Many pathways to staying below 1.5C delay deep cuts in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and rely instead on huge amounts of CO2 removal (CDR) later this century.
Land-based CDR is used extensively in the 1.5C pathways presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and also features heavily in the climate plans of many governments and businesses.
Yet the large-scale deployment of land-based CDR could come with major challenges. These include significant ecological and societal risks – particularly to biodiversity loss, food security, freshwater use and human rights, among others – which have not been comprehensively assessed.
In our new paper, published in Science, we assess the level of sustainability risks that could be triggered by the use of various different land-based CDR techniques, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and afforestation and reforestation (A/R).
We show that risks are triggered at much lower levels of deployment than previously thought. Moreover, many of the “Paris aligned” 1.5C pathways presented by the IPCC would exceed the CDR sustainability limits defined by our evaluation.
CDR deployment in mitigation pathways
Many mitigation pathways assessed by the IPCC envisage large deployments of CDR throughout the 21st century.
This is significant because, although the IPCC is not “policy prescriptive”, these pathways – and the policy options within them – strongly shape the “solution space” as seen by policymakers when considering how to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.
The use of CDR is particularly widespread in the pathways labelled by the IPCC as “1.5C with high overshoot”. In these pathways, emissions cuts are not fast enough to avoid breaching the carbon budget for 1.5C and global temperatures temporarily overshoot the 1.5C limit, before extensive use of CDR brings temperatures down later this century.
Within these pathways, CDR is deployed up to 2050 to help compensate for a slower transition away from fossil fuels, to reduce net emissions. When emissions reach net-zero, CDR is being used to counterbalance large remaining residual emissions. Beyond this point, it is used to draw-down global temperature after exceeding 1.5C.
This type of pathway is typified by the IPCC’s “Neg” illustrative mitigation pathway. Here, – some 5.1bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2) is taken out of the atmosphere using CDR in 2050 and 15.1GtCO2 in 2100.
In this pathway, one of five outlined in the IPPC’s sixth assessment report (AR6), primary energy from fossil fuel drops only 36% below 2020 levels by 2050 and 73% by 2100, relative to 2020.
This CDR and emissions profile is in sharp contrast to the IPCC’s “Ren” pathway – which relies on rapid scale-up of renewable energy – primary energy from fossil fuel falls 85% by 2050 and 95% by 2100, relative to 2020. (IMP-Ren)
This means that this renewable energy pathway has much lower reliance on CDR, which is only used to take 2.6GtCO2 out of the atmosphere in 2050 and 3GtCO2 in 2100.
Sustainability limits
The large amounts of land-based CDR in many of the pathways assessed by the IPCC come with significant implications in terms of sustainability, with the potential for serious impacts on human livelihoods and food security.
Yet the IPCC report does not comprehensively assess the environmental feasibility of the scenarios, nor their associated sustainability risks. Nor does it put a figure on the scale of CDR that could be deployed without triggering major impacts.
To address this gap, we quantified the sustainability limits to the widespread deployment of BECCS, A/R and “nature-based” CDR, which includes limited reforestation, forest restoration, reduced forest harvest and agroforestry.
To do so, we draw from recent studies that give greater attention to the ecological, biological and societal impacts of land-based CDR.
Based on these studies, we calculated the levels of CDR deployment that would trigger “low”, “medium”, “high” and “very high” risks for sustainability. These risk levels are colour-coded from green through to dark red, for each type of land-based CDR in the figure below.
Reading from left to right, the figure shows increasing levels of CDR deployment in terms of GtCO2 removed per year. The grey bar shows the range of “technical mitigation potential” for each technique, as currently assessed by the IPCC. The upper end of this is the largest amount that could theoretically be deployed, if barriers to rapid scale-up, constraints on feasibility and sustainability risks are not taken into account.
The figure shows that sustainability risks start well below the technical mitigation potential.
For BECCS, the IPCC reports an average technical potential of 5.9GtCO2 per year. Yet we find that deploying more than 1.2GtCO2 of BECCS per year would tip over from “low risk” into “medium” or higher risk levels.
(This figure is based on BECCS plants capturing a “medium” share of their associated CO2 emissions, below 70%. For a “low” capture rate below 50%, the low-risk threshold drops to just 0.7GtCO2 per year.)
Correspondingly, BECCS would cross the high sustainability risk threshold (shown in red) if used to remove 1.3GtCO2 with a low capture rate – or 2.8GtCO2 with a medium rate.
Even these limited levels of BECCS assume significant bioenergy policy reforms that governments have not yet addressed. These include addressing gaps in emissions accounting and ensuring bioenergy is not causing deforestation, either directly or indirectly.
For A/R, the IPCC average technical potential is 3.9GtCO2 a year. Our research shows that associated sustainability risks remain low or medium below 3.8GtCO2 per year, with high risks beyond that point.
