The 2nd derivative is now the right direction, but it's not had long enough to reduce the 1st derivative to make it zero.

We need to keep the pressure up, keep building out production of Renewables, Heat-pumps, EVs and stop building fossil fueled generation, heating and transport.

I know this is all possible because as a household we electrified:

Heating - got a heat-pump
Transport - got a MG MG5 electric car
Installed Solar + 15kWh household battery

Running costs have dropped 60% and carbon footprint is tiny fraction of what it was (will figure that our at end of month.)

The tech is ready, we have "good enough" electric cars, heat-pumps, batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, long distance HVDC transmission etc. to deliver on 100% RE and electrified societies.

It's now about make it cheaper and scaling production, and not standing in the way of progress.

I expect by the end of this decade modelling of the transition will be forced to cull out scenarios that are just straight impossible.

I'm very much in the techno-optimist camp, or perhaps really it should be economic-optimist camp as I now think it's economics that will drive a rapid transition.

As business owners, employees and householders we also have our own businesses and personal "policies" we can enact to help or hinder the transition:

Choose heat-pump over a gas heating.
Choose BEV (bike up to trucks/trains/ships) over a ICE vehicle.
Invest in Renewables.
Help educate others.

Now that Renewables are the cheapest source of power government policies can just get out of the way and let economics drive the transition, or try to slow it down like the current US government.

BEVs are close to this tipping point too.

One of things I like about simplified models is that are simple to update to fit data as it comes out and look at different broad scenarios to see their impact.

For instance changing demand growth from linear growth to leveling off will have a dramatic effect on timing of the phase out of oil/gas.

Ember's estimate of 50% demand increase by 2100 is very different to 100% by 2060.

I'm OK with that, these are estimates based on assumptions where the systems involved are often very non linear.

We need these projections, but we also will require them to be updated regularly as data comes in.

I expect we'll see significant changes in final energy demand over the next decade so we'll have a clearer picture of the slope of demand growth.

For me it doesn't seem credible that the present demand growth will be maintained through to 2040, let alone 2060 and beyond.

Typo alert: 1/4 rather than 1.4 :-)

Things could change quite fast with Solar now the cheapest form a energy in many developing nations, and with Solar being easy to install in a distributed way that households and business can just go straight to generator their own power.

Pakistan is an example of this.

I expect for a few more years we'll see developing economies keep increasing demand at a faster rate than developed economies reducing demand, this will look linear linear growth.

However, as the developing economies mature their demand will also peak and then fall as they become more efficient.

The drop in electricity demand in the past 2 decades happened while UK population increased 13%.

In 2005 we required 6.71TWh per Million.
In 2024 we required 4.58TWh per Million.

We required 46% more electricity per person 20 years ago!

ourworldindata.org/grapher/popu...

At national scale we can also see how energy demand isn't always upward.

Here in the UK electricity demand has fallen steadily over the past 2 decades.

ourworldindata.org/grapher/elec...

Personally, I think efficiency improvements achieved by electrification will likely reduce energy demand per capita.

For instance, our household transitioned from Gas heating and Diesel car to Heat-pump and Battery Electric Car and have reduced heating and transport energy demand to a 1/4.

Pushing the primary energy fallacy is just what fossil fuel diehards do to make it seem like the task is greater than it is.

Your trolling is so consistent doomerist and void of relevant perspective it seems like a deliberate attempt to slow transition.