Solutions and transition
In Depth
Do solutions to climate change already exist?
Many technologies and strategies are available. The difficulty is combining them and applying them at the scale and within the timeframes needed.
- Last updated:
- Reading time:
- 7 min
In Brief
- According to the IPCC (AR6, Working Group III), technically feasible and increasingly cost-effective mitigation options exist in all major sectors.
- No single technology is sufficient: pathways compatible with 1.5 °C or 2 °C require rapid, deep reductions across all sectors at the same time.
- Many solutions bring immediate additional benefits: cleaner air, health, less congestion, lower demand for materials.
- Technical availability is not the same as implementation: institutional, financial, social, territorial and infrastructural barriers remain.
What we know
Documented facts
- The IPCC documents the availability of mitigation options in energy, buildings, transport, industry, agriculture and land use, with falling costs for several technologies.
- Options include solar and wind power, energy efficiency, electrification, grids and storage systems, low-emission mobility, sustainable forest and agricultural management, reducing food waste and demand-side measures.
- Pathways that limit warming require immediate, deep and sustained emissions reductions across all sectors.
- The IPCC documents significant co-benefits of many measures, particularly on air quality and health.
- Institutional, financial, infrastructural and social barriers to implementation are documented.
How sure are we?
Solid evidence
Numerous studies and authoritative sources converge.
The existence of many feasible options is solid evidence. Costs, optimal combinations and timelines depend heavily on national and local context: estimates vary on this.
How it can be read
Interpretations
- The main constraint today is not so much the lack of solutions as the capacity to apply them at scale and in time.
- Presenting the transition as a purely technological problem hides its political and social dimension.
What we don't know
- We do not know which combination of interventions is optimal for every country: it depends on resources, infrastructure, and social and institutional arrangements.
- Cost estimates for some emerging technologies are still uncertain.
- It is not possible to predict precisely how quickly social and institutional barriers can be overcome.
Why it matters
- Knowing that solutions exist changes the nature of the discussion: from 'is it possible?' to 'how, on what timeline, and at whose expense?'
- Some populations need more energy and more resources to reach adequate well-being: interventions must distribute costs and benefits fairly.
- Delaying increases the overall cost and reduces the options available in the future.
What we can do
- Assess policy proposals by asking about timelines, resources and implementation tools, not only targets.
- Support measures that combine emissions reduction with immediate benefits for people.
- Ask that every measure specify who bears the costs and how the most exposed are protected.
The No-Extinction proposal
Proposals
- No-Extinction proposes assessing every solution on three dimensions together: effectiveness on emissions, feasibility within the available time, and fairness in the distribution of costs and benefits.
Sources and data
The links lead to the original documents and open in a new tab. Every figure cited in this article comes from these sources.
IPCC
AR6 Working Group III — Summary for Policymakers
assessment report · 2022
www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/(opens in a new tab)IPCC
AR6 Working Group III — Headline Statements
summary · 2022
www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/resources/spm-headline-statements/(opens in a new tab)