CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,391Integrated Energy Systems OptimizationClimate Change Policy and EconomicsHybrid Renewable Energy Systems

Net-zero emissions energy systems

Open access
Davis, Steven J., Lewis, Nathan S., Shaner, Matthew, Aggarwal, Sonia, Arent, Doug, Azevedo, Inês L., Benson, Sally M., Bradley, Thomas +24 more·2018·Science
DOI 10.1126/science.aas9793
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Path to zero carbon emissions: Models show that to avert dangerous levels of climate change, global carbon dioxide emissions must fall to zero later this century. Most of these emissions arise from energy use. Davis et al.review what it would take to achieve decarbonization of the energy system. Some parts of the energy system are particularly difficult to decarbonize, including aviation, long-distance transport, steel and cement production, and provision of a reliable electricity supply. Current technologies and pathways show promise, but integration of now-discrete energy sectors and industrial processes is vital to achieve minimal emissions. Science, this issue p.eaas9793

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.aas9793

Cites

120 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Aviation, long-distance road transportation, and ocean shipping require high energy density fuels and are not conducive to electrification.

    “Aviation, long-distance road transportation, and ocean shipping require fuels with high energy density and thus are not conducive to electrification [162].”

    From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [162]

  • Industrial production, logistics, and building materials are leading causes of difficult-to-eliminate GHG emissions.

    “Industrial production, logistics, and building materials are leading causes of difficult-to-eliminate GHG emissions [162].”

    From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [162]

  • Liquid biofuel production is currently among the most technologically mature and cost-effective routes to decarbonizing aviation, shipping, long-haul transport, and residual nonelectrified light-duty transport.

    “Liquid biofuel production (BP) is currently among the most technologically mature and cost-effective routes to decarbonizing aviation, shipping, long-haul transport, and residual nonelectrified light-duty transport ( 4 , 5 ).”

    From Robust paths to net greenhouse gas mitigation and negative emissions via advanced biofuels (2020) · cites this paper as [5]

  • Massively expanding renewable energy sources would allow for a rapid substitution of fossil fuels in the power sector as well as in industry, transport, and heating via electrification.

    “Massively expanding renewable energy sources would allow for a rapid substitution of fossil fuels in the power sector as well as in the industry, transport, and heating sector via electrification, a widely recognized decarbonization strategy also referred to as “sector coupling”1–5.”

    From Long-duration electricity storage needs for coping with Dunkelflaute events in Europe (2026) · cites this paper as [3]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 121 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 68

