Full report available here
www.iea.org/reports/worl...

Despite these assumptions, nuclear remains much more expensive in terms of cost per MWh and contributes much less clean power than wind and solar even in their current policies scenario with the least renewable energy ambition.

Very optimistic assumptions on investment costs for nuclear, assuming <= 5000 $/kW by 2035 for US and EU. Where do those come from? Recent projects (Flamanville, Hinkley Point, Olkiluoto, Vogtle) were more like 8000-15000 $/kW, so these assumptions seem quite doubtful.

Eine sehr umfassende Modellierungsstudie, zu einem guten Teil auf Basis offener Modelle 👍 Gut gemacht, @gunnarenergyclima.bsky.social und @nworbmot.bsky.social !👏
Im Folgenden ein paar schnelle Takes zu ein paar Highlights:

(3) Very difficult to see how timeline and process of this report can be salvaged. The IPCC assessments on mitigation provide essential guidance for climate policy processes, and will be crucial to informing the next global stock take and subsequent climate negotiations on emission reduction targets

(2)This stop-work order comes on the eve of an IPCC plenary scheduled for next week. Hardly a coincidence: That plenary is supposed to approve the outline for the next assessment next IPCC report on climate change mitigation developed by Kate Calvin and team together with dozens of other scientists.

(1) Kate is an absolutely outstanding scientist who has made many essential contributions to climate science, such as transformation pathways towards climate stabilization. I had the privilege to work with her on several projects. So heartbreaking to see her curtailed in this way.

Sorry, but your electricity prices are just totally off. Households currently pay around 30 ct/kWh (see e.g. www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/e...), and for industry electricity demand it is much lower. If some consumers
still pay higher prices, it's a legacy effect from the gas crisis, not renewables.