The Group of Twenty (G20) represents the world's largest economies, accounted for 86 % of global final electricity demand and 87 % of global energy-related CO2 emissions in 2020. The success of the Paris Agreement will be heavily dependent on successful energy transitions in G20 countries. This is the first comparative study to assess the potential for solar and onshore wind energy generation across the G20 using a comprehensive and consistent approach. A GIS-based spatial analysis was conducted to identify geographical areas with potential for solar and onshore wind energy generation, and assessed the renewable electricity generation potential of individual G20 member states against the modelled electricity demands for 2050. The results confirmed that the G20's renewable energy potential is high enough to supply projected global electricity demand in 2050. A total of 33.6 million km2 of land within the G20 was identified as solar energy potential areas, which could provide 923,322 TWh/year of electricity. The results also indicated that 31.1 million km2 of land was suitable for onshore wind energy, with the potential to generate 466,925 TWh/year of electricity. These areas are sufficient to generate over 42 times (solar) or 21 times (onshore wind) global electricity demand in 2020, or 14 (solar) or seven times (onshore wind) the projected global electricity demand in 2050. The results also highlight significantly variance in opportunities and barriers by country. Despite the political challenges, further commitments by G20 leaders are expected to lead to faster energy transitions and greater international cooperation.

This paper documents data for global, regional (EU-27), and country-specific (G20 member countries) energy and emission pathways required to achieve a defined carbon budget of between 400 GtCO 2 and 500 GtCO 2 , developed to limit the mean global temperature rise to 1.5 °C, over 50% likelihood. The data were calculated with the 1.5 °C sectorial pathways of the One Earth Climate Model—an integrated energy assessment model devised at the University of Technology Sydney. The data consist of the following six zip-folder datasets (refer to Sect. 2 for an explanation of the data): (1) Appendix folder: Each file contains one worksheet, which summarizes the overall 1.5 °C scenario. (2) Sector folder (XLSX): Each file contains one worksheet, which summarizes the industry sectors analysed. (3) Sector folder (CSV): The data contained are the same as those described in point 2. (4) Sector emissions folder: Each file contains one worksheet, which summarizes the total annual emissions for each industry sector. (5) Scope emissions folder (XLSX): Each file contains one worksheet, which summarizes the total annual emissions for each industry sector—with the additional specificity of emission scope. (6) Scope emissions folder (CSV): The data contained are the same as those described in point 5.

Rapid decarbonisation of electricity production is required if Australia is to meet its obligations under the Paris Agreement. Critical to achieving this at low cost while maintaining system reliability is the selection of an appropriate mix of generation technologies to service electrical demand. Australia has seen extensive deployment of renewable energy technologies such as onshore wind and solar but has not yet seen the adoption of offshore wind technology. However, there is currently significant interest in developing this resource, with ongoing debate occurring about future technology costs and the potential of onshore renewables to meet electrical demand. This article presents the results of an investigation into the techno-economic impact of exogenously fixing offshore wind capacity on a future least-cost Australian National Electricity Market with 100 % renewable generation. An existing open-source cost optimisation model, National Electricity Market Optimiser, was used for the study. It was found that increasing the capacity of offshore wind in the generation mix leads to displacement of both onshore wind and solar generators. This is due to the greater magnitude and consistency of the offshore wind resource relative to onshore. Increasing offshore wind capacity therefore tends to reduce the total system generation capacity, as well as the amount of unused surplus generation. Using lowest published projections for future capital costs, inclusion of offshore wind was found to reduce total system costs. Using an average of future cost projections, total system costs were found to increase. However, adding up to 15 GW of offshore wind capacity to a 100 % renewable system would only impact total system costs by 5 %. Given the other potential advantages of offshore wind, namely closer siting to load centres, reduced need for onshore land resources, and the potential to transition existing fossil fuel workers, our results suggest that offshore wind may be a suitable candidate for inclusion in Australia's transition to a low carbon electricity system, under a range of future cost scenarios.