THE FUTURE OF ENERGY: 3 ROUTES TO CHANGE

On Monday 30th January, I and all other Geography Scholar had the pleasure of attending a talk, at the Royal Geographical Society, about the future of energy globally and the issues relating to changing the energy mix around the world. It was delivered by Professor Mike Bradshaw of Warwick University and provided a deep insight into the current and potential future states of climate change caused by energy use. First, he poised the overarching question of the lecture: Can the world have secure, affordable, and equitable energy services that are environmentally benign? Or, in short, can the world have truly sustainable energy that everyone has access to and has little risk of failing?

The answer to this is a complex one. Energy use causes 73.2% of greenhouse gas emissions globally, so clearly it is important to reduce these emissions greatly by switching to renewable/green energy. A successful transition to this will ensure there are no physical issues with obtaining the energy (no involuntary interruptions in the supply), having the ability to sell the energy at a reasonable price and making sure the energy is geopolitically independent (countries can generate it without too much reliance on others).

There are many global agreements and treaties in place to reach these goals already. These include the Paris Agreement 2015, annual Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings of UN nations to combat climate change, and the UN

Sustainable Development Goal 7: Affordable and clean energy for all around the world. On top of this, optimistic estimates predict a 1.5-2.3 degree Celsius of warming from the pre-industrial period by 2100. However, many challenges are still present in order to ensure that these targets will be met. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that, to get 2 degrees of warming, global energy emissions must peak before 2025 and decline by 27% by 2030. We are currently not reaching this target, and this would not even reach the Paris Agreement target of a 1.5-degree rise, clearly showing we have a long way to go.

Professor Bradshaw proposed three possible transitions that could emerge relating to global energy source changes. The first was a Gradual Transition - the energy mix does not change much in the future and the global system is not compatible with meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement. This means energy security would be prioritised. While a very undesirable option, it would likely lead to energy sources being more secure and stable in the long term. The second was a Rapid Transition - clean energy technology supplies the growth in energy demand, energy emissions peak in the 2020’s and Net-Zero is likely achieved. This would result in restricting global warming to less than 2 degrees and result in relative safety from the drastic effects of climate change. The last and most interesting was the Messy Transition - a failure to phase out fossil fuels in a timely manner leading to increased price volatility, backlash against the Net-Zero transition, a breakdown in international cooperation in climate change, and more geopolitical competition. This is arguably the most dangerous future for energy and could lead to the effects of climate change worsening in the long term, compared to current energy use, putting the entire planet’s future in peril.

Overall, the future of energy is definitely in question, as there are many different models and predictions that show vastly different outcomes for changes in energy use. With the right mindset and a rapid transition to renewable energy, the global target of a 1.5-2 degree temperature rise is still possible, but it will take international efforts and investment to see it out.