Synergies

Climate stabilisation requires the mobilization of substantial investments in low- and zero-carbon technologies, especially in emerging and developing economies. However, access to stable and affordable finance varies dramatically across countries. Models used to evaluate the energy transition do not differentiate regional financing costs and therefore cannot study risk-sharing mechanisms for renewable electricity generation. In this study, we incorporated the empirically estimated cost of capital differentiated by country and technology into an ensemble of five climate–energy–economy models. We quantified the additional financing cost of decarbonisation borne by developing regions and explored policies of risk premium convergence across countries. We found that alleviating financial constraints benefits both climate and equity as a result of more renewable and affordable energy in the developing world. This highlights the importance of fair finance for energy availability, affordability and sustainability, as well as the need to include financial considerations in model-based assessments.

We reflect on the development of digital twins of the Earth, which we associate with a reductionist view of nature as a machine. The projects of digital twins deviate from contemporary scientific paradigms in the treatment of complexity and uncertainty, and does not engage with critical and interpretative social sciences. We contest the utility of digital twins for addressing climate change issues and discuss societal risks associated with the concept, including the twins' potential to reinforce economicism and governance by numbers, emphasizing concerns about democratic accountability. We propose a more balanced alternative, advocating for independent institutions to develop diverse models, prioritize communication with simple heuristic-based models, collect comprehensive data from various sources, including traditional knowledge, and shift focus away from physics-centered variables to inform climate action. We argue that the advancement of digital twins should hinge on stringent controls, favoring a nuanced, interdisciplinary, and democratic approach that prioritizes societal well-being over blind pursuit of computational sophistication.

The year 2015 was an important milestone in the world’s struggle for sustainability. Although mostly remembered for the landmark Paris Agreement, which formalised and operationalised a mechanism for globally coordinated and cooperative efforts to address the climate crisis, it also featured the UN-wide adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, embodied in seventeen distinct yet highly intertwined dimensions—the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These inter alia include poverty and hunger elimination, alleviating social and gender inequalities, fostering peace and the development of strong institutions, making production responsible, environmental and biodiversity protection, and achieving good health and well-being.

Income and its distribution profile are important determinants of residential energy demand and carry direct implications for human well-being and climate. We explore the sensitivity of residential energy systems to income growth and distribution across SSP-RCP scenarios using a global, integrated, multisector dynamics model, GCAM, which tracks national/regional household energy services and fuel choice by income decile. Nation/region energy use patterns across deciles tend to converge over time with aggregate income growth, as higher-income consumers approach satiation levels in floorspace and energy services. However, in some regions, existing within-region inequalities in energy consumption persist over time due to slow income growth in lower income groups. Due to continued differences in fuel types, lower income groups will have higher exposure to household air pollution, despite lower contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. We also find that the share of income dedicated to energy is higher for lower deciles, with strong regional differences.

As the imperative to address climate change intensifies, understanding the effectiveness of policy interventions becomes paramount. In the context of addressing these urgent challenges and given the inadequacy of current policies to address this issue, this study examines the extent to which Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Long-Term Targets (LTTs) can contribute to achieving ambitious climate goals. Recognizing the critical need for effective climate action, we employ the advanced modelling tools PROMETHEUS and GCAM to assess the implications of different scenarios–Current Policies (CP), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), and combination of NDCs with Long-Term Targets (NDC_LTT)–on the future development of energy system and emission. This study, by employing these well-known models, seeks to provide an improved understanding of the impacts of NDCs on global emission trajectories and whether the integration of NDCs and LTTs can help close the gap towards Paris-compatible pathways. The study analyzes various sectors including buildings, transportation, electricity generation, and industry to provide insights into the limitations of existing policies and the potential of enhanced commitments to drive transformative changes in a global scale. The effectiveness of these policies varies across different sectors, highlighting the challenges that need to be addressed for achieving the required emission reduction targets in the medium- and long-term. Key findings indicate significant shifts in energy consumption, fuel mix, technology adoption, and emission trajectories, particularly under the synergistic action represented by the NDC_LTT scenario.

