The IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report highlights that pathways limiting warming to 2°C or 1.5°C involve substantial reductions in coal consumption (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 6, Executive Summary). This includes a rapid shift away from unabated coal (coal without carbon capture and storage, or CCS) use, production, and supply (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 6, Box 6.2). In scenarios limiting warming to 1.5°C, coal consumption without CCS falls by 67–82% by 2030 and is nearly eliminated by 2040–2050 (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 6, Section 6.7.4). For scenarios limiting warming to 2°C or lower, all use of coal, including coal with CCS, is reduced by 90% between 2019 and 2050 (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2). These pathways necessitate the cancellation of new coal power projects and the accelerated retirement of existing coal plants (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 6, Box 6.2). The IPCC also states that new investments in coal-fired electricity without CCS are inconsistent with limiting warming to well below 2°C, while many studies find that retirement of unabated coal far outpaces the deployment of coal with CCS (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 6, Section 6.7.4). Continued investments in coal could lock energy systems into higher emissions, making it more difficult to limit warming to well below 2°C (IPCC AR6 WGIII, April 2022, Chapter 6, Section 6.7.3.2).
A +2 score, indicating strong alignment with the IPCC’s science-based guidance on the role of coal in 1.5°C pathways, is achieved by supporting stringent intervention to remove unabated coal from the energy mix. These positions should reference timelines that are consistent with IPCC scenarios that limit warming to 1.5°C for the years 2020–2050. A +2 score may also be applied for strongly advocating for a steep reduction or opposing investments in coal, with residual energy production dependent on strict measures to ensure the scale-up and deployment of CCS in existing coal assets prior to 2050. Such positions should acknowledge the longer-term risks and uncertainties associated with CCS deployment alongside coal.
A +1 score, indicating partial alignment with the IPCC’s science-based guidance on the role of coal in 1.5°C pathways, is achieved by expressing general support for the phase-out of unabated coal in the energy mix. This score may also be applied to positions that advocate for a steep reduction in coal, with residual energy production dependent on measures to ensure the scale-up and deployment of CCS in coal assets prior to 2050. Such positions should reference the longer-term risks and uncertainties associated with CCS deployment alongside coal.
A 0 score, indicating neutral alignment with the IPCC’s science-based guidance on the role of coal in 1.5°C pathways, is given where there is support for the phase-out of coal, but uncertainty remains whether the pace of its transition is aligned with pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C. Similarly, a 0 is applied for statements that support reducing coal in the energy mix with a residual role for coal based on the deployment of CCS, but without clear timelines associated with CCS deployment.
A -1 score, indicating misalignment with the IPCC’s science-based guidance on the role of coal in 1.5°C pathways, is given for supporting a continued role for coal with CCS in the energy mix without clear support for a reduction in coal in line with the IPCC’s pathway for limiting warming to 2°C. A -1 can also be applied to support for deploying CCS for existing thermal coal installations with exceptions, such as proposing less stringent timelines or supporting a transition away from coal but leaving this to market forces.
A -2 score, indicating strong misalignment with the IPCC’s science-based guidance on the role of coal in 1.5°C pathways, is given for supporting the expansion of coal capacity. This includes support for a continued role of unabated coal in the energy mix, advocating for new or additional coal capacity with or without CCS, or supporting new investments, infrastructure, and policy measures that maintain a role for coal. A -2 score also applies to positions that oppose early retirement of coal assets or governmental intervention to phase out coal. Additionally, it can be given for positions that oppose measures or policies to deploy CCS for coal power assets or to retrofit existing coal power assets with CCS.
Region
Source
Query
Score
Combustion of fossil fuels gives rise to almost 90 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions. An established time frame for the phasing out of fossil fuels in all sectors within the EU would contribute to increased clarity and more predictable rules of the game for business and society's other actors. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has also underlined the vulnerability of continued European dependence on fossil fuels. Decisions to phase out fossil fuels within the EU benefit energy security, public health and the development of a sustainable and viable business that is competitive even in the long term. [...] • Phase out all use of fossil fuels within the EU. Sweden should work for a complete phasing out of fossil fuels within the EU through decisions which mean that the use of coal ceases around 2030, natural gas is phased out in the mid-2030s (not biogas) and oil by 2040. All fossil fuel subsidies within the EU should also quickly cease, at the same time that vulnerable groups in society who in the short term suffer from increased costs as a result of climate measures are compensated.