  1. S. Satyapal, in Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program, Fuel Cell Technologies Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (Washington, DC, 2017).
  2. L. Zheng, T. P. Hills, P. Fennell, Phase evolution, characterisation, and performance of cement prepared in an oxy-fuel atmosphere. Faraday Discuss. 192, 113-124 (2016). doi: 10.1039/C6FD00032Kpmid: 27477884 · DOI
  3. T. Letcher, Storing Energy with Special Reference to Renewable Energy Sources (Elsevier, 2016).
  4. L. Clarke et al., in Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the IPCC 5th Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
  5. J. Rogelj, M. Schaeffer, M. Meinshausen, R. Knutti, J. Alcamo, K. Riahi, W. Hare, Zero emission targets as long-term global goals for climate protection. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 105007 (2015). doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/10/105007 · DOI · Paper page
  6. J. C. Steckel, R. J. Brecha, M. Jakob, J. Strefler, G. Luderer, Development without energy? Assessing future scenarios of energy consumption in developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 90, 53-67 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.02.006 · DOI
  7. S. Collins, J. P. Deane, K. Poncelet, E. Panos, R. C. Pietzcker, E. Delarue, B. P. Ó Gallachóir, Integrating short term variations of the power system into integrated energy system models: A methodological review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 76, 839-856 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.090 · DOI
  8. S. Yeh, G. S. Mishra, L. Fulton, P. Kyle, D. L. McCollum, J. Miller, P. Cazzola, J. Teter, Detailed assessment of global transport-energy models' structures and projections. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 55, 294-309 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.trd.2016.11.001 · DOI
  9. L. M. Fulton, L. R. Lynd, A. Körner, N. Greene, L. R. Tonachel, The need for biofuels as part of a low carbon energy future. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin. 9, 476-483 (2015). doi:10.1002/bbb.1559 · DOI
  10. D. Cecere, E. Giacomazzi, A. Ingenito, A review on hydrogen industrial aerospace applications. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 39, 10731-10747 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.04.126 · DOI
  11. M. Muratori, S. J. Smith, P. Kyle, R. Link, B. K. Mignone, H. S. Kheshgi, Role of the Freight Sector in Future Climate Change Mitigation Scenarios. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 3526-3533 (2017). doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04515 Medline · DOI
  12. S. Satyapal, in Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program, Fuel Cell Technologies Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (Washington, DC, 2017).
  13. H. Zhao, A. Burke, L. Zhu, Analysis of Class 8 hybrid-electric truck technologies using diesel, LNG, electricity, and hydrogen, as the fuel for various applications. EVS27 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium, 17-20 November 2013 (IEEE, 2014).
  14. J. Li, H. Huang, N. Kobayashi, Z. He, Y. Nagai, Study on using hydrogen and ammonia as fuels: Combustion characteristics and NOx formation. Int. J. Energy Res. 38, 1214-1223 (2014). doi:10.1002/er.3141 · DOI
  15. D. Tilman, R. Socolow, J. A. Foley, J. Hill, E. Larson, L. Lynd, S. Pacala, J. Reilly, T. Searchinger, C. Somerville, R. Williams, Beneficial biofuels-The food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science 325, 270-271 (2009). doi:10.1126/science.1177970 Medline · DOI · Paper page
  16. E. H. DeLucia, N. Gomez-Casanovas, J. A. Greenberg, T. W. Hudiburg, I. B. Kantola, S. P. Long, A. D. Miller, D. R. Ort, W. J. Parton, The theoretical limit to plant productivity. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 9471-9477 (2014). doi:10.1021/es502348e Medline · DOI
  17. P. Smith, S. J. Davis, F. Creutzig, S. Fuss, J. Minx, B. Gabrielle, E. Kato, R. B. Jackson, A. Cowie, E. Kriegler, D. P. van Vuuren, J. Rogelj, P. Ciais, J. Milne, J. G. Canadell, D. McCollum, G. Peters, R. Andrew, V. Krey, G. Shrestha, P. Friedlingstein, T. Gasser, A. Grübler, W. K. Heidug, M. Jonas, C. D. Jones, F. Kraxner, E. Littleton, J. Lowe, J. R. Moreira, N. Nakicenovic, M. Obersteiner, A. Patwardhan, M. Rogner, E. Rubin, A. Sharifi, A. Torvanger, Y. Yamagata, J. Edmonds, C. Yongsung, Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 6, 42-50 (2016). doi:10.1038/nclimate2870 · DOI · Paper page
  18. N. Johnson, N. Parker, J. Ogden, How negative can biofuels with CCS take us and at what cost? Refining the economic potential of biofuel production with CCS using spatially- explicit modeling. Energy Procedia 63, 6770-6791 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.712 · DOI
  19. L. R. Lynd, X. Liang, M. J. Biddy, A. Allee, H. Cai, T. Foust, M. E. Himmel, M. S. Laser, M. Wang, C. E. Wyman, Cellulosic ethanol: Status and innovation. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 45, 202-211 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2017.03.008 Medline · DOI · Paper page
  20. O. Cavalett, M. F. Chagas, T. L. Junqueira, M. D. B. Watanabe, A. Bonomi, Environmental impacts of technology learning curve for cellulosic ethanol in Brazil. Ind. Crops Prod. 106, 31-39 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.11.025 · DOI
  21. L. R. Lynd, The grand challenge of cellulosic biofuels. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 912-915 (2017). doi:10.1038/nbt.3976 Medline · DOI
  22. N. Mac Dowell, P. S. Fennell, N. Shah, G. C. Maitland, The role of CO2 capture and utilization in mitigating climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 7, 243-249 (2017). doi:10.1038/nclimate3231 · DOI · Paper page
  23. F. S. Zeman, D. W. Keith, Carbon neutral hydrocarbons. Philos. Trans. A Math Phys. Eng. Sci. 366, 3901-3918 (2008). doi:10.1098/rsta.2008.0143 Medline · DOI · Paper page
  24. C. Graves, S. D. Ebbesen, M. Mogensen, K. S. Lackner, Sustainable hydrocarbon fuels by recycling CO2 and H2O with renewable or nuclear energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 1-23 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.07.014 · DOI
  25. M. R. Shaner, H. A. Atwater, N. S. Lewis, E. W. McFarland, A comparative technoeconomic analysis of renewable hydrogen production using solar energy. Energy Environ. Sci. 9, 2354-2371 (2016). doi:10.1039/C5EE02573G · DOI
  26. J. D. Holladay, J. Hu, D. L. King, Y. Wang, An overview of hydrogen production technologies. Catal. Today 139, 244-260 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.cattod.2008.08.039 · DOI
  27. O. Schmidt, A. Gambhir, I. Staffell, A. Hawkes, J. Nelson, S. Few, Future cost and performance of water electrolysis: An expert elicitation study. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 42, 30470-30492 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.10.045 · DOI
  28. S. M. Saba, M. Muller, M. Robinius, D. Stolten, The investment costs of electrolysis-A comparison of cost studies from the past 30 years. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 43, 1209- 1223 (2018). doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.11.115 · DOI
  29. A. C. Nielander, M. R. Shaner, K. M. Papadantonakis, S. A. Francis, N. S. Lewis, A taxonomy for solar fuels generators. Energy Environ. Sci. 8, 16-25 (2015). doi:10.1039/C4EE02251C · DOI
  30. J. R. McKone, N. S. Lewis, H. B. Gray, Will solar-driven water-splitting devices see the light of day? Chem. Mater. 26, 407-414 (2014). doi:10.1021/cm4021518 · DOI
  31. N. S. Lewis, Research opportunities to advance solar energy utilization. Science 351, aad1920 (2016). doi:10.1126/science.aad1920 Medline · DOI
  32. A. Denis-Ryan, C. Bataille, F. Jotzo, Managing carbon-intensive materials in a decarbonizing world without a global price on carbon. Clim. Policy 16 (sup1), S110-S128 (2016). doi:10.1080/14693062.2016.1176008 · DOI
  33. J. Tollefson, The wooden skyscrapers that could help to cool the planet. Nature 545, 280-282 (2017). doi:10.1038/545280a Medline · DOI
  34. B. J. van Ruijven, D. P. van Vuuren, W. Boskaljon, M. L. Neelis, D. Saygin, M. K. Patel, Long-term model-based projections of energy use and CO2 emissions from the global steel and cement industries. Resour. Conserv. Recycling 112, 15-36 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.04.016 · DOI · Paper page
  35. L. J. Sonter, D. J. Barrett, C. J. Moran, B. S. Soares-Filho, Carbon emissions due to deforestation for the production of charcoal used in Brazil's steel industry. Nat. Clim. Chang. 5, 359-363 (2015). doi:10.1038/nclimate2515 · DOI
  36. M.-G. Piketty, M. Wichert, A. Fallot, L. Aimola, Assessing land availability to produce biomass for energy: The case of Brazilian charcoal for steel making. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 180-190 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.06.002 · DOI
  37. T. Kuramochi, A. Ramírez, W. Turkenburg, A. Faaij, Comparative assessment of CO2 capture technologies for carbon-intensive industrial processes. Pror. Energy Combust. Sci. 38, 87-112 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001 · DOI
  38. M. C. Romano, R. Anantharaman, A. Arasto, D. C. Ozcan, H. Ahn, J. W. Dijkstra, M. Carbo, D. Boavida, Application of advanced technologies for CO2 capture from industrial sources. Energy Procedia 37, 7176-7185 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.655 · DOI
  39. C. C. Dean, D. Dugwell, P. S. Fennell, Investigation into potential synergy between power generation, cement manufacture and CO2 abatement using the calcium looping cycle. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 2050-2053 (2011). doi:10.1039/c1ee01282g · DOI
  40. F. Xi, S. J. Davis, P. Ciais, D. Crawford-Brown, D. Guan, C. Pade, T. Shi, M. Syddall, J. Lv, L. Ji, L. Bing, J. Wang, W. Wei, K.-H. Yang, B. Lagerblad, I. Galan, C. Andrade, Y. Zhang, Z. Liu, Substantial global carbon uptake by cement carbonation. Nat. Geosci. 9, 880-883 (2016). doi:10.1038/ngeo2840 · DOI · Paper page
  41. M. Jarre, M. Noussan, A. Poggio, Operational analysis of natural gas combined cycle CHP plants: Energy performance and pollutant emissions. Appl. Therm. Eng. 100, 304-314 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.02.040 · DOI
  42. Q. Wang, X. Chen, A. N. Jha, H. Rogers, Natural gas from shale formation -The evolution, evidences and challenges of shale gas revolution in United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 30, 1-28 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.065 · DOI
  43. M. R. Shaner, S. J. Davis, N. S. Lewis, K. Caldeira, Geophysical constraints on the reliability of solar and wind power in the United States. Energy Environ. Sci. 11, 914-925 (2018). doi:10.1039/C7EE03029K · DOI · Paper page
  44. A. E. MacDonald, C. T. M. Clack, A. Alexander, A. Dunbar, J. Wilczak, Y. Xie, Future cost- competitive electricity systems and their impact on US CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 6, 526-531 (2016). doi:10.1038/nclimate2921 · DOI
  45. L. Hirth, J. C. Steckel, The role of capital costs in decarbonizing the electricity sector. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 114010 (2016). doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/11/114010 · DOI
  46. E. Mechleri, P. S. Fennell, N. Mac Dowell, Optimisation and evaluation of flexible operation strategies for coal-and gas-CCS power stations with a multi-period design approach. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 59, 24-39 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.09.018 · DOI
  47. R. Ponciroli, Y. Wang, Z. Zhou, A. Botterud, J. Jenkins, R. B. Vilim, F. Ganda, Profitability evaluation of load-following nuclear units with physics-induced operational constraints. Nucl. Technol. 200, 189-207 (2017). doi:10.1080/00295450.2017.1388668 · DOI
  48. J. D. Jenkins, Z. Zhou, R. Ponciroli, R. B. Vilim, F. Ganda, F. de Sisternes, A. Botterud, The benefits of nuclear flexibility in power system operations with renewable energy. Appl. Energy 222, 872-884 (2018). doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.002 · DOI
  49. J. R. Lovering, A. Yip, T. Nordhaus, Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors. Energy Policy 91, 371-382 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.011 · DOI · Paper page
  50. A. Grubler, The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing. Energy Policy 38, 5174-5188 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.003 · DOI · Paper page
  51. J. Koomey, N. E. Hultman, A reactor-level analysis of busbar costs for US nuclear plants, 1970-2005. Energy Policy 35, 5630-5642 (2007). doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2007.06.005 · DOI
  52. W. A. Braff, J. M. Mueller, J. E. Trancik, Value of storage technologies for wind and solar energy. Nat. Clim. Chang. 6, 964-969 (2016). doi:10.1038/nclimate3045 · DOI
  53. N. Kittner, F. Lill, D. Kammen, Energy storage deployment and innovation for the clean energy transition. Nat. Energy 2, 17125 (2017). doi:10.1038/nenergy.2017.125 · DOI
  54. Y. Wang, D. Y. C. Leung, J. Xuan, H. Wang, A review on unitized regenerative fuel cell technologies, part A: Unitized regenerative proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 65, 961-977 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.046 · DOI
  55. D. McVay, J. Brouwer, F. Ghigliazza, Critical evaluation of dynamic reversible chemical energy storage with high temperature electrolysis. Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Advanced Ceramics and Composites 38, 47-53 (2018).
  56. R. E. Ciez, J. F. Whitacre, The cost of lithium is unlikely to upend the price of Li-ion storage systems. J. Power Sources 320, 310-313 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.04.073 · DOI
  57. Z. Li, M. S. Pan, L. Su, P.-C. Tsai, A. F. Badel, J. M. Valle, S. L. Eiler, K. Xiang, F. R. Brushett, Y.-M. Chiang, Air-breathing aqueous sulfur flow battery for ultralow cost electrical storage. Joule 1, 306-327 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.joule.2017.08.007 · DOI
  58. C. Quinn, D. Zimmerle, T. H. Bradley, The effect of communication architecture on the availability, reliability, and economics of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle-to-grid ancillary services. J. Power Sources 195, 1500-1509 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.08.075 · DOI
