Oxford scientist makes the case for a practical path to net zero

Professor Myles Allen argues that stopping global warming is not about sacrifice, but about responsibility - calling for a shift to “geological net zero” where fossil fuel producers store the carbon they extract

In episode 47 of The Decarbonisation Dialogue podcast, internationally renowned climate scientist Professor Myles Allen sets out a clear and hopeful message: the world already has the tools to stop global warming - it just needs the will to use them properly.

Myles, head of atmospheric, oceanic and planetary physics and professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford, is best known for developing the idea of a finite carbon budget. This means every tonne of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere contributes to warming and the effect is cumulative.

Myles says: “What it implies very simply, is if we want to stop global warming getting any worse, we have to stop dumping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”

He adds that the physics behind it is remarkably consistent. “Every tonne of carbon dioxide we release into the atmosphere drives up global temperature by about the same amount as the last one.”

Myles, who has also served on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, believes vast social change is not required to impact climate change but we do need to us the available technology to get things done.

In our interview, he distinguishes between offsetting claims and a more precise system he calls “geological net zero.” At the centre of his proposal is what he calls a “carbon take-back obligation” - a policy that would make fossil fuel producers responsible not just for extracting carbon-based fuels, but for dealing with the carbon dioxide they create.

Myles says: “If you sell something that generates a waste product, you’re obligated to take that waste back from your customer and dispose of it responsibly.”

He says this would shift the burden away from individuals and onto the companies that supply fossil fuels. He adds that capture and storage technologies already exist.

The challenge, he says, is scale and timing rather than feasibility. A gradual transition over the next 25 to 30 years would allow industries to adapt while steadily increasing the proportion of carbon captured and stored.

“It would be entirely feasible,” he says, “if they started now and increased that stored fraction progressively over time until they got to 100 per cent.”

Myles also pushes back against the idea that climate action must rely on individual behavioural change alone. He argues that current policy frameworks place too much emphasis on consumers rather than producers.

“I can’t go and capture the carbon dioxide that comes out of my home boiler and dig a deep hole and put it back underground, but the person who supplies me with the gas could.”

Despite the scale of the challenge, Myles’ message is optimistic. He says the transition would be manageable and, importantly, affordable when spread over time.

“There is something positive,” he concludes. “We could stop climate change within a generation.”