Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2 °C


Policy makers have generally agreed that the average global temperature rise caused by greenhouse gas emissions should not exceed 2 °C above the average global temperature of pre-industrial times1. It has been estimated that to have at least a 50 per cent chance of keeping warming below 2 °C throughout the twenty-first century, the cumulative carbon emissions between 2011 and 2050 need to be limited to around 1,100 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (Gt CO2)2,3. However, the greenhouse gas emissions contained in present estimates of global fossil fuel reserves are around three times higher than this2,4, and so the unabated use of all current fossil fuel reserves is incompatible with a warming limit of 2 °C. Here we use a single integrated assessment model that contains estimates of the quantities, locations and nature of the world’s oil, gas and coal reserves and resources, and which is shown to be consistent with a wide variety of modelling approaches with different assumptions5, to explore the implications of this emissions limit for fossil fuel production in different regions. Our results suggest that, globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused from 2010 to 2050 in order to meet the target of 2 °C. We show that development of resources in the Arctic and any increase in unconventional oil production are incommensurate with efforts to limit average global warming to 2 °C. Our results show that policy makers’ instincts to exploit rapidly and completely their territorial fossil fuels are, in aggregate, inconsistent with their commitments to this temperature limit. Implementation of this policy commitment would also render unnecessary continued substantial expenditure on fossil fuel exploration, because any new discoveries could not lead to increased aggregate production.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Supply cost curves for oil, gas and coal and the combustion CO2 emissions for these resources.
Figure 2: Cumulative production between 2010 and 2050 from a range of long-term energy scenarios.
Figure 3: Oil, gas and coal production in the TIAM-UCL 2 °C scenario (with CCS) and comparison with all other 2 °C scenarios in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) database5.


  1. 1

    United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Fifteenth Session, held in Copenhagen from 7 to 19 December 2009. Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its Fifteenth Session. United Nations Climate Change Conf. Report 43 (UNFCC, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458, 1158–1162 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Clarke, L. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change ( Edenhofer, O. et al.) Ch. 6 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014)

  4. 4

    Raupach, M. R. et al. Sharing a quota on cumulative carbon emissions. Nature Clim. Chang. 4, 873–879 (2014)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    IPCC Working Group III. Integrated Assessment Modelling Consortium (IAMC) AR5 Scenario Database (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis 2014).

  6. 6

    Allen, M. R. et al. Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne. Nature 458, 1163–1166 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Matthews, H. D., Gillett, N. P., Stott, P. A. & Zickfeld, K. The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions. Nature 459, 829–832 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Friedlingstein, P. et al. Persistent growth of CO2 emissions and implications for reaching climate targets. Nature Geosci. 7, 709–715 (2014)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Leaton, J. Unburnable Carbon—Are the World’s Financial Markets Carrying a Carbon Bubble? (Investor Watch, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    McGlade, C. E. A review of the uncertainties in estimates of global oil resources. Energy 47, 262–270 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE). Petroleum Resources Management (SPE, 2008)

  12. 12

    Bauer, N. et al. Global fossil energy markets and climate change mitigation—an analysis with REMIND. Clim. Change (2013)

  13. 13

    Anandarajah, G., Pye, S., Usher, W., Kesicki, F. & McGlade, C. E. TIAM-UCL Global Model Documentation. (University College London, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Meinshausen, M., Raper, S. C. B. & Wigley, T. M. L. Emulating atmosphere–ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6—Part 1: Model description and calibration. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 1417–1456 (2011)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Usher, W. & Strachan, N. Critical mid-term uncertainties in long-term decarbonisation pathways. Energy Policy 41, 433–444 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    IEA. Resources to Reserves Ch. 8 (International Energy Agency, 2013)

  17. 17

    Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2013 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2014–2023. (AER, 2014)

  18. 18

    Yergin, D. The Prize: the Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power Epilogue (Simon and Schuster, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    McKelvey, V. E. Mineral resource estimates and public policy. Am. Sci. 60, 32–40 (1972)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    McGlade, C. E., Speirs, J. & Sorrell, S. Unconventional gas—a review of regional and global resource estimates. Energy 55, 571–584 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR). Energy Study 2012. Reserves, Resources and Availability of Energy Resources. (BGR, 2012)

  22. 22

    McGlade, C. E. Uncertainties in the outlook for oil and gas. PhD thesis, UCL, (2013)

  23. 23

    Klett, T. & Schmoker, J. in Giant Oil and Gas fields of the Decade 1990–1999 (ed. Halbouty, M. T. ) 107–122 (The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Attanasi, E. D. & Freeman, P. A. Survey of Stranded Gas and Delivered Costs to Europe of Selected Gas Resources. SPE Econ. Manag. 3, 149–162 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    International Energy Agency (IEA). World Energy Outlook. (IEA, 2008)

  26. 26

    Trinnaman, J. & Clarke, A. Survey of Energy Resources (World Energy Council, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    International Energy Agency (IEA). World Energy Outlook. (IEA, 2013)

  28. 28

    International Energy Agency (IEA). World Energy Outlook. (IEA, 2011)

