It might help if they could decide on whether the target is to remove 12 billion tonnes of carbon per year or 12 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide. Not just because of the minor difference between a solid and a gas, but also because one weighs a little more than the other (by a factor of 3.664). Of course, they will also be well aware of the difference between estimated emissions (around 12 billion tonnes of carbon per year) and atmospheric growth of CO2 (about double that in CO2 weight terms, but only half of emissions). Of course they will. OK, add a /sarc.

Front page BBC website news in the ramping up ahead of COP 24:

"Climate change: Can 12 billion tonnes of carbon be sucked from the air?"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46345280

"Is it remotely feasible to remove 12 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the air? Every year. For decades to come.

That's the challenge posed by the latest conclusions of the UN's climate science panel.

It says that only by pulling this heat-trapping gas out of the atmosphere can we avoid dangerous climate change.

But according to one leading researcher, there's a bit of a hitch: "We haven't a clue how to do it".

The problem is that scientists reckon that even if the world manages to cut emissions of the gas, it will no longer be enough to avoid the worst impacts."

"When might any of these ideas be ready?
That's a question that usually produces shrugs. Too little is known at this stage.

I ask Prof Beerling when the basalt-spraying technique might be in use, assuming it's eventually proven to work on a large scale.

"The infrastructure for farmers to deploy basalt on their crops is already in place. If proven safe and effective, it might be deployable within a decade or two," he says.

Yet all the time, even more CO₂ is being added to the atmosphere - and with few options for reversing it."

Sounds like they're admitting that Paris hasn't worked, isn't working, and won't work. Only the desperate and grant-seekers now need apply!

Great Lakes surface temperature getting colder with each passing year .

https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/res/glcfs/compare_years/

Obviously such a inconsequential body of water has little effect on the North American climate......

Why do people keep using the words "our borders and our country "

Please you must get over this incorrect use of language.
We have no stake in our patch
It's obviously owned by someone else.

I see that in today's figures that immigration shows no signs of reducing but EU citizens are being replaced by R9W citizens. Is the UK ever going to reduce numbers or will this continue for the foreseeable future with whatever style of Brexit is the outcome of the current circus? Was this the taking control of our borders we envisaged?