Mobilize Electric Buses

Sector
Transportation
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Fuel Switching
Image
Peatland
Coming Soon
On
Description for Social and Search
Mobilize Electric Buses is a Highly Recommended climate solution.
Solution in Action
Speed of Action
Caveats
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Mobilize
Solution Title
Electric Buses
Classification
Highly Recommended

Lawmakers and Policymakers

Practitioners

Business Leaders

Nonprofit Leaders

Investors

Philanthropists and International Aid Agencies

Thought Leaders

Technologists and Researchers

Communities, Households, and Individuals

Deploy Electric Irrigation Pumps

Sector
Food, Agriculture, Land & Ocean (FALO)
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Fuel Switching
Image
An image of a sprinkler system watering a field of crops
Coming Soon
Off
Summary

Replacing fossil-fuel-powered irrigation pumps with electric pumps powered by the grid can reduce emissions in most regions of the world. Electric irrigation pumps, which can also be powered by on-site clean energy, are more efficient than fossil fuel pumps. They are already cost-competitive and widely used, and adoption is increasing. Their emissions benefits will continue to grow as irrigation expands and the emissions intensity of the electrical grid falls. However, based on current grid emissions intensity, the climate impact of using electric pumps for agricultural irrigation is not globally meaningful (<0.1 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr ). Despite its modest climate impact, our assessment finds that deploying electric irrigation pumps is “Worthwhile.”

Description for Social and Search
Electric irrigation pumps
Overview

What is our assessment?

Based on our analysis, deploying electric irrigation pumps will reduce emissions but will not provide a globally significant climate impact (>0.1 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr ), even under high adoption scenarios, until electrical grid emissions decline further. Therefore, this potential climate solution is “Worthwhile.”

Plausible Could it work? Yes
Ready Is it ready? Yes
Evidence Are there data to evaluate it? Yes
Effective Does it consistently work? Yes
Impact Is it big enough to matter? No
Risk Is it risky or harmful? No
Cost Is it cheap? Yes

What is it? 

This solution reduces emissions from irrigation by replacing pumps powered by natural gas, diesel, propane, or gasoline with electric pumps. Irrigation is the practice of adding water to croplands or pastures to reduce crop water stress and increase productivity. Pumps are used on some irrigated croplands to extract groundwater, transport surface water, and pressurize water for application through sprinklers or drip irrigation systems. Electric pumps have much higher motor efficiencies (~88%) than fossil fuel pumps (~21–31%), so pump switching reduces the energy required to pump the same amount of water. The extent to which emissions are reduced depends on the emissions intensity of the electrical grid mix. Electric pumps reduce emissions when the emissions intensity of the grid is below ~0.75 kg CO₂‑eq /kWh, or when they are powered by on-site solar or wind energy. In some places, additional emissions reductions can be achieved through Improving Irrigation Water Use Efficiency.

Does it work?

The efficiency and emissions benefits of electric pumps over fossil fuel pumps are well established. On-farm pumping emissions, currently estimated at approximately 0.2 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr, could feasibly be eliminated if all fossil fuel pumps are replaced with electric pumps and electrical grid emissions reach net-zero, or if they are powered by on-farm solar or wind energy. However, the climate impact of electric pump adoption today would be much lower, as electricity generation still produces substantial emissions. Under current conditions, replacing a diesel pump with an electric pump will reduce emissions in most, but not all, places around the world.

Why are we excited?

Electric pumps can reliably reduce emissions, are already cost-competitive and widely used, and adoption is increasing. Irrigation is a major energy user, and its energy use is increasing as irrigated areas expand. These trends are expected to continue in the coming decades as climate change exacerbates heat and water stress and agricultural production intensifies in low- and middle-income countries. Coupled with ongoing reductions in electrical grid emissions intensity, the potential climate benefits of this solution are growing.

Electric pump adoption can also be geographically targeted, as just five countries (China, India, the United States, Pakistan, and Iran) account for almost 70% of irrigation energy use. Areas with high groundwater reliance can also be targeted, as groundwater pumping accounts for 89% of irrigation energy use.

Pump switching also provides additional benefits, such as lowering long-term energy costs for farmers and reducing air pollution from on-farm fossil fuel use. Access to the electrical grid is the primary technical barrier to electric pump adoption, but small-scale solar installations can be used where grid connectivity is limited. Powering pumps with on-site solar also eliminates operational emissions, reduces the load on the electrical grid, and insulates farmers from variability in energy costs. 

Why are we concerned?

The climate impacts of pump switching are highly dependent on the emissions factor of the electrical grid. A large share of the potential reduction in fossil fuel pumping is located in India and China, which currently have relatively high electrical grid emissions intensities. Under the current grid mix, we estimate that pump switching in these countries will result in only modest benefits or a small increase in emissions.

Solution in Action

References

Anand, S. K., Rosa, L., Mohanty, B. P., Rajan, N., & Calabrese, S. (2025). Balancing productivity and climate impact: A framework to assess climate-smart irrigation. Earth’s Future, 13(11), Article e2025EF006116. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1029/2025EF006116

Driscoll, A. W., Conant, R. T., Marston, L. T., Choi, E., & Mueller, N. D. (2024). Greenhouse gas emissions from US irrigation pumping and implications for climate-smart irrigation policy. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 1. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-44920-0

Hrozencik, R. A. & Aillery, Marcel. (2021). Trends in U.S. irrigated agriculture: Increasing resilience under water supply scarcity. United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Report No. EIB-229. Link to source: https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3996325

Kebede, E. A., Oluoch, K. O., Siebert, S., Mehta, P., Hartman, S., Jägermeyr, J., Ray, D., Ali, T., Brauman, K. A., Deng, Q., Xie, W., & Davis, K. F. (2025). A global open-source dataset of monthly irrigated and rainfed cropped areas (MIRCA-OS) for the 21st century. Scientific Data, 12(1), Article 208. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-024-04313-w

McCarthy, B., Anex, R., Wang, Y., Kendall, A. D., Anctil, A., Haacker, E. M. K., & Hyndman, D. W. (2020). Trends in water use, energy consumption, and carbon emissions from irrigation: Role of shifting technologies and energy sources. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(23), 15329–15337. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c02897

McDermid, S., Mahmood, R., Hayes, M. J., Bell, J. E., & Lieberman, Z. (2021). Minimizing trade-offs for sustainable irrigation. Nature Geoscience, 14(10), 706–709. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00830-0

McDermid, S., Nocco, M., Lawston-Parker, P., Keune, J., Pokhrel, Y., Jain, M., Jägermeyr, J., Brocca, L., Massari, C., Jones, A. D., Vahmani, P., Thiery, W., Yao, Y., Bell, A., Chen, L., Dorigo, W., Hanasaki, N., Jasechko, S., Lo, M.-H., … Yokohata, T. (2023). Irrigation in the Earth system. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 4, 435–453. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00438-5

McGill, B. M., Hamilton, S. K., Millar, N., & Robertson, G. P. (2018). The greenhouse gas cost of agricultural intensification with groundwater irrigation in a Midwest U.S. row cropping system. Global Change Biology, 24(12), 5948–5960. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14472

Qin, J., Duan, W., Zou, S., Chen, Y., Huang, W., & Rosa, L. (2024). Global energy use and carbon emissions from irrigated agriculture. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 3084. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47383-5

Ren, C., & Rosa, L. (2025). Global energy and emissions of irrigation and fertilizers management for closing crop yield gaps. Environmental Research Letters. 20(10), Article 104026. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/adfbfd 

Rollason, E., Sinha, P., & Bracken, L. J. (2022). Interbasin water transfer in a changing world: A new conceptual model. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 46(3), 371–397. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1177/03091333211065004

Rosa, L., Chiarelli, D. D., Sangiorgio, M., Beltran-Peña, A. A., Rulli, M. C., D’Odorico, P., & Fung, I. (2020). Potential for sustainable irrigation expansion in a 3 °C warmer climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(47), 29526–29534. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2017796117

Rosa, L., Rulli, M. C., Ali, S., Chiarelli, D. D., Dell’Angelo, J., Mueller, N. D., Scheidel, A., Siciliano, G., & D’Odorico, P. (2021). Energy implications of the 21st century agrarian transition. Nature Communications, 12(1), Article 2319. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22581-7

Sanders, K. T., & Webber, M. E. (2012). Evaluating the energy consumed for water use in the United States. Environmental Research Letters, 7(3), Article 034034. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034034

Schmitt, R. J. P., Rosa, L., & Daily, G. C. (2022). Global expansion of sustainable irrigation limited by water storage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(47), Article e2214291119. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2214291119

Siddik, M. A. B., Dickson, K. E., Rising, J., Ruddell, B. L., & Marston, L. T. (2023). Interbasin water transfers in the United States and Canada. Scientific Data, 10(1), Article 1. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-01935-4

Sowby, R. B., & Dicataldo, E. (2022). The energy footprint of U.S. irrigation: A first estimate from open data. Energy Nexus, 6, Article 100066. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexus.2022.100066

Yang, Y., Jin, Z., Mueller, N. D., Driscoll, A. W., Hernandez, R. R., Grodsky, S. M., Sloat, L. L., Chester, M. V., Zhu, Y.-G., & Lobell, D. B. (2023). Sustainable irrigation and climate feedbacks. Nature Food, 4(8), Article 8. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00821-x

Credits

Lead Fellow

Avery Driscoll, Ph.D.

Internal Reviewers

Christina Swanson, Ph.D.

Heather McDiarmid, Ph.D.

James Gerber, Ph.D.