The reduction of the EU's pipeline gas imports from Russia because of the Russian war against Ukraine has had severe economy-wide implications for the bloc. Using a multisector integrated assessment model (GCAM), we find that a potential complete cut-off of Russian pipeline gas exports to the EU unevenly impacts the energy mix and gas prices across subregions within the EU, depending on their access to alternative gas pipelines and liquefied natural gas infrastructure. The restrictions also affect global gas infrastructure capacity additions, asset stranding, and trade dynamics. Our results show that the Fit-for-55 policy framework already improves the EU's resilience against a cut-off of Russian pipeline gas, while additional improvements in energy efficiency and renewable targets could further soften impacts.

In every Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment cycle, a multitude of scenarios are assessed, with different scope and emphasis throughout the various Working Group reports and special reports, as well as their respective chapters. Within the reports, the ambition is to integrate knowledge on possible climate futures across the Working Groups and scientific research domains based on a small set of “framing pathways” such as the so-called representative concentration pathways (RCPs) in the Fifth IPCC Assessment Report (AR5) and the shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP) scenarios in the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). This perspective, initiated by discussions at the IPCC Bangkok workshop in April 2023 on the “Use of Scenarios in AR6 and Subsequent Assessments”, is intended to serve as one of the community contributions to highlight the needs for the next generation of framing pathways that is being advanced under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) umbrella, which will influence or even predicate the IPCC AR7 consideration of framing pathways. Here we suggest several policy research objectives that such a set of framing pathways should ideally fulfil, including mitigation needs for meeting the Paris Agreement objectives, the risks associated with carbon removal strategies, the consequences of delay in enacting that mitigation, guidance for adaptation needs, loss and damage, and for achieving mitigation in the wider context of societal development goals. Based on this context, we suggest that the next generation of climate scenarios for Earth system models should evolve towards representative emission pathways (REPs) and suggest key categories for such pathways. These framing pathways should address the most critical mitigation policy and adaptation plans that need to be implemented over the next 10 years. In our view, the most important categories are those relevant in the context of the Paris Agreement long-term goal, specifically an immediate action (low overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway and a delayed action (high overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway. Two other key categories are a pathway category approximately in line with current (as expressed by 2023) near- and long-term policy objectives, as well as a higher-emission category that is approximately in line with “current policies” (as expressed by 2023). We also argue for the scientific and policy relevance in exploring two “worlds that could have been”. One of these categories has high-emission trajectories well above what is implied by current policies and the other has very-low-emission trajectories which assume that global mitigation action in line with limiting warming to 1.5 °C without overshoot had begun in 2015. Finally, we note that the timely provision of new scientific information on pathways is critical to inform the development and implementation of climate policy. Under the Paris Agreement, for the second global stocktake, which will occur in 2028, and to inform subsequent development of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) up to 2040, scientific inputs are required by 2027. These needs should be carefully considered in the development timeline of community modelling activities, including those under CMIP7.

Climate action to achieve the Paris Agreement should respect the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Here, we use an integrated assessment modelling framework comprising nine climate policy models and quantify the impacts of decarbonisation pathways on Sustainable Development Goals in the European Union at regional and national levels. We show that scenario-consistent assumptions of future socio-economic trends and current climate policies would improve energy- and carbon-related aspects of sustainability and reduce inequalities. Ambitious net-zero emissions pathways would further improve health and agricultural productivity. Furthermore, countries currently lagging in achieving sustainable development goals would see the greatest benefits from ambitious climate action. Negative socio-economic impacts from climate action on poverty, hunger, and economic growth will require specific corrective policies. While our analysis does not quantify the negative effects of less ambitious climate policy, it demonstrates where co-benefits and trade-offs of greenhouse gas mitigation and sustainable development agenda exist and can guide policy formulation.

