this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
54 points (95.0% liked)

science

14791 readers
373 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Uncertainties arise, however, over grid stability in a renewables-dominated power system, the availability of sufficient finance in underdeveloped economies, the capacity of supply chains and political resistance from regions that lose employment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

that only addresses one of the issues above.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

then you see there are multiple reasons why coal may still be in use in 2060?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"may" is maybe. Lets talk again about it in 36 years.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

not here to set a wager, I was just trying to help explain the authors' reasoning.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Indeed that's strange, and the flat slope in 2060 seems inconsistent with declared net-zero policies of China and even India. Russia has no such policy, but still strange to assume continuation of current government concepts there until 2060. (you can see the regional breakdown in supplem Fig 1. )

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

I'm guessing it has more to do with underdeveloped countries still relying on the simplicity of coal power.