View source for Climate change mitigation

{{Short description|Actions to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions to limit climate change}}
{{About|reducing greenhouse gas emissions or removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere|other topics|Solar radiation modification|and|Climate movement|and|Climate change adaptation}}
{{Use British English|date=May 2025}}
{{Multiple image
| perrow            = 2
| total_width       = 400
| image1            = Westmill Solar 2.jpg
| alt1              = Aerial view of a solar farm with part of a wind farm in the background
| image2            = Tramway de Dijon DSC 0244.JPG
| alt2              = public transport
| image3            = Haiti reforestation nursery.jpg
| alt3              = reforestation
| image4            = Plant-Based Dishes, Raw Food (29103285347).jpg
| alt4              = Plant-based dishes
| footer            = Various aspects of climate change mitigation: [[Renewable energy]] ([[solar power|solar]] and [[wind power]]) in England, electrified [[public transport in France]], a [[reforestation]] project in [[Haiti]] to [[carbon dioxide removal|remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere]], and an example of a [[plant-based diet|plant-based meal]]
}}

'''Climate change mitigation''' (or '''decarbonisation''') is action to limit the [[greenhouse gases]] in the atmosphere that cause [[climate change]]. Climate change mitigation actions include [[energy conservation|conserving energy]] and [[Fossil fuel phase-out|replacing fossil fuels]] with [[sustainable energy|clean energy sources]]. Secondary mitigation strategies include changes to land use and [[carbon sequestration|removing carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>)]] from the atmosphere.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Fawzy |first1=Samer |last2=Osman |first2=Ahmed I. |last3=Doran |first3=John |last4=Rooney |first4=David W. |title=Strategies for mitigation of climate change: a review |journal=Environmental Chemistry Letters |date=2020 |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=2069–2094 |doi=10.1007/s10311-020-01059-w |doi-access=free|bibcode=2020EnvCL..18.2069F }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Abbass |first1=Kashif |last2=Qasim |first2=Muhammad Zeeshan |last3=Song |first3=Huaming |last4=Murshed |first4=Muntasir |last5=Mahmood |first5=Haider |last6=Younis |first6=Ijaz |title=A review of the global climate change impacts, adaptation, and sustainable mitigation measures |journal=Environmental Science and Pollution Research |date=2022 |volume=29 |issue=28 |pages=42539–42559 |doi=10.1007/s11356-022-19718-6|pmid=35378646 |pmc=8978769 |bibcode=2022ESPR...2942539A }}</ref> Current climate change mitigation policies are insufficient as they would still result in global warming of about 2.7&nbsp;°C by 2100,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |author1-link=Hannah Ritchie |last2=Roser |first2=Max |author2-link=Max Roser |last3=Rosado |first3=Pablo |date=11 May 2020 |title=CO<sub>2</sub> and Greenhouse Gas Emissions |url=https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions#future-emissions |journal=Our World in Data |access-date=27 August 2022}}</ref> significantly above the 2015 [[Paris Agreement]]'s<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogelj |first1=J. |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_High_Res.pdf |title=Global Warming of 1.5&nbsp;°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5&nbsp;°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty |last2=Shindell |first2=D. |last3=Jiang |first3=K. |last4=Fifta |first4=S. |last5=Forster |first5=P. |last6=Ginzburg |first6=V. |last7=Handa |first7=C. |last8=Kheshgi |first8=H. |last9=Kobayashi |first9=S. |year=2018 |chapter=Chapter 2: Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5&nbsp;°C in the Context of Sustainable Development |display-authors=4 |chapter-url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/05/SR15_Chapter2_High_Res.pdf |first10=E. |last10=Kriegler |first11=L. |last11=Mundaca |first12=R. |last12=Séférian |first13=M. V. |last13=Vilariño}}</ref> goal of limiting global warming to below 2&nbsp;°C.<ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite news |last1=Harvey |first1=Fiona |author-link=Fiona Harvey |date=26 November 2019 |title=UN calls for push to cut greenhouse gas levels to avoid climate chaos |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/26/united-nations-global-effort-cut-emissions-stop-climate-chaos-2030 |access-date=27 November 2019 |agency=The Guardian}}</ref><ref name="United Nations">{{cite web |title=Cut Global Emissions by 7.6 Percent Every Year for Next Decade to Meet 1.5°C Paris Target – UN Report |url=https://unfccc.int/news/cut-global-emissions-by-76-percent-every-year-for-next-decade-to-meet-15degc-paris-target-un-report |access-date=27 November 2019 |website=United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change |publisher=United Nations}}</ref>  

[[Solar energy]] and [[wind power]] can replace fossil fuels at the lowest cost compared to other [[renewable energy]] options.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_SPM.pdf Summary for policy makers] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref> The availability of sunshine and wind is variable and can require [[electrical grid]] upgrades, such as using [[super grid|long-distance electricity transmission]] to group a range of power sources.<ref name="Ram-2019">Ram M., Bogdanov D., Aghahosseini A., Gulagi A., Oyewo A.S., Child M., Caldera U., Sadovskaia K., Farfan J., Barbosa LSNS., Fasihi M., Khalili S., Dalheimer B., Gruber G., Traber T., De Caluwe F., Fell H.-J., Breyer C. [http://energywatchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/EWG_LUT_100RE_All_Sectors_Global_Report_2019.pdf Global Energy System based on 100% Renewable Energy – Power, Heat, Transport and Desalination Sectors] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210401183622/http://energywatchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/EWG_LUT_100RE_All_Sectors_Global_Report_2019.pdf |date=2021-04-01 }}. Study by Lappeenranta University of Technology and Energy Watch Group, Lappeenranta, Berlin, March 2019.</ref> [[Energy storage]] can also be used to even out power output, and [[Energy demand management|demand management]] can limit power use when power generation is low. Cleanly generated [[Electrification|electricity can usually replace fossil fuels]] for powering transportation, heating buildings, and running industrial processes.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=van Heerden |first1=Rik |last2=Edelenbosch |first2=Oreane Y. |last3=Daioglou |first3=Vassilis |last4=Le Gallic |first4=Thomas |last5=Baptista |first5=Luiz Bernardo |last6=Di Bella |first6=Alice |last7=Colelli |first7=Francesco Pietro |last8=Emmerling |first8=Johannes |last9=Fragkos |first9=Panagiotis |last10=Hasse |first10=Robin |last11=Hoppe |first11=Johanna |last12=Kishimoto |first12=Paul |last13=Leblanc |first13=Florian |last14=Lefèvre |first14=Julien |last15=Luderer |first15=Gunnar |date=2025 |title=Demand-side strategies enable rapid and deep cuts in buildings and transport emissions to 2050 |journal=Nature Energy |language=en |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=380–394 |doi=10.1038/s41560-025-01703-1 |bibcode=2025NatEn..10..380V |issn=2058-7546|doi-access=free }}</ref> Certain processes are more difficult to decarbonise, such as [[Environmental effects of aviation|air travel]] and [[Cement|cement production]]. [[Carbon capture and storage]] (CCS) can be an option to reduce net emissions in these circumstances, although fossil fuel power plants with CCS technology is currently a high-cost climate change mitigation strategy.<ref name="IEA-2022">{{Cite web |title=Cement – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/cement |access-date=24 November 2022 |website=IEA |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{cite report |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter04.pdf |title=Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change |year=2022 |publisher=Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |quote=Transformative changes for the near term include rapid decarbonisation of the electricity sector and low‑carbon electrification of buildings, industry and transport. |access-date=3 May 2025 |chapter= |section=4.2}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Nadel |first=Steven |title=Electrification in the Transportation, Buildings, and Industrial Sectors: A Review of Opportunities, Barriers, and Policies|journal=Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports |year=2019 |volume=6 |issue=4 |pages=158–168 |doi=10.1007/s40518-019-00138-z|bibcode=2019CSRER...6..158N }}</ref>

Human land use changes such as [[Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture|agriculture]] and deforestation cause about 1/4th of climate change. These changes impact how much {{CO2}} is absorbed by plant matter and how much organic matter decays or burns to release {{CO2}}. These changes are part of the fast [[carbon cycle]], whereas fossil fuels release {{CO2}} that was buried underground as part of the slow carbon cycle. [[Methane]] is a short-lived greenhouse gas that is produced by decaying organic matter and livestock, as well as fossil fuel extraction. Land use changes can also impact precipitation patterns and the [[Albedo|reflectivity of the surface of the Earth]]. It is possible to cut emissions from agriculture by reducing [[Food loss and waste|food waste]], switching to a more [[plant-based diet]] (also referred to as [[low-carbon diet]]), and by improving farming processes.<ref name="UNEP-2022" />

Various policies can encourage climate change mitigation. [[carbon price|Carbon pricing]] systems have been set up that either [[carbon tax|tax {{CO2}} emissions]] or [[carbon emission trading|cap total emissions and trade emission credits]]. [[Fossil fuel subsidies]] can be eliminated in favour of clean [[energy subsidy|energy subsidies]], and incentives offered for installing energy efficiency measures or switching to electric power sources.<ref>{{cite web |date=November 2022 |title=Climate Change Performance Index |url=http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/CCPI%202023.pdf |access-date=16 November 2022}}</ref> Another issue is overcoming environmental objections when constructing new clean energy sources and making grid modifications. Limiting climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions or removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere could be supplemented by climate technologies such as [[solar radiation management]] (or solar geoengineering). Complementary [[climate change action]]s, including [[climate activism]], have a focus on political and cultural aspects.

{{TOC limit|5}}

== Definitions and scope ==
{{Climate change mitigation}}
Climate change mitigation aims to sustain [[ecosystem]]s to maintain [[human civilisation]]. This requires drastic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 1">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_01.pdf Chapter 1: Introduction and Framing] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp||page=1–64}} The [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] (IPCC) defines ''mitigation'' (of climate change) as "a human intervention to reduce [[Greenhouse gas emissions|emissions]] or enhance the [[Carbon sink|sinks]] of [[greenhouse gas]]es".<ref name="IPCC AR6 WGI Glossary"/>{{rp|2239}}

It is possible to approach various mitigation measures in parallel. This is because there is no single pathway to limit global warming to 1.5 or 2&nbsp;°C.<ref name="Rogelj-2018" />{{rp|109}} There are four types of measures:
# [[Sustainable energy]] and [[sustainable transport]]
# [[Energy conservation]], including [[efficient energy use]]
# [[Sustainable agriculture]] and [[green industrial policy]]
# Enhancing [[carbon sink]]s and [[carbon dioxide removal]] (CDR), including [[carbon sequestration]]
The IPCC defined carbon dioxide removal as "Anthropogenic activities removing carbon dioxide ({{CO2}}) from the atmosphere and durably storing it in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products. It includes existing and potential anthropogenic enhancement of biological or geochemical {{CO2}} sinks and [[Direct air carbon capture and storage|direct air carbon dioxide capture and storage]] (DACCS) but excludes natural {{CO2}} uptake not directly caused by human activities."<ref name="IPCC AR6 WGI Glossary" />

== Emission trends and pledges ==
{{Main|Greenhouse gas emissions}}

{{Pie chart|thumb=right|caption=''GHG emissions 2020 by gas type''<br />without land-use change<br />using 100 year GWP<br />Total: 49.8 Gt{{CO2}}e<ref name="Olivier 2022">Olivier J.G.J. (2022), [https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/pbl-2022-trends-in-global-co2-and_total-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2021-summary-report_4758.pdf Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions: 2021 summary report] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230308142245/https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/pbl-2022-trends-in-global-co2-and_total-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2021-summary-report_4758.pdf |date=2023-03-08 }}. PBL Netherlands, Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague.</ref>{{rp|5}}|label1={{CO2}} mostly by fossil fuel|value1=72|color1=black|label2=CH<sub>4</sub> methane|color2=brown|value2=19|label3={{chem|N|2|O}} nitrous oxide|value3=6|color3=grey|label4=Fluorinated gases|value4=3|color4=blue}}

{{Pie chart|thumb=right|caption={{CO2}} emissions by fuel type<ref name="Global Carbon Budget 2020">{{Cite journal |last1=Friedlingstein |first1=Pierre |last2=O'Sullivan |first2=Michael |last3=Jones |first3=Matthew W. |last4=Andrew |first4=Robbie M. |last5=Hauck |first5=Judith |last6=Olsen |first6=Are |last7=Peters |first7=Glen P. |last8=Peters |first8=Wouter |last9=Pongratz |first9=Julia |last10=Sitch |first10=Stephen |last11=Le Quéré |first11=Corinne |last12=Canadell |first12=Josep G. |last13=Ciais |first13=Philippe |last14=Jackson |first14=Robert B. |last15=Alin |first15=Simone |date=2020 |title=Global Carbon Budget 2020 |url=https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/12/3269/2020/ |journal=Earth System Science Data |language=en |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=3269–3340 |doi=10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020 |bibcode=2020ESSD...12.3269F |issn=1866-3516|doi-access=free |hdl=10871/126892 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>|label1=coal|value1=39|color1=#602200|label2=oil|value2=34|color2=#333333|label3=gas|value3=21|color3=#888800|label4=cement|value4=4|color4=#888888|label5=others|value5=1.5|color5=#000050}}

Greenhouse gas emissions from human activities strengthen the [[greenhouse effect]]. This contributes to [[climate change]]. Most is [[carbon dioxide]] from burning [[fossil fuel]]s: coal, oil, and natural gas. Human-caused emissions have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 50% over pre-industrial levels. Emissions in the 2010s averaged a record 56 billion tons (Gt) a year.<ref name="ipccar6wg3ch2">{{cite journal |year=2022 |title=Chapter 2: Emissions trends and drivers |url=https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg3/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FinalDraft_Chapter02.pdf |journal=Ipcc_Ar6_Wgiii |access-date=2022-11-21 |archive-date=2022-04-12 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220412163517/https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg3/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FinalDraft_Chapter02.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> In 2016, energy for electricity, heat and transport was responsible for 73.2% of GHG emissions. Direct industrial processes accounted for 5.2%, waste for 3.2% and agriculture, forestry and land use for 18.4%.<ref name="OWiD-2022">{{Cite web |title=Sector by sector: where do global greenhouse gas emissions come from? |url=https://ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector |access-date=16 November 2022 |website=Our World in Data|date=18 September 2020 |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah }}</ref>

Electricity generation and transport are major emitters. The largest single source is [[coal-fired power station]]s with 20% of greenhouse gas emissions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=It's critical to tackle coal emissions |url=https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/its-critical-tackle-coal-emissions |access-date=25 November 2022 |website=blogs.worldbank.org |date=8 October 2021 |language=en |quote=Coal power plants produce a fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions – more than any other single source.}}</ref> [[Deforestation]] and other changes in land use also emit carbon dioxide and methane. The largest sources of anthropogenic methane emissions are [[Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture|agriculture]], and [[gas venting]] and [[fugitive emissions]] from the fossil-fuel industry. The largest agricultural methane source is livestock. [[Agricultural soil science|Agricultural soils]] emit [[nitrous oxide]], partly due to fertilizers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |last2=Roser |first2=Max |last3=Rosado |first3=Pablo |date=11 May 2020 |title=CO<sub>2</sub> and Greenhouse Gas Emissions |url=https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions |journal=Our World in Data}}</ref> There is now a political solution to the problem of fluorinated gases from [[refrigerant]]s. This is because many countries have ratified the [[Kigali Amendment]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=27 October 2022 |title=Biden signs international climate deal on refrigerants |url=https://apnews.com/article/biden-business-china-rwanda-canada-922cd2519e517e1454e020a06d3cf881 |access-date=26 November 2022 |website=AP NEWS |language=en}}</ref>

[[Carbon dioxide]] ({{CO2}}) is the dominant emitted greenhouse gas. [[Methane]] ({{CH4}}) emissions almost have the same short-term impact.<ref name="ch4-vs-co2">{{cite web |date=30 September 2014 |title=Methane vs. Carbon Dioxide: A Greenhouse Gas Showdown |url=http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-carbon-dioxide-a-greenhouse-gas-showdown/ |access-date=13 February 2020 |website=One Green Planet}}</ref> [[Nitrous oxide]] (N<sub>2</sub>O) and [[fluorinated gases]] (F-Gases) play a minor role. Livestock and manure produce 5.8% of all greenhouse gas emissions.<ref name="OWiD-2022" /> But this depends on the time frame used to calculate the [[global warming potential]] of the respective gas.<ref name="ReferenceB">{{Cite journal |last1=Pérez-Domínguez |first1=Ignacio |last2=del Prado |first2=Agustin |last3=Mittenzwei |first3=Klaus |last4=Hristov |first4=Jordan |last5=Frank |first5=Stefan |last6=Tabeau |first6=Andrzej |last7=Witzke |first7=Peter |last8=Havlik |first8=Petr |last9=van Meijl |first9=Hans |last10=Lynch |first10=John |last11=Stehfest |first11=Elke |date=December 2021 |title=Short- and long-term warming effects of methane may affect the cost-effectiveness of mitigation policies and benefits of low-meat diets |journal=Nature Food |language=en |volume=2 |issue=12 |pages=970–980 |doi=10.1038/s43016-021-00385-8 |issn=2662-1355 |pmc=7612339 |pmid=35146439}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author=Franziska Funke |author2=Linus Mattauch |author3=Inge van den Bijgaart |author4=H. Charles J. Godfray |author5=Cameron Hepburn |author6=David Klenert |author7=Marco Springmann |author8=Nicolas Treich |date=19 July 2022 |title=Toward Optimal Meat Pricing: Is It Time to Tax Meat Consumption? |journal=Review of Environmental Economics and Policy |language=en |volume=16 |issue=2 |page=000 |doi=10.1086/721078 |quote=animal-based agriculture and feed crop production account for approximately 83 percent of agricultural land globally and are responsible for approximately 67 percent of deforestation (Poore and Nemecek 2018). This makes livestock farming the single largest driver of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, nutrient pollution, and ecosystem loss in the agricultural sector. A failure to mitigate GHG emissions from the food system, especially animal-based agriculture, could prevent the world from meeting the climate objective of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, as set forth in the Paris Climate Agreement, and complicate the path to limiting climate change to well below 2°C of warming (Clark et al. 2020). |s2cid=250721559|doi-access=free |bibcode=2022RvEEP..16..219F }}</ref>

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are measured in [[Global warming potential#Carbon dioxide equivalent|{{CO2}} equivalents]]. Scientists determine their {{CO2}} equivalents from their [[global warming potential]] (GWP). This depends on their lifetime in the atmosphere. There are widely used [[Carbon accounting|greenhouse gas accountin]]g methods that convert volumes of methane, nitrous oxide and other greenhouse gases to [[Global warming potential#Carbon dioxide equivalent|carbon dioxide equivalents]]. Estimates largely depend on the ability of oceans and land sinks to absorb these gases. [[Short-lived climate pollutants]] (SLCPs) persist in the atmosphere for a period ranging from days to 15 years. Carbon dioxide can remain in the atmosphere for millennia.<ref name="IGSD-2013">{{Cite web |last=IGSD |date=2013 |title=Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (SLCPs) |url=https://www.igsd.org/short-lived-climate-pollutants-slcps/ |access-date=29 November 2019 |website=Institute of Governance and Sustainable Development (IGSD) }}</ref> Short-lived climate pollutants include [[methane]], [[Hydrofluorocarbon|hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)]], [[tropospheric ozone]] and [[black carbon]].

Scientists increasingly use satellites to locate and measure greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation. Earlier, scientists largely relied on or calculated estimates of greenhouse gas emissions and governments' self-reported data.<ref>{{cite news |title=How satellites could help hold countries to emissions promises made at COP26 summit |newspaper=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/09/cop26-satellites-emissions/ |access-date=1 December 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Satellites offer new ways to study ecosystems—and maybe even save them |url=https://www.science.org/content/article/satellites-offer-new-ways-study-ecosystems-maybe-even-save-them |access-date=21 December 2021 |website=www.science.org |language=en}}</ref>

=== Needed emissions cuts ===
[[File:Greenhouse gas emission scenarios 01.svg|thumb|upright=1.35|right|Global greenhouse gas emission scenarios, based on policies and pledges as of 11/21]]
The annual "Emissions Gap Report" by [[United Nations Environment Programme|UNEP]] stated in 2022 that it was necessary to almost halve emissions. "To get on track for limiting global warming to 1.5°C, global annual GHG emissions must be reduced by 45 per cent compared with emissions projections under policies currently in place in just eight years, and they must continue to decline rapidly after 2030, to avoid exhausting the limited remaining atmospheric [[carbon budget]]."<ref name="UNEP-2022">United Nations Environment Programme (2022). [https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2022 Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window — Climate crisis calls for rapid transformation of societies]. Nairobi.</ref>{{rp|xvi}} The report commented that the world should focus on broad-based economy-wide transformations and not incremental change.<ref name="UNEP-2022" />{{rp|xvi}}

In 2022, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its [[IPCC Sixth Assessment Report|Sixth Assessment Report]] on climate change. It warned that greenhouse gas emissions must peak before 2025 at the latest and decline 43% by 2030 to have a good chance of limiting global warming to 1.5&nbsp;°C (2.7&nbsp;°F).<ref>{{cite web |date=4 April 2022 |title=It's over for fossil fuels: IPCC spells out what's needed to avert climate disaster |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/04/its-over-for-fossil-fuels-ipcc-spells-out-whats-needed-to-avert-climate-disaster |access-date=4 April 2022 |website=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=4 April 2022 |title=The evidence is clear: the time for action is now. We can halve emissions by 2030. |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/2022/04/04/ipcc-ar6-wgiii-pressrelease/ |access-date=4 April 2022 |website=IPCC}}</ref> Or in the words of Secretary-General of the United Nations [[António Guterres]]: "Main emitters must drastically cut emissions starting this year".<ref>{{cite web |title=Ambitious Action Key to Resolving Triple Planetary Crisis of Climate Disruption, Nature Loss, Pollution, Secretary-General Says in Message for International Mother Earth Day {{!}} Meetings Coverage and Press Releases |url=https://www.un.org/press/en/2022/sgsm21243.doc.htm |access-date=10 June 2022 |website=www.un.org}}</ref>

A 2023 synthesis by leading climate scientists highlighted ten critical areas in climate science with significant policy implications. These include the near inevitability of temporarily exceeding the 1.5&nbsp;°C warming limit, the urgent need for a rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out, challenges in scaling carbon dioxide removal technologies, uncertainties regarding the future contribution of natural carbon sinks, and the interconnected crises of biodiversity loss and climate change. These insights underscore the necessity for immediate and comprehensive mitigation strategies to address the multifaceted challenges of climate change.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Ten new insights in climate science 2023 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/global-sustainability/article/ten-new-insights-in-climate-science-2023/F7F1C10C07FD241BFE30ACC4BA555A56 |journal=Global Sustainability |date=2023 |doi=10.1017/sus.2023.25 |access-date=6 May 2025 |last1=Bustamante |first1=Mercedes |last2=Roy |first2=Joyashree |last3=Ospina |first3=Daniel |last4=Achakulwisut |first4=Ploy |last5=Aggarwal |first5=Anubha |last6=Bastos |first6=Ana |last7=Broadgate |first7=Wendy |last8=Canadell |first8=Josep G. |last9=Carr |first9=Edward R. |last10=Chen |first10=Deliang |last11=Cleugh |first11=Helen A. |last12=Ebi |first12=Kristie L. |last13=Edwards |first13=Clea |last14=Farbotko |first14=Carol |last15=Fernández-Martínez |first15=Marcos |last16=Frölicher |first16=Thomas L. |last17=Fuss |first17=Sabine |last18=Geden |first18=Oliver |last19=Gruber |first19=Nicolas |last20=Harrington |first20=Luke J. |last21=Hauck |first21=Judith |last22=Hausfather |first22=Zeke |last23=Hebden |first23=Sophie |last24=Hebinck |first24=Aniek |last25=Huq |first25=Saleemul |last26=Huss |first26=Matthias |last27=Jamero |first27=M. Laurice P. |last28=Juhola |first28=Sirkku |last29=Kumarasinghe |first29=Nilushi |last30=Lwasa |first30=Shuaib |volume=7 |bibcode=2023GlSus...7E..19B |display-authors=1 |hdl=20.500.11850/648183 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

=== Pledges ===
{{Further|Climate target}}
[[Climate Action Tracker]] described the situation on 9 November 2021 as follows. The global temperature will rise by 2.7&nbsp;°C by the end of the century with current policies and by 2.9&nbsp;°C with nationally adopted policies. The temperature will rise by 2.4&nbsp;°C if countries only implement the pledges for 2030. The rise would be 2.1&nbsp;°C with the achievement of the long-term targets too. Full achievement of all announced targets would mean the rise in global temperature will peak at 1.9&nbsp;°C and go down to 1.8&nbsp;°C by the year 2100.<ref>{{cite web |title=Glasgow's 2030 credibility gap: net zero's lip service to climate action |url=https://climateactiontracker.org/publications/glasgows-2030-credibility-gap-net-zeros-lip-service-to-climate-action/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211109140537/https://climateactiontracker.org/publications/glasgows-2030-credibility-gap-net-zeros-lip-service-to-climate-action/ |archive-date=9 November 2021 |access-date=9 November 2021 |website=climateactiontracker.org |language=en}}</ref> Experts gather information about climate pledges in the [[Global Climate Action Portal - Nazca]]. The scientific community is checking their fulfilment.<ref>{{cite web |title=Global Data Community Commits to Track Climate Action |url=https://unfccc.int/news/global-data-community-commits-to-track-climate-action |access-date=15 December 2019 |website=UNFCCC}}</ref>

There has not been a definitive or detailed evaluation of most goals set for 2020. But it appears the world failed to meet most or all international goals set for that year.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Nations |first1=United |title=Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020 |language=en |work=United Nations |url=https://www.un.org/en/desa/sustainable-development-goals-report-2020 |access-date=20 December 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=15 September 2020 |title=World fails to meet a single target to stop destruction of nature – UN report |language=en |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/15/every-global-target-to-stem-destruction-of-nature-by-2020-missed-un-report-aoe |access-date=20 December 2021}}</ref>

