
Abstract Approximately 20% of global CO 2 emissions originate from sectors often labeled as hard-to-abate, which are challenging or impossible to electrify. Alternative abatement options are necessary for these sectors but face critical bottlenecks, particularly concerning the availability and cost of low-emission hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, and non-fossil CO 2 for synthetic fuels or carbon-dioxide removal. In this study, we conduct a broad techno-economic analysis, mapping abatement options and hard-to-electrify sectors while addressing associated technological uncertainties. Our findings reveal a diverse mitigation landscape that can be categorized into three tiers, based on the abatement cost and technologies required. By requiring long-term climate neutrality through simple conditions, the mitigation landscape narrows substantially, with single options dominating each sector. This clarity justifies targeted political support for sector-specific abatement options, increasing investment security for transforming hard-to-electrify sectors.
Science, Q, Article
Science, Q, Article
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
