Title: Can we get to net zero emissions? – Physics World
Headings: Can we get to net zero emissions?
Can we get to net zero emissions?
Zero appearance
Winners, losers and the low-cost energy future
Plan check
Winners, losers and the low-cost energy future

Content: That may all sound quite onerous and likely to be expensive, and as I have noted in earlier posts, not everyone thinks that large-scale negative emission options like BECCS will be needed or viable. However, big changes will be needed, although the cost pattern for each scenario differs. Crucially, the ECF report says that all the scenarios cost less than the business-as-usual scenario — cutting carbon saves money. Plan check
So how does Labour’s plan stack up against these major requirements for rapid change? Its energy supply proposals are ambitious, but with costs falling rapidly, the UK should be able to go well beyond the 63 GW of renewables suggested as possible by 2030 in the most recent UK government projections. Though the 117 GW total that Labour proposes may be stretching it, and would surely not all be needed by 2030 — energy demand is actually falling. At present, the UK has around 40 GW of renewables, delivering around 30% of its electricity, so very roughly 80 GW might deliver 60% of electricity. However, there could also be a need for some extra electricity for heating, depending on how this is done. So maybe 100 GW or more might be required in all, if the aim is to get 44% of heat demand met from renewables — although not all of that would have to be met via electricity-generating renewables. As noted above, provocatively, Labour’s 60% target also includes the use of nuclear power, which is arguably only retained due to the political strength of the nuclear lobby.