Explore the vast range of titles available.

The Paris Agreement does not only stipulate to limit the global average temperature increase to well below 2 °C, it also calls for ‘making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions’. Consequently, there is an urgent need to understand the implications of climate targets for energy systems and quantify the associated investment requirements in the coming decade. A meaningful analysis must however consider the near-term mitigation requirements to avoid the overshoot of a temperature goal. It must also include the recently observed fast technological progress in key mitigation options. Here, we use a new and unique scenario ensemble that limit peak warming by construction and that stems from seven up-to-date integrated assessment models. This allows us to study the near-term implications of different limits to peak temperature increase under a consistent and up-to-date set of assumptions. We find that ambitious immediate action allows for limiting median warming outcomes to well below 2 °C in all models. By contrast, current nationally determined contributions for 2030 would add around 0.2 °C of peak warming, leading to an unavoidable transgression of 1.5 °C in all models, and 2 °C in some. In contrast to the incremental changes as foreseen by current plans, ambitious peak warming targets require decisive emission cuts until 2030, with the most substantial contribution to decarbonization coming from the power sector. Therefore, investments into low-carbon power generation need to increase beyond current levels to meet the Paris goals, especially for solar and wind technologies and related system enhancements for electricity transmission, distribution and storage. Estimates on absolute investment levels, up-scaling of other low-carbon power generation technologies and investment shares in less ambitious scenarios vary considerably across models. In scenarios limiting peak warming to below 2 °C, while coal is phased out quickly, oil and gas are still being used significantly until 2030, albeit at lower than current levels. This requires continued investments into existing oil and gas infrastructure, but investments into new fields in such scenarios might not be needed. The results show that credible and effective policy action is essential for ensuring efficient allocation of investments aligned with medium-term climate targets.

Low-carbon investments are necessary for driving the energy system transformation that is called for by both the Paris Agreement and Sustainable Development Goals. Improving understanding of the scale and nature of these investments under diverging technology and policy futures is therefore of great importance to decision makers. Here, using six global modelling frameworks, we show that the pronounced reallocation of the investment portfolio required to transform the energy system will not be initiated by the current suite of countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions. Charting a course toward ‘well below 2 °C’ instead sees low-carbon investments overtaking fossil investments globally by around 2025 or before and growing thereafter. Pursuing the 1.5 °C target demands a marked upscaling in low-carbon capital beyond that of a 2 °C-consistent future. Actions consistent with an energy transformation would increase the costs of achieving the goals of energy access and food security, but reduce the costs of achieving air-quality goals. The scale and nature of energy investments under diverging technology and policy futures is of great importance to decision makers. Here, a multi-model study projects investment needs under countries’ nationally determined contributions and in pathways consistent with achieving the 2 °C and 1.5 °C targets as well as certain SDGs.

Direct air capture (DAC) is critical for achieving stringent climate targets, yet the environmental implications of its large-scale deployment have not been evaluated in this context. Performing a prospective life cycle assessment for two promising technologies in a series of climate change mitigation scenarios, we find that electricity sector decarbonization and DAC technology improvements are both indispensable to avoid environmental problem-shifting. Decarbonizing the electricity sector improves the sequestration efficiency, but also increases the terrestrial ecotoxicity and metal depletion levels per tonne of CO 2 sequestered via DAC. These increases can be reduced by improvements in DAC material and energy use efficiencies. DAC exhibits regional environmental impact variations, highlighting the importance of smart siting related to energy system planning and integration. DAC deployment aids the achievement of long-term climate targets, its environmental and climate performance however depend on sectoral mitigation actions, and thus should not suggest a relaxation of sectoral decarbonization targets. New study concludes that environmental tradeoffs of direct air capture and sequestration technologies are linked to the energy system in which they will operate, and their deployment should not equate to a relaxation of decarbonization or resource use efficiency targets.

The Russian military aggression against Ukraine has had significant global impacts on energy security, economy and geopolitics. The 2022 global energy crisis raises questions about how the war affects the energy transition and global climate policy. However, there are limited studies that incorporate its effects into self-consistent projections of alternative scenarios. This scenario study uses two leading macro-economic models and one integrated assessment model to assess how the war in Ukraine and its direct implications—trade restrictions and rising energy prices—affect economies, energy supply and demand trends, emissions and the feasibility of climate policies. The models consistently project that the disruptive responses to the war lead to a shift from fossil fuels (notably natural gas) to renewable energy and a consequent CO2 emission reduction of about 1%–5%, in the period up to 2050, both for the European Union and globally. However, projections differ across models in terms of sectoral and regional contributions to emission reductions. The results are found to be highly sensitive to the expected, yet uncertain persistence of higher fossil energy prices due to the war, which depends on the duration of the conflict, the disruption of global energy supplies and the response of other major fossil fuel exporters.

