The global green agenda has emerged as a collective response to the urgent need for mitigating climate change and transitioning toward sustainable energy systems. This agenda gained significant momentum following landmark international agreements, beginning with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992 and continuing with pivotal milestones like the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 and the Paris Agreement in 2015.
The Paris Agreement marked a crucial turning point in global climate efforts, as nations committed to limiting global temperature rise to well below 2°C, with an aspirational goal of 1.5°C. This required ambitious emission reduction targets and a unified push for renewable energy adoption. Countries pledged to implement nationally determined contributions (NDCs), outlining plans to reduce emissions and shift to cleaner energy sources.
While these agreements set critical global priorities, the targets they establish often fail to align with the realities of energy demand and the persistent dominance of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels remain integral to the functioning of modern economies, powering industries, transportation, and global supply chains. Despite significant progress in renewable energy technologies, fossil fuels account for over 80% of the world's energy consumption—a figure unlikely to drastically change within the next few decades.
The lofty goals of the green agenda have sometimes faced criticism for being overly ambitious, particularly in regions where dependency on coal, oil, and gas is deeply entrenched. Developing nations often grapple with the dual challenge of pursuing economic growth while adhering to stringent emissions reduction commitments. For many, transitioning to renewables is constrained by financial limitations, inadequate infrastructure, and the high initial costs of cleaner energy solutions.
Moreover, the global energy market is shaped by complex geopolitical dynamics, with fossil-fuel-rich nations wielding significant influence. The availability of proven and unproven reserves further complicates transition timelines, as countries prioritise energy security over immediate decarbonisation. These factors underscore the inherent tension between the aspirations of international climate agreements and the realities of energy consumption patterns worldwide.
The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) provide critical frameworks for understanding future energy use and climate change mitigation under varying socioeconomic conditions. Each pathway represents a distinct narrative shaped by global priorities, policies, and technological advancements, offering valuable insights into potential climate and development trajectories. Realism plays a crucial role in assessing their applicability to current global trends and challenges.
The SSPs framework outlines five distinct scenarios for global development and climate change. Each SSP represents a unique combination of socioeconomic conditions, governance capacities, and environmental challenges:
SSP1 through SSP4 explore pathways emphasising sustainability, moderate progress, regional fragmentation, and inequality, respectively. While these scenarios reflect different approaches to energy transitions, recent developments—such as increased coal extraction and continued dependence on fossil fuels in major economies like the United States—challenge their practicality. SSP1’s vision of global cooperation and rapid renewable energy adoption appears increasingly unrealistic in the face of fossil fuel dominance. Similarly, SSP3 and SSP4 struggle to account for the interconnected global reliance on fossil fuels and the slow pace of international collaboration. SSP5 adopts a fossil-fuelled development trajectory, emphasising rapid economic growth alongside gradual integration of renewable energy technologies as they advance. It captures the pragmatic reality of continued global dependency on fossil fuels while recognising the potential for economic growth and technological innovation to drive renewable adoption over time.
Choosing a particular SSP depends on the analysis's objectives and priorities. SSP1 aligns with aspirations for sustainability, reduced inequality, and environmental protection, making it ideal for studying optimistic low-carbon futures. SSP5 appeals to those prioritising economic growth and energy security, reflecting the reality of rapid development and fossil fuel reliance. SSP3 is suitable for examining worst-case scenarios, as it assumes fragmented global cooperation and significant mitigation challenges. SSP4 focuses on inequality, exploring how resource disparities might impede progress. Meanwhile, SSP2 offers a balanced and gradual pathway, reflecting moderate challenges to mitigation and adaptation.
Each Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) has various scenario variations that explore different dimensions of societal and economic development, each represented as a target radiative forcing level expressed in W/m2 by 2100. These variations are modelled to account for uncertainties and complexities in global trends.
| Variation | Representation |
|---|---|
| SSP1-1.9 | Assesses the feasibility of achieving ambitious climate goals, such as limiting global warming to 1.5°C, through rapid decarbonization and sustainable development. |
| SSP1-2.6 | Evaluates pathways to limit global warming to below 2°C, focusing on moderate mitigation efforts and sustainable practices. |
| SSP1-3.4 | Assesses moderate climate action within the sustainability framework, exploring the balance between socioeconomic development and environmental goals. |
| SSP1-4.5 | Evaluates less ambitious mitigation efforts while maintaining a focus on sustainable practices, highlighting the challenges of achieving environmental targets with slower progress. |
| Variation | Representation |
|---|---|
| SSP2-1.9 | Assesses ambitious climate goals, such as limiting global warming to 1.5°C, within the "Middle of the Road" socioeconomic framework. |
| SSP2-2.6 | Evaluates pathways to limit global warming to below 2°C, focusing on moderate mitigation efforts and balanced socioeconomic trends. |
| SSP2-3.4 | Explores moderate climate action and its interplay with historical socioeconomic patterns. |
| SSP2-4.5 | Assesses less ambitious mitigation efforts while maintaining the "Middle of the Road" trajectory |
| SSP2-6.0 | Evaluates scenarios with limited climate action and higher emissions, reflecting slower progress in mitigation. |
| Variation | Representation |
|---|---|
| SSP3-3.4 | Assesses moderate climate action within the "Regional Rivalry" framework, exploring the impacts of fragmented international cooperation and regional conflicts on mitigation efforts. |
| SSP3-4.5 | Evaluates less ambitious mitigation efforts in a world characterized by regional competition, limited global collaboration, and uneven resource distribution. |
| SSP3-6.0 | Explores scenarios with minimal climate action, higher emissions, and intensified regional rivalries, highlighting the challenges of addressing global environmental issues in a fragmented world. |
| Variation | Representation |
|---|---|
| SSP4-2.6 | Assesses ambitious climate mitigation efforts in a world characterized by stark inequalities, where a small elite drives technological and economic progress while large segments of the population remain marginalised. |
| SSP4-3.4 | Explores moderate climate action within the SSP4 framework, focusing on how unequal access to resources and technology impacts global mitigation efforts. |
| SSP4-4.5 | Evaluates less ambitious mitigation efforts in a world of persistent inequalities, highlighting the challenges of achieving environmental goals when disparities in wealth and power dominate. |
| SSP4-6.0 | Explores scenarios with limited climate action and higher emissions, reflecting the difficulties of addressing global challenges in a fragmented and unequal world. |
| Variation | Representation |
|---|---|
| SSP5-1.9 | Assesses ambitious climate goals, such as limiting global warming to 1.5°C, within the "Fossil-fuelled Development" framework, which emphasises rapid economic growth and technological innovation. |
| SSP5-2.6 | Evaluates pathways to limit global warming to below 2°C, focusing on moderate mitigation efforts while maintaining high economic growth driven by fossil fuels. |
| SSP5-3.4 | Explores moderate climate action within the SSP5 framework, balancing economic growth and environmental considerations. |
| SSP5-4.5 | Assesses less ambitious mitigation efforts in a world characterized by high reliance on fossil fuels and rapid economic development. |
| SSP5-6.0 | Explores scenarios with limited climate action and higher emissions, reflecting the challenges of addressing global environmental issues in a fossil-fueled development pathway. |
The figures below show the global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase (relative to the pre-industrial era) from 2005 with projections until 2100 for all SSP baselines and variations.
The projected global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase relative to the pre-industrial era are shown below for SSP1 to SSP5 baselines.
The projected global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase relative to the pre-industrial era are shown below for SSP1 baseline and variants.
The projected global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase relative to the pre-industrial era are shown below for SSP2 baseline and variants.
The projected global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase relative to the pre-industrial era are shown below for SSP3 baseline and variants.
The projected global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase relative to the pre-industrial era are shown below for SSP4 baseline and variants.
The projected global primary energy consumption, atmospheric concentrations and average temperature increase relative to the pre-industrial era are shown below for SSP5 baseline and variants.
The energy crossover strategy framework is divided into 4 key steps: 1. Assessment of fossil fuel reserves, 2. Gradual transition framework, 3. Policy and economic measures, and 4. Technological innovation.
