Committed emissions from existing and planned power plants and asset stranding required to meet the Paris Agreement

Video thumbnail (Frame 0) Video thumbnail (Frame 75) Video thumbnail (Frame 217) Video thumbnail (Frame 301) Video thumbnail (Frame 361) Video thumbnail (Frame 525) Video thumbnail (Frame 583) Video thumbnail (Frame 709) Video thumbnail (Frame 853) Video thumbnail (Frame 941) Video thumbnail (Frame 1003) Video thumbnail (Frame 1225) Video thumbnail (Frame 1280) Video thumbnail (Frame 1345) Video thumbnail (Frame 1771) Video thumbnail (Frame 1909) Video thumbnail (Frame 2150) Video thumbnail (Frame 2209) Video thumbnail (Frame 2504) Video thumbnail (Frame 2631) Video thumbnail (Frame 2704) Video thumbnail (Frame 2777) Video thumbnail (Frame 2848) Video thumbnail (Frame 2954) Video thumbnail (Frame 3145) Video thumbnail (Frame 3214) Video thumbnail (Frame 3343) Video thumbnail (Frame 3493) Video thumbnail (Frame 3614)
Video in TIB AV-Portal: Committed emissions from existing and planned power plants and asset stranding required to meet the Paris Agreement

Formal Metadata

Committed emissions from existing and planned power plants and asset stranding required to meet the Paris Agreement
Title of Series
CC Attribution 3.0 Unported:
You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
Release Date

Content Metadata

Subject Area
Over the coming decade, the power sector is expected to invest ~7.2 trillion USD in power plants and grids globally, much of it into CO2-emitting coal and gas plants. These assets typically have long lifetimes and commit large amounts of (future) CO2 emissions. Here, we analyze the historic development of emission commitments from power plants and compare the emissions committed by current and planned plants with remaining carbon budgets. Based on this comparison we derive the likely amount of stranded assets that would be required to meet the 1.5 °C–2 °C global warming goal. We find that even though the growth of emission commitments has slowed down in recent years, currently operating generators still commit us to emissions (~300 GtCO2) above the levels compatible with the average 1.5 °C–2 °C scenario (~240 GtCO2). Furthermore, the current pipeline of power plants would add almost the same amount of additional commitments (~270 GtCO2). Even if the entire pipeline was cancelled, therefore, ~20% of global capacity would need to be stranded to meet the climate goals set out in the Paris Agreement. Our results can help companies and investors re-assess their investments in fossil-fuel power plants, and policymakers strengthen their policies to avoid further carbon lock-in.
Fuse (electrical) Video Electric power distribution Spaceflight
Field-effect transistor Power station Emissionsvermögen Spaceflight Power (physics)
Coal Plant (control theory) Fossil fuel
Hot working Plant (control theory) Pickup truck
Alcohol proof Rolling-element bearing Energy level
Stock (firearms)
Power station Plant (control theory) Emissionsvermögen
Shutdown (nuclear reactor)
Tiefdruckgebiet Plant (control theory) Energy level Pickup truck
Plant (control theory)
Stellar atmosphere
Fossil fuel
Plant (control theory) Source (album)
I'm I'm stemming a professor environmental economics here at the University of Oxford and I'm happy
to tell you about this paper has been led by spike here said about Commission
missions all the power set aside by
committed emissions remain the body conditions all all the fleet of power plants we already have installed around the world
coal plants the guest and of fossil fuels and
what we've done this is to look at all the
plants how all their how long like the rumble the utilization factors like the debate and
work out how many reasons we should anticipate from plants and we
expect around 300 billion tons of carbon dioxide now this turns out to be a problem because to achieve the Paris Goals of limiting warming to
less than roller to degrees of pre
above pre-industrial levels we've got about
around 240 billion tons of C A 2 so with the existing stock of patents were already 60 billion tons over the budget so that's not good but even worse is coming down the pipeline
we've got over 7 freely uracil is worth of potential spend on new
how ants and if you have the power plants that are already in and reconstruction of financing around the world a lot of them in Asia and you look at the embodied
emissions in most plants they would have
another 270 billion tons of C O 2 2 about is already being exceeded that is where the really difficult to learn I'm really good at something and so on and we
have to then a shutdown of the
plants to keep within the budget will run all
plants at low utilization levels all
will carbon capture and storage at the back end of those plants just expenses will
come out the ways to substitute throughout
atmosphere which untested and potentially expensive all we give up on the Paris Times so in my career cheapest
thing to be doing the most economically efficient and doing is not the building promotes money into
assets that you're likely have to scrap it and instead of having those trillions of dollars in the fossil fuel interests and
plants allocate money instead into
clean energy sources