• Energy Research
• 7. Clean energy close
• AT close
• Kasetsart University close

Recently, assessments have robustly linked stabilization of global-mean temperature rise to the necessity of limiting the total amount of emitted carbon-dioxide (CO2). Halting global warming thus requires virtually zero annual CO2 emissions at some point. Policymakers have now incorporated this concept in the negotiating text for a new global climate agreement, but confusion remains about concepts like carbon neutrality, climate neutrality, full decarbonization, and net zero carbon or net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Here we clarify these concepts, discuss their appropriateness to serve as a long-term global benchmark for achieving temperature targets, and provide a detailed quantification. We find that with current pledges and for a likely (>66%) chance of staying below 2 °C, the scenario literature suggests net zero CO2 emissions between 2060 and 2070, with net negative CO2 emissions thereafter. Because of residual non-CO2 emissions, net zero is always reached later for total GHG emissions than for CO2. Net zero emissions targets are a useful focal point for policy, linking a global temperature target and socio-economic pathways to a necessary long-term limit on cumulative CO2 emissions.

The principles of Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability (FAIR) have been put forward to guide optimal sharing of data. The potential for industrial and social innovation is vast. Domain-specific metadata standards are crucial in this context, but are widely missing in the energy sector. This report provides a collaborative response from the low carbon energy research community for addressing the necessity of advancing FAIR metadata standards. We review and test existing metadata practices in the domain based on a series of community workshops. We reflect the perspectives of energy data stakeholders. The outcome is reported in terms of challenges and elicits recommendations for advancing FAIR metadata standards in the energy domain across a broad spectrum of stakeholders.

Supplementary Data File for: Vita, G., Rao, N. D., Usubiaga‐Liaño, A., Min, J. & Wood, R. Durable goods drive two-thirds of global households’ final energy footprints. Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021).

Worldwide, 98% of total electricity is currently produced by thermoelectric power and hydropower. Climate change is expected to directly impact electricity supply, in terms of both water availability for hydropower generation and cooling water usage for thermoelectric power. Improved understanding of how climate change may impact the availability and temperature of water resources is therefore of major importance. Here we use a multi-model ensemble to show the potential impacts of climate change on global hydropower and cooling water discharge potential. For the first time, combined projections of streamflow and water temperature were produced with three global hydrological models (GHMs) to account for uncertainties in the structure and parametrization of these GHMs in both water availability and water temperature. The GHMs were forced with bias-corrected output of five general circulation models (GCMs) for both the lowest and highest representative concentration pathways (RCP2.6 and RCP8.5). The ensemble projections of streamflow and water temperature were then used to quantify impacts on gross hydropower potential and cooling water discharge capacity of rivers worldwide. We show that global gross hydropower potential is expected to increase between +2.4% (GCM-GHM ensemble mean for RCP 2.6) and +6.3% (RCP 8.5) for the 2080s compared to 1971–2000. The strongest increases in hydropower potential are expected for Central Africa, India, central Asia and the northern high-latitudes, with 18–33% of the world population living in these areas by the 2080s. Global mean cooling water discharge capacity is projected to decrease by 4.5-15% (2080s). The largest reductions are found for the United States, Europe, eastern Asia, and southern parts of South America, Africa and Australia, where strong water temperature increases are projected combined with reductions in mean annual streamflow. These regions are expected to affect 11–14% (for RCP2.6 and the shared socio-economic pathway (SSP)1, SSP2, SSP4) and 41–51% (RCP8.5–SSP3, SSP5) of the world population by the 2080s.

We conducted a feasibility study in Indochina (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam) with the aim of promoting biomass and bioenergy markets, technology transfer, rural development, and income generation. Policy development is guided by the International Union of Forest Research Institutions (IUFRO) Task Force “Sustainable Forest Bioenergy Network”. In this paper, we highlight the achievements up to now and present results of a multi-stakeholder questionnaire in combination with a quantitative analysis of the National Bioenergy Development Plans (NBDPs). We found a gap between official documents and working group assessments. NBDPs are focused on the market development, technology transfer, and funding possibilities of a regional bioenergy strategy, while the respondents of a questionnaire (working groups) favored more altruistic goals, i.e., sustainable resource management, environmental protection and climate change mitigation, generation of rural income, and community involvement, etc. We therefore suggest the following measures to ensure regulations that support the original aims of the network (climate change mitigation, poverty alleviation, sustainable resource use, and diversification of energy generation): (i) Consideration of science-based evidence for drafting bioenergy policies, particularly in the field of biomass production and harvesting; (ii) invitation of stakeholders representing rural communities to participate in this process; (iii) development of sustainability criteria; (iv) feedback cycles ensuring more intensive discussion of policy drafts; (v) association of an international board of experts to provide scientifically sound feedback and input; and (vi) establishment of a local demonstration region, containing various steps in the biomass/bioenergy supply chain including transboundary collaboration in the ACMECS region.