The design of the framework incorporates the following:
| Activity and Timeline | Considerations | |
|---|---|---|
| SSP1 | Minimise mapping efforts from 2025–2030, as the focus shifts rapidly to renewable energy systems. | Restrict use to non-energy purposes like petrochemicals; mandate cleaner technologies to reduce impacts during the transition phase. |
| SSP2 | Map high-certainty reserves by 2025–2035 to sustain energy security during gradual transitions. | Use cleaner extraction methods selectively in advanced regions. |
| SSP3 | Aggressive evaluations from 2025–2050, with large-scale exploitation beginning 2060. | Prioritise national interests over global collaboration. |
| SSP4 | Wealthier regions map and reduce reserve usage by 2045, while developing regions sustain heavy dependence until 2100. | Cleaner extraction in high-income regions only. |
| SSP5 | Map and utilise high-certainty reserves by 2025–2035 in major fossil-fuel regions to sustain growth. | Use cleaner technologies to reduce impacts and enhance efficiency. |
| Activity and Timeline | Considerations | |
|---|---|---|
| SSP1 | Avoid evaluations or exploitation of unproven reserves; prioritise global investments in renewable solutions. | Direct resources toward scaling renewable energy infrastructure to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. |
| SSP2 | Evaluate unproven resources (e.g., deep-sea and shale) between 2025–2045, with limited use starting 2050–2070. | Balance fossil fuel reliance with renewable adoption programs, ensuring regional energy security. |
| SSP3 | Aggressive evaluations from 2025–2050, with large-scale exploitation beginning 2060. | Prioritise national interests over global collaboration. |
| SSP4 | Evaluations start in wealthy regions by 2025–2040; minimal exploitation in developing areas by 2050. | Access disparities reinforce global inequalities. |
| SSP5 | Evaluate reserves such as Arctic and deep-sea resources (2025–2045); exploit starting 2045–2060 as proven reserves decline. | Focus on sustaining economic expansion through resource abundance. |
| Activity and Timeline | Considerations | |
|---|---|---|
| SSP1 | Transition from fossil fuel reserve mapping to renewable resource mapping by 2027, with periodic updates. | Collaborate with global agencies to align fossil fuel use with decarbonisation pathways. |
| SSP2 | Update reserve maps by 2027, every 5 years thereafter, incorporating renewable energy potentials. | Assess regional reserves-to-production ratios to guide balanced usage. |
| SSP3 | Reserve mapping conducted independently by nations; global updates infrequent. | Align reserve use with short-term national energy security goals. |
| SSP4 | Wealthy nations drive data collection; updates exclude poorer regions. | Regional reserves managed unevenly, prioritising wealthier regions' energy security. |
| SSP5 | Develop and update reserve maps by 2027, every 5 years thereafter. | Maximise reserves-to-production ratios to ensure long-term availability. |
| Activity and Timeline | Considerations | |
|---|---|---|
| SSP1 | Launch renewable energy programs in fossil-fuel-scarce regions by 2025, emphasising community-scale projects and micro-grids. | Fossil-Fuel-Rich Regions: Phase out extraction gradually while incentivising diversification into green industries. |
| SSP2 | Expand renewable capacity in energy-scarce regions by 2035 while maintaining hybrid systems in resource-rich areas. | Enable gradual transition with region-specific renewable targets. |
| SSP3 | Enable energy access in resource-scarce regions through fossil fuels; minimal renewable integration. | Fossil-Fuel-Rich Regions: Maximise resource utilisation for economic stability. |
| SSP4 | Wealthy regions prioritise green transitions; developing regions extend fossil fuel usage. | Provide international subsidies to support renewable adoption in resource-poor areas. |
| SSP5 | Launch renewables in fossil-fuel-scarce regions (2025–2035) to reduce dependence. Tailor strategies for resource-rich areas to emphasise cleaner technologies. | Balance short-term fossil fuel dominance with gradual green energy integration. |
| SSP Variations |
|---|
| SSP1 |
| SSP1-1.9: Proven reserves phased out completely by 2040, with no unproven reserve use. |
| SSP1-2.6: Phase-out completed by 2050, with strict limits on new resource exploration. |
| SSP1-3.4/4.5: Extend reliance on proven reserves until 2060, avoiding any unproven reserve exploitation. |
| SSP2 |
| SSP2-4.5: Proven reserves sustain use until 2060; selective utilisation of unproven reserves begins in 2070. |
| SSP2-6.0: Extend heavy reliance on both reserve types until 2080. |
| SSP3 |
| SSP3-3.4: Limited fossil fuel usage extends to 2070; unproven reserves are gradually utilised. |
| SSP3-4.5/6.0: Prolong heavy use of reserves into the late century. |
| SSP4 |
| SSP4-2.6: Wealthy regions phase out fossil fuels by 2070, while developing regions rely on proven reserves longer. |
| SSP4-3.4/4.5/6.0: Increased unproven reserve utilisation for developing regions starting 2050. |
| SSP5 |
| SSP5-1.9: Phase out proven reserves by 2050; no unproven reserve utilisation. |
| SSP5-2.6: Limited unproven reserves used by 2060. |
| SSP5-3.4/4.5/6.0: Sustained reliance on proven and unproven reserves through 2100. |
| Efficient Fossil Fuel Use |
| SSP1: Phase out proven reserves rapidly; limit use to essential non-energy applications; Deploy carbon capture and storage (CCS) selectively to minimize emissions in remaining fossil fuel applications. |
| SSP2: Focus on improving extraction efficiency for proven reserves; apply CCS for industrial processes where feasible. |
| SSP3: Heavily rely on proven reserves; minimal CCS adoption due to cost and limited global cooperation. |
| SSP4: Wealthy regions adopt cleaner technologies; poorer regions depend on traditional fossil fuels. |
| SSP5: Prioritise proven reserves for key industries; deploy CCS selectively. |
| Hybrid Systems |
| SSP1: Prioritise renewable energy systems in urban areas; limit hybrid system usage to transitional rural needs. |
| SSP2: Promote balanced fossil fuel and renewable energy systems in urban and suburban areas. |
| SSP3: Develop hybrid systems where economic conditions permit. |
| SSP4: Promote hybrid systems primarily in affluent areas. |
| SSP5: Introduce hybrid systems combining fossil fuels and renewables. |
| Technology Investment |
| SSP1: Accelerate R&D into advanced battery storage, targeting $80 per kWh by 2040. |
| SSP2: Invest moderately in energy storage, targeting $100 per kWh by 2040. |
| SSP3: Limited investment in energy storage technologies. |
| SSP4: Wealthy regions invest in advanced battery storage technologies. |
| SSP5: Aggressively expand research into battery technologies and cost reductions. |
| Reserve Monitoring |
| SSP1: Redirect focus to monitoring renewable resource scalability rather than fossil reserves. |
| SSP2: Track fossil reserve use and update depletion estimates every 5 years. |
| SSP3: Fragmented reserve tracking, conducted independently by regions. |
| SSP4: Conduct reserve monitoring separately for wealthy and developing regions. |
| SSP5: Implement reserve tracking updated every 3 years. |
| Diversified Energy |
| SSP1: Eliminate unproven reserve extraction; scale offshore wind, solar farms, and green hydrogen infrastructure. |
| SSP2: Scale renewable projects like modular nuclear reactors while maintaining limited fossil fuel reliance. |
| SSP3: Focus on unproven reserve exploitation; renewable projects remain localised and underdeveloped. |
| SSP4: Expand renewables in wealthy regions; fossil fuel reliance persists in poorer regions. |
| SSP5: Extract unproven reserves while scaling offshore wind farms and nuclear reactors. |
| Energy Grids |
| SSP1: Achieve global interconnection of renewable energy grids by 2055. |
| SSP2: Interconnect regional grids selectively, emphasising flexibility and energy trade. |
| SSP3: Limited regional interconnectivity for energy sharing. |
| SSP4: Limited grid interconnection, favouring advanced economies. |
| SSP5: Fully interconnect global grids by 2055. |
| Global Agreements |
| SSP1: Foster international energy treaties to secure equitable renewable energy access and technology transfer. |
| SSP2: Establish technology-sharing agreements for renewable projects by 2050. |
| SSP3: Minimal international collaboration; energy treaties focus on national interests. |
| SSP4: Unequal treaties focusing on resource access for wealthier nations. |
| SSP5: Finalise resource-sharing treaties by 2050. |
| Resource Allocation |
| SSP1: Dedicate all revenues to renewable adoption projects globally, prioritizing vulnerable regions. |
| SSP2: Gradually redirect fossil fuel revenues to support renewable adoption initiatives. |
| SSP3: Fossil fuel revenues support local economic goals. |
| SSP4: Wealthy regions redirect fossil fuel revenues toward green funds. |
| SSP5: Redirect revenues to sovereign green funds. |
| Minimal Fossil Fuel Use |
| SSP1: Achieve near-zero fossil fuel reliance by 2080, retaining reserves for strategic purposes only. |
| SSP2: Phase down fossil fuels progressively, maintaining small-scale strategic reserves. |
| SSP3: Extend heavy reliance on fossil fuels through the 21st century. |
| SSP4: Wealthy regions achieve 80% renewable reliance; poorer regions lag significantly. |