Currently, climate impacts are mostly absent in the analysis of process-based integrated assessment models (IAMs). This is becoming increasingly problematic given the fact that climate impacts are expected to influence both baseline developments as well as the capacity to mitigate and adapt in the future. This paper presents a set of scenarios made using the IAM IMAGE with climate change impacts on labor productivity and GDP, renewable energy supply, heating and cooling demand, food production, water availability, and biodiversity. The results show that these impacts can have significant effect on existing projections of the economic, energy and land system that are usually not included in IAM projections. In the current implementation, the aggregated economic impacts are often larger in size than sectoral feedbacks, such as those on energy supply and demand, GHG emissions, and food consumption. Importantly, we find that there are several hotspot areas, including Western Africa, Indonesia and the Middle East, where multiple risks accumulate more than in other regions.

Renewable energy resources, which depend on climate, may be susceptible to future climate change. Here we use climate and integrated assessment models to estimate this effect on key renewables. Future potential and costs are quantified across two warming scenarios for eight technologies: utility-scale and rooftop photovoltaic, concentrated solar power, onshore and offshore wind energy, first-generation and lignocellulosic bioenergy, and hydropower. The generated cost–supply curves are then used to estimate energy system impacts. In a baseline warming scenario, the largest impact is increased availability of bioenergy, though this depends on the strength of CO2 fertilization. Impacts on hydropower and wind energy are uncertain, with declines in some regions and increases in others, and impacts on solar power are minor. In a future mitigation scenario, these impacts are smaller, but the energy system response is similar to that in the baseline scenario given a larger reliance of the mitigation scenario on renewables.Renewable energy relies on climate fields that will be altered by warming, and the impacts on the energy system are estimated for eight renewable energy technologies. Bioenergy sees the largest global increases but high uncertainty; other types see small global change but robust local trends.

A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy. There lacks a consistent and holistic evaluation of co-benefits of different mitigation pathways in studies on Integrated Assessment Models. Here the authors quantify environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of a portfolio of alternative power sector decarbonisation pathways and show that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice.

Mitigation scenarios that achieve the ambitious targets included in the Paris Agreement typically rely on greenhouse gas emission reductions combined with net carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere, mostly accomplished through large-scale application of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, and afforestation. However, CDR strategies face several difficulties such as reliance on underground CO2 storage and competition for land with food production and biodiversity protection. The question arises whether alternative deep mitigation pathways exist. Here, using an integrated assessment model, we explore the impact of alternative pathways that include lifestyle change, additional reduction of non-CO2 greenhouse gases and more rapid electrification of energy demand based on renewable energy. Although these alternatives also face specific difficulties, they are found to significantly reduce the need for CDR, but not fully eliminate it. The alternatives offer a means to diversify transition pathways to meet the Paris Agreement targets, while simultaneously benefiting other sustainability goals.

The Paris Agreement—which is aimed at holding global warming well below 2 °C while pursuing efforts to limit it below 1.5 °C—has initiated a bottom-up process of iteratively updating nationally determined contributions to reach these long-term goals. Achieving these goals implies a tight limit on cumulative net CO2 emissions, of which residual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are the greatest impediment. Here, using an ensemble of seven integrated assessment models (IAMs), we explore the determinants of these residual emissions, focusing on sector-level contributions. Even when strengthened pre-2030 mitigation action is combined with very stringent long-term policies, cumulative residual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels remain at 850–1,150 GtCO2 during 2016–2100, despite carbon prices of US$130–420 per tCO2 by 2030. Thus, 640–950 GtCO2 removal is required for a likely chance of limiting end-of-century warming to 1.5 °C. In the absence of strengthened pre-2030 pledges, long-term CO2 commitments are increased by 160–330 GtCO2, further jeopardizing achievement of the 1.5 °C goal and increasing dependence on CO2 removal.

The decarbonization of shipping has become an important policy goal. While integrated assessment models (IAMs) are often used to explore climate mitigation strategies, they typically provide little information on international shipping, which accounts for emissions of around 0.7 GtCO 2  yr −1 . Here we perform a multi-IAM analysis of international shipping and show the potential for decreasing annual emissions in the next decades, with reductions of up to 86% by 2050. This is primarily achieved through the deployment of low-carbon fuels. Models that represent several potential low-carbon alternatives tend to show a deeper decarbonization of international shipping, with drop-in biofuels, renewable alcohols and green ammonia standing out as the main substitutes for conventional maritime fuels. While our results align with the 2018 emission reduction goal of the International Maritime Organization, their compatibility with the agency’s revised target is still subject to a more definitive interpretation. International maritime shipping accounts for an important proportion of global CO 2 emissions, but its role in a world with deep decarbonization has not been thoroughly examined. Through a multi-model comparison, this study reveals the necessity of reducing and stabilizing emissions from this sector in the next few decades.