How uncertainty in technology costs and carbon dioxide removal availability affect climate mitigation pathways.

Limiting global warming to "well below 2°C" as stated in the Paris Agreement requires ambitious emissions reductions from all sectors. Rapid technology cost declines in the energy sector are changing energy investment and emissions, even with the weak climate policies currently in place. We assess how energy supply costs and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) availability affect mitigation by performing a sensitivity analysis with the energy-economy-climate model REMIND. We use new scenarios with carbon price paths that aim to reduce the frequently seen temperature overshoot. Further, we measure the sensitivities of mitigation indicators to the costs of technologies across economic sectors. We assess the sensitivity to nine techno-economic parameters: the costs of wind, solar, biomass, gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and electric/hydrogen vehicles, as well as the injection rate of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). While technology costs play a role in shaping optimal pathways, we find that transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization, whereas costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. This further highlights the value of renewable energy deployment as a no-regrets option in climate policy. In terms of the sensitivity of model outputs, economic indicators become more sensitive to costs than emissions, with increasing policy stringency. • The transport sector costs affect the economics of deep decarbonization. • The costs of renewables are more important for scenarios under weak climate policies. • Renewable energy deployment is a no-regrets option in climate policy. • Even in "favorable" price scenarios, optimal emissions need to reach zero by 2065. • Robust and broad policy support is needed for achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]