Abstract

We further show that widespread adoption of national TN would create a proliferation dynamic, a “race to the bottom”, in which the mitigation gap left by TN-adopting states increases pressure on remaining states, collectively undermining the EU and global mitigation effort. We also rebut the assertion that GWP100 lacks scientific rigour: it is grounded in the same physical climate modelling as TN-based approaches and benefits from a standardised, internationally accepted accounting protocol. Finally, we highlight the equity implications identified in our original study: national TN grandfathers disproportionately high per-capita agricultural CH₄ emissions in Ireland, appropriating emissions space needed by food-insecure developing countries. We conclude that TN is not an effective, fair, transparent, or robust basis for national climate policy.