| SSP5: Phase out fossil fuels by 2085. |
| Renewable Leadership |
| SSP1: Reliance on renewables exceeds 85% globally through green hydrogen, fusion energy, and smart grids. |
| SSP2: Achieve 70–75% global renewable reliance by 2085. |
| SSP3: Achieve only 30–40% renewable reliance globally. |
| SSP4: Progress is regionally fragmented. |
| SSP5: Achieve >75% reliance on renewables globally. |
| Energy Reserves |
| SSP1: Establish renewable resource banks to stabilise intermittent energy supplies. |
| SSP2: Focus on advanced battery systems to support grid stability. |
| SSP3: Fossil fuel reserves dominate, with limited renewable resource banks. |
| SSP4: Wealthy regions establish renewable energy banks; limited adoption elsewhere. |
| SSP5: Establish advanced renewable storage systems. |
| SSP Variations |
|---|
| SSP1 |
| SSP1-1.9: Aggressively phase out fossil fuel use by 2040, prioritising green hydrogen and solar storage systems. |
| SSP1-2.6/3.4/4.5: Gradually reduce fossil fuel use over mid-century, aligning with specific global temperature goals. |
| SSP2 |
| SSP2-4.5: Increase reliance on hybrid systems, maintaining a balance of renewables and fossil fuels into the late 21st century. |
| SSP2-6.0: Slower renewable adoption, relying on fossil fuels for a longer period. |
| Carbon Pricing |
| SSP1: Introduce global carbon pricing systems in 2025, escalating annually to encourage rapid emissions reductions and renewable investments by 2030. |
| SSP2: Implement tiered pricing systems starting in 2025, with moderate annual escalation to balance economic growth and emissions reduction. |
| SSP3: Introduce fragmented, region-specific carbon pricing systems by 2040, with minimal escalation. |
| SSP4: Introduce tiered carbon pricing in wealthy regions by 2025, while exempting developing nations. |
| SSP5: Introduce tiered carbon pricing systems in 2025, escalating aggressively to incentivise cleaner technologies. |
| Subsidies and Incentives |
| SSP1: Provide extensive subsidies for renewable energy technologies starting 2025, with phased reductions as renewable costs decrease by 2040. |
| SSP2: Provide targeted subsidies for renewable projects between 2025–2035, focusing on cost-effective technologies. |
| SSP3: Provide limited subsidies to regions with strong economic capacity; minimal support for developing areas. |
| SSP4: Offer renewable energy subsidies primarily to affluent nations, with limited programs for poorer regions. |
| SSP5: Provide substantial subsidies for renewables and tax breaks for green industries starting 2025. |
| Global Energy Transition Accord |
| SSP1: Finalise frameworks for equitable resource sharing and climate financing among nations by 2030, emphasising the needs of energy-poor regions. |
| SSP2: Gradual progress toward agreements by 2035, emphasising mutual benefit and economic equity. |
| SSP3: Limited or no progress on global agreements; resource-sharing frameworks remain fragmented. |
| SSP4: Focus on agreements among wealthy nations, marginalising underdeveloped areas. |
| SSP5: Establish robust frameworks for shared resources and financing by 2030. |
| Workforce Development |
| SSP1: Launch education programs for green energy careers by 2025, targeting universal access to vocational training by 2035. |
| SSP2: Introduce industry-specific training programs by 2025, prioritizing gradual re-skilling of fossil fuel workers. |
| SSP3: Focus on localised training programs, primarily for fossil fuel-related industries. |
| SSP4: Create specialised programs for green technology sectors in advanced economies; minimal investment in developing regions. |
| SSP5: Launch specialised green workforce programs with extensive university partnerships by 2035. |
| Fossil Fuel Revenue Utilization |
| SSP1: Redirect all fossil fuel revenues to renewable R&D and green infrastructure starting 2025, achieving complete allocation to renewables by 2040. |
| SSP2: Allocate portions of fossil fuel revenues to renewable energy development, increasing the share progressively by 2040. |
| SSP3: Retain revenues for domestic infrastructure projects, with little allocation to renewables. |
| SSP4: Wealthy nations redirect fossil fuel revenues toward green R&D; poorer nations sustain reliance on fossil fuels. |
| SSP5: Direct a large share of fossil fuel revenues to green funds, scaling allocations significantly by 2040. |
| Private Sector Engagement |
| SSP1: Enhance partnerships with industries, incentivising investments in renewable solutions through tax benefits until 2050. |
| SSP2: Offer moderate tax benefits for renewable investments, scaling them down after 2050. |
| SSP3: Offer minimal incentives due to reduced international cooperation. |
| SSP4: Incentivise private investments in renewables within affluent regions. |
| SSP5: Offer aggressive tax incentives to attract private-sector investments into renewable technologies. |
| Equitable Access |
| SSP1: Establish international financing mechanisms by 2030 to ensure affordable access to clean energy for developing nations. |
| SSP2: Develop financing mechanisms by 2040, targeting underdeveloped regions for renewable energy projects. |
| SSP3: Financing mechanisms remain regionally fragmented, with limited outreach to energy-poor regions. |
| SSP4: Negotiate limited financing mechanisms for developing countries by 2050. |
| SSP5: Develop international financing mechanisms by 2035 to support energy-poor regions. |
| SSP Variations |
|---|
| SSP1 |
| SSP1-1.9: Aggressively escalate carbon pricing, aiming for total fossil fuel phase-out by 2040. |
| SSP1-2.6/3.4/4.5: Adjust incentives and timelines to align with respective global temperature targets. |
| SSP2 |
| SSP2-4.5: Emphasise subsidies for hybrid energy systems until 2060. |
| SSP2-6.0: Sustain fossil fuel revenue utilization into the late 21st century. |
| SSP3 |
| SSP3-3.4: Moderate carbon pricing and subsidies; limited renewable adoption before 2070. |
| SSP3-4.5/6.0: Heavy reliance on fossil fuels with minimal policy shifts into the late century. |
| SSP4 |
| SSP4-2.6: Accelerate renewable investments in wealthy regions; extend fossil fuel reliance in poorer areas. |
| SSP4-3.4/4.5/6.0: Increase reliance on fossil fuels in developing regions post-2050. |
| SSP5 |
| SSP5-1.9: Phase out fossil fuel subsidies by 2030, redirecting all incentives to renewables. |
| SSP5-2.6/3.4/4.5: Maintain fossil fuel revenues to support hybrid systems through 2060. |
| SSP5-6.0: Sustain high fossil fuel reliance with minimal economic shifts until 2100. |
| Next-Gen Systems |
| SSP1: Focus research on solid-state batteries and flow batteries (2025–2030), achieving widespread deployment by 2040. |
| SSP2: Conduct research on solid-state batteries through 2025–2035, achieving global deployment by 2050. |
| SSP3: Conduct limited research, focusing on regional technologies where economically feasible. |
| SSP4: Accelerate deployment in wealthy regions while relying on basic storage solutions in developing regions. |
| SSP5: Achieve breakthroughs in solid-state batteries by 2035, deploying globally by 2045. |
| Localised Solutions |
| SSP1: Prioritise community-scale storage systems for off-grid and rural areas, achieving full rollout by 2040. |
| SSP2: Focus on off-grid solutions for developing regions (2035–2050). |
| SSP3: Deploy storage selectively in wealthy regions, with minimal investment elsewhere. |
| SSP4: Focus on decentralised systems for off-grid access in poorer regions. |
| SSP5: Scale community systems for off-grid areas by 2040. |
| Emerging Technologies |
| SSP1: Scale up technologies like perovskite solar cells and floating wind farms starting 2025, achieving global deployment by 2035. |
| SSP2: Scale up emerging technologies gradually, achieving cost-effective deployment by 2050. |
| SSP3: Scale deployment locally, achieving fragmented adoption of wind and solar by 2080. |
| SSP4: Wealthy regions scale deployment by 2035; fragmented adoption elsewhere. |
| SSP5: Scale emerging solar and wind technologies globally, achieving deployment by 2045. |
| Hydrogen Economy |
| SSP1: Expand green hydrogen infrastructure starting 2030, achieving universal adoption by 2050. |
| SSP2: Expand green hydrogen infrastructure starting 2040, achieving full integration by 2080. |
| SSP3: Develop green hydrogen regionally, with full integration delayed until post-2100. |
| SSP4: Develop infrastructure primarily in advanced economies, achieving minimal adoption in developing areas. |
| SSP5: Expand green hydrogen infrastructure, achieving universal use by 2070. |
| Integrated Systems |
| SSP1: Deploy fully integrated smart grids in urban and suburban areas by 2040. |
| SSP2: Develop smart grids regionally by 2035, achieving interconnectivity by 2055. |
| SSP3: Apply localised smart grid solutions by 2060, with limited regional interconnectivity. |
| SSP4: Deploy advanced smart grids for wealthier nations; minimal interconnectivity globally. |
| SSP5: Deploy smart grids by 2030, achieving full integration globally by 2050. |
| Demand-Side Efficiency |
| SSP1: Achieve peak efficiency through AI-driven demand management systems starting 2025, scaling by 2030. |
| SSP2: Apply AI-driven energy management systems selectively, targeting affordability in key markets. |
| SSP3: Minimal AI implementation due to cost concerns. |