We find that nature-based CDR (which includes limited reforestation) carries the lowest sustainability risks. Deployment would trigger high risks beyond 5.1GtCO2 a year (including 3.8GtCO2 per year of non-monoculture reforestation).
Having defined risk levels for each type of CDR, we then mapped those indicators onto the amount of CDR deployed in each of the IPCC’s five “illustrative mitigation pathways” (IMPs).
(These pathways are: gradual strengthening of climate policy, GS; widespread use of CDR, Neg; low energy demand, LD; shifting pathways towards sustainable development, SP; and heavy use of renewables, Ren.)
Our results, illustrated in the table below, show that the three pathways that limit warming to 1.5C with limited to no overshoot are able to do so without greatly overstepping our sustainability risk thresholds.
In contrast, Neg limits warming in 2100 to 1.5C with high temperature overshoot, but exceeds high and even very high sustainability risk thresholds. The GS pathway only limits warming to 2C and still carries significant levels of sustainability risks.
Reading the table from top to bottom, the first set of rows list the change in CO2 emissions, energy demand and fossil fuel use in 2050 and 2100.
The second set of rows show the amount of each type of CDR deployed in 2050 and 2100, colour-coded according to our sustainability risk levels.
The third set of rows show the amount of land needed for CDR deployment – the land footprint. Again, these are colour-coded according to our sustainability risk levels.
Notably, our findings show that the amount of land needed for CDR in the Neg pathway could reach 7.2m square kilometres in 2050 and 13.3m square kilometres in 2100. For comparison, the land area of the US is just 9.1m square kilometres.
Risk assessment
Our findings suggest there is an urgent need to consider sustainability risks when choosing between different mitigation pathways.
One way to do this would be to define a “sustainable CDR budget”, as the amount of CDR that could be deployed sustainably across all CDR methods.
While our research only considered land-based CDR, alternative CDR options are also likely to come with sustainability and deployment risks, which could limit their potential. These include direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS) or ocean-based CDR.
Another option would be for scientists to identify Paris-aligned scenarios that do not overstep sustainability limits. Our research suggests that this could be a key priority for the IPCC’s seventh assessment cycle, as well as integrating environmental risks and feasibility throughout the IPCC’s work.
Moreover, our findings suggest that delaying fossil fuel cuts, in the hope that emissions can be drawn down later this century using CDR, would come with high sustainability risks.
If, on the other hand, countries wish to account for biodiversity considerations alongside climate goals, while still limiting temperatures to 1.5C, then they would need to follow a mitigation pathway with more rapid cuts in fossil fuel use, our research suggests.
Many of these pathways include behaviour changes and reductions in energy demand.
Countries could take up our findings in their next nationally-determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement, due in 2025. For example, they could address sustainability risks by setting separate, transparent targets for CDR, in addition to headline emissions goals.
They could also aim to limit their reliance on CDR – and its corresponding land footprint – in order to avoid climate actions that have negative consequences for their national biodiversity plans under the global biodiversity framework (NBSAPs).
The post Guest post: Heavy use of CO2 removal would trigger high sustainability risks appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Guest post: Heavy use of CO2 removal would trigger high sustainability risks
Episode 102: Can Talking About Climate Change Reduce Anxiety?
In this episode of Citizens’ Climate Radio, co-hosts Peterson Toscano and Elise Silvestri dive into the pressing issue of climate anxiety with Kate Schapira.
Kate Schapira is a writer, educator, and climate listener based in Providence, Rhode Island. Since 2014, she has operated the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth, a public listening project where she invites people to share their climate concerns, anxieties, and hopes. Her deep engagement with these conversations has informed her approach to climate action—centering community, emotional resilience, and meaningful steps toward change.
Kate shares her decade-long journey of listening to people’s climate worries, how she transformed these conversations into actionable climate engagement, and the insights she presents in her book, “Lessons from the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth: How to Live With Care and Purpose in an Endangered World,” where she explores how individuals and communities can navigate climate anxiety through connection and activism.
She also teaches writing at Brown University and works with organizations such as Alliance to Mobilize Our Resistance (AMOR) and the People’s Port Authority Movement. Find more about Kate’s work at kateschapira.com.
This episode also features an inspiring good news story: a group of students in Tucson, Arizona, successfully passed a climate action resolution for their school district, securing funding for sustainability initiatives and setting an example for youth-led climate action.
Learn how listening, storytelling, and collective action transform climate despair into meaningful change.
Listen Now!
Listen & Subscribe: Find us wherever you get your podcasts or visit cclusa.org/radio
Listener Survey
We want to hear your feedback about this episode. Please fill out our short survey.
Join the Conversation
Engage with other listeners and share your thoughts on our social media channels. Follow and connect with us on X, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook, and TikTok.
Tune in next month for more inspiring stories, expert insights, and actionable climate solutions. Together, we can make a difference, one story at a time.
We Want to Hear from You
- Email: radio @ citizensclimate.org
- Text/Voicemail: 619-512-9646 (+1 if calling from outside the USA.)