One update came during the [[2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference]] in Glasgow. The group of researchers running the Climate Action Tracker looked at countries responsible for 85% of greenhouse gas emissions. It found that only four countries or political entities—the EU, UK, Chile and Costa Rica—have published a detailed official policy{{nbhyph}}plan that describes the steps to realise 2030 mitigation targets. These four polities are responsible for 6% of global greenhouse gas emissions.<ref>{{cite web |title=Glasgow's 2030 credibility gap: net zero's lip service to climate action |url=https://climateactiontracker.org/publications/glasgows-2030-credibility-gap-net-zeros-lip-service-to-climate-action/ |access-date=9 November 2021 |website=climateactiontracker.org |language=en}}</ref>

In 2021 the US and EU launched the Global Methane Pledge to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030. The UK, Argentina, Indonesia, Italy and Mexico joined the initiative. Ghana and Iraq signalled interest in joining. A White House summary of the meeting noted those countries represent six of the top 15 methane emitters globally.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Mason |first1=Jeff |last2=Alper |first2=Alexandra |date=18 September 2021 |title=Biden asks world leaders to cut methane in climate fight |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/biden-convenes-world-leaders-discuss-climate-change-ahead-glasgow-summit-2021-09-17/ |access-date=8 October 2021}}</ref> Israel also joined the initiative.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Bassist |first1=Rina |date=6 October 2021 |title=At OECD, Israel joins global battle against climate change |agency=Al – Monitor |url=https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2021/10/oecd-israel-joins-global-battle-against-climate-change}}</ref>

== Low-carbon energy ==
{{main|Sustainable energy|Energy transition||}}

[[File:Global Energy Consumption.svg|thumb|upright=1.35|right|Coal, oil, and [[natural gas]] remain the primary global energy sources even as [[Renewable energy|renewables]] have begun rapidly increasing.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Friedlingstein |first1=Pierre |last2=Jones |first2=Matthew W. |last3=O'Sullivan |first3=Michael |last4=Andrew |first4=Robbie M. |last5=Hauck |first5=Judith |last6=Peters |first6=Glen P. |last7=Peters |first7=Wouter |last8=Pongratz |first8=Julia |last9=Sitch |first9=Stephen |last10=Le Quéré |first10=Corinne |last11=Bakker |first11=Dorothee C. E. |date=2019 |title=Global Carbon Budget 2019 |url=https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/11/1783/2019/ |url-status=live |journal=Earth System Science Data |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=1783–1838 |bibcode=2019ESSD...11.1783F |doi=10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019 |issn=1866-3508 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506142248/https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/11/1783/2019/ |archive-date=6 May 2021 |access-date=15 February 2021 |via= |doi-access=free|hdl=20.500.11850/385668 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>]]

The [[energy system]] includes the delivery and use of energy. It is the main emitter of carbon dioxide ({{CO2}}).<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 6" />{{rp|6-6}} Rapid and deep reductions in the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from the energy sector are necessary to limit global warming to well below 2&nbsp;°C.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 6" />{{rp|6-3}} IPCC recommendations include reducing fossil fuel consumption, increasing production from low- and zero carbon energy sources, and increasing use of electricity and alternative energy carriers.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 6" />{{rp|6-3}}

Nearly all scenarios and strategies involve a major increase in the use of renewable energy in combination with increased energy efficiency measures.<ref name="Teske-2019" />{{rp|xxiii}} It will be necessary to accelerate the deployment of [[renewable energy]] six-fold from 0.25% annual growth in 2015 to 1.5% to keep global warming under 2&nbsp;°C.<ref>{{cite web |title=Global Energy Transformation: A Roadmap to 2050 (2019 edition) |url=https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/Apr/IRENA_Global_Energy_Transformation_2019.pdf |access-date=29 January 2020 |publisher=[[International Renewable Energy Agency]]}}</ref>

[[File:2010- Power capacity by technology - Dec 2022 International Energy Agency.svg|thumb| Renewable energy sources, especially [[Photovoltaic system|solar photovoltaic]] and [[Wind power|wind]] power, are providing an increasing share of power capacity.<ref name="IEA_20221205">{{cite web |title=Share of cumulative power capacity by technology, 2010-2027 |url=https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/share-of-cumulative-power-capacity-by-technology-2010-2027 |website=IEA.org |publisher=International Energy Agency (IEA) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204170647/https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/share-of-cumulative-power-capacity-by-technology-2010-2027 |archive-date=4 February 2023 |date=5 December 2022 |url-status=live}} Source states "Fossil fuel capacity from IEA (2022), ''World Energy Outlook 2022''. IEA. Licence: CC BY 4.0."</ref>]]
The competitiveness of renewable energy is a key to a rapid deployment. In 2020, onshore wind and solar photovoltaics were the cheapest source for new bulk electricity generation in many regions.<ref name="Bloomberg">{{cite web |date=28 April 2020 |title=Scale-up of Solar and Wind Puts Existing Coal, Gas at Risk |url=https://about.bnef.com/blog/scale-up-of-solar-and-wind-puts-existing-coal-gas-at-risk |publisher=BloombergNEF}}</ref> Renewables may have higher storage costs but non-renewables may have higher clean-up costs.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Emilio |first=Maurizio Di Paolo |date=2022-09-15 |title=The Cost of Energy, Key to Sustainability |url=https://www.powerelectronicsnews.com/why-the-cost-of-energy-is-key-to-sustainability/ |access-date=2023-01-05 |website=Power Electronics News |language=en-US}}</ref> A [[carbon price]] can increase the competitiveness of renewable energy.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Liebensteiner |first1=Mario |last2=Naumann |first2=Fabian |date=2022-11-01 |title=Can carbon pricing counteract renewable energies' cannibalization problem? |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988322004741 |journal=Energy Economics |language=en |volume=115 |pages=106345 |doi=10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106345 |bibcode=2022EneEc.11506345L |s2cid=252958388 |issn=0140-9883}}</ref>

=== Solar and wind energy ===
{{main|Solar energy|Wind power}}

[[File:Andasol Guadix 4.jpg|thumb|right|The 150 MW [[Andasol solar power station]] is a commercial [[parabolic trough]] [[solar thermal]] power plant, located in [[Renewable energy in Spain|Spain]]. The Andasol plant uses tanks of molten salt to store solar energy so that it can continue generating electricity for 7.5 hours after the sun has stopped shining.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Saving for a rainy day |first=Edwin |last=Cartlidge |date=18 November 2011 |journal=Science |volume=334 |issue=6058 |pages=922–24|doi=10.1126/science.334.6058.922 |pmid=22096185 |bibcode=2011Sci...334..922C }}</ref>]]Wind and sun can provide large amounts of low-carbon energy at competitive production costs.<ref>{{Cite web |date=6 December 2022 |title=Renewable power's growth is being turbocharged as countries seek to strengthen energy security |url=https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-power-s-growth-is-being-turbocharged-as-countries-seek-to-strengthen-energy-security |access-date=8 December 2022 |website=IEA |language=en-GB |quote=Utility-scale solar PV and onshore wind are the cheapest options for new electricity generation in a significant majority of countries worldwide.}}</ref> The IPCC estimates that these two mitigation options have the largest potential to reduce emissions before 2030 at low cost.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13" />{{rp|43}}

Solar [[photovoltaics]] (PV) has become the cheapest way to generate electricity in many regions of the world.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Solar - Fuels & Technologies |url=https://www.iea.org/fuels-and-technologies/solar |access-date=22 December 2022 |website=IEA |language=en-GB |quote=utility-scale solar PV is the least costly option for new electricity generation in a significant majority of countries worldwide}}</ref> The growth of photovoltaics has been close to exponential. It has about doubled every three years since the 1990s.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Jaeger |first=Joel |date=20 September 2021 |title=Explaining the Exponential Growth of Renewable Energy |url=https://www.wri.org/insights/growth-renewable-energy-sector-explained |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Wanner |first1=Brent |title=Is exponential growth of solar PV the obvious conclusion? |date=6 February 2019 |url=https://www.iea.org/commentaries/is-exponential-growth-of-solar-pv-the-obvious-conclusion |publisher=IEA |access-date=30 December 2022}}</ref> A different technology is [[concentrated solar power]] (CSP). This uses mirrors or lenses to concentrate a large area of sunlight on to a receiver. With CSP, the energy can be stored for a few hours. This provides supply in the evening. [[Solar water heating]] doubled between 2010 and 2019.<ref>{{cite web |title=Renewables 2021 Global Status Report |url=https://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/GSR2021_Full_Report.pdf |publisher=REN21 |access-date=22 July 2021 |pages=137–138}}</ref>[[File:Shepherds Flat Wind Farm 2011.jpg|thumb |The [[Shepherds Flat Wind Farm]] is an 845 [[megawatt]] (MW) [[nameplate capacity]], wind farm in the US state of [[Oregon]]. Each turbine is a nameplate 2 or 2.5 MW electricity generator.]]
Regions in the higher northern and southern latitudes have the greatest potential for wind power.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://science.globalwindatlas.info/datasets.html|title=Global Wind Atlas|publisher=DTU Technical University of Denmark|access-date=28 March 2020|archive-date=24 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200224101415/http://science.globalwindatlas.info/datasets.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> Offshore [[wind farms]] are more expensive. But offshore units deliver more energy per installed capacity with less fluctuations.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Onshore vs offshore wind energy: what's the difference? {{!}} National Grid Group |url=https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/onshore-vs-offshore-wind-energy |access-date=9 December 2022 |website=www.nationalgrid.com |language=en}}</ref> In most regions, wind power generation is higher in the winter when PV output is low. For this reason, combinations of wind and solar power lead to better-balanced systems.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Nyenah |first1=Emmanuel |last2=Sterl |first2=Sebastian |last3=Thiery |first3=Wim |date=1 May 2022 |title=Pieces of a puzzle: solar-wind power synergies on seasonal and diurnal timescales tend to be excellent worldwide |journal=Environmental Research Communications |volume=4 |issue=5 |pages=055011 |doi=10.1088/2515-7620/ac71fb |bibcode=2022ERCom...4e5011N |issn=2515-7620 |s2cid=249227821|doi-access=free }}</ref>

=== Other renewables ===
[[File:ThreeGorgesDam-China2009.jpg|thumb |The 22,500 [[megawatt|MW]] [[nameplate capacity]] [[Three Gorges Dam]] in the [[People's Republic of China]], the largest hydroelectric power station in the world]]Other well-established renewable energy forms include hydropower, bioenergy and geothermal energy.
* [[Hydroelectricity]] is electricity generated by [[hydropower]] and plays a leading role in countries like Brazil, Norway and China.<ref name="BP">{{cite web |title=BP Statistical Review 2019 |url=https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2019-full-report.pdf |access-date=28 March 2020}}</ref> but there are geographical limits and environmental issues.<ref>{{cite news |date=5 November 2018 |title=Large hydropower dams not sustainable in the developing world |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46098118 |access-date=27 March 2020}}</ref> [[Tidal power]] can be used in coastal regions.
* [[Bioenergy]] can provide energy for electricity, heat and transport. Bioenergy, in particular [[biogas]], can provide [[Dispatchable generation|dispatchable electricity generation]].<ref>{{cite web|title=From baseload to peak|url=https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2015/IRENA_Baseload_to_Peak_2015.pdf|publisher=IRENA|access-date=27 March 2020}}</ref> While burning plant-derived [[biomass]] releases {{CO2}}, the plants withdraw {{CO2}} from the atmosphere while they grow. The technologies for producing, transporting and processing a fuel have a significant impact on the lifecycle emissions of the fuel.<ref>{{cite web|title=Biomass – Carbon sink or carbon sinner|url=https://fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/Biomass__carbon_sink_or_carbon_sinner_summary_report.pdf|publisher=UK environment agency|access-date=27 March 2020|archive-date=28 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200328150806/https://fcrn.org.uk/sites/default/files/Biomass__carbon_sink_or_carbon_sinner_summary_report.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> For example, aviation is starting to use renewable [[biofuel]]s.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Virgin Atlantic purchases 10 million gallons of SAF from Gevo |url=https://biofuels-news.com/news/virgin-atlantic-purchases-10-million-gallons-of-saf-from-gevo/ |access-date=22 December 2022 |website=Biofuels International Magazine |date=7 December 2022 |language=en-US}}</ref>
* [[Geothermal power]] is electrical power generated from [[geothermal energy]]. Geothermal electricity generation is currently used in 26 countries.<ref name="gea2010">Geothermal Energy Association. [http://www.geo-energy.org/pdf/reports/GEA_International_Market_Report_Final_May_2010.pdf Geothermal Energy: International Market Update] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170525165514/http://www.geo-energy.org/pdf/reports/GEA_International_Market_Report_Final_May_2010.pdf |date=2017-05-25 }} May 2010, p. 4-6.</ref><ref name="Bassam-2013">{{Cite book |last1=Bassam |first1=Nasir El |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uP4eGFt4c_AC&q=international+Geothermal+Association+10,715+megawatts&pg=PA187 |title=Distributed Renewable Energies for Off-Grid Communities: Strategies and Technologies Toward Achieving Sustainability in Energy Generation and Supply |last2=Maegaard |first2=Preben |last3=Schlichting |first3=Marcia |date=2013 |publisher=Newnes |isbn=978-0-12-397178-4 |pages=187 |language=en}}</ref> [[Geothermal heating]] is in use in 70 countries.<ref name="IPCC Annex II">Moomaw, W., P. Burgherr, G. Heath, M. Lenzen, J. Nyboer, A. Verbruggen, [http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/IPCC_SRREN_Annex_II.pdf 2011: Annex II: Methodology. In IPCC: Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (ref. page 10)]</ref>

=== Integrating variable renewable energy ===
{{Further|Variable renewable energy|energy storage}}

Wind and solar power production does not consistently match demand.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ruggles |first1=Tyler H. |last2=Caldeira |first2=Ken |date=1 January 2022 |title=Wind and solar generation may reduce the inter-annual variability of peak residual load in certain electricity systems |journal=Applied Energy |language=en |volume=305 |pages=117773 |doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117773 |issn=0306-2619 |s2cid=239113921|doi-access=free |bibcode=2022ApEn..30517773R }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=You've heard of water droughts. Could 'energy' droughts be next? |url=https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/04/220412161551.htm |access-date=8 December 2022 |website=ScienceDaily |language=en}}</ref> To deliver reliable electricity from [[variable renewable energy]] sources such as wind and solar, electrical power systems must be flexible.<ref>{{Cite book |author=[[United Nations Environment Programme]] |year=2019 |title=Emissions Gap Report 2019 |url=https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30797/EGR2019.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y |isbn=978-92-807-3766-0 |archive-date=7 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210507022320/https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30797/EGR2019.pdf?isAllowed=y&sequence=1 |url-status=live |page=47 |publisher=United Nations Environment Programme }}</ref> Most electrical grids were constructed for non-intermittent energy sources such as coal-fired power plants.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Introduction to System Integration of Renewables |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/introduction-to-system-integration-of-renewables |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200515213454/https://www.iea.org/reports/introduction-to-system-integration-of-renewables |archive-date=15 May 2020 |access-date=30 May 2020 |publisher=[[International Energy Agency|IEA]]}}</ref> The integration of larger amounts of solar and wind energy into the grid requires a change of the energy system; this is necessary to ensure that the supply of electricity matches demand.<ref name="Blanco-2018">{{Cite journal |last1=Blanco |first1=Herib |last2=Faaij |first2=André |date=2018 |title=A review at the role of storage in energy systems with a focus on Power to Gas and long-term storage |journal=[[Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews]] |volume=81 |pages=1049–1086 |doi=10.1016/j.rser.2017.07.062 |issn=1364-0321 |doi-access=free|bibcode=2018RSERv..81.1049B }}</ref>

There are various ways to make the electricity system more flexible. In many places, wind and solar generation are complementary on a daily and a seasonal scale. There is more wind during the night and in winter when solar energy production is low.<ref name="Blanco-2018" /> Linking different geographical regions through [[High-voltage direct current|long-distance transmission lines]] also makes it possible to reduce variability.<ref>{{Cite book |author=[[REN21]] |title=Renewables 2020: Global Status Report |publisher=REN21 Secretariat |url=https://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/gsr_2020_full_report_en.pdf |year=2020 |isbn=978-3-948393-00-7 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200923065621/https://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/gsr_2020_full_report_en.pdf |archive-date=23 September 2020 |url-status=live |page=177}}</ref> It is possible to shift energy demand in time. [[Energy demand management]] and the use of [[smart grids]] make it possible to match the times when variable energy production is highest.<ref name="Blanco-2018" /> [[Sector coupling]] can provide further flexibility. This involves coupling the electricity sector to the heat and mobility sector via [[power-to-heat]]-systems and electric vehicles.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bloess |first1=Andreas |last2=Schill |first2=Wolf-Peter |last3=Zerrahn |first3=Alexander |date=2018 |title=Power-to-heat for renewable energy integration: A review of technologies, modeling approaches, and flexibility potentials |journal=[[Applied Energy]] |volume=212 |pages=1611–1626 |doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.073 |s2cid=116132198|doi-access=free |bibcode=2018ApEn..212.1611B |hdl=10419/200120 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>[[File:1 MW 4 MWh Turner Energy Storage Project in Pullman, WA.jpg|alt=Photo with a set of white containers|thumb|Battery storage facility]]
Energy storage helps overcome barriers to intermittent renewable energy.<ref name="Koohi-Fayegh-2020">{{Cite journal |last1=Koohi-Fayegh |first1=S. |last2=Rosen |first2=M.A. |date=2020 |title=A review of energy storage types, applications and recent developments |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X19306012 |url-status=live |journal=Journal of Energy Storage |volume=27 |pages=101047 |doi=10.1016/j.est.2019.101047 |bibcode=2020JEnSt..2701047K |issn=2352-152X |s2cid=210616155 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210717132743/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352152X19306012 |archive-date=17 July 2021 |access-date=28 November 2020}}</ref> The most commonly used and available storage method is [[pumped-storage hydroelectricity]]. This requires locations with large differences in height and access to water.<ref name="Koohi-Fayegh-2020" /> Batteries are also in wide use.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Katz |first=Cheryl |date=17 December 2020 |title=The batteries that could make fossil fuels obsolete |url=https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201217-renewable-power-the-worlds-largest-battery |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210111075439/https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201217-renewable-power-the-worlds-largest-battery |archive-date=11 January 2021 |access-date=10 January 2021 |publisher=[[BBC]]}}</ref> They typically store electricity for short periods.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Herib |first1=Blanco |last2=André |first2=Faaij |date=2018 |title=A review at the role of storage in energy systems with a focus on Power to Gas and long-term storage |journal=[[Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews]] |volume=81 |pages=1049–1086 |doi=10.1016/j.rser.2017.07.062 |issn=1364-0321 |doi-access=free|bibcode=2018RSERv..81.1049B }}</ref> Batteries have low [[energy density]]. This and their cost makes them impractical for the large energy storage necessary to balance inter-seasonal variations in energy production.<ref name="RoyalSoc-2021">{{Cite book |url=https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-science-solutions/ |title=Climate change: science and solutions |date=19 May 2021 |publisher=[[The Royal Society]] |chapter=Climate change and batteries: the search for future power storage solutions |access-date=15 October 2021 |chapter-url=https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/climate-change-science-solutions/climate-science-solutions-batteries.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211016023551/https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-science-solutions/ |archive-date=16 October 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref> Some locations have implemented pumped hydro storage with capacity for multi-month usage.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hunt |first1=Julian D. |last2=Byers |first2=Edward |last3=Wada |first3=Yoshihide |last4=Parkinson |first4=Simon |last5=Gernaat |first5=David E. H. J. |last6=Langan |first6=Simon |last7=van Vuuren |first7=Detlef P. |last8=Riahi |first8=Keywan |display-authors=4 |date=2020 |title=Global resource potential of seasonal pumped hydropower storage for energy and water storage |journal=[[Nature Communications]] |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=947 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11..947H |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-14555-y |issn=2041-1723 |pmc=7031375 |pmid=32075965 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Nuclear power ===
{{Further|Sustainable energy#Nuclear power|Nuclear power#Carbon emissions|Nuclear power#Comparison with renewable energy}}

[[Nuclear power]] could complement renewables for electricity.<ref>{{Cite web |date=19 August 2020 |title=Climate Change and Nuclear Power 2022 |url=https://www.iaea.org/topics/nuclear-power-and-climate-change/climate-change-and-nuclear-power-2022 |access-date=1 January 2023 |website=www.iaea.org |language=en}}</ref> On the other hand, environmental and security risks could outweigh the benefits.<ref name="worldnuclearwastereport">{{cite web |title=World Nuclear Waste Report |url=https://worldnuclearwastereport.org/ |access-date=25 October 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Smith |first1=Brice |title=Insurmountable Risks: The Dangers of Using Nuclear Power to Combat Global Climate Change – Institute for Energy and Environmental Research |url=https://ieer.org/resource/books/insurmountable-risks-dangers-nuclear/ |access-date=24 November 2021 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Prăvălie |first1=Remus |last2=Bandoc |first2=Georgeta |date=2018 |title=Nuclear energy: Between global electricity demand, worldwide decarbonisation imperativeness, and planetary environmental implications |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301479717312227 |journal=Journal of Environmental Management |language=en |volume=209 |pages=81–92 |doi=10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.12.043|pmid=29287177 |bibcode=2018JEnvM.209...81P }}</ref> Examples of these environmental risks being the discharge of radioactive water to nearby ecosystems, and the routine release of radioactive gases as well.<ref>{{cite journal |date=12 July 2016 |title=Emerging Environmental Justice Issues in Nuclear Power and Radioactive Contamination |pmc=4962241 |language=en |last1=Kyne |first1=D. |last2=Bolin |first2=B. |journal=International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health |volume=13 |issue=7 |page=700 |doi=10.3390/ijerph13070700 |doi-access=free |pmid=27420080 }}</ref>

The construction of new nuclear reactors currently takes about 10 years. This is much longer than scaling up the deployment of wind and solar.<ref name="statusreport">{{cite report|last1=Schneider|first1=Mycle|last2=Froggatt|first2=Antony|title=World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2021 |url=https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/wnisr2021-lr.pdf |access-date=1 January 2023}}</ref>{{rp|335}} And this timing gives rise to credit risks.<ref name="DuboisPelerin-2023">{{Cite web |title=Nuclear Power Is Declining in the West and Growing in Developing Countries |url=https://www.brinknews.com/nuclear-power-is-declining-in-the-west-and-growing-in-developing-countries/ |access-date=1 January 2023 |website=BRINK – Conversations and Insights on Global Business |language=en-US}}</ref> However nuclear may be much cheaper in China. China is building a significant number of new power plants.<ref name="DuboisPelerin-2023" /> {{As of|2019}} the cost of extending nuclear power plant lifetimes is competitive with other electricity generation technologies<ref name="IEA2019">{{Cite web|url=https://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2019/may/steep-decline-in-nuclear-power-would-threaten-energy-security-and-climate-goals.html|title=May: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals|website=www.iea.org|access-date=8 July 2019}}</ref> if long term costs for nuclear waste disposal are excluded from the calculation. There is also no sufficient financial insurance for nuclear accidents.<ref>{{cite book |title=Lessons Learned from the Fukushima Nuclear Accident for Improving Safety of U.S. Nuclear Plants (Appendix L - Factoring the Costs of Severe Nuclear Accidents into Backfit Decisions)|chapter=Factoring the Costs of Severe Nuclear Accidents into Backfit Decisions |date=2014 |publisher=National Research Council |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK253929/ |access-date=29 December 2023}}</ref>

=== Replacing coal with natural gas ===
{{excerpt|sustainable energy#Fossil fuel switching and mitigation|paragraphs=1-2|file=no}}

== Demand reduction ==
{{Further|Individual action on climate change}}
Reducing demand for products and services that cause greenhouse gas emissions can help in mitigating climate change. One is to reduce demand by [[Individual action on climate change|behavioural and cultural changes]], for example by making changes in diet, especially the decision to reduce meat consumption,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Carman |first1=Jennifer |last2=Goldberg |first2=Matthew |last3=Marlon |first3=Jennifer |last4=Wang |first4=Xinran |last5=Lacroix |first5=Karine |last6=Neyens |first6=Liz |last7=Leiserowitz |first7=Anthony |last8=Maibach |first8=Edward |last9=Rosenthal |first9=Seth |last10=Kotcher |first10=John |title=Americans' Actions to Limit and Prepare For Global Warming |journal=Americans' Actions to Limit and Prepare for Global Warming, March 2021 |date=Aug 3, 2021 |volume=March 2021}}</ref> an effective [[Individual action on climate change|action individuals take to fight climate change]]. Another is by reducing the demand by improving infrastructure, by building a good public transport network, for example. Lastly, changes in end-use technology can reduce energy demand. For instance a well-insulated house emits less than a poorly-insulated house.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp||page=119}}

Mitigation options that reduce demand for products or services help people make personal choices to reduce their [[carbon footprint]]. This could be in their choice of transport or food.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5">Patrick Devine-Wright, Julio Diaz-José, Frank Geels, Arnulf Grubler, Nadia Maïzi, Eric Masanet, Yacob Mulugetta, Chioma Daisy Onyige-Ebeniro, Patricia E. Perkins, Alessandro Sanches Pereira, Elke Ursula Weber (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_05.pdf Chapter 5: Demand, services and social aspects of mitigation] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|5-3}} So these mitigation options have many social aspects that focus on demand reduction; they are therefore ''demand-side'' ''mitigation actions''. For example, people with high socio-economic status often cause more greenhouse gas emissions than those from a lower status. If they reduce their emissions and promote green policies, these people could become low-carbon lifestyle role models.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|5-4}} However, there are many psychological variables that influence consumers. These include awareness and perceived risk.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cardenas |first1=IC |title=Mitigation of climate change. Risk and uncertainty research gaps in the specification of mitigation actions |journal=Environmental Science & Policy |date=2024 |volume=162 |issue=December 2024 |page=103912 |doi=10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103912 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Government policies can support or hinder demand-side mitigation options. For example, public policy can promote [[circular economy]] concepts which would support climate change mitigation.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|5–6}} Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is linked to the [[sharing economy]].