| SSP4: Achieve efficiency gains in affluent regions; minimal adoption in poorer areas. |
| SSP5: Utilise AI-driven energy management systems aggressively to optimize usage. |
| Selective CCS Deployment |
| SSP1: Restrict CCS to essential industrial applications; scale deployment by 2040 in industries like steel and cement. |
| SSP2: Focus CCS development on high-emission industries, scaling by 2055. |
| SSP3: Expand CCS efforts in regions with high energy capacity; limited deployment elsewhere. |
| SSP4: Scale CCS in industrialised regions by 2050; limited efforts elsewhere. |
| SSP5: Focus CCS on large-scale industrial applications, scaling by 2045. |
| Carbon Utilisation |
| SSP1: Commercialise CO₂ repurposing technologies by 2035, focusing on sustainable construction materials. |
| SSP2: Commercialise utilisation systems for fuel synthesis by 2060. |
| SSP3: Commercialisation restricted to wealthier economies by 2070. |
| SSP4: Commercialise CO₂ usage in wealthier nations by 2060. |
| SSP5: Commercialise CO₂ repurposing technologies by 2045. |
| Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) |
| SSP1: Deploy SMRs as complementary low-carbon baseload energy systems by 2050. |
| SSP2: Deploy SMRs regionally by 2060, focusing on energy-intensive urban areas. |
| SSP3: Deploy SMRs only in stable regions; rollout delayed until 2080. |
| SSP4: Focus deployment on wealthy nations; adoption elsewhere delayed until post-2100. |
| SSP5: Deploy SMRs widely by 2070, focusing on energy-intensive urban areas. |
| Fusion Research and Spin-Offs |
| SSP1: Focus on spin-offs, including neutron sources and advanced materials for renewable applications (2025–2045). Maintain funding for long-term breakthroughs by 2075. |
| SSP2: Conduct fusion research and spin-off development through 2100. |
| SSP3: Conduct research with low funding; prioritise spin-offs for wealthier areas. |
| SSP4: Invest in long-term research for affluent regions, with limited outreach globally. |
| SSP5: Scale spin-offs aggressively while pursuing long-term breakthroughs for deployment by 2080. |
| SSP Variations |
|---|
| SSP1 |
| SSP1-1.9: Accelerate deployment timelines; achieve full renewable integration by 2040. |
| SSP1-2.6/3.4/4.5: Align technologies with gradual transition goals based on specific temperature pathways. |
| SSP2 |
| SSP2-4.5: Scale adoption of emerging technologies and storage systems by 2060. |
| SSP2-6.0: Delay deployment timelines for advanced technologies, maintaining reliance on hybrid systems. |
The Conflict Trap Model postulates that nations experiencing civil wars or violent conflicts are more likely to suffer recurrent cycles of instability. These conflicts disrupt governance systems, economic growth, and social cohesion, creating a feedback loop that perpetuates instability. Factors such as poverty, resource mismanagement, inequality, and institutional fragility exacerbate the trap. The model highlights how weak institutional capacity combined with limited access to resources undermines efforts to break free from cycles of violence. Countries stuck in the conflict trap face challenges in infrastructure development, international cooperation, and long-term planning.
The WEC-Model explores the relationship between energy resources and geopolitical conflicts. It emphasises that energy is a fundamental driver of global disputes, particularly in regions where access to fossil fuels and renewable energy technologies is contested. The model considers how dependence on critical resources (e.g., oil, gas, lithium) intersects with political power, environmental concerns, and economic priorities. Energy scarcity exacerbates tensions between nations, while competition for reserves and renewable infrastructure fuels international conflict. The model also highlights how technological monopolies on renewable innovations can create inequalities and geopolitical friction.
The Cross-Country Analysis Model evaluates how institutional capacity, socioeconomic factors, and governance structures shape energy systems and transitions across nations. This model highlights disparities in economic development and political stability, showing how these factors influence resource management, policy implementation, and technological adoption. It emphasises that institutional strength drives effective planning and execution of energy strategies, while weak governance exacerbates inefficiencies and inequalities. Socioeconomic factors—like education levels, workforce skills, and income disparities—affect the speed and success of energy transitions.
| Key Themes: |
| Institutional Weakness: Fragile governance systems struggle to maintain stability, hindering reforms. |
| Resource Mismanagement: Overreliance on resource extraction can exacerbate inequalities and conflicts. |
| Self-Reinforcing Instability: Conflict begets more conflict by disrupting economic systems and trust. |
| Applications: |
| Energy Assessments: Predicting how instability affects fossil fuel reserve mapping and exploitation, particularly in conflict-prone SSPs like SSP3 and SSP4. |
| Transitions: Assessing delays in renewable adoption due to infrastructure damage and weak institutional support. |
| Policies: Examining why carbon pricing and international agreements may falter in fragile states. |
| Technological Innovation: Exploring how instability disrupts funding and collaboration for advanced energy technologies. |
| Key Themes: |
| Resource Scarcity: Competition for limited fossil fuels and renewable resources escalates disputes. |
| Geopolitical Tensions: Resource access and control can determine power dynamics among nations. |
| Transition Struggles: Conflicts can arise when nations compete for dominance in clean energy technologies. |
| Applications: |
| Energy Assessments: Evaluating risks of geopolitical conflict over proven/unproven reserves and renewables in SSP4 and SSP5. |
| Transitions: Understanding how competition for resources like lithium and cobalt affects renewable deployment. |
| Policies: Highlighting barriers to global energy treaties due to conflicting national interests. |
| Technological Innovation: Investigating how competition for critical materials slows adoption of advanced energy systems like batteries and CCS. |
| Key Themes: |
| Institutional Strength: Robust governance accelerates transitions, while weak institutions delay progress. |
| Economic Disparities: Wealthier nations often drive innovation, leaving developing regions behind. |
| Systemic Inequalities: Uneven adoption of policies and technologies reinforces existing global divides. |
| Applications: |
| Energy Assessments: Examining how disparities in governance affect resource mapping and exploitation. |
| Transitions: Assessing uneven progress in renewable adoption due to varying institutional capacity, as seen in SSP2 and SSP4. |
| Policies: Exploring how governance quality determines the success of carbon pricing and subsidies. |
| Technologies: Highlighting why strong institutions foster R&D for advanced systems, while weak ones struggle. |
| Conflict Model | WEC Model | Cross-Country Analysis Model | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SSP1 |
Proven Reserves: Peaceful global cooperation under SSP1 reduces the likelihood of conflict, facilitating orderly fossil fuel phase-outs. Unproven Reserves: Conflict risks are minimized, discouraging exploration of unproven reserves. Variations: SSP1-1.9 would show the least reliance on reserves due to low conflict levels, while SSP1-4.5 may maintain marginal fossil fuel usage. |
Global cooperation reduces energy-driven conflicts, enabling equitable transition from fossil fuels to renewables. Variations: SSP1-1.9 would avoid most energy-based conflicts due to early transition efforts. |
Strong institutions and international collaboration ensure responsible resource management Variations: Favour renewables, limiting the need for fossil fuel reserves. |
| SSP2 |
Proven Reserves: Conflicts in some regions (e.g., developing countries) could disrupt extraction and equitable resource distribution. Unproven Reserves: Political instability might slow evaluations but sustain reliance in conflict-prone areas. Variations: SSP2-4.5 could manage moderate reliance on reserves, while SSP2-6.0 sees heightened exploitation in unstable regions. |
Moderate tensions arise over equitable fossil fuel usage, especially between developed and developing regions. Variations: SSP2-6.0 faces more severe tensions as fossil fuel reliance persists longer. |
Mixed institutional capacity results in uneven resource management. Developing countries face challenges in balancing fossil fuel dependence and sustainability. Variations: SSP2-4.5 sees incremental improvement, while SSP2-6.0 struggles with inconsistent policies |
| SSP3 |
Proven Reserves: Fragmentation worsens resource-based conflicts, limiting cooperative reserve mapping. Unproven Reserves: High conflict potential drives unilateral exploitation of reserves to secure energy independence. Variations: All SSP3 pathways exacerbate resource conflicts due to fragmented governance. |
Energy-driven conflicts dominate regional rivalries, leading to fragmented assessments and unilateral exploitation of reserves. Variations: All variations deepen resource competition under limited global governance. |
