Scope & Jurisdiction
Climate Target
Energy Deployment
Land & Natural Capital
Policy Design
Technology Portfolio
Gap Accounting
Uncertainty
Physical Climate Risk
Adaptation
Economic Cost
Fiscal Risk
Finance & Investment
Just Transition
Test

Step 6 — Technology Portfolio

Review the 17-technology breakthrough portfolio and mature technology stack. Set probability weights and deployment ceilings that, together with Step 5 policy abatement, will determine the residual gap in Step 7.

Tech Mean Abatement (Gt)
Tech Optimistic (Gt)
Tech Pessimistic (Gt)
CDR Portfolio (Gt)
Scenario Probability Weights

Optimistic / Base / Pessimistic Weighting

P(base) = 1 − P(opt) − P(pes) = 50%
22% overlap discount applied to total portfolio
Covariance: ρ_elec = 0.21 (fusion, perovskite, green_H₂) · ρ_CDR = 0.25 (DAC, BECCS, enhanced weathering, ocean iron)
Breakthrough Technologies (17)

Technology Readiness & Abatement Potential

TechnologySectorTRL203020402050 baseOptimisticPessimisticCeiling
All values in GtCO₂e/yr. TRL = Technology Readiness Level (1–9). Ceiling = deployment cap from resource / land constraints.

Mature Technology Stack (2030–2060)

Technology Sensitivity — Tornado Chart

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Options

CO₂ Storage Bottleneck

DAC + BECCS CDR demand vs verified geological storage build-out. Storage shortfall constrains CDR ceiling.

Budget Delay Cost (5-yr vs 10-yr)

GtCO₂ foregone due to delayed investment decision dates.
Infrastructure Cliff Dates

Latest Permissible Investment Decision Dates

Cliff = latest permissible investment decision date to achieve 2050 scale. Red = at cliff now. Yellow = 1–2 yr window.
Feeds into Step 7 (Gap Accounting): technology mean abatement, CDR ceiling, and δ factor drive the breakthrough gap computation · Step 8 (Uncertainty): opt/pes weights set the Monte Carlo fan bounds
Back