Energy transition and the role of system integration of the energy, water and environmental systems

Many countries have implemented national climate policies to accomplish pledged Nationally Determined Contributions and to contribute to the temperature objectives of the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2023, the global stocktake will assess the combined effort of countries. Here, based on a public policy database and a multi-model scenario analysis, we show that implementation of current policies leaves a median emission gap of 22.4 to 28.2 GtCO2eq by 2030 with the optimal pathways to implement the well below 2 °C and 1.5 °C Paris goals. If Nationally Determined Contributions would be fully implemented, this gap would be reduced by a third. Interestingly, the countries evaluated were found to not achieve their pledged contributions with implemented policies (implementation gap), or to have an ambition gap with optimal pathways towards well below 2 °C. This shows that all countries would need to accelerate the implementation of policies for renewable technologies, while efficiency improvements are especially important in emerging countries and fossil-fuel-dependent countries.

The still escalating COVID-19 pandemic also has a substantial impact on energy structure, requirements and related emissions. The consumption is unavoidable and receives a lower priority in the critical situation. However, as the pandemic continues, the impacts on energy and environment should be assessed and possibly reduced. This study aims to provide an overview of invested energy sources and environmental footprints in fighting the COVID-19. The required energy and resources consumption of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) and testing kits have been discussed. The protecting efficiency returned on environmental footprint invested for masks has been further explored. The main observation pinpointed is that with a proper design standard, material selection and user guideline, reusable PPE could be an effective option with lower energy consumption/environmental footprint. Additional escalated energy consumption for aseptic and disinfection has been assessed. This includes the energy stemming from emergency and later managed supply chains. The outcomes emphasised that diversifying solutions to achieve the needed objective is a vital strategy to improve the susceptibility and provide higher flexibility in minimising the environmental footprints. However, more comprehensive research proof for the alternative solution (e.g. reusable option) towards low energy consumption without compromise on the effectiveness should be offered and advocated.