There is a debate regarding the correlation of economic growth and emissions. It seems economic growth no longer necessarily means higher emissions.<ref name="The Economist-0013">{{Cite news |title=Economic growth no longer means higher carbon emissions |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/11/08/economic-growth-no-longer-means-higher-carbon-emissions |access-date=28 December 2022 |issn=0013-0613}}</ref><ref name="EIB-2021">{{Cite web |title=2021-2022 EIB Climate Survey, part 3 of 3: The economic and social impact of the green transition |url=https://www.eib.org/en/surveys/climate-survey/4th-climate-survey/green-transition-jobs-lifestyle-adaptation.htm |access-date=4 April 2022 |website=EIB.org |language=en}}</ref>

A 2024 article in Nature Climate Change emphasises the importance of integrating behavioural science into climate change mitigation strategies. The article presents six key recommendations aimed at improving individual and collective actions toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions, including overcoming barriers to research, fostering cross-disciplinary collaborations, and promoting practical behaviour-oriented solutions. These insights suggest that behavioural science plays a crucial role alongside technological and policy measures in addressing climate change.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Nielsen |first1=K. S. |last2=Cologna |first2=V. |last3=Bauer |first3=J. M. |last4=Berger |first4=S. |last5=Brick |first5=C. |last6=Dietz |first6=T. |last7=Hahnel |first7=U. J. J. |last8=Henn |first8=L. |last9=Lange |first9=F. |last10=Stern |first10=P. C. |last11=Wolske |first11=K. S. |date=2024 |title=Realizing the full potential of behavioural science for climate change mitigation |journal=Nature Climate Change |volume=14 |issue=5 |pages=322–330 |doi=10.1038/s41558-024-01951-1|bibcode=2024NatCC..14..322N }}</ref>

===Energy conservation and efficiency===
{{Main|2 = Energy conservation|3 = Efficient energy use}}
Global [[primary energy]] demand exceeded 161,000 terawatt hours (TWh) in 2018.<ref>IEA (2019), ''[https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-co2-status-report-2019 Global Energy & CO2 Status Report 2019]'', IEA, Paris, License: CC BY 4.0</ref> This refers to electricity, transport and heating including all losses. In transport and electricity production, fossil fuel usage has a low efficiency of less than 50%. Large amounts of heat in power plants and in motors of vehicles go to waste. The actual amount of energy consumed is significantly lower at 116,000 TWh.<ref name="IEA">{{cite report |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/key-world-energy-statistics-2020/final-consumption |title=Key World Energy Statistics 2020 |publisher=IEA |year=2020}}</ref>

[[Energy conservation]] is the effort made to reduce the [[Energy consumption|consumption of energy]] by using less of an energy service. One way is to [[Efficient energy use|use energy more efficiently]]. This means using less energy than before to produce the same service. Another way is to reduce the amount of service used. An example of this would be to drive less. Energy conservation is at the top of the sustainable [[energy hierarchy]].<ref name="REW-2015">{{cite web |date=9 April 2015 |title=A guide for effective energy saving |url=http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/ugc/blogs/2015/04/a-guide-for-effective-energy-saving.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160611144103/http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/ugc/blogs/2015/04/a-guide-for-effective-energy-saving.html |archive-date=11 June 2016 |access-date=14 June 2016 |website=Renewable Energy World}}</ref> When consumers reduce wastage and losses they can conserve energy. The upgrading of technology as well as the improvements to operations and maintenance can result in overall efficiency improvements.

[[Efficient energy use]] (or ''energy efficiency'') is the process of reducing the amount of energy required to provide products and services. Improved [[Energy-efficient buildings|energy efficiency in buildings]] ("green buildings"), industrial processes and transportation could reduce the world's energy needs in 2050 by one third. This would help reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The value of urgent action on energy efficiency – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/the-value-of-urgent-action-on-energy-efficiency |access-date=23 November 2022 |website=IEA |date=8 June 2022 |language=en-GB}}</ref> For example, insulating a building allows it to use less heating and cooling energy to achieve and maintain thermal comfort. Improvements in energy efficiency are generally achieved by adopting a more efficient technology or production process.<ref>[[Mark Diesendorf|Diesendorf, Mark]] (2007). ''[[Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy]]'', UNSW Press, p. 86.</ref> Another way is to use commonly accepted methods to reduce energy losses.

=== Lifestyle changes ===
[[File:2019 Carbon dioxide emissions by income group - Oxfam data.svg|thumb|upright=1.2|This pie chart illustrates both total emissions for each income group, and emissions ''per person'' within each income group. For example, the 10% with the highest incomes are responsible for half of carbon emissions, and its members emit an average of more than five times as much ''per person'' as members of the lowest half of the income scale.<ref name=OxfamClimateEquality_202311>{{cite book |title=Climate Equality: a Climate for the 99% |date=November 2023 |publisher=Oxfam International |url=https://webassets.oxfamamerica.org/media/documents/cr-climate-equality-201123-en.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231123191311/https://webassets.oxfamamerica.org/media/documents/cr-climate-equality-201123-en.pdf |archive-date=23 November 2023 |url-status=live }} Fig. ES.2, Fig. ES.3, Box 1.2.</ref>]]

[[Individual action on climate change]] can include personal choices in many areas. These include diet, travel, household energy use, consumption of goods and services, and family size. People who wish to reduce their [[carbon footprint]] can take high-impact actions such as avoiding [[frequent flying]] and petrol-fuelled cars, eating mainly a [[plant-based diet]], having fewer children,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wolf |first1=C. |last2=Ripple |first2=W.J. |last3=Crist |first3=E. |date=2021 |title=Human population, social justice, and climate policy |journal=Sustainability Science |volume=16 |issue=5 |pages=1753–1756 |doi=10.1007/s11625-021-00951-w |bibcode=2021SuSc...16.1753W |s2cid=233404010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Crist|first1=Eileen|last2=Ripple|first2=William J.|author-link2=William J. Ripple|last3= Ehrlich|first3=Paul R.|author-link3=Paul R. Ehrlich|last4=Rees|first4=William E.|author-link4=William E. Rees|last5=Wolf|first5=Christopher |date=2022 |title=Scientists' warning on population|url=https://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/Crist2022.pdf|journal=[[Science of the Total Environment]]|volume=845 |issue=|page=157166 |doi=10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157166|pmid= 35803428|bibcode=2022ScTEn.84557166C |s2cid=250387801 |quote="Our first action call is a direct, global appeal to all women and men to choose none or at most one child. Individuals, especially if they aspire to large families, may pursue adoption, which is a desirable and compassionate choice for children who are here and need to be cared for."}}</ref> using clothes and electrical products for longer,<ref>{{Cite web |date=7 March 2022 |title=Six key lifestyle changes can help avert the climate crisis, study finds |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/07/six-key-lifestyle-changes-can-help-avert-the-climate-crisis-study-finds |access-date=7 March 2022 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref> and electrifying homes.<ref name="Adcock-2022">{{Cite web |last=Adcock |first=Bronwyn |date=2022 |title=Electric Monaros and hotted-up skateboards : the 'genius' who wants to electrify our world |url=https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/feb/05/electric-monaros-and-hotted-up-skateboards-the-genius-who-wants-to-electrify-our-world |access-date=6 February 2022 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Ripple-2013" /> These approaches are more practical for people in high-income countries with high-consumption lifestyles. Naturally, it is more difficult for those with lower income statuses to make these changes. This is because choices like electric-powered cars may not be available. Excessive consumption is more to blame for climate change than population increase.<ref>{{Cite news |date=11 November 2021 |title=COP26: How can an average family afford an electric car? And more questions |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58925049 |access-date=12 November 2021}}</ref> High-consumption lifestyles have a greater environmental impact, with the richest 10% of people emitting about half the total lifestyle emissions.<ref>{{cite web |date=10 April 2019 |title=Emissions inequality—a gulf between global rich and poor – Nicholas Beuret |url=https://www.socialeurope.eu/emissions-inequality |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191026191732/https://www.socialeurope.eu/emissions-inequality |archive-date=26 October 2019 |access-date=26 October 2019 |website=Social Europe |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Westlake |first=Steve |title=Climate change: yes, your individual action does make a difference |url=http://theconversation.com/climate-change-yes-your-individual-action-does-make-a-difference-115169 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191218042819/http://theconversation.com/climate-change-yes-your-individual-action-does-make-a-difference-115169 |archive-date=18 December 2019 |access-date=9 December 2019 |website=The Conversation |date=11 April 2019 |language=en}}</ref>

=== Dietary change ===
{{main|Low-carbon diet|Plant-based diet}}

Some scientists say that avoiding meat and dairy foods is the single biggest way an individual can reduce their environmental impact.<ref name="the Guardian-2018">{{cite web |date=31 May 2018 |title=Avoiding meat and dairy is 'single biggest way' to reduce your impact on Earth |url=http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/may/31/avoiding-meat-and-dairy-is-single-biggest-way-to-reduce-your-impact-on-earth |access-date=25 April 2021 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref> The widespread adoption of a vegetarian diet could cut food-related greenhouse gas emissions by 63% by 2050.<ref name="harvey-2016">{{cite news |last1=Harvey |first1=Fiona |author-link=Fiona Harvey |date=21 March 2016 |title=Eat less meat to avoid dangerous global warming, scientists say |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/21/eat-less-meat-vegetarianism-dangerous-global-warming |access-date=20 June 2016 |work=The Guardian}}</ref> China introduced new dietary guidelines in 2016 which aim to cut meat consumption by 50% and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1{{nbsp}}Gt per year by 2030.<ref name="milman-2016">{{cite news |last1=Milman |first1=Oliver |date=20 June 2016 |title=China's plan to cut meat consumption by 50% cheered by climate campaigners |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/20/chinas-meat-consumption-climate-change |access-date=20 June 2016}}</ref> Overall, food accounts for the largest share of consumption-based greenhouse gas emissions. It is responsible for nearly 20% of the global carbon footprint. Almost 15% of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have been attributed to the livestock sector.<ref name="Ripple-2013">{{cite journal |last1=Ripple |first1=William J. |last2=Smith |first2=Pete |display-authors=etal. |date=2013 |title=Ruminants, climate change and climate policy |url=https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/trophic/files/Ripple_2014_NCC.pdf |journal=[[Nature Climate Change]] |volume=4 |issue= 1|pages=2–5 |doi=10.1038/nclimate2081|bibcode=2014NatCC...4....2R }}</ref>

A shift towards [[plant-based diets]] would help to mitigate climate change.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schiermeier |first1=Quirin |date=8 August 2019 |title=Eat less meat: UN climate-change report calls for change to human diet |journal=Nature |volume=572 |issue=7769 |pages=291–292 |bibcode=2019Natur.572..291S |doi=10.1038/d41586-019-02409-7 |pmid=31409926 |doi-access=free}}</ref> In particular, reducing meat consumption would help to reduce methane emissions.<ref>{{cite news |last=Harvey |first=Fiona |author-link=Fiona Harvey |date=4 April 2022 |title=Final warning: what does the IPCC's third report instalment say? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/04/final-warning-what-does-the-ipcc-third-report-instalment-say |access-date=5 April 2022 |work=The Guardian |location=}}</ref> If high-income nations switched to a plant-based diet, vast amounts of land used for animal agriculture could be allowed to [[Restoration ecology|return to their natural state]]. This in turn has the potential to sequester 100 billion tonnes of {{CO2}} by the end of the century.<ref>{{cite news |title=How plant-based diets not only reduce our carbon footprint, but also increase carbon capture |language=en |work=[[Leiden University]] |url=https://phys.org/news/2022-01-plant-based-diets-carbon-footprint-capture.html |access-date=15 February 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sun |first1=Zhongxiao |last2=Scherer |first2=Laura |last3=Tukker |first3=Arnold |last4=Spawn-Lee |first4=Seth A. |last5=Bruckner |first5=Martin |last6=Gibbs |first6=Holly K. |last7=Behrens |first7=Paul |date=January 2022 |title=Dietary change in high-income nations alone can lead to substantial double climate dividend |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357723207 |journal=Nature Food |language=en |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=29–37 |doi=10.1038/s43016-021-00431-5 |pmid=37118487 |issn=2662-1355 |url-access=subscription |s2cid=245867412}}</ref> A comprehensive analysis found that plant based diets reduce emissions, water pollution and land use significantly (by 75%), while reducing the destruction of wildlife and usage of water.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Carrington |first1=Damian |title=Vegan diet massively cuts environmental damage, study shows |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/20/vegan-diet-cuts-environmental-damage-climate-heating-emissions-study |access-date=20 July 2023 |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=21 July 2023}}</ref>
[[File:GHG by diet groups.svg|thumb|right|Environmental footprint of 55,504 UK citizens by diet group (''Nat Food'' 4, 565–574, 2023).]]

=== Family size ===
{{Further|Individual action on climate change#Family size}}[[File:World population (UN).svg|thumb|right|upright=1.35|Since 1950, world population has tripled.<ref>{{cite web |title=World Population Prospects |url=https://population.un.org/wpp |publisher=UN}}</ref>]]<nowiki> </nowiki>[[Projections of population growth|Population growth]] has resulted in higher greenhouse gas emissions in most regions, particularly Africa.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 6">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_06.pdf Chapter 6: Energy systems] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|6–11}} However, economic growth has a bigger effect than population growth.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|6–622}} Rising incomes, changes in consumption and dietary patterns, as well as population growth, cause pressure on land and other natural resources. This leads to more greenhouse gas emissions and fewer carbon sinks.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 7">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_07.pdf Chapter 7: Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Uses (AFOLU)] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|117}} Some scholars have argued that humane policies to slow population growth should be part of a broad climate response together with policies that end fossil fuel use and encourage sustainable consumption.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Dodson |first1=Jenna C. |last2=Dérer |first2=Patrícia |last3=Cafaro |first3=Philip |last4=Götmark |first4=Frank |date=2020 |title=Population growth and climate change: Addressing the overlooked threat multiplier |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0048969720348750 |journal=Science of the Total Environment |language=en |volume=748 |pages=141346 |doi=10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141346|pmid=33113687 |bibcode=2020ScTEn.74841346D |s2cid=225035992 }}</ref> Advances in female education and [[Sexual and reproductive health|reproductive health]], especially voluntary [[family planning]], can contribute to reducing population growth.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|5–35}}

== Preserving and enhancing carbon sinks ==
[[File:Carbon Dioxide Partitioning.svg|thumb|upright=1.35|right|About 58% of {{CO2}} emissions have been absorbed by [[carbon sinks]], including plant growth, soil uptake, and ocean uptake ([[Global Carbon Project#Global Carbon Budget|2020 Global Carbon Budget]]).]]
{{Main|Carbon dioxide removal|Carbon sequestration|Carbon sink}}

An important mitigation measure is "preserving and enhancing [[carbon sink]]s".<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13" /> This refers to the management of Earth's natural [[carbon sink]]s in a way that preserves or increases their capability to remove CO<sub>2</sub> from the atmosphere and to store it durably. Scientists call this process also [[carbon sequestration]]. In the context of climate change mitigation, the IPCC defines a ''sink'' as "Any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere".<ref name="IPCC AR6 WGI Glossary" />{{rp|2249}} Globally, the two most important carbon sinks are vegetation and the [[ocean]].<ref>{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=2020-03-26 |title=Carbon Sources and Sinks |url=http://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/carbon-sources-and-sinks/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201214082221/https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/carbon-sources-and-sinks/ |archive-date=14 December 2020 |access-date=2021-06-18 |website=National Geographic Society |language=en}}</ref>

To enhance the ability of [[ecosystem]]s to sequester carbon, changes are necessary in agriculture and forestry.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Levin |first=Kelly |date=8 August 2019 |title=How Effective Is Land At Removing Carbon Pollution? The IPCC Weighs In |url=https://www.wri.org/insights/how-effective-land-removing-carbon-pollution-ipcc-weighs |journal=World Resources Institute |language=en}}</ref> Examples are preventing [[deforestation]] and restoring natural ecosystems by [[reforestation]].<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., D. Jacob, M. Taylor, M. Bindi, S. Brown, I. Camilloni, A. Diedhiou, R. Djalante, K.L. Ebi, F. Engelbrecht, J.Guiot, Y. Hijioka, S. Mehrotra, A. Payne, S.I. Seneviratne, A. Thomas, R. Warren, and G. Zhou, 2018: [https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2022/06/SR15_Chapter_3_LR.pdf Chapter 3: Impacts of 1.5°C Global Warming on Natural and Human Systems]. In: [https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T.Maycock, M.Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, US, pp. 175-312. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940.005.</ref>{{rp|266}} Scenarios that limit global warming to 1.5&nbsp;°C typically project the large-scale use of [[Carbon dioxide removal|carbon dioxide removal methods]] over the 21st century.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bui |first1=Mai |last2=Adjiman |first2=Claire S. |last3=Bardow |first3=André |last4=Anthony |first4=Edward J. |last5=Boston |first5=Andy |last6=Brown |first6=Solomon |last7=Fennell |first7=Paul S. |last8=Fuss |first8=Sabine |last9=Galindo |first9=Amparo |last10=Hackett |first10=Leigh A. |last11=Hallett |first11=Jason P. |last12=Herzog |first12=Howard J. |last13=Jackson |first13=George |last14=Kemper |first14=Jasmin |last15=Krevor |first15=Samuel |date=2018 |title=Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward |journal=Energy & Environmental Science |language=en |volume=11 |issue=5 |pages=1062–1176 |doi=10.1039/C7EE02342A |issn=1754-5692|doi-access=free |bibcode=2018EnEnS..11.1062B |hdl=10044/1/55714 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>{{rp|1068}}<ref name="IPCC-2018">IPCC, 2018: [https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2022/06/SPM_version_report_LR.pdf Summary for Policymakers]. In: [https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, US, pp. 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940.001.</ref>{{rp|17}} There are concerns about over-reliance on these technologies, and their environmental impacts.<ref name="IPCC-2018" />{{rp|17}}<ref>IPCC, 2018: [https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_High_Res.pdf Global Warming of 1.5°C]. An [https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. In Press.</ref>{{rp|34}} But ecosystem restoration and reduced conversion are among the mitigation tools that can yield the most emissions reductions before 2030.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13" />{{rp|43}}

Land-based mitigation options are referred to as "AFOLU mitigation options" in the 2022 IPCC report on mitigation. The abbreviation stands for "agriculture, forestry and other land use"<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13" />{{rp|37}} The report described the economic mitigation potential from relevant activities around forests and ecosystems as follows: "the conservation, improved management, and restoration of forests and other ecosystems (coastal wetlands, [[peatlands]], savannas and grasslands)". A high mitigation potential is found for reducing deforestation in tropical regions. The economic potential of these activities has been estimated to be 4.2 to 7.4 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO<sub>2</sub> -eq) per year.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13" />{{rp|37}}

=== Forests ===
{{Further|Carbon sequestration#Forestry|Deforestation and climate change|Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation}}

====Conservation====
{{Main|Deforestation#Control|Desertification#Countermeasures|Proforestation|Wildfire#Prevention}}

[[File:Shennongjia virgin forest.jpg|thumb|Transferring [[land rights]] to indigenous inhabitants is argued to efficiently conserve forests.]]
The [[Stern Review]] on the economics of climate change stated in 2007 that curbing [[deforestation]] was a highly cost-effective way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.<ref>{{cite book |author=Stern, Nicholas Herbert |url=http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm |title=The economics of climate change: the Stern review |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-521-70080-1 |location=Cambridge, UK |page=xxv |author-link=Nicholas Stern, Baron Stern of Brentford |access-date=2009-12-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061114045919/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm |archive-date=2006-11-14 |url-status=live}}</ref> About 95% of deforestation occurs in the tropics, where clearing of land for agriculture is one of the main causes.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |last2=Roser |first2=Max |date=9 February 2021 |title=Forests and Deforestation |url=https://ourworldindata.org/drivers-of-deforestation |journal=Our World in Data}}</ref> One forest conservation strategy is to transfer rights over land from public ownership to its indigenous inhabitants.<ref name="Guardian1">{{cite news |date=22 July 2016 |title=India should follow China to find a way out of the woods on saving forest people |newspaper=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jul/22/india-follow-china-saving-forest-people-land-rights |access-date=2 November 2016}}</ref> Land concessions often go to powerful extractive companies.<ref name="Guardian1" /> Conservation strategies that exclude and even evict humans, called [[fortress conservation]], often lead to more exploitation of the land. This is because the native inhabitants turn to work for extractive companies to survive.<ref name="fp0718">{{cite magazine |date=16 July 2018 |title=How Conservation Became Colonialism |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/16/how-conservation-became-colonialism-environment-indigenous-people-ecuador-mining/ |magazine=Foreign Policy |access-date=30 July 2018}}</ref>

[[Proforestation]] is promoting forests to capture their full ecological potential.<ref name="ReferenceA2">{{Cite journal|last1=Moomaw|first1=William R.|last2=Masino|first2=Susan A.|last3=Faison|first3=Edward K.|year=2019|title=Intact Forests in the United States: Proforestation Mitigates Climate Change and Serves the Greatest Good|journal=Frontiers in Forests and Global Change|volume=2|page=27 |doi=10.3389/ffgc.2019.00027|bibcode=2019FrFGC...2...27M |doi-access=free}}</ref> This is a mitigation strategy as [[secondary forest]]s that have regrown in abandoned farmland are found to have less biodiversity than the original [[old-growth forest]]s. Original forests store 60% more carbon than these new forests.<ref name="nytimes0109" /> Strategies include [[Rewilding (conservation biology)|rewilding]] and establishing [[wildlife corridor]]s.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{Cite web |date=3 April 2019 |title=The natural world can help save us from climate catastrophe {{pipe}} George Monbiot |url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/03/natural-world-climate-catastrophe-rewilding |website=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|title=Effects of gray wolf-induced trophic cascades on ecosystem carbon cycling|first1=Christopher C.|last1=Wilmers|first2=Oswald J.|last2=Schmitz|date=19 October 2016|journal=Ecosphere|volume=7|issue=10|doi=10.1002/ecs2.1501|bibcode=2016Ecosp...7E1501W |doi-access=free}}</ref>

====Afforestation and reforestation====

[[Afforestation]] is the establishment of trees where there was previously no tree cover. Scenarios for new plantations covering up to 4000 million hectares (Mha) (6300 x 6300&nbsp;km) suggest cumulative carbon storage of more than 900&nbsp;GtC (2300&nbsp;Gt{{CO2}}) until 2100.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=van Minnen |first1=Jelle G |last2=Strengers |first2=Bart J |last3=Eickhout |first3=Bas |last4=Swart |first4=Rob J |last5=Leemans |first5=Rik |title=Quantifying the effectiveness of climate change mitigation through forest plantations and carbon sequestration with an integrated land-use model |journal=Carbon Balance and Management |date=2008 |volume=3 |issue=1 |page=3 |doi=10.1186/1750-0680-3-3 |pmid=18412946 |pmc=2359746 |bibcode=2008CarBM...3....3V |issn=1750-0680 |doi-access=free }}</ref> But they are not a viable alternative to aggressive emissions reduction.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Boysen |first1=Lena R. |last2=Lucht |first2=Wolfgang |last3=Gerten |first3=Dieter |last4=Heck |first4=Vera |last5=Lenton |first5=Timothy M. |last6=Schellnhuber |first6=Hans Joachim |title=The limits to global-warming mitigation by terrestrial carbon removal |journal=Earth's Future |date=17 May 2017 |volume=5 |issue=5 |pages=463–474 |doi=10.1002/2016EF000469|bibcode=2017EaFut...5..463B |hdl=10871/31046 |s2cid=53062923 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> This is because the plantations would need to be so large they would eliminate most natural ecosystems or reduce food production.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Yoder |first1=Kate |title=Does planting trees actually help the climate? Here's what we know. |url=https://www.rewildingmag.com/does-planting-trees-help-climate-change/ |website=Rewilding |date=12 May 2022 |publisher=Grist |access-date=15 May 2022}}</ref> One example is the [[Trillion Tree Campaign]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=One trillion trees - uniting the world to save forests and climate |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/one-trillion-trees-world-economic-forum-launches-plan-to-help-nature-and-the-climate/ |access-date=8 October 2020 |website=World Economic Forum |date=22 January 2020 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Gabbatiss |first1=Josh |date=16 February 2019 |title=Massive restoration of world's forests would cancel out a decade of {{CO2}} emissions, analysis suggests |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/forests-climate-change-co2-greenhouse-gases-trillion-trees-global-warming-a8782071.html |access-date=26 July 2021 |publisher=Independent}}</ref> However, preserving [[biodiversity]] is also important and for example not all [[grassland]]s are suitable for conversion into forests.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hasler |first1=Natalia |last2=Williams |first2=Christopher A. |last3=Denney |first3=Vanessa Carrasco |last4=Ellis |first4=Peter W. |last5=Shrestha |first5=Surendra |last6=Terasaki Hart |first6=Drew E. |last7=Wolff |first7=Nicholas H. |last8=Yeo |first8=Samantha |last9=Crowther |first9=Thomas W. |last10=Werden |first10=Leland K. |last11=Cook-Patton |first11=Susan C. |date=2024-03-26 |title=Accounting for albedo change to identify climate-positive tree cover restoration |journal=Nature Communications |language=en |volume=15 |issue=1 |page=2275 |doi=10.1038/s41467-024-46577-1 |issn=2041-1723 |pmc=10965905 |pmid=38531896|bibcode=2024NatCo..15.2275H }}</ref> Grasslands can even turn from [[carbon sink]]s to [[carbon source]]s. [[File:Coppice stool.jpg|thumb|right|Helping existing roots and tree stumps regrow even in long deforested areas is argued to be more efficient than planting trees. Lack of legal ownership to trees by locals is the biggest obstacle preventing regrowth.<ref name="ScientificAmerican2011" /><ref name="ensia2020" />]]

