What do we know about the global negative emissions energy system –

2050+

Michael ObersteinerICAE International Conference on Applied EnergyAugust 12-16, 2019 Västerås Sweden

Personal entry to BECCS and NETs

2, date

BECCS for Climate Risk Management

Paris Agreement

4

• ‘…pursue efforts to limit the (global average) temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change’.

• ‘Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions asap...and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century’

The Global Carbon Law

5

Source: Rockstroem et al. 2017, Science

The Grand late century atmospheric restoration

6

Scenario types behind the Paris Agreement Land use sectors contribution to mitigation 2oC

Source: Based on Fricko et al. 2016, GEC

7

Optimal control schedule of NETs/CDR

8

2000 2100

2C

Figure 1 / 2 / 3 / 4

AR5

Annual carbon tax flows under the late CDR

scenario

SSP

Polluter Pays

Annual subsidy flows under “The 50% rich

pay scenario”

New Emission Pathway Archetypes

11

Late Century NETs

NoOvershoot

Rapid Decarbon

ization

MinimizeNETs

Name - Title 12

Archetypes

“Late Century CDR”f

“Rapid Decarbonization”e

“No Overshoot”f

“Minimize CDR”f

Characteristics

PEAK

2020 BECCS from 2050 Early and fast decarbonization

Early BECCS and other CDRs

Early BECCS 2025

BECCS from 2030 and other end of century

CDRs required

Fast decarbonization and late century BECCS

Early BECCS and large scale other

CDRs Early BECCS

Benc

hmar

ks

Natural land losta PE

AK 2020 26% 6% 8% 8%

2025 33% 10% g 20% 19% Potential stranded assetsb PE

AK 2020 53% 0% 0% 13%

2025 71% 31% g 2% 32%

Overshoot levelc PE

AK 2020 87 Gt C 0 Gt C 0 Gt C 22 Gt C

2025 116 Gt C 77 Gt C g 0 Gt C 56 Gt C

Backstop relianced PE

AK 2020 8-9 yrs 0 yrs 1 yr 2-3 yrs

2025 11-12 yrs 3-5 yrs g 1-2 yrs 6-7 yrs

(a) Compared to year 2000 levels; (b) Percentage of today’s primary energy consumption; (c) Gt C budget overshoot; (d) Amount of carbon emissions to be captured in the late 21st century (from 2080 onwards) expressed in years of current emissions; (e) Half-

life period of fossil emission phase out = 10 years; (f) Half-life period of fossil emission phase out = 25 years; (g) Includes late century BECCS.

Climate feedbacksPermafrost

Impact of permafrost feedback on remaining carbon budget

Gasser et al., 2018

New Climate targets and pathways

Walsh et al. Nature Comm. 2017

Overshoot and Permafrost targets

16

First time Net Negative

~10% 100%PermaFrost loss 30% 50% 70% 90%

17, date

Are countries doing their NETs homework?

LULUCF in pledging for Paris

18Source: Forsell et al. 2016

LULUCF in pledging for Paris

19Source: Forsell et al. 2016

LULUCF in pledging for Paris

20No-overshoot target

Source: Forsell et al. 2016, Obersteiner et al. 2018

Conclusion

• Current phasing of NETs as foreseen under the Paris agreement is: – Financially not plausible– Huge intergenerational equity issue– Environmentally problematic (incl. overshoot risks)

• Near-term large scale NETs deployment– Nature based solutions (afforestation)– Evidence on DAC cost draw-down?– Are there any other NET technologies we do not know about???

21, date

..and put more NET thinking into 2050-2500

Innovation for Energy – Carbon System