Production Team:
- Written and produced by Peterson Toscano and Elise Silvestri
- Music is provided by epidemicsound.com and Elise Silvestri
Introduction
Peterson Toscano: Welcome to Citizens Climate Radio, your climate change podcast! We highlight people’s stories, celebrate successes, and share strategies for effective climate communication. I’m your host, Peterson Toscano, and this is Episode 102, airing on Friday, March 14, 2025.
Joining me today is Elise Silvestri, who has been working on Citizens Climate Radio since September 2024. This is her first time co-hosting. Welcome, Elise!
Elise Silvestri: Hi, Peterson! It’s great to be here.
Peterson Toscano: You’ve worked hard on this episode. What do we have for listeners today?
Elise Silvestri: We have an incredible segment with Kate Schapira, an expert on climate anxiety and ways to reduce it. We’ll also share a good news story about students leading a climate action resolution in their school district.
Peterson Toscano: That’s right! Kate’s expertise helps people manage climate anxiety instead of causing it—which we all need.
Behind the Scenes: Elise’s Journey with Podcasting
Peterson Toscano: Elise, you’ve been with us since September. What have you learned so far?
Elise Silvestri: I had no idea how much work goes into producing a podcast! I thought I’d be doing simple audio cleanup, but editing is a much bigger process. I’ve learned so much about pacing an episode and making it engaging.
Peterson Toscano: You’re also great at editing down long interviews while keeping the essential parts. It’s nice to have a partner to help “kill my darlings” when cutting material is tough.
Kate Schapira: Climate Anxiety Counseling and Action
Elise Silvestri: What emotions come up for you when you think about climate change? Maybe you feel nervous about extreme weather events or the uncertainty of the future.
Peterson Toscano: That’s why today’s guest, Kate Schapira, is so valuable. She has spent over a decade listening to people’s climate worries at her Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth in Providence, Rhode Island.
Elise Silvestri: Kate’s experience led her to write Lessons from the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth: How to Live With Care and Purpose in an Endangered World. In it, she offers actionable steps for finding joy in the climate movement and imagining a livable future.
Peterson Toscano: What makes Kate’s perspective unique is that she has been listening to people long before climate anxiety was widely recognized. She learned from her community how to navigate big emotions and find peace through collective action.
How the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth Began
Kate Schapira: I was between meetings one day when I read an article about coral reef collapse. The language was harsh: “too late,” “cannot be restored,” and “irreversible damage.” It hit me hard—I started sobbing.
At the time, people still talked about climate change as a slow, distant process. But here was proof that real damage was already happening.
When I tried discussing it with others in 2013, many dismissed my reaction:
“You’re overreacting.”
“Have you considered therapy?”
I started wondering: Does anyone else feel this way?
Then, inspiration struck. My husband is a cartoonist, and we own collections of Charles Schulz’s Peanuts comics. I saw Lucy Van Pelt’s classic “Psychiatric Help, 5 Cents” booth, and a thought clicked:
“What if I set up a Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth?”
So, in 2014, I built a small plywood table, painted a “Climate Anxiety Counseling—5 Cents” sign, got a city permit, and set it up outside the Providence bus station. I had no idea what to expect.
To my surprise, people stopped to talk—right away. I stayed out there almost daily for two months, just listening.
Climate Anxiety and Economic Injustice
One conversation that stuck with me was a young father who couldn’t take his son swimming because he worked too much. He also couldn’t afford air conditioning, making their apartment unbearably hot at night.
I think about them often—how climate anxiety isn’t just about the future. For many, it’s already happening right now, especially for those facing economic injustice.
Some say, “Climate anxiety is for privileged people.” But if you fear worsening conditions, struggle to keep your family safe, or worry about affording relief from extreme heat, that is still climate anxiety.
From Listening to Action
The second year, I expanded the booth to farmers’ markets. One day, a visitor told me about a campaign to stop a liquefied natural gas plant in a working-class neighborhood. I attended their meeting that night.
That moment changed my life. I joined community climate action, working with activists to stop pollution projects harming low-income communities.
At the booth, many people would ask:
“I’m just one person. What can I do?”
That sense of isolation is deliberate—fossil fuel companies push individual responsibility narratives (“just reduce your carbon footprint”) to distract from their systemic harm.
But the real solution? Collective action. Working with others to create change feels empowering instead of overwhelming.
Lessons from the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth
As I continued listening, I realized the booth was great for emotional relief, but it wasn’t enough for collective action.
That’s why I wrote Lessons from the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth. The book explores:
Stories of people transforming their lives in response to climate change
How to take action, no matter your circumstances
Exercises to build resilience and connection
One of my favorite takeaways:
No one does anything alone.
We eat food others grow.
We learn from teachers and elders.
Even the most “self-made” person relies on community.
The best way to relieve climate anxiety? Join forces with others.
Good News: Tucson Students Lead Climate Action!
