Energy Policy Scenarios to 2050
4.3. Scenario 3: Lion
4.3.1. Global Story
Gross Domestic Product
This scenario produced the most optimistic estimates in many respects, especially in the development of the global economy. In Asia, the high growth rates of today continue with the combination of significant government engagement and high degrees of cooperation and integration. In Africa, these conditions help with technology transfer and technology leapfrogging, as well as financing. In Latin America, there is concern that active government engagement leaves insufficient room for private enterprise, both domestic and foreign, which can bring managerial and technical improvements to the region and, therefore, an increase in economic efficiency. This effect is felt more intensely in the later period.
Demographic growth continues at stable rates in Asia and is somewhat higher initially in North America. In Africa and Latin America, population growth rates decline after the initial period due to achieving higher GDP/capita ratios, therefore improved standards of living.
In this scenario energy intensity declines worldwide. As population growth stabilises in Latin America and declines in Africa, and standards of living improve, energy efficiency gains take place and, despite new energy demand, lead to lower energy intensity. In Asia and Europe, a large number of government initiatives leads to increases in energy efficiency and lower energy intensity. Canada and Mexico expect improvements to the levels already seen in the United States where the degree of improvement is expected to continue.
The model indicates energy intensities decreasing by almost 25% by 2020, nearly 40% by 2035, and close to 50% by 2050, compared with today. These are significant improvements over the projections in the Leopard and Elephant scenarios (see Figure 4.1 ).
The mix of energy sources, which became more diverse under government support in the Elephant scenario, diversifies further with global cooperation and integration. The effects are felt in Africa after the initial period (2035). In Asia, the curbing of energy demand and a shift from fossil fuels to renewable and nuclear energies is primarily responsible for improvements in the energy mix. In Latin America, government actions support oil, gas, biomass, and hydroelectric shares in the first two periods (2020 and 2035) and only later, with increased scarcities of oil and gas, does the mix change (after 2035).
There are dramatic improvements over the previous two scenarios. After initial increases, there are decreases in all regions.
The mathematical model suggests that in this scenario primary energy (modern) production increases by over 30% in 2020, between 64-70% by 2035, and nearly 100% by 2050. This is higher than with government engagement alone, mostly because international and regional cooperation and integration leads to more economic growth (see Figure 4-2 ).
A strong international framework results in significant decreases in greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions rates in this scenario initially increase in Asia, Africa, and Latin America (more oil and gas) and then decline after 2035. In Latin America, coal substitutes for hydropower initially. The rates decline in Europe and are mixed in North America, being higher in Canada, lower in Mexico, and stable in the United States, the dominant player in the region. The introduction of significant renewable and nuclear energies in Asia before 2035 leads to a reduction in emissions there.
The model shows this scenario with slightly higher CO2 emissions earlier, increasing by around 30% by 2020, before decreasing relative to other scenarios and being almost 35% higher in 2035 and in 2050, compared with 27.6 Gtonne in 2005 (see Figure 4-3 ).
There is less tension for oil in this scenario, especially late in the period toward 2050. This is because of decreasing oil availability, more use of renewable energy, and falling demand from the transport sector toward the end of the period (2050) in Africa. North America and Asia see a movement toward non-conventional oil late in the period. Latin America sees scarcities late in the period, as new discoveries cannot keep up with demand.
Tension increases in Asia, Latin America, and Africa due to energy demand growth, although it eases in Latin America and later in Asia as supply systems begin to catch up with demand. Canada and Mexico have similar views, although the United States sees demand and tension decreasing (stable markets and supplies).
Africa, Asia, and North America (United States) show increases due to growth in energy demand. This is partly due to CTL technology supplying transport fuels, although decreases in tension occur later in the period as nuclear and renewable power become more pronounced. Coal is abundant and meets demand (i.e., no tension) in Latin America. Europe sees coal losing importance throughout the period despite the expected development of carbon capture and storage technologies.
There is a nuclear power resurgence with the drivers being GDP growth, government incentives to reduce carbon emissions and high cooperation among limited suppliers.
As in the other scenarios but more so, renewable energy grows substantially in this scenario, tripling in Europe by 2050. Thus, the range of renewable resources is in continual tension. A combination of government incentives, increased cooperation, and environmental concerns provide the drivers. Europe sees a 21% share for this scenario in 2050 in contrast to the much higher targets set by some governments, but this share could be reached sooner. Hydropower and biomass are likely to have increased tension by the end of the period in Latin America and in Africa, due to the use of scarce agricultural land for food crops.
Not an issue in North America and Europe, it decreases in significance and tension in Asia and is neutral in Latin America as governments provide incentives for the expansion of commercial fuels. In Africa, the introduction of new alternative technologies now eases tension from 2035.
4.3.2. Winners, Losers, and Dilemmas
Because this scenario envisages both high government engagement and international cooperation and integration, all 3 A's benefit, especially access to energy for the poor and less developed areas. Regional carbon emissions control regimes are more likely to be linked to a global method which sets a carbon value high enough to address greenhouse gas emissions but low enough to avoid undue impact on the growth potential of different regions. This scenario thus optimises the possibilities for the revitalisation of nuclear power, as well as for the introduction of large amounts of renewable energy, especially biomass and biofuels, wind, and solar (photovoltaic and thermal).
It is not clear if there are any losers in this scenario, as governments and industry are believed to be capable, when working together, to solve the problems of energy supply and environmental concerns. However, this scenario creates a dilemma almost unique to it: as things begin to work effectively on a regional scale, issues will then be raised over how to transition this cooperation from a regional to a global scale and manage the result. If the world is to have a sustainable energy future, international cooperative schemes on an unprecedented scale (e.g., on the rules of energy trade in the WTO) will likely have to devised and enforced.