Global Energy Scenarios 2026

Not all energy crises have had a lasting impact on the energy system. Their effects often depend on the scale of supply losses and the duration of the disruption. Some crises have been severe but short-lived, such as the 2019 attacks on Abqaiq and Khurais.

Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

Other shocks have had lasting effects. The energy crises of the 1970s, for example, reshaped thinking around energy security and contributed to changes in technology, policy and energy consumption. The energy crises of the 2020s fall into the latter category and are notable because several major shocks occurred within a relatively short period.

In directly affected regions, high fossil-fuel prices and growing energy-security concerns have reinforced diversification through electrification technologies such as renewable energy and electric vehicles (EVs).

Supply grew from 288 EJ to 665 EJ since 1973, while efficiency and structural change avoided another 632 EJ.

Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

Conventional oil and gas, coal, hydro, nuclear and biomass have grown by 236 EJ since 1973. Shale oil and gas has added 94 EJ, while oil sands and heavy oils added 17 EJ. Alternative fuels include biofuels and biogas, which contributed to a growth of 14EJ since 1973.

Solar and wind have added 12 EJ and 11 EJ to primary energy supply, respectively. As solar and wind produce electricity directly, their contribution to useful energy is typically 2-3 times higher per unit of primary energy supply compared to fuels.

Avoided demand comes from energy efficiency improvements and structural changes to the economy. Without these gains, primary energy demand today would have been twice as high.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the 2022 energy crisis have contributed to a shift away from a transition driven primarily by stringent climate policies towards a more pragmatic approach that balances reliable, affordable and clean energy. How regions balance this energy trilemma in the short and long term will shape both the pace and direction of the transition.

Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

Under Pragmatism, this balance still results in substantial change to the global energy system. Primary energy demand reaches 700 EJ by 2050, equivalent to adding another India to global energy demand in less than 25 years. Solar, wind and batteries continue their strong growth, enabling higher rates of electrification as the historical link between natural gas and power prices weakens. At the same time, greater reliance on domestic energy resources reduces import dependence among importing countries from around 40% today to 25% by 2050.

Under Climate First, primary energy demand remains around current levels, yet broadly the same energy services are delivered to end consumers, reflecting higher efficiency and greater electrification. The shift towards more efficient and domestic energy sources also reduces import dependence to less than 15% by 2050.

Note: colored bands are useful energy by country, largest at the bottom, EU-27 aggregated; the light blue band on top is conversion losses, so the top of each stack is primary energy.
Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

A slowdown in primary energy demand does not mean that access to energy stops growing. Useful energy, the energy that delivers work and heat to end users, keeps rising as the system becomes more efficient at delivering services. For importers, primary energy peaks in 2038 at 421 EJ and then eases, yet the energy they put to work grows 22% through 2050, as conversion losses fall by 30 EJ.

Electricity drives the shift. Its share of useful energy rises from about 32% to 48% for importers and from 26% to 42% for exporters. Electric end uses lose far less energy than combustion, so for importers, efficiency becomes energy security: they get more out of every unit of fuel.

The energy system is better equipped to absorb short-term shocks than in the past. Rising LNG supply, more flexible trade routes and larger storage capacity give buyers more options when a supplier or transport corridor is disrupted. These measures improve responsiveness but leave the underlying exposure to internationally traded fuels in place.

*Net fossil import dependence: net imports of oil, gas and coal as a share of total primary energy consumption, for the 172 countries and territories that were net fossil fuel importers in 2025
Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

Import dependence falls from about 40% today in all three scenarios, reaching 33% in Fossil first, 26% in Pragmatism and 14% in Climate first by 2050. Electrification, efficiency gains and more domestic energy supply cut the volume of oil, gas and coal traded across borders.

The pathways diverge most in the long term. Climate first delivers the largest resilience gains, as lower fossil fuel demand and faster build-out of domestic power supply cut import needs. Pragmatism improves resilience to a lesser degree, while Fossil first leaves importers more exposed to international fuel supply disruptions.

Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

In our scenarios, Climate first front-loads investment as it builds up the low-carbon asset base as fast as possible. From 2037 to 2050, its capex falls by more than half as the asset demand saturates, while Fossil first capex rises 13% over the same time, leaving Climate first as the lowest of all pathways by 2050. For net importers, Pragmatism means a very modest capex growth at $1.5–1.8 trillion a year, close to today’s $1.6 trillion.

Source: Rystad Energy Energy Scenarios Solution

Rystad Energy’s Decarbonization Index tracks progress across the Three Tasks of the Energy Transition from a decarbonization perspective: 1) cleaning and expanding the power system, 2) increasing electrification, and 3) addressing residual emissions. The first two tasks are closely interrelated since a cleaner power system forms the basis for electrification, while Task 3 covers the remaining emissions that require solutions like clean alternative fuel and  carbon capture.

Progress so far has been led by Task 1. In the mid-2020s, the Task 1 index stands at around 40%, compared with around 30% for Task 2 and 15% for Task 3. In Rystad Energy’s Pragmatism scenario, Task 1 speeds up and reaches approximately 85% by 2050 since cleaner power generation continues to expand.