  29. 29

    Rogner, H.-H. et al. in Global Energy Assessment—Towards a Sustainable Future Ch. 7 423–512 (Cambridge University Press, 2012)

  30. 30

    Owen, N. A., Inderwildi, O. R. & King, D. A. The status of conventional world oil reserves—hype or cause for concern? Energy Policy 38, 4743–4749 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    McGlade, C. & Ekins, P. Un-burnable oil: an examination of oil resource utilisation in a decarbonised energy system. Energy Policy 64, 102–112 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    International Energy Agency (IEA). World Energy Outlook. (IEA, 2009)

  33. 33

    Leatherdale, A. et al. Bioenergy Review: Technical Paper 2—Global and UK Bioenergy Supply Scenarios. (Committee on Climate Change, 2011)

  34. 34

    O’Neill, B. C. et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Clim. Change 122, 387–400 (2014)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Campbell, C. J. Atlas of Oil and Gas Depletion (Springer, 2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Herrmann, L. et al. Oil and Gas for Beginners 270–413 (Deutsche Bank, 2013)

  37. 37

    Klett, T. R. et al. An Assessment of Potential Additions to Conventional Oil and Gas Resources of the World (outside the United States) from Reserve Growth. (USGS, 2012)

  38. 38

    Klett, T. R. et al. Potential Additions to Conventional Oil and Gas Resources in Discovered Fields of the United States from Reserve Growth, 2012. (USGS, 2012)

  39. 39

    Ahlbrandt, T., Charpentier, R., Klett, T., Schmoker, J. & Schenk, C. USGS World Petroleum Assessment 2000. (USGS, 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Bentley, R., Miller, R., Wheeler, S. & Boyle, G. UKERC Review of Evidence on Global Oil Depletion: Annex 1—Models of global oil supply for the period 2008-2030. (UKERC, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Brownfield, M., Charpentier, R. R., Cook, T., Gautier, D. L. & Higley, D. K. An Estimate of Undiscovered Conventional Oil and Gas Resources of the World, 2012. (USGS, 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Gautier, D. L. et al. Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas in the Arctic. Science 324, 1175–1179 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Smith, T. Arctic dreams—a reality check. Geo ExPro. 4, 16–24 (2007)

  44. 44

    Shah, A. et al. A review of novel techniques for heavy oil and bitumen extraction and upgrading. Energy Environ. Sci. 3, 700–714 (2010)

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Clarke, B. NPC Global Oil and Gas Study: Topic Paper 22—Heavy Oil. (National Petroleum Council, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Schenk, C. et al. An Estimate of Recoverable Heavy Oil Resources of the Orinoco Oil Belt, Venezuela. (USGS, 2009)

  47. 47

    Attanasi, E. D. & Meyer, R. F. in 2010 Survey of Energy Resources 123–150 (World Energy Council, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    Johnson, R. C., Mercier, T. J. & Brownfield, M. Assessment of in-place oil shale resources of the Green River Formation, Greater Green River Basin in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah. (USGS, 2011)

  49. 49

    Dyni, J. Geology and Resources of Some World Oil-Shale Deposits. (USGS, 2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    Biglarbigi, K., Mohan, H. & Carolus, M. Potential for Oil Shale Development in the United States. (INTEK, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51

    CEDIGAZ. Natural Gas in the World, End of July 2008 (Centre International d’Information sur le Gaz Naturel et tous Hydrocarbures Gazeux (CEDIGAZ), 2009)

Download references


We thank I. Keppo at the UCL Energy Institute, E. Trutnevyte at ETH Zurich, and A.-M. Lyne at the UCL Department of Statistical Science. This research formed part of the programme of the UK Energy Research Centre and was supported by the UK Research Councils under Natural Environment Research Council award NE/G007748/1.

Author information




Both authors contributed equally to this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christophe McGlade.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Figure 1 Cumulative fossil fuel production under a range of sensitivity scenarios run using TIAM-UCL.

Scenario names and characteristics are given in Extended Data Table 2.

Extended Data Figure 2 The auxiliary energy inputs for natural bitumen production in Canada by in situ technologies in the 2 °C scenario and the CO2 intensity of these.

bbl SCO, a barrel of synthetic crude oil, the oil that results after upgrading the natural bitumen.

Extended Data Table 1 Best estimates of remaining reserves and remaining ultimately recoverable resources from 2010
Extended Data Table 2 Labels and description of the sensitivity scenarios modelled in this project
Extended Data Table 3 Regional distribution of resources unburnable before 2050 in absolute terms and as a percentage of current resources under the 2 °C scenario that allows CCS
Extended Data Table 4 Principal data sources used to derive reserve and resource estimates and estimates at the global level for each category of production
Extended Data Table 5 Global aggregated oil, gas and coal reserve and resource estimates from a selection of data sources
Extended Data Table 6 Regions included in TIAM-UCL and their aggregation to the regions given in the main text
Extended Data Table 7 Labels and description of the four core scenarios modelled in this project

PowerPoint slides

Source data

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McGlade, C., Ekins, P. The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 517, 187–190 (2015).

Download citation

Further reading


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing