To stay within the targeted limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, scientists insist that we need to reduce the carbon that’s already in the atmosphere as well as dropping new emissions to net-zero. In so far as fossil fuels supply 86% of the world’s energy needs (2024 numbers), it is clear that those emissions have to be cut at least in half by 2030. Meeting that goal will require major transitions in the energy sector. Even if we cut most of our carbon emissions down to zero, the carbon dioxide that is already in the atmosphere can affect the climate for hundreds of thousands of years. The IPCC projects between 100 billion and 1 trillion tons of CO2 would need to be removed this century. So, even as keeping fossil fuels in the ground is the surest known way to prevent further warming, the search is clearly on for other solutions.
In 2020, the International Energy Agency (IEA) evaluated existing clean energy technologies and identified four main decarbonization approaches: electrification of end usage (particularly heating and transportation); carbon capture, utilization, and storage; low-carbon hydrogen and hydrogen fuels; and bioenergy. The unsettling news is that, of the more than 400 technologies within those four categories identified by the IEA, few were on track to meet necessary goals. The IEA’s 2023 update reported that clean energy technology adoption has surged at an unprecedented pace, while at the same time, demand for fossil fuels has also steadily increased.
In low-carbon electricity, where we have made important progress in solar, wind, geothermal, and nuclear generation, our infrastructure and use in industry is lagging. The development of long duration storage as a solution to extend the reach of renewable energy, otherwise limited by the amount of time the sun shines and the wind blows, is not where anyone wants it to be - yet. Battery storage is critical in the transportation sector as the race is on to accelerate the speed by which electric vehicles can be charged and accelerate the longevity of those batteries. This matters as individuals and communities search for ways to protect themselves from economic impacts and power outages. It matters to utilities as they search for solutions to provide reliability, integrate clean energy into the grid, and reduce the cost of energy.
Lithium-ion batteries, which are both improving and becoming cheaper (97% in the past three decades) are vital to the transportation sector because, as they become less expensive and more efficient, so do electric vehicles. Graphene aluminum-ion batteries are promising ever more improvements and cost efficiencies although not ideal for long-duration energy storage yet. Adden Energy, a Harvard spinoff, announced in September 2022 a “game changing” new solid-state battery which promises, among other things, a 3-minute charge for electric vehicles. In July 2025, Milan-based company Energy Dome began operating its long duration energy-storage facility in Sardinia with a giant bubble holding 2,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide representing the first “CO2 battery.” CO2 batteries don’t need specific topography or critical minerals, and they are 30% cheaper and three times as long-lasting as lithium-ion batteries. More CO2 batteries will be built around the world starting in 2026, including for Google data centers.
Another way to store renewable energy is by using electrolyzers to extract hydrogen from water. In this technology, engineers run an electric current through water and collect the hydrogen molecules that break off. These can be burned for heat, stored in fuel cells or turned into chemicals such as methane for processes that require fossil fuels. When the electrolyzer system is used to produce hydrogen as a fuel, the only emission is water vapor. This concept is better known as ‘Power-to-X’ --taking grid electricity (power) and turning it into something else. In this case the ‘X’ is hydrogen fuel. Hydrogen is also being looked at to decarbonize heavy industry, a high-polluting sector that has mostly been overlooked. The high heat needed to process industrial materials — such as concrete, iron, steel, and petrochemicals — is responsible for about 10 percent of global CO2 emissions, according to a report from the Centre on Global Energy Policy. Zero-carbon hydrogen is attracting attention not just for use in industrial transportation but also as chemical energy for industry.
There are two carbon removal strategies:
Read more about carbon removal and carbon capture here.
And, then there is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) -- whereby plants are burned for energy at a power plant, which then captures and stores the resulting emissions so that the CO2 previously absorbed by the plants is removed from the atmosphere. It can then be used for enhanced oil recovery or injected into the earth where it is sequestered in geologic formations.
Technologies and ventures that capture methane and turn it into biogas, which is then purified (removing CO2, H2S, etc) to become renewable natural gas (RNG) are also taking off. Vanguard Renewables is, for example, partnering with companies like Unilever and Starbucks to turn their food and agricultural waste (including manure) into renewable natural gas and by-products such as fertilizer. This RNG is then injected into gas pipelines or used as vehicle fuel, replacing dirtier diesel or natural gas. Because RNG uses the same pipelines as fossil gas, economic incentives are created to maintain that system rather than build purely renewable solutions (like electric). It's "renewable" because it comes from waste, but it's chemically the same (mostly methane) as fossil gas, leading some to call it "greenwashing" or extending the life of fossil gas systems, says Fast Company.
There is no doubt, however, that regulating methane gas is critical for reducing emissions. In the challenge to cut gas leaks a number of companies are developing emission tracking tools:
The World Economic Forum’s 2024 report on Innovation and Adaptation in the Climate Crisis identifies six emerging technologies that will be crucial for adaptation and mitigation in the coming years: artificial intelligence (AI) ; drones (to collect visual data for monitoring and to aid in disaster response); earth observation (satellites and remote sensing technology); advanced supercomputing; The Internet of Things (IoT); and Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR). These technologies often work in tandem, for example, PanoAI utilizes a mix of IoT, satellites, and AI to detect wildfires. The Polar Tipping Points Hub uses VR to create an immersive experience of arctic warming to inspire action. These emerging technologies can also augment other climate technologies, like carbon capture and battery storage. Advanced supercomputing, like quantum computers, can perform high-level calculations to stimulate chemical reactions for enhancing carbon capture technologies, and can produce models for battery design.
Blockchain, known for its use in cryptocurrencies, also has climate applications for developing carbon credit trading markets, decentralized renewable energy trading, supply chain transparency, and smart contracts. To combat food waste, Freshpire uses cloud computing to produce a network of sustainable food, connecting farms, grocery stores, restaurants, and consumers, while Princeton University is developing a wireless technology to sort fruit quality. Startups are exploring packing peanut alternatives made from mushrooms, 3D-printing coral reefs, growing cement with bacteria, and developing fabric that can collect solar power.
However, as Andreas Malm and Wim Carton argue in their new book The Long Heat, all these novel “technofixes” for the climate crisis, like manipulating the orbit of asteroids or even carbon capture technology, may just be a manifestation of society’s unwillingness to directly challenge the root of the problem: fossil capital. Instead of reckoning with the political power of fossil capital, we are invested in a “doom loop” of “reckless experimentation.” Malm and Carton specifically critique direct air capture and carbon removal technologies, writing that DAC gives fossil fuel executives excuses to continue to operate, and to in fact generate profit twice off of fossil fuels by burning them and then monetizing the emissions. Meanwhile, AI is extremely resource-intensive, often drawing huge amounts of water from water-scarce environmental justice communities, and relying on fossil fuels to power the energy guzzling data centers. Therefore, while it is easy to fall into the trap of indiscriminately admiring all new technologies and hailing them as climate panaceas, it is important to remain critical of each new technology, asking important questions about profit-motivation and scientific impact, and ensuring that new technologies aren’t excuses to further prolong our dependence on fossil fuels and intensify deep-rooted injustices in our communities.
Overview of climate mitigation options and their estimated ranges of costs and potentials in 2030
Courtesy Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
CREDIT: IPCC
