How to cite this WIREs title:
WIREs Clim Change

Impact Factor: 6.099

A critical review of global decarbonization scenarios: what do they tell us about feasibility?

Advanced Review

Peter J. Loftus, Armond M. Cohen, Jane C. S. Long, Jesse D. Jenkins

Published Online: Nov 06 2014

DOI: 10.1002/wcc.324

Full article on Wiley Online Library: HTML PDF

Can't access this content? Tell your librarian.

Dozens of scenarios are published each year outlining paths to a low carbon global energy system. To provide insight into the relative feasibility of these global decarbonization scenarios, we examine 17 scenarios constructed using a diverse range of techniques and introduce a set of empirical benchmarks that can be applied to compare and assess the pace of energy system transformation entailed by each scenario. In particular, we quantify the implied rate of change in energy and carbon intensity and low‐carbon technology deployment rates for each scenario and benchmark each against historical experience and industry projections, where available. In addition, we examine how each study addresses the key technical, economic, and societal factors that may constrain the pace of low‐carbon energy transformation. We find that all of the scenarios envision historically unprecedented improvements in energy intensity, while normalized low‐carbon capacity deployment rates are broadly consistent with historical experience. Three scenarios that constrain the available portfolio of low‐carbon options by excluding some technologies (nuclear and carbon capture and storage) a priori are outliers, requiring much faster low‐carbon capacity deployment and energy intensity improvements. Finally, all of the studies present comparatively little detail on strategies to decarbonize the industrial and transportation sectors, and most give superficial treatment to relevant constraints on energy system transformations. To be reliable guides for policymaking, scenarios such as these need to be supplemented by more detailed analyses realistically addressing the key constraints on energy system transformation. WIREs Clim Change 2015, 6:93–112. doi: 10.1002/wcc.324 This article is categorized under: Integrated Assessment of Climate Change > Integrated Scenario Development The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Decarbonizing Energy and/or Reducing Demand

CO₂ emissions targets of the global climate stabilization studies reviewed (see Table for key to sources). Dashed lines are for clarity and do not imply emissions trajectories.

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Historical and projected total global installed power generation capacity (see Table for key sources).

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Worldwide normalized capacity addition rates of total power system capacity and key power generation technologies since 1965 (sources: Refs ) and ranges of normalized capacity additions for scenarios reviewed. All capacity addition rates normalized by constant dollar global GDP.

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Projected installed power generation capacity in 2030, and current installed capacity in 2009 (‘other’ includes oil, biomass, geothermal, and ocean).

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Share of projected total primary energy demand for specified year by energy source (nonbiomass renewables includes hydro, wind, solar, and geothermal; see Table for key sources).

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Global trends in energy intensity, past, and projected (sources: Refs , and the various studies reviewed herein).

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Projected total primary energy demand for the climate stabilization scenarios reviewed (see Table for key to sources). Dashed lines are for clarity and do not imply energy trajectories.