Elise Silvestri: Our good news story today comes from Tucson, Arizona, where students in the Tucson Unified School District pushed for a climate action resolution.
Their resolution includes:
Electrifying school buses
Upgrading buildings for energy efficiency
Incorporating climate education
Preparing for extreme heat
These students researched for 16 months, fought for funding, and won! The plan will save the school district $4.7 million per year.
Even better? The resolution is public, so other districts can use it as a model.
Closing Thoughts
Peterson Toscano: If you have good climate news to share, leave us a voicemail at +1-619-512-9646.
Elise Silvestri: I think we should start a listening booth ourselves!
Peterson Toscano: A podcast is a listening booth!
Thank you for joining us for Episode 102 of Citizens Climate Radio!
Subscribe and find full show notes at cclusa.org/radio
Support our work at citizensclimateducation.org
Music by Elise Silvestri & EpidemicSound.com
The post Episode 102: Can Talking About Climate Change Reduce Anxiety? appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.
Episode 102: Can Talking About Climate Change Reduce Anxiety?
China will need to install around 10,000 gigawatts (GW) of wind and solar capacity to reach carbon neutrality by 2060, according to new Chinese government-endorsed research.
This huge energy transition – with the technologies currently standing at 1,408GW – can make a “decisive contribution” to the country’s climate efforts and bring big economic rewards, the China Energy Transformation Outlook 2024 (CETO24) shows.
The report was produced by our research team at the Energy Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Macroeconomic Research – a “national high-end thinktank” of China’s top planner the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).
The outlook looks at two pathways to meeting China’s “dual-carbon” climate goals and its wider aims for economic and social development.
In the first pathway, a challenging geopolitical environment constrains international cooperation.
The second assumes international climate cooperation continues despite broader geopolitical tensions.
We find that, under both scenarios, China’s energy system can achieve net-zero carbon emissions before 2060, paving the way to make Chinese society as a whole carbon neutral before 2060.
However, the outlook shows that meeting these policy goals will not be possible unless China improves its energy efficiency, sustains its electrification efforts and develops a power system built around “intelligent” grids that are predominantly supplied with electricity from solar and wind.
(Carbon Brief interviewed the report’s lead authors at the COP29 climate talks in Baku last November.)
- Trends governing China’s energy transition
- Scenarios for carbon neutrality
- Pathway to achieving “dual-carbon” targets
- Innovation and market forces for energy transition
- Focusing on enabling forces
Trends governing China’s energy transition
China’s rapid economic growth over the past decades has driven a massive increase in industrial production, particularly energy-intensive industries such as steel and cement, requiring vast amounts of energy.
To meet the high demand for energy, the country has built up a coal-based energy sector.
In 2014, Chinese president Xi Jinping introduced the concept of “four revolutions and one cooperation”, which calls for a drastic change in how energy system development is thought about.
The following 13th “five-year plan” (2016-20) – an influential economic planning document – required a shift from maintaining and developing a system based on fossil fuels to creating a system that is “clean, low-carbon, safe and efficient”.
This led to the announcement of China’s “dual-carbon” targets in 2020, which positioned achieving a peak in emissions by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060 as integral to China’s economic development in the future.
As part of this, policymakers are working towards a “new type of energy system”, in which low-carbon technologies will simultaneously provide energy security and affordable energy prices, as well as addressing environmental concerns.
In the past few years, however, electricity demand has grown rapidly due to increased production of goods after the Covid-19 pandemic and the impact of heatwaves.
Furthermore, the supply of hydropower has been hampered by the lack of water because of droughts. This has led to a push for new investments in coal power, despite a massive deployment of solar and wind power plants.
The challenge today is related to this transformation’s speed – how China can vigorously accelerate renewable energy deployment to cover growing energy demand and substitute coal power.
Scenarios for carbon neutrality
CETO24 looks at two scenarios for its analysis of China’s energy transformation towards 2060. The first – the baseline carbon-neutral scenario (BCNS) – assumes geopolitics continues to constrain low-carbon cooperation.
The second – the ideal carbon-neutral scenario (ICNS) – assumes climate cooperation avoids geopolitical conflict.
Both scenarios envision that China will reach peak carbon emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality before 2060, against a backdrop of the growing urgency of global climate change and increasing complexity and volatility of the international political and economic landscape.
The BCNS assumes that addressing climate change may become a lower priority globally, but that China still meets its “dual-carbon” goals. The ICNS assumes that other countries prioritise accelerating their domestic energy transformation and cooperation on climate change, despite occasional political or economic conflicts.
The outlook models the two scenarios and analyses the transformation of end-use energy consumption in different sectors, such as industry, buildings and transportation.
The CETO model suite, used in the outlook, is illustrated in the figure below. For example, the electricity and district heating optimisation model (EDO, blue box), looks at power, heat and “e-fuel” production in great detail with an hourly resolution, in order to capture the fluctuations in variable renewable energy output at provincial level.