A rapid phase-out of unabated coal use is essential to limit global warming to below 2 °C. This review presents a comprehensive assessment of coal transitions in mitigation scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement, using data from more than 1500 publicly available scenarios generated by more than 30 integrated assessment models. Our ensemble analysis uses clustering techniques to categorize coal transition pathways in models and bridges evidence on technological learning and innovation with historical data of energy systems. Six key findings emerge: First, we identify three archetypal coal transitions within Paris-consistent mitigation pathways. About 38% of scenarios are 'coal phase out' trajectories and rapidly reduce coal consumption to near zero. 'Coal persistence' pathways (42%) reduce coal consumption much more gradually and incompletely. The remaining 20% follow 'coal resurgence' pathways, characterized by increased coal consumption in the second half of the century. Second, coal persistence and resurgence archetypes rely on the widespread availability and rapid scale-up of carbon capture and storage technology (CCS). Third, coal-transition archetypes spread across all levels of climate policy ambition and scenario cycles, reflecting their dependence on model structures and assumptions. Fourth, most baseline scenarios—including the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs)—show much higher coal dependency compared to historical observations over the last 60 years. Fifth, coal-transition scenarios consistently incorporate very optimistic assumptions about the cost and scalability of CCS technologies, while being pessimistic about the cost and scalability of renewable energy technologies. Sixth, evaluation against coal-dependent baseline scenarios suggests that many mitigation scenarios overestimate the technical difficulty and costs of coal phase-outs. To improve future research, we recommend using up-to-date cost data and evidence about innovation and diffusion dynamics of different groups of zero or low-carbon technologies. Revised SSP quantifications need to incorporate projected technology learning and consistent cost structures, while reflecting recent trends in coal consumption.

Energy system models are important tools to guide our understanding of current and future carbon dioxide emissions as well as to inform strategies for emissions reduction. These models offer a vital evidence base that increasingly underpins energy and climate policies in many countries. In light of this important role in policy formation, there is growing interest in, and demands for, energy modellers to integrate more diverse perspectives on possible and preferred futures into the modelling process. The main purpose of this is to ensure that the resultant policy decisions are both fairer and better reflect people's concerns and preferences. However, while there has been a focus in the literature on efforts to bring societal dimensions into modelling tools, there remains a limited number of examples of well-structured participatory energy systems modelling processes and no available how-to guidance. This paper addresses this gap by providing good practice guidance for integrating stakeholder and public involvement in energy systems modelling based on the reflections of a diverse range of experts from this emergent field. The framework outlined in this paper offers multiple entry points for modellers to incorporate participatory elements either throughout the process or in individual stages. Recognising the messiness of both fields (energy systems modelling and participatory research), the good practice principles are not comprehensive or set in stone, but rather pose important questions to steer this process. Finally, the reflections on key issues provide a summary of the crucial challenges and important areas for future research in this critical field.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Andrzej Ceglarz and Amanda Schibline from the Renewables Grid Initiative for their valuable input in the workshops held. This research was funded by the Science Foundation Ireland MaREI Centre and ESB Networks under grant number 12/RC/2302/P2 and the US-Ireland R, D & D Partnership Programme funded by Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) together with the National Science Foundation under grant number 16/US-C2C/3290. It also involved researchers from H2020 ENCLUDE (GA: 101022791), EU LIFE programme JUSTEM (project ID 101076151), H2020 PARIS REINFORCE (GA: 820846), Horizon Europe IAM COMPACT (GA: 101056306), Horizon Europe DIAMOND (GA: 101081179), and the Portuguese Science Foundation FCT/MCTES (UID/04085/2020, 2020.00038. CEECIND).

The Paris Agreement rests on individual countries and regions identifying stretching but feasible mitigation pathways. These must be acceptable and achievable in the eyes of a range of stakeholders in those countries or regions, including those from civil society, governments, and businesses. This Special Issue explores a range of feasible yet ambitious greenhouse gas emissions reduction pathways in a diversity of regions/countries of the world, in principle compatible with the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change. Each of these pathways have been developed using energy system models or whole-economy models, in most cases using mitigation scenarios co-created with a range of policy, civil society, academic, and business stakeholders.

Clean energy technological innovations are widely acknowledged as a prerequisite to achieving ambitious long-term energy and climate targets. However, the optimal speed of their adoption has been parsimoniously studied in the literature. This study seeks to identify the optimal intensity of moving to a green hydrogen electricity sector in Greece, using the OSeMOSYS energy modeling framework. Green hydrogen policies are evaluated, first, on the basis of their robustness against uncertainty and, afterwards, against conflicting performance criteria and for different decision-making profiles towards risk, by applying the VIKOR and TOPSIS multi-criteria decision aid methods. Although our analysis focuses exclusively on the power sector and compares different rates of hydrogen penetration compared to a business-as-usual case without considering other game-changing innovations (such as other types of storage or carbon capture and storage), we find that a national transition to a green hydrogen economy can support Greece in potentially cutting at least 16 MtCO2 while stimulating investments of EUR 10–13 bn. over 2030–2050.

