Reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions will require at least $2.5 trillion in additional capital investment into energy supply, industry, buildings and vehicles over the next decade, according to a major new study by Princeton University researchers.

“A successful net-zero transition could be accomplished with annual spending on energy that is comparable or lower as a percentage of GDP to what the nation spends annually on energy today. However, foresight and proactive policy and action are needed to achieve the lowest-cost outcomes,” the researchers said in their interim report, “Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure and Impacts.” “Major investment decisions must start now, with levels of investments ramping up throughout the transition.”

Effectively eliminating GHG emissions economywide is widely considered the target needed to avoid the worst effects of climate change. A dozen states and numerous utilities and other major companies have pledged to eliminate their emissions by 2050.

5 Paths

The Princeton researchers looked at five paths for getting to the 2050 goal, all of which they said would keep energy spending in line with historical rates of 4 to 6% of GDP — but would require massive increases in transmission and renewable generation.

“We are agnostic as to which of these pathways is ‘best,’ and the final path the nation takes will no doubt differ from all of these,” they wrote. “Our goal is to provide confidence that the U.S. now has multiple genuine paths to net zero by 2050 and to provide a blueprint for priority actions for the next decade. These priorities include accelerating deployment at scale of technologies and solutions that are mature and affordable today and will have high value regardless of what path the nation takes, as well as a set of actions to build key enabling infrastructure and improve a set of less mature technologies that will help complete the transition to a net-zero America.”

Hurdles

The researchers said reaching the goal will require:

• deployment of technology and infrastructure “at historically unprecedented rates across most sectors”;
• mitigating the impacts on landscapes and communities to obtain sustained political support;
• mobilization of large amounts of risk capital by government and private sectors;
• rapid adoption of building and transportation electrification by consumers; and
• the development of low-carbon industrial processes such as steel and cement manufacturing using electrification and hydrogen.

2030 Goals

To get on the trajectory to 2050, the study says the expansion of low-carbon technology must begin immediately, with the following goals hit by 2030:

• put about 50 million electric vehicles on the road, with at least 3 million public charging ports to serve them;
• increase the share of electric heat pumps for home heating to 23% from 10% today and triple heat pumps’ use in commercial buildings;
• increase wind and solar generating capacity fourfold to 600 GW to supply half of U.S. electricity (vs. 10% today);
• expand high-voltage transmission capacity by 60% to deliver renewable power to load centers;
• increase annual uptake of carbon stored permanently in forests and agricultural soils by 200 million metric tons; and
• reduce non-CO₂ GHG emissions, including methane, nitrous oxides and hydrofluorocarbons, by at least 10%.

“It may seem like 2050 is a long way off. But if you think about the timelines for policies, business decisions and capital investments, it’s really more like the day after tomorrow,” Jesse Jenkins, an assistant professor at Princeton and one of the authors of the report, told The New York Times.

The nation also will need to develop enabling infrastructure and innovative technologies during the next decade, the researchers said. Among the items on the to-do list are planning and permitting even more electric transmission, and planning and beginning construction of a nationwide CO₂ transportation network and accompanying permanent underground storage basins to address industrial sectors that cannot be decarbonized.

Investments also will be required to speed the maturation and reduce the costs of options such as clean “firm” electricity technologies (advanced nuclear, advanced geothermal and hydrogen combustion turbines); advanced bioenergy conversion and high-yield bioenergy crops; hydrogen and synthetic fuel production from clean electricity and biomass; natural gas with carbon capture; and direct air capture of CO₂.

The five scenarios studied are based on the Energy Information Administration’s projected energy demands for 2050 from the 2019 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) and vary based on the extent of end-use electrification in transportation and buildings, solar and wind generation levels, and the contribution of biomass.

All but one of the scenarios assumes half of existing nuclear generation will run for an 80-year lifespan. All scenarios essentially eliminate coal use by 2030. “Overall, fossil fuels in the primary energy mix decline by 70 to 100% from 2020 to 2050 across scenarios,” it said, with oil and gas dropping 65 to 100%.

The study projects a net increase of 500,000 to 1 million jobs in the 2020s compared with the reference scenario in the AEO. Improved air quality would also prevent 200,000 to 300,000 premature deaths by 2050, according to the analysis.

Achieving the goals will require “coalitions of public support and political will” to enable massive infrastructure additions and address employment losses in particular communities, the study says. Policymakers also will have to overcome upfront cost premiums for EVs and heat pumps.

Reaction

The report — whose findings are similar to those in a study released in October by the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network — attracted attention from those arguing for a continued role for fossil fuels.

The Carbon Capture Coalition cited the study in endorsing the Storing CO₂ and Lowering Emissions (SCALE) Act, which was introduced Wednesday by Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) with cosponsors David McKinley (R-W.Va.), Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.) and Pete Stauber (R-Minn.). “The infrastructure buildout enabled by the SCALE Act is consistent with what the Princeton analysis finds is necessary in the next five to 10 years,” the coalition said in a press release.

“Across every scenario the Princeton team examined, the scale of investment needed to achieve our climate goals is truly massive. But it is possible, especially if resources are deployed in a strategic way,” said Steven Schleimer, Calpine’s senior vice president for government and regulatory affairs. “The report doesn’t examine a nationwide price on carbon, but when you look at the complexity of the challenge, it’s clear that pricing carbon is the most effective option to drive change.”

Schleimer urged the incoming Biden administration to review the Princeton report along with recent analyses performed by the Energy Futures Initiatives and Energy and Environmental Economics, which he said “all recognize that gas capacity will remain vital for the reliability of a fast-growing grid, even as the role of those units shifts to filling the supply gaps inherent to greater reliance on intermittent, renewable sources.”