EDO looks at the least-cost pathway to reach the dual-carbon goals for the whole power system, including the production, storage and transport of electricity.
On the demand side, the end-use energy demand analysis model (END-USE, black box) allows for different modelling approaches in the different sectors. The model also includes the processing of fossil fuels and biomass.
The EDO and END-USE models are supported by a socioeconomic model (red box), which looks into the macroeconomic impact of the energy transformation and vice-versa.
The results from the models are used in the summary model (yellow box), which shows the primary energy consumption, the energy flows for the whole energy system and the investments and operating costs for the supply sectors, as modelled in the EDO model.
Our strategy for developing the new type of energy system, based on the models shown above, consists of:
- Focusing on efficient use of energy in the end-use sectors, with an emphasis on a shift from fossil fuel consumption to the direct use of electricity (electrification).
- Transforming the power sector to a zero-carbon emission system, mainly based on wind and solar.
- Ensuring that the grid management system – the system of transmission, distribution and storage of electricity – is able to deal with the fluctuations in production and demand. This includes more focus on flexible demand, as well as digital, intelligent control systems to manage system integration, cost-efficient dispatch of supply and demand, as well as energy security in the short- and long-term.
The approach of the model is to promote system-wide optimisation for the two scenarios. This allows for the analysis of the complex interaction between demand, supply, grids and storage, seeking to optimise the whole system, instead of optimising subsystems on their own.
The approach is based on a least-cost modelling of the power system, along with the production and distribution of low-carbon fuels, such as green methanol, green hydrogen, e-fuels and so on.
The demand-side modelling allows for flexible methodologies for the different end-use sectors, with “soft links” to the power and low-carbon fuel optimisation model.
The models are constrained to ensure that China’s dual-carbon goals are met. In other words, the energy system’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions peak before 2030 and reach net-zero before 2060.
Other assumptions built into the models include a moderate economic growth rate and a shift in China’s economic structure to focus more on high-quality products and services instead of heavy industry, which has much higher energy consumption per unit of economic output.
Pathway to achieving ‘dual-carbon’ targets
The analyses for both scenarios in CETO24 confirm that China’s energy system can achieve net-zero carbon emissions before 2060, paving the way to make Chinese society as a whole carbon neutral before 2060.
Shown in the figures below, in both scenarios, primary energy consumption peaks before 2035 and declines thereafter, despite the assumption that China’s economy will grow between 3.3 to 3.6 times its 2020 level in the period until 2060.
Both scenarios underscore the importance of energy conservation and efficiency as prerequisites for energy transition.
This is because without effective energy conservation, China’s energy transition would demand significantly greater deployment of clean energy sources, making it difficult to achieve the necessary pace to hit the dual-carbon targets.
Sustained electrification drives carbon neutrality
In order to reach carbon neutrality, CETO24 suggests that the use of fossil fuels in the end-use sectors should be substituted by clean electricity as much as possible.
Furthermore, electricity should also be used to produce synthetic fuels or heat supply to satisfy end-use demands for energy.
In 2023, China’s electrification rate was around 28%. The report’s figures, illustrated below, show that electricity (light blue) accounts for as much as 79%-84% of the total end-use energy demand in 2060.
In both scenarios, the transportation sector is expected to experience the fastest growth in electrification, while the building sector achieves the highest overall electrification rate.
Some fossil-fuel-based fuels would still be needed to support certain industries, such as freight transport and aviation, by 2060.
Nevertheless, both scenarios indicate that China’s end-use energy demand would peak before 2035, followed by a gradual decline, with the 2060 value being roughly 30% lower than the peak.
(It is important to note that end-use energy demand is not the same as useful energy services, such as warmer buildings or the movement of vehicles. The replacement of fossil fuels by electricity results in a more efficient use of energy in the end-use sectors, since the losses of energy from burning fossil fuels are removed. Hence, it is possible to reduce final energy consumption even as demand for energy services rises.)
The short-term growth in the end-use energy demand is due to the rapid increase in electricity demand.
As shown in the graphs below, the share of electricity demand from traditional end-use sectors (blue) – mainly from industry, buildings and transport – would decrease from 89% in 2022 to 68%-72% by 2060.
In contrast, an increasing share of electricity is expected to be used for new types of demand such as for hydrogen production (light green), electric district heating (pink) and synthetic fuel production (dark blue).
Building a power system centred on wind and solar
CETO24 finds that decarbonising the energy supply is a lynchpin of energy transformation – and replacing fossil fuel power with non-fossil sources is the top priority.
In 2023, non-fossil sources comprised 53.9% of China’s power capacity. In the report’s scenarios, as shown in the figures below, the total installed power generation capacity could reach between 10,530GW and 11,820GW by 2060 – about four times the 2023 level.
The installed capacity of renewable energy sources – including solar (yellow) and wind (blue) – would account for about 96% of the total in 2060.
