Renewables accelerate but do not satisfy the hunger for energy

Oil in particular has for the first time in history crossed the symbolic bar of 100 million barrels per day of global demand, in defiance of aspirations for sustainable mobility and crusades to limit the use of plastic. As for coal, while in mature economies we are learning (albeit still too gradually) to do without it, there are countries that burn more and more of it: India, where there has been an 8% leap in fossil fuel consumption, now burns more than Europe and North America combined. China - which has taken the lead in the green revolution, with one in three cars on the road running on batteries and more than 60% of the world's new solar and wind power plants installed by 2023 - has been decreasing the share of fossil fuels in its energy mix since 2011 (it is now at 81.6%) but still continues to burn half of the world's coal.

This is the picture described by the latest Statistical Review of World Energy, the 'heir' to the famous Bp report, now edited by the Energy Institute (Ei) with Kpmg and Kearney. The key figure - the one that allows all the pieces of the puzzle to be put together and the apparent contradictions to be reconciled - is that of primary energy consumption, which has risen to a new historical record of 620 Exajoules. A single Exajoule is equivalent to 170 million barrels of oil. As long as energy requirements grow faster than 'clean' solutions, the decarbonisation challenge will be impossible to overcome. Today, we are running, but only to stand still (if not to retreat). Running to stand still, as an old U2 song used to say.

There is enough to be despondent about. "The new data are hardly encouraging for climate change mitigation, the transition has not even begun," commented Nick Wayth, CEO of the Energy Institute, presenting the Statistical Review. After years of effort (to be fair, concentrated until recently mainly in the mature economies of the West) the global energy mix has changed very little: fossil fuels still meet 81.5 % of primary energy consumption, up from 86 % in 1995. Renewables despite everything today are only 8 % of the mix, or 15 % if hydroelectricity is also counted. With nuclear power, which also has zero emissions, the 'slice' of clean energy does not reach one fifth of the total.

If you want to look at the glass half full, in Europe for the first time in history fossil fuels have dropped below 70% of the mix (which is still a substantial share). In the USA they have just gone below 80%, with coal consumption falling by almost 20% in a single year. In China, CO2 emissions have recently started to fall, even in a period of economic growth: an important sign, which bodes well.

It is also comforting to learn that green investments in the energy sector are twice as high as those attracted by hydrocarbons: around 2 trillion dollars against 1 trillion, the International Energy Agency (IEA) told us, immediately echoed with emphasis by the world's media. This, too, is a positive sign, although the same Paris-based agency warns that it would be necessary to spend twice as much to achieve Net Zero. The IEA estimates, moreover, label many investments as 'green', including, for example, those in electricity grids. The money channelled into solar and wind power - just to avoid misunderstandings - amounts to 770 billion this year, the IEA specifies, up by 5% compared to last year, but in sharp decline compared to the +22% recorded in 2023. And there are still too many developing countries that do not participate in the green revolution, or participate very little, because they are unable to finance it and because the primary urgency is to guarantee the entire population access to energy (still a luxury in many areas of the world) at the lowest possible cost.

The energy transition is now underway and is unlikely to come to a halt. But even in the West there is growing unease about the cost of decarbonisation measures, which tends to weigh disproportionately on the weaker sections of the population. And it is not out of the question that in the 'rich' world we will slow down the pace rather than speed up, especially in the event of an election victory for Donald Trump in the US, or of an EU Commission more influenced by political forces that would like to water down the Green Deal: an orientation the latter espoused not only by the extreme right, but also by more moderate fringes of conservatives, including a part of the Popular Party to which Ursula von der Leyen belongs. The glass - half-empty or half-full as it may be - must still be filled. And to limit the damage of climate change we do not have too much time.