Weak institutions and low international collaboration amplify resource mismanagement and exploitation. Variations: All variations deepen inequalities in reserve access and exacerbate environmental degradation. |
| SSP4 |
Proven Reserves: Developing regions face resource conflicts as wealthier nations monopolize cleaner technologies. Unproven Reserves: Disparities reinforce exploration in conflict-prone developing countries. Variations: SSP4-2.6 sees reduced conflict risks in wealthy regions, while SSP4-6.0 deepens exploitation in poorer areas. |
Energy wealth disparities drive conflicts, with poorer regions forced into unregulated extraction to meet energy needs. Variations: SSP4-2.6 reduce conflict risks in wealthy regions, but resource disputes persist elsewhere. |
Wealthy regions benefit from strong institutions, while weaker governance in poorer regions drives inefficient reserve usage Variations: Highlight the gap between sustainable practices in affluent areas and exploitation in underdeveloped regions. |
| SSP5 |
Proven Reserves: High energy demands increase geopolitical tensions over control of reserves. Unproven Reserves: Intensive exploration in conflict regions like the Arctic exacerbates disputes. Variations: SSP5-1.9 reduces reliance faster, while SSP5-6.0 amplifies conflict over resource control. |
Widespread competition for energy resources amplifies geopolitical tensions, particularly in unproven reserve exploration (e.g., Arctic). Variations: SSP5-6.0 exacerbate resource conflicts due to prolonged fossil fuel reliance. |
Advanced institutions in wealthy regions enable efficient extraction but may prioritize economic growth over sustainability. Variations: Maintain high reliance on reserves, with SSP5-6.0 emphasizing aggressive exploitation. |
| Conflict Model | WEC Model | Cross-Country Analysis Model | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SSP1 |
Short-Term: Minimal conflict in SSP1 enables efficient fossil fuel phase-outs and renewable energy adoption. Mid-Term: Stable international cooperation accelerates interconnection of grids and diversification of resources. Long-Term: Countries exit the conflict trap entirely, achieving renewable dominance (>75%) globally. |
Short-Term: High global cooperation minimizes energy-driven conflicts, enabling rapid hybrid system deployment. Mid-Term: Energy-sharing agreements stabilize regions with limited resources, avoiding conflict over renewables. Long-Term: Renewable dominance (>85%) globally eliminates energy conflicts entirely. |
Short-Term: Strong institutions ensure efficient reserve tracking and hybrid system deployment. Mid-Term: Universal education programs for the green workforce accelerate renewable adoption globally. Long-Term: Collaborative governance achieves renewable dominance (>85%) globally. |
| SSP2 |
Short-Term: Sporadic conflicts in developing countries delay hybrid system deployment and grid interconnection. Mid-Term: Uneven progress in conflict-prone regions hinders scaling of green hydrogen and modular nuclear systems. Long-Term: Persistent conflicts slow the transition, leaving vulnerable regions reliant on fossil fuels. |
Short-Term: Energy-driven conflicts slow reserve tracking and hybrid system deployment in resource-scarce regions. Mid-Term: Grid interconnection and hydrogen expansion face delays due to ongoing geopolitical tensions. Long-Term: Persistent energy conflicts leave vulnerable regions lagging in renewable adoption. |
Short-Term: Mixed institutional capacity delays hybrid system deployment in conflict-prone regions. Mid-Term: Uneven economic policies hinder scaling of advanced technologies like modular nuclear reactors. Long-Term: Limited institutional capacity slows global transition to renewables. |
| SSP3 |
Short-Term: Widespread conflict limits effective reserve tracking and hybrid system introduction. Mid-Term: Energy transitions are fragmented, with regional instability stalling interconnection efforts. Long-Term: Countries trapped in conflict fail to phase out fossil fuels entirely, resulting in <40% renewable adoption globally. |
Short-Term: Energy-driven rivalries dominate, leading to unilateral hybrid system deployment and limited regional cooperation. Mid-Term: Geopolitical competition for unproven reserves undermines diversification and scaling efforts. Long-Term: Energy-driven conflicts dominate fossil-fuel-scarce regions, delaying renewable adoption globally. |
Short-Term: Weak institutions amplify resource mismanagement, leading to fragmented energy transitions Mid-Term: Regional disparities in governance stall interconnection and diversification efforts. Long-Term: Institutional weaknesses prolong fossil fuel reliance. |
| SSP4 |
Short-Term: Conflict affects poor regions disproportionately, limiting access to hybrid systems. Mid-Term: Wealthy nations make progress, but conflict in poorer areas delays grid interconnection and technology transfer. Long-Term: Persistent inequality leaves poorer regions in the conflict trap, relying on fossil fuels well into the 22nd century. |
Short-Term: Wealthier nations benefit from strong institutions; poorer regions face energy-driven conflicts. Mid-Term: Limited technology transfer fuels competition in underdeveloped areas. Long-Term: Persistent conflicts over energy access prolong inequality in renewable adoption. |
Short-Term: Wealthier regions benefit from strong governance; poorer areas lag due to institutional inefficiencies. Mid-Term: Economic inequality reinforces institutional disparities, limiting renewable adoption in poorer regions. Long-Term: Poor regions remain reliant on fossil fuels due to weak governance structures. |
| SSP5 |
Short-Term: Economic expansion exacerbates resource-driven conflicts. Mid-Term: Conflict around unproven reserves (e.g., Arctic and deep-sea) complicates diversification efforts. Long-Term: Conflict persists over remaining reserves, delaying renewable dominance until post-2100. |
Short-Term: Conflicts over proven reserves escalate during economic expansion. Mid-Term: Energy competition around unproven reserves delays global resource-sharing agreements. Long-Term: Prolonged reliance on fossil fuels amplifies geopolitical tensions over remaining reserves. |
Short-Term: Advanced institutions in wealthy regions enable efficient extraction but prioritise economic growth over sustainability. Mid-Term: Institutional focus on fossil fuels delays diversification. Long-Term: Institutional disparities prolong reliance on fossil fuels, delaying renewable dominance until post-2100. |
| Conflict Model | WEC Model | Cross-Country Analysis Model | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SSP1 |
Policy Frameworks: Low conflict levels enable early implementation of carbon pricing and renewable energy subsidies. International cooperation supports shared financing frameworks for energy transitions. Economic Strategies: Fossil fuel revenue allocation to green funds progresses smoothly, with equitable financing mechanisms for underdeveloped regions. |
Policy Frameworks: High global cooperation minimizes energy conflicts, supporting early carbon pricing and robust subsidies for renewables. Economic Strategies: Equitable access to international financing mechanisms mitigates energy disparities and resource-driven tensions. |
Policy Frameworks: Strong institutions enable early carbon pricing and robust subsidies for green technologies, complemented by universal workforce development. Economic Strategies: Collaborative governance achieves smooth fossil fuel revenue allocation to renewables and equitable financing mechanisms. |
| SSP2 |
Policy Frameworks: Sporadic conflicts in developing nations slow workforce development and global energy transition accords, leading to delays in carbon pricing escalation. Economic Strategies: Uneven progress in revenue redirection limits green investment, with energy-poor regions struggling to access international financing mechanisms. |
Policy Frameworks: Resource-driven conflicts slow the establishment of global energy accords and carbon pricing systems, with fragmented policy implementation. Economic Strategies: Energy competition hinders financing mechanisms for underdeveloped regions, delaying workforce development programs. |
Policy Frameworks: Mixed institutional capacities delay policy implementation and workforce development, limiting carbon pricing escalation. Economic Strategies: Uneven institutional capacity restricts fossil fuel revenue allocation and green investments. |
| SSP3 |
Policy Frameworks: High levels of conflict prevent global agreements and reduce implementation of subsidies. Carbon pricing remains fragmented and region-specific. Economic Strategies: Resource mismanagement and political instability divert fossil fuel revenues into domestic infrastructure rather than renewable investments. |
Policy Frameworks: Resource competition worsens energy conflicts, leading to fragmented carbon pricing policies and limited subsidies for renewables. Economic Strategies: Resource-rich nations prioritize fossil fuel revenue utilization domestically, neglecting global green funds. |
Policy Frameworks: Weak institutions amplify policy fragmentation, preventing cohesive carbon pricing and renewable energy subsidies. Economic Strategies: Resource mismanagement and poor governance delay green investments and financing mechanisms. |
| SSP4 |
Policy Frameworks: Wealthy regions implement carbon pricing and green policies, while conflicts in poorer regions limit policy effectiveness and exacerbate inequalities. Economic Strategies: Limited international financing for energy-poor regions reinforces disparities, leaving fossil fuel revenues concentrated in affluent economies. |
Policy Frameworks: Energy-driven inequalities prevent cohesive policy frameworks, limiting carbon pricing escalation in poorer regions. Economic Strategies: Wealthy regions dominate energy markets and financing mechanisms, leaving resource-poor areas reliant on fossil fuels. |
Policy Frameworks: Institutional inequalities prevent cohesive policy frameworks, with affluent regions advancing policies faster than developing nations. Economic Strategies: Wealthy regions use fossil fuel revenues for green investments, while poorer areas struggle to finance energy transitions. |
| SSP5 |
Policy Frameworks: Resource-driven conflicts complicate carbon pricing escalation and hinder shared financing frameworks, delaying global energy accords. Economic Strategies: Fossil fuel revenues are used primarily for economic expansion, with limited allocations to renewables. Conflicts over resource access disrupt equitable financing mechanisms. |
Policy Frameworks: Aggressive competition for fossil fuel resources amplifies conflicts, complicating global policy agreements. Economic Strategies: Energy resource competition limits international financing mechanisms and prioritizes domestic fossil fuel revenues over global green investments. |
Policy Frameworks: Advanced institutions implement carbon pricing and green policies but prioritise economic growth over sustainability. Economic Strategies: Fossil fuel revenues are redirected to economic expansion, with limited allocations to global green funds. |
| Conflict Model | WEC Model | Cross-Country Analysis Model | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SSP1 |
Energy Storage: Low conflict risks in SSP1 support robust research into solid-state and flow batteries, enabling their deployment by 2040. Renewable Energy: International stability fosters global scaling of emerging technologies like perovskite solar cells. Smart Grids: Rapid deployment of smart grids occurs due to the absence of conflict-related infrastructure damage. Advanced Carbon Capture: Cooperative governance accelerates CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) research and deployment in high-emission sectors. Nuclear Innovations: Stable funding supports long-term fusion research and modular nuclear reactor development, ensuring breakthroughs by 2075. |
Energy Storage: Collaboration reduces energy-driven conflicts, enabling efficient R&D and deployment timelines for storage systems. Renewable Energy: Shared global priorities eliminate barriers to scaling renewables like floating wind farms and green hydrogen. Smart Grids: High global cooperation ensures smart grids are integrated seamlessly across regions. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS technologies are widely shared and deployed, mitigating emissions globally. Nuclear Innovations: Universal cooperation accelerates fusion research and modular reactor deployment. |
Energy Storage: Strong institutions ensure timely R&D for next-gen systems, achieving global deployment by 2040. Renewable Energy: Stable governance accelerates adoption of solar, wind, and hydrogen technologies. Smart Grids: Efficient policies and governance support universal smart grid integration by 2050. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS technologies benefit from institutional support, enabling widespread use. Nuclear Innovations: Coordinated governance achieves nuclear breakthroughs and spin-offs. |
| SSP2 |
Energy Storage: Conflict in developing nations delays localized energy storage solutions. Renewable Energy: Regional conflicts slow global scaling, although advanced economies progress steadily. Smart Grids: Infrastructure damage in conflict-prone regions delays grid interconnection by decades. Advanced Carbon Capture: Uneven stability limits large-scale CCS deployment. Nuclear Innovations: Nuclear advancements are fragmented, with progress concentrated in conflict-free regions. |
Energy Storage: Conflicts over resource scarcity delay regional storage adoption in some developing areas. Renewable Energy: Resource-driven conflicts between nations impede large-scale adoption of emerging technologies. Smart Grids: Tensions delay full grid interconnection until after 2055. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS deployment is concentrated in resource-rich nations, limiting global effectiveness. Nuclear Innovations: Uneven collaboration delays nuclear advancements in conflict-prone regions. |
Energy Storage: Mixed institutional capacity delays localized storage adoption in conflict-prone regions. Renewable Energy: Socioeconomic disparities limit adoption of advanced renewable technologies globally. Smart Grids: Partial grid interconnections arise due to uneven governance structures. Advanced Carbon Capture: Adoption varies by institutional strength and regional economic priorities. Nuclear Innovations: Fragmented governance slows nuclear R&D and deployment. |
| SSP3 |
Energy Storage: Widespread conflict undermines research funding, limiting battery advancements to wealthy regions. Renewable Energy: Fragmentation slows global adoption of new technologies; reliance on legacy systems persists in conflict zones. Smart Grids: Regional rivalries prevent grid interconnections and integrated systems. Advanced Carbon Capture: Minimal research funding and unstable industries restrict CCS deployment to isolated wealthy regions. Nuclear Innovations: Political instability halts development, restricting SMRs (Small Modular Reactors) and fusion spin-offs. |
Energy Storage: Energy-driven rivalries limit cross-border collaborations on storage solutions, slowing technological progress. Renewable Energy: Geopolitical tensions reinforce reliance on legacy energy systems over emerging renewables. Smart Grids: Resource conflicts prevent smart grid integration and interconnection. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS remains a niche technology due to fragmented global efforts. Nuclear Innovations: Rivalries among major powers slow SMR deployment and fusion research, favouring fossil fuels. |
Energy Storage: Weak institutions and fragmented governance stall research and deployment efforts. Renewable Energy: Institutional weaknesses exacerbate reliance on fossil fuels over renewables Smart Grids: Poor governance prevents integration and limits efficiency. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS deployment remains regional and limited. Nuclear Innovations: Institutional fragility restricts R&D funding for advanced nuclear systems. |
| SSP4 |
Energy Storage: Wealthy regions advance battery technologies rapidly, while conflict in poorer regions limits implementation. Renewable Energy: Affluent nations achieve technological scaling by 2040, but conflict-prone areas remain reliant on fossil fuels. Smart Grids: Rich regions deploy smart grids efficiently; poorer regions lag behind due to infrastructure insecurity. Advanced Carbon Capture: Limited to high-income nations, with negligible adoption in developing regions. Nuclear Innovations: Affluent regions drive nuclear progress, leaving conflict-affected poorer regions without access. |
Energy Storage: Competition between wealthy and poor regions limits equitable deployment of storage technologies. Renewable Energy: Affluent regions scale technologies, while resource-driven conflicts exacerbate delays in underdeveloped regions. Smart Grids: Resource disparities restrict smart grid deployment to affluent regions. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS adoption is limited to regions with high economic capacity. Nuclear Innovations: Technological advancements remain concentrated in wealthy nations, leaving poorer regions excluded. |
Energy Storage: Institutional disparities limit deployment to affluent regions. Renewable Energy: Governance gaps lead to unequal adoption of advanced technologies. Smart Grids: Wealthy regions achieve smart grid integration; poorer areas lack access due to weak governance. Advanced Carbon Capture: Adoption remains concentrated in regions with strong institutions. Nuclear Innovations: Institutional disparities confine nuclear progress to wealthy regions. |
| SSP5 |
Energy Storage: Resource-driven conflicts around fossil fuels delay global deployment of advanced batteries. Renewable Energy: Economic priorities focus on fossil fuels, with limited scaling of renewables until later in the century. Smart Grids: Conflicts over energy resources obstruct global grid interconnections. Advanced Carbon Capture: High industrial demand spurs CCS research, but conflicts limit deployment in key sectors. Nuclear Innovations: Political instability around unproven reserves delays fusion research and SMR adoption. |