The installed capacity of nuclear power (dark pink) and pumped storage power (in hydro, dark blue) could reach 180GW and 380GW, respectively. Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) (dark green) would have an installed capacity of more than 130GW.
In addition to dominating installed capacity, wind and solar could account for as much as 94% of China’s electricity generation by 2060, as shown in the figure below.
Energy transformation in China adheres to the principle of “construction new before destruct old” (先立后破). (The principle is also translated as “build before breaking”. See Carbon Brief’s articles from 2021 and 2022 for background.)
As new low-carbon energy capacity grows and power system control capabilities gradually improve, coal power will gradually shift to a regulating and backup power source, with older and less efficient capacity being decommissioned as it reaches the end of its life.
Building an intelligent power grid
The construction of a new power system is a core component of China’s energy transformation.
CETO24 suggests that a coordinated nationwide approach would be the most efficient way to facilitate this. It would integrate all resources – generation, grid, demand, storage and hydrogen – to create a power grid that enables large-scale interconnection as well as lower-level balancing.
This coordinated nationwide approach would involve three key elements.
First, an optimised electricity grid layout, with the completion of the national network of key transmission lines by 2035, enabling west-to-east and north-to-south power transmission, with provinces able to send power to each other. By using digital and intelligent technologies, the grid would be able to adapt flexibly to changes in power supply and demand.
By 2060 in both of CETO24’s scenarios, the total scale of electricity exports from the north-west, north-east and north China regions would increase by 140% to 150% compared to 2022 levels.
Second, this approach would see continuous improvements in the construction of local electricity distribution grids, allowing them to adapt to large-scale inputs of distributed “new energy” sources such as rooftop solar.
As part of this element, China would need to promote the transformation of distribution grids from a unidirectional system into a two-way interactive system. It would also need to focus on providing and promoting local consumption of renewable energy sources for industrial, agricultural, commercial and residential use.
The creation of numerous zero-carbon distribution grid hubs would be needed to provide strong support for the development of more than 5,000 GW of distributed wind and solar energy, which is a feature of CETO24’s modelled pathways.
Third, the multiple energy networks would need to be combined, fully integrating power, heat and transportation systems. This would create a new-type energy network where electricity and hydrogen, in particular, serve as key hubs.
Under both scenarios, the scale of green hydrogen production and use could reach 340-420m tonnes of coal equivalent (Mtce) by 2060. Hydrogen and e-fuel production through electrolysis would become an important means to support grid load balancing – using excess supply to run electrolysers – and to facilitate seasonal grid balancing, with stored hydrogen being used to generate power when needed.
Battery energy storage capacity could reach 240-280GW and the number of electric vehicles could reach 480-540m, with “vehicle-to-grid” interaction capacity reaching 810-900GW, providing real-time responsiveness to the power system.
Innovation and market forces for energy transition
The development of “new productive forces” is a distinctive feature of China’s energy transformation.
Low-carbon, zero-carbon and negative-carbon technologies, equipment and industries, such as electric arc furnaces for steel production, hydrogen-based steelmaking furnaces, high-efficiency heat-pump heating systems, among others, offer broad market potential and present significant investment opportunities.
From the perspective of energy equipment demand, the scenarios show that by 2060 China’s installed wind and solar power capacity would reach approximately 10,000GW.
In the scenarios, the annual investment demand for wind and solar power equipment in China would grow from approximately two trillion yuan ($270bn) per year in 2023 to around six trillion yuan ($820bn) per year by 2060, with cumulative investment needs over the next 30 years exceeding 160tn yuan ($22tn).
The energy transformation will also require China to update or retrofit energy-using equipment across various sectors over the next 30 years, including industry, buildings and transportation.
While playing a smaller part than electrification and efficiency, CETO24’s modelling also points to an essential role for technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and industrial CO2 recycling, if China is to reach carbon neutrality.
In order for these technologies to be deployed at scale on the timelines needed, more and greater research and planning would need to begin now.
If it is to contribute to the dual-carbon goals over the next 30 years, China’s energy system will need to enter an accelerated phase of equipment upgrades and retrofits, with the scale of demand for such improvements continuing to grow, providing a sustained driving force for economic growth.
Strengthening international cooperation on energy transformation would also help China and other countries reduce the manufacturing, service and usage costs of new energy transformation technologies, enabling both China and the world to achieve carbon neutrality sooner and at lower cost.
Last but not least, a complete legal system for energy is likely to be a key requirement for a successful energy transition. China’s new energy law came into force in the beginning of 2025. More reforms in the legal system, carbon pricing, as well as data management would add significant support to energy transition.
Focusing on enabling forces
In summary, CETO24 demonstrates that there are technically feasible solutions for China’s energy transformation. However, it is still a long-term and challenging societal project.
China would need to reach peak carbon emissions by the end of this decade and then cut them to net-zero within 30 years, far more quickly than the trajectories envisaged by developed economies.
