Key ideas
In theory, we can stabilise and reduce the global mean temperature in the 21st century via rapid decarbonisation and wise policies to avoid a dangerous escalation of human-caused climate change. Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan’s En-ROADS Climate Solutions Simulator gives a simplified picture of some key aspects of the global decarbonisation challenge. On the En-ROADS website, you can move the sliders in the control panel to guide the global mean surface temperature from the 3.3°C by 2100 default global warming level (relative to the 1850–1900 average) to something safer and more liveable. While it looks straightforward, exploring different combinations of mitigation options in En-ROADS simulator shows that it’s surprisingly difficult to stabilise the global mean temperature this century, but it’s definitely doable.
This post compares two scenarios: an ambitious Early Action 1.5°C by 2100 global warming scenario and a more believable Delayed Action 2.3°C by 2100 scenario. Neither of these are radical scenarios in the sense that they’re both set to the status quo levels for ongoing population growth and ongoing economic growth (unless you consider that to be radical).
For the Early Action scenario, using En-ROADS default assumptions, market forces alone didn’t appear sufficient to limit global warming to 1.5°C by 2100. To reach the target, the “reduction in utilization” slider in the detailed settings was applied for coal, oil, and natural gas, along with a combination of other measures.
The Delayed Action scenario fails to effectively address the core problem of greenhouse gas emissions for decades and then belatedly introduces a high carbon price and a range of other measures. These measures are expensive, and some use truly vast areas of land to capture CO2. More importantly, they don’t sufficiently counteract the overwhelming cumulative emissions to drive down atmospheric CO2 concentrations fast enough to reduce global surface air temperatures by 2100.
Note: this is an early version of this post. The two scenarios and the outcomes haven’t been properly explained here yet.
“From a physical science perspective, limiting human induced global warming to a specific level requires limiting cumulative CO2 emissions, reaching at least net zero CO2 emissions, along with strong reductions in other greenhouse gas emissions.”
Source: IPCC (2021) AR6 WGI Summary for Policymakers, D.1, pg. 27
The En-ROADS Climate Solutions Simulator makes decarbonisation look easy… at first.
Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan’s En-ROADS Climate Solutions Simulator enables you to compare a wide range of potential climate solutions. It’s free and easy to use and was used to produce the En-ROADS plots below. The Early Action and Delayed Action labels were added with GIMP software.
This is an independent website and these scenarios don’t represent any organisation. They’re just food for thought and you’re encouraged to compare custom climate solutions for yourself. Some of the choices in the scenarios were shaped by the design and the default assumptions of the En-ROADS simulator. Although the main settings and detailed settings were changed, the default assumptions weren’t modified for these scenarios (the simulator does allow you to modify the assumptions).
The Climate Interactive blog article by Ellie Johnston titled 1.5°C—What will it take? is worth a look. It features a 1.5°C by 2100 En-ROADS scenario by Ellie Johnston and describes many aspects of that scenario. I wasn’t aware of Ellie Johnston’s blog post when creating this post and the Early Action (1.5°C) scenario below is different to their 1.5°C scenario.
Explanations of the scientific basis of the simulations, including references, are available on En-ROADS website and in their settings menus.
An early action scenario: 1.5°C by 2100
This section explores a single En-ROADS scenario 1.5°C by 2100. All of the plots and images below labelled “Early Action (1.5°C)” use the same settings
- You can examine the settings and assumptions by exploring the menus at the link above
- You can modify the scenario by moving the sliders on the En-ROADS Simulator settings at the link above
- Some detailed settings were modified, and these are summarised in the Actions and Outcomes screenshot at the end of this section
- Detailed settings are accessed on their website by clicking the vertical ellipsis symbol in En-ROADS settings: ⋮
- The default assumptions were left unchanged
- Version 26.8.0 of Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator was used
For this scenario:
- CH4 concentration peaks in 2030
- Atmospheric GHG concentration peaks in 2036 and atmospheric CO2 concentration also peaks in 2036
- Net GHG emissions (anthropogenic) reach zero in 2083 and net CO2 emissions (anthropogenic) reach zero in 2060
- The global mean surface temperature peaks in 2047 at a 1.75°C global warming level (relative to the 1850–1900 average), reducing to 1.50°C of global warming by 2100
- The temperature peak (in 2047) lags the CO2 concentration peak (in 2036) by eleven years
Net-zero CO2 emissions: “Condition in which anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are balanced by anthropogenic CO2 removals over a specified period.”
Source: IPCC (2022) AR6 WGIII Annex I, Glossary, pg. 1809
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Kaya graphs
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
En-ROADS settings for the 1.5°C by 2100 scenario
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
A delayed action scenario: 2.3°C by 2100
This section explores a single En-ROADS scenario for global warming of 2.3°C by 2100. All of the plots and images below labelled “Delayed Action (2.3°C)” use the same settings
- You can examine the settings and assumptions by exploring the menus at the link above
- You can modify the scenario by moving the sliders on the En-ROADS Simulator settings at the link above
- Some detailed settings were modified, and these are summarised in the Actions and Outcomes screenshot at the end of this section
- Detailed settings are accessed on their website by clicking the vertical ellipsis symbol in En-ROADS settings: ⋮
- The default assumptions were left unchanged
- Version 26.8.0 of Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator was used
For this scenario:
- CH4 concentration peaks in 2047
- Atmospheric GHG concentration peaks in 2055 and atmospheric CO2 concentration peaks in 2057
- Net GHG emissions (anthropogenic) are still well above zero in 2100, as are net CO2 emissions (anthropogenic)
- The global mean surface temperature in 2100 is at a 2.31°C global warming level (relative to the 1850–1900 average) and increasing
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Kaya graphs
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
En-ROADS settings for the 2.3°C by 2100 scenario
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Side by side: early transformative action vs. delayed and insufficient action
This section compares plots for the two custom En-ROADS scenarios above: 1.5°C by 2100 and 2.3°C by 2100.
There are a large number of En-ROADS plots below and some will be more relevant than others when the arguments in this post are developed more fully (at a later date). They were included here in case you find something of interest.
Explanations of the scientific basis of the simulations, including references, are available on En-ROADS website and in their settings menus.
Note: this is an early version of this post. The two scenarios and the outcomes haven’t been properly explained here yet.
Missing the Paris target
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
The Early Action scenario succeeds in holding the increase in the global average temperature to below 2°C above pre-industrial levels throughout the 21st century, and bringing it down to 1.5°C in 2100.
The Delayed Action scenario (2.3°C of global warming by 2100) fails to stabilise the global average temperature by 2100, let alone meet the Paris Agreement target:
“Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels”
Source: UN (2015) Paris Agreement, pg. 3
Using vast areas of land for CO2 removal
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
GHG emissions and CO2 uptake and removals
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Energy prices and GDP
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Human health
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Environmental impacts
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Agriculture
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Energy
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
Source: Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
IPCC scenarios

