Coal-exit alliance must confront freeriding sectors to propel Paris-aligned momentum

Bi, Stephen; Bauer, Nico; Jewell, Jessica

doi:10.1038/s41558-022-01570-8

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A particularly welcome development would be to extend the application of feasibility spaces to a broader range of technological solutions, policies, and social practices. There are also promising advances in using the feasibility space to develop new scenarios based on assumptions grounded in empirical examination of reference cases (Bi et al, 2023; Muttitt et al, 2023; Vinichenko et al, 2023). In the future we hope that the science and art of constructing feasibility spaces will be critically examined and continuously improved by diverse scientific communities dealing with both climate mitigation and adaptation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The feasibility of climate action: Bridging the inside and the outside view through feasibility spaces

Jewell

Cherp

2023

WIREs Climate Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The feasibility of different options to reduce the risks of climate change has engaged scholars for decades. Yet there is no agreement on how to define and assess feasibility. We define feasible as “do‐able under realistic assumptions.” A sound feasibility assessment is based on causal reasoning; enables comparison of feasibility across climate options, contexts, and implementation levels; and reflexively considers the agency of its audience. Global climate scenarios are a good starting point for assessing the feasibility of climate options since they represent causal pathways, quantify implementation levels, and consider policy choices. Yet, scenario developers face difficulties to represent all relevant causalities, assess the realism of assumptions, assign likelihood to potential outcomes, and evaluate the agency of their users, which calls for external feasibility assessments. Existing approaches to feasibility assessment mirror the “inside” and the “outside” view coined by Kahneman and co‐authors. The inside view considers climate change as a unique challenge and seeks to identify barriers that should be overcome by political choice, commitment, and skill. The outside view assesses feasibility through examining historical analogies (reference cases) to the given climate option. Recent studies seek to bridge the inside and the outside views through “feasibility spaces,” by identifying reference cases for a climate option, measuring their outcomes and relevant characteristics, and mapping them together with the expected outcomes and characteristics of the climate option. Feasibility spaces are a promising method to prioritize climate options, realistically assess the achievability of climate goals, and construct scenarios with empirically‐grounded assumptions.This article is categorized under: Climate, History, Society, Culture > Disciplinary Perspectives Assessing Impacts of Climate Change > Representing Uncertainty The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Decarbonizing Energy and/or Reducing Demand

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The feasibility of climate action: Bridging the inside and the outside view through feasibility spaces

Jewell

Cherp

2023

WIREs Climate Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More generally, our research serves as a model for quantifying the social and political concerns of rapid transitions 51,52 so that they can be considered on par with economic aspects. In spite of the cost-effectiveness of coal phase-out, its feasibility is often challenged on socio-political grounds 10,11,15,22,53 . We show that political will and social acceptance have a tangible economic component which can be at least partially quantified in monetary terms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio-political cost of accelerating coal phase-out

Nacke

Vinichenko

Cherp

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While macroeconomic models highlight rapid coal phase-out as an urgent climate mitigation measure, its socio-political feasibility is unclear. The negative impacts of coal phase-out for companies, workers and coal-dependent regions, and the unequal global distribution of the coal phase-out burden has triggered resistance and calls for just transitions. Here, we construct a database of domestic and international just transition policies and partnerships that compensate affected actors of coal phase-outs. By comparing coal phase-out in countries which have compensation plans with those that don’t, we show that compensation policies are essential to realizing premature retirement of coal. The cost we estimate associated with these policies clarifies the financial cost of making coal phase-out politically feasible. We find that compensation costs are proportional to avoided emissions resulting from coal phase-out and are generally consistent with recent carbon prices. We find that the cost of implementing similar compensation policies in case of 1.5°C -consistent coal phase-out for China and India is 17 times higher than all existing compensation, and roughly comparable to global Official Development Assistance in 2021. We show that in the case of coal phase-out, political will and social acceptance have a tangible economic component which should be factored in to assessing the feasibility of achieving climate targets.

show abstract

“…This mismatch is most likely driven by significant decline in costs of wind and solar and stagnating costs of nuclear in the models underlying the scenarios. However, models and scenarios would better reflect empirically observed mechanisms [12,82] if they also incorporate non-cost factors prominently shaping historical experience. Finally, we show how empirically-grounded benchmarks can be used to construct a feasibility space for simultaneous deployment of nuclear and renewables and how the 'solution space' from the IPCC mitigation pathways can be mapped onto the feasibility space for identifying more feasible scenarios.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Historical diffusion of nuclear, wind and solar power in different national contexts: implications for climate mitigation pathways

Vinichenko,

Jewell,

Jacobsson

et al. 2023

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change mitigation requires rapid expansion of low-carbon electricity but there is a disagreement on whether available technologies such as renewables and nuclear power can be scaled up sufficiently fast. Here we analyze the diffusion of nuclear (from the 1960s), as well as wind and solar (from the 1980–90s) power. We show that all these technologies have been adopted in most large economies except major energy exporters, but solar and wind have diffused across countries faster and wider than nuclear. After the initial adoption, the maximum annual growth for nuclear power has been 2.6% of national electricity supply (IQR 1.3%–6%), for wind − 1.1% (0.6%–1.7%), and for solar − 0.8% (0.5%–1.3%). The fastest growth of nuclear power occurred in Western Europe in the 1980s, a response by industrialized democracies to the energy supply crises of the 1970s. The European Union (EU), currently experiencing a similar energy supply shock, is planning to expand wind and solar at similarly fast rates. This illustrates that national contexts can impact the speed of technology diffusion at least as much as technology characteristics like cost, granularity, and complexity. In the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mitigation pathways, renewables grow much faster than nuclear due to their lower projected costs, though empirical evidence does not show that the cost is the sole factor determining the speed of diffusion. We demonstrate that expanding low-carbon electricity in Asia in line with the 1.5 °C target requires growth of nuclear power even if renewables increase as fast as in the most ambitious EU’s plans. 2 °C-consistent pathways in Asia are compatible with replicating China’s nuclear power plans in the whole region, while simultaneously expanding renewables as fast as in the near-term projections for the EU. Our analysis demonstrates the usefulness of empirically-benchmarked feasibility spaces for future technology projections.

show abstract

Coal-exit alliance must confront freeriding sectors to propel Paris-aligned momentum

Cited by 16 publications

References 87 publications

The feasibility of climate action: Bridging the inside and the outside view through feasibility spaces

The feasibility of climate action: Bridging the inside and the outside view through feasibility spaces

Socio-political cost of accelerating coal phase-out

Historical diffusion of nuclear, wind and solar power in different national contexts: implications for climate mitigation pathways

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About