In order to be successful, policymakers will need to face the challenges head-on, find solutions and seek clarity amid uncertainty, to ensure that China’s energy transformation stays on track and progresses steadily.
Our research suggests their solutions could aim to address five areas: electrify energy consumption and improve energy efficiency; decarbonise energy supply; enhance interaction between energy supply and demand; industrialise energy technologies; and modernise energy governance.
At the same time, strengthening international cooperation on energy transformation and exploring pathways together with the global community would allow China to both ensure the smooth progression of its own energy transformation and contribute significantly to the global effort.
The post Guest post: China will need 10,000GW of wind and solar by 2060 appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Guest post: China will need 10,000GW of wind and solar by 2060
Greenhouse Gases
DeBriefed 14 March 2025: US’s ‘moral case for fossil fuels’; Rainforest felled for ‘COP30 road’; Myanmar’s energy crisis
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
US ‘180-degree pivot’
‘SIDE EFFECT’: US energy secretary Chris Wright promised a “180-degree pivot” on climate policy while speaking in front of oil and gas executives, the New York Times reported. Addressing an industry conference in Houston, he said there was a “moral case for fossil fuels” to alleviate poverty and was dismissive of renewables, the newspaper added. CNBC reported that Wright also said: “The Trump administration will treat climate change for what it is – a global physical phenomenon that is a side effect of building the modern world.”
MORE CUTS: The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) terminated $20bn in grants for climate projects, awarded through a “green bank” known as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, Bloomberg reported. However, Inside Climate News said that a federal judge has “sharply criticised the agency for canceling the grants without presenting any evidence of wrongdoing, calling the administration’s justification weak and unsubstantiated”. It added: “The judge stopped short of issuing a ruling on reinstatement of the funds, leaving grant recipients in limbo.”
NASA CHANGES: NASA has dismissed its chief scientist, climate-science expert Katherine Calvin, along with 20 others as part of changes imposed by the Trump administration, says the New York Times. The newspaper also added the government “could be considering slashing the budget for NASA’s science activities by half”.
Road to COP30
COP30 HIGHWAY: Eight miles of “Amazon rainforest” are being cleared to build a four-lane highway ahead of the COP30 climate talks in Belém later this year, said the Times. BBC News, which broke the story, added the road is designed to ease traffic in the Brazilian city. However, the Brazilian government responded to say the media stories were “misleading” because the road was planned before COP30 was announced.
CLIMATE MULTILATERALISM: Meanwhile, the Times of India reported that, in the wake of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the Brazilian COP30 presidency has invited the hosts of all the UN climate summits since COP21 in Paris to form a “circle of presidencies” to enhance multilateral efforts to tackle climate change.
Carney for Canada
OH, CANADA: Mark Carney was elected leader of the Liberal party in Canada and will replace Justin Trudeau as prime minister, reported the Globe and Mail. CNN noted that the former governor of the banks of England and Canada has “advocated for the financial sector to invest in net-zero” and held the position of UN special envoy for climate action and finance in 2019.
BANKING ROLLBACKS: Meanwhile, the Financial Times reported that the Net-Zero Banking Alliance – the “top global climate alliance for banks” founded by Carney – will ask its members to vote on abandoning a pledge to align their $54tn in assets with the Paris Agreement aim of limiting global warming to 1.5C. There has been an “exodus of many leading US banks” since Trump’s second term, but major players such as HSBC and Barclays remain in the alliance, the newspaper said.
Around the world
- FLASH FLOODS: Agence France-Presse reported that a flash flood in Bahía Blanca, Argentina has killed at least 16 people and caused $400m in damages.
- ENERGY BILLS: A UK bill introduced to parliament this week sought to speed up approval of clean-energy projects and reduce energy bills by £250 a year for people living near new or upgraded pylons, BBC News reported.
- TWO SESSIONS: China’s influential “two-sessions” political meetings ended on Tuesday, with new climate commitments, Carbon Brief reported.
- FEWER EMISSIONS: Emissions in Germany fell 3.4% in 2024, noted Reuters, adding that it puts the country “on track” to meet its 2030 climate targets.
3.6%
The amount that the UK’s emissions fell by in 2024, seeing emissions reach their lowest level since 1872, according to a new analysis by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- A study in Public Understanding of Science, co-authored by Carbon Brief’s Josh Gabbatiss, found that UK newspapers increased their support for climate action from 2011-21, but also featured “multiple discourses of delay”.
- New analysis from the World Weather Attribution group concluded that human-caused climate change increased recent heavy rainfall in Botswana by 60%.
- A study in PLOS Climate found smallholder farmers in rural northeast Madagascar witnessed increases in temperature and decreases in rainfall over a five-year period and are concerned about the effects of climate change on their livelihoods.