Speed of Action
Caveats
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Deploy
Solution Title
Electric Irrigation Pumps
Classification
Worthwhile

Lawmakers and Policymakers

Practitioners

Business Leaders

Nonprofit Leaders

Investors

Philanthropists and International Aid Agencies

Thought Leaders

Technologists and Researchers

Communities, Households, and Individuals
Updated Date

Use Corn Ethanol

Sector
Transportation
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Fuel Switching
Image
An image of corn next to a beaker filled with corn-based ethanol
Coming Soon
Off
Summary

Corn ethanol, an alcohol made by fermenting corn grain, is the most produced and used biofuel in the United States. The U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard requires that corn ethanol be blended with gasoline for the intended purpose of reducing transportation emissions. Ethanol is a useful vehicle fuel additive that improves engine performance and reduces air pollution. However, life cycle emissions analyses show that corn ethanol does not reduce GHG emissions as claimed and, more likely, increases emissions by 24% compared to gasoline alone. One-third of the corn grown in the U.S. is now used to produce more than 15 billion gallons of ethanol per year. This huge demand for corn has increased prices and driven the conversion of unfarmed land and natural ecosystems. The higher demand for corn also led to more fertilizer use on farms, resulting in increased pollution and nitrous oxide emissions. Based on these life cycle analyses, we conclude that using corn ethanol is "Not Recommended" as a climate solution.

Description for Social and Search
The Use Corn-Based Ethanol solution is coming soon.
Overview

What is our assessment?

The use of corn ethanol as a transportation biofuel, which has led to the expansion and intensification of corn production, does not reduce GHG emissions compared to gasoline. Based on this finding, using corn ethanol is not a plausible approach for reducing emissions and is “Not Recommended” as a climate solution.

Plausible Could it work? No
Ready Is it ready? Yes
Evidence Are there data to evaluate it? Yes
Effective Does it consistently work? No
Impact Is it big enough to matter? No
Risk Is it risky or harmful? No
Cost Is it cheap? No

What is it?

Corn ethanol is a liquid biofuel that is blended with gasoline to displace a fraction of the petroleum-based fuel with a renewable fuel derived from plants. Proponents claim that blending corn ethanol with gasoline reduces emissions because the CO₂ produced from combusting the ethanol is offset, or balanced out, by the atmospheric CO₂ absorbed by the corn plant during growth. Corn ethanol is made from corn grain by breaking down the starch in the kernels into sugar and then fermenting it into a liquid. In the United States, the world leader in biofuel production, almost 90% of biofuel is corn ethanol. Most gasoline now sold in the U.S. contains about 10% corn ethanol, and, in 2025, the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program requires production of more than 15 billion gallons of this biofuel. Currently, it is primarily made from corn kernels; the technology for producing biomass-derived ethanol from other, non-edible parts of the corn plant is not yet commercially viable. Brazil is the second-largest producer of ethanol, but uses sugarcane as a feedstock. 

Does it work?

The Renewable Fuel Standard requires that the life cycle emissions from corn ethanol be at least 20% lower than those of conventional gasoline. However, based on comprehensive life cycle emissions analyses, using corn ethanol does not reduce emissions compared to gasoline. The main reasons for this are that the production of corn and processing it into ethanol generate large amounts of emissions, including from land conversion, fertilizer-related nitrous oxide emissions, and the industrial process of fermenting the corn into ethanol. The most prominent recent study reported that corn ethanol life cycle emissions were, at best, no less than gasoline and, more likely, were 24% higher. Corn ethanol is also more emissions-intensive than ethanol made from other plants, like sugar cane. 

Why are we excited?

Ethanol has been used as a transportation fuel, including as a blend with gasoline, for more than a century. It boosts the octane number of fuel, improves engine performance and fuel economy, and reduces emissions of harmful pollutants like unburned hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and particulates. Ethanol has also been used to replace other harmful and polluting gasoline additives, including lead and methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE). Ethanol produced from non-edible biological feedstocks with lower production emissions, such as switchgrass or cellulose from crop residues, has the potential to reduce emissions. 

Why are we concerned?

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program requires that biofuels be blended into the transportation fuel supply at annually increasing increments. The United States now uses one-third of its corn to generate more than 15 billion gallons of ethanol per year. Not only does this mandated program not reduce emissions (it more likely increases emissions), but it also consumes corn that could otherwise be used for food or animal feed. The increased demand for corn for ethanol has increased corn prices, which in turn have contributed to the conversion of grasslands and semi-natural ecosystems to grow more corn. When grasslands, woodlands, or other natural ecosystems are plowed and converted to cropland, the carbon stored in the vegetation and soil is emitted to the atmosphere. Between 2008 and 2016, the conversion of 1.8 Mha of natural and semi-natural land in the U.S. released about 400 million metric tons of CO₂ from vegetation and soil. The increased corn production also increased the application of synthetic fertilizers, which has increased nitrate leaching, phosphorus runoff, and emissions of nitrous oxide, a powerful GHG (see Improve Nutrient Management). These problems are particularly severe in the U.S. Midwest and the Mississippi River drainage.

Solution in Action

References

Broda, M., Yelle, D. J., & Serwańska, K. (2022). Bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass—challenges and solutions. Molecules, 27(24), 8717. Link to source: https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/27/24/8717

California Air Resources Board (CARB) (2003). Cleaner Burning Gasoline without MTBE. Link to source: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/cleaner-burning-gasoline-without-mtbe

Cassidy, E. (2014). Ethanol’s Broken Promise. Environmental Working Group. Link to source: https://www.ewg.org/research/ethanols-broken-promise

Ciolkosz, D. (2024). Fuel Ethanol: Hero or Villain? Penn State Extension. Link to source: https://extension.psu.edu/fuel-ethanol-hero-or-villain

Douglas, L. (2022). U.S. corn-based ethanol worse for the climate than gasoline, study finds. Reuters. Link to source: https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-corn-based-ethanol-worse-climate-than-gasoline-study-finds-2022-02-14/

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) (2023). Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: Standards for 2023–2025 and Other Changes Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Results. Federal Register/Vol. 88, No. 132/Wednesday, July 12, 2023/Rules and Regulations. Link to source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-07-12/pdf/2023-13462.pdf

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) (2025a). Overview of the Renewable Fuel Standard Program. Link to source: https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard/overview-renewable-fuel-standard-program

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) (2025b). Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Results. Link to source: https://www.epa.gov/fuels-registration-reporting-and-compliance-help/lifecycle-greenhouse-gas-results

Hill, J. (2022). The sobering truth about corn ethanol. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(11), e2200997119. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2200997119

Kramer, D. (2022). Whatever happened to cellulosic ethanol? Physics Today, 75(7), 22-24. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.5036

Lark, T. J., Hendricks, N. P., Smith, A., Pates, N., Spawn-Lee, S. A., Bougie, M., ... & Gibbs, H. K. (2022). Environmental outcomes of the US renewable fuel standard. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(9), e2101084119. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2101084119

Lark, T. J., Salmon, J. M., & Gibbs, H. K. (2015). Cropland expansion outpaces agricultural and biofuel policies in the United States. Environmental Research Letters, 10(4), 044003. Link to source: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/4/044003

National Library of Medicine (2023). Toxicological Profile for Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE). Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (US); CHAPTER 1, RELEVANCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH. Link to source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK601216/

Robertson, G. P., Dale, V. H., Doering, O. C., Hamburg, S. P., Melillo, J. M., Wander, M. M., ... & Wilhelm, W. W. (2008). Sustainable biofuels redux. Science, 322(5898), 49–50. Link to source: https://lter.kbs.msu.edu/docs/robertson/robertson_et_al._2008_science.pdf

Searchinger, T. et al. (2008) Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change. Science 319,1238-1240(2008). Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1151861

Spawn, S. A., Lark, T. J., & Gibbs, H. K. (2019). Carbon emissions from cropland expansion in the United States. Environmental Research Letters, 14(4), 045009. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0399

Tilman, D., Socolow, R., Foley, J. A., Hill, J., Larson, E., Lynd, L., ... & Williams, R. (2009). Beneficial biofuels—the food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science, 325(5938), 270-271. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1177970

Wright, C. K., Larson, B., Lark, T. J., & Gibbs, H. K. (2017). Recent grassland losses are concentrated around US ethanol refineries. Environmental Research Letters, 12(4), 044001. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6446

Credits

Lead Researcher

  • Emily Cassidy

Internal Reviewers

  • Christina Swanson, Ph.D.
Speed of Action
Caveats
Additional Benefits
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Use
Solution Title
Corn Ethanol
Classification
Not Recommended
Updated Date

Mobilize Green Hydrogen for Aviation and Trucking

Sector
Transportation
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Fuel Switching
Image
A graphic of a clear bubble in the form of a molecule with a green background
Coming Soon
Off
Summary

Green hydrogen is an emissions-free fuel produced by using renewable electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. For aviation and long-haul trucking, green hydrogen can be used either directly in fuel cells or combusted in modified engines, offering a potential pathway to deep emissions reductions. It generates no CO₂ at the point of use, and when produced with clean power, life-cycle emissions can be near zero. However, green hydrogen faces major barriers in terms of energy intensity, infrastructure needs, cost, and vehicle redesign. We will “Keep Watching” Mobilize Green Hydrogen for Aviation and Trucking due to its high potential impact, even though it is not yet ready for widespread deployment.

Description for Social and Search
Green hydrogen is an emissions-free fuel produced by using renewable electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. For aviation and long-haul trucking, green hydrogen can be used either directly in fuel cells or combusted in modified engines, offering a potential pathway to deep emissions reductions.
Overview

What is our assessment?

Based on our analysis, green hydrogen holds long-term potential in sectors that are difficult to decarbonize, particularly long-haul aviation and freight trucking. It is technologically feasible, but currently hampered by high costs, severe infrastructure gaps, and limited commercial readiness. While it is unlikely to be deployed at scale this decade, we will “Keep Watching” green hydrogen as innovation and policy evolve.

Plausible Could it work? Yes
Ready Is it ready? No
Evidence Are there data to evaluate it? Yes
Effective Does it consistently work? Yes
Impact Is it big enough to matter? Yes
Risk Is it risky or harmful? No
Cost Is it cheap? No

What is it?

Green hydrogen is a clean, emissions-free liquid fuel produced through electrolysis powered by renewable energy that can replace fossil fuels in some transportation sectors. Unlike hydrogen from fossil fuels (gray or blue hydrogen), green hydrogen generates no CO₂ emissions during production. For transportation, green hydrogen can be used in two main ways: (1) in fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) to generate electricity onboard and power electric motors, or (2) combusted in specially designed hydrogen combustion engines or turbines. For aviation, liquid hydrogen may fuel aircraft engines directly, be used to produce synthetic jet fuels, or power fuel cell airplanes. For long-haul trucking, hydrogen can replace diesel by powering fuel cell trucks, which offer long range and fast refueling.