The proposed framework is an intuitively obvious one, yet still serves as a climate technology-specific “checklist” to ensure that any newly proposed technologies or products can succeed. There will be continuous changes to the regulations, infrastructures, and political contexts, in which new technologies will be developed, which is why each consideration is not intended as a one-shot “yes/no” process but must rather be continuously reviewed and reconsidered in light of potentially rapid developments.

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) physical science reports usually assess a handful of future scenarios, the Working Group III contribution on climate mitigation to the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6 WGIII) assesses hundreds to thousands of future emissions scenarios. A key task in WGIII is to assess the global mean temperature outcomes of these scenarios in a consistent manner, given the challenge that the emissions scenarios from different integrated assessment models (IAMs) come with different sectoral and gas-to-gas coverage and cannot all be assessed consistently by complex Earth system models. In this work, we describe the “climate-assessment” workflow and its methods, including infilling of missing emissions and emissions harmonisation as applied to 1202 mitigation scenarios in AR6 WGIII. We evaluate the global mean temperature projections and effective radiative forcing (ERF) characteristics of climate emulators FaIRv1.6.2 and MAGICCv7.5.3 and use the CICERO simple climate model (CICERO-SCM) for sensitivity analysis. We discuss the implied overshoot severity of the mitigation pathways using overshoot degree years and look at emissions and temperature characteristics of scenarios compatible with one possible interpretation of the Paris Agreement. We find that the lowest class of emissions scenarios that limit global warming to “1.5 ∘C (with a probability of greater than 50 %) with no or limited overshoot” includes 97 scenarios for MAGICCv7.5.3 and 203 for FaIRv1.6.2. For the MAGICCv7.5.3 results, “limited overshoot” typically implies exceedance of median temperature projections of up to about 0.1 ∘C for up to a few decades before returning to below 1.5 ∘C by or before the year 2100. For more than half of the scenarios in this category that comply with three criteria for being “Paris-compatible”, including net-zero or net-negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, median temperatures decline by about 0.3–0.4 ∘C after peaking at 1.5–1.6 ∘C in 2035–2055. We compare the methods applied in AR6 with the methods used for SR1.5 and discuss their implications. This article also introduces a “climate-assessment” Python package which allows for fully reproducing the IPCC AR6 WGIII temperature assessment. This work provides a community tool for assessing the temperature outcomes of emissions pathways and provides a basis for further work such as extending the workflow to include downscaling of climate characteristics to a regional level and calculating impacts.

Current technological improvements are yet to put the world on track to net-zero, which will require the uptake of transformative low-carbon innovations to supplement mitigation efforts. However, the role of such innovations is not yet fully understood; some of these ‘miracles’ are considered indispensable to Paris Agreement-compliant mitigation, but their limitations, availability, and potential remain a source of debate. We evaluate such potentially game-changing innovations from the experts' perspective, aiming to support the design of realistic decarbonisation scenarios and better-informed net-zero policy strategies. In a worldwide survey, 260 climate and energy experts assessed transformative innovations against their mitigation potential, at-scale availability and/or widescale adoption, and risk of delayed diffusion. Hierarchical clustering and multi-criteria decision-making revealed differences in perceptions of core technological innovations, with next-generation energy storage, alternative building materials, iron-ore electrolysis, and hydrogen in steelmaking emerging as top priorities. Instead, technologies highly represented in well-below-2°C scenarios seemingly feature considerable and impactful delays, hinting at the need to re-evaluate their role in future pathways. Experts' assessments appear to converge more on the potential role of other disruptive innovations, including lifestyle shifts and alternative economic models, indicating the importance of scenarios including non-technological and demand-side innovations. To provide insights for expert elicitation processes, we finally note caveats related to the level of representativeness among the 260 engaged experts, the level of their expertise that may have varied across the examined innovations, and the potential for subjective interpretation to which the employed linguistic scales may be prone to.

In a new paper in Nature Energy, Odenweller et al. use uncertainty analysis to derive a probabilistic feasibility space for green hydrogen supply. Their analysis shows that even if electrolysis capacity grows as fast as wind and solar power have done, green hydrogen supply will remain scarce in the short term and uncertain in the long term.