My take on 2023 Energy Outlook by @IEA👉https://origin.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2023. I see glass 90% empty & 10% full. Yes,renewable energy is ⬆️both in investment and capacity. Maybe fossil energy will peak in this decade. & no, this is not fast enough to get even near to Net Zero in 2050.🧵
1/10
World Energy Outlook 2023 – Analysis - IEA

World Energy Outlook 2023 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.

IEA
The Report is forward-looking. It measures 2022 energy sources and it projects them up to 2050 under (a) current policies (labelled STEPS👇);(b)Pledges (APS👇);(c)Net Zero in 2050 (NZE👇).
2/10
The overall picture is:(1) renewables are bound to rise, but under STEPS only at half the rate that is needed to achieve net zero in 2050. (2) Coal is about to go down quickly even under STEPS,but not as much as needed; (3) Oil and gas are going down way too slowly.
3/10
Solar is a success story. Production has increased ten-fold globally over the past decade and is bound to raise again from ~640 GW in 2022 to over 1200 GW in medium term. A lot of capacity is idle so it can be further used.
4/10
Thanks to solar (⬇️3Gt per year),wind(⬇️2 Gt p/y),Electric Vehicles (⬇️1 Gt p/y) emission curve from energy is being bent and will be even more so. However, "This is far from enough to get on track for net zero emissions by 2050" (cit. Energy Outlook).
5/10
Outlook recommends to triple renewables by 2030 (this has been pledged at the recent COP28;but pledges are...pledges);doubling energy efficiency and cutting by 3/4 methane emissions. The latter is actually very cheap to do.
6/10
The big question mark is "Announced critical mineral mining projects [needed to built renewable] are not sufficient to meet the needs of the NZE Scenario in 2030. (cit.)" Moreover,exploitation in mining is horrible+unacceptable 👉 https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/AFR6231832016ENGLISH.pdf @amnesty.
7/10
Reliance on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) appears to be mere wishful thinking. In 2022 CCS has absorbed 40Mt of CO2 and it should scale-up to capture 6000Mt (i.e. 150 times as much) in 2050. Can anyone see that coming? IPCC Report says it's very costly. Why do we bother?
8/10
2 thoughts:(1)Outlook takes as dogma rising energy demand. But it's clear that current trajectory is not even enough to achieve Net Zero in 2050, which is not enough to steer away from climate collapse. We need to think of ⬇️consumption,which is what degrowth is about.
9/10
(2)It's clear markets can't price bad externalities of energy consumption. Hence,we need to nationalize the energy sector given its inability to avoid climate collapse.Health & education sectors are (largely) nationalized.Why can't the same be with energy sector?
10/10