Energy Storage: Resource-driven conflicts stall adoption of solid-state batteries and flow systems globally. Renewable Energy: Aggressive fossil fuel use delays the scaling of renewable technologies until economic priorities shift. Smart Grids: Energy competition complicates grid interconnection, fragmenting global energy systems. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS research advances for high-emission industries but faces deployment challenges in conflict zones. Nuclear Innovations: Conflicts over energy resources disrupt research funding and deployment of advanced nuclear systems. |
Energy Storage: Advanced institutions drive early breakthroughs but prioritize fossil fuel dominance over immediate deployment. Renewable Energy: Technological adoption is deprioritized as fossil fuels dominate energy policy. Smart Grids: Institutional focus on fossil fuels delays integration of smart grids. Advanced Carbon Capture: CCS research advances in developed regions but remains limited globally. Nuclear Innovations: Institutional disparities prioritize economic growth over nuclear advancements. |
The conflict-based models reveal the following key dynamics with each SSP scenario in relation to the 4 key actions:
| SSP1 | Minimises conflict risks, enabling sustainable resource management. |
| SSP2 | Balances resource use amid moderate conflict and institutional capacity. |
| SSP3 | Amplifies resource-driven conflicts, creating fragmented and inefficient reserve management. |
| SSP4 | Highlights inequality-driven resource disputes, with affluent regions gaining a disproportionate share. |
| SSP5 | Increases resource competition, driving geopolitical tensions and aggressive reserve exploitation. |
| SSP1 | Minimises conflict risks, enabling smooth transitions globally. |
| SSP2 | Achieves gradual transitions but faces uneven progress due to sporadic conflict and governance challenges |
| SSP3 | Exacerbates resource-driven conflicts, stalling transitions and fragmenting global efforts. |
| SSP4 | Deepens inequality-driven disparities, with poorer regions lagging due to weak institutional capacity |
| SSP5 | Amplifies energy competition and geopolitical tensions, delaying renewable dominance and prolonging fossil fuel reliance. |
| SSP1 | Strong institutions and low conflict risks support smooth implementation of policies and economic measures. |
| SSP2 | Moderate institutional capacities and sporadic conflicts slow progress but allow incremental improvements. |
| SSP3 | High levels of conflict and weak institutions undermine global agreements and green investments. |
| SSP4 | Inequality-driven institutional disparities limit cohesive policy frameworks and reinforce economic imbalances. |
| SSP5 | Advanced institutions prioritise fossil fuel revenue utilization for economic growth but face resource-driven conflicts. |
| SSP1 | Strong institutions and low conflict risks foster rapid technological innovation and adoption. |
| SSP2 | Moderate institutional capacity and sporadic conflicts create uneven progress. |
| SSP3 | High conflict levels and weak institutions undermine technological advancements globally. |
| SSP4 | Institutional disparities drive unequal access to advanced technologies, favouring wealthy regions. |
| SSP5 | Resource-driven conflicts and institutional focus on fossil fuels delay renewable and nuclear innovations. |
The SSP framework does not assign specific regions to each pathway but instead describes global scenarios that could apply differently across regions based on their socioeconomic and governance characteristics. However, for the purpose of developing a framework for an energy crossover strategy it is useful to broadly classify how regions might align with the SSPs based on their features. SSPs that are indicated in the 4 key action tables below, refer to the following regions:
Timeframe: 2025-2035
| Action | Timeframe |
|---|---|
| Institutional Capacity Building (2025–2027): | |
| 1. Conduct governance assessments in target countries | Q2–Q4 2025 |
| Collect data on reserve monitoring frameworks. | |
| Identify gaps using the Cross-Country Analysis Model. | |
| 2. Develop and distribute standardised mapping protocols | Q1–Q3 2026 |
| Collaborate with experts to establish guidelines. | |
| 3. Organise technical training workshops for regional institutions | Q4 2026–Q4 2027 |
| Provide training on monitoring tools, e.g., GIS-based mapping. | |
| Conflict Risk Assessment (2026–2028): | |
| 1. Map conflict-prone areas using the Conflict Trap Model | Q1 2026–Q1 2027 |
| Integrate data from historical conflict records and predictive modelling. | |
| 2. Evaluate risks to reserve assessment and extraction | Q2–Q4 2027 |
| Conduct scenario planning for volatile regions. | |
| 3. Propose and disseminate safety measures and response plans | Q1–Q2 2028 |
| Geopolitical Collaboration (2028–2031): | |
| 1. Organise international forums to resolve disputes over shared reserves | Q1 2028–Q4 2029 |
| Facilitate dialogues with regional and global stakeholders. | |
| 2. Draft and finalise transnational agreements for reserve sharing and exploration | Q1 2030–Q2 2031 |
| Proven Reserve Analysis (2025–2030): | |
| 1. Data Collection and Validation | 2025–2026 |
| Use satellite imagery, seismic studies, and geological surveys to confirm proven reserves. | |
| Collaborate with local authorities to verify data accuracy. | |
| 2. Feasibility Modelling | 2026–2028 |
| SSP1: Model feasibility under global cooperation scenarios. | |
| SSP3: Identify barriers to mapping in fragmented governance regions. | |
| 3. Actionable Planning | 2028–2030 |
| Develop regional agreements for SSP3 regions. | |
| Propose tailored governance reforms to enhance mapping capabilities. | |
| Unproven Reserve Analysis (2027–2035): | |
| 1. Exploration Initiatives | 2027–2030 |
| Conduct aeromagnetic and geophysical surveys in unexplored areas. | |
| Establish partnerships with private and public entities for funding exploratory studies. | |
| 2. Regional Feasibility Studies | 2027–2032 |
| SSP4: Assess unproven reserves in governance-strong wealthy regions. | |
| SSP4 Low-Income: Promote alternative energy solutions in conflict-prone regions. | |
| 3. Pilot Projects | 2030–2035 |
| Launch small-scale drilling/exploration pilots in promising SSP4-4.5/6.0 regions. | |
| Initiate renewable energy programs in regions where feasibility is low. | |
| Global Reserve Analysis (2025–2031): | |
| 1. Compilation of Existing Global Data | 2025–2026 |
| Collect data from geological surveys, energy corporations, and national databases. | |
| Use existing maps and reserve estimates as a foundation for global analysis. | |
| 2. Assessment of Reserve Distribution and Accessibility | 2026–2028 |
| Analyse global reserve distribution in terms of accessibility, quality, and extraction potential. | |
| Use AI models to predict geopolitical or climatic factors affecting reserve usability. | |
| 3. Global Reporting | 2028–2031 |
| Create an open-access global reserve database in collaboration with international energy bodies. | |
| Publish annual reports on reserve updates and availability trends. | |
| Regional Prioritisation (2026–2035): | |
| 1. Define Criteria for Regional Prioritisation | 2026–2027 |
| Develop a scoring system based on governance capacity, conflict risk, and potential reserve yield. | |
| Involve experts from the WEC-Model for geopolitical considerations. | |
| 2. Rank Regions Based on Strategic Importance | 2028–2031 |
| Use the scoring system to rank regions for short-term, mid-term, and long-term priorities. | |
| 3. Develop Regional Action Plans | 2031–2035 |
| For high-priority regions (e.g., SSP1): Focus on immediate mapping and extraction. | |
| For low-priority/conflict zones (e.g., SSP3): Emphasise stabilisation and preparatory infrastructure work. | |
Timeframe: 2025–2100
| Action | Timeframe |
|---|---|
| Short-Term Transition (2025–2045) | |
| Hybrid Energy System Implementation: | |
| 1. Grid Assessment and Planning | 2025–2026 |
| Conduct surveys to identify regions where hybrid systems (renewables integrated with fossil fuels) can be implemented. | |
| Create transition plans tailored to SSP5 regions with high energy demand. | |
| 2. Technology Deployment | 2026–2030 |
| Install hybrid systems in SSP5 regions. | |
| Collaborate with technology providers to ensure systems are robust and scalable. | |
| 3. Monitoring and Optimization | 2030–2035 |
| Set up monitoring stations to analyse the performance of hybrid systems. | |
| Optimise systems for efficiency and gradually reduce dependency on fossil fuels. | |
| Personnel Training: | |
| 1. Training Program Development | 2027–2028 |
| Partner with educational institutions to create curricula for hybrid energy system management. | |
| Focus on technical training for engineers and technicians. | |
| 2. Capacity Building Workshops | 2029–2032 |
| Organise regional workshops in SSP5 zones to train personnel. | |
| Provide hands-on experience with system operation and maintenance. | |
| Conflict Resolution Efforts: | |
| 1. Diplomatic Negotiations | 2027–2035 |
| Establish intergovernmental task forces to address conflicts over fossil resource access. | |
| Use Conflict Trap Model predictions to prioritise regions most at risk. | |
| 2. Implementation of Agreements | 2035–2045 |
| Work on peacebuilding and resource-sharing frameworks in SSP5 regions. | |
| Mid-Term Transition (2045–2070) | |
| Scaling Renewable Infrastructure: | |
| 1. Centralised Renewable Hub Development | 2045–2055 |
| Expand renewable energy hubs in SSP1 and SSP2 regions. | |
