The Delayed Recovery Scenario (DRS) will be launched this year to reflect on the uncertainties related to the impact of the pandemic on the global economy. In this scenario, the pandemic lasts longer and the economic recovery is weaker than expected in the STEPS. Lockdowns in different forms are much longer; periodic forced detention, social distancing and other restrictive measures are part of daily life; and the public health crisis is weighing on the ability of many governments to provide financial arteries to households and businesses, compounding the collapse. To understand the effects of a prolonged pandemic and stronger economic turbulence, we developed the Scenario Delayed Recovery (DRS). This scenario perfectly illustrates the scenario-based approach of the World Energy Outlook: the DRS maintains steps` initial policy assumptions, while public health and economic assumptions differ. “[A]mbitions are not automatically included in the scenario: full implementation cannot be taken for granted, so the outlook and timing of their realization are based on our assessment of relevant regulatory, market, infrastructure and financial constraints.” […] Climate Change – Get Rid of Us Global CO2 emissions are on the rise again and won`t peak until 2040 The IEA`s 2019 WEO scenarios won`t meet Paris targets, again 10 carbon capture methods Updates: Dr Ridd Fight for freedom […] The consequences are real. Since it receives most of the spotlight, the media, investors, corporations and governments regularly use this “central” scenario as a prediction of future fossil fuel demand and become a self-fulfilling prophecy. In fact, WEO`s projections of a fossil-fuel-rich future have been used to justify projects such as the TransMountain oil sands pipeline in Canada and the Adani Carmichael coal mine in Australia. With weo`s central focus on the STEPS pathway, the declaration on Parisian “orientation” is at the center of criticism from a group of NGOs, scientists, business groups and others.

In a letter dated April, they asked the IEA to develop a scenario with a 66% chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C. Although SDS emissions exceed those of other high-net trails, the IEA uses misleading terminology to suggest that SDS could be redirected to 1.5°C with relatively reasonable NET. The IEA states that SDS could give a 50% chance of temperature stabilization at 1.5°C, “net negative emissions being significantly lower than in most scenarios assessed by the IPCC.” The scenarios, briefly explained in a new IEEFA factsheet, meet the overall objectives of the Paris Agreement in 2016, which aim to keep global temperature rise well below 2°C, while working together to limit the rise to 1.5°C. Almost all of these IPCC scenarios (88 out of 90) are based on some degree of net negative emissions. The sustainable development scenario is not based on net negative emissions, but if the necessary technologies were available on a large scale, warming could still be limited. A significantly lower level of net negative emissions than used in most scenarios assessed by the IPCC would give the sustainable development scenario a 50% probability of limiting the rise in global temperatures to 1.5°C. .