Recent reports on climate change emphasise the urgency of our situation. We need to limit emissions to 510 GtCO2 to achieve net zero by 2050, but with our current business-as-usual approach, we will end up emitting 850 GtCO2.
Back in 2009, Stanford University Professors Jacobson and Mark A Deluchhi proposed in the Scientific American journal, that the world could meet its energy needs through renewables like wind, water and solar by 2030. Their vision included 3.8 million large wind turbines, 90,000 solar plants and various geothermal, tidal and rooftop photovoltaic installations worldwide. In 2017, Prof. Jacobson and his team expanded on this idea and provided energy roadmaps for 139 countries to combat global warming. Their plans advocated for electrifying all energy-dependent sectors and providing 100 per cent wind, water and solar power. Fully implementing these roadmaps by 2050 would help avoid a 1.5°C global warming scenario.
Current Reality Falls Short
Fast forward to 2023, we are far from replacing our current energy infrastructure with renewables, even by 2050. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), we will need to mine six times the current amount of critical minerals (cobalt, lithium, nickel, copper, manganese, graphite, rare earths, chromium, etc.) to switch to renewables by 2040. This expansion in mineral extraction could lead to unforeseen environmental consequences.
The Cost of Green Energy
In the new zero pathway discussed in IEA 2023 report, global clean energy spending are expected to rise from USD 1.8 trillion in 2023 (1.7% of global GDP) to USD 4.5 trillion annually by early 2030s. While developed countries can afford such investments, developing nations grappling with urgent priorities like hunger and nutrition, face challenges in dedicating resources to clean energy.
Broken Promises and Emerging Challenge
At the 2009 COP15 summit, G7 countries promised to deliver USD 100 billion in climate finance to developing nations by 2020, for climate adaptation and mitigation. These promises were never fulfilled. Several were reverted too. The USA withdrew from the Paris Agreement under the Trump administration. The recent Ukraine war and its impact on energy supplies has led some EU countries to reopen coal power plants and delay their phase-out. G20 countries pledged to reduce fossil fuel subsidies, but they ended up providing a staggering one trillion dollars in subsidies during the energy supply disruption caused by the war.
Balancing the Energy Transition
The IEA’s updated net-zero scenario expects fossil fuel demand to decrease by 25 per cent in 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050, provided nations implement the right policies. However, the challenge remains in balancing investments between clean energy and “dirty energy” projects, to avoid price shocks or supply shortages.
If the world fails to expand clean energy by 2030, nearly 5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide would have to be removed from the atmosphere every year, during the second half of this century, according to IEA report. If carbon removal technologies fail to deliver at such scale, returning the temperature to 1.5 °C would not be possible. As of now, carbon capture, use and storage technologies (CCUS) are not much proven and those that have been, are of small scale and expensive.
Seeking Justice through Legal Action
In response to the slow energy transition, some individuals and organisations are resorting to legal action against oil companies and governments. For example, California has filed lawsuits against major oil companies, alleging that they knowingly deceived the public about the dangers of their emissions. On the other hand, six young individuals from Portugal took 32 countries to the European Court of Human Rights in September 2023 for failing to protect them against climate change. These cases underscore the severity of the climate crisis, but the larger issue remains: how to engage the entire world in addressing this global challenge.
