This article explores the climate mitigation strategies of the 15 industries with the largest carbon dioxide emissions in Sweden. Starting from two carbon budget alternatives, we analyse the mitigation projections of the companies in relation to what can be considered their fair share of the remaining carbon budget for Sweden.
We furthermore determine the uncertainties associated with the strategies. The results suggest that if the communicated mitigation plans are implemented as planned, the companies overdraft our main, 1.5-degree, budget option but stay within the alternative 1.7-degree budget. The analysis shows, however, that the timing and efficiency of emission reductions are crucial.
Already small delays or lower efficiency in implementation, result in evident overdrafts of also the alternative budget. There are also substantial political and technical risks which can prevent timely mitigations. The article makes a novel contribution by analyzing industries’ mitigation strategies relative to their share of the remaining carbon budget.
The article demonstrates the importance of transparent industrial climate mitigation strategies and in particular the need for policymakers to set incentive structures to promote strategy implementation.