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
New analysis by Carbon Brief revealed that nearly a tenth of global climate finance could be under threat, as Trump continues to cut spending on international aid. Since taking office in January, Trump has pulled the US out of multiple international climate funds and initiatives, including plans withdrawing the US from the Paris Agreement. He has also threatened to cancel virtually all US Agency for International Development (USAid) projects, with climate funds identified as a prime target. These actions are likely to endanger global efforts to help developing countries tackle climate change.
Spotlight
Myanmar’s energy crisis
This week, Carbon Brief looks at energy challenges in Myanmar and whether solar power could help to provide a solution.
Earlier this year, military rulers in Myanmar slashed power supplies for two of the country’s major cities – the capital, Naypyidaw, and Yangon. The order said that Yangon, the country’s largest city, would only receive eight hours of electricity per day on a rotating power schedule.
However, the reality on the ground is more severe. The capital of Naypyidaw appears to have been prioritised, with 16 hours of power on and eight hours off, while residents in Yangon report sometimes only receiving two hours of electricity per day. Other parts of the country have also been affected.
‘In the dark’
Rolling blackouts in Myanmar are not new. Back in 2019, the country experienced widespread energy shortages due to a widening power supply-demand gap.
However, Myanmar’s power-sector challenges have grown since the country’s military coup in February 2021.
The national power grid has been attacked and damaged due to armed conflict resisting the coup. A Frontier Myanmar article from 2023 reported that there had been 229 attacks on electricity infrastructure since the 2021 coup, which the military blamed on rebel groups.
A loss of foreign investment, economic turmoil and mismanagement have also all contributed to Myanmar’s energy crisis, said Richard Harrison, former CEO of Smart Power Myanmar, an NGO aimed at providing solar power to small businesses. He told Carbon Brief:
“Governments and donors no longer have direct relations with the national government and most NGOs are badly underfunded. There is almost no energy-related funding in Myanmar.”
Slowing solar
The country’s electricity mix currently mostly consists of gas and hydropower.
Before the coup, multiple projects, including solar farms, had been planned to help reduce the growing power supply-demand and increase electrification rates.
According to a report by the World Bank, a “major solar tender was launched in May 2020 for 30 solar power plants to be constructed throughout the country”. But “only one of those was completed since the military takeover in 2021 and the other 29 were cancelled”, the report said.
Myanmar has also experienced shortages of gas for power generation, compounded by investor exits and the decline of Myanmar’s largest gas field.
The Irrawaddy, a Myanmar-focused news site in Thailand, reported that military leaders have called for solar panels to be installed on all new buildings in a bid to solve Myanmar’s energy crisis. However, it is worth noting that, according to the Irrawaddy, the junta leader’s son has “won licenses to sell solar panels and equipment while the regime has granted tax exemptions on solar imports”.
Yet, the Irrawaddy has also noted that the cost of solar is “beyond the reach of many small businesses, which form the backbone of Myanmar’s economy”.
Not-for-profits have continued to build solar projects in the country since the coup, aimed at supporting local businesses and powering rural healthcare facilities.
However, the situation is volatile as the civil war drags on, Harrison noted:
“The outlook is bleak. Myanmar has failed to invest in new generation capacity and current sources of energy (gas) are declining or curtailed. This means that, even if conflict were to end, we will continue to see declining energy access and major shortages through 2030. In other words, Myanmar’s energy crisis is almost guaranteed to get worse and be protracted.”
Watch, read, listen
REMOVING CARBON: The Solving for Climate podcast spoke to Carbon Brief climate science contributor Dr Zeke Hausfather about whether the use of carbon removal technologies should expand.
BLACKOUTS: Dialogue Earth reported on how extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change are causing more frequent power outages in Latin America.
SABOTAGE TACTICS: A feature in the Guardian said “tougher laws” are said to be “inspiring clandestine attacks [by climate protesters] on the ‘property and machinery’ of the fossil fuel economy”.
Coming up
- 16-20 March: Applied Power Electronics Conference (APEC), Atlanta, Georgia
- 17-18 March: First part of the 30th annual session of the International Seabed Authority, Kingston, Jamaica
- 21 March:UN observed International Day of Forests
Pick of the jobs
- Stockholm Environment Institute , climate project intern | Salary: Unknown. Location: Tallinn, Estonia (onsite, hybrid or remote)
- Doughnut Economics Action Lab , junior communications freelancer | Salary: £250 a day. Location: Remote (UK hours)
- EarthRights International, policy advisor | Salary: $85,000-$95,000. Location: Remote (US)
- Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust, conservation officer | Salary: £24,570. Location: Flexible
- British Antarctic Survey, field coordinator – Antarctica | Salary: £29,273 to £30,201. Location: Antarctica
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 14 March 2025: US’s ‘moral case for fossil fuels’; Rainforest felled for ‘COP30 road’; Myanmar’s energy crisis appeared first on Carbon Brief.
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change10 months ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos1 year ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Carbon Footprint11 months agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Farmers turn to tech as bees struggle to pollinate
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Clouds now contains plastic, contaminating ‘everything we eat and drink’