[[Reforestation]] is the restocking of existing depleted forests or in places where there were recently forests. Reforestation could save at least 1{{nbsp}}GtCO<sub>2</sub> per year, at an estimated cost of $5–15 per tonne of carbon dioxide (tCO<sub>2</sub>).<ref name="stern">Stern, N. (2006). ''Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change: Part III: The Economics of Stabilisation.'' HM Treasury, London: http://hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm</ref> Restoring all degraded forests all over the world could capture about 205&nbsp;GtC (750&nbsp;Gt{{CO2}}).<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Chazdon |first1=Robin |author-link=Robin Chazdon |last2=Brancalion |first2=Pedro |date=5 July 2019 |title=Restoring forests as a means to many ends |journal=Science |language=en |volume=365 |issue=6448 |pages=24–25 |bibcode=2019Sci...365...24C |doi=10.1126/science.aax9539 |issn=0036-8075 |pmid=31273109 |s2cid=195804244}}</ref> With increased [[intensive agriculture]] and [[urbanisation]], there is an increase in the amount of abandoned farmland. By some estimates, for every acre of original [[old-growth forest]] cut down, more than 50 acres of new [[secondary forest]]s are growing.<ref name="nytimes0109">{{cite news|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/science/earth/30forest.html?pagewanted=all|title=New Jungles Prompt a Debate on Rain Forests|newspaper=New York Times |access-date=18 July 2016|date=29 January 2009}}</ref><ref>Young, E. (2008). ''IPCC Wrong On Logging Threat to Climate.'' New Scientist, 5 August 2008. Retrieved on 18 August 2008, from https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14466-ipcc-wrong-on-logging-threat-toclimate.html</ref> In some countries, promoting regrowth on abandoned farmland could offset years of emissions.<ref>{{cite news|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/science/forests-carbon-dioxide.html?_r=1|title=In Latin America, Forests May Rise to Challenge of Carbon Dioxide|newspaper=New York Times |access-date=18 July 2016|date=16 May 2016}}</ref>

Planting new trees can be expensive and a risky investment. For example, about 80 per cent of planted trees in the [[Sahel]] die within two years.<ref name="ScientificAmerican2011" /> Reforestation has higher carbon storage potential than afforestation. Even long-deforested areas still contain an "underground forest" of living roots and tree stumps. Helping native species sprout naturally is cheaper than planting new trees and they are more likely to survive. This could include [[pruning]] and [[coppicing]] to accelerate growth. This also provides woodfuel, which is otherwise a major source of deforestation. Such practices, called [[farmer-managed natural regeneration]], are centuries old but the biggest obstacle towards implementation is ownership of the trees by the state. The state often sells timber rights to businesses which leads to locals uprooting seedlings because they see them as a liability. Legal aid for locals<ref>{{Cite book |title=Securing Rights, Combating Climate Change |date=23 July 2014 |url=https://www.wri.org/research/securing-rights-combating-climate-change|access-date=2 June 2022|publisher=World Resources Institute |isbn=978-1569738290 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Community forestry can work, but plans in the Democratic Republic of Congo show what's missing  |url=https://theconversation.com/community-forestry-can-work-but-plans-in-the-democratic-republic-of-congo-show-whats-missing-138625|access-date=2 June 2022 |website=The Conversation |date=29 June 2020 |language=en-US}}</ref> and changes to property law such as in Mali and Niger have led to significant changes. Scientists describe them as the largest positive environmental transformation in Africa. It is possible to discern from space the border between Niger and the more barren land in Nigeria, where the law has not changed.<ref name="ScientificAmerican2011">{{cite web|url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/farmers-in-sahel-beat-back-drought-and-climate-change-with-trees/|title=The Great Green Wall: African Farmers Beat Back Drought and Climate Change with Trees|publisher=Scientific America|access-date=12 September 2021|date=28 January 2011}}</ref><ref name="ensia2020">{{cite web|url=https://ensia.com/features/in-semi-arid-africa-farmers-are-transforming-the-underground-forest-into-life-giving-trees/|title=In semi-arid Africa, farmers are transforming the "underground forest" into life-giving trees|publisher=University of Minnesote|access-date=11 February 2020|date=28 January 2011}}</ref>

===Soils===
{{Further|Carbon sequestration#Agriculture|Carbon farming|}}

There are many measures to increase soil carbon.<ref>{{Cite web |date=14 February 2022 |title=What to consider when increasing soil carbon stocks |url=https://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/land-preparation/soils/what-to-consider-when-increasing-soil-carbon-stocks |access-date=2 December 2022 |website=Farmers Weekly |language=en-US |quote=many factors can affect how easy it is for micro-organisms to access carbon}}</ref> This makes it complex<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Terrer |first1=C. |last2=Phillips |first2=R. P. |last3=Hungate |first3=B. A. |last4=Rosende |first4=J. |last5=Pett-Ridge |first5=J. |last6=Craig |first6=M. E. |last7=van Groenigen |first7=K. J. |last8=Keenan |first8=T. F. |last9=Sulman |first9=B. N. |last10=Stocker |first10=B. D. |last11=Reich |first11=P. B. |last12=Pellegrini |first12=A. F. A. |last13=Pendall |first13=E. |last14=Zhang |first14=H. |last15=Evans |first15=R. D. |date=March 2021 |title=A trade-off between plant and soil carbon storage under elevated {{CO2}} |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03306-8 |journal=Nature |language=en |volume=591 |issue=7851 |pages=599–603 |doi=10.1038/s41586-021-03306-8 |pmid=33762765 |bibcode=2021Natur.591..599T |hdl=10871/124574 |osti=1777798 |s2cid=232355402 |issn=1476-4687 |quote=Although plant biomass often increases in elevated {{CO2}} (e{{CO2}}) experiments SOC has been observed to increase, remain unchanged or even decline. The mechanisms that drive this variation across experiments remain poorly understood, creating uncertainty in climate projections|hdl-access=free }}</ref> and hard to measure and account for.<ref>{{Cite web |date=17 March 2022 |title=Carbon farming explained: the pros, the cons and the EU's plans |url=https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/carbon-farming-explained-pros-cons-and-eus-plans |access-date=2 December 2022 |website=Clean Energy Wire |language=en |quote=But many German researchers and the country's agriculture ministry warn that soil carbon sequestration is easily reversible, hard to measure, and could lead to greenwashing. Existing frameworks for carbon farming certificates deploy a wide variety of approaches to quantifying the amount of carbon removals, the European Commission says.}}</ref> One advantage is that there are fewer trade-offs for these measures than for [[Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage|BECCS]] or afforestation, for example.{{Citation needed|date=November 2022}}

Globally, protecting healthy soils and restoring the soil carbon sponge could remove 7.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere annually. This is more than the annual emissions of the US.<ref name="wri.org">{{Cite web |last1=Harris |first1=Nancy |last2=Gibbs |first2=David |date=21 January 2021 |title=Forests Absorb Twice As Much Carbon As They Emit Each Year |url=https://www.wri.org/insights/forests-absorb-twice-much-carbon-they-emit-each-year |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Rosane |first1=Olivia |title=Protecting and Restoring Soils Could Remove 5.5 Billion Tonnes of {{CO2}} a Year |url=https://www.ecowatch.com/soil-protection-co2-2645518371.html |access-date=19 March 2020 |agency=Ecowatch |date=18 March 2020}}</ref> Trees capture {{CO2}} while growing above ground and [[Plant root exudates|exuding]] larger amounts of carbon below ground. Trees contribute to the building of a [[soil carbon sponge]]. Carbon formed above ground is released as {{CO2}} immediately when wood is burned. If dead wood remains untouched, only some of the carbon returns to the atmosphere as decomposition proceeds.<ref name="wri.org" />

Farming can deplete soil carbon and render soil incapable of supporting life. However, [[conservation farming]] can protect carbon in soils, and repair damage over time.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Papanicolaou |first1=A. N. (Thanos) |last2=Wacha |first2=Kenneth M. |last3=Abban |first3=Benjamin K. |last4=Wilson |first4=Christopher G. |last5=Hatfield |first5=Jerry L. |last6=Stanier |first6=Charles O. |last7=Filley |first7=Timothy R. |year=2015 |title=Conservation Farming Shown to Protect Carbon in Soil |url=https://eos.org/research-spotlights/conservation-farming-shown-to-protect-carbon-in-soil |journal=Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences |volume=120 |issue=11 |pages=2375–2401 |bibcode=2015JGRG..120.2375P |doi=10.1002/2015JG003078 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The farming practice of [[cover crop]]s is a form of [[carbon farming]].<ref>{{cite news |year=2016 |title=Cover Crops, a Farming Revolution With Deep Roots in the Past |newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/business/cover-crops-a-farming-revolution-with-deep-roots-in-the-past.html?_r=0}}</ref> Methods that enhance carbon sequestration in soil include [[no-till farming]], residue mulching and [[crop rotation]]. Scientists have described the best management practices for European soils to increase soil organic carbon. These are conversion of arable land to grassland, straw incorporation, reduced tillage, straw incorporation combined with reduced tillage, [[Ley farming|ley cropping]] system and cover crops.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lugato |first1=Emanuele |last2=Bampa |first2=Francesca |last3=Panagos |first3=Panos |last4=Montanarella |first4=Luca |last5=Jones |first5=Arwyn |date=1 November 2014 |title=Potential carbon sequestration of European arable soils estimated by modelling a comprehensive set of management practices |journal=Global Change Biology |volume=20 |issue=11 |pages=3557–3567 |bibcode=2014GCBio..20.3557L |doi=10.1111/gcb.12551 |issn=1365-2486 |pmid=24789378 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

Another mitigation option is the production of [[biochar]] and its storage in soils This is the solid material that remains after the [[pyrolysis]] of [[biomass]]. Biochar production releases half of the carbon from the biomass—either released into the atmosphere or captured with CCS—and retains the other half in the stable biochar.<ref name="Lehmann-2021">{{Cite journal |last1=Lehmann |first1=Johannes |last2=Cowie |first2=Annette |last3=Masiello |first3=Caroline A. |last4=Kammann |first4=Claudia |last5=Woolf |first5=Dominic |last6=Amonette |first6=James E. |last7=Cayuela |first7=Maria L. |last8=Camps-Arbestain |first8=Marta |last9=Whitman |first9=Thea |date=2021 |title=Biochar in climate change mitigation |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-021-00852-8 |journal=Nature Geoscience |language=en |volume=14 |issue=12 |pages=883–892 |doi=10.1038/s41561-021-00852-8 |bibcode=2021NatGe..14..883L |s2cid=85463771 |issn=1752-0908}}</ref> It can endure in soil for thousands of years.<ref name="DOI10.1038/ncomms1053">{{cite journal |author=Dominic Woolf |author2=James E. Amonette |author3=F. Alayne Street-Perrott |author4=Johannes Lehmann |author5=Stephen Joseph |date=August 2010 |title=Sustainable biochar to mitigate global climate change |journal=Nature Communications |volume=1 |issue=5 |pages=56 |bibcode=2010NatCo...1...56W |doi=10.1038/ncomms1053 |issn=2041-1723 |pmc=2964457 |pmid=20975722}}</ref> Biochar may increase the [[soil fertility]] of [[acidic soil]]s and increase [[agricultural productivity]]. During production of biochar, heat is released which may be used as [[bioenergy]].<ref name="Lehmann-2021" />

=== Wetlands ===
{{Further|Carbon sequestration#Wetlands|Wetland#Climate change mitigation}}

Wetland restoration is an important mitigation measure. It has moderate to great mitigation potential on a limited land area with low trade-offs and costs.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Zhang |first1=X. |last2=Wang |first2=Y. |last3=Li |first3=Z. |last4=Chen |first4=H. |title=Carbon sequestration potential of wetlands and regulating strategies: A review |journal=Environmental Research |volume=238 |pages=117345 |year=2024 |doi=10.1016/j.envres.2024.117345|doi-broken-date=24 May 2025 }}</ref> Wetlands perform two important functions in relation to climate change. They can [[Carbon sink|sequester carbon]], converting carbon dioxide to solid plant material through [[photosynthesis]]. They also store and regulate water.<ref>{{cite book |title=Synthesis of Adaptation Options for Coastal Areas |date=2009 |publisher=US Environmental Protection Agency |series=Climate Ready Estuaries Program, EPA 430-F-08-024 |location=Washington, DC}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=6 February 2020 |title=Coastal Wetland Protection |url=https://drawdown.org/solutions/coastal-wetland-protection |access-date=13 September 2020 |website=Project Drawdown |language=en}}</ref> Wetlands store about 45 million tonnes of carbon per year globally.<ref name="Chmura, G. L. 20032">{{cite journal |last1=Chmura |first1=G. L. |date=2003 |title=Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils |journal=Global Biogeochemical Cycles |volume=17 |issue=4 |bibcode=2003GBioC..17.1111C |doi=10.1029/2002GB001917 |doi-access=free |s2cid=36119878|page=Abstract}}</ref>

Some [[Wetland methane emissions|wetlands are a significant source of methane emissions]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Tiwari |first1=Shashank |title=Restoration of Wetland Ecosystem: A Trajectory Towards a Sustainable Environment |last2=Singh |first2=Chhatarpal |last3=Singh |first3=Jay Shankar |date=2020 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-981-13-7665-8 |editor-last=Upadhyay |editor-first=Atul Kumar |location=Singapore |pages=59–74 |language=en |chapter=Wetlands: A Major Natural Source Responsible for Methane Emission |doi=10.1007/978-981-13-7665-8_5 |editor2-last=Singh |editor2-first=Ranjan |editor3-last=Singh |editor3-first=D. P. |s2cid=198421761}}</ref> Some also emit [[nitrous oxide]].<ref name="Bange-2006">{{Cite journal |last=Bange |first=Hermann W. |date=2006 |title=Nitrous oxide and methane in European coastal waters |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0272771406002496 |journal=Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science |language=en |volume=70 |issue=3 |pages=361–374 |bibcode=2006ECSS...70..361B |doi=10.1016/j.ecss.2006.05.042}}</ref><ref name="Thompson-2012">{{cite journal |last1=Thompson |first1=A. J. |last2=Giannopoulos |first2=G. |last3=Pretty |first3=J. |last4=Baggs |first4=E. M. |last5=Richardson |first5=D. J. |date=2012 |title=Biological sources and sinks of nitrous oxide and strategies to mitigate emissions |journal=Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B |volume=367 |issue=1593 |pages=1157–1168 |doi=10.1098/rstb.2011.0415 |pmc=3306631 |pmid=22451101}}</ref> [[Peat]]land globally covers just 3% of the land's surface.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25 January 2018 |title=Climate change and deforestation threaten world's largest tropical peatland |url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/climate-change-and-deforestation-threaten-worlds-largest-tropical-peatland |website=Carbon Brief}}</ref> But it stores up to 550 gigatonnes (Gt) of carbon. This represents 42% of all soil carbon and exceeds the carbon stored in all other vegetation types, including the world's forests.<ref>{{Cite web |date=6 November 2017 |title=Peatlands and climate change |url=https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/peatlands-and-climate-change |website=IUCN}}</ref> The threat to peatlands includes draining the areas for agriculture. Another threat is cutting down trees for lumber, as the trees help hold and fix the peatland.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Maclean |first=Ruth |date=22 February 2022 |title=What Do the Protectors of Congo's Peatlands Get in Return? |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/02/21/headway/peatlands-congo-climate-change.html |access-date=30 May 2022 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=6 November 2017 |title=Peatlands and climate change |url=https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/peatlands-and-climate-change |access-date=30 May 2022 |website=IUCN |language=en}}</ref> Additionally, peat is often sold for compost.<ref>{{cite news |date=7 November 2021 |title=Climate change: National Trust joins international call for peat product ban |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59195535 |access-date=12 June 2022}}</ref> It is possible to restore degraded peatlands by blocking drainage channels in the peatland, and allowing natural vegetation to recover.<ref name="ReferenceA" /><ref>Harenda K.M., Lamentowicz M., Samson M., Chojnicki B.H. (2018) The Role of Peatlands and Their Carbon Storage Function in the Context of Climate Change. In: Zielinski T., Sagan I., Surosz W. (eds) Interdisciplinary Approaches for Sustainable Development Goals. GeoPlanet: Earth and Planetary Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71788-3_12</ref>

[[Mangrove]]s, [[salt marsh]]es and [[seagrass]]es make up the majority of the ocean's vegetated habitats. They only equal 0.05% of the plant biomass on land. But they store carbon 40 times faster than tropical forests.<ref name="ReferenceA" /> [[Bottom trawling]], [[dredging]] for coastal development and [[fertiliser runoff]] have damaged coastal habitats. Notably, 85% of [[oyster reef]]s globally have been removed in the last two centuries. Oyster reefs clean the water and help other species thrive. This increases biomass in that area. In addition, oyster reefs mitigate the effects of climate change by reducing the force of waves from hurricanes. They also reduce the erosion from rising sea levels.<ref>{{cite web |date=31 August 2021 |title=How oysters can stop a flood |url=https://www.vox.com/videos/22650761/oyster-reef-restoration-flooding-climate-change |access-date=2 June 2022 |publisher=Vox}}</ref> Restoration of coastal wetlands is thought to be more cost-effective than restoration of inland wetlands.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Taillardat |first1=Pierre |last2=Thompson |first2=Benjamin S. |last3=Garneau |first3=Michelle |last4=Trottier |first4=Karelle |last5=Friess |first5=Daniel A. |date=6 October 2020 |title=Climate change mitigation potential of wetlands and the cost-effectiveness of their restoration |journal=Interface Focus |volume=10 |issue=5 |pages=20190129 |doi=10.1098/rsfs.2019.0129 |pmc=7435041 |pmid=32832065 |quote=Analysis of wetland restoration costs relative to the amount of carbon they can sequester revealed that restoration is more cost-effective in coastal wetlands such as mangroves (US$1800 ton C−1) compared with inland wetlands (US$4200–49 200 ton C−1). We advise that for inland wetlands, priority should be given to conservation rather than restoration; while for coastal wetlands, both conservation and restoration may be effective techniques for climate change mitigation.}}</ref>

=== Deep ocean ===
{{Further|Carbon sequestration#Sequestration techniques in oceans|Ocean acidification#Technologies to remove carbon dioxide from the ocean|Blue carbon}}

These options focus on the carbon which ocean reservoirs can store. They include [[ocean fertilization]], [[ocean alkalinity enhancement]] or [[enhanced weathering]].<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 12">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_12.pdf Chapter 12: Cross sectoral perspectives] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|12–36}} The IPCC found in 2022 ocean-based mitigation options currently have only limited deployment potential. But it assessed that their future mitigation potential is large.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 12" />{{rp|12–4}} It found that in total, ocean-based methods could remove 1–100&nbsp;Gt of {{CO2}} per year.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-94}} Their costs are in the order of US$40–500 per tonne of {{CO2}}. Most of these options could also help to reduce [[ocean acidification]]. This is the drop in pH value caused by increased atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Doney |first1=Scott C. |last2=Busch |first2=D. Shallin |last3=Cooley |first3=Sarah R. |last4=Kroeker |first4=Kristy J. |date=2020 |title=The Impacts of Ocean Acidification on Marine Ecosystems and Reliant Human Communities |journal=Annual Review of Environment and Resources |language=en |volume=45 |issue=1 |pages=83–112 |doi=10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-083019 |issn=1543-5938 |s2cid=225741986 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The recovery of whale populations can play a role in mitigation as [[whale]]s play a significant part in [[nutrient recycling]] in the ocean. This occurs through what is referred to as the [[whale pump]], where whales’ liquid feces stay at the surface of the ocean. [[Phytoplankton]] live near the surface of the ocean in order use sunlight to photosynthesize and rely on much of the carbon, nitrogen and iron of the feces. As the phytoplankton form the [[Primary production|base]] of the [[marine food chain]] this increases ocean biomass and thus the amount of carbon sequestrated in it.<ref name="PLOSOne">{{cite journal|author1=Roman, J. |author2=McCarthy, J.J. |year= 2010|title=The Whale Pump: Marine Mammals Enhance Primary Productivity in a Coastal Basin|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=5|issue=10|id=e13255|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0013255|pages=e13255|pmid=20949007|pmc=2952594|bibcode= 2010PLoSO...513255R|doi-access= free}}</ref>

Blue carbon management is another type of ocean-based biological [[carbon dioxide removal]] (CDR). It can involve land-based as well as ocean-based measures.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 12" />{{rp|12–51}}<ref>Canadell, J.G., P.M.S. Monteiro, M.H. Costa, L. Cotrim da Cunha, P.M. Cox, A.V. Eliseev, S. Henson, M. Ishii, S. Jaccard, C. Koven, A. Lohila, P.K. Patra, S. Piao, J. Rogelj, S. Syampungani, S. Zaehle, and K. Zickfeld, 2021: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-5/ Chapter 5: Global Carbon and other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks]. In ''[https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/ Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]'' [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 673–816, doi: 10.1017/9781009157896.007.</ref>{{rp|764}} The term usually refers to the role that [[tidal marsh]]es, [[mangrove]]s and [[seagrass]]es can play in carbon sequestration.<ref name="IPCC AR6 WGI Glossary">IPCC, 2021: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_AnnexVII.pdf Annex VII: Glossary] [Matthews, J.B.R., V. Möller, R. van Diemen, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. Masson-Delmotte, C.&nbsp; Méndez, S. Semenov, A. Reisinger (eds.)]. In [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/ Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2215–2256, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.022.</ref>{{rp|2220}} Some of these efforts can also take place in deep ocean waters. This is where the vast majority of ocean carbon is held. These ecosystems can contribute to climate change mitigation and also to [[ecosystem-based adaptation]]. Conversely, when blue carbon ecosystems are degraded or lost they release carbon back to the atmosphere.<ref name="IPCC AR6 WGI Glossary" />{{rp|2220}} There is increasing interest in developing blue carbon potential.<ref name="Ricart2022">{{cite journal |last1=Ricart |first1=Aurora M. |last2=Krause-Jensen |first2=Dorte |last3=Hancke |first3=Kasper |last4=Price |first4=Nichole N. |last5=Masqué |first5=Pere |last6=Duarte |first6=Carlos M. |date=2022 |title=Sinking seaweed in the deep ocean for carbon neutrality is ahead of science and beyond the ethics |journal=Environmental Research Letters |volume=17 |issue=8 |page=081003 |bibcode=2022ERL....17h1003R |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/ac82ff |s2cid=250973225 |doi-access=free|hdl=10754/679874 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Scientists have found that in some cases these types of ecosystems remove far more carbon per area than terrestrial forests. However, the long-term effectiveness of blue carbon as a carbon dioxide removal solution remains under discussion.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hurd |first1=Catriona L. |last2=Law |first2=Cliff S. |last3=Bach |first3=Lennart T. |last4=Britton |first4=Damon |last5=Hovenden |first5=Mark |last6=Paine |first6=Ellie R. |last7=Raven |first7=John A. |last8=Tamsitt |first8=Veronica |last9=Boyd |first9=Philip W. |date=2022 |title=Forensic carbon accounting: Assessing the role of seaweeds for carbon sequestration |journal=Journal of Phycology |volume=58 |issue=3 |pages=347–363 |doi=10.1111/jpy.13249 |pmid=35286717 |bibcode=2022JPcgy..58..347H |s2cid=247453370|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Ricart2022" /><ref name="Boyd2022">{{cite journal |last1=Boyd |first1=Philip W. |last2=Bach |first2=Lennart T. |last3=Hurd |first3=Catriona L. |last4=Paine |first4=Ellie |last5=Raven |first5=John A. |last6=Tamsitt |first6=Veronica |date=2022 |title=Potential negative effects of ocean afforestation on offshore ecosystems |journal=Nature Ecology & Evolution |volume=6 |issue=6 |pages=675–683 |doi=10.1038/s41559-022-01722-1 |pmid=35449458 |bibcode=2022NatEE...6..675B |s2cid=248322820}}</ref>

===Enhanced weathering===
{{Main|Enhanced weathering}}

Enhanced weathering could remove 2–4&nbsp;Gt of {{CO2}} per year. This process aims to accelerate natural [[weathering]] by spreading finely ground [[Silicate mineral|silicate]] rock, such as [[basalt]], onto surfaces. This speeds up chemical reactions between rocks, water, and air. It [[Carbon dioxide removal|removes carbon dioxide]] from the atmosphere, permanently storing it in solid [[carbonate mineral]]s or ocean [[alkalinity]].<ref>{{Cite web|date=19 February 2018|title=Guest post: How 'enhanced weathering' could slow climate change and boost crop yields|url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-enhanced-weathering-could-slow-climate-change-and-boost-crop-yields|access-date=3 November 2021|website=Carbon Brief|language=en|archive-date=8 September 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210908204350/https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-enhanced-weathering-could-slow-climate-change-and-boost-crop-yields|url-status=live}}</ref> Cost estimates are in the US$50–200 per tonne range of {{CO2}}.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-94}}

== Other methods to capture and store CO<sub>2</sub> ==
{{Main|Direct air capture|Carbon capture and storage|Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage}}

[[File:Carbon sequestration-2009-10-07.svg|thumb|upright=1.35|Schematic showing both terrestrial and geological sequestration of carbon dioxide emissions from a large point source, for example burning natural gas]]