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

References

Allen, M, Frame, D, Huntingford, C, Jones, C, Lowe, JA, Meinshausen, M, Meinshausen, N. Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne. Nature 2009, 458:1163–1166. doi: 10.1038/nature08019.
Matthews, HD, Caldeira, K. Stabilizing climate requires near‐zero emissions. Geophys Res Lett 2008, 35:L04705. doi: 10.1029/2007GL032388.
Anderson, K, Bows, A. Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post‐2000 emission trends. Phil Trans R Soc A 2008, 366:3863–3882.
Rogelj, J, Hare, W, Lowe, J, van Vuuren, DP, Riahi, K, Matthews, B, Hanaoka, T, Jiang, K, Meinshausen, M. Emission pathways consistent with a 2 °C global temperature limit. Nat Clim Change 2011, 1:413–418.
Solomon, S, Plattner, GK, Knutti, R, Friedlingstein, P. Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009, 106:1704–1709. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0812721106.
Bowerman, N, Frame, D, Huntingford, C, Jason, A, Lowe, J, Allen, M. Cumulative carbon emissions, emissions floors and short‐term rates of warming: implications for policy. Phil Trans R Soc A 2011, 369:45–66.
IPCC. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. In: Edenhofer, O, Pichs‐Madruga, R, Sokona, Y, Farahani, E, Kadner, S, Seyboth, K, Adler, A, Baum, I, Brunner, S, Eickemeier, P, et al., eds. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2014.
Kriegler, E, Weyant, JP, Blanford, GJ, Krey, V, Edmonds, J, Riahi, K, Richels, R, Tavoni, M. The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies. Clim Change 2014, 123:353–367.
Myhrvold, NP, Caldeira, K. Greenhouse gases, climate change and the transition from coal to low‐carbon electricity. Environ Res Lett 2012, 7:014019. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/7/1/014019.
Hoffert, MI. Farewell to fossil fuels? Science 2012, 329:1292–1294. doi: 10.1126/science.1195449.
Davis, SJ, Caldeira, K, Matthews, HD. Future CO₂ emissions and climate change from existing energy infrastructure. Science 2012, 329:1330–1333. doi: 10.1126/science.1188566.
Greenpeace/EREC. Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable World Energy Outlook. Amsterdam, The Netherlands and Brussels, Belgium: Greenpeace %26 European Renewable Energy Council; 2010.
Jacobson, M, Delucchi, M. Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, part I: technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials. Energy Policy 2011, 39:1154–1169.
Delucchi, M, Jacobson, M. Evaluating the feasibility of meeting all global energy needs with wind, water, and solar power, part II: reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies. Energy Policy 2011, 39:1170–1190.
Worldwatch Institute. Renewable Revolution: Low‐Carbon Energy by 2030. Worldwatch Institute, 2009.
Brook, BW. Could nuclear fission energy, etc., solve the greenhouse problem? The affirmative case. Energy Policy 2012, 42:4–8. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.041.
Clarke, L, Edmonds, J, Jacoby, H, Pitcher, H, Reilly, J, Richels, R. Scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions and atmospheric concentrations. Sub‐report 2.1A of Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1. U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Department of Energy, Office of Biological & Environmental Research, Washington, DC, 2007.
Clarke, L, Edmonds, J, Krey, V, Richels, R, Rose, S, Tavoni, M. International climate policy architectures: overview of the EMF 22 international scenarios. Energy Econ 2009, 31:S64–S81.
GEA. Global Energy Assessment: Towards a Sustainable Future. Cambridge, UK: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and Cambridge University Press; 2012.
IEA. World Energy Outlook 2010. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/International Energy Agency; 2010.
IEA. Energy Technology Perspectives 2010: Scenarios and Strategies to 2050. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/International Energy Agency; 2010.
World Wildlife Fund. Climate Solutions: WWF`s Vision for 2050. Gland, Switzerland: World Wildlife Fund; 2007.
McKinsey and Company: Pathways to a Low Carbon Economy. New York, NY: McKinsey %26 Company; 2009.
Calvin, KV, Clarke, LE, Krey, V, eds. The Asia modeling exercise: exploring the role of Asia in mitigating climate change (special issue). Energy Econ 2012, 34(suppl 3):S251–S512.
Hughes, N, Strachan, N. Methodological review of UK and international low carbon scenarios. Energy Policy 2010, 38:6056–6065. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.061.
van Vliet, J, Hof, AF, Mendoza Beltran, A, van den Berg, M, Deetman, S, den Elzen, MJ, Lucas, PL, van Vuuren, D: The impact of technology availability on the timing and costs of emission reductions for achieving long‐term climate targets. Clim Change 2014, 123: 559‐569.
IEA. CO₂ Emissions from Fuel Combustion: Highlights 2012. Paris, France: International Energy Agency; 2012.
Kriegler, E, Weyant, JP, Blanford, GJ, Krey, V, Clarke, L, Edmonds, J, Fawcett, A, Luderer, G, Riahi, K, Richels, R, et al. The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies. Clim Change 2014, 123:353–367. doi: 10.1007/s10584-013-0953-7.
EIA. International Energy Outlook. Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA‐0484; 2010.
IEA. World Energy Outlook 2011. Paris, France:Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Energy Agency; 2011.
Schipper, L, Fulton, L. Disappointed by Diesel? The Impact of the Shift to Diesels in Europe through 2006. Trans Res Rec 2009 Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2139–01.
World Bank: World Bank Databank; 2012. Available at: http://databank.worldbank.org/. (Accessed September 29, 2013).
Jenkins, J. Which nations have reduced carbon intensity the fastest? Breakthrough Institute, April 3, 2012. Available at: http://thebreakthrough.org/archive/which_nations_have_reduced_car. (Accessed September 29, 2013).