  59. J. I. Pérez-Díaz, M. Chazarra, J. García-González, G. Cavazzini, A. Stoppato, Trends and challenges in the operation of pumped-storage hydropower plants. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 44, 767-784 (2015). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.029 · DOI
  60. A. B. Gallo, J. R. Simões-Moreira, H. K. M. Costa, M. M. Santos, E. Moutinho dos Santos, Energy storage in the energy transition context: A technology review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 65, 800-822 (2016). doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.028 · DOI
  61. T. Letcher, Storing Energy with Special Reference to Renewable Energy Sources (Elsevier, 2016).
  62. A. Abedin, M. Rosen, A critical review of thermochemical energy storage systems. Open Renew. Ener. J. 4, 42-46 (2010). doi:10.2174/1876387101004010042 · DOI
  63. L. Clarke et al., in Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the IPCC 5th Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
  64. D. P. van Vuuren, S. Deetman, J. van Vliet, M. van den Berg, B. J. van Ruijven, B. Koelbl, The role of negative CO2 emissions for reaching 2°C-Insights from integrated assessment modelling. Clim. Change 118, 15-27 (2013). doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0680-5 · DOI
  65. E. Kriegler, J. P. Weyant, G. J. Blanford, V. Krey, L. Clarke, J. Edmonds, A. Fawcett, G. Luderer, K. Riahi, R. Richels, S. K. Rose, M. Tavoni, D. P. van Vuuren, The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: Overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies. Clim. Change 123, 353-367 (2014). doi:10.1007/s10584-013-0953-7 · DOI
  66. C. Azar, K. Lindgren, M. Obersteiner, K. Riahi, D. P. van Vuuren, K. M. G. J. den Elzen, K. Möllersten, E. D. Larson, The feasibility of low CO2 concentration targets and the role of bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Clim. Change 100, 195-202 (2010). doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9832-7 · DOI
  67. J. M. D. MacElroy, Closing the carbon cycle through rational use of carbon-based fuels. Ambio 45 (Suppl 1), S5-S14 (2016). doi:10.1007/s13280-015-0728-7 Medline · DOI
  68. H. de Coninck, S. M. Benson, Carbon dioxide capture and storage: Issues and prospects. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 39, 243-270 (2014). doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-032112- 095222 100. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Davis, S. J., Lewis, N. S., Shaner, M., Aggarwal, S., Arent, D., Azevedo, I. L., Benson, S. M., Bradley, T., Brouwer, J., Chiang, Y.-M., Clack, C. T. M., Cohen, A., Doig, S., Edmonds, J., Fennell, P., Field, C. B., Hannegan, B., Hodge, B.-M., Hoffert, M. I., Ingersoll, E., Jaramillo, P., Lackner, K. S., Mach, K. J., Mastrandrea, M., Ogden, J., Peterson, P. F., Sanchez, D. L., Sperling, D., Stagner, J., Trancik, J. E., Yang, C.-J., & Caldeira, K.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • Carnegie Institution for Science (US)
  • Energy Innovation, San Francisco, CA, USA.
  • National Laboratory of the Rockies (US)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Colorado State University (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Vibrant Clean Energy, Boulder, CO, USA.
  • Clean Air Task Force (US)
  • Rocky Mountain Institute (US)
  • Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Glens Falls Hospital (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Lucid Strategy, Cambridge, MA, USA.
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Santa Fe Institute (US)
  • Independent researcher.
Corresponding author
  • Davis, Steven J.
  • Lewis, Nathan S.
  • Caldeira, Ken
ORCID
Venue
Science
Publisher
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Published
2018-06-29
Volume
360
Issue
6396
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
DOI
10.1126/science.aas9793
OpenAlex
W2811133697
Cited by
2,391
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 336 · 2025: 390 · 2024: 401 · 2023: 343 · 2022: 329 · 2021: 284 · 2020: 196 · 2019: 98 · 2018: 14
FWCI
8.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (EAR1639318)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research
  • Heising-Simons Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Integrated Energy Systems Optimization
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Energy Engineering and Power Technology › Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems
Keywords
net-zero emissions, energy decarbonization, CO2 emissions, climate change mitigation, energy integration, aviation emissions, long-distance transport, electricity supply reliability, industrial decarbonization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review