reduction by 2050 (vs. 2020).
Panels: ... (c) Temperature change relative to Ireland’s 2020 global temperature contribution for all scenarios, includes all gases. ...

From:
Duffy, Colm, Carl Doedens, Róisín Moriarty, Hannah Daly, David Styles, and Malte Meinshausen. ‘National Temperature Neutrality, Agricultural Methane and Climate Policy: Reinforcing Inequality in the Global Food System’. Environmental Research Letters 20, no. 9 (2025): 094019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/adf12d.

Note, in the above chart suggesting adjustments to the CCAC 2021 assessment, the corrected CCAC Paris Test's threshold of 0.15ºC is "globally upscaled", which equates to about 0.1mºC (0.001 ºC) on a "downscaled" national basis.

The above chart is Figure 1(b) in McMullin, Barry, Paul R Price, and Aideen O’Dochartaigh. ‘Defining a “Paris Test” of National Contribution to Global Climate Mitigation: The Irish Exemplar’. Environmental Research Letters 19, no. 4 (2024): 041006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad3660.

Paul Price@swimsure· Aug 12

Duffy et al.(2025) out today: "Looking specifically at Ireland, ∼90% of ASFP [animal-sourced food production] is exported to high-income markets, with just ∼0.3% reaching low-income countries." ➡️ Demolishing the "feed the world" claims of the 🇮🇪 agri-food industry & Teagasc. doi.org/10.1088/1748...

Figure 5. Trade Flows (USD) of Animal Sourced Food Products (ASFP) & indirect Land Use Change (iLUC) from animal feed.

From:
Duffy, Colm, Carl Doedens, Róisín Moriarty, Hannah Daly, David Styles, and Malte Meinshausen. ‘National Temperature Neutrality, Agricultural Methane and Climate Policy: Reinforcing Inequality in the Global Food System’. Environmental Research Letters 20, no. 9 (2025): 094019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/adf12d.

– "Figure 5 challenges the assumption that ASFP [animal sourced food products] production in higher-income countries contributes meaningfully to alleviating global food insecurity."

Paul Price@swimsure· Aug 1

Comparing GHG intensity of economic agricultural output across all EU member states. – My charts via Eurostat and UNFCCC data. [Ireland has by far the least "climate efficient" agriculture of any MS. In other words, Irish agri output has by far the highest GHG emissions per euro in kgCO2e/€]

Bar chart of Agricultural GHG intensity of economic output by Average 2019-2021, comparing EU Member States.
Data: Eurostat agricultural output (tag000102); UNFCCC Agriculture sector total GHG
Chart: Paul Price July 2025 @swimsure.bsky.social

Ireland's Agriculture kgCO2e per euro output is far higher than other EU MS.

Line chart of Agricultural GHG intensity of economic output over 2013 -2021, comparing EU Member States.
Data: Eurostat agricultural output (tag000102); UNFCCC Agriculture sector total GHG
Chart: Paul Price July 2025 @swimsure.bsky.social

Ireland's Agriculture kgCO2e per euro output is far higher than other EU MS.

Paul Price@swimsure· Jul 27

Wings! A bumblebee on marjoram flowers.