Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The statement warns that adopting GWP* would allow the livestock industry to greenwash emissions and undermine the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. It recommends maintaining GWP100 or GWP20 for reporting and mitigation policies.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The signatories argue that adopting GWP* as a climate metric at the country or company level would enable livestock companies to greenwash their products as “climate neutral” or “climate negative” while continuing to emit large amounts of greenhouse gases.
  • The document claims GWP* is an inappropriate metric for country or company reporting because it measures changes in warming contribution rather than total ongoing impacts, which could lead to perverse outcomes: the same volume of methane could be described as causing warming, no warming, or cooling depending on the baseline year; ongoing warming impacts could be declared “climate neutral”; and minor methane reductions could be used to offset CO2 or N2O emissions.
  • The statement asserts that GWP* would unfairly penalize countries in the Global South with low methane emissions while rewarding historically high emitters in the Global North.
  • The authors argue that adopting GWP* would undermine the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target by damaging efforts to restrict livestock methane and compromising CO2 and N2O reductions in other sectors. They note that GWP100 is already embedded in the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions, making a shift to GWP* impractical.
  • The document highlights the necessity of significant methane reductions to meet climate goals, citing that reductions of at least 33% by 2030 and 47–60% by 2050 are required, making a “no added warming” approach insufficient.

Cite the original document

APA
Changing Markets Foundation (n.d.). Joint-Statement on GWP* and Livestock Methane. https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/GWP-Star-NGO-statement-with-signatories-1.pdf
Chicago
Changing Markets Foundation. Joint-Statement on GWP* and Livestock Methane. n.d. https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/GWP-Star-NGO-statement-with-signatories-1.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |author=Changing Markets Foundation |title=Joint-Statement on GWP* and Livestock Methane |url=https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/GWP-Star-NGO-statement-with-signatories-1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{changingmarketsfoundationndjointstatement, author = {{Changing Markets Foundation}}, title = {{Joint-Statement on GWP* and Livestock Methane}}, publisher = {Changing Markets Foundation}, url = {https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/GWP-Star-NGO-statement-with-signatories-1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated