Phasing out coal for 2 °C target requires worldwide replication of most ambitious national plans despite security and fairness concerns

Abstract

Ending the use of unabated coal power is a key climate change mitigation measure. However, we do not know how fast it is feasible to phase-out coal on the global scale. Historical experience of individual countries indicates feasible coal phase-out rates, but can these be upscaled to the global level and accelerated by deliberate action? To answer this question, we analyze 72 national coal power phase-out pledges and show that these pledges have diffused to more challenging socio-economic contexts and now cover 17% of the global coal power fleet but their impact on emissions (up to 4.8 Gt CO2 avoided by 2050) remains small compared to what is needed for achieving Paris climate targets. We also show that the ambition of pledges is similar across countries and broadly in line with faster historical precedents of coal power decline. While some pledges strengthen over time, up to 10% have been weakened by the energy crisis caused by the Russo-Ukrainian war. We construct scenarios of coal power decline based on empirically-grounded assumptions about future diffusion and ambition of coal phase-out pledges. We show that under these assumptions unabated power generation from coal in 2022-2050 would range from generation equivalent to the median in 2°C-consistent IPCC AR6 pathways and three-quarters of 2.5°C-consistent pathways. More ambitious coal phase-out scenarios require much stronger effort in Asia than in OECD countries which raises fairness and equity concerns. The majority of the 1.5°C- and 2°C-consistent IPCC pathways envision even more unequal distribution of effort and faster coal power decline in India and China than has ever been historically observed in individual countries or pledged by climate leaders.

Socio-political cost of accelerating coal phase-out

“…Our analysis also brings evidence to the debate on fairness of energy transitions 7,[13][14][15] . While there is general agreement on the need for a just transition, what exactly this should entail is contested.…”

“…In India, discussions are underway for a national just transition strategy 37 and Just Energy Transition Partnership 38 , however the country's net zero target (2070) is also several decades after coal phase-out in IPCC 1.5°C and 2°C compatible pathways (Table 3, Methods). All in all, we nd that the avoided emissions to reach 1.5°C and 2°C targets required in India + and China + are 13-18 times higher than all countries with coal phase-out commitments globally 15 .…”

“…For the date of coal phase-out for China and India, we calculate the date when unabated coal power generation falls below 1% in respective IPCC AR6 pathways (Methods, ref. 15 ). The range in each column represents the range we calculate based on the IQR of avoided emissions in IPCC AR6 pathways.…”

“…For coal phase-out commitments, we build on a database from ref. 15 which includes coal phase-out commitments for all countries with installed coal capacity at the time the commitment was made. This database was built through a systematic review of national and international documents including National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs); National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) submitted by member states to the EU; Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted under the Paris Agreement; the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA); the Global Coal to Clean Power Statement (GCCP); as well as other policy statements.…”

“…We calculate the average historical lifetime of coal power plants since 2001 in each country using the World Electric Power Plants (WEPP) database 72 . If a country has fewer than four retirement events in that period, we use the global average lifetime (42 years), except for Asian countries where we use a regional average which is markedly shorter (30 years) 15,22 .…”