Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. 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.

  • Article
  • Published:

Negotiating risks to natural capital in net-zero transitions

Nature Sustainability volume 8, pages 619–628 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Global and national commitments on climate imply clean energy and industrial infrastructure deployment at a speed and scale that could have serious implications for natural capital and other important land uses. Prior modelling of a net-zero emissions solution for Australia sites new renewable infrastructure on 111,000 km2 of land (approximately 1.7 times the area of mainland Tasmania) by 2060. That solution uses a single, static and certain map of land availability, making it immediately vulnerable to competition with other national goals involving widespread land management. We have incorporated climate goals with consistent handling of Australian Indigenous estate and varying treatments for biodiversity and agriculture to demonstrate an approach to navigate the risks to achieving both the net-zero goal and sustainable use of natural capital in an uncertain land-use planning future. We have identified regions of Australia in which modelled renewable infrastructure is rendered infeasible or more costly when natural capital protection occurs without collaborative consideration of climate action. Our approach and methods are relevant globally and highlight the importance of proactively, collaboratively and regularly reconsidering the risks to the natural capital on which we not only plan our net-zero solutions but also rely on for the critical systems that sustain life and lifestyles.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Map of Australia presenting a static approach to natural capital in the ‘best-current’ case.
Fig. 2: Maps showing target VRE capacity and cost results for ‘best-current’ and ‘uncollaborative’ land-use cases by model region.
Fig. 3: Natural capital considerations in selected regions of Australia under the ‘uncollaborative’ case.
Fig. 4: Maps demonstating the use of land-use cases to inform modelling and planning approaches to solar energy project siting in Australia.
Fig. 5: Process flow of the modelling and analysis steps followed in this research with inputs from prior modelling.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data to replicate analyses are provided in or linked from Github at https://github.com/acpascale/netzero_navigate.

Code availability

The code to replicate analyses is provided on Github at https://github.com/acpascale/netzero_navigate.

References

  1. Rogelj, J. et al. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C. Nature 534, 631–639 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Richardson, K. et al. Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Sci. Adv. 9, eadh2458 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Steffen, W. et al. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347, 1259855 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jenkins, J. D., Mayfield, E. N., Larson, E. D., Pacala, S. W. & Greig, C. Mission net-zero America: the nation-building path to a prosperous, net-zero emissions economy. Joule 5, 2755–2761 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Greig, C. Getting to net-zero emissions. Engineering 6, 1341–1342 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Patankar, N., Sarkela-Basset, X., Schivley, G., Leslie, E. & Jenkins, J. Land use trade-offs in decarbonization of electricity generation in the American West. Energy Clim. Change 4, 100107 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wu, G. C. et al. Low-impact land use pathways to deep decarbonization of electricity. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 074044 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wu, G. C. et al. Minimizing habitat conflicts in meeting net-zero energy targets in the western United States. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2204098120 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Williams, J. H. et al. Carbon-neutral pathways for the United States. AGU Adv. 2, e2020AV000284 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Jägermeyr, J. et al. Climate impacts on global agriculture emerge earlier in new generation of climate and crop models. Nat. Food 2, 873–885 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Scheidel, A. & Sorman, A. H. Energy transitions and the global land rush: ultimate drivers and persistent consequences. Glob. Environ. Change 22, 588–595 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Avila, S. Environmental justice and the expanding geography of wind power conflicts. Sustain. Sci. 13, 599–616 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Caggiano, H., Constantino, S. M., Greig, C. & Weber, E. U. Public and local policymaker preferences for large-scale energy project characteristics. Nat. Energy 9, 1230–1240 (2024).

  14. Wilson, A. G. Models in urban planning: a synoptic review of recent literature. Urban Stud. 5, 249–276 (1968).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Convention on Biological Diversity Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (United Nations Environmental Programme, 2022).

  16. Wood, D. A. & Leather, D. T. B. in Sustainable Liquefied Natural Gas Vol. 3 (eds Wood, D. A. & Cai, J.) 125–161 (Elsevier, 2024).

  17. Burke, P. J. et al. Contributing to regional decarbonization: Australia’s potential to supply zero-carbon commodities to the Asia-Pacific. Energy 248, 123563 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Walsh, S. D. C. et al. Evaluating the economic fairways for hydrogen production in Australia. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 46, 35985–35996 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bolam, F. C. et al. Over half of threatened species require targeted recovery actions to avert human-induced extinction. Front. Ecol. Environ. 21, 64–70 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Catchment Scale Land Use of Australia—Update December 2023 Version 2 (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, 2024); https://doi.org/10.25814/2w2p-ph98

  21. Australia’s Indigenous Land and Forest Estate (2020) (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, 2022); https://doi.org/10.25814/6wms-8x73