Does it work?

Green hydrogen is being produced and used in pilot projects and select transportation initiatives globally. Hydrogen combustion engines and fuel cells are currently in use and have been shown to reduce emissions compared to fossil fuels. For aviation, aircraft manufacturers, such as Airbus, have hydrogen-powered planes in development, with test flights expected by 2030, but it could be several decades before they are put into commercial use. In heavy-duty trucking, several major automakers, including Toyota and Hyundai, have already commercialized hydrogen trucks in limited markets, such as China and Japan.

Why are we excited?

Green hydrogen is one of the few near-zero-emission fuels with the potential to decarbonize aviation and long-haul trucking, where battery-electric solutions currently face range and weight constraints. If produced using abundant, low-cost renewables, green hydrogen could significantly cut emissions in sectors responsible for nearly 15% of global transport emissions. In aviation, hydrogen-based fuels like e-kerosene could save around five million tons of CO₂ per year in Europe by 2030. In trucking, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are beginning to roll out but remain a niche market. Looking ahead, hydrogen has strong potential: by 2050, it could meet up to 30% of energy demand in long-haul trucking and significantly reduce aviation emissions, particularly for short- and medium-haul flights, but it will have to compete with advances in battery-electric options. Hydrogen enables fast refueling and long range, making it a strong candidate for freight and intercity applications. Additionally, investment in green hydrogen infrastructure could unlock cross-sectoral benefits, supporting decarbonization of industry, power, and potentially heating. As electrolyzer costs fall and renewable power expands, the economics and emissions profile of green hydrogen are likely to improve.

Why are we concerned?

Despite its promise, green hydrogen for transport faces significant technical, economic, and logistical hurdles. Electrolysis is energy-intensive, and green hydrogen production is still expensive (US$300–600/t CO₂ avoided for trucking and US$500–1500/t CO₂ for aviation), making it much more costly than diesel or jet fuel but comparable to sustainable aviation fuel today. It is also less energy-dense by volume than other fuels, requiring complex transportation and storage (especially for aviation, where cryogenic tanks are needed) and limiting payload capacity. In addition to producing contrails, hydrogen leakage, though not a GHG, can contribute to indirect global warming effects. There are also safety concerns related to flammability and explosiveness, and a complete overhaul of transportation and refueling infrastructure is needed for both aviation and trucking. Green hydrogen requires entirely new infrastructure for production, storage, and distribution, including refueling stations for trucks and specialized handling systems for liquid or compressed hydrogen at each airport the airplane uses. The absence of this infrastructure creates a major barrier to adoption in aviation and long-haul trucking, where fuel logistics, safety standards, and scale are critical for commercial viability. Hydrogen remains a niche fuel due to its low energy density per volume, the need for cryogenic storage in aviation, limited refueling infrastructure, and high cost. While technically viable, major deployment for aviation and trucking is still nascent. Without a clear business case or strong policy incentives, uptake will remain limited in the near term.

Solution in Action

References

Clean Hydrogen Partnership. (2020). Hydrogen-powered aviation. Link to source: https://www.clean-hydrogen.europa.eu/media/publications/hydrogen-powered-aviation_en

Clean Hydrogen Partnership. (2020). Study on fuel cells hydrogen trucks. Link to source: https://www.clean-hydrogen.europa.eu/media/publications/study-fuel-cells-hydrogen-trucks_en

Galimova, T., Fasihi, M., Bogdanov, D., & Breyer, C. (2023). Impact of international transportation chains on cost of green e-hydrogen: Global cost of hydrogen and consequences for Germany and Finland. Applied Energy, 347, 121369. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121369

Gulli, C., Heid, B., Noffsinger, J., Waardenburg, M., & Wilthaner, M. Global energy perspective 2023: Hydrogen outlook. Link to source: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/oil-and-gas/our-insights/global-energy-perspective-2023-hydrogen-outlook

International Energy Agency. (2019). The Future of hydrogen – analysis. IEA. Link to source: https://www.iea.org/reports/the-future-of-hydrogen

International Renewable Energy Agency. (2022). Green hydrogen for industry: A guide to policy making. Link to source: https://www.irena.org/publications/2022/Mar/Green-Hydrogen-for-Industry

Jaramillo, P., Ribeiro, S. K., Newman, P., Dhar, S., Diemuodeke, O. S., Kajino, T., Lee, D. S., Nugroho, S. B., Ou, X., Strømman, A. H., & Whitehead, J. (2022). Transport. In P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, & J. Malley, (Eds.), Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (Chapter 10). Cambridge University Press. Link to source: https://10.1017/9781009157926.012

Li, Y., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2022). The economic feasibility of green hydrogen and fuel cell electric vehicles for road transport in China. Energy Policy, 160, 112703. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112703

Credits

Lead Fellow

  • Heather Jones, Ph.D.

Internal Reviewers

  • Heather McDiarmid, Ph.D.
  • Christina Swanson, Ph.D.
Speed of Action
Caveats
Additional Benefits
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Mobilize
Solution Title
Green Hydrogen for Aviation and Trucking
Classification
Keep Watching
Updated Date

Deploy Sustainable Aviation Fuel

Sector
Transportation
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Fuel Switching
Image
Airline jet engine
Coming Soon
Off
Summary

Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is a low-carbon alternative to conventional jet fuel. It is made from renewable feedstocks, including waste oils, agricultural residues, and renewable electricity. However, when combustion emissions are considered, SAF does not consistently reduce emissions when compared to conventional fuels. SAF is already in use in commercial flights at low blending levels. Advantages of SAF include its compatibility with existing aircraft and fueling infrastructure. Disadvantages include limited feedstock availability, high costs, variable climate benefits depending on production methods, and challenges in scaling up supply to meet global demand. We will “Keep Watching” SAF as part of a broader portfolio of aviation decarbonization strategies.

Description for Social and Search
Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is a low-carbon alternative to conventional jet fuel. It is made from renewable feedstocks, including waste oils, agricultural residues, and renewable electricity.
Overview

What is our assessment?

Based on our analysis, sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) has the potential to reduce emissions in the aviation sector, particularly for long-haul flights where few alternatives exist. However, pathways with the lowest emissions are not yet cost-effective and face significant challenges to scaling production due to feedstock constraints, land conversion pressure, and the need to meet robust sustainability standards. Based on our assessment, SAF is a climate solution to “Keep Watching.”

Plausible Could it work? Yes
Ready Is it ready? Yes
Evidence Are there data to evaluate it? Yes
Effective Does it consistently work? No
Impact Is it big enough to matter? ?
Risk Is it risky or harmful? No
Cost Is it cheap? No

What is it?

Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is a low-carbon alternative to conventional jet fuel that uses non-petroleum feedstocks such as waste oils, agricultural residues, and municipal solid waste. SAF is produced through chemical processes that convert these feedstocks into fuels that meet the same technical standards as fossil-based jet fuel, allowing them to be blended and used in existing aircraft engines and fueling infrastructure without modification. As of 2025, existing SAFs are only approved for use in blends; no SAF is yet certified for 100% use in commercial aircraft (also known as “neat SAF”) for passenger flights.

Does it work?

Life-cycle emissions vary widely depending on the feedstock and production pathway. Multiple SAF production pathways – such as hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (HEFA), Fischer-Tropsch synthesis (FT), and alcohol-to-jet (ATJ) – have been approved by international aviation standards bodies. However, as of 2025, the HEFA pathway (which uses vegetable oils, waste oils, or fats) is the only commercially deployed method to produce significant amounts of SAF. 

While some SAFs could achieve low emissions, others, especially those using food crops or poorly regulated waste streams, deliver uncertain climate benefits or can even increase emissions compared to conventional fuels. (We include emissions from burning biomass and biofuels, using default Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] stationary combustion emission factors for each feedstock. See the Drawdown Explorer primer on “Effectiveness” of solutions.) Others, such as FT pathways, which use municipal solid waste or agricultural waste and residues, have the greatest potential for emissions reduction.

Real-world use of SAF is already underway: over 450,000 commercial flights have flown using SAF blends as of early 2025. SAF is currently being supplied at major airports in Europe, the United States, and Asia, with dozens of airlines integrating SAF into operations or entering offtake agreements. However, SAF supplies less than 0.5% of global jet fuel use. 

Why are we excited?

Sustainable aviation fuels may reduce contrails, potentially significantly reducing aviation’s climate impact. SAF can be used in existing aircraft and fueling systems without requiring new infrastructure or major redesigns. This makes it one of the few ready-to-deploy solutions for long-haul and international flights, which are difficult to electrify or replace. SAF production from waste oils and residues can deliver additional benefits, such as reduced methane emissions from organic waste streams and improved waste management. Growing policy support, rising carbon prices, and airline demand are accelerating development. 

Why are we concerned?

Despite its promise, SAF faces significant limitations and challenges that could constrain its impact and scalability. In the United States, soybean oil is one of the most commonly used feedstocks for HEFA SAF, and its production faces similar land use and ecological risks and constraints as corn ethanol. Whereas in Europe, waste oils and fats are more commonly used. Measurement, reporting, and verification of actual emissions reductions can be complex, especially when land-use change, indirect emissions, or supply chain impacts are involved. 

Due to limited feedstock availability, SAF is highly unlikely to meet the ambitious 2050 goals set by industry organizations and government institutions. Effective SAFs must be combined with other strategies, like demand reduction and new aircraft technologies, to achieve substantial emissions reductions. 

Another major concern is cost. Current SAF prices are substantially higher than fossil jet fuel, ranging from US$300 to over US$1,500 per ton of CO₂ avoided, depending on the pathway. Without strong policy support, this cost premium poses a barrier to widespread adoption.

