Greenhouse gas emissions from global electricity production are now higher than they were before the coronavirus pandemic, suggesting that countries are failing to take the opportunity to “build back better” from the economic downturn, a new report has revealed.
Across the world, electricity demand and emissions are now 5% higher than they were in the first half of 2019, before lockdowns went into effect, even as the UN warns time is running out for the world to take the necessary action to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. The half-yearly review from climate and energy think-tank Ember shows emissions jumped 12% in the first half of 2021 compared with 2020.
The main culprit for the rise in emissions, Ember says, is coal. Coal-fired generation is by far the most emissions-intensive way to produce electricity, yet it is still prevalent across many economies—particularly in the developing world. Ember’s data show that the 63 countries featured in the review generated 4,351 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity from coal in the first half of 2019, equating to 39.5% of total electricity production. This rose to 4,604 TWh in the first half of 2021, making up 39.9% of total electricity production.
“Catapulting emissions in 2021 should send alarm bells across the world,” said Dave Jones, Ember’s global lead. “We are not building back better, we are building back badly. A super-fast electricity transition this decade is critical to limit global heating to 1.5 degrees. The electricity transition is happening but with little urgency: emissions are going in the wrong direction.”
Much of the rise in emissions was a result of massively increased demand in developing countries, particularly in Asia. In China, despite a huge build-out of solar and wind generation, coal power increased by 337 TWh—more coal generation than was used by the whole of the EU in the first half of the year—taking China’s share of global coal generation from 50% prior to the pandemic, up to 53%.
In less developed Asian nations, from Mongolia to Bangladesh, coal power stepped in to meet rebounding demand for electricity. With fossil fuels delivering 98% of the bounce back in demand, CO2 emissions in Bangladesh rose 25%. Even in Vietnam, where new solar and wind generation managed to meet the increased demand, emissions still rose 4% as some gas generation was taken over by coal.
Looking ahead, Jones told me that the global picture for emissions could get even worse as the year continues and as electricity demand in the West picks up.
“No country had a green recovery, by which we mean not just seeing emissions fall on stagnant demand, but as electricity demand increases,” he said. According to the report, emissions in the U.S. remain low following the 2020 economic downturn, but only because electricity demand remains at -0.3% below pre-pandemic levels. A modest growth in wind and solar generation from 10.1% to 13.7% of the energy mix contributed to a fall in emissions of just 4%.
Of all the regions surveyed, Europe saw the greatest increase in clean energy, with 9% more solar and wind, taking these two sources to 20% of European energy generation. Combined with a 16% fall in coal generation, European emissions stood at 12% below the first half of 2019. However, Ember noted, these gains still aren’t enough to meet the bloc’s goal of reducing net emissions by at least 55% by 2030.
This, Jones said, is particularly concerning when taking into account the relatively slow growth in electricity use in developed nations over the previous decade. “That was the norm, but we know in the coming decade that’s not going to be the norm,” he explained. “This decade we’re going to see the electrification of transport, of industry, of heat and everything else. We might be reducing emissions at the moment, but not against the background of increasing electricity demand. So that’s a warning for developed countries not to be complacent.”
Not all the news is gloomy: Ember found that wind generated 26% more electricity in the first half of the year than in the pre-pandemic period to produce 7.6% of electricity worldwide, while solar rose a huge 46% to generate 4.1% of the total.
Also notably, and for the first time, renewables generated more electricity than nuclear power worldwide.
But Ember senior analyst Muyi Yang said that to set global emissions on a downward trajectory, countries would at the very least have to meet new and rising demand with clean sources of electricity, rather than reverting to coal.
“Developing Asia must focus its attention on meeting all demand growth with new, zero-carbon electricity as a first initial step of the region’s journey towards 100% clean electricity before mid-century,” Yang said. “Developing Asia can leapfrog fossils and move straight to cheap, clean renewables. But this is contingent on whether the region can further accelerate its inexorable march of clean electricity while at the same time use electricity more efficiently.”
With this in mind, Jones suggested that when countries meet for the all-important COP26 UN climate conference in November, they should prioritize tackling the low-hanging fruit, specifically: coal. Because while the conference was focused on NDCs, or the nations’ nationally determined contributions towards cutting emissions, “for any plan that’s 1.5 degrees aligned you need to have a plan on coal.”
“At COP, we should get countries to recognize that they don’t need new coal power plants, and to actually put a moratorium on coal plants,” Jones said. “For many countries this is a relatively easy ask: if you know coal power plants aren’t being built you have a lot more certainty over your planning policy; about what you need to achieve on the clean energy side; how you get that investment.”
Ember noted that the half-year review covers just 63 countries, with data for some major countries such as Indonesia and the Philippines missing from the equation, “which may mean our data even underestimates both the rise in electricity demand and rise in CO2 emissions.” Add to this the fact that many of the world’s largest economies—including the U.S. and India—still haven’t recovered from the shock of the pandemic, and 2021 could end up painting a picture that illustrates not global progress but climate inaction.
Perhaps this should not come as a surprise: researchers such as the Global Recovery Observatory at the University of Oxford have found, time and again, that sustainable spending has made up only a fraction of coronavirus recovery packages. In June, the Greenness of Stimulus Index showed that almost $5 trillion in stimulus money had actually harmed the environment, with vast quantities of money going to prop up emissions-heavy industries—including fossil fuels.
Ember’s figures reveal that, if the international community is serious about tackling climate change, it will need to put its money where its mouth is.
“When it comes to cutting emissions, many countries are doing a half-decent job,” Jones concluded. “Unfortunately, we need to be doing much better than a half-decent job.”