Source: IPCC (2023) AR6 Synthesis Report, Figure 3.6
“Global net zero CO2 emissions are reached in the early 2050s in modelled pathways that limit warming to 1.5°C (>50%) with no or limited overshoot, and around the early 2070s in modelled pathways that limit warming to 2°C (>67%). Many of these pathways continue to net negative CO2 emissions after the point of net zero. These pathways also include deep reductions in other GHG emissions. The level of peak warming depends on cumulative CO2 emissions until the time of net zero CO2 and the change in non-CO2 climate forcers by the time of peaking. Deep GHG emissions reductions by 2030 and 2040, particularly reductions of methane emissions, lower peak warming, reduce the likelihood of overshooting warming limits and lead to less reliance on net negative CO2 emissions that reverse warming in the latter half of the century. Reaching and sustaining global net zero GHG emissions results in a gradual decline in warming. (high confidence)”
Source: IPCC (2022) AR6 WGIII Summary for Policymakers, C.2, pg. 23
Global emissions scenarios to 2100

Source: IPCC (2022) WGIII Chapter 3, Figure 3.10, pg. 315
CO2 concentrations for SSPs


Source: Meinshausen et al. (2020) Figure 11 (modified to show CO2 only)
Global warming scenarios to 2100

Source: IPCC (2022) AR6 WGIII Chapter 3, Figure 3.11, pg. 317
Simulated temperature change up to 2300 under the extended SSP scenarios

Source: IPCC (2021) AR6 WGI Chapter 4, Figure 4.40, pg. 632

“Global net zero CO2 emissions are reached in the early 2050s in modelled pathways that limit warming to 1.5°C (>50%) with no or limited overshoot, and around the early 2070s in modelled pathways that limit warming to 2°C (>67%). Many of these pathways continue to net negative CO2 emissions after the point of net zero. These pathways also include deep reductions in other GHG emissions. The level of peak warming depends on cumulative CO2 emissions until the time of net zero CO2 and the change in non-CO2 climate forcers by the time of peaking. Deep GHG emissions reductions by 2030 and 2040, particularly reductions of methane emissions, lower peak warming, reduce the likelihood of overshooting warming limits and lead to less reliance on net negative CO2 emissions that reverse warming in the latter half of the century. Reaching and sustaining global net zero GHG emissions results in a gradual decline in warming. (high confidence)”
Source: IPCC (2022) AR6 WGIII Summary for Policymakers, C.2, pg. 23






Sources for this post:
- Climate Interactive & MIT Sloan (2026) En-ROADS Simulator (Version 26.8.0)
- Ellie Johnston (2025) 1.5°C—What will it take? Climate Interactive blog (accessed on 19th Sep. 2026)
- IPCC (2021) AR6 WGI, Summary for Policymakers
- IPCC (2021) AR6 WGI, Chapter 4, Future Global Climate: Scenario-based Projections and Near-term Information
- IPCC (2022) AR6 WGIII, Chapter 3, Mitigation pathways compatible with long-term goals
- IPCC (2022) AR6 WGIII, Annex 1, Glossary, pg. 1809 (PDF)
- IPCC (2023) AR6 Synthesis Report, Section 3, Long-Term Climate and Development Futures
- Meinshausen et al (2020) The shared socio-economic pathway (SSP) greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions to 2500
- UN (2015) Paris Agreement (PDF)