  22. Davis, D. et al. Modelling Summary Report (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

  23. Davis, D. et al. Methods, Assumptions, Scenarios & Sensitivities (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

  24. Pascale, A. et al. Downscaling—Net-Zero Transitions, Australian Communities, the Land and Sea (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

  25. van Zalk, J. & Behrens, P. The spatial extent of renewable and non-renewable power generation: a review and meta-analysis of power densities and their application in the U.S. Energy Policy 123, 83–91 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Davis, D., Pascale, A. & Brear, M. Downscaling—Bioenergy Systems (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

  27. Jacobson, A., Pecci, F., Sepulveda, N., Xu, Q. & Jenkins, J. A computationally efficient Benders decomposition for energy systems planning problems with detailed operations and time-coupling constraints. INFORMS J. Optim. https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoo.2023.0005 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Larson, E. et al. Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure, and Impacts (Princeton Univ., 2021); https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/

  29. Chen, Y., Kirkerud, J. G. & Bolkesjø, T. F. Balancing GHG mitigation and land-use conflicts: alternative Northern European energy system scenarios. Appl. Energy 310, 118557 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Davis, D., Lopez Peralta, M., Keenan, R., Eckard, R. & Brear, M. Downscaling—The Role of Forestry in Enhancing the Australian Land CO2 Sink (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

  31. Pascale, A., Tabatabaei, M. & Smart, S. Downscaling—Hydrogen and Synthetic Fuel Production, Transmission and Storage (Net Zero Australia, 2023); https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:56c4c92

  32. Pascale, A., Greig, C., Tabatabaei, M., Vosshage, O. & Smart, S. Downscaling—Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transmission, Use, and Storage (Net Zero Australia, 2023); https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:60fc981

  33. Ward, M. et al. Principles and Rules for Implementing Spatial Zoning Under the EPBC Act (University of Queensland and Griffith University, 2024); https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25893610.v1

  34. Reside, A. E. et al. The cost of recovering Australia’s threatened species. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02617-z (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Camaclang, A. E., Maron, M., Martin, T. G. & Possingham, H. P. Current practices in the identification of critical habitat for threatened species. Conserv. Biol. 29, 482–492 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rodrigues, A. S. L. et al. Global gap analysis: priority regions for expanding the global protected-area network. BioScience 54, 1092–1100 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Polak, T. et al. Balancing ecosystem and threatened species representation in protected areas and implications for nations achieving global conservation goals. Conserv. Lett. 9, 438–445 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Venter, O. et al. Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001891 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Watson, J. E. M. et al. Communicating the true challenges of saving species: response to Wiedenfeld et al. Conserv. Biol. 36, e13961 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Beyer, H. L., Venter, O., Grantham, H. S. & Watson, J. E. M. Substantial losses in ecoregion intactness highlight urgency of globally coordinated action. Conserv. Lett. 13, e12692 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Allan, J. R. et al. The minimum land area requiring conservation attention to safeguard biodiversity. Science 376, 1094–1101 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019).

  43. 2024 Integrated System Plan (ISP) (AEMO, 2024); https://aemo.com.au/energy-systems/major-publications/integrated-system-plan-isp/2024-integrated-system-plan-isp

  44. Pascale, A., Kiri, U., Davis, D. & Smart, S. Downscaling—Solar, Wind and Electricity Transmission Siting (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

  45. Deshmukh, R. & Wu, G. MapRE GIS Tools & Data (MapRE) (USDOE, 2016); https://doi.org/10.11578/dc.20210416.67

  46. Patankar, N., Sarkela-Basset, X., Schivley, G., Leslie, E. & Jenkins, J. Corrigendum to “Land use trade-offs in decarbonization of electricity generation in the American West” [Energy and Climate Change 4 (2023) 100107]. Energy Clim. Change 5, 100130 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Leslie, E., Pascale, A. C. & Jenkins, J. D. Princeton’s Net-Zero America Study. Annex D: Solar and Wind Generation Transitions (Princeton Univ., 2021).

  48. Pascale, A. & Jenkins, J. D. Princeton’s Net-Zero America Study. Annex F: Integrated Transmission Line Mapping and Costing (Princeton Univ., 2021).

  49. Uden, S., Socolow, R. & Greig, C. Bridging capital discipline and energy scenarios. Energy Environ. Sci. 15, 3114–3118 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Greig, C., Keto, D., Hobart, S., Finch, B. & Winkler, R. Speeding up risk capital allocation to deliver net-zero ambitions. Joule 7, 239–243 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Lymburner, L., Tan, P., McIntyre, A., Thankappan, M. & Sixsmith, J. Dynamic Land Cover Dataset Version 2.1 (Geoscience Australia, 2017); http://pid.geoscience.gov.au/dataset/ga/83868

  52. Greig, C. & Finch, B. T. Downscaling—Capital Mobilisation (Net Zero Australia, 2023).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the advice received from many individuals and groups during the Net Zero Australia (NZAu) Project, and particularly the NZAu Project’s Advisory Group as well as B. Burbidge and A. Nagar of the National Native Title Council and W. Ragg of the National Farmers Federation. This work was generously funded by a research grant from Princeton University’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative and the Supporters of the Net Zero Australia Project through various research gift agreements. These Supporters are the APA Group, Dow Chemical (Australia), the Future Energy Exports Cooperative Research Centre, the Future Fuels Cooperative Research Centre, the Minderoo Foundation and Worley. The Supporters had no involvement in study design, in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of this article and other project reports, and in the decision to submit this article for publication. Complete details of the Net Zero Australia Project, including its governance, can be found at www.netzeroaustralia.net.au. We are grateful for early advice given by conservation academics H. Possingham (UQ), M. Ward (Griffith) and A. Reside (UQ). We are grateful to U. Kiri (UQ), Y. Zhang (UoM) and past collaborators from Montara Mountain Energy, Princeton University, TNC and UCSB, whose inputs led to the continual evolution of the electricity transmission siting methods released in code with this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

    Andrew C. Pascale, Dominic Davis & Chris Greig

  2. School of Chemical Engineering, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia

    Andrew C. Pascale & Simon Smart

  3. School of the Environment, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia

    James E. M. Watson

  4. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Dominic Davis & Michael Brear

  5. Energy and Resources Group, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Ryan Jones

  6. Evolved Energy Research, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Ryan Jones

Authors
  1. Andrew C. Pascale
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James E. M. Watson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dominic Davis
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Simon Smart
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael Brear
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ryan Jones
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Chris Greig
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: A.C.P., J.E.M.W., D.D., C.G., S.S., R.J. and M.B. Formal analysis: A.C.P. Funding acquisition: C.G. Investigation: A.C.P. Methodology: A.C.P. and J.E.M.W. Project administration: A.C.P. and C.G. Resources: A.C.P. and S.S. Software: A.C.P. and R.J. Supervision: A.C.P., C.G. and J.E.M.W. Validation: A.C.P. Visualization: A.C.P. and D.D. Writing—original draft: A.C.P. and J.E.M.W. Writing—review and editing: A.C.P., J.E.M.W., D.D., C.G., S.S., R.J. and M.B.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew C. Pascale.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

J.E.M.W. is also the Australian chair of the National Coordination Committee for the nation’s Key Biodiversity Areas. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Sustainability thanks Robert Lempert, David McCollum and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Net-Zero modelling framework of prior Australia focused macro-scale energy and emissions project.

Boxes shown in red indicate the primary areas of the prior study22 with which our study area interacts.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Energy and emissions results for a high electrification scenario that selects the best national clean energy resources for export.

Energy (EJ per annum) and emissions (Mt-CO2e per annum) results of prior modelling22 for a high electrification scenario that selects Australia’s best national clean energy resources for export. Results cover 2020 to 2060 and are disaggregated by domestic (left column) and export (right column) energy systems. The top row shows the primary energy supply by different energy sources. The middle row shows the final energy consumed by different energy vectors. The bottom row shows the resulting net GHG emissions going to net-zero.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Cumulative capital (2020 AU$) results for a high electrification scenario that selects the best national clean energy resources for export.

Cumulative capital (2020 AU$) results of prior modelling52 for a high electrification scenario that selects the best national clean energy resources for export. Results in panels cover 2020 to 2060 and are for the clean electricity sector (left panel), and industrial, hydrogen and other clean fuel sectors (right panel).

Extended Data Fig. 4 Energy system capacity results (GW) for a high electrification scenario that selects the best national clean energy resources for export.

Australian energy system capacity (GW) results of prior modelling22 of a high electrification scenario that selects Australia’s best national clean energy resources for export. The left panel shows the VRE, firm electricity generation and storage, and energy conversion plant capacities from 2020 to 2060. The right panel shows the regional distribution of installed capacity of large-scale solar PV and wind in 2030 and 2060.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Solar PV, wind and transmission infrastructure siting in 2060 for a high electrification scenario that selects the best national clean energy resources for export.

Renewable energy and electricity transmission siting results of prior modelling44 for a high electrification scenario that selects Australia’s best national clean energy resources for export. The map shows notional siting in 2060.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information (download PDF )

Supplementary Sections 1–5, Figs. 1–15 and Tables 1–14.

Reporting Summary (download PDF )

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pascale, A.C., Watson, J.E.M., Davis, D. et al. Negotiating risks to natural capital in net-zero transitions. Nat Sustain 8, 619–628 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-025-01576-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-025-01576-y

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

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