49 ms·

Absolutely not. No way we make Net Zero by 2050. People need to stop reading feel good stories and look at the numbers globally. Update: Global CO2 emission

Absolutely not. No way we make Net Zero by 2050. People need to stop reading feel good stories and look at the numbers globally. Update: Global CO2 emissions increase almost every year https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissions/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissi... And for some reason, people think we’re only trying to reduce emissions in the grid. It’s a much bigger problem than electricity.

bryanlarsen 2y ago
Net Zero by 2050 is a reduction of 4% per annum. 2024 is projected to be almost 3%. Seems not an unreasonable optimistic target?
atonse 2y ago
What would you like to see happen instead?
dotnet00 2y ago
The progress isn't perfect, so we better throw it all out.
ben_w 2y ago
Currently, PV alone has a nameplate capacity about equal to average total global demand for electricity. The capacity factor is 10%*, which is why it's not already "done", but even with the assumption of zero increase in the annual production of PV, you get to 62%* of current electrical demand from just PV by 2050. But it has also demonstrated an average of 26% per year growth since about 2016 (higher before that), which means it's not unreasonable to expect us to reach that point by the early 2030s, quickly followed by all the other things we use energy for. Wind is also growing, and has a better capacity factor. The hard part about really reaching net zero is the long tail of small things, as even the CO2 emissions from the degradation of grassland(!) are on the borderline of being unsustainable, and that's 0.1% of global emissions. Or in country terms, getting absolutely everything sorted everywhere except North Korea still isn't good enough. But the power? That's basically fine. * Edit: I was being pessimistic, it's improved to 14% and this year is estimated to be 560 GW newly installed nameplate capacity, which means 98% of current demand can be supplied just by PV by 2050 even with no growth, assuming 25 year average lifespan so we can also ignore all currently installed panels.

bryanlarsen 2y ago

Net Zero by 2050 is a reduction of 4% per annum. 2024 is projected to be almost 3%. Seems not an unreasonable optimistic target?

atonse 2y ago

What would you like to see happen instead?

dotnet00 2y ago

The progress isn't perfect, so we better throw it all out.

ben_w 2y ago

Currently, PV alone has a nameplate capacity about equal to average total global demand for electricity. The capacity factor is 10%*, which is why it's not already "done", but even with the assumption of zero increase in the annual production of PV, you get to 62%* of current electrical demand from just PV by 2050. But it has also demonstrated an average of 26% per year growth since about 2016 (higher before that), which means it's not unreasonable to expect us to reach that point by the early 2030s, quickly followed by all the other things we use energy for. Wind is also growing, and has a better capacity factor. The hard part about really reaching net zero is the long tail of small things, as even the CO2 emissions from the degradation of grassland(!) are on the borderline of being unsustainable, and that's 0.1% of global emissions. Or in country terms, getting absolutely everything sorted everywhere except North Korea still isn't good enough. But the power? That's basically fine. * Edit: I was being pessimistic, it's improved to 14% and this year is estimated to be 560 GW newly installed nameplate capacity, which means 98% of current demand can be supplied just by PV by 2050 even with no growth, assuming 25 year average lifespan so we can also ignore all currently installed panels.