June 7, 2008
IEA: $45 Trillion Needed To Cut CO2 Emissions 50% By 2050
The International Energy Agency says that it will take $45 trillion in additional clean technology investments between now and 2050 in order to reduce CO2 emissions to 50 percent. That’s 1.1% of average annual global GDP over the period.
“The world faces the daunting combination of surging energy demand, rising greenhouse gas emissions and tightening resources,” said Nobuo Tanaka, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency (IEA) today in Tokyo, at the launch of the latest edition of Energy Technology Perspectives (ETP).
The ETP is built around three sets of global energy technology scenarios. These are a Baseline (business-as-usual Scenario), a range of ACT Scenarios showing how CO2 emissions could be brought back to current levels by 2050, and a set of BLUE Scenarios outlining how they could be reduced to 50% below current levels.
Business as usual
If governments around the world continue with policies in place to date – the underlying premise in the ETP Baseline scenario to 2050 – CO2 emissions will rise by 130 percent and oil demand will rise by 70 percent, according to the report. This expansion in oil equals five times today’s production of Saudi Arabia. “Such growth of oil demand raises major concerns regarding energy supply access and investment needs,” said Tanaka. In the Baseline scenario, the power generation sector accounts for 44 percent of total global emissions in 2050, followed by industry, transport, the fuel transformation sector and buildings.
Bringing CO2 back to current levels
To bring CO2 emissions back to current levels in 2050, all options are needed at a cost of up to $50 per ton CO2, according to the report. No single form of energy or technology can provide the full solution. Improving energy efficiency is the first step and is very attractive as it results in immediate cost savings. Significantly reducing emissions from power generation is also a key component of emissions stabilisation. But even this is not enough.
Reducing emissions 50% below current levels
Emissions halving implies that all options up to a cost of $200 per ton CO2 will be needed. This is based on a set of “optimistic assumptions for technology development.” Under less optimistic assumptions, options that would cost up to $500 per ton CO2.
“Total additional investment needs in technology and deployment between now and 2050 would amount to USD 45 trillion, or 1.1% of average annual global GDP over the period,” Tanaka said.
Given the growing demand for electricity, this would mean that on average per year 35 coal and 20 gas-fired power plants would have to be fitted with CO2 capture and storage technology, between 2010 and 2050 at a cost of $1.5 billion each.
In addition, 32 new nuclear plants would need to be built each year and wind capacity would have to increase by approximately 17.500 turbines each year.
On top of all this, the world would also have to make an eightfold reduction of the carbon intensity of the transport sector.
“There should be no doubt – meeting the target of a 50 percent cut in emissions represents a formidable challenge. We would require immediate policy action and technological transition on an unprecedented scale. It will essentially require a new global energy revolution which would completely transform the way we produce and use energy,”Tanaka said.
Advertisers
Enhance Sustainability. Improve Profitability.
Learn how at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE WATER COMPLIANCE
Understand how increased enforcement may affect your company. Find out more >>
EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st
CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>
Join the Discussion
Recent Daily News [ see all ]
- 11/06/2009
- 11/05/2009
- 11/04/2009
- Emissions Intensity Falling Globally
- JohnsonDiversey Ups GHG Reduction Target to 25%
- Sainsbury’s Offers Free London Electric Car Charging
- Carbon Trading Could Trigger a ‘Sub-prime Style’ Economic Crash
- Peabody, Exxon Accused of Undermining Climate Talks
- BMW, Toyota, Ford Tout Eco-cars
- In ‘Apathy Gap,’ Energy Efficiency at Home Ranks Low
- China Pushes for CO2 Storage, Not Emissions Reductions
- Clean Tech VC Funding On Rebound, Up 50% Since 2nd Quarter
- IECC Building Code Recommendations Add Up to 30% in Energy Efficiency Gains
- Disney Buys $7M in Reforestation Offsets, a Corporate Record
- McKesson to Save $300K Via Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
- Sprint to Save $2.1M With Eco-Friendly Packaging
- U.S. Export-Import Bank Adopts Carbon Policy to Support Renewable Energy
- Greening the Automotive Supply Chain
- Yokohama Rubber Cuts GHG Emissions 13.4% in 2008
- Electronics Industry Lawsuit Called ‘Attack on States’ Rights’
- Wal-Mart Adding LEDs to 650 Stores
- One Committee Down for Senate Climate Bill, Five More to Go
- EU Poised to Give Heavy Industry Free Carbon Permits
- ResponsibleTravel.com Scuttles Carbon Offsetting Option
- U.S. Cap-and-Trade Creates Winners and Losers among Largest Emitters
- DOE Awards $155M to Make Industrial Sector More Energy Efficient
- System Upgrades Power Up Energy Savings for Hotels
- Xerox Cuts GHG Emissions by 20% from 2002
- Waste Management Landfill Gas Project Complete
- Intel, Pepsi, Kohl’s Stay Atop Green Power Partnership list
- Wal-Mart Thinks Big With Smaller Stores
- Despite Critics, Gore ‘Proud’ to Invest in Green Firms
- Metal Recyclers Spar Over Ship Recycling Site
Industry Voices [ see all ]
A Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Partnership
Brad Cashaw
Vice President
Quaker Foods and Snacks Supply Chain and Sustainability
Forest Carbon Core to Climate Change Deal
Chris Elliott
Forest Carbon Initiative Lead
World Wildlife Fund
VCS and CarbonFix Tops in Review of Forestry Carbon Standards
Paulo Lopes
Carbon Management Consultant
Carbon Clear







Reader Comments
This is one of the best news stories of the week! The first of many about the real costs to develop a new energy system for the world.
JV | June 7th, 2008
We must put in perspective that the oil industry is $8 Trillion annually. In light of these numbers, $45 trillion over 40 years is not a huge amount of money. The opportunities are endless. Let’s go!
Beth Ringdahl | June 9th, 2008
We do need to enact policies that will start cutting emissions now but just think if we weren’t conducting an unjust war in Iraq, the trillion dollar figure wouldn’t be so insurmountable.
melanie | June 14th, 2008