In addition to traditional land-based methods to remove carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) from the air, other technologies are under development. These could reduce CO<sub>2</sub> emissions and lower existing atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> levels. [[Carbon capture and storage]] (CCS) is a method to mitigate climate change by capturing CO<sub>2</sub> from large [[Point source pollution|point sources]], such as cement factories or [[Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage|biomass]] power plants. It then stores it away safely instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. The IPCC estimates that the costs of halting global warming would double without CCS.<ref name="guardian0916">{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/09/co2-turned-into-stone-in-iceland-in-climate-change-breakthrough|title={{CO2}} turned into stone in Iceland in climate change breakthrough|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=2 September 2017|date=9 June 2016}}</ref>

Among the most viable carbon dioxide removal methods considered alongside solar radiation modification, biochar soil amendment is already being deployed commercially. Studies indicate that the carbon it contains remains stable in soils for centuries, giving it a durable potential of removing gigatonnes of CO2 per year.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Weng |first1=Zhe Han |last2=Cowie |first2=Annette L.|title=Estimates vary but credible evidence points to gigaton‑scale climate change mitigation potential of biochar |journal=Communications Earth and Environment |year=2025 |volume=6 |issue=1 |page=259 |doi=10.1038/s43247-025-02228-x |doi-access=free |bibcode=2025ComEE...6..259W }}</ref> Expert assessments place the net cost of removing CO2 with biochar between US$30 and $120 per tonne. Market data show that biochar supplied 94% of all durable CDR credits delivered in 2023, demonstrating current scalability.<ref>{{cite report |title=Soil Carbon & Biochar – Carbon Removal Fact Sheet |publisher=Institute for Carbon Removal Law and Policy, American University |year=2018 |url=https://www.american.edu/sis/centers/carbon-removal/upload/icrlp_fact_sheet_soil_carbon_biochar_181006.pdf}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Trending on Track? CDR.fyi 2023 Year in Review|website=CDR.fyi |date=2024-02-07|url=https://www.cdr.fyi/blog/2023-year-in-review}}</ref> Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), by comparison, could reduce global temperature quickly by dispersing sulfate aerosols in the stratosphere; however, deployment at climatically relevant scale would require the design and certification of a new fleet of high‑altitude aircraft, a process estimated to take a decade or more, and ongoing operating costs of about US$18 billion for each degree Celsius of cooling.<ref>{{cite news |last=Cho |first=Renée |title=Solar Geoengineering to Cool the Planet: Is It Worth the Risks?|work=State of the Planet |publisher=Columbia Climate School|date=2024-04-24|url=https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2024/04/24/solar-geoengineering-to-cool-the-planet-is-it-worth-the-risks/}}</ref> While models confirm that SAI would lower global mean temperature, there are potential side effect including ozone depletion, altered
regional precipitation patterns, and the risk of a sudden "termination shock" warming if the programme were interrupted. These systemic risks are absent from biochar deployment.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tang |first1=Aaron |last2=Kemp |first2=Luke |title=A Fate Worse Than Warming? Stratospheric Aerosol Injection and Global Catastrophic Risk |journal=Frontiers in Climate |year=2021 |volume=3 |doi=10.3389/fclim.2021.720312 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2021FrCli...3.0312T }}</ref>

[[Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage]] (BECCS) expands on the potential of CCS and aims to lower atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> levels. This process uses [[biomass]] grown for [[bioenergy]]. The biomass yields energy in useful forms such as electricity, heat, biofuels, etc. through consumption of the biomass via combustion, fermentation, or pyrolysis. The process captures the CO<sub>2</sub> that was extracted from the atmosphere when it grew. It then stores it underground or via land application as [[biochar]]. This effectively [[Carbon dioxide removal|removes it from the atmosphere]].<ref name="Obersteiner2">{{cite journal |last1=Obersteiner |first1=M. |year=2001 |title=Managing Climate Risk |journal=Science |volume=294 |issue=5543 |pages=786–7 |doi=10.1126/science.294.5543.786b |pmid=11681318 |s2cid=34722068}}</ref> This makes BECCS a negative emissions technology (NET).<ref>{{Cite book |last=National Academies of Sciences |first=Engineering |url=https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259/negative-emissions-technologies-and-reliable-sequestration-a-research-agenda |title=Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda |date=24 October 2018 |isbn=978-0-309-48452-7 |language=en |doi=10.17226/25259 |pmid=31120708 |access-date=22 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200525204549/https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259/negative-emissions-technologies-and-reliable-sequestration-a-research-agenda |archive-date=25 May 2020 |url-status=live |s2cid=134196575}}</ref>

Scientists estimated the potential range of negative emissions from BECCS in 2018 as 0–22&nbsp;Gt per year.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Smith |first1=Pete |last2=Porter |first2=John R. |date=July 2018 |title=Bioenergy in the IPCC Assessments |journal=GCB Bioenergy |volume=10 |issue=7 |pages=428–431 |doi=10.1111/gcbb.12514 |bibcode=2018GCBBi..10..428S |doi-access=free|hdl=2164/10480 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> {{As of|2022}}, BECCS was capturing approximately 2 million tonnes per year of CO<sub>2</sub> annually.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/bioenergy-with-carbon-capture-and-storage |access-date=2 December 2022 |website=IEA |language=en-GB}}</ref> The cost and availability of biomass limits wide deployment of BECCS.<ref name="rhodes2">{{cite journal |last1=Rhodes |first1=James S. |last2=Keith |first2=David W. |year=2008 |title=Biomass with capture: Negative emissions within social and environmental constraints: An editorial comment |journal=Climatic Change |volume=87 |issue=3–4 |pages=321–8 |bibcode=2008ClCh...87..321R |doi=10.1007/s10584-007-9387-4 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>Fajardy, M., Köberle, A., Mac Dowell, N., Fantuzzi, A. (2019) BECCS deployment: a reality check. Imperial College London.</ref>{{rp|10}} BECCS currently forms a big part of achieving climate targets beyond 2050 in modelling, such as by the [[Integrated assessment modelling|Integrated Assessment Models]] (IAMs) associated with the IPCC process. But many scientists are sceptical due to the risk of loss of biodiversity.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Rishi Sunak lambasted by scientists for UK's 'disturbing' energy source |url=https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-lambasted-by-scientists-for-uks-disturbing-energy-source-12760175 |access-date=3 December 2022 |website=Sky News |language=en}}</ref>

[[Direct air capture]] is a process of capturing {{co2}} directly from the ambient air. This is in contrast to CCS which captures carbon from point sources. It generates a concentrated stream of {{CO2}} for [[Carbon sequestration|sequestration]], [[Carbon capture and utilization|utilisation]] or production of [[carbon-neutral fuel]] and [[windgas]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Direct Air Capture – Analysis|url=https://www.iea.org/reports/direct-air-capture|access-date=24 December 2021|website=IEA|language=en-GB}}</ref> Artificial processes vary, and there are concerns about the long-term effects of some of these processes.<ref name="RoyalSociety">The Royal Society, (2009) [http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=35151 "Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty"]. Retrieved 12 September 2009.</ref>{{Obsolete source|date=December 2022}}

== Mitigation by sector ==
{{See also|Greenhouse gas emissions#Emissions by sector}}
{{multiple image
| total_width       = 500
| image1            = Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Economic Sector.svg
| caption1          = Taking into account direct and indirect emissions, industry is the sector with the highest share of global emissions.
| image2            = Global GHG Emissions by Sector 2016.png
| caption2          = 2016 global greenhouse gas emissions by sector.<ref>{{Cite web |date=6 March 2020 |title=Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector |url=http://earthcharts.org/emissions-sources/ |access-date=15 March 2020 |website=EarthCharts}}</ref> Percentages are calculated from estimated global emissions of all Kyoto Greenhouse Gases, converted to {{CO2}} equivalent quantities (Gt{{CO2}}e).
}}

=== Buildings ===
{{Further|Energy-efficient buildings|Sustainable architecture|Green building|Low-energy house|Air conditioning paradox}}

The building sector accounts for 23% of global energy-related {{CO2}} emissions.<ref name="Rogelj-2018">Rogelj, J., D. Shindell, K. Jiang, S. Fifita, P. Forster, V. Ginzburg, C. Handa, H. Kheshgi, S. Kobayashi, E. Kriegler, L. Mundaca, R. Séférian, and M.V.Vilariño, 2018: [https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2022/06/SR15_Chapter_2_LR.pdf Chapter 2: Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development]. In: [https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, US, pp. 93-174. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940.004.</ref>{{rp|141}} About half of the energy is used for space and [[water heating]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=International Energy Agency |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1144453104 |title=Energy technology perspectives 2017 : catalysing energy technology transformations |date=2017 |isbn=978-92-64-27597-3 |location=Paris |publisher=Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development |oclc=1144453104}}</ref> Building insulation can reduce the primary energy demand significantly. [[Heat pump]] loads may also provide a flexible resource that can participate in [[demand response]] to integrate variable renewable resources into the grid.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Thomas |first=Nathalie |date=2022-11-30 |title=Now is the time for all consumers to come to the aid of their grid |work=Financial Times |url=https://www.ft.com/content/83ef3de0-c7eb-463a-beea-750c0dfbc687 |access-date=2023-05-17}}</ref> [[Solar water heating]] uses thermal energy directly. Sufficiency measures include moving to smaller houses when the needs of households change, mixed use of spaces and the collective use of devices.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|71}} Planners and civil engineers can construct new buildings using [[passive solar building design]], [[low-energy building]], or [[zero-energy building]] techniques. In addition, it is possible to design buildings that are more energy-efficient to cool by using lighter-coloured, more reflective materials in the development of urban areas.

Heat pumps efficiently heat buildings, and cool them by [[air conditioning]]. A modern heat pump typically transports around three to five times more thermal energy than electrical energy consumed. The amount depends on the [[coefficient of performance]] and the outside temperature.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Heat Pumps – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/heat-pumps |access-date=25 November 2022 |year=2022 |website=IEA |language=en-GB}}</ref>

Refrigeration and air conditioning account for about 10% of global {{CO2}} emissions caused by fossil fuel-based energy production and the use of fluorinated gases. Alternative cooling systems, such as [[passive cooling]] building design and [[passive daytime radiative cooling]] surfaces, can reduce air conditioning use. Suburbs and cities in hot and arid climates can significantly reduce energy consumption from cooling with daytime radiative cooling.<ref name="Zhou-2021">{{Cite journal |last1=Zhou |first1=Kai |last2=Miljkovic |first2=Nenad |last3=Cai |first3=Lili |date=March 2021 |title=Performance analysis on system-level integration and operation of daytime radiative cooling technology for air-conditioning in buildings |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778821000335 |journal=Energy and Buildings |volume=235 |page=110749 |doi=10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.110749 |bibcode=2021EneBu.23510749Z |via=Elsevier Science Direct |s2cid=234180182}}</ref>

Energy consumption for cooling is likely to rise significantly due to increasing heat and availability of devices in poorer countries. Of the 2.8 billion people living in the hottest parts of the world, only 8% currently have air conditioners, compared with 90% of people in the US and Japan.<ref>{{cite web |last=Radhika |first=Lalik |date=2019 |title=How India is solving its cooling challenge |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/india-heat-cooling-challenge-temperature-air-conditioning/ |access-date=20 July 2021 |publisher=World Economic Forum}}</ref> Adoption of air conditioners typically increases in warmer areas at above $10,000 annual household income.<ref name="Davis">[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102299 Davis, L., Gertler, P., Jarvis, S., & Wolfram, C. (2021). Air conditioning and global inequality. Global Environmental Change, 69, 102299.]</ref> By combining energy efficiency improvements and decarbonising electricity for air conditioning with the transition away from super-polluting refrigerants, the world could avoid cumulative greenhouse gas emissions of up to 210–460 Gt{{CO2}}-eq over the next four decades.<ref name="IEA2020">{{cite web |date=2020 |title=Cooling Emissions and Policy Synthesis Report |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/cooling-emissions-and-policy-synthesis-report |access-date=20 July 2020 |publisher=IEA/UNEP}}</ref> A shift to renewable energy in the cooling sector comes with two advantages: Solar energy production with mid-day peaks corresponds with the load required for cooling and additionally, cooling has a large potential for load management in the electric grid.<ref name="IEA2020" />

=== Urban planning ===
{{Main|Climate change and cities}}

[[File:BikesInAmsterdam 2004 SeanMcClean.jpg|right|thumb|[[Bicycle]]s have almost no [[carbon footprint]].<ref>{{cite web |title=The Future of the Canals |url=http://www.canalmuseum.org.uk/education/teacher/lessonplan-future.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303233108/http://www.canalmuseum.org.uk/education/teacher/lessonplan-future.pdf |archive-date=3 March 2016 |access-date=8 September 2013 |publisher=London Canal Museum}}</ref>]]

Cities emitted 28&nbsp;GtCO<sub>2</sub>-eq in 2020 of combined CO<sub>2</sub> and {{CH4}} emissions.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-61}} This was from producing and consuming goods and services.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-61}} Climate-smart [[urban planning]] aims to reduce [[urban sprawl|sprawl]] to reduce the distance travelled. This lowers emissions from transportation. Switching from cars by improving [[walkability]] and [[cycling infrastructure]] is beneficial to a country's economy as a whole.<ref>{{Cite web |last=UKCCC |date=2020 |title=The Sixth Carbon Budget Surface Transport |url=https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Sector-summary-Surface-transport.pdf |website=[[UKCCC]] |quote=there is zero net cost to the economy of switching from cars to walking and cycling}}</ref>

[[Urban forestry]], lakes and other blue and green infrastructure can reduce emissions directly and indirectly by reducing energy demand for cooling.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-66}} Methane emissions from [[municipal solid waste]] can be reduced by segregation, [[compost]]ing, and recycling.<ref>{{Cite web |date=7 November 2022 |title=This is how cities can reduce emissions with waste-reduction solutions |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/11/waste-emissions-methane-cities/ |access-date=6 December 2022 |website=World Economic Forum |language=en}}</ref>

=== Transport ===
{{Main|Sustainable transport|Phase-out of fossil fuel vehicles}}

[[File:2015- Passenger electric vehicle (EV) annual sales - BloombergNEF.svg|thumb|Sales of electric vehicles (EVs) indicate a trend away from gas-powered vehicles that generate greenhouse gases.<ref name="BloombergNEF_20230112">Data from {{cite news |last1=McKerracher |first1=Colin |title=Electric Vehicles Look Poised for Slower Sales Growth This Year |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-12/electric-vehicles-look-poised-for-slower-sales-growth-this-year |publisher=BloombergNEF |date=12 January 2023 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20230112125649/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-12/electric-vehicles-look-poised-for-slower-sales-growth-this-year |archive-date=12 January 2023 |url-status=live }}</ref>]]
Transportation accounts for 15% of emissions worldwide.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ge |first1=Mengpin |last2=Friedrich |first2=Johannes |last3=Vigna |first3=Leandro |date=6 February 2020 |title=4 Charts Explain Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Countries and Sectors |url=https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-sector |language=en |access-date=30 December 2020 |website=World Resources Institute}}</ref> Increasing the use of public transport, low-carbon freight transport and [[cycling]] are important components of transport decarbonisation.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Jochem |first1=Patrick |last2=Rothengatter |first2=Werner |last3=Schade |first3=Wolfgang |date=2016 |title=Climate change and transport |url=https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/91601/ |language=en}}</ref><ref name="10.1016/j.scs.2016.01.004">{{cite journal |last1=Kwan |first1=Soo Chen |last2=Hashim |first2=Jamal Hisham |date=1 April 2016 |title=A review on co-benefits of mass public transportation in climate change mitigation |journal=Sustainable Cities and Society |language=en |volume=22 |pages=11–18 |doi=10.1016/j.scs.2016.01.004 |bibcode=2016SusCS..22...11K |issn=2210-6707}}</ref>

[[Electric vehicle]]s and environmentally friendly rail help to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels. In most cases, electric trains are more efficient than air transport and truck transport.<ref>{{cite web |author=Lowe, Marcia D. |date=April 1994 |title=Back on Track: The Global Rail Revival |url=http://www.worldwatch.org/node/872 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061204005745/http://www.worldwatch.org/node/872 |archive-date=4 December 2006 |access-date=15 February 2007}}</ref> Other efficiency means include improved public transport, [[smart mobility]], carsharing and [[hybrid vehicle|electric hybrids]]. Fossil-fuel for passenger cars can be included in emissions trading.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Keating |first=Dave |date=21 December 2022 |title=EU's end-of-year energy breakthroughs will have big climate implications |url=https://www.energymonitor.ai/finance/regulation-policy/eus-end-of-year-energy-breakthroughs-will-have-big-climate-implications/ |access-date=30 December 2022 |website=Energy Monitor |language=en-US}}</ref> Furthermore, moving away from a [[car]]-dominated transport system towards low-carbon advanced public transport system is important.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mattioli |first1=Giulio |last2=Roberts |first2=Cameron |last3=Steinberger |first3=Julia K. |last4=Brown |first4=Andrew |date=1 August 2020 |title=The political economy of car dependence: A systems of provision approach |journal=Energy Research & Social Science |language=en |volume=66 |pages=101486 |doi=10.1016/j.erss.2020.101486 |issn=2214-6296 |s2cid=216186279|doi-access=free |bibcode=2020ERSS...6601486M }}</ref>

Heavyweight, large personal vehicles (such as cars) require a lot of energy to move and take up much urban space.<ref>{{Cite web |author1=Venkat Sumantran |author2=Charles Fine |author3=David Gonsalvez |date=16 October 2017 |title=Our cities need fewer cars, not cleaner cars |url=http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/16/our-cities-need-fewer-cars-not-cleaner-cars-electric-green-transport |website=The Guardian}}</ref><ref name="Casson">{{Cite web |last=Casson |first=Richard |date=25 January 2018 |title=We don't just need electric cars, we need fewer cars |url=https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/13968/we-dont-just-need-electric-cars-we-need-fewer-cars/ |access-date=17 September 2020 |publisher=Greenpeace}}</ref> Several alternatives modes of transport are available to replace these. The European Union has made smart mobility part of its [[European Green Deal]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=7 January 2020 |title=The essentials of the "Green Deal" of the European Commission |url=https://www.greenfacts.org/en/europe-green-deal-2019/l-2/index.htm#0 |access-date=3 April 2020 |website=Green Facts }}</ref> In [[Smart city|smart cities]], smart mobility is also important.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Smart Mobility in Smart Cities |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314246043 |website=ResearchGate}}</ref>[[File:Societe de transport de Montreal bus 36-902 - 08.jpg|thumb|[[Battery electric bus]] in [[Montreal]]]]
The World Bank is helping lower income countries buy electric buses. Their purchase price is higher than diesel buses. But lower running costs and health improvements due to cleaner air can offset this higher price.<ref>{{Cite web |title=How electric vehicles can help the developing world |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/12/electric-vehicles-developing-world-cities/ |access-date=9 December 2022 |website=World Economic Forum |date=5 December 2022 |language=en}}</ref>

Between one quarter and three quarters of cars on the road by 2050 are forecast to be electric vehicles.<ref>{{Cite news |title=How green are electric cars? |url=http://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2017/dec/25/how-green-are-electric-cars |website=The Guardian|date=25 December 2017 |last1=Clarke |first1=Seán }}</ref> [[Hydrogen]] may be a solution for long-distance heavy freight trucks, if batteries alone are too heavy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Collins |first=Leigh |date=13 May 2022 |title=Hydrogen v battery trucks {{!}} UK launches $240m competition to find out which is best for zero-emissions haulage {{!}} Recharge |url=https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/hydrogen-v-battery-trucks-uk-launches-240m-competition-to-find-out-which-is-best-for-zero-emissions-haulage/2-1-1219034 |access-date=9 December 2022 |website=Recharge news |language=en}}</ref>

==== Shipping ====
{{Further|Environmental effects of shipping#Greenhouse gas emissions}}

In the shipping industry, the use of [[liquefied natural gas]] (LNG) as a marine bunker fuel is driven by emissions regulations. Ship operators must switch from [[heavy fuel oil]] to more expensive oil-based fuels, implement costly flue gas treatment technologies or switch to [[Marine LNG Engine|LNG engines]].<ref>{{cite web |date=28 September 2014 |title=LNG projected to gain significant market share in transport fuels by 2035 |url=http://gasprocessingnews.com/news/lng-projected-to-gain-significant-market-share-in-transport-fuels-by-2035.aspx |publisher=Gas Processing News/Bloomberg}}</ref> Methane slip, when gas leaks unburned through the engine, lowers the advantages of LNG. [[Maersk]], the world's biggest container shipping line and vessel operator, warns of [[stranded asset]]s when investing in transitional fuels like LNG.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Chambers |first1=Sam |date=26 February 2021 |title='Transitional fuels are capturing the regulatory agenda and incentives': Maersk |publisher=splash247 |url=https://splash247.com/transitional-fuels-are-capturing-the-regulatory-agenda-and-incentives-maersk/ |access-date=27 February 2021}}</ref> The company lists green [[ammonia]] as one of the preferred fuel types of the future. It has announced the first carbon-neutral vessel on the water by 2023, running on carbon-neutral [[methanol]].<ref>{{cite press release |title=Maersk backs plan to build Europe's largest green ammonia facility |url=https://www.maersk.com/news/articles/2021/02/23/maersk-backs-plan-to-build-europe-largest-green-ammonia-facility |publisher=Maersk |date=23 February 2021 |access-date=27 February 2021}}</ref> Cruise operators are trialling partially [[hydrogen-powered ship]]s.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bahtić |first=Fatima |date=10 November 2022 |title=Viking's new cruise ship equipped with hydrogen fuel cells delivered |url=https://www.offshore-energy.biz/vikings-new-cruise-ship-equipped-with-hydrogen-fuel-cells-delivered/ |access-date=9 December 2022 |website=Offshore Energy |language=en-US}}</ref>

Hybrid and all electric ferries are suitable for short distances. Norway's goal is an all electric fleet by 2025.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Parker |first1=Selwyn |date=8 September 2020 |title=Norway moves closer to its ambition of an all-electric ferry fleet |url=https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/news-content-hub/partnership-creates-next-generation-all-electric-ferry-60619 |publisher=Rivera}}</ref>

==== Air transport ====
{{Further|environmental impact of aviation}}
[[File:CO2 emissions fraction of Aviation (%25).png|thumb|Between 1940 and 2018, aviation [[CO2 emissions|CO<sub>2</sub> emissions]] grew from 0.7% to 2.65% of all {{CO2}} emissions.<ref name="Lee20202">{{citation |author=D. S. Lee |title=The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018 |url= |journal=[[Atmospheric Environment]] |volume=244 |page=117834 |year=2021 |bibcode=2021AtmEn.24417834L |doi=10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834 |pmc=7468346 |pmid=32895604 |display-authors=etal}}</ref>]]<!--Climate change: Factors-->

Jet airliners contribute to climate change by emitting carbon dioxide, [[nitrogen oxides]], [[Condensation trails|contrails]] and particulates.<!--ref name=IPCC-1999--> Their [[radiative forcing]] is estimated at 1.3–1.4 that of {{CO2}} alone,<!--ref name=Azar2012Apr--> excluding induced [[cirrus cloud]].<!--ref name=Lee2009--> <!--Climate change: volume-->In 2018, global commercial operations generated 2.4% of all {{CO2}} emissions.<ref name="ICCTsep2019">{{cite web |author=Brandon Graver |author2=Kevin Zhang |author3=Dan Rutherford |date=September 2019 |title=CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from commercial aviation, 2018 |url=https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_CO2-commercl-aviation-2018_20190918.pdf |publisher=[[International Council on Clean Transportation]]}}</ref><!--Climate change: per passenger-->

The aviation industry has become more fuel efficient. But overall emissions have risen as the volume of air travel has increased.<!--ref name=ATAG--> By 2020, aviation emissions were 70% higher than in 2005 and they could grow by 300% by 2050.<ref name="EC-aviation">{{Cite web |date=23 November 2016 |title=Reducing emissions from aviation |url=https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/aviation_en |website=Climate Action |publisher=European Commission}}</ref> <!--Mitigation-->

It is possible to reduce aviation's environmental footprint by better [[fuel economy in aircraft]]. Optimising flight routes to lower non-{{CO2}} effects on climate from nitrogen oxides, particulates or contrails can also help. [[Aviation biofuel]], [[carbon emission trading]] and [[carbon offsetting]], part of the 191 nation ICAO's [[Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation]] (CORSIA), can lower {{CO2}} emissions. [[Short-haul flight ban]]s, train connections, personal choices and [[aviation taxation and subsidies|taxation on flights]] can lead to fewer flights. [[Hybrid electric aircraft]] and [[electric aircraft]] or [[hydrogen-powered aircraft]] may replace fossil fuel-powered aircraft.

Experts expect emissions from aviation to rise in most projections, at least until 2040. They currently amount to 180&nbsp;Mt of {{CO2}} or 11% of transport emissions. [[Aviation biofuel]] and hydrogen can only cover a small proportion of flights in the coming years. Experts expect hybrid-driven aircraft to start commercial regional scheduled flights after 2030. Battery-powered aircraft are likely to enter the market after 2035.<ref>{{Cite web |date=4 September 2019 |title=The aviation network – Decarbonisation issues |url=https://www.eurocontrol.int/publication/aviation-network-decarbonisation-issues |publisher=[[Eurocontrol]]}}</ref> Under CORSIA, flight operators can purchase [[carbon offset]]s to cover their emissions above 2019 levels. CORSIA will be compulsory from 2027.

=== Agriculture, forestry and land use ===
[[File:Environmental-impact-of-food-by-life-cycle-stage.png|thumb|upright=1.35|[[Greenhouse gas emissions]] across the [[supply chain]] for different foods, showing which type of food should be encouraged and which discouraged from a mitigation perspective]]
{{See also|Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture|Environmental impact of meat production|4=Sustainable agriculture}}

Almost 20% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the agriculture and forestry sector.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah |last2=Roser |first2=Max |last3=Rosado |first3=Pablo |date=11 May 2020 |title=CO<sub>2</sub> and Greenhouse Gas Emissions |url=https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector |journal=Our World in Data|access-date=21 December 2022}}</ref> To significantly reduce these emissions, annual investments in the agriculture sector need to increase to $260 billion by 2030. The potential benefits from these investments are estimated at $4.3 trillion by 2030, offering a substantial economic return of 16-to-1.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Sutton |first1=William R. |last2=Lotsch |first2=Alexander |last3=Prasann |first3=Ashesh |date=2024-05-06 |title=Recipe for a Livable Planet: Achieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood System |url=https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/c68a6f57-d4fb-4176-9a85-e313dd34c4e2/content |journal=World Bank}}</ref>{{Rp|pages=7–8}}

Mitigation measures in the food system can be divided into four categories. These are demand-side changes, ecosystem protections, mitigation on farms, and mitigation in [[supply chains]]. On the demand side, limiting [[food waste]] is an effective way to reduce food emissions. Changes to a diet less reliant on animal products such as [[plant-based diets]] are also effective.<ref name="UNEP-2022" />{{rp|XXV}}

With 21% of global methane emissions, cattle are a major driver of global warming.<ref name="Olivier-2020">Olivier J.G.J. and Peters J.A.H.W. (2020), [https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/pbl-2020-trends-in-global-co2-and_total-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2020-report_4331.pdf Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions: 2020 report]. [https://www.pbl.nl/en PBL Netherlands] Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague.</ref>{{rp|6}} When rainforests are cut and the land is converted for grazing, the impact is even higher. In Brazil, producing 1&nbsp;kg of beef can result in the emission of up to 335&nbsp;kg CO<sub>2</sub>-eq.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schmidinger |first1=Kurt |last2=Stehfest |first2=Elke |year=2012 |title=Including {{CO2}} implications of land occupation in LCAs – method and example for livestock products |url=https://foodethics.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/inst_ethik_wiss_dialog/Schmidinger__K._2012._Including_CO2_implications_of_land_occupation_in_LCAs-method_and_example_for_livestock_products._International_Journal_of_Life_Cycle_Assessment.pdf |journal=Int J Life Cycle Assess |volume=17 |issue=8 |page=967 |doi=10.1007/s11367-012-0434-7 |bibcode=2012IJLCA..17..962S |s2cid=73625760 |access-date=2021-06-09 |archive-date=2021-06-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210609213753/https://foodethics.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/inst_ethik_wiss_dialog/Schmidinger__K._2012._Including_CO2_implications_of_land_occupation_in_LCAs-method_and_example_for_livestock_products._International_Journal_of_Life_Cycle_Assessment.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Increasing the milk yield of dairy cows has been shown to reduce emissions.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/international/2024/12/12/what-has-four-stomachs-and-could-change-the-world|title=What has four stomachs and could change the world?|last1=Eldoret|date=12 Dec 2024|publisher=The Economist|last2=Merced|access-date=1 Mar 2025}}</ref>
Other livestock, manure management and rice cultivation also emit greenhouse gases, in addition to fossil fuel combustion in agriculture.

Important mitigation options for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions from livestock include genetic selection,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Bovine Genomics {{pipe}} Genome Canada |url=https://www.genomecanada.ca/en/programs/large-scale-science/past-competitions/strategic-initiatives/bovine-genomics |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190810023632/https://www.genomecanada.ca/en/programs/large-scale-science/past-competitions/strategic-initiatives/bovine-genomics |archive-date=10 August 2019 |access-date=2 August 2019 |website=www.genomecanada.ca}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |last1=Airhart |first1=Ellen |title=Canada Is Using Genetics to Make Cows Less Gassy |url=https://www.wired.com/story/canada-is-using-genetics-to-make-cows-less-gassy/ |magazine=Wired }}</ref> introduction of [[Methanotroph|methanotrophic bacteria]] into the rumen,<ref>{{Cite web |title=The use of direct-fed microbials for mitigation of ruminant methane emissions: a review |url=https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01137190/document}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Parmar |first1=N.R. |last2=Nirmal Kumar |first2=J.I. |last3=Joshi |first3=C.G. |year=2015 |title=Exploring diet-dependent shifts in methanogen and methanotroph diversity in the rumen of Mehsani buffalo by a metagenomics approach |journal=Frontiers in Life Science |volume=8 |issue=4 |pages=371–378 |doi=10.1080/21553769.2015.1063550 |s2cid=89217740}}</ref> vaccines, feeds,<ref>{{cite news |date=30 September 2021 |title=Kowbucha, seaweed, vaccines: the race to reduce cows' methane emissions |language=en |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/30/cow-methane-emissions-reduce-seaweed-kowbucha |access-date=1 December 2021}}</ref> diet modification and grazing management.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Boadi |first1=D |year=2004 |title=Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review |journal=Can. J. Anim. Sci. |volume=84 |issue=3 |pages=319–335 |doi=10.4141/a03-109 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>Martin, C. et al. 2010. Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale. ''Animal'' 4 : pp 351-365.</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Eckard |first1=R. J. |display-authors=etal |year=2010 |title=Options for the abatement of methane and nitrous oxide from ruminant production: A review |journal=Livestock Science |volume=130 |issue=1–3 |pages=47–56 |doi=10.1016/j.livsci.2010.02.010}}</ref> Other options are diet changes towards [[ruminant]]-free alternatives, such as [[milk substitute]]s and [[meat analogue]]s. Non-ruminant livestock, such as poultry, emit far fewer GHGs.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The carbon footprint of foods: are differences explained by the impacts of methane? |url=https://ourworldindata.org/carbon-footprint-food-methane |access-date=2023-04-14 |website=Our World in Data|date=10 March 2020 |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah }}</ref>

It is possible to cut methane emissions in rice cultivation by improved water management, combining dry seeding and one drawdown, or executing a [[alternate wetting and drying|sequence of wetting and drying]]. This results in emission reductions of up to 90% compared to full flooding and even increased yields.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Searchinger |first1=Tim |last2=Adhya |first2=Tapan K. |year=2014 |title=Wetting and Drying: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Saving Water from Rice Production |url=https://www.wri.org/research/wetting-and-drying-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-saving-water-rice-production |publisher=WRI}}</ref>

Reducing the usage of [[Fertilizer#Nitrogen_fertilizers|nitrogen fertilizers]] through [[nutrient management]] could avoid nitrous oxide emissions equal to 2.77 - 11.48 gigatons of carbon dioxide from 2020 to 2050.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://drawdown.org/solutions/nutrient-management |access-date=2025-06-17 |title=Nutrient management }}</ref>

=== Industry ===
{{Pie chart
 | caption= Global [[List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions|carbon dioxide emissions]] by country in 2023:
 | other = yes
 | label1 = China
 | value1 = 31.8 | color1=#E33
 | label2 = United States
 | value2 = 14.4 | color2=#1A9
 | label3 = European Union
 | value3 = 4.9  | color3=#36A
 | label4 = India
 | value4 = 9.5  | color4=#CC5
 | label5 = Russia
 | value5 = 5.8  | color5=#E72
 | label6 = Japan
 | value6 = 3.5  | color6=#928
 }}
Industry is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases when direct and indirect emissions are included. [[Electrification]] can reduce emissions from industry. [[Green hydrogen]] can play a major role in [[energy-intensive industries]] for which electricity is not an option. Further mitigation options involve the steel and cement industry, which can switch to a less polluting production process. Products can be made with less material to reduce emission-intensity and industrial processes can be made more efficient. Finally, [[circular economy]] measures reduce the need for new materials. This also saves on emissions that would have been released from the mining of collecting of those materials.<ref name="UNEP-2022" />{{rp|43}}

The decarbonisation of cement production requires new technologies, and therefore investment in innovation.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Cement – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/cement |access-date=1 January 2023 |website=IEA |language=en-GB}}</ref> Bioconcrete is one possibility to reduce emissions.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Adding bacteria can make concrete greener |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2022/11/23/adding-bacteria-can-make-concrete-greener |access-date=26 November 2022 |issn=0013-0613}}</ref> But no technology for mitigation is yet mature. So CCS will be necessary at least in the short-term.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The role of CCUS in decarbonizing the cement industry: A German case study |url=https://www.oxfordenergy.org/publications/the-role-of-ccus-in-decarbonizing-the-cement-industry-a-german-case-study/ |access-date=25 November 2022 |website=Oxford Institute for Energy Studies |language=en}}</ref>

Another sector with a significant carbon footprint is the steel sector, which is responsible for about 7% of global emissions.<ref name="Renewable Reads">{{Cite web |last=Renewable Reads|title=How to decarbonize the steel sector |url=https://renewablereads.com/2023/11/16/how-to-decarbonize-the-steel-sector/ |access-date=4 February 2024 |website=Renewable Reads |date=16 November 2023 |language=en}}</ref> Emissions can be reduced by using [[electric arc furnaces]] to melt and recycle scrap steel. To produce virgin steel without emissions, [[blast furnace]]s could be replaced by hydrogen [[direct reduced iron]] and [[electric arc furnace]]s. Alternatively, carbon capture and storage solutions can be used.<ref name="Renewable Reads"/>

Coal, gas and oil production often come with significant methane leakage.<ref name="Krane-2022">{{Cite web |last=Krane |first=Jim |title=Why fixing methane leaks from the oil and gas industry can be a climate game-changer – one that pays for itself |url=http://theconversation.com/why-fixing-methane-leaks-from-the-oil-and-gas-industry-can-be-a-climate-game-changer-one-that-pays-for-itself-194346 |access-date=27 November 2022 |website=The Conversation |date=17 November 2022 |language=en}}</ref> In the early 2020s some governments recognised the scale of the problem and introduced regulations.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cocks |first=Tim |date=29 September 2022 |title=Explainer: How methane leaks accelerate global warming |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/how-methane-leaks-accelerate-global-warming-2022-09-27/ |access-date=27 November 2022}}</ref> [[Methane leaks]] at oil and gas wells and processing plants are cost-effective to fix in countries which can easily trade gas internationally.<ref name="Krane-2022" /> There are leaks in countries where gas is cheap; such as Iran,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Heyman |first=Taylor |date=26 October 2022 |title=Iran and Turkmenistan among methane 'super emitters' spotted by Nasa from space |url=https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/2022/10/26/iran-and-turkmenistan-among-methane-super-emitters-spotted-by-nasa-from-space/ |access-date=27 November 2022 |website=The National |language=en}}</ref> Russia,<ref>{{Cite web |title=CO2 Emissions: Multiple Countries - Fossil fuel operations - 2021 - Climate TRACE |url=https://climatetrace.org/inventory |access-date=28 November 2022 |website=climatetrace.org |language=en}}</ref> and Turkmenistan.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Combier |first=Etienne |date=10 March 2022 |title=Turkmenistan, the unknown mega-polluter |url=https://novastan.org/en/turkmenistan/turkmenistan-the-unknown-mega-polluter/ |access-date=27 November 2022 |website=Novastan English |language=en-GB}}</ref> Nearly all this can be stopped by replacing old components and preventing routine flaring.<ref name="Krane-2022" /> [[Coalbed methane]] may continue leaking even after the mine has been closed. But it can be captured by drainage and/or ventilation systems.<ref>{{Cite web |last=US EPA |first=OAR |date=8 December 2015 |title=About Coal Mine Methane |url=https://www.epa.gov/cmop/about-coal-mine-methane |access-date=28 November 2022 |website=www.epa.gov |language=en}}</ref> Fossil fuel firms do not always have financial incentives to tackle methane leakage.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Driving Down Methane Leaks from the Oil and Gas Industry – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/reports/driving-down-methane-leaks-from-the-oil-and-gas-industry |access-date=28 November 2022 |website=IEA |date=18 January 2021 |language=en-GB}}</ref>

== Co-benefits ==
Co-benefits of climate change mitigation, also often referred to as ''ancillary benefits'', were firstly dominated in the scientific literature by studies that describe how lower GHG emissions lead to better air quality and consequently impact human health positively.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Burtraw |first1=Dallas |last2=Krupnick |first2=Alan |last3=Palmer |first3=Karen |last4=Paul |first4=Anthony |last5=Toman |first5=Michael |last6=Bloyd |first6=Cary |date=May 2003 |title=Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity sector |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0095-0696(02)00022-0 |journal=Journal of Environmental Economics and Management |volume=45 |issue=3 |pages=650–673 |doi=10.1016/s0095-0696(02)00022-0 |bibcode=2003JEEM...45..650B |issn=0095-0696 |s2cid=17391774}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Thambiran |first1=Tirusha |last2=Diab |first2=Roseanne D. |date=May 2011 |title=Air pollution and climate change co-benefit opportunities in the road transportation sector in Durban, South Africa |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.059 |journal=Atmospheric Environment |volume=45 |issue=16 |pages=2683–2689 |bibcode=2011AtmEn..45.2683T |doi=10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.059 |issn=1352-2310}}</ref> The scope of co-benefits research expanded to its economic, social, ecological and political implications.

Positive secondary effects that occur from climate mitigation and [[climate change adaptation|adaptation]] measures have been mentioned in research since the 1990s.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ayres |first1=Robert U. |last2=Walter |first2=Jörg |date=1991 |title=The greenhouse effect: Damages, costs and abatement |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00367920 |journal=Environmental & Resource Economics |volume=1 |issue=3 |pages=237–270 |doi=10.1007/bf00367920 |bibcode=1991EnREc...1..237A |issn=0924-6460 |s2cid=41324083}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Pearce |first=David William |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/232159680 |title=The secondary benefits of greenhouse gas control |date=1992 |publisher=Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment |oclc=232159680}}</ref> The IPCC first mentioned the role of co-benefits in 2001, followed by its fourth and fifth assessment cycle stressing improved working environment, reduced waste, health benefits and reduced capital expenditures.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Metz |first=Bert |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/46640845 |title=Climate change 2001 : mitigation : contribution of Working Group III to the third assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |date=2001 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0-521-80769-7 |oclc=46640845}}</ref> In the early 2000s the [[OECD]] was further fostering its efforts in promoting ancillary benefits.<ref>{{Cite book |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264188129-en |title=Ancillary Benefits and Costs of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation |date=2000-10-25 |isbn=9789264185425 |doi=10.1787/9789264188129-en}}</ref>

The IPCC pointed out in 2007: "Co-benefits of GHG mitigation can be an important decision criteria in analyses carried out by policy-makers, but they are often neglected" and added that the co-benefits are "not quantified, monetised or even identified by businesses and decision-makers".<ref name="ipcc">{{cite web |last1=IPCC |title=Co-benefits of climate change mitigation |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch4s4-5-3.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160525042147/http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch4s4-5-3.html |archive-date=2016-05-25 |accessdate=2016-02-18 |website=Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change |publisher=IPCC}}</ref> Appropriate consideration of co-benefits can greatly "influence policy decisions concerning the timing and level of mitigation action", and there can be "significant advantages to the national economy and technical innovation".<ref name="ipcc" />

An analysis of climate action in the UK found that public health benefits are a major component of the total benefits derived from climate action.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Sudmant |first1=Andrew |last2=Boyle |first2=Dom |last3=Higgins-Lavery |first3=Ruaidhri |last4=Gouldson |first4=Andy |last5=Boyle |first5=Andy |last6=Fulker |first6=James |last7=Brogan |first7=Jamie |date=2024-07-05 |title=Climate policy as social policy? A comprehensive assessment of the economic impact of climate action in the UK |journal=Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences |language=en |doi=10.1007/s13412-024-00955-9 |issn=2190-6491|doi-access=free }}</ref>

=== Employment and economic development ===
{{See also|Renewable energy#Market and industry trends}}
Co-benefits can positively impact employment, industrial development, states' energy independence and energy self-consumption. The deployment of renewable energies can foster job opportunities. Depending on the country and deployment scenario, replacing coal power plants with renewable energy can more than double the number of jobs per average MW capacity.<ref>{{Cite web |last=IASS/Green ID |date=2019 |title=Future skills and job creation through renewable energy in Vietnam. Assessing the co-benefits of decarbonising the power sector. |url=https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/COBENEFITS-Vietnam_Employment_Exec-Report.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210420232336/https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/COBENEFITS-Vietnam_Employment_Exec-Report.pdf |archive-date=2021-04-20}}</ref> Investments in renewable energies, especially in solar- and wind energy, can boost the value of production.<ref>{{Cite web |last=IASS/IPC |date=2019 |title=Industrial development, trade opportunities and innovation with renewable energy in Turkey. Assessing the co-benefits of decarbonising the power sector |url=https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/COBENEFITS-Turkey_Industrial-Development_ExecReport_200604.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210420232341/https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/COBENEFITS-Turkey_Industrial-Development_ExecReport_200604.pdf |archive-date=2021-04-20}}</ref> Countries which rely on energy imports can enhance their energy independence and ensure supply security by deploying renewables. National energy generation from renewables lowers the demand for fossil fuel imports which scales up annual economic saving.<ref>{{Cite web |last=IASS/IPC |date=2020 |title=Securing Turkey's energy supply and balancing the current account deficit through renewable energy. Assessing the co-benefits of decarbonising the power sector. |url=https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/13_LY_IASS_study_Turkey_201026.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210305061613/https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/13_LY_IASS_study_Turkey_201026.pdf |archive-date=2021-03-05}}</ref>

The European Commission forecasts a shortage of 180,000 skilled workers in hydrogen production and 66,000 in solar photovoltaic power by 2030.<ref name=":2113">{{Cite web |title=The scale-up gap: Financial market constraints holding back innovative firms in the European Union |url=https://www.eib.org/the-scale-up-gap |access-date=2024-07-30 |website=European Investment Bank |language=en}}</ref>

=== Energy security ===
A higher share of renewables can additionally lead to more [[energy security]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Mondal |first1=Md. Alam Hossain |last2=Denich |first2=Manfred |last3=Vlek |first3=Paul L.G. |date=December 2010 |title=The future choice of technologies and co-benefits of CO2 emission reduction in Bangladesh power sector |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.08.037 |journal=Energy |volume=35 |issue=12 |pages=4902–4909 |doi=10.1016/j.energy.2010.08.037 |bibcode=2010Ene....35.4902M |issn=0360-5442}}</ref> Socioeconomic co-benefits have been analysed such as energy access in rural areas and improved rural livelihoods.<ref>{{Cite web |last=IASS/TERI |date=2019 |title=Secure and reliable electricity access with renewable energy mini-grids in rural India. Assessing the co-benefits of decarbonising the power sector |url=https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/IN_EnergyAccess_ExecReport.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201021101531/https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/IN_EnergyAccess_ExecReport.pdf |archive-date=2020-10-21}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last1=Chhatre |first1=Ashwini |last2=Lakhanpal |first2=Shikha |last3=Larson |first3=Anne M |last4=Nelson |first4=Fred |last5=Ojha |first5=Hemant |last6=Rao |first6=Jagdeesh |date=December 2012 |title=Social safeguards and co-benefits in REDD+: a review of the adjacent possible |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.08.006 |journal=Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability |volume=4 |issue=6 |pages=654–660 |bibcode=2012COES....4..654C |doi=10.1016/j.cosust.2012.08.006 |issn=1877-3435}}</ref> Rural areas which are not fully electrified can benefit from the deployment of [[Renewable energy|renewable energies]]. Solar-powered mini-grids can remain economically viable, cost-competitive and reduce the number of power cuts. Energy reliability has additional social implications: stable electricity improves the quality of education.<ref>{{Cite web |last=IASS/TERI |date=2019 |title=Secure and reliable electricity access with renewable energy mini-grids in rural India. Assessing the co-benefits of decarbonising the power sector |url=https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/IN_EnergyAccess_ExecReport.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201021101531/https://www.cobenefits.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/IN_EnergyAccess_ExecReport.pdf |archive-date=2020-10-21}}</ref>

The International Energy Agency ([[International Energy Agency|IEA]]) spelled out the "multiple benefits approach" of [[Efficient energy use|energy efficiency]] while the International Renewable Energy Agency ([[International Renewable Energy Agency|IRENA]]) operationalised the list of co-benefits of the renewable energy sector.<ref>{{Cite web |last=IRENA |date=2016 |title=Renewable Energy Benefits: Measuring the Economics |url=https://www.irena.org/publications/2016/Jan/Renewable-Energy-Benefits-Measuring-the-Economics |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201093053/http://www.irena.org/publications/2016/Jan/Renewable-Energy-Benefits-Measuring-the-Economics |archive-date=2017-12-01}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=IEA |date=2015 |title=Capturing the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency |url=https://webstore.iea.org/capturing-the-multiple-benefits-of-energy-efficiency |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190701031853/https://webstore.iea.org/capturing-the-multiple-benefits-of-energy-efficiency |archive-date=2019-07-01}}</ref>

===Health and well-being===
{{Further|Effects of climate change on human health#Benefits from climate change mitigation and adaptation}}
{{See also|Health and environmental impact of the coal industry|Health and environmental impact of the petroleum industry}}

The health benefits from climate change mitigation are significant. Potential measures can not only mitigate future health impacts from climate change but also improve health directly.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Workman |first1=Annabelle |last2=Blashki |first2=Grant |last3=Bowen |first3=Kathryn J. |last4=Karoly |first4=David J. |last5=Wiseman |first5=John |date=April 2018 |title=The Political Economy of Health Co-Benefits: Embedding Health in the Climate Change Agenda |journal=International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health |language=en |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=674 |doi=10.3390/ijerph15040674 |pmc=5923716 |pmid=29617317 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="auto">{{cite web |last1=Molar |first1=Roberto |title=Reducing Emissions to Lessen Climate Change Could Yield Dramatic Health Benefits by 2030 |url=https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3134/reducing-emissions-to-lessen-climate-change-could-yield-dramatic-health-benefits-by-2030/ |access-date=1 December 2021 |website=Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet}}</ref> Climate change mitigation is interconnected with various health co-benefits, such as those from reduced [[air pollution]].<ref name="auto" /> Air pollution generated by fossil fuel combustion is both a major driver of global warming and the cause of a large number of annual deaths. Some estimates are as high as {{tooltip|2=A review of this and a more nuanced assessment of mortality impacts in terms of contribution to death, rather than number of deceased, may be needed|8.7 million}} excess deaths during 2018.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Green |first1=Matthew |date=9 February 2021 |title=Fossil fuel pollution causes one in five premature deaths globally: study |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pollution-fossil-idUSKBN2A90UB |url-status=live |access-date=5 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210225031944/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pollution-fossil-idUSKBN2A90UB |archive-date=25 February 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vohra |first1=Karn |last2=Vodonos |first2=Alina |last3=Schwartz |first3=Joel |last4=Marais |first4=Eloise A. |author4-link=Eloise Marais|last5=Sulprizio |first5=Melissa P. |last6=Mickley |first6=Loretta J. |date=April 2021 |title=Global mortality from outdoor fine particle pollution generated by fossil fuel combustion: Results from GEOS-Chem |url=https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10119672/ |journal=Environmental Research |volume=195 |pages=110754 |bibcode=2021ER....19510754V |doi=10.1016/j.envres.2021.110754 |pmid=33577774 |s2cid=231909881}}</ref> A 2023 study estimated that fossil fuels kill over 5 million people each year, as of 2019,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Gregory |first=Andrew |date=2023-11-29 |title=Air pollution from fossil fuels 'kills 5 million people a year' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/29/air-pollution-from-fossil-fuels-kills-5-million-people-a-year |work=[[The Guardian]] |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> by causing diseases such as [[heart attack]], [[stroke]] and [[chronic obstructive pulmonary disease]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Phasing out fossil fuels could save millions of lives |url=https://www.mpic.de/5466214/ausstieg-aus-fossilen-brennstoffen-koennte-mehr-als-fuenf-millionen-todesfaelle-verhindern |access-date=2024-04-19 |website=www.mpic.de |language=en}}</ref> [[Particulate pollution|Particulate air pollution]] kills by far the most, followed by [[ground-level ozone]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Roser |first=Max |date=2024-03-18 |title=Data review: how many people die from air pollution? |url=https://ourworldindata.org/data-review-air-pollution-deaths |journal=Our World in Data}}</ref>