Wilson, C. Meta‐analysis of unit and industry level scaling dynamics in energy technologies and climate change mitigation scenarios. IIASA Report IR‐09‐029; 2009.
British Petroleum. BP statistical review of world energy 2012; 2012. Available at: bp.com/statisticalreview. (Accessed September 29, 2013).
WWEA. World Wind Energy Report 2009. Bonn, Germany: World Wind Energy Association; 2010.
EPIA. Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics until 2014. Brussels, Belgium: European Photovoltaics Industry Association; 2010.
GWEC and Greenpeace. Global Wind Energy Outlook 2012. Brussels, Belgium: Global Wind Energy Council; 2012.
EPIA. Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics 2013–2017. Brussels, Belgium: European Photovoltaic Industry Association; 2013.
EPIA. Unlocking the Sunbelt Potential of Photovoltaics. Brussels, Belgium: European Photovoltaic Industry Association; 2010.
ESTELA. Concentrating Solar Power: Global Outlook 2009. Brussels, Belgium: European Solar Thermal Electricity Association; 2009.
MIT. The Future of Geothermal Energy: Impact of Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) on the United States in the 21st Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT; 2006.
Smil, V. Energy at the Crossroads: Global Perspectives and Uncertainties. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2003.
Smil, V. Energy Myths and Realities: Bringing Science to the Energy Policy Debate. Washington, DC: AEI Press; 2010.
Nocera, DG. On the future of global energy. Daedalus 2006, 135:112.
Lewis, N. Powering the planet. MRS Bull 2007, 2007:808–820.
MacKay, D 2009: Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air. UIT Cambridge. Available at: http://www.withouthotair.com. (Accessed September 29, 2013).
Searchinger, T, Heimlich, R, Houghton, RA, Dong, F, Elobeid, A, Fabiosa, J, Tokgoz, S, Hayes, D, and Yu, T. Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land‐use change. Science 2008, 319:1238. doi: 10.1126/science.1151861.
Lapola, DM, Schaldach, R, Alcamo, J, Bondeau, A, Koch, J, Koelking, C, Priess, JA. Indirect land‐use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010, 107:3388–93. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0907318107.
Edwards, R, Mulligan, D, Marelli, L. Indirect land use change from increased biofuels demand: comparison of models and results for marginal biofuels production from different feedstocks. EC Joint Research Commission 59771; 2010. doi: 10.2788/54137.
Plevin, RJ, O`Hare, M, Jones, AD, Torn, MS, Gibbs, HK. Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels` indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. Environ Sci Technol 2010, 44. doi: 10.1021/es101946t.
Arima, EY, Richards, P, Walker, R, and Caldas, MM. Statistical confirmation of indirect land use change in the Brazilian Amazon. Environ Res Lett 2011, 6:024010. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/6/2/024010.
Belzowski, BM, McManus, W. Alternative powertrain strategies and fleet turnover in the 21st century. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Report UMTRI‐2010‐20, 2010. Available at: http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/78001/102673.pdf. (Accessed September 29, 2013).
Electrification Coalition. Electrification Roadmap: Revolutionizing Transportation And Achieving Energy Security. Washington, DC: Electrification Coalition; 2009.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Standards of performance for greenhouse gas emissions from new stationary sources: electric utility generating units; proposed rule, 79 Fed. Reg. 1430, 1471 (January 8, 2014) (citing Dooley JJ, Davidson CL, Dahowski RT. An Assessment of the Commercial Availability of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Technologies as of June 2009. PNNL‐18520, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA; 2009.
Jacobson, M, Delucchi, M. A path to sustainable energy by 2030. Scientific American, November 2009, 58–65.
MIT Energy Initiative. Managing Large‐Scale Penetration of Intermittent Renewables. Cambridge, MA: MIT; 2011.
Idaho Power. Wind Integration Study Report. Boise, ID: Idaho Power; 2012.
Denholm, P, Hand, M. Grid flexibility and storage required to achieve very high penetration of variable renewable electricity. Energy Policy 2011, 39:1817–1830. NREL Report No. JA‐6A20‐49400.
Denholm, P, Margolis, R. Very large‐scale deployment of grid‐connected solar photovoltaics in the united states: challenges and opportunities. NREL Report No. CP‐620‐39683; 2006.
Mills, A, Wiser, R, Porter, K. A critical review of wind transmission cost estimates from major transmission planning efforts. In: 27th USAEE/IAEE North American Conference, Houston, TX, 18–19 September, 2007.
Melaina, MW, Heath, G, Sandor, D, Steward, D, Vimmerstedt, L, Warner, E, Webster, KW. Alternative fuel infrastructure expansion: costs, resources, production capacity, and retail availability for low‐carbon scenarios. NREL Report DOE/GO‐102013‐3710; 2013, 101.
Greenpeace. False hope: why carbon capture and storage won`t save the climate. Greenpeace Report JN136, May 2008.

Further Reading

D MacKay,. Sustainable Energy without the Hot Air. UIT Cambridge: 2009. Available at: http://www.withouthotair.com.
Jaccard, M. Sustainable Fossil Fuels: The Unusual Suspect in the Quest for Clean and Enduring Energy. Cambridge University Press; 2006.
Smil, V. Energy Transitions: History, Requirements, Prospects. Santa Barbara: Praeger; 2010.
California Council on Science and Technology. California`s Energy Future: The View to 2050. CCST, 2011. Available at: http://www.ccst.us/publications/2011/2011energy.pdf.

Society Partners

	Royal Geographical Society (with IBG)
	Royal Meteorological Society

Access to this WIREs title is by subscription only.

Recommend to Your
Librarian Now!

The latest WIREs articles in your inbox

Sign Up for Article Alerts