Solution in Action

References

Alternative Fuels Data Center. (n.d.). Sustainable Aviation Fuel. https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/sustainable-aviation-fuel

Bardon, P., & Massol, O. (2025). Decarbonizing aviation with sustainable aviation fuels: Myths and realities of the roadmaps to net zero by 2050. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 211, 115279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2024.115279

Boyles, H. (2022). Climate-Tech to Watch: Sustainable Aviation Fuel. https://itif.org/publications/2022/10/17/climate-tech-to-watch-sustainable-aviation-fuel

Buchholz, N., Fehrm, B., Kaestner, L., Uhrenbacher, S., & Vesco, M. (2023). Study: How To Accelerate Aviation’s CO2 Reduction | Aviation Week Network. Link to source: https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/study-how-accelerate-aviations-co2-reduction 

Bullerdiek, N., Neuling, U., & Kaltschmitt, M. (2021). A GHG reduction obligation for sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) in the EU and in Germany. Journal of Air Transport Management, 92, 102020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102020

EASA. (2025). Sustainable Aviation Fuels | EASA. https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/domains/environment/eaer/sustainable-aviation-fuels

European Commission. (n.d.). ReFuelEU Aviation. ReFuelEU Aviation - European Commission

ICAO. (n.d.). LTAG Costs and Investments. ICAO. Link to source: https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/LTAG/Pages/LTAG-and-Fuels.aspx

ICAO. (n.d.). Sustainable Aviation Fuels. Link to source: https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/pages/SAF.aspx

IEA. (2025). Aviation. IEA. https://www.iea.org/energy-system/transport/aviation

IATA. (2024). IATA - Disappointingly Slow Growth in SAF Production. Link to source: https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/2024-releases/2024-12-10-03/

IATA. (2025). IATA Releases SAF Accounting and Reporting Methodology. https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/2025-releases/2025-01-31-01/

Michaga, M. F. R., Michailos, S., Hughes, K. J., Ingham, D., & Pourkashanian, M. (2021). 10—Techno-economic and life cycle assessment review of sustainable aviation fuel produced via biomass gasification. In R. C. Ray (Ed.), Sustainable Biofuels (pp. 269–303). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820297-5.00012-8

O’Malley, J., & Baldino, C. (2024). Availability of biomass feedstocks in the European Union to meet the 2035 ReFuelEU Aviation SAF target. International Council on Clean Transportation. https://theicct.org/publication/low-risk-biomass-feedstocks-eu-refueleu-aug24/

Prussi, M., Lee, U., Wang, M., Malina, R., Valin, H., Taheripour, F., Velarde, C., Staples, M. D., Lonza, L., & Hileman, J. I. (2021). CORSIA: The first internationally adopted approach to calculate life-cycle GHG emissions for aviation fuels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 150, 111398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111398

Rojas-Michaga, M. F., Michailos, S., Cardozo, E., Akram, M., Hughes, K. J., Ingham, D., & Pourkashanian, M. (2023). Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production through power-to-liquid (PtL): A combined techno-economic and life cycle assessment. Energy Conversion and Management, 292, 117427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117427

Rosales Calderon, O., Tao, L., Abdullah, Z., Talmadge, M., Milbrandt, A., Smolinski, S., Moriarty, K., et al. (2024). Sustainable Aviation Fuel State-of-Industry Report: Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids Pathway. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-5100-87803. Link to source: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/87803.pdf.

Shahriar, M. F., & Khanal, A. (2022). The current techno-economic, environmental, policy status and perspectives of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Fuel, 325, 124905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124905 

Voigt, C., Kleine, J., Sauer, D., Moore, R. H., Bräuer, T., Le Clercq, P., Kaufmann, S., Scheibe, M., Jurkat-Witschas, T., Aigner, M., Bauder, U., Boose, Y., Borrmann, S., Crosbie, E., Diskin, G. S., DiGangi, J., Hahn, V., Heckl, C., Huber, F., … Anderson, B. E. (2021). Cleaner burning aviation fuels can reduce contrail cloudiness. Communications Earth & Environment, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00174-y

Watson, M. J., Machado, P. G., da Silva, A. V., Saltar, Y., Ribeiro, C. O., Nascimento, C. A. O., & Dowling, A. W. (2024). Sustainable aviation fuel technologies, costs, emissions, policies, and markets: A critical review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 449, 141472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141472

World Economic Forum. (2021). Clean Skies for Tomorrow: Sustainable Aviation Fuels as a Pathway to Net-Zero Aviation. World Economic Forum. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Clean_Skies_Tomorrow_SAF_Analytics_2020.pdf

Yoo, E., Lee, U., & Wang, M. (2022). Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Sustainable Aviation Fuel through a Net-Zero Carbon Biofuel Plant Design. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 10(27), 8725–8732. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c00977

Zahid, I., Nazir, M. H., Chiang, K., Christo, F., & Ameen, M. (2024). Current outlook on sustainable feedstocks and processes for sustainable aviation fuel production. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 49, 100959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2024.100959

Credits

Lead Fellow

  • Emily Cassidy
  • Heather Jones, Ph.D.

Internal Reviewers

  • Christina Swanson, Ph.D.
Speed of Action
Caveats
Additional Benefits
Risks
Consensus
Trade-offs
Action Word
Deploy
Solution Title
Sustainable Aviation Fuel
Classification
Keep Watching
Updated Date

Mobilize Electric Scooters & Motorcycles

Sector
Transportation
Mode
Cut Emissions
Cluster
Electrify Vehicles Fuel Switching
Image
a pack of electric motorcycles
Coming Soon
On
Summary

Electric scooters and motorcycles are battery-powered two- and three-wheeled vehicles that provide low-emissions mobility. This category of transport includes electric mopeds, motorbikes, seated motor scooters, motorcycles, and three-wheel vehicles, such as e-rickshaws and e-tuk-tuks. Electric scooters and motorcycles run on rechargeable batteries and are powered by electric motors rather than fossil fuel–powered ICEs, helping reduce transport-related GHG emissions. Throttle-controlled and pedal-assist (pedelecs) electric bicycles, as well as standing e-scooters/trotinettes, are excluded from the analysis of this climate solution.

Income & work,Health
Air quality
Description for Social and Search
Mobilize Electric Scooters & Motorcycles solution is a highly recommended climate solution.
Overview

Electric scooters and motorcycles use electricity stored in batteries to power an electric motor, providing mobility similar to conventional fossil fuel–powered two- and three-wheelers while generating significantly lower GHG emissions because they replace fossil-fuel combustion with electricity (Barreiros, 2020; Carranza et al., 2022; Cox & Mutel, 2018; International Transport Forum, 2020, 2023b; La Fleur et al., 2024; Mera & Bieker, 2023; Montoya-Torres et al., 2023; Schneider at al., 2023; Tuayharn et al., 2015). 

Because of their efficiency, compact size, and affordability, electric scooters and motorcycles are particularly effective as transportation modes in urban and peri-urban areas. These vehicles’ relatively low energy use per pkm makes them an energy-efficient motorized transport mode, especially when powered with renewable electricity. Electric scooters and motorcycles are also increasingly used for delivery services, shared fleets, ride-hailing, and formal and informal shared rental systems, helping displace car or fossil fuel–powered motorcycle trips that typically result in high per-person GHG emissions.

Safety issues, informal charging infrastructure, and concerns surrounding equitable access are the principal challenges standing in the way of broader adoption of electric scooters and motorcycles, particularly in emerging economies where most electric two- and three-wheelers operate (La Fleur et al., 2024). Meanwhile, emissions benefits related to electric scooters and motorcycles are typically lower in regions with carbon-intensive electricity. These vehicles may also offer fewer GHG emissions reductions benefits in areas with strong pre-existing public transportation systems, especially if broader adoption of electric scooters and motorcycles triggers a decrease in public transit use. Finally, electric two- and three-wheelers generate higher GHG emissions and provide fewer health benefits than do pedal-assisted electric bicycles; nevertheless, electric scooters and motorcycles remain far more efficient than cars in terms of GHG emissions (International Transport Forum, 2020).

In addition to reducing emissions of GHGs such as CO₂, methane, and nitrous oxide, electric scooters and motorcycles eliminate tailpipe pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, lower fossil-fuel use, and reduce noise (International Transport Forum, 2023a). They also provide an immediate and practical pathway for creating cleaner, more equitable cities.

References

Anenberg, S., Miller, J., Henze, D., & Minjares, R. (2019). A global snapshot of the air pollution-related health impacts of transportation sector emissions in 2010 and 2015 [Report]. International Council on Clean Transportation. Link to source: https://theicct.org/publication/a-global-snapshot-of-the-air-pollution-related-health-impacts-of-transportation-sector-emissions-in-2010-and-2015/ 

Anup, S., Deo, A., & Bandivadekar, A. (2021). Impact of fuel consumption standard on electrification of two-wheelers in India [Technical paper 2021-26-0050]. SAE International. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.4271/2021-26-0050

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. (2024). Connecting traveler choice with climate outcomes: Innovative greenhouse gas emissions reduction policies and practices in the APEC region through traveler behavioral change [Report]. Link to source: https://www.apec.org/publications/2024/09/connecting-traveler-choice-with-climate-outcomes--innovative-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reduction-policies-and-practices-in-the-apec-region-through-traveler-behavioral-change

Ayetor, G. K., Mbonigaba, I., & Mashele, J. (2023). Feasibility of electric two and three-wheelers in Africa. Green Energy and Intelligent Transportation, 2(4), Article 100106. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geits.2023.100106

Barreiros, T. V. (2020). Comparison of the life cycle of different scooters used in Berlin [Report 1.0]. GreenDelta GmbH. Link to source: https://www.openlca.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Report_Scooters_in_Berlin.pdf 

BloombergNEF. (2025, December 9). Lithium-ion battery pack prices fall to $108 per kilowatt-hour, despite rising metal prices: BloombergNEF [Press release]. Link to source: https://about.bnef.com/insights/clean-transport/lithium-ion-battery-pack-prices-fall-to-108-per-kilowatt-hour-despite-rising-metal-prices-bloombergnef

Carranza, G., Do Nascimiento, M., Fanals, J., Febrer, J., & Valderrama, C. (2022). Life cycle assessment and economic analysis of the electric motorcycle in the city of Barcelona and the impact on air pollution. Science of The Total Environment, 821, Article 153419. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153419

