In this case I used Citi's own numbers for the energy mix, that were OK when they seemed to support solar winning the race. Hell, they even went all the way out to 2100, which is stupid. So, I used Citi's numbers and a very modest expectation of energy growth.
I estimated of a rise in CO2 emissions of 20% by 2040. The IEA expects to see an 18% growth in emissions by 2035, which comes out to about 24% by 2040.
That supposes an emissions growth rate of 0.8% pa, which we know is extremely low compared to the current growth rate of about 2.8%, averaged over the last decade.
I used an estimate of 1.5% pa growth in primary energy consumption to 2040. IEA assumes 1.45% in their 2012 WEO. The previous 10-year trailing average was 2.6% pa.
So my numbers are right in line with those of the IEA, which was also one of the primary source for Citi's data (I hadn't looked at the 2012 WEO before now, so this is an interesting cross-check). Given that I'm in line with the estimates made by the Citi paper in the OP, I can only conclude that your dudgeon is caused by the conclusion I came to: that global CO2 emissions will almost certainly keep rising for at least the next 27 years, enough to put us over 450ppmv.
The growth of renewable energy may very well imperil fossil fuel companies here and there. That's a good thing, but it doesn't look like it will be enough to stop world CO2 levels from rising dangerously, which is the point of the whole exercise. 450 ppm (along with the recent uprating of methane's GWP by the IPCC, from 21 to 34) will result in us blowing right by 2 degrees C, and into "dangerous warming" territory without a backward glance.
The core issue is the carbon budget. If we blow that, we're cooked - literally. According to the IPCC, if we pass 880 GtC cumulative, we will probably go over 2C. A growth of 0.8% pa (less than a third of the current growth rate) puts us over that budget by the year 2037. If we hope to stay under 2C it will take a lot more than the adoption of renewables at the rates estimated by Citi and the IEA.
So pat yourself on the back if you wish, but keep your eye on the carbon.
http://theenergycollective.com/lindsay-wilson/283921/22-years-till-we-blow-2-c-carbon-budget
http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/media/weowebsite/2012/factsheets.pdf
And woo hoo to you too! 
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read