Created - 04/12/2023
Last Edited - 04/12/2023
Region
Source
Query
Score
Evidence suggests support for the need for government intervention and/or policymaking to aid the phase out of coal in the energy mix; entity has communicated support for a transition to renewable energy. (AGL, comments on the Orderly Exit Management Framework, February 2024)
We note the consultation paper states the OEMF is intended to give government the tools necessary to manage the transition to renewables. However, there is a suite of government measures, including the Commonwealth Government’s Capacity Investment Scheme (CIS), and other jurisdictional initiatives that governments are utilising to meet policy objectives. While the consultation paper acknowledges these other policies, AGL considers further assessment is needed to ensure that, collectively, the market is not being presented with mixed incentives. For example, analysis of the interaction between this framework and the CIS will be necessary to ensure they work together to strengthen our progress in the energy transition. There is a risk that CIS investments could put more pressure on existing thermal assets and conversely extensions to the life of thermal assets could increase the risk to new investment driving up these costs. Additionally, we note the development of a Value of Emissions Reduction will also play an important role in managing the transition to renewables, particularly around building new transmission infrastructure.
Created - 17/06/2024
Last Edited - 17/06/2024
Region
Source
Query
Score
Supporting a phase out of coal in the energy mix, but with some ambiguity around the pace of this transition. Supporting the replacement of old coal plants with renewables, but not clearly supporting premature retirement of other coal plants. Also supporting renewables but stating that they will not be enough on their own (Eskom Group Executive for Generation Bheki Nxumalo, ESI Africa interview, June 2024)
We have recently been given the opportunity to participate in renewables, and also we are enabling the private sector as well to continue to invest. So we are also within Eskom going aggressively to ramp up this renewable power because we believe it’s the way to go for the country and also for Eskom. The combination of power systems within South Africa is critical, we just commissioned the last two [coal-fired] plants in Eskom, Medupi and Kusile, Kusile we are still commissioning and has a 50-year life, but in terms of the commitment of the country and to net-zero by 2050 it is critical that we need to grow renewables and more focus on cleaner energy as well […] renewables alone are not going to be enough, we need cleaner technology, and coal that we just commissioned we need to continue developing that but obviously older units with time as the country’s energy becomes sufficient we can continue to decommission.
Created - 04/07/2024
Last Edited - 04/07/2024
Region
Source
Query
Score
Evidence suggests support for the continued role for coal in the energy mix while stating need for transition to decarbonization solutions with no clarity on timelines (CNOOC, CNOOC Energy Economics Institute Blog, April 2024)
发展超临界和超超临界的燃煤发电，降低燃煤发电排放量 [...] 丰富煤炭利用方式，积极发展煤制气，提高煤炭利用效率，降低单位煤炭碳排放量 [...] 支持传统矿区转型，将传统矿区与清洁能源开发利用相结合，积极利用坑口火电厂及电力运营优势。依托资源禀赋进行风光绿电转型 [...]
Created - 26/06/2024
Last Edited - 07/08/2024
Region
Source
Query
Score
Actively advocating a position that opposes IPCC guidance on the reduced role for fossil fuels in the energy mix: opposing the accelerated retirement of coal assets, promoting policy enabling the future role for unabated coal and fossil gas (ALEC draft model policy: Equitable Escalation of Electricity Demand Act, July 2024)
The legislature of [name of state] finds that: [...] 4. electric grid operators project a rapid increase in American electricity demand, up to 4.7% between 2023 and 2028, caused by growth in data centers and electric vehicles; [...] 8. restricting the supply of electricity without immediate substitutes jeopardizes reliability and affordability and will cause interruptions of service, often when needed most, during the hottest or coldest months; 9. America's coal and natural gas plants should not be recklessly decommissioned or regulated out of existence, they should be kept online (readily available) to meet the projected rapid increase in electricity demand caused by new data centers and electric vehicles
Created - 05/07/2024
Last Edited - 24/07/2024
InfluenceMap Comment
Supporting phase out of all fossil fuels in the EU, with a coal phase out by 2030, fossil gas by mid-2030s and oil by 2040, and supporting rapid phase out of fossil fuel subsidies (Joint letter to Swedish government and Climate and Environment Minister Romina Pourmokhtari, December 2023)