By Vijay Jayaraj
A new report from McKinsey & Company, the Global Energy Perspective, lays bare what many of us – those we have dismissed as climate deniers – have always claimed: Coal, oil and natural gas will remain the dominant global energy sources well beyond 2050.
The McKinsey outlook for 2025 significantly adjusts previous forecasts. Last year, the consultant’s models expected coal demand to fall by 40% by 2035. Today, McKinsey forecasts a 1% increase over the same period. The dramatic turnaround is due to the record start-up of coal-fired power plants in China, the unexpected increase in global electricity consumption and the lack of viable alternatives for industries such as steel, chemicals and heavy manufacturing.
The report says the three fossil fuels will still provide up to 55% of the world’s energy in 2050, a forecast that seems low in my opinion. The share of hydrocarbons is now over 60% in electricity generation and over 80% in primary energy consumption.
In any case, the McKinsey report confirms what experienced energy analysts and pragmatic politicians have long claimed: the energy transition will not be quick, easy and not solely driven by climate goals. In fact, this energy transition will not be possible at all without the large-scale deployment of nuclear, geothermal or other technological innovations that prove practical.
In countries such as India, Southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, access, affordability and reliability are the top energy priorities, which together ensure national security. Planners are aware of a trap: Relying solely on weather-dependent energy sources risks power outages, industrial disruptions, economic decline and unrest.
For this reason, many developing countries are pursuing a two-pronged path: continued investment in conventional energy production (coal, gas, nuclear) while developing alternative technologies. McKinsey says this in consultant jargon: “Countries and regions will pursue different paths based on local economic conditions, resource endowments and the realities of specific industries.”
In countries like India, Indonesia and Nigeria, the scale of electrification and industrial expansion is enormous. These countries cannot afford to wait decades for perfect solutions; You need “reliable and good enough for the moment.” This means that conventional fuels are retained.
McKinsey’s analysis also underscores what physics and engineering dictate: Intermittent and weather-dependent sources like wind and solar require vast areas of land, backup batteries, and investments in generation and the grid that are neither cheap nor quick.
Wind and solar technologies branded as renewable should instead be called economic killers. They create expensive and unstable electrical systems that have brought energy-rich nations like Germany to their knees. After spending billions of dollars on unreliable wind turbines and solar panels and tearing down nuclear and coal-fired power plants, the country is struggling with high prices and economic stagnation.
The Germans now have a word for their self-inflicted crisis: dark flute. It means “dark doldrums” – a time of cold, sunless and windless days when their “green” grid fails. During a lull in November 2024, fossil fuels were called upon to supply 70% of Germany’s electricity.
If “renewables” were truly powerful, planners would phase out fossil fuel production. But that’s not the case. While wind and solar energy are being promoted in some places, coal and natural gas remain popular fuels. In the first half of 2025 alone, China commissioned around 21 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power capacity, more than any other country and the largest increase since 2016.
In addition, China has approved the construction of new coal-fired power plants with a capacity of 25 GW in the first half of 2026. As of July, there were almost 1,200 coal-fired power plants in mainland China, far more than the rest of the world.
McKinsey points to a dramatic increase in data center electricity demand, estimated to be around 17% per year from 2022 to 2030 across the 38 OECD countries. Such growth in electricity consumption simply cannot be met by wind and solar energy.
When analysts, journalists and engineers point out this reality, they are branded as “stooges” of the fossil fuel industry. However, it is not the job of public relations to point out the physical and economic fundamentals that form the basis for meeting global energy needs. To reject such facts is to deny that reliable energy remains the foundation of modern civilization.
The cost of stupid “green” policies is paid in job losses, ruined businesses, broken lives and impoverishment that could have been avoided by smarter decisions.
For those who have spent years repeating energy realities, the vindication is bittersweet. The satisfaction of being right is tempered by the knowledge that many have suffered because reality was ignored.
Vijay Jayaraj is a science and research associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental science from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the United Kingdom, and a bachelor’s degree in engineering from Anna University, India.
Like this:
Load…
Explore more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to receive the latest posts by email.
Comments are closed.