Look closely...
1.5°C scenarios have a huge drop in global coal use (~80% by 2030), but there are some models that have a 'return to coal' afterwards.
Why do models 'return to coal' after shutting down the industry?
1/
1.5°C scenarios have a huge drop in global coal use (~80% by 2030), but there are some models that have a 'return to coal' afterwards.
Why do models 'return to coal' after shutting down the industry?
1/
In modern scenarios, the 'return to coal' seems to be based on CCS. The models get out of coal in the short-term, but then rebuild coal with CCS.
I know people worry about solar/wind costs in models, I worry more about the level of coal with CCS in models...
2/
I know people worry about solar/wind costs in models, I worry more about the level of coal with CCS in models...
2/
This has been noted before. @jritch found Jae Edmonds discussing this issue in 1997, with some consideration of why that happens in a model...
link.springer.com/article/10.100…
I am sure it has been discussed before, at least, I would assume...
3/
link.springer.com/article/10.100…
I am sure it has been discussed before, at least, I would assume...
3/
The 'return to coal' seems a bigger problem in 2°C scenarios. Coal with CCS has quite some emissions as capture rates are not 100%, so less likely to be used in 1.5°C scenarios?
Some 2°C scenarios assume as much coal use in 2100 as today!
4/
Some 2°C scenarios assume as much coal use in 2100 as today!
4/
This is a messy figure, but the labels show different models seem to have more 'return to coal' than others.
It is useful to look into the details of different models / scenarios & think through the implications before over interpreting results...
5/5
It is useful to look into the details of different models / scenarios & think through the implications before over interpreting results...
5/5