Mitigation policies can also promote healthier diets such as less red meat, more active lifestyles, and increased exposure to green urban spaces.<ref name="Romanello-2021">{{cite journal |last1=Romanello |first1=Marina |last2=McGushin |first2=Alice |last3=Di Napoli |first3=Claudia |last4=Drummond |first4=Paul |last5=Hughes |first5=Nick |last6=Jamart |first6=Louis |last7=Kennard |first7=Harry |last8=Lampard |first8=Pete |last9=Solano Rodriguez |first9=Baltazar |last10=Arnell |first10=Nigel |last11=Ayeb-Karlsson |first11=Sonja |last12=Belesova |first12=Kristine |last13=Cai |first13=Wenjia |last14=Campbell-Lendrum |first14=Diarmid |last15=Capstick |first15=Stuart |last16=Chambers |first16=Jonathan |last17=Chu |first17=Lingzhi |last18=Ciampi |first18=Luisa |last19=Dalin |first19=Carole |last20=Dasandi |first20=Niheer |last21=Dasgupta |first21=Shouro |last22=Davies |first22=Michael |last23=Dominguez-Salas |first23=Paula |last24=Dubrow |first24=Robert |last25=Ebi |first25=Kristie L |last26=Eckelman |first26=Matthew |last27=Ekins |first27=Paul |last28=Escobar |first28=Luis E |last29=Georgeson |first29=Lucien |last30=Grace |first30=Delia |last31=Graham |first31=Hilary |last32=Gunther |first32=Samuel H |last33=Hartinger |first33=Stella |last34=He |first34=Kehan |last35=Heaviside |first35=Clare |last36=Hess |first36=Jeremy |last37=Hsu |first37=Shih-Che |last38=Jankin |first38=Slava |last39=Jimenez |first39=Marcia P |last40=Kelman |first40=Ilan |last41=Kiesewetter |first41=Gregor |last42=Kinney |first42=Patrick L |last43=Kjellstrom |first43=Tord |last44=Kniveton |first44=Dominic |last45=Lee |first45=Jason K W |last46=Lemke |first46=Bruno |last47=Liu |first47=Yang |last48=Liu |first48=Zhao |last49=Lott |first49=Melissa |last50=Lowe |first50=Rachel |last51=Martinez-Urtaza |first51=Jaime |last52=Maslin |first52=Mark |last53=McAllister |first53=Lucy |last54=McMichael |first54=Celia |last55=Mi |first55=Zhifu |last56=Milner |first56=James |last57=Minor |first57=Kelton |last58=Mohajeri |first58=Nahid |last59=Moradi-Lakeh |first59=Maziar |last60=Morrissey |first60=Karyn |last61=Munzert |first61=Simon |last62=Murray |first62=Kris A |last63=Neville |first63=Tara |last64=Nilsson |first64=Maria |last65=Obradovich |first65=Nick |last66=Sewe |first66=Maquins Odhiambo |last67=Oreszczyn |first67=Tadj |last68=Otto |first68=Matthias |last69=Owfi |first69=Fereidoon |last70=Pearman |first70=Olivia |last71=Pencheon |first71=David |last72=Rabbaniha |first72=Mahnaz |last73=Robinson |first73=Elizabeth |last74=Rocklöv |first74=Joacim |last75=Salas |first75=Renee N |last76=Semenza |first76=Jan C |last77=Sherman |first77=Jodi |last78=Shi |first78=Liuhua |last79=Springmann |first79=Marco |last80=Tabatabaei |first80=Meisam |last81=Taylor |first81=Jonathon |last82=Trinanes |first82=Joaquin |last83=Shumake-Guillemot |first83=Joy |last84=Vu |first84=Bryan |last85=Wagner |first85=Fabian |last86=Wilkinson |first86=Paul |last87=Winning |first87=Matthew |last88=Yglesias |first88=Marisol |last89=Zhang |first89=Shihui |last90=Gong |first90=Peng |last91=Montgomery |first91=Hugh |last92=Costello |first92=Anthony |last93=Hamilton |first93=Ian |display-authors=4|title=The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: code red for a healthy future |journal=The Lancet |date=October 2021 |volume=398 |issue=10311 |pages=1619–1662 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01787-6 |pmid=34687662 |pmc=7616807 |hdl=10278/3746207 |s2cid=239046862 |url=http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/102413/1/2021%20Report%20of%20the%20Lancet%20Countdown%20revised%20_no%20refs%20ES_clean.pdf |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Shrestha |first1=Pallavi |last2=Nukala |first2=Sai Keerthana |last3=Islam |first3=Fariha |last4=Badgery-Parker |first4=Tim |last5=Foo |first5=Fiona |title=The co-benefits of climate change mitigation strategies on cardiovascular health: a systematic review |journal=The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific |date=2024 |volume=48 |pages=101098 |doi=10.1016/j.lanwpc.2024.101098 |doi-access=free|pmid=39380746 |pmc=11458989 }}</ref> Access to urban green spaces provides benefits to mental health as well.<ref name="Romanello-2021" />{{Rp|18|date=November 2012}} The increased use of [[Green infrastructure|green]] and [[Blue space|blue infrastructure]] can reduce the [[urban heat island]] effect. This reduces [[Hyperthermia|heat stress]] on people.<ref name="IPCC-2022">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_TS.pdf Technical Summary]. In [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|TS-66}}

===Climate change adaptation===
{{Further|Climate change adaptation#Co-benefits with mitigation}}
Some mitigation measures have co-benefits in the area of [[climate change adaptation]].<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 8">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter08.pdf Chapter 8: Urban systems and other settlements]
in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|8–63}} This is for example the case for many [[nature-based solutions]].<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 4">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter04.pdf Chapter 4: Mitigation and development pathways in the near- to mid-term] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>{{rp|4–94}}<ref>Ingemarsson, M. L., Weinberg, J., Rudebeck, T., Erlandsson, L. W. (2022) [https://siwi.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/the-essential-drop-to-reach-net-zero_key-messages-and-executive-summary.pdf Key messages and executive summary], [https://siwi.org/publications/essential-drop-to-net-zero-unpacking-freshwaters-role-in-climate-change-mitigation-report/ The essential drop to Net-Zero: Unpacking freshwater's role in climate change mitigation], SIWI, Stockholm, Sweden</ref>{{rp|6}} Examples in the urban context include urban green and blue infrastructure which provide mitigation as well as adaptation benefits. This can be in the form of [[Urban forestry|urban forests]] and street trees, [[green roof]]s and [[Green wall|walls]], [[urban agriculture]] and so forth. The mitigation is achieved through the conservation and expansion of carbon sinks and reduced energy use of buildings. Adaptation benefits come for example through reduced heat stress and flooding risk.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 8" />{{rp|8–64}}

[[File:Carbon taxes and emission trading worldwide.svg|alt=Carbon taxes and emission trading worldwide|thumb|upright=1.35|Emission trading and carbon taxes around the world (2019)<ref>{{cite book |publisher=World Bank Group |date=6 June 2019 |title=State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2019 |doi=10.1596/978-1-4648-1435-8 |isbn=978-1-4648-1435-8 |s2cid=197582819 |url=https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/31755 |language=en}}</ref>
{{Legend|#009a3e|[[Carbon emission trading]] implemented or scheduled}}
{{Legend|#323b90|[[Carbon tax]] implemented or scheduled}}
{{Legend|#fbba00|[[Carbon emission trading]] or [[carbon tax]] under consideration}}]]

== Negative side effects ==
Mitigation measures can also have negative side effects and risks.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-133}} In agriculture and forestry, mitigation measures can affect biodiversity and ecosystem functioning.<ref name="IPCC-2022" />{{rp|TS-87}} In renewable energy, mining for metals and minerals can increase threats to conservation areas.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sonter |first1=Laura J. |last2=Dade |first2=Marie C. |last3=Watson |first3=James E. M. |last4=Valenta |first4=Rick K. |date=1 September 2020 |title=Renewable energy production will exacerbate mining threats to biodiversity |url= |journal=Nature Communications |language=en |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=4174 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11.4174S |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-17928-5 |issn=2041-1723 |pmc=7463236 |pmid=32873789 |s2cid=221467922}}</ref> There is some research into ways to recycle solar panels and electronic waste. This would create a source for materials so there is no need to mine them.<ref name="techrev">{{cite web |title=Solar panels are a pain to recycle. These companies are trying to fix that. |url=https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/08/19/1032215/solar-panels-recycling/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211108103705/https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/08/19/1032215/solar-panels-recycling/ |archive-date=8 November 2021 |access-date=8 November 2021}}</ref><ref name="Lamb et al.">{{cite journal |last1=Lamb |first1=William F. |last2=Mattioli |first2=Giulio |last3=Levi |first3=Sebastian |last4=Roberts |first4=J. Timmons |last5=Capstick |first5=Stuart |last6=Creutzig |first6=Felix |last7=Minx |first7=Jan C. |last8=Müller-Hansen |first8=Finn |last9=Culhane |first9=Trevor |last10=Steinberger |first10=Julia K. |date=2020 |title=Discourses of climate delay |journal=Global Sustainability |language=en |volume=3 |bibcode=2020GlSus...3E..17L |doi=10.1017/sus.2020.13 |issn=2059-4798 |s2cid=222245720 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

Scholars have found that discussions about risks and negative side effects of mitigation measures can lead to deadlock or the feeling that there are insuperable barriers to taking action.<ref name="Lamb et al." />

== Costs and funding ==
{{Main|Economics of climate change mitigation#Assessing costs and benefits|Economic analysis of climate change}}

Several factors affect mitigation cost estimates. One is the baseline. This is a reference scenario that the alternative mitigation scenario is compared with. Others are the way costs are modelled, and assumptions about future government policy.<ref>{{cite book |author=Barker, T. |url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch11.html |title=In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |publisher=Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, N.Y., U.S.A. |year=2007 |editor=B. Metz |contribution=Mitigation from a cross-sectoral perspective. |display-authors=etal |access-date=20 May 2009 |display-editors=etal |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110608063706/http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch11.html |archive-date=8 June 2011 |url-status=dead}}</ref>{{rp|622}} Cost estimates for mitigation for specific regions depend on the quantity of emissions allowed for that region in future, as well as the timing of interventions.<ref>IPCC, 2007: [https://web.archive.org/web/20181017035910/http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4_wg3_full_report.pdf Technical Summary] - [http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg3_report_mitigation_of_climate_change.htm Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091211015940/http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg3_report_mitigation_of_climate_change.htm |date=2009-12-11 }} [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States., XXX pp.</ref>{{rp|90}}

Mitigation costs will vary according to how and when emissions are cut. Early, well-planned action will minimise the costs.<ref name="stern" /> Globally, the benefits of keeping warming under 2&nbsp;°C exceed the costs,<ref name="Sampedro-2020">{{Cite journal |last1=Sampedro |first1=Jon |last2=Smith |first2=Steven J. |last3=Arto |first3=Iñaki |last4=González-Eguino |first4=Mikel |last5=Markandya |first5=Anil |last6=Mulvaney |first6=Kathleen M. |last7=Pizarro-Irizar |first7=Cristina |last8=Van Dingenen |first8=Rita |date=2020 |title=Health co-benefits and mitigation costs as per the Paris Agreement under different technological pathways for energy supply |journal=Environment International |language=en |volume=136 |pages=105513 |bibcode=2020EnInt.13605513S |doi=10.1016/j.envint.2020.105513 |pmid=32006762 |s2cid=211004787 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free |hdl=10810/44202}}</ref> which according to [[The Economist]] are affordable.<ref>{{Cite news |title=The energy transition will be much cheaper than you think |url=https://www.economist.com/interactive/briefing/2024/11/14/the-energy-transition-will-be-much-cheaper-than-you-think |access-date=2024-11-16 |newspaper=The Economist |issn=0013-0613}}</ref>

Economists estimate the cost of climate change mitigation at between 1% and 2% of [[Gross domestic product|GDP]].<ref name="Rhys-2019">{{Cite web |title=Can cost benefit analysis grasp the climate change nettle? And can we... |url=https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/blog/can-cost-benefit-analysis-grasp-the-climate-change-nettle-and-can-we-justify-ambitious-targets/ |access-date=11 November 2019 |website=Oxford Martin School |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Kotz2024">{{Cite journal |last1=Kotz |first1=Mazimilian. |last2=Levermann |first2=Anders |last3=Wenz |first3=Leonie |date=2024-04-17 |title=The economic commitment of climate change |journal=Nature |language=en |volume=628 |issue=8008 |pages=551–557 |doi=10.1038/s41586-024-07219-0 |pmid=38632481 |pmc=11023931|bibcode=2024Natur.628..551K }}</ref> While this is a large sum, it is still far less than the subsidies governments provide to the ailing fossil fuel industry. The [[International Monetary Fund]] estimated this at more than $5 trillion per year.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Below 1.5°C: a breakthrough roadmap to solve the climate crisis |url=https://www.oneearth.org/below-1-5-c-a-breakthrough-roadmap-to-solve-the-climate-crisis/ |access-date=21 November 2022 |website=One Earth |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Teske-2019">{{Cite book|url=https://www.springer.com/de/book/9783030058425|title=Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals: Global and Regional 100% Renewable Energy Scenarios with Non-energy GHG Pathways for +1.5°C and +2°C |editor-first=Sven|editor-last=Teske|date=2 August 2019|publisher=Springer Science+Business Media|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-05843-2|isbn=978-3030058425|s2cid=198078901|via=www.springer.com}}</ref>

Another estimate says that financial flows for climate mitigation and adaptation are going to be over $800 billion per year. These financial requirements are predicted to exceed $4 trillion per year by 2030.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The crucial intersection between gender and climate |url=https://www.eib.org/en/stories/gender-climate |access-date=2023-12-29 |website=European Investment Bank |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Nations |first=United |title=Finance & Justice |url=https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/raising-ambition/climate-finance |access-date=2023-12-29 |website=United Nations |language=en}}</ref>

Globally, limiting warming to 2&nbsp;°C may result in higher economic benefits than economic costs.<ref>
{{cite book |author=IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ |title=Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |year=2022 |editor-last1=Shukla |editor-first1=P.R. |page=300 |editor-last2=Skea |editor-first2=J. |editor-last3=Slade |editor-first3=R. |editor-last4=Al Khourdajie |editor-first4=A. |display-editors=etal}}: The global benefits of pathways limiting warming to 2°C (>67%) outweigh global mitigation costs over the 21st century, if aggregated economic impacts of climate change are at the moderate to high end of the assessed range, and a weight consistent with economic theory is given to economic impacts over the long term. This holds true even without accounting for benefits in other sustainable development dimensions or nonmarket damages from climate change (medium confidence).</ref>{{rp|300}} The economic repercussions of mitigation vary widely across regions and households, depending on policy design and level of [[international cooperation]]. Delayed global cooperation increases policy costs across regions, especially in those that are relatively carbon intensive at present. Pathways with uniform carbon values show higher mitigation costs in more carbon-intensive regions, in fossil-fuels exporting regions and in poorer regions. Aggregate quantifications expressed in GDP or monetary terms undervalue the economic effects on households in poorer countries. The actual effects on welfare and well-being are comparatively larger.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 3">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_03.pdf Chapter 3: Mitigation pathways compatible with long-term goals] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States</ref>

[[Cost–benefit analysis]] may be unsuitable for analysing climate change mitigation as a whole. But it is still useful for analysing the difference between a 1.5&nbsp;°C target and 2&nbsp;°C.<ref name="Rhys-2019" /> One way of estimating the cost of reducing emissions is by considering the likely costs of potential technological and output changes. Policymakers can compare the [[marginal abatement costs]] of different methods to assess the cost and amount of possible abatement over time. The marginal abatement costs of the various measures will differ by country, by sector, and over time.<ref name="stern" />

[[Eco-tariff]]s on only imports contribute to reduced global export [[Competition (economics)|competitiveness]] and to [[deindustrialisation]].<ref name="o344">{{cite journal | last1=Evans | first1=Stuart | last2=Mehling | first2=Michael A. | last3=Ritz | first3=Robert A. | last4=Sammon | first4=Paul | title=Border carbon adjustments and industrial competitiveness in a European Green Deal | journal=Climate Policy | volume=21 | issue=3 | date=16 March 2021 | issn=1469-3062 | doi=10.1080/14693062.2020.1856637 | pages=307–317| bibcode=2021CliPo..21..307E | url=https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/77128/1/Evans_etal_CP_2020_Border_carbon_adjustments_and_industrial_competitiveness.pdf }}</ref>

=== Avoided costs of climate change effects ===
{{See also|Economic impacts of climate change}}

It is possible to avoid some of the costs of the [[effects of climate change]] by limiting climate change. According to the [[Stern Review]], inaction can be as high as the equivalent of losing at least 5% of global gross domestic product (GDP) each year, now and forever. This can be up to 20% of GDP or more when including a wider range of risks and impacts. But mitigating climate change will only cost about 2% of GDP. Also it may not be a good idea from a financial perspective to delay significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Dyke |first=James |title=Inaction on climate change risks leaving future generations $530 trillion in debt |url=http://theconversation.com/inaction-on-climate-change-risks-leaving-future-generations-530-trillion-in-debt-81134 |website=The Conversation|date=18 July 2017 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hansen |first1=James |last2=Sato |first2=Makiko |last3=Kharecha |first3=Pushker |last4=von Schuckmann |first4=Karina |last5=Beerling |first5=David J. |last6=Cao |first6=Junji |last7=Marcott |first7=Shaun |last8=Masson-Delmotte |first8=Valerie |last9=Prather |first9=Michael J. |last10=Rohling |first10=Eelco J. |last11=Shakun |first11=Jeremy |last12=Smith |first12=Pete |last13=Lacis |first13=Andrew |last14=Russell |first14=Gary |last15=Ruedy |first15=Reto |date=18 July 2017 |title=Young people's burden: requirement of negative {{CO2}} emissions |url=https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/8/577/2017/ |journal=Earth System Dynamics |volume=8 |issue=3 |pages=577–616 |arxiv=1609.05878 |bibcode=2017ESD.....8..577H |doi=10.5194/esd-8-577-2017 |s2cid=54600172 |via=esd.copernicus.org |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Mitigation solutions are often evaluated in terms of costs and greenhouse gas reduction potentials. This fails to take into account the direct effects on human well-being.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Creutzig |first1=Felix |last2=Niamir |first2=Leila |last3=Bai |first3=Xuemei |last4=Callaghan |first4=Max |last5=Cullen |first5=Jonathan |last6=Díaz-José |first6=Julio |last7=Figueroa |first7=Maria |last8=Grubler |first8=Arnulf |last9=Lamb |first9=William F. |last10=Leip |first10=Adrian |last11=Masanet |first11=Eric |date=25 November 2021 |title=Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being |journal=Nature Climate Change |language=en |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=36–46 |bibcode=2022NatCC..12...36C |doi=10.1038/s41558-021-01219-y |issn=1758-6798 |s2cid=244657251 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Distributing emissions abatement costs ===
Mitigation at the speed and scale required to limit warming to 2&nbsp;°C or below implies deep economic and structural changes. These raise multiple types of distributional concerns across regions, income classes and sectors.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 3" />

There have been different proposals on how to allocate responsibility for cutting emissions.<ref name="banuri">{{cite book |author=Banuri, T. |url=https://archive.org/details/climatechange1990000unse_h1m9 |title=Equity and Social Considerations. In: Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (J. P. Bruce et al. eds.) |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1996 |isbn=978-0521568548 |location=Cambridge and New York |display-authors=etal |url-access=registration}}  PDF version: IPCC website.</ref>{{rp|103}} These include [[egalitarianism]], [[basic needs]] according to a minimum level of consumption, proportionality and the [[Polluter pays principle|polluter-pays principle]]. A specific proposal is "equal per capita entitlements".<ref name="banuri" />{{rp|106}} This approach has two categories. In the first category, emissions are allocated according to national population. In the second category, emissions are allocated in a way that attempts to account for historical or cumulative emissions.

===Funding===
{{main|Climate finance|Economics of climate change mitigation#Finance}}

In order to reconcile economic development with mitigating carbon emissions, developing countries need particular support. This would be both financial and technical. The IPCC found that accelerated support would also tackle inequities in financial and economic vulnerability to climate change.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Synthesis Report of The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report |url=https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6syr/pdf/IPCC_AR6_SYR_LongerReport.pdf |page=82 |access-date=2023-03-27 |archive-date=2023-03-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230322195653/https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6syr/pdf/IPCC_AR6_SYR_LongerReport.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> One way to achieve this is the Kyoto Protocol's [[Clean Development Mechanism]] (CDM).

== Policies ==

=== National policies ===
[[File:Total CO2 emissions by country in 2017 vs per capita emissions (top 40 countries).svg|thumb|Although China is the leading producer of {{CO2}} emissions in the world with the U.S. second, per capita the U.S. leads China by a fair margin (data from 2017).]]Climate change mitigation policies can have a large and complex impact on the socio-economic status of individuals and countries This can be both positive and negative.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Markkanen |first1=Sanna |last2=Anger-Kraavi |first2=Annela |date=9 August 2019 |title=Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality |journal=Climate Policy |volume=19 |issue=7 |pages=827–844 |doi=10.1080/14693062.2019.1596873 |bibcode=2019CliPo..19..827M |issn=1469-3062 |s2cid=159114098|doi-access=free }}</ref> It is important to design policies well and make them inclusive. Otherwise climate change mitigation measures can impose higher financial costs on poor households.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Social Dimensions of Climate Change |url=https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/social-dimensions-of-climate-change |access-date=20 May 2021 |website=World Bank |language=en}}</ref>

An evaluation was conducted on 1,500 climate policy interventions made between 1998 and 2022.<ref name="Stechemesser2024">{{cite journal|last1=Stechemesser|first1=Annika|last2=Koch|first2=Nicolas|last3=Mark|first3=Ebba|last4=Dilger|first4=Elina|last5=Klösel|first5=Patrick|last6=Menicacci|first6=Laura|last7=Nachtigall|first7=Daniel|last8=Pretis|first8=Felix|last9=Ritter|first9=Nolan|last10=Schwarz|first10=Moritz|last11=Vossen|first11=Helena|last12=Wenzel|first12=Anna|year=2024|title=Climate policies that achieved major emission reductions: Global evidence from two decades|journal=[[Science (journal)|Science]]|publisher=[[American Association for the Advancement of Science]]|volume=385|issue=6711|pages=884–892|doi=10.1126/science.adl6547|pmid=39172830 |bibcode=2024Sci...385..884S }}</ref> The interventions took place in 41 countries and across 6 continents, which together contributed 81% of the world's total emissions as of 2019. The evaluation found 63 successful interventions that resulted in significant emission reductions; the total {{CO2}} release averted by these interventions was between 0.6 and 1.8 billion metric tonnes. The study focused on interventions with at least 4.5% emission reductions, but the researchers noted that meeting the reductions required by the Paris Agreement would require 23 billion metric tonnes per year. Generally, carbon pricing was found to be most effective in [[Developed country|developed countries]], while regulation was most effective in the [[Developing country|developing countries]]. Complementary policy mixes benefited from synergies, and were mostly found to be more effective interventions than the implementation of isolated policies.<ref>{{cite web |title=Effectiveness of 1,500 global climate policies ranked for first time |url=https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2024-08-23-effectiveness-1500-global-climate-policies-ranked-first-time|access-date=13 September 2024 |website=University of Oxford|date =24 August 2024 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Niiler|first=Eric|date=August 22, 2024|title=Most Climate Policies Don't Work. Here's What Science Says Does Reduce Emissions.|work=The Wall Street Journal|publisher=News Corp|url=https://www.wsj.com/science/environment/climate-change-policies-emissions-ai-research-a02b3f59|access-date=September 12, 2024}}</ref><ref name="The Boston Globe 9-4-2024">{{cite news|last=Jacoby|first=Jeff|date=September 4, 2024|title=Most climate policies have something in common: They don't work|work=The Boston Globe|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/09/04/opinion/climate-change-study-ineffective-policies/|access-date=September 12, 2024}}</ref>

The [[OECD]] recognise 48 distinct climate mitigation policies suitable for implementation at national level. Broadly, these can be categorised into three types: ''market based'' instruments, ''non market based'' instruments and ''other'' policies.<ref name="capmf">{{cite web |title=Climate actions and policies measurement framework |url=https://oe.cd/dx/capmf|access-date=13 September 2024 |website=OECD}}</ref><ref name="Stechemesser2024" />
* '''Other''' policies include the ''Establishing an Independent climate advisory body''.<ref name="capmf" />
* '''Non market based''' policies include the Implementing or tighening of ''Regulatory standards''. These set technology or performance standards. They can be effective in addressing the [[market failure]] of informational barriers.<ref name="bashmakov3">{{cite book |author=Bashmakov, I. |url=http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/357.htm |title=Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2001 |editor=B. Metz |contribution=Policies, Measures, and Instruments |display-authors=etal |access-date=20 May 2009 |display-editors=etal |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305032914/http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=%2Fclimate%2Fipcc_tar%2Fwg3%2F357.htm |archive-date=5 March 2016 |url-status=dead}}</ref>{{rp|412}} 
*Among '''market based''' policies, the ''carbon price'' has been found to be the most effective (at least for developed economies),<ref name="Stechemesser2024" /> and has its own section below. Additional ''market based'' policy instruments for climate change mitigation include:
''Emissions taxes'' These often require domestic emitters to pay a fixed fee or tax for every tonne of CO<sub>2</sub> emissions they release into the atmosphere.<ref name="bashmakov3" />{{rp|4123}} [[Methane emissions]] from fossil fuel extraction are also occasionally taxed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pham |first=Alexander |date=7 June 2022 |title=Can We Widely Adopt A Methane Tax to Cut the Greenhouse Gas? |url=https://earth.org/methane-tax/ |access-date=26 November 2022 |website=Earth.Org |language=en}}</ref> But methane and nitrous oxide from agriculture are typically not subject to tax.<ref>{{Cite web |title=New Zealand Outlines Plans to Tax Livestock Gas |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/new-zealand-outlines-plans-to-tax-livestock-gas/6787828.html |access-date=26 November 2022 |website=VOA |date=12 October 2022 |language=en}}</ref>
<br />''Removing unhelpful subsidies:'' Many countries provide subsidies for activities that affect emissions. For example, significant [[fossil fuel subsidies]] are present in many countries.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Browning |first1=Noah |last2=Kelly |first2=Stephanie |date=8 March 2022 |title=Analysis: Ukraine crisis could boost ballooning fossil fuel subsidies |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ukraine-crisis-could-boost-ballooning-fossil-fuel-subsidies-2022-03-08/ |access-date=2 April 2022 |work=Reuters |language=en}}</ref> [[Fossil fuel phase-out#Phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies|Phasing-out fossil fuel subsidies]] is crucial to address the climate crisis.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Breaking up with fossil fuels |url=https://feature.undp.org/breaking-up-with-fossil-fuels |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230603162133/https://feature.undp.org/breaking-up-with-fossil-fuels/ |archive-date=3 June 2023 |access-date=24 November 2022 |website=UNDP |language=en}}</ref> It must however be done carefully to avoid protests<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Gencsu |first1=Ipek |last2=Walls |first2=Ginette |last3=Picciariello |first3=Angela |last4=Alasia |first4=Ibifuro Joy |date=2 November 2022 |title=Nigeria's energy transition: reforming fossil fuel subsidies and other financing opportunities |url=https://odi.org/en/publications/nigerias-energy-transition-reforming-fossil-fuel-subsidies-and-other-financing-opportunities/ |access-date=24 November 2022 |website=ODI: Think change |language=en-gb}}</ref> and making poor people poorer.<ref>{{Cite web |title=How Reforming Fossil Fuel Subsidies Can Go Wrong: A lesson from Ecuador |url=https://www.iisd.org/blog/lesson-ecuador-fossil-fuel-subsidies |access-date=11 November 2019 |website=IISD |language=en}}</ref>
<br />''Creating helpful subsidies'': Creating subsidies and financial incentives.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Hittinger |first1=Eric |last2=Williams |first2=Eric |last3=Miao |first3=Qing |last4=Tibebu |first4=Tiruwork B. |title=How to design clean energy subsidies that work – without wasting money on free riders |url=http://theconversation.com/how-to-design-clean-energy-subsidies-that-work-without-wasting-money-on-free-riders-191635 |access-date=24 November 2022 |website=The Conversation |date=21 November 2022 |language=en}}</ref> One example is [[Energy subsidy|energy subsidies]] to support clean generation which is not yet commercially viable such as tidal power.<ref>{{Cite web |date=23 November 2022 |title=How tide has turned on UK tidal stream energy as costs ebb and reliability flows |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/23/tidal-stream-energy-costs-ebb-reliability-flows |access-date=24 November 2022 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref>
<br />''Tradable permits'': A [[carbon emission trading|permit system]] can limit emissions.<ref name="bashmakov3" />{{rp|415}}

==== Carbon pricing ====
{{Main|Carbon price}}

[[File:ETS-allowance-prices.svg|thumb|upright=1.35|Carbon emission trade – allowance prices from 2008]]
Imposing additional costs on greenhouse gas emissions can make fossil fuels less competitive and accelerate investments into low-carbon sources of energy. A growing number of countries raise a fixed [[carbon tax]] or participate in dynamic [[carbon emission trading]] (ETS) systems. In 2021, more than 21% of global greenhouse gas emissions were covered by a carbon price. This was a big increase from earlier due to the introduction of the [[Chinese national carbon trading scheme]].<ref>{{Cite book |url=http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/book/10.1596/978-1-4648-1728-1 |title=State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2021 |date=2021 |publisher=The World Bank |isbn=978-1-4648-1728-1 |language=en |doi=10.1596/978-1-4648-1728-1}}</ref>{{rp|23}}

Trading schemes offer the possibility to limit emission allowances to certain reduction targets. However, an oversupply of allowances keeps most ETS at low price levels around $10 with a low impact. This includes the Chinese ETS which started with $7/t{{CO2}} in 2021.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Shepherd |first1=Christian |date=16 July 2021 |title=China's carbon market scheme too limited, say analysts |newspaper=Financial Times |url=https://www.ft.com/content/3bcc2380-8544-4146-ba71-83944caff48d |url-status=live |url-access=subscription |access-date=16 July 2021 |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221211221255/https://www.ft.com/content/3bcc2380-8544-4146-ba71-83944caff48d |archive-date=11 December 2022 }}</ref> One exception is the [[European Union Emission Trading Scheme]] where prices began to rise in 2018. They reached about €80/t{{CO2}} in 2022.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Carbon Price Viewer |url=https://ember-climate.org/data/carbon-price-viewer |access-date=10 October 2021 |publisher=EMBER}}</ref> This results in additional costs of about €0.04/KWh for coal and €0.02/KWh for gas combustion for electricity, depending on the [[emission intensity]].{{Citation needed|date=November 2022}} Industries which have high energy requirements and high emissions often pay only very low energy taxes, or even none at all.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 11">IPCC (2022) "[https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_11.pdf Chapter 11: Industry]" in "[https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States.</ref>{{rp|11–80}}

While this is often part of national schemes, [[carbon offsets and credits]] can be part of a voluntary market as well such as on the international market. Notably, the company [[Blue Carbon (company)|Blue Carbon]] of the [[UAE]] has bought ownership over an area equivalent to the United Kingdom to be preserved in return for carbon credits.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/30/the-new-scramble-for-africa-how-a-uae-sheikh-quietly-made-carbon-deals-for-forests-bigger-than-uk|title=The new 'scramble for Africa': how a UAE sheikh quietly made carbon deals for forests bigger than UK|author=Patrick Greenfield|journal=The Guardian|date=30 November 2023|access-date=25 August 2024}}</ref>

=== International agreements ===
{{Main|Politics of climate change}}

{{See also|Climate change#Policies and politics|Climate change mitigation framework}}

[[International cooperation]] is considered a ''critical enabler'' for climate action<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 13" />{{rp|52}} while conflicts generally hamper it.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Block |first1=Katharina |last2=Li |first2=Mengyu |title=Geopolitical conflict impedes climate change mitigation |journal=Climate Action |publisher=Nature |date=29 March 2025 |volume=4 |issue=1 |page=33 |doi=10.1038/s44168-025-00224-7 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2025npjCA...4...33B }}</ref> Almost all countries are parties to the [[United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]] (UNFCCC).<ref>{{Cite web |title=UN Framework Convention on Climate Change – UNFCCC |url=https://enb.iisd.org/negotiations/un-framework-convention-climate-change-unfccc |access-date=2 November 2022 |website=IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change {{!}} United Nations Secretary-General |url=https://www.un.org/sg/en/global-leadership/united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change/all |access-date=2 November 2022 |website=www.un.org}}</ref> The ultimate objective of the UNFCCC is to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at a level that would prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system.<ref>{{cite web |author=UNFCCC |date=2002 |title=Full Text of the Convention, Article 2: Objectives |url=http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/background/items/1353.php |publisher=UNFCCC}}</ref>

Although not designed for this purpose, the [[Montreal Protocol]] has benefited climate change mitigation efforts.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Velders, G.J.M. |display-authors=etal |date=20 March 2007 |title=The importance of the Montreal Protocol in protecting climate |journal=PNAS |volume=104 |issue=12 |pages=4814–19 |bibcode=2007PNAS..104.4814V |doi=10.1073/pnas.0610328104 |pmc=1817831 |pmid=17360370 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The Montreal Protocol is an international treaty that has successfully reduced emissions of [[ozone-depleting substance]]s such as [[Chlorofluorocarbon|CFCs]]. These are also greenhouse gases.

==== Paris Agreement ====
[[File:ParisAgreement.svg|thumb|[[Paris Agreement#Parties and signatories|Signatories (yellow) and parties (blue)]] to the [[Paris Agreement]]]]
{{excerpt|Paris Agreement|paragraphs=1|file=no}}

== History ==
{{See also|Climate change mitigation framework|History of climate change policy and politics|Kyoto Protocol#Chronology|Paris Agreement#Development}}
Historically efforts to deal with climate change have taken place at a multinational level. They involve attempts to reach a consensus decision at the United Nations, under the [[United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]] (UNFCCC).<ref>{{Cite web |title=History of the Convention {{!}} UNFCCC |url=https://unfccc.int/process/the-convention/history-of-the-convention |access-date=2 December 2019 |website=unfccc.int}}</ref> This is the dominant approach historically of engaging as many international governments as possible in taking action on a worldwide public issue. The [[Montreal Protocol]] in 1987 is a precedent that this approach can work. But some critics say the top-down framework of only utilising the UNFCCC consensus approach is ineffective. They put forward counter-proposals of bottom-up governance. At this same time this would lessen the emphasis on the UNFCCC.<ref name="Cole-2015">{{Cite journal |last=Cole |first=Daniel H. |date=28 January 2015 |title=Advantages of a polycentric approach to climate change policy |url=https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/1415 |journal=Nature Climate Change |language=en |volume=5 |issue=2 |pages=114–118 |bibcode=2015NatCC...5..114C |doi=10.1038/nclimate2490 |issn=1758-6798}}</ref><ref name="Sabel-2017">{{Cite journal |last1=Sabel |first1=Charles F. |last2=Victor |first2=David G. |date=1 September 2017 |title=Governing global problems under uncertainty: making bottom-up climate policy work |journal=Climatic Change |language=en |volume=144 |issue=1 |pages=15–27 |bibcode=2017ClCh..144...15S |doi=10.1007/s10584-015-1507-y |issn=1573-1480 |s2cid=153561849}}</ref><ref name="Zefferman-2018">{{Cite journal |last=Zefferman |first=Matthew R. |date=1 January 2018 |title=Cultural multilevel selection suggests neither large or small cooperative agreements are likely to solve climate change without changing the game |journal=Sustainability Science |language=en |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=109–118 |doi=10.1007/s11625-017-0488-3 |bibcode=2018SuSc...13..109Z |issn=1862-4057 |s2cid=158187220}}</ref>

The [[Kyoto Protocol]] to the UNFCCC adopted in 1997 set out legally binding emission reduction commitments for the "Annex 1" countries.<ref>{{cite book |author-last1=Verbruggen |author-first1=A. |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ar4_wg3_full_report-1.pdf |title=Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-521-88011-4 |editor-last1=Metz |editor-first1=B. |location=Cambridge, UK, and New York, N.Y. |pages=809–822 |chapter=Annex I. Glossary |access-date=19 January 2022 |display-editors=etal |chapter-url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg3-annex1-1.pdf}}</ref>{{rp|817}} The Protocol defined three international policy instruments ("[[Flexibility mechanisms|Flexibility Mechanisms]]") which could be used by the Annex 1 countries to meet their emission reduction commitments. According to Bashmakov, use of these instruments could significantly reduce the costs for Annex 1 countries in meeting their emission reduction commitments.<ref name="bashmakov">{{cite book |author-last1=Bashmakov |author-first1=Igor |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/WGIII_TAR_full_report.pdf |title=Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |author-last2=Jepma |author-first2=Catrinus |date=2001 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |editor-last1=Metz |editor-first1=B. |location=Cambridge |chapter=6. Policies, Measures, and Instruments |access-date=20 January 2020 |editor-last2=Davidson |editor-first2=O |editor-last3=Swart |editor-first3=R. |editor-last4=Pan |editor-first4=J.}}</ref>{{rp|402}}{{Update inline|date=January 2022|reason=were they used and did they work?}}

The Paris Agreement reached in 2015 succeeded the [[Kyoto Protocol]] which expired in 2020. [[List of Kyoto Protocol signatories|Countries that ratified the Kyoto protocol]] committed to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, or engage in [[carbon emissions trading]] if they maintain or increase emissions of these gases.

In 2015, the UNFCCC's "structured expert dialogue" came to the conclusion that, "in some regions and vulnerable ecosystems, high risks are projected even for warming above 1.5&nbsp;°C".<ref>{{cite web |date=4 April 2015 |title=Report on the structured expert dialogue on the 2013–2015 review |url=http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/sb/eng/inf01.pdf |access-date=21 June 2016 |publisher=UNFCCC, Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice & Subsidiary Body for Implementation}}</ref> Together with the strong diplomatic voice of the poorest countries and the island nations in the Pacific, this expert finding was the driving force leading to the decision of the 2015 [[2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference|Paris Climate Conference]] to lay down this 1.5&nbsp;°C long-term target on top of the existing 2&nbsp;°C goal.<ref>{{cite web |title=1.5°C temperature limit – key facts |url=http://climateanalytics.org/hot-topics/1-5c-key-facts.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160630193348/http://climateanalytics.org/hot-topics/1-5c-key-facts.html |archive-date=30 June 2016 |access-date=21 June 2016 |publisher=Climate Analytics}}</ref>

== Barriers ==
{{See also|Economic analysis of climate change#Economic barriers to addressing climate change mitigation|Climate change denial|Public opinion on climate change|Sustainability#Barriers}}
[[File:A typology of climate delay discourses.png|thumb|A typology of discourses aimed at delaying climate change mitigation<ref name="Lamb et al." />]]
[[File:Distribution of committed CO2 emissions from developed fossil fuel reserves.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|Distribution of committed {{CO2}} emissions from developed fossil fuel reserves]]

There are individual, institutional and market barriers to achieving climate change mitigation.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|5–71}} They differ for all the different mitigation options, regions and societies.

Difficulties with [[Carbon accounting|accounting for carbon dioxide removal]] can act as economic barriers. This would apply to BECCS ([[bioenergy with carbon capture and storage]]).<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 6" />{{rp|6–42}} The strategies that companies follow can act as a barrier. But they can also accelerate decarbonisation.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|5–84}}

In order to decarbonise societies the state needs to play a predominant role. This is because it requires a massive coordination effort.<ref name="Berg-2020">{{Cite book |last=Berg |first=Christian |title=Sustainable action : overcoming the barriers |date=2020 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-429-57873-1 |location=Abingdon, Oxon |oclc=1124780147}}</ref>{{rp|213}} This strong government role can only work well if there is social cohesion, political stability and trust.<ref name="Berg-2020" />{{rp|213}}

For land-based mitigation options, finance is a major barrier. Other barriers are cultural values, governance, accountability and institutional capacity.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 7" />{{rp|7-5}}

Developing countries face further barriers to mitigation.<ref>{{cite web |author=Sathaye, J. |display-authors=etal |year=2001 |title=Barriers, Opportunities, and Market Potential of Technologies and Practices. In: Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (B. Metz, ''et al''., Eds.) |url=http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181005032403/http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.htm |archive-date=5 October 2018 |access-date=20 May 2009 |publisher=Cambridge University Press}}</ref>
* The cost of capital increased in the early 2020s.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Loe |first=Catherine |date=1 December 2022 |title=Energy transition will move slowly over the next decade |url=https://services.eiu.com/energy-transition-will-move-slowly-over-the-next-decade/ |access-date=2 December 2022 |website=Economist Intelligence Unit |language=en-GB}}</ref> A lack of available capital and finance is common in developing countries.<ref>{{Cite web |date=17 December 2021 |title=The cost of capital in clean energy transitions – Analysis |url=https://www.iea.org/articles/the-cost-of-capital-in-clean-energy-transitions |access-date=26 November 2022 |website=IEA |language=en-GB}}</ref> Together with the absence of regulatory standards, this barrier supports the proliferation of inefficient equipment.
* There are also financial and [[Capacity building|capacity]] barrier in many of these countries.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 5" />{{rp|97}}

One study estimates that only 0.12% of all funding for climate-related research goes on the social science of climate change mitigation.<ref name="Overland-2020">{{Cite journal |last1=Overland |first1=Indra |last2=Sovacool |first2=Benjamin K. |date=1 April 2020 |title=The misallocation of climate research funding |journal=Energy Research & Social Science |language=en |volume=62 |pages=101349 |bibcode=2020ERSS...6201349O |doi=10.1016/j.erss.2019.101349 |issn=2214-6296 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free |hdl=11250/2647605}}</ref> Vastly more funding goes on natural science studies of climate change. Considerable sums also go on studies of the impact of climate change and adaptation to it.<ref name="Overland-2020" />

== Society and culture ==

=== Commitments to divest ===
[[File:Climate investment is stalling, but more firms plan to invest, with firms in low-carbon sectors taking the lead.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|More firms plan to invest in climate change mitigation, specifically focusing on low-carbon sectors.<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.eib.org/en/publications/investment-report-2021 |title=EIB Investment Report 2021/2022: Recovery as a springboard for change |date=2022 |publisher=European Investment Bank |doi=10.2867/82061 |isbn=978-9286151552 |language=EN |author1=European Investment Bank. }}</ref>]]More than 1000 organisations with investments worth US$8 trillion have made commitments to [[fossil fuel divestment]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Major milestone: 1000+ divestment commitments |url=https://gofossilfree.org/major-milestone-1000-divestment-commitments/ |date=December 13, 2018 |access-date=17 December 2018 |website=350.org}}</ref> Socially responsible investing funds allow investors to invest in funds that meet high [[environmental, social and corporate governance]] (ESG) standards.<ref>{{cite web |title=5 Mutual Funds for Socially Responsible Investors |date=May 2012 |url=http://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C016-S001-5-mutual-funds-for-socially-responsible-investors.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190222214205/https://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C016-S001-5-mutual-funds-for-socially-responsible-investors.html |archive-date=22 February 2019 |access-date=30 December 2015 |publisher=Kiplinger |url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic ===
{{Main|Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the environment#Climate change}}

The [[COVID-19 pandemic]] led some governments to shift their focus away from climate action, at least temporarily.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Filho |first1=Walter Leal |last2=Hickmann |first2=Thomas |last3=Nagy |first3=Gustavo J. |last4=Pinho |first4=Patricia |last5=Sharifi |first5=Ayyoob |last6=Minhas |first6=Aprajita |last7=Islam |first7=M Rezaul |last8=Djalanti |first8=Riyanti |last9=García Vinuesa |first9=Antonio |last10=Abubakar |first10=Ismaila Rimi |date=2022 |title=The Influence of the Corona Virus Pandemic on Sustainable Development Goal 13 and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Processes |journal=Frontiers in Environmental Science |volume=10 |pages=784466 |doi=10.3389/fenvs.2022.784466 |issn=2296-665X |doi-access=free|bibcode=2022FrEnS..1084466F |hdl=10347/29848 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> This obstacle to environmental policy efforts may have contributed to slowed investment in green energy technologies. The economic slowdown resulting from COVID-19 added to this effect.<ref name="UN">{{cite web |date=1 April 2020 |title=Cop26 climate talks postponed to 2021 amid coronavirus pandemic |url=https://www.climatechangenews.com/2020/04/01/cop26-climate-talks-postponed-2021-amid-coronavirus-pandemic/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200404132430/https://www.climatechangenews.com/2020/04/01/cop26-climate-talks-postponed-2021-amid-coronavirus-pandemic/ |archive-date=4 April 2020 |access-date=2 April 2020 |website=Climate Home News |language=en}}</ref><ref name="9mMFi">{{cite news |date=13 March 2020 |title=Coronavirus could weaken climate change action and hit clean energy investment, researchers warn |publisher=[[CNBC]] |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/13/coronavirus-could-weaken-climate-change-action-hit-clean-energy.html |url-status=live |access-date=16 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200315223847/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/13/coronavirus-could-weaken-climate-change-action-hit-clean-energy.html |archive-date=15 March 2020 |vauthors=Newburger E}}</ref>

In 2020, carbon dioxide emissions fell by 6.4% or 2.3 billion tonnes globally.<ref name="Tollefson-2021">{{cite journal |vauthors=Tollefson J |date=January 2021 |title=COVID curbed carbon emissions in 2020 - but not by much |journal=Nature |volume=589 |issue=7842 |pages=343 |bibcode=2021Natur.589..343T |doi=10.1038/d41586-021-00090-3 |pmid=33452515 |s2cid=231622354}}</ref> Greenhouse gas emissions rebounded later in the pandemic as many countries began lifting restrictions. The direct impact of pandemic policies had a negligible long-term impact on climate change.<ref name="Tollefson-2021" /><ref name="effectspaper">{{cite journal |display-authors=6 |vauthors=Forster PM, Forster HI, Evans MJ, Gidden MJ, Jones CD, Keller CA, Lamboll RD, Le Quéré C, Rogelj J, Rosen D, Schleussner CF |date=7 August 2020 |title=Current and future global climate impacts resulting from COVID-19 |journal=Nature Climate Change |language=en |volume=10 |issue=10 |pages=913–919 |bibcode=2020NatCC..10..913F |doi=10.1038/s41558-020-0883-0 |issn=1758-6798 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

== Examples by country ==
{{multiple image
| total_width       = 450
| image1            = 20210626 Variwide chart of greenhouse gas emissions per capita by country.svg
| caption1          = Greenhouse gas emissions ''per person'' in the highest-emitting countries.<ref name=GlobalCarbonAtlas_Territorial_MtCO2>● Source for carbon emissions data: {{cite web |title=Territorial (MtCO₂) / Emissions / Carbon emissions / Chart View |url=https://globalcarbonatlas.org/emissions/carbon-emissions/ |date=2024 |publisher=Global Carbon Atlas }}<br>● Source for country population data: {{cite web |title=Population 2022 |url=https://databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_download/POP.pdf |publisher=World Bank |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241022200208/https://databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_download/POP.pdf |archive-date=22 October 2024 |date=2024 |url-status=live }}</ref> Though China has the greatest total annual carbon dioxide emissions, the U.S. and a few other high-emitting countries exceed China in ''per capita'' emissions.
| image2            = 2021 Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person versus GDP per person - scatter plot.svg
| caption2          = Richer [[Developed country|(developed)]] countries emit more {{CO2}} per person than poorer [[Developing country|(developing)]] countries.<ref name=WashPost_20230301>{{cite news |last1=Stevens |first1=Harry |title=The United States has caused the most global warming. When will China pass it? |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2023/global-warming-carbon-emissions-china-us/ |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=1 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230301130719/https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2023/global-warming-carbon-emissions-china-us/ |archive-date=1 March 2023 |url-status=live }}</ref> Emissions are roughly proportional to [[Gross domestic product|GDP]] per person, though the rate of increase diminishes with average GDP/pp of about $10,000.
}}

=== United States ===
{{Main|Climate change in the United States}}

{{excerpt|Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States#Federal Policies}}

=== China ===
{{main|Greenhouse gas emissions by China|Climate change in China|Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation}}

China has committed to peak emissions by 2030 and reach [[net zero]] by 2060.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Stanway |first=David |date=2022-11-21 |title=China's {{CO2}} emissions fall but policies still not aligned with long-term goals |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/chinas-co2-emissions-down-since-2021-still-not-peak-report-2022-11-21/ |access-date=2023-04-14}}</ref> Warming cannot be limited to 1.5&nbsp;°C if any [[Electricity sector in China#Coal power|coal plants in China]] (without carbon capture) operate after 2045.<ref>{{Cite report |url=https://www.efchina.org/Attachments/Report/report-lceg-20201210/Full-Report_Synthesis-Report-2020-on-Chinas-Carbon-Neutrality_EN.pdf |title=China's New Growth Pathway: From the 14th Five-Year Plan to Carbon Neutrality |last= |first= |date=December 2020 |publisher=Energy Foundation China |page=24 |access-date=20 July 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210416100821/https://www.efchina.org/Attachments/Report/report-lceg-20201210/Full-Report_Synthesis-Report-2020-on-Chinas-Carbon-Neutrality_EN.pdf |archive-date=16 April 2021 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The [[Chinese national carbon trading scheme]] started in 2021.

=== European Union ===
The [[European Commission]] estimates that an additional €477 million in annual investment is needed for the European Union to meet its [[Fit for 55|Fit-for-55]] decarbonisation goals.<ref name=":2113"/><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Andersson |first1=Malin |last2=Nerlich |first2=Carolin |last3=Pasqua |first3=Carlo |last4=Rusinova |first4=Desislava |date=2024-06-18 |title=Massive investment needs to meet EU green and digital targets |url=https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/fie/box/html/ecb.fiebox202406_01.en.html |journal= European Central Bank |language=en}}</ref>

In the European Union, government-driven policies and the [[European Green Deal]] have helped position greentech (as an example) as a vital area for venture capital investment. By 2023, venture capital in the EU's greentech sector equalled that of the United States, reflecting a concerted effort to drive innovation and mitigate climate change through targeted financial support.<ref name=":2113"/><ref>{{Cite web |title=Financing and commercialisation of cleantech innovation |url=https://link.epo.org/web/publications/studies/en-financing-and-commercialisation-of-cleantech-innovation-study.pdf}}</ref> The European Green Deal has fostered policies that contributed to a 30% rise in venture capital for greentech companies in the EU from 2021 to 2023, despite a downturn in other sectors during the same period.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Cleantech Annual Briefing 2023 |url=https://www.cleantechforeurope.com/publications/cleantech-annual-briefing-2023 |access-date=2024-08-31 |website=www.cleantechforeurope.com}}</ref>

While overall venture capital investment in the EU remains about six times lower than in the United States, the greentech sector has closed this gap significantly, attracting substantial funding. Key areas benefitting from increased investments are energy storage, circular economy initiatives, and agricultural technology. This is supported by the EU's ambitious goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030.<ref name=":1" />

== Related approaches ==

=== Relationship with solar radiation modification (SRM) ===
While [[solar geoengineering|solar radiation modification]] (SRM) could reduce surface temperatures, it temporarily masks climate change rather than addressing the root cause, which is greenhouse gases.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 14">IPCC (2022) [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter_14.pdf Chapter 14: International cooperation] in [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, United States]</ref>{{rp|14–56}} SRM would work by altering how much solar radiation the Earth absorbs.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 14" />{{rp|14–56}} Examples include reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the surface, reducing the optical thickness and lifetime of clouds, and changing the ability of the surface to reflect radiation.<ref>{{Cite book |last=National Academies of Sciences |first=Engineering |url=https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25762/reflecting-sunlight-recommendations-for-solar-geoengineering-research-and-research-governance |title=Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance |date=25 March 2021 |isbn=978-0-309-67605-2 |language=en |doi=10.17226/25762 |s2cid=234327299}}</ref> The [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|IPCC]] describes SRM as a climate risk reduction strategy or supplementary option rather than a climate mitigation option.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 14" />

The terminology in this area is still evolving. Experts sometimes use the term ''geoengineering'' or [[climate engineering]] in the scientific literature for both CDR or SRM, if the techniques are used at a global scale.<ref name="AR6 WGIII Ch 1" />{{rp|6–11}} IPCC reports no longer use the terms ''geoengineering'' or ''climate engineering''.<ref name="IPCC AR6 WGI Glossary" />

== See also ==
* [[Carbon budget]]
* [[Carbon offsets and credits]]
* [[Carbon price]]
* [[Climate movement]]
* [[Climate change denial]]
* [[Tipping points in the climate system]]
{{subject bar|auto=y|d=y|Climate change|Plants|Trees}}

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

{{Climate change}}
{{World topic|Climate change in|title=Climate change by country|noredlinks=no}}
{{Sustainability}}
{{Population}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Climate change mitigation| ]]
[[Category:Biogeochemical cycle]]
[[Category:Biogeography]]
[[Category:Carbon|Cycle]]
[[Category:Chemical oceanography]]
[[Category:Climate change policy]]
[[Category:Geochemistry]]
[[Category:Numerical climate and weather models]]
[[Category:Soil]]