![]() This provides one important pathway for progress: if we can shift some activities towards electricity we may see greater progress on decarbonization. This comparison is shown in the chart: in 2019, just over one-third of global electricity came from nuclear or renewables. This means the electricity mix tends to have a higher share of low-carbon sources. In the electricity system, however, we have more options: nuclear power, hydropower, wind, and solar. There are fewer energy options available to substitute in these sectors. Transport relies heavily on oil and heating on gas. One of the reasons that the energy mix is so dominated by fossil fuels is that transport and heating are often harder to decarbonize that electricity. We consume more fossil fuels every year – this is what ultimately matters for climate ![]() In the context of meeting the targets laid out in the Paris Climate Agreement to limit average global temperature rise to 2☌, the answer to the latter question is, no. In line with our analysis on CO 2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the question is less “are we making progress?” but rather “are we making progress fast enough?”. But since the millennium, progress has been slower: in two decades it has increased by only 3 percentage points. From 1970 to 2000, the low-carbon share more than doubled from 6% to 13%. In the interactive chart we see the breakdown of the global energy mix between fossil fuels and low-carbon energy (which is the sum of nuclear and renewables). But unfortunately this is progress is slow. ![]() The share of energy we get from low-carbon sources is increasing. Is this transition happening? And how quickly? But if this was shifting quickly, we might have case for optimism. The global energy supply is still dominated by fossil fuels.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |