Pathways

Developed by the Global Calculator team

This is one of four plausible 2°C pathways created by the Global Calculator team to generate the messages of our report Prosperous living for the world in 2050 (PDF 1.43MB).

In this pathway, the effort to decarbonise is spread fairly evenly across all sectors. Specifically, level 2.8 across all technology and fuel, and land and food levers.

Common features of all four pathways:

• Lifestyle levers are set at the same level as the IEA 6DS business as usual scenario (with the exception of the “consumer activism” pathway, in which the levers "mode", "occupancy & load", "car own or hire", "quantity of meat", "type of meat" and "product lifespan & demand" are altered).
• All four pathways can be considered consistent with projected patterns of economic development.
• Population and urbanisation are set at the central UN projections (level 2).
• Emissions after 2050 are set at around level 2.8 to allow continued reductions toward zero.
• No level 1s or 4s selected in order to avoid extremely ambitious or pessimistic scenarios.
• No use of speculative greenhouse gas removal (GGR) technologies as these are unproven.

Developed by the Global Calculator team

This is one of four plausible 2°C pathways created by the Global Calculator team to generate the messages of our report Prosperous living for the world in 2050 (PDF 1.43MB).

In this pathway, consumers are reluctant to accept new technologies that have an immediate impact on them. In particular:

• Transport: continued use of internal combustion engines with very low take up of electric and hydrogen vehicles.
• Buildings: continued use of gas for cooking and relatively low take up of insulation and low carbon heating technologies in homes because the consumer does not want the upheaval.
• Electricity: less use of wind than some of the other 2°C pathways because consumers do not want to see changes to their landscape.
• Wastes and residues: relatively low collection of waste by households.

Instead, the low-carbon activity happens in a way the consumer is less directly aware of:

• Higher use of nuclear and CCS.
• Higher effort on land use (higher food yields, etc.) and relatively high afforestation.

This is a low electrification pathway, with high use of bioenergy. This pathway shows that it is possible to have low consumer acceptance of technologies that have a direct impact on them. But it means you have to be very ambitious elsewhere, especially across all areas of land use, food production, energy efficiency, transport and industry.

Common features of all four pathways:

• Lifestyle levers are set at the same level as the IEA 6DS business as usual scenario (with the exception of the “consumer activism” pathway, in which the levers "mode", "occupancy & load", "car own or hire", "quantity of meat", "type of meat" and "product lifespan & demand" are altered).
• All four pathways can be considered consistent with projected patterns of economic development.
• Population and urbanisation are set at the central UN projections (level 2).
• Emissions after 2050 are set at around level 2.8 to allow continued reductions toward zero.
• No level 1s or 4s selected in order to avoid extremely ambitious or pessimistic scenarios.
• No use of speculative greenhouse gas removal (GGR) technologies as these are unproven.

Developed by the Global Calculator team

This is one of four plausible 2°C pathways created by the Global Calculator team to generate the messages of our report Prosperous living for the world in 2050 (PDF 1.43MB).

In this pathway there are insufficient measures in place to expand forests, so non-commercial forest increases by just 1% between 2011 and 2050. Lack of protection of forests means that there is little incentive to boost food yields, so crop and livestock yields are relatively low. There is very little land for bioenergy, so high electrification is necessary.

This pathway shows that protecting and expanding our forest area plays a critical role towards meeting our 2°C target. Failure to expand forest area significantly means that very ambitious action will have to be taken across a range of other sectors.

Common features of all four pathways:

• Lifestyle levers are set at the same level as the IEA 6DS business as usual scenario (with the exception of the “consumer activism” pathway, in which the levers "mode", "occupancy & load", "car own or hire", "quantity of meat", "type of meat" and "product lifespan & demand" are altered).
• All four pathways can be considered consistent with projected patterns of economic development.
• Population and urbanisation are set at the central UN projections (level 2).
• Emissions after 2050 are set at around level 2.8 to allow continued reductions toward zero.
• No level 1s or 4s selected in order to avoid extremely ambitious or pessimistic scenarios.
• No use of speculative greenhouse gas removal (GGR) technologies as these are unproven.

Developed by the Global Calculator team

This is one of four plausible 2°C pathways created by the Global Calculator team to generate the messages of our report Prosperous living for the world in 2050 (PDF 1.43MB).

In this pathway, people around the world are concerned about technologies perceived at risk of having unintended adverse side effects on the natural environment (e.g. nuclear power or genetically modified crops). Consumers actively embrace changes to the technologies they use and aspects of their lifestyle to ensure we can reach 2°C. Specifically:

• Relatively low nuclear.
• Relatively low crop yields (reflecting reluctance to use genetically modified crops and fertilisers).
• Relatively low livestock intensification (reflecting high value placed on organic/free-range farming practices).
• Some shift from private to public transport.
• Some changes in quantity and type of meat consumed (away from beef and lamb, towards poultry and pork).
• Shift away from a “disposable society” by selecting high effort on the "product lifespan & demand" lever. This pathway shows that making changes in our lifestyle (for example our dietary and travel choices) can significantly reduce emissions and the effort needed across other sectors.

Common features of all four pathways:

• Lifestyle levers are set at the same level as the IEA 6DS business as usual scenario (with the exception of the “consumer activism” pathway, in which the levers "mode", "occupancy & load", "car own or hire", "quantity of meat", "type of meat" and "product lifespan & demand" are altered).
• All four pathways can be considered consistent with projected patterns of economic development.
• Population and urbanisation are set at the central UN projections (level 2).
• Emissions after 2050 are set at around level 2.8 to allow continued reductions toward zero.
• No level 1s or 4s selected in order to avoid extremely ambitious or pessimistic scenarios.
• No use of speculative greenhouse gas removal (GGR) technologies as these are unproven.

Developed by the International Energy Agency (IEA)

The 6°C Scenario (6DS) is largely an extension of current trends. By 2050, energy use almost doubles (compared with 2009) and total GHG emissions rise even more. In the absence of efforts to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of GHGs, average global temperature rise is projected to be at least 6°C in the long term. The 6DS is broadly consistent with the World Energy Outlook Current Policy Scenario through 2035.

The 6DS is part of the IEA's Energy Technology Perspectives.

Developed by the International Energy Agency (IEA)

The 4°C Scenario (4DS) takes into account recent pledges made by countries to limit emissions and step up efforts to improve energy efficiency. It serves as the primary benchmark in ETP 2012 when comparisons are made between scenarios. Projecting a long-term temperature rise of 4°C, the 4DS is broadly consistent with the World Energy Outlook New Policies Scenario through 2035 (IEA, 2011). In many respects, this is already an ambitious scenario that requires significant changes in policy and technologies. Moreover, capping the temperature increase at 4°C requires significant additional cuts in emissions in the period after 2050.

The 4DS is part of the IEA's Energy Technology Perspectives.

Developed by the International Energy Agency (IEA)

The 2°C Scenario (2DS) is the focus of IEA's Energy Technology Perspectives. The 2DS describes an energy system consistent with an emissions trajectory that recent climate science research indicates would give an 80% chance of limiting average global temperature increase to 2°C. It sets the target of cutting energy-related CO2 emissions by more than half in 2050 (compared with 2009) and ensuring that they continue to fall thereafter. Importantly, the 2DS acknowledges that transforming the energy sector is vital, but not the sole solution: the goal can only be achieved provided that CO2 and GHG emissions in non-energy sectors are also reduced.

Shell's scenarios are plausible alternative futures.  They are not forecasts or desired outcomes, but an analysis of how technology, economic, social and political forces might play out over the century. 

Our 2013 scenarios explore where power for change really lies.  In the Mountains scenario, advantages flow to the influential, who remain relatively concentrated, whilst stability is prized.  Institutional rigidities hamper economic development, but governments retain the authority to introduce far-reaching policy measures in secondary areas.  These help to develop, for example, more compact cities and transform the global transport network.

New policies unlock plentiful natural gas resources and accelerate carbon capture and storage technology, supporting a cleaner energy system.  Energy prices are lower and policy takes a more regulated approach.  Smart urban planning plays a significant role worldwide, helping to facilitate the electrification of road transport.

Increasing CO2 and environmental stresses are moderated by slower overall growth; the substitution of natural gas for coal; and the success of carbon capture and storage technologies.We have provided a fuller discussion of this scenario in the Global Calculator on the DECC website.  You can read more about the Shell scenarios at www.shell.com/scenarios.

Shell's scenarios are plausible alternative futures.  They are not forecasts or desired outcomes, but an analysis of how technology, economic, social and political forces might play out over the century. 

Our 2013 scenarios explore where power for change really lies.  The Oceans scenario describes a more prosperous and volatile world, in which influence becomes more dispersed.  Energy demand surges owing to strong economic growth.  Power is more widely distributed and governments take longer to achieve consensus on major decisions.  Market forces shape the energy system more than policies. 

Oil and coal remain central to the energy mix, but renewable energy also grows and by the 2060s solar becomes the world's largest primary energy source.

With higher energy prices, end-users respond by taking up much more energy-efficient equipment.  Unconventional gas is significant only in North America.  The internal combustion engine remains dominant in road transport, meaning ongoing demand for liquid fuels – oil, and later, large quantities of biofuels.

Greenhouse gas emissions peak and remain high for a prolonged period until reduced by the combination of biomass, CCS and solar.

We have provided a fuller discussion of this scenario in the Global Calculator on the DECC website.  You can read more about the Shell scenarios at www.shell.com/scenarios.

Developed by Friends of the Earth

A world with less than 1.5 degrees of global warming is much more desirable and much less risky than a warmer world; particularly for the poorest people across the world who will suffer most from warming (although nobody is immune to the impacts, as extreme weather events have already shown). The Global Carbon Calculator shows that, in theory at least, it is still possible to have a 50:50 chance of avoiding 1.5 degrees. It is obvious that to do so will require extraordinary efforts, particularly on demand management. But the goal is worth it. A world than is greener, healthier, cheaper, safer and, necessarily, more equal. In other words, a better world.

More informaton

For more information, please see the FOE pathway briefing.pdf

Developed by Mott MacDonald

Developed by our Transportation, Buildings, Power, International Development and Climate Resilience experts, Mott MacDonald’s pathway reflects, what, from our perspective, we need to do to stay below the 2 degree rise that is necessary to prevent dangerous climate change. 

This would be achieved through technological development that will maintain economic growth, societal choice and climate resiliency.

We use less carbon intensive technologies and fuels with more efficient supply chains. Buildings are heated and cooled more efficiently, our appliances are efficient in both water and energy usage.

Gas, nuclear, renewables and CCS drive down emissions, however, decarbonisation of energy is not the sole driver: through awareness raising and cultural shifts we will use land more efficiently and produce less food waste. 

When developing the pathway, we were even more optimistic of the possibilities for the low carbon generation, however, in order to balance the electricity supply and demand, we had to constrain those levers.  Mott MacDonald did not consider the Manufacturing levers but instead adopted values from IEA 2DEG pathway. 

We found this tool valuable and empowering: it opened the minds of even the most experienced professionals.  We appreciated the complexity of the tool, but would like to make the following comments: (i) some levers group together technologies that could have differing strategies; (ii) there is absence of water resources as a key boundary condition.

Developed by Climact

Lifestyle:

• Our pathway strives for a realistic but ambitious lifestyle effort at level ~3, in part because these changes have positive impacts on other areas than Energy/CO2, including on costs of course
• It’s worth noting again how key the diet choices are, and particularly the “type of meat” lever. I was eager to push this lever to 3,5, but we wanted stay realistic in our Lifestyle assumptions.
• I still think governments should push much stronger and tax these significantly in the long run.

Technology and fuels:

• The demand side is pushed a little more than the supply side (up to level 3), as reducing energy demand has other side effects than CO2 and leads to a more resilient system
• No CCS is used as it seems it can be avoided (I am impressed by this finding, but I am not sure it holds after 2050, as I see negative emissions, can you confirm?), there is a lot of uncertainty around it and this leads additional material requirements
• Nuclear is kept at today’s levels (level 1,5) as it is unrealistic to think it will not be used by some countries
• But more emphasis is set on RES at level 2,3
• Fossil fuel efficiency at 3 at is of paramount importance to use the fossil fuels we have most efficiently, and we push for more gas use in power production

Land and food:

• We do not push land and food levers too far as this could lead to other serious issues (e.g., extensive use of fertilizer, large need of water)
• Much of the surplus land is simply used to regenerate forests and grasslands

Demographics: we keep the standard level 2 assumptions which we understand are the UN base case assumptions

Emissions after 2050: level 2,7, which was used in the balanced pathway

All in all it is attractive as it reduces investments significantly, and leads to much lower costs overall, this is of course related to larger lifestyle and efficiency efforts. 

Developed by Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology (ICEPT)

ICEPT is a leading centre for research, policy analysis and postgraduate training, working at the interface between energy technology and policy. The ICEPT pathway is a high innovation, low carbon energy scenario, based on an assumption of strong technological progress and ambitious policies. The scenario also incorporates some key constraints related to social/political acceptance and about food-crop yield growth.  

The ICEPT scenario uses IEA 2DS pathway assumptions for travel, homes, fossil fuels, buildings and manufacturing. It explores high growth in wind and solar, and vehicle efficiency/fuel switching. In comparison to the IEA 2DS scenario, this pathway shows that an additional 39 EJ of renewables could be generated by 2050, accompanied by a high level of storage and demand shifting measures. Vehicle efficiency increases to 3.7 l gasoline equivalent/100 km and alternative fuelled vehicles rise to 35% of passenger cars. In contrast, the scenario considers a range of constraints on CCS, nuclear, and in biofuel yield growth. ICEPT analysis of crop-fuel debate informs adjustments to crop yields, but also explores more ambition with dietary change. The ICEPT pathway focuses on the technological options for climate mitigation and how to develop energy strategies to achieve them.

Developed for the Global Calculator by Dr. Rajiv Kumar Chaturvedi at the Indian Institute of Science

The Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) were developed by the scientific community, and IPCC adopted these pathways for their Fifth Assessment Report (AR5).

RCP 8.5 pathway: RCP 8.5 is the highest in terms of radiative forcing among the four representative concentration pathways. This particular scenario is developed by the MESSAGE modeling team and the IIASA Integrated Assessment Framework at the International Institute for Applies Systems Analysis (IIASA) (Riahi et al., 2007). It includes a pathway of time series of emissions and concentrations of the full suite of greenhouse gases and aerosols and chemically active gases, as well as land use/land cover, where radiative forcing reaches 8.5 Wm–2 by 2100 and continues to rise for some amount of time.

In order to investigate a broad range of possible climate futures, RCP 8.5 (highest among the RCPs) assumes high emissions between 2100 and 2150 and assumes to stabilize the concentrations only by 2250, at CO2 concentrations of approximately 2000 ppm, nearly seven times the pre-industrial levels (as against the 360 ppm of RCP 2.6 by 2300). In comparison to the earlier SRES scenarios RCP 8.5 is somewhat higher than A2 in 2100 and close to the SRES A1FI scenario.

Developed for the Global Calculator by Dr. Rajiv Kumar Chaturvedi at the Indian Institute of Science

The Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) were developed by the scientific community, and IPCC adopted these pathways for their Fifth Assessment Report (AR5).

RCP 6.0 pathway: RCP6.0 is one of the two intermediate stabilization pathways (higher medium) among the four representative concentration pathways, the lower intermediate stabilization pathway being RCP4.5. This particular scenario is developed by the AIM modeling team at the National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Japan (Fujino et al., 2006; Hijioka et al., 2008).

It is a stabilization pathway of time series of emissions and concentrations of the full suite of greenhouse gases and aerosols and chemically active gases, as well as land use/land cover, where total radiative forcing is stabilized at 6.0 Wm-2 after 2100 by employing a range of technologies and strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. RCP 6.0 aims for a smooth stabilization of concentrations by 2150. In comparison to the earlier SRES scenarios RCP6 is close to SRES A1B (more after 2100 than during the 21st century).

Developed for the Global Calculator by Dr. Rajiv Kumar Chaturvedi at the Indian Institute of Science

The Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) were developed by the scientific community, and IPCC adopted these pathways for their Fifth Assessment Report (AR5).

 RCP 2.6 (also referred to as RCP3-PD) is the lowest in terms of radiative forcing among the four representative concentration pathways. This particular scenario is developed by the IMAGE modeling team of the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (Van Vuuren et al., 2007). It includes a pathway of time series of emissions and concentrations of the full suite of greenhouse gases and aerosols and chemically active gases, as well as land use/land cover, where radiative forcing peaks at approximately 3 Wm–2 before 2100 and then declines to 2.6 Wm–2 in 2100.

In order to investigate a broad range of possible climate futures, RCP 2.6 (lowest among the RCPs) assumes small constant net negative emissions after 2100 (as against RCP 8.5 that assumes stabilization with high emissions between 2100 and 2150, then a linear decrease until 2250). As the RCP 2.6 implies net negative CO2 emissions after around 2070 and throughout the extension, under this pathway CO2 concentrations are slowly reduced towards 360 ppm by 2300 (in comparison to 2000 ppm in the RCP 8.5 scenario). In comparison to the earlier SRES scenarios RCP 2.6 is lower than any of the SRES scenarios.

Developed by UCL

This pathway is an approximate representation of the least-cost global energy system generated by the integrated assessment model TIAM-UCL, producing an emissions trajectory that results in around a 40% chance of the average global temperature exceeding 4°C by 2100. Under this reference scenario current energy practices are expected to continue into the future and high emission levels are allowed since no climate change mitigation policy is applied. TIAM-UCL finds the energy system that maximises social welfare subject to the imposed constraints. No constraints are placed on emissions reduction, however, and so global CO2 emissions continue to rise out to 2050 (and beyond) such that they increase by almost 45% by 2050. There are also no requirements for other non-energy sectors to reduce non-CO2 emissions. The impacts or damages that are likely to result from a 4°C temperature rise are not included within the model or the optimisation process.

Developed by UCL 

This pathway is an approximate representation of the least-cost global energy system generated by the integrated assessment model TIAM-UCL. The original pathway produces an emissions trajectory that recent climate science research indicates gives around a 60% chance of limiting average global temperature increase to 2°C. TIAM-UCL finds the energy system that maximises social welfare subject to the imposed constraints. For this scenario up to 2020 it assumes that emissions reductions follow the pledges made as part of the Copenhagen Accord only. After 2020 emissions can fall at any rate but we constrain the model to ensure that the average surface temperature rise does not exceed 2oC in any period i.e. no 'overshoot' of temperature is allowed. This results in global CO2 emissions falling by nearly 45% by 2050. It is assumed that there are commensurate reductions in sectors outside the energy sector, particularly in those that result in high volumes of non-CO2 emissions such as the agriculture sector.

Developed by The Vegan Society

Human farming of animals is in the top three causes of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.  Nitrous oxide and methane are particularly problematic for "animal farming", since on the critical 20-year timescale they have global warming potentials of 289 and 72 respectively (see the IPCC website).  However, methane also has an atmospheric lifetime of around 12 years. Meanwhile, food energy sufficient for over 3 billion humans is currently wasted by artificially breeding farmed animals, rather than eating crops first-hand ourselves. 

Therefore, we focus on shifting farming and diets toward lower methane and nitrous oxide production.  This is achieved by moving toward agro-ecological crop farming and plant-centred diets.  We approximate this thus:

• Diet lever - major reductions in emissions achieved by well-planned plant-centred diets
• Food lever - agricultural research effort is concentrated on crop yields, with no cattle in feedlots, minimal numbers of "farmed animals" on pasture, and maximal "wastes & residues" recycling
• Land Use lever - some of the land freed up by moving away from "farming animals" to be used for biofuels, and increased crop growing efficiency e.g. with multi-cropping and agro-forestry
• Emissions trajectory - continues downwards, some carbon capture and storage in sustainable electricity generation. 

Otherwise, we use IEA 6DS as our approximately "business as normal" base scenario.

Developed by Cambridge Architectural Research

We tried to do as much as possible using proven technologies, and avoid any of the extreme 'Level 4' options. We did as much as we thought possible by insulating and improving the efficiency of buildings, and power generation efficiencies, and made maximum use of renewables. We didn't think you can dictate to people how far they travel, or the size of the buildings they use, or the foods they eat. And we did all we could to avoid any increase in nuclear power because of the problems of disposing of nuclear waste (a legacy we shouldn't leave future generations).

However, it simply was not possible to achieve even a 50% chance of sticking to the IPCC's 2 degree threshold without using more nuclear power. We ended up modelling a 50% rise in nuclear power through to 2050: up to 558 GW globally.

Our pathway sees a complete phasing-out of coal for electricity generation: from 60% of power from goal today to nothing by 2050. And simultaneous improvements in generation efficiencies – partly from greater use of combined cycle gas turbines, partly from improved efficiencies in coal-fired power. We modelled modest use of carbon-capture and storage (still unproven at scale): around 250 GW of installed capacity worldwide by 2050.

Developed by Chatham House

• High-meat pathway illustrating IEA 2DS with a global shift to Western patterns of meat consumption
• Impact: 79.7 GtCO2e annual emissions by 2100, up from 4.9 GtCO2e projected under IEA 2DS. As a result, mean temperature increase by 2100 is projected to be over 4 degrees.

This pathway describes a world in which ambitious action is taken in almost every aspect of global lifestyles, in line with the IEA's 2 degree scenario, with the exception of dietary patterns. Global average calorie and meat intake rises to current European levels, with a significant increase in meat consumption and particularly in the consumption of ruminant meats such as beef, mutton and lamb. Such a shift in global diets would likely incur a dramatic increase in levels of obesity and non-communicable diseases such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

As a result of these shifts towards Western dietary patterns, projected annual emissions by 2100 rise from 4.9 GtCO2e under IEA’s 2DS to 79.7 GtCO2e. This leads to a mean temperature increase of over 4 degrees by 2100, in spite of very ambitious and potentially expensive abatement action taken in other sectors. For further analysis, see Chatham House’s recent report, Livestock – Climate Change’s Forgotten Sector.

This is an illustrative scenario demonstrating the potential impact of diet changes on emissions, developed by researchers at Chatham House. Chatham House is an independent policy institute; it does not express opinions of its own.

Developed by Chatham House

• Chatham House low-meat pathway illustrating IEA 4DS with ambitious action on diet, land and food.
• Impact: 56.1 GtCO2e annual emissions in 2100 down to 19.1 GtCO2e annual emissions in 2100

This pathway describes a future in which global dietary patterns shift considerably. In other areas - primarily energy production, use and behaviour change - efforts to reduce emissions are assumed to be in line with the IEA's 4 degree scenario. Monogastric meats, such as chicken and pork, come largely to replace ruminant meats like beef and lamb. Increased meat consumption in emerging and developing economies is counterbalanced by a significant reduction in those countries where meat intake is above accepted healthy levels. By 2050, the global average is 90g per person per day, as recommended by the WHO. Similarly, there is a redistribution of calorie intake with the global average reaching 2,180 kcal per person per day by 2050. Efficiency improvements and technological advances are seen in land management and livestock husbandry, with a high degree of transfer to developing countries. Accordingly, there is a significant reduction in food waste and the global feed-to-meat conversion ratio increases.

As a result of these dietary shifts and a move away from emission-intensive ruminant meat, annual emissions in 2100 fall from 56.1 GtCO2e, as foreseen under the IEA 4DS, to 19.1 GtCO2e. The 2 degree target is very nearly reached, at relatively low mitigation cost. For further analysis, see Chatham House’s recent report, Livestock – Climate Change’s Forgotten Sector.

This is an illustrative scenario demonstrating the potential impact of diet changes on emissions, developed by researchers at Chatham House. Chatham House is an independent policy institute; it does not express opinions of its own.

Developed by the World Energy Council (WEC)

One of WEC's two World Energy Scenarios to 2050, Symphony has a focus on achieving environmental sustainability through internationally coordinated policies and practices.

In the Symphony scenario, there is a voter consensus on driving environmental sustainability and energy security through corresponding practices and policies. The main players are governments, the public sector, private companies, NGOs, and environmentally minded voters. Selected energy sources are subsidised and incentivised by governments and certain types of renewable and low carbon energy are actively promoted by governments. Carbon market is top-down, based on an international agreement with commitments and allocations. Some nationalistic strategies result in reduced imports/exports.  As there is less cross-border convergence, more environmental constraints and a more capital-intensive growth pathway, GDP growth in the Symphony scenario is slightly lower.

Built through consultaton with experts worldwide using a global multi-regional MARKAL (GMM) model, WEC's World Energy Scenarios to 2050 are designed to glimpse what the future might look like in a plausible and maybe challenging manner – yet they are not meant to be exact or precise forecasts. These scenarios are designed to help a range of stakeholders address the "energy trilemma" of achieving environmental sustainability, energy security, and energy equity and hence putting forward different policy options.

For more imformation, please visit the WEC website.

Developed by the World Energy Council (WEC)

One of WEC's two World Energy Scenarios to 2050, Jazz has a focus on energy equity with priority given to achieving individual access and affordability of energy through economic growth.

The Jazz scenario represents a world where there is a consumer focus on achieving energy access, affordability, and quality of supply with the use of best available energy sources. The main players are multi-national companies, banks, venture capitalists, and price-conscious consumers. Energy sources compete on basis of price and availability and technologies are chosen in competitive markets. Renewable and low carbon energy grows in line with market selection and in the absence of internationally agreed commitment, a global carbon market grows more slowly from bottom up based on regional, national and local initiatives. Free-trade strategies lead to increased exports, while faster convergence across countries, higher international competition and low environmental constraints lead to higher GDP growth.

Built through consultaton with experts worldwide using a global multi-regional MARKAL (GMM) model, WEC's World Energy Scenarios to 2050 are designed to glimpse what the future might look like in a plausible and maybe challenging manner – yet they are not meant to be exact or precise forecasts. These scenarios are designed to help a range of stakeholders address the "energy trilemma" of achieving environmental sustainability, energy security, and energy equity and hence putting forward different policy options.

For more information, please visit WEC's website.

Developed by the World Nuclear Association

We have devised two scenarios, looking at how different levels of nuclear energy deployment can influence achieving the 2C objective.

The first scenario - called Largo - takes as its basis our reference case from the World Nuclear Association Global Fuel Market Report, which assumes just under 3% growth in global nuclear capacity to 2030. Continuing the same growth rate through to 2050 gives a global nuclear capacity of 1030 GWe.

The second scenario - called Allegro - selects the maximum capacity of nuclear generation that the Global Calculator allows, giving a total global nuclear capacity in 2050 of 1870 GWe.

For the rest of the scenario choices, both Largo and Allegro seek to maximise the benefits of low carbon generation, by putting more effort into shifting from gasoline to electric transport options. The scenarios also look for improvements in energy efficiency, at home and in industry. In addition to more nuclear generation, the Allegro scenario seeks higher levels of effort with renewables, energy efficiency and CCS.

With both scenarios the 2C target is reached, at least according to the judgement of the Global Calculator. However, the area in which they differ most is in the level of effort required after 2050. In the Largo scenario emissions reduction efforts must continue at an "extremely ambitious" between 2050 and 2100. In the Allegro scenario more ambition for nuclear energy in the first half of the century, coupled with greater electrification of transport and a stronger shift away from coal, means the overall level of effort for emissions reductions post-2050 is a more manageable "very ambitious" level.

According to the authors of the Global Calculator, a level 4 effort is making "an extraordinarily ambitious and extreme level of abatement effort." The Allegro scenario would require a significant acceleration in deployment of nuclear energy. But according to the Global Calculator model the reward could be a much more manageable level of effort on avoiding climate disruption in the longer term.