| Focus on technologies - solar farms, wind farms, and large-scale hydroelectric systems. | |
| 2. Integration into Energy Grids | 2050–2055 |
| Connect renewable hubs to national and regional grids. | |
| Ensure stable energy supply during peak demand. | |
| Localised Renewable Solutions: | |
| 1. Pilot Programs for Localized Systems | 2050–2060 |
| Develop community-level renewable systems for SSP3 regions, including microgrids and off-grid solutions. | |
| 2. Conflict Bypass Initiatives | 2060–2070 |
| Deploy systems in areas where inter-regional energy grid conflicts persist. | |
| Focus on decentralised solutions to increase energy security. | |
| Hydrogen Integration: | |
| 1. Feasibility Studies for Hydrogen Integration | 2045–2070 |
| Assess areas suitable for hydrogen production, storage, and utilisation. | |
| Evaluate the economic feasibility of hydrogen-based energy systems. | |
| Deploy pilot plants in specific regions | |
| Small Modular Nuclear Reactors: | |
| 1. Technology Research and Development | 2050–2070 |
| Fund research into modular and scalable nuclear reactor designs. | |
| Include safety measures and waste disposal mechanisms in reactor designs. | |
| Long-Term Transition (2070–2100) | |
| Hydrogen Production Plants: | |
| 1. Global Scale-Up of Hydrogen Infrastructure | 2070–2100 |
| Build hydrogen production plants and distribution networks worldwide. | |
| Integrate hydrogen systems into grids alongside renewables and nuclear. | |
| Small Modular Nuclear Reactors: | |
| 1. Global Deployment | 2070–2100 |
| Begin construction and deployment of reactors in SSP2 and SSP5 regions. | |
| Monitor environmental and safety impacts closely. | |
Timeframe: 2025–2055
| Action | Timeframe |
|---|---|
| Carbon Pricing Mechanisms: | |
| 1. Framework Development | 2025–2027 |
| Convene regional expert panels to determine carbon pricing models suitable for SSP1 and SSP2. | |
| Conduct assessments to evaluate readiness for pricing adoption. | |
| 2. Regional Rollout | 2028–2035 |
| Implement tiered pricing mechanisms in SSP2 to address disparities. | |
| Monitor initial implementation in SSP1 regions to assess alignment and effectiveness. | |
| 3. Optimisation and Expansion | 2035–2045 |
| Refine pricing systems based on economic data and stakeholder feedback. | |
| Expand mechanisms to SSP3 regions as governance improves. | |
| Fossil Fuel Revenue Allocation: | |
| 1. Agreement Drafting | 2025–2027 |
| Negotiate international agreements on revenue allocation for SSP5 regions. | |
| Identify key funding priorities for green energy projects, emphasising renewable technologies and infrastructure. | |
| 2. Fund Establishment | 2027–2032 |
| Create sovereign green funds at the national level to direct revenues into renewable investments. | |
| Establish global regulatory bodies to oversee fund implementation and compliance across SSP5 regions. | |
| 3. Monitoring and Adjustment | 2033–2055 |
| Set up regional monitoring bodies to track revenue distribution and fund utilisation | 2033–2040 |
| Conduct periodic reviews (every 5 years) to ensure alignment with green energy transition goals. | |
| Expand revenue allocation frameworks to SSP3 regions as governance improves | 2040–2055 |
| 4. Equity Mechanisms for Low-Income Nations | 2027–2032 |
| Allocate a portion of SSP5 revenue into financial aid programs for SSP4 low-income regions. | |
| Develop support packages focused on renewable energy projects and capacity-building in underfunded areas. | |
| Equitable Access to Financing: | |
| 1. Global Financial Aid Framework Development | 2025–2030 |
| Form multilateral coalitions to address financing gaps in low-income SSP4 regions. | |
| Propose tiered financing models to accommodate varying levels of governance capacity. | |
| 2. Bilateral Funding Agreements | 2030–2035 |
| Negotiate country-specific financing agreements, emphasising equitable distribution for renewable projects. | |
| Align funding mechanisms with institutional strengthening efforts in SSP4 regions. | |
| 3. Implementation and Monitoring | 2035–2055 |
| Roll out financing programs incrementally across SSP4 regions. | 2035–2045 |
| Establish accountability frameworks for tracking the impact of funds on renewable adoption. | 2040–2055 |
| Collaborate with international financial institutions to ensure sustainability of funding mechanisms. | |
Timeframe: 2025–2080
| Action | Timeframe |
|---|---|
| Energy Storage Systems: | |
| 1. Feasibility Studies for Regional Storage Hubs | 2025–2035 |
| Conduct technical assessments of storage technologies suitable for different regions. | 2025–2027 |
| Evaluate demand for energy storage in SSP4 regions with varied governance capacities. | 2028–2030 |
| Focus on identifying locations for renewable energy storage hubs in SSP1 and SSP2 regions | 2030–2035 |
| 2. Construction of Storage Hubs Globally | 2040–2055 |
| Build regional renewable storage hubs in SSP1 regions leveraging institutional cooperation. | 2040–2045 |
| Expand storage infrastructure in SSP4 wealthy regions with existing governance capacity. | 2045–2050 |
| Prioritise modular designs for scalability across SSP2 and SSP3 regions. | 2050–2055 |
| 3. Adoption of Advanced Storage Technologies | 2055–2080 |
| Integrate next-generation storage systems (e.g., battery technologies, compressed air systems) into existing hubs. | 2055–2065 |
| Develop decentralised energy storage solutions for SSP3 fragmented regions. | 2065–2080 |
| Renewable Technologies: | |
| 1. Localisation of Off-Grid Renewable Systems for SSP3 | 2030–2050 |
| Design and deploy small-scale solar and wind systems in conflict-affected SSP3 regions. | 2030–2035 |
| Expand access to clean energy through off-grid solutions in geographically isolated SSP3 communities. | 2035–2045 |
| Develop affordable renewable models tailored to SSP3 income levels and governance constraints. | 2045–2050 |
| 2. Global Testing and Deployment of Innovative Renewable Technologies | 2025–2050 |
| Pilot emerging technologies, including advanced photovoltaic materials, vertical wind turbines, and tidal energy systems. | 2025–2035 |
| Scale successful pilot technologies to SSP1 and SSP5 regions. | 2035–2050 |
| 3. Integration of Renewables into Urban Areas | 2045–2080 |
| Incorporate renewable solutions like rooftop solar and vertical gardens into SSP2 and SSP5 cities. | 2045–2065 |
| Develop urban renewable microgrids for high-density regions. | 2065–2080 |
| Carbon Capture, Hydrogen Production and Nuclear Innovations: | |
| 1. Carbon Capture Technologies | 2035–2080 |
| Develop direct air capture systems for large-scale deployment in SSP1 and SSP5 regions. | 2035–2045 |
| Build integrated CCS plants in SSP4 wealthy regions. | 2045–2060 |
| Scale CCS systems with fusion and advanced geothermal technologies. | 2060–2080 |
| 2. Hydrogen Production | 2045–2070 |
| Design cost-effective and scalable hydrogen production plants | 2045–2055 |
| Deploy pilot plants in identified regions. | 2055–2070 |
| Scale-up and deployment of hydrogen fuel infrastructure . | 2070–2100 |
| 3. Development of Modular Nuclear Reactors | 2070–2080 |
| Design cost-effective and scalable nuclear designs with modular safety protocols. | 2050–2070 |
| Deploy pilot modular reactors in SSP2 regions. | 2060–2070 |
| Expand reactor installations globally, prioritizing SSP5 energy-intensive regions. | 2070–2100 |
| 4. Fusion Research and Long-Term Nuclear Goals | 2035–2080 |
| Sustain research into fusion technology for SSP1 and SSP2 . | 2035–2060 |
| Implement successful fusion-based systems into SSP1 energy networks. | 2060–2080 |
Estimating the CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere by 2100 based on this strategy requires evaluating its effectiveness in reducing emissions across different SSP scenarios. Given its gradual transition, emphasis on renewables, nuclear, hydrogen, and carbon capture technologies, it aligns closely with pathways leading to significant CO₂ reductions—but the impact will depend on global implementation.
If successfully adopted at scale and integrated into SSP1 or an optimistic SSP2 pathway, CO₂ concentration could stabilise between 450–500 ppm by 2100, consistent with low-emission scenarios in climate models. However, if implementation faces challenges—particularly in SSP3 or fossil-fuelled SSP5 contexts—the reduction effect may be weaker, potentially leading to 600–700 ppm or more by 2100.
The degree to which this framework influences global emissions depends on:
The expected global temperature increase by 2100 depends on how effectively the energy crossover strategy is implemented and how different regions transition away from fossil fuels. Based on climate modelling:
The strategy strongly supports the lower-emission pathways by gradually phasing out fossil fuels, scaling renewables, advancing technology, and implementing economic incentives. If executed efficiently at a global level, it could help maintain temperatures below 2°C by 2100.
Estimating global primary energy consumption by 2100 depends on the transition pathway taken. Based on current projections and how the energy crossover strategy aligns with the SSPs:
The strategy emphasises hybrid systems early, renewables scaling mid-term, and hydrogen/nuclear integration long-term, supporting a moderate to low-energy future, likely within the 200,000–250,000 TWh range if widely adopted.