{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"analysis_type":["infrastructure risk assessment"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'infrastructure risk assessment' for facet 'analysis_type' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":1,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?analysis_type=infrastructure+risk+assessment","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"sei-001770","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/sei-001770","title":"Leaving room for ‘green growth’: identifying near-term actions to avoid long-term carbon lock-in","publisher":{"name":"Stockholm Environment Institute","organization":"stockholm-environment-institute"},"document_type":"policy brief","language":"en","date_published":"2015","source_url":"https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-PB-2015-Avoiding-carbon-lock-in.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The policy brief defines carbon lock-in as the process where investments in carbon-intensive technologies and institutions make shifting to low-carbon pathways more difficult and expensive. It introduces a four-step methodology for policy-makers to assess lock-in risk: defining the context, identifying investments inconsistent with climate goals (using 'over-committed emissions' and 'over-production' metrics), assessing the strength of the lock-in (via equipment lifetime and capital intensity), and considering techno-institutional effects. Applying this globally for the period 2015–2030, the brief identifies coal-fired power plants as the highest risk on the demand side, committing 180 Gt CO2 beyond a 2°C pathway. On the supply side, capital-intensive offshore oil and gas platforms are highlighted as significant risks due to high capital and rent intensities. The author recommends that policy-makers move beyond merely promoting low-carbon technologies to actively restricting high-carbon investments through stringent codes, moratoria, and the use of shadow carbon prices.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Coal-fired power plants represent the most significant global carbon lock-in risk for the period 2015–2030, as they are long-lived and would over-commit 180 Gt CO2, a substantial amount relative to the remaining 2°C carbon budget of approximately 1,000 Gt CO2.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Beyond coal power, significant lock-in risks are identified in the expansion of natural gas power plants and private vehicle travel, the latter of which risks further entrenching fueling networks and hindering low-carbon transport development.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"In fossil fuel supply, capital-intensive offshore oil and gas investments pose a high lock-in risk because their high capital intensity (>50 USD/tCO2) and economic rents (up to USD 100/tCO2) make them likely to continue production once established, despite being inconsistent with a 2°C scenario.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"While coal supply leads to the highest volume of over-production (5 of 7 Gt CO2), it is generally less 'locked-in' than coal power plants because coal mining is not particularly capital-intensive and yields low economic rents (typically less than 3 USD/tCO2).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The proposed four-step assessment process involves: 1) defining the decision context and climate objectives; 2) identifying investments that lead to 'over-committed emissions' or 'over-production' of fuels; 3) measuring lock-in strength via equipment lifetime or capital intensity; and 4) analyzing techno-institutional effects using market share as a proxy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"To minimize lock-in, the document suggests policy-makers should prioritize stringent codes and standards, consider moratoria on high-risk investments like new coal plants, and use high shadow carbon prices for government and private sector decision-making.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001770#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["Carbon lock-in","coal-fired power station","green growth","carbon price","carbon budget"],"geography_discussed":["Asia"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy analysis","infrastructure risk assessment","scenario modeling"]}]}