Cox, B. L., & Mutel, C. L. (2018). The environmental and cost performance of current and future motorcycles. Applied Energy, 212, 1013–1024. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.100

Guarnieri, M., & Balmes, J. R. (2014). Outdoor air pollution and asthma. The Lancet, 383(9928), 1581–1592. Link to source: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)60617-6/abstract 

Gupta, R., Hertzke, P., Lath, V., & Vig, G. (2023). The real global EV buzz comes on two wheels. McKinsey & Company. Link to source: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/the-real-global-ev-buzz-comes-on-two-wheels

Hernandez, M., Kockelman, K. M., Lentz, J. O., & Lee, J. (2019). Emissions and noise mitigation through use of electric motorcycles. Transportation Safety and Environment, 1(2), 164–175. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1093/tse/tdz013

International Energy Agency. (2020). Sustainable recovery [Report]. Link to source: https://www.iea.org/reports/sustainable-recovery

International Energy Agency. (2024). Global EV outlook 2024. Link to source: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2024/outlook-for-electric-mobility 

International Energy Agency. (2025a). Global EV outlook 2025 [Report]. Link to source: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025

International Energy Agency. (2025b). Breakthrough agenda report 2025 [Report]. Link to source: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/6f3b4ad7-b1aa-4791-b363-e4efe58cbb83/BreakthroughAgendaReport2025.pdf 

International Transport Forum. (2020). Good to go? Assessing the environmental performance of new mobility [Corporate partnership board report]. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/International Transport Forum. Link to source: https://www.itf-oecd.org/good-to-go-environmental-performance-new-mobility 

International Transport Forum. (2023a). ITF transport outlook 2023 [Report]. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1787/b6cc9ad5-en 

International Transport Forum. (2023b). Life-cycle assessment of passenger transport: An Indian case study [Policy paper]. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1787/2d11e416-en

Jaramillo, P., Ribeiro, S. K., Newman, P., Dhar, S., Diemuodeke, O. E., Kajino, T., Lee, D. S., Nugroho, S. B., Ou, X., Strømman, A. H., & Whitehead, J. (2022). Transport. In P. R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, & J. Malley (Eds.), Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (pp. 1049–1160). Cambridge University Press. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.012

Kamakaté, F., & Gordon, D. (2009). Managing motorcycles: Opportunities to reduce pollution and fuel use from two- and three-wheeled vehicles [Report]. International Council on Clean Transportation. Link to source: https://theicct.org/publication/managing-motorcycles-opportunities-to-reduce-pollution-and-fuel-use-from-two-and-three-wheeled-vehicles/

Kerr, G. H., Goldberg, D. L., & Anenberg, S. C. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic reveals persistent disparities in nitrogen dioxide pollution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(30), Article e2022409118. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022409118

Kumar, P. (2020, November 3). Busting the cost barrier: Why electric three-wheelers make business sense. World Resources Institute India. Link to source: https://wri-india.org/blogs/busting-cost-barrier-why-electric-three-wheelers-make-business-sense

Kumar, P., & Chakrabarty, S. (2020). Total cost of ownership analysis of the impact of vehicle usage on the economic viability of electric vehicles in India. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2674(11), 563–572. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120947089 

Kumar, P., & Singh, A. (2024). Emerging opportunities for battery swapping in the electric two-wheeler segment in India. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2678(1), 568–582. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231171916

La Fleur, L., Lindkvist, E., Trångteg, R., Winter, S., & Thollander, P. (2024). Riding the future: Environmental, primary energy and economic analysis of an electric motorcycle - A Kenyan case study. Energy for Sustainable Development, 83, Article 101573. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2024.101573

Mera, Z., & Bieker, G. (2023). Comparison of the life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of combustion engine and electric passenger cars and two-wheelers in Indonesia [ICCT report]. International Council on Clean Transportation. Link to source: https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/ID-17-%E2%80%93-LCA-Indonesia_report_final2.pdf 

Montoya-Torres, J., Akizu-Gardoki, O., & Iturrondobeitia, M. (2023). Measuring life-cycle carbon emissions of private transportation in urban and rural settings. Sustainable Cities and Society, 96, Article 104658. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104658

Pan, S., Yu, W., Fulton, L. M., Jung, J., Choi, Y., & Gao, H. O. (2023). Impacts of the large-scale use of passenger electric vehicles on public health in 30 US. metropolitan areas. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 173, Article 113100. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.11310

Patil, M., Bandhu Majumdar, B., & Kumar Sahu, P. (2022). A comparative evaluation of the total cost of ownership between electric two-wheelers and motorized two-wheelers from an Indian perspective. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2676(5), 526–550. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981221077087 

Pennington, A. F., Cornwell, C. R., Sircar, K. D., & Mirabelli, M. C. (2024). Electric vehicles and health: A scoping review. Environmental Research, 251, Article 118697. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2024.118697

Polanco Vásquez, L. O., Chavarría-Hernández, J. C., Arias Trinidad, A., Ordóñez-López, L. C., Forti Sosa, S., Contreras Pool, P. Y., & Barrera-Cabrera, J. N. (2025). Life cycle assessment of electric and gasoline moto-taxis in Yucatán, México: Impact of battery technology and social considerations. Energy for Sustainable Development, 85, Article 101614. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2024.101614

Requia, W. J., Mohamed, M., Higgins, C. D., Arain, A., & Ferguson, M. (2018). How clean are electric vehicles? Evidence-based review of the effects of electric mobility on air pollutants, greenhouse gas emissions and human health. Atmospheric Environment, 185, 64–77. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.04.040

Schneider, F., Castillo Castro, D. S., Weng, K.-C., Shei, C.-H., & Lin, H.-T. (2023). Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) on battery electric and combustion engine motorcycles in Taiwan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 406, Article 137060. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137060

Szyszkowicz, M., Kousha, T., Castner, J., & Dales, R. (2018). Air pollution and emergency department visits for respiratory diseases: A multi-city case crossover study. Environmental Research, 163, 263–269. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.043

Tuayharn, K., Kaewtatip, P., Ruangjirakit, K., & Limthongkul, P. (2015). ICE motorcycle and electric motorcycle: Environmental and economic analysis [Technical paper 2015-01-0100]. SAE International. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-0100

United Nations Environment Programme. (2023). Electric two and three wheelers: Global emerging market overview [Report]. Link to source: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-emerging-market-overview-electric-two-and-three-wheelers

Wanyama, M. (2024). Africa’s automobile maintenance structure – How it can contribute to road crashes and increased emissions [Policy brief]. High Volume Transport Applied Research Programme. Link to source: https://transport-links.com/hvt-publications/africas-automobile-maintenance-structure-policy-brief

Weiss, M., Dekker, P., Moro, A., Scholz, H., & Patel, M. K. (2015). On the electrification of road transportation – A review of the environmental, economic, and social performance of electric two-wheelers. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 41, 348–366. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.09.007

World Health Organization. (2022). Powered two-and three-wheeler safety: A road safety manual for decision-makers and practitioners, second edition. Link to source: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240060562 

Zia, S., Qureshi, S., Zulfiqar, M., & Ijaz, A. (2025). Assessing the feasibility of electric vehicle adoption in Pakistan affordability, preferences, and market readiness. Engineering Proceedings, 111(1), Article 42. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025111042

Ziegler, M. S., & Trancik, J. E. (2021). Re-examining rates of lithium-ion battery technology improvement and cost decline. Energy & Environmental Science, 14(4), 1635–1651. Link to source: https://doi.org/10.1039/d0ee02681f 

Credits

Lead Fellows

  • Heather Jones, Ph.D.

Contributors

  • Ruthie Burrows, Ph.D.

  • James Gerber, Ph.D.

  • Daniel Jasper

  • Alex Sweeney

Internal Reviewers

  • Nina-Francesca Farac, Ph.D.

  • Heather McDiarmid, Ph.D.

  • Amanda D. Smith, Ph.D.

Effectiveness

Electric scooters and motorcycles offer savings of up to 54.4 t CO₂‑eq /million pkm on a 100-year basis, compared with fossil fuel–powered models (Table 1) (Ayetor et al., 2023; Barreiros, 2020; Carranza et al., 2022; Cox & Mutel, 2018; International Transport Forum, 2020, 2023b; Mera & Bieker, 2023; Montoya-Torres et al., 2023; Polanco Vásquez et al., 2025; Schneider et al., 2023; Tuayharn et al., 2015). Every trip shifted from fossil fuel–powered models to electric models helps avoid GHG emissions by eliminating tailpipe emissions and replacing gasoline combustion with electricity use. Effectiveness is calculated by subtracting the per-pkm operating-phase emissions of electric models from the per-pkm operating-phase emissions of conventional fossil fuel–powered models. Furthermore, per-pkm emissions decrease as vehicle occupancy increases.

The extent of electric scooters and motorcycles’ long-term climate benefits across the vehicles’ life cycle depends on the local charging electricity mix. Widespread adoption of electric scooters and motorcycles supported by low-carbon grids delivers large GHG emissions reductions, for example, while electric scooter and motorcycle usage supported by fossil fuel–dominant grids narrows the emissions advantage over ICE models (Jaramillio et al., 2022). The effectiveness of electric scooters and motorcycles is likely an underestimate in many cities, particularly in Africa, where these vehicles are well positioned to replace old two-stroke motorcycles that generate high levels of pollution due to poor maintenance, counterfeit spare parts, and weak GHG emissions enforcement (Wanyama et al., 2024).

Table 1. Effectiveness at reducing emissions.

Unit: t CO₂‑eq (100-year basis)/million pkm

25th percentile 29.9
Mean 48.2
Median (50th percentile) 54.4
75th percentile 60.6
Left Text Column Width
Cost

While it costs US$0.08/pkm to operate a fossil fuel–powered scooter or motorcycle, it costs only US$0.06/pkm for an electric model. This results in savings of US$0.02/pkm (US$20,800/million pkm) (Ayetor et al., 2023; Carranza et al., 2022; Cox & Mutel, 2018; Kumar, 2020; Kumar & Chakrabarty, 2020; La Fleur et al., 2024; Patil et al., 2022). These direct financial costs include vehicle purchase, maintenance expenses, and fuel. As a result, relying on electric models instead of their fossil fuel–powered counterparts generates a savings of US$382/t CO₂‑eq on a 100-year basis (Table 2). 

Electric scooters and motorcycles also have a lower total operating cost than do fossil fuel–powered models, despite a higher initial purchase price. This is evident in a few African countries – including Ghana, Mauritius, Rwanda, Kenya, and South Africa – due to the high cost of gasoline compared withj electricity (Ayetor et al., 2023). In Ghana, gasoline cost US$7.13/gallon in 2023 while electricity cost US$0.04/kWh (Ayetor et al., 2023). However, the price difference between gasoline and electricity is much less in other countries, such as Egypt, India, and Spain (Ayetor et al., 2023; Carranza et al., 2022; Cox & Mutel, 2018; Kumar & Chakrabarty, 2020; La Fleur et al., 2024; Patil et al., 2022; United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP], 2023). 

In most countries, the payback period for electric scooter and motorcycle users is about three to four years (IEA, 2020). Other countries, such as Pakistan, have reported a payback period as low as four to six months, while India reports a payback period ranging from one to eight years (Zia et al., 2025; Patil et al., 2022).

Table 2. Cost per unit of climate impact.

Unit: US$ (2023)/t CO₂‑eq (100-year basis)

Median -382
Left Text Column Width

Methods and Supporting Data

Methods and Supporting Data

Learning Curve

Very little literature exists exploring learning rates for electric scooters and motorcycles. In this analysis, we estimated a learning rate of just over 5% based on the median battery learning rate (13.5%) applied to the median battery portion (40%) of total cost (Table 3). Weiss et al. (2015) calculated a learning rate of 8% for all electric two-wheelers combined, including electric bicycles, scooters, and motorcycles. 

Lithium-ion battery prices fell 97% during the past three decades, plummeting from US$7,500/kWh in 1991 to US$181/kWh in 2018. More importantly, lithium-ion battery costs halved between 2014–2018, while capacity increased by a factor of 50,000 over the same period. 

Continuing the recent trend, battery prices declined another 8% from 2024 to 2025, dropping to US$108/kWh in 2025 (BloombergNEF, 2025). While the component of the learning rate linked to decreases in the price of lithium-ion batteries is expected to diminish in the coming years, advances in materials, design, technology, and the use of different battery types may contribute to future learning rate increases. 

Table 3. Learning rate: Drop in cost per doubling of the installed solution base.

Unit: %

25th percentile 4.2
Mean 5.4
Median (50th percentile) 5.4
75th percentile 6.7
Left Text Column Width
Speed of Action

Speed of action refers to how quickly a climate solution physically affects the atmosphere after it is deployed. This is different from speed of deployment, which is the pace at which solutions are adopted.

At Project Drawdown, we define the speed of action for each climate solution as emergency brake, gradual, or delayed.

Mobilize Electric Scooters & Motorcycles is a GRADUAL climate solution. It has a steady, linear impact on the atmosphere. The cumulative effect over time builds as a straight line.

Caveats

The climate effectiveness of electric scooters and motorcycles depends strongly on the GHG emissions intensity of the electricity used for charging (IPCC, 2022). Additionally, it is important to consider that real-world performance and user acceptance of electric scooters and motorcycles can hinge on charging convenience and reliability. Even though many models can charge from standard sockets and some can use swapping, limited access to safe, affordable charging at home, work, or in public can constrain the degree to which electric scooters and motorcycles can be driven in practice (IEA, 2025b). Finally, in places where battery swapping is part of the charging strategy for electric scooters and motorcycles, the lack of common standards and interoperability (including battery form factors, connectors, communication protocols, and locking interfaces) can fragment markets and limit cross-brand usability, reducing the convenience benefits that swapping is meant to provide. 

Current Adoption

With approximately 79 million electric scooters and motorcycles in use worldwide – which corresponds to roughly 9% of the total global stock of nearly 859 million scooters and motorcycles (IEA, 2025a) – we estimated that electric scooters and motorcycles travel 865 billion pkm/yr (Table 4). We assumed this travel would occur on fossil fuel–powered scooters and motorcycles if electric scooters and motorcycles were not used. Adoption rates of electric scooters and motorcycles are much higher in countries such as China, where the global electric scooters and motorcycles stock share in 2024 was 39%.

To convert this number into pkm traveled via electric scooters and motorcycles, we needed to determine the median distance that each scooter and motorcycle travels per year. Using data from several different countries, the median scooter and motorcycle travels about 10,950 vehicle-kilometers (vkm)/yr. The vehicle occupancy was assumed to be one passenger per vehicle (International Transport Forum, 2020), making vkm equal to pkm. While occupancy is likely higher, reliable data are scarce; however, generally speaking increases in occupancy reduce GHG emissions and lower cost per pkm. Multiplying this number by the number of electric scooters and motorcycles in use (79 million) provides the total travel distance shifted (865 billion pkm/yr) from fossil fuel–powered scooters and motorcycles to their electric equivalents.

Table 4. Current (2024) adoption level.

Unit: million pkm/yr

25th percentile 409,000
Mean 1,336,000
Median (50th percentile) 865,000
75th percentile 1,580,000
Left Text Column Width
Adoption Trend

Globally, the pkm driven via electric scooters and motorcycles rather than via fossil fuel–powered scooters and motorcycles increases by a median of about 110 billion pkm/yr (Table 5). Electric scooters and motorcycles purchases grew 22%/yr between 2019–2024 (IEA, 2025a). Global purchases of electric scooters and motorcycles are increasing by roughly 10 million vehicles/yr (IEA, 2025a).

Table 5. 2019–2024 adoption trend.

Unit: million pkm/yr

25th percentile 41,000
Mean 166,000
Median (50th percentile) 110,000
75th percentile 200,000
Left Text Column Width
Adoption Ceiling

The total adoption ceiling for electric scooters and motorcycles is equal to the total passenger distance driven via scooters and motorcycles worldwide. Using the median distance traveled per vehicle annually, this translates to about 9.4 trillion pkm traveled per year (Table 6).

Replacing every fossil fuel–powered scooter and motorcycle with an electric scooter or motorcycle would require not only a major scale-up of electric scooter and motorcycle manufacturing (both vehicles and batteries), but also the rapid deployment of convenient charging options at homes, workplaces, and public locations, and cost reductions to make the purchase price of electric models affordable across income groups. While ambitious, this transition is technically possible. Electric scooters and motorcycles are already being produced at scale in several markets with new capacity being quickly added. Meanwhile, continued declines in battery cost – plus expanding charging and battery-swapping networks – can make widespread replacement both practical and cost-effective (IEA, 2025a).

Table 6. Adoption ceiling

Unit: million pkm/yr

25th percentile 4,444,000
Mean 14,526,000
Median (50th percentile) 9,403,000
75th percentile 17,174,000
Left Text Column Width
Achievable Adoption

The achievable adoption of electric scooter and motorcycle travel is roughly 6–8 trillion pkm/yr shifted from fossil fuel–powered ICE vehicles.

Various organizations and researchers have forecast future electric scooter and motorcycle adoption trends. These are not assessments of feasible adoption per se; rather, they are predictions of likely rates of adoption, given various assumptions about the future (Anup et el., 2021; Gupta et al., 2023; IEA, 2025a; Kumar & Singh, 2024; UNEP, 2023). Nevertheless, these forecasts are useful considering the sheer number of variables they take into account. To convert these estimates of future likely adoption into estimates of the achievable adoption range, we applied some optimistic assumptions to the numbers in the scenario projections. 

To identify a lower feasible rate of adoption of electric scooters and motorcycles, we took the highest projected rate of electric scooters and motorcycles stock share by 2030, which was 60% in India according to Anup et al. (2021). This translates to 515 million electric scooters and motorcycles – or 5.6 trillion pkm/yr traveled via electric scooters and motorcycles.

To identify a high rate of adoption of electric scooters and motorcycles, we assumed that every country could reach the highest rate of adoption projected to occur for any country. Kumar and Singh (2024) predict that India could reach 80% electric scooters and motorcycles sales share by 2030; such a high share of sales would allow the stock share to quickly approach the rate of sales. We therefore set our high adoption rate at 80% adoption worldwide, which corresponds to 687 million electric scooters and motorcycles in use and 7.5 trillion pkm/yr traveled via electric scooters and motorcycles (Table 7). 

Table 7. Range of achievable adoption levels.

Unit: million pkm/yr

Current adoption 865,000
Achievable – low 5,642,000
Achievable – high 7,522,000
Adoption ceiling (physical limit) 9,403,000
Left Text Column Width

Electric scooters and motorcycles currently displace 0.05 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr of GHG emissions from the transportation system on a 100-yr basis (Table 8). 

If electric scooters and motorcycles achieve 60% of the global scooters and motorcycles stock share – as Anup et al. (2021) projects will take place in India (our low achievable adoption estimate) – then with the current total number of scooters and motorcycles on the road, electric scooters and motorcycles will displace 0.31 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr of GHG emissions on a 100-yr basis.

If electric scooters and motorcycles reach 80% of global scooters and motorcycles stock share – our high achievable adoption estimate, as Kumar and Singh (2024) estimate might eventually happen in sales (that would lead to stock) in India – they will displace 0.41 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr of GHG emissions on a 100-yr basis.

And if electric scooters and motorcycles replace 100% of the global fleet of scooters and motorcycles – the adoption ceiling – they will displace 0.51 Gt CO₂‑eq/yr of GHG emissions on a 100-yr basis.

These estimates are based on the present-day emissions intensity from electrical grids; if grids become cleaner over time, the cumulative climate benefits of electric scooters and motorcycles would be even greater.

Table 8. Climate impact at different levels of adoption.

Unit: Gt CO₂‑eq/yr (100-yr basis)

Current adoption 0.05
Achievable – low 0.31
Achievable – high 0.41
Adoption ceiling (physical limit) 0.51
Left Text Column Width
Additional Benefits

Income and Work

While the up-front cost of electric scooters and motorcycles is generally higher than that of fossil fuel–powered ICE scooters and motorcycles, electric scooter users and motorcyclists can save money on fuel costs once the initial costs are covered. Depending on mileage driven and fuel costs, the up-front cost can usually be recouped in about one year (UNEP, 2023).

Health

Since electric scooters and motorcycles do not have tailpipe emissions, they can mitigate traffic-related air pollution, an environmental ill associated with asthma, lung cancer, increased emergency department visits for respiratory disease, and increased mortality (Anenberg et al., 2019; Guarnieri & Balmes, 2014; Pan et al., 2023; Pennington et al., 2024; Requia et al., 2018; Szyszkowicz et al., 2018). Fossil fuel–powered motorcycles also emit toxic compounds such as benzene, formaldehyde, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are associated with increased cancer risk and short-term respiratory conditions (Kamakaté & Gordon, 2009). 

Communities rich in racial and ethnic minorities tend to be located near highways and major traffic corridors, making those communities disproportionately exposed to air pollution compared to neighboring areas (Kerr et al., 2021). As a result, transitioning to electric scooters and motorcycles could improve community health in marginalized urban neighborhoods near highways (Pennington et al., 2024). These health benefits would prove particularly important for people in densely populated cities – especially in low- and middle-income countries where scooters and motorcycles are widely used and where air quality is often poor (La Fleur et al., 2024). It should be noted some of these benefits depend on the type of fuel used for electricity generation and could displace air pollution from urban centers to more rural areas near power plants. 

Fossil fuel–powered ICE scooters and motorcycles can be very noisy, especially if they are not maintained regularly. In urban areas where motorcycles are a common choice for transportation, adopting electric motorcycles could improve noise pollution, which is a major chronic concern in cities across Asia and Africa (Kamakaté & Gordon, 2009; Hernandez et al., 2019; Sheng et al., 2016).

Air Quality

With the rapid growth of scooter use in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries, more widespread adoption of electric scooters could improve air pollution in densely populated areas where air quality is often a major concern. Increased adoption of electric scooters and motorcycles also reduces emissions of air pollutants associated with tailpipes, including particulate matter, sulfur oxides, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds (Requia et al., 2018). 

Risks

Electricity often costs less per pkm than gasoline, and electric scooter and motorcycle maintenance can be cheaper than maintenance for fossil fuel–powered ICE scooters and motorcycles. These factors lower marginal travel costs, which may increase pkm traveled for some users – partially offsetting GHG emissions benefits. This is a form of the rebound effect, where efficiency gains are offset by increased travel demand (Jaramillio et al., 2022).

If electric scooter and motorcycle fleets grow at a rate that outpaces the implementation of relevant safety measures, road safety could worsen given scooters and motorcycles already account for a large share of road traffic deaths worldwide. Rapid uptake of electric scooters and motorcycles in the absence of safer infrastructure, speed management, helmets, and enforcement could increase injuries and fatalities (World Health Organization [WHO], 2022). 

Interactions with Other Solutions

Reinforcing

Electric scooters and motorcycles reinforce non-car transportation modes by extending reach, offering first- and last-mile connections, and providing flexible options where fixed-route services are limited.

Competing 

Electric scooters and motorcycles compete with alternatives to cars for the same traffic share. Once people have access to a scooter or motorcycle – electric or otherwise – they tend to use it frequently, to the detriment of other modes of transportation.

Dashboard

Solution Basics

million passenger kilometers (million pkm)

t CO₂-eq (100-yr)/unit
029.954.4median
units/yr
Current 865,000 05.642×10⁶7.522×10⁶
Achievable (Low to High)

Climate Impact

Gt CO₂-eq (100-yr)/yr
Current 0.05 0.310.41
US$ per t CO₂-eq
-382
Gradual

CO₂ , CH₄, N₂O

Trade-offs

Many electric scooters and motorcycles can charge from a standard household socket. Some areas also have battery swapping, meaning that infrastructure requirements for electric scooters and motorcycles are much lower than those for electric cars. However, there are still infrastructure requirements associated with electric scooter and motorcycle usage because riders need reliable, safe, and affordable access to charging or swapping, which can be a barrier for people who park on-street, live in multi-unit housing, or lack secure electricity access. For high-utilization commercial users such as delivery riders or motorcycle taxis, availability and uptime are critical, whereas downtime can lead to reduced earnings and weaken the business case for electrification (IEA, 2025b).

Action Word
Mobilize
Solution Title
Electric Scooters & Motorcycles
Classification
Highly Recommended

Lawmakers and Policymakers
  • Set national goals for transitioning transportation to low- and no-emission vehicles; include ambitious targets for shifting to electric models of scooters and motorcycles.
  • Create government procurement policies to transition government fleets to electric models of scooters and motorcycles.
  • Provide financial incentives – such as subsidies, tax breaks, grants, and low-interest loans – for consumers, retailers, and manufacturers; provide targeted incentives and support for battery-swapping stations to help develop the market for electric scooters and motorcycles; offer financial assistance to low- and middle-income communities to purchase electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Collaborate at the international level to develop manufacturing and safety standards to facilitate trade and adoption.
  • Simultaneously transition fossil-fuel electricity production to renewables while promoting the transition to electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Implement performance and emissions standards; gradually increase stringency of standards; consider phasing out fossil fuel–powered ICE vehicles; simultaneously unroll incentive policies to make adoption both easier and more affordable for retailers and drivers alike.
  • Develop charging and battery-swapping infrastructure, ensuring adequate spacing between stations and equitable distribution of stations; consider regulations to require standard sockets in electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Construct dedicated lanes for scooters and motorcycles in addition to protected lanes for nonmotorized vehicles and e-bikes; include guardrails and/or demarcations to separate dedicated lanes from other traffic; construct bypasses around bus stops and public transportation; dedicate tunnels and passages, if necessary, to improve safety; optimize traffic signals to ensure traffic flow isn’t disrupted.
  • Set green manufacturing standards – including incentives or requirements for products such as green aluminum and steel – if possible and practicable. 
  • Develop recovery and recycling programs for both electric and fossil fuel–powered ICE models; implement buyback programs to facilitate upgrades to electric scooters and motorcycles; set minimum standards for recyclability and to guarantee the inclusion of recycled materials in electric scooters and motorcycles, and gradually increase the stringency of those standards; set clear guidelines for collection points for recycled materials and adhere to standards for acceptable origins of recycled materials. 
  • Collaborate with industry leaders to develop battery standards for performance, interoperability, and battery-swapping stations, and diversify supply chains for batteries and other necessary components to enhance domestic production capabilities.
  • Set standards for carbon emissions, raw material usage, water footprint, and environmental impact for batteries on the market; gradually increase stringency of those standards to reduce environmental impact; encourage or require battery components to be recyclable and use recycled material when possible; set legal requirements for batteries to be replaceable; consider requiring the use of product passports for batteries, ensuring the passport includes operationally-relevant information such as diagnostics, individual identification numbers, and information on repair, reuse, and recycling (in addition to environmental impact information). 
  • Increase funding for agencies responsible for road safety and ensure strong enforcement of safety regulations; rapidly expand safety measures such as improving infrastructure and road conditions, enforcing speed management, implementing legal requirements for helmets, and introducing load limits to reduce risks; support public education initiatives and the creation of visible road signage; encourage the use of reflective gear and protective clothing for drivers and passagers; develop and enforce laws related to alcohol impairment while driving; consider mandating speed governors.
  • Create and/or mandate dedicated parking spots for electric scooters and motorcycles, ensuring equitable distribution; include incentives for placing charging and battery-swapping stations at these lots if possible.
  • Extend vehicle recall and audit programs to include electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Require compulsory skill testing for licenses or permits to drive scooters and motorcycles; offer retraining programs for drivers upgrading to electric scooters and motorcycles from their fossil fuel–powered equivalents; require vehicle registration and offer green vehicle designations for preferential treatment for parking and access to recreational parks.
  • Support workforce development programs to improve technician and retailer skills and knowledge; create focused programs for handling and repairing batteries and tire repair; ensure workforce development programs include and seek to recruit women technicians; create dedicated hotlines for discrimination in the sector.
  • Expand taxi regulations to include electric scooters and motorcycles; require specific permits and safety features for these taxis.
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Offer one-stop shops for information on electric scooters and motorcycles, including demonstrations and educational resources on cost savings, environmental impact, and maintenance; include information helpdesks to support retailers and consumers. 
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Practitioners
  • Help policymakers set national goals for transitioning transportation to low- and no-emission vehicles; assist policymakers in developing ambitious targets for shifting to electric scooter and motorcycle models.
  • Take advantage of financial incentives to sell, repair, recycle, or manufacture electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Ensure electric scooters and motorcycles include standard safety features such as anti-lock brake systems, daytime running headlights, and diagnostic dashboards to alert drivers to maintenance issues.
  • Develop charging and battery-swapping infrastructure, ensuring adequate spacing between stations and equitable distribution of stations.
  • Sell safety equipment and consider offering deals that include helmets, reflective gear, and protective clothing for those purchasing an electric scooter or motorcycle.
  • Invest in R&D to improve manufacturing, adoption, supply chain standards, and circularity of electric scooters and motorcycles, particularly batteries.
  • Offer warranties for both vehicles and batteries comparable or better than warranties offered for fossil fuel–powered ICE models.
  • Create vehicle- and ride-sharing schemes for electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Work with policymakers and other industry leaders to diversify supply chains and create domestic production capabilities.
  • Recycle and recover material from batteries as quickly as possible – and avoid hoarding batteries in expectation of future compensation – to improve the circularity of the industry. 
  • Gather consent-based data on rider information and patterns; make onboard interfaces compatible with WiFi; update software regularly to improve performance, facilitate driver feedback, and increase product longevity. 
  • Develop, create, or work with battery-swapping businesses, helping promote interoperability and customer awareness; consider models such as leasing and battery-as-a-service, which allows customers to use and swap batteries without owning them.
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Offer one-stop shops for information on electric scooters and motorcycles, including demonstrations and educational resources on cost savings, environmental impact, and maintenance; include information helpdesks to support retailers and consumers. 
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Business Leaders
  • Set company procurement policies to transition corporate fleets to electric models of scooters and motorcycles.
  • Take advantage of any financial incentives, such as tax breaks, subsidies, or grants for electric scooter and motorcycle purchases.
  • Create long-term purchasing agreements with manufacturers to support stable demand and improve economies of scale.
  • Install charging and battery-swapping stations; offer employee benefits for electric scooter or motorcycle drivers, such as privileged parking areas.
  • Invest in R&D to improve manufacturing, adoption, supply chain standards, and circularity of electric scooters and motorcycles, particularly batteries.
  • Advocate for financial incentives and policies that promote electric scooter and motorcycle adoption.
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Educate customers and investors about the company's transition to electric models of scooters and motorcycles; encourage them to learn more about these alternatives to fossil fuel–powered scooters and motorcycles.
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Nonprofit Leaders
  • Work with policymakers to help set national goals for transitioning transportation to low- and no-emission vehicles; assist policymakers in developing ambitious targets for shifting to electric scooter and motorcycle model adoption.
  • Advocate for financial incentives for consumers, retailers, and manufacturers, such as subsidies, tax breaks, grants, and low-interest loans; recommend providing targeted incentives and support for battery-swapping stations to help develop the market for electric scooters and motorcycles; offer financial assistance to low- and middle-income communities to purchase electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Work at the international level to develop manufacturing and safety standards to facilitate trade and adoption.
  • Advocate to transition fossil fuel electricity production to renewables while promoting the transition to electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Push for ambitious performance and emissions standards; suggest gradually increasing stringency of standards; consider advocating for the phasing out of fossil fuel–powered ICE vehicles; advocate simultaneously for public incentives to make adoption easier and affordable for retailers and drivers alike.
  • Help develop, plan, and design charging and battery-swapping infrastructure, ensuring adequate spacing between stations and equitable distribution of stations; advocate for regulations to require standard sockets in electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Develop recovery and recycling programs for both electric and fossil fuel–powered ICE models; offer buyback programs to facilitate upgrades to electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for minimum standards for recyclability and to guarantee the inclusion of recycled materials in electric scooters and motorcycles, and gradually increase the stringency of those standards; help set clear guidelines for collection points for recycled materials and adhere to standards for acceptable origins of recycled materials. 
  • Collaborate with policymakers and key industry players to develop battery standards for performance, interoperability, and battery swapping stations. 
  • Work with policymakers and industry leaders to diversify supply chains for batteries and other necessary components and create domestic production capabilities.
  • Help set standards for carbon emissions, raw material use, water footprint, and environmental impact for batteries on the market; advocate for the gradual increase of standards to reduce environmental impact; advocate for requirements for battery components to be recyclable and use recycled material when possible; help set legal requirements for batteries to be replaceable; advocate for the use of product passports for batteries, ensuring the passport includes operationally-relevant information such as diagnostics, individual identification numbers, and information on repair, reuse, and recycling (in addition to environmental impact information). 
  • Advocate for increased funding for agencies responsible for road safety and encourage strong enforcement of safety regulations; help plan for expanding safety measures, such as improving infrastructure and road conditions, enforcing speed management, implementing legal requirements for helmets, and introducing load limits to reduce risks; support public education initiatives and the creation of visible road signage; encourage the use of reflective gear and protective clothing for drivers and passengers; develop and enforce laws for alcohol impairment while driving; consider mandating speed governors..
  • Call on policymakers to require dedicated parking spots for electric scooters and motorcycles, ensuring equitable distribution; advocate for incentives for placing charging and battery-swapping infrastructure at these lots if possible.
  • Administer vehicle recall and audit programs for electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Offer road-safety retraining programs for drivers upgrading to electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for green vehicle designations and preferential treatment for parking and access to recreational parks.
  • Develop and/or support workforce development programs to improve technician and retailer skills and knowledge; create focused programs for handling and repairing batteries and tire repair; ensure workforce development programs include and seek to recruit women technicians; create dedicated hotlines for discrimination in the sector.
  • Offer one-stop shops for information on electric scooters and motorcycles, including demonstrations and educational resources on cost savings, environmental impact, and maintenance; include information helpdesks to support retailers and consumers. 
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Investors
  • Invest in electric scooter and motorcycle companies and start-ups, including battery and component suppliers.
  • Explore investment opportunities that address supply chain issues such as battery suppliers and maintenance providers.
  • Invest in companies conducting R&D to improve electric scooter and motorcycle performance, decrease the need for materials, and reduce maintenance costs.
  • Invest in electric scooter- and motorcycle-sharing systems.
  • Offer concessional financing for companies transitioning fleets to electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Invest in companies developing charging and battery-swapping infrastructure for electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Philanthropists and International Aid Agencies
  • Work with policymakers to help set national goals for transitioning transportation to low- and no-emission vehicles; assist policymakers in developing ambitious targets for shifting to electric models of scooters and motorcycles.
  • Advocate for financial incentives for consumers, retailers, and manufacturers, such as subsidies, tax breaks, grants, and low-interest loans; recommend providing targeted incentives and support for battery-swapping stations to help develop the market for electric scooters and motorcycles; offer financial assistance to low- and middle-income communities to purchase electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Provide grants for electric scooter and motorcycle companies and start-ups, including battery and component suppliers.
  • Explore opportunities that address supply chain issues such as battery suppliers and maintenance providers.
  • Offer financing for companies conducting R&D to improve electric scooter and motorcycle performance, decrease the need for materials, and reduce maintenance costs.
  • Support systems for sharing electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Offer grants or financing for companies developing charging and battery-swapping infrastructure for electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Work at the international level to develop manufacturing and safety standards to facilitate trade and adoption.
  • Advocate to transition fossil-fuel electricity production to renewables while promoting the transition to electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Push for ambitious performance and emissions standards; suggest gradually increasing stringency of standards; consider advocating for the phasing out of fossil fuel–powered ICE vehicles; advocate simultaneously for public incentives to make adoption easier and affordable for retailers and drivers alike.
  • Help develop, plan, and design charging and battery-swapping infrastructure, ensuring adequate spacing between stations and equitable distribution of stations; advocate for regulations to require standard sockets in electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Develop recovery and recycling programs for both electric and fossil fuel–powered ICE models; offer buyback programs to facilitate upgrades to electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for minimum standards for recyclability and to guarantee the inclusion of recycled materials in electric scooters and motorcycles, and gradually increase the stringency of those standards; help set clear guidelines for collection points for recycled materials and adhere to standards for acceptable origins of recycled materials. 
  • Collaborate with policymakers and the industry to develop battery standards for performance, interoperability, and battery-swapping stations.
  • Work with policymakers and industry leaders to diversify supply chains for batteries and other necessary components and create domestic production capabilities.
  • Help set standards for carbon emissions, raw material use, water footprint, and environmental impact for batteries on the market; advocate for the gradual increase of standards to reduce impact; advocate for requirements for battery components to be recyclable and use recycled material when possible; help set legal requirements for batteries to be replaceable; advocate for the use of product passports for batteries, ensuring the passport includes operationally relevant information such as diagnostics, individual identification numbers, and information on repair, reuse, and recycling (in addition to environmental impact information). 
  • Advocate for or provide increased funding for agencies responsible for road safety and encourage strong enforcement of safety regulations; help plan for expanding safety measures such as improving infrastructure and road conditions, enforcing speed management, implementing legal requirements for helmets, and introducing load limits to reduce risks; support public education initiatives and the creation of visible road signage; encourage the use of reflective gear and protective clothing for drivers and passengers; advocate for laws for alcohol impairment while driving; consider mandating speed governors.
  • Call on policymakers to require dedicated parking spots for electric scooters and motorcycles, ensuring equitable distribution; advocate for incentives for placing charging and battery swapping infrastructure at these lots if possible.
  • Support or help administer vehicle recall and audit programs for electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Offer or support road safety retraining programs for drivers upgrading to electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for green vehicle designations and preferential treatment for parking and access to recreational parks.
  • Develop and/or support workforce development programs to improve technician and retailer skills and knowledge; create focused programs for handling and repairing batteries and tire repair; ensure workforce development programs include and seek to recruit women technicians; create dedicated hotlines for discrimination in the sector.
  • Offer one-stop shops for information on electric scooters and motorcycles, including demonstrations and educational resources on cost savings, environmental impact, and maintenance; include information helpdesks to support retailers and consumers. 
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Thought Leaders
  • Help policymakers set national goals for transitioning transportation to low- and no-emission vehicles; assist policymakers in developing ambitious targets for shifting to electric models of scooters and motorcycles.
  • Advocate for financial incentives for consumers, retailers, and manufacturers, such as subsidies, tax breaks, grants, and low-interest loans; recommend providing targeted incentives and support for battery-swapping stations to help develop the market for electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for financial assistance for low- and middle-income communities to purchase electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Work at the international level to develop manufacturing and safety standards to facilitate trade and adoption.
  • Advocate to transition fossil fuel electricity production to renewables while promoting the transition to electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Push for ambitious performance and emissions standards; suggest gradually increasing stringency of standards; consider advocating for the phasing out of fossil fuel–powered ICE vehicles; advocate simultaneously for public incentives to make adoption easier and affordable for retailers and drivers alike.
  • Help develop, plan, and design charging and battery-swapping infrastructure, ensuring adequate spacing between stations and equitable distribution of stations; advocate for regulations to require standard sockets in electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Help develop certification programs for manufacturers of electric scooters and motorcycles to ensure quality and safety before mass production.
  • Develop recovery and recycling programs for both electric and fossil fuel–powered ICE models; offer buyback programs to facilitate upgrades to electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for minimum standards for recyclability and to guarantee the inclusion of recycled materials in electric scooters and motorcycles, and gradually increase the stringency of those standards; help set clear guidelines for collection points for recycled materials and adhere to standards for acceptable origins of recycled materials. 
  • Collaborate with policymakers and the industry to develop battery standards for performance, interoperability, and battery-swapping stations.
  • Help set standards for carbon emissions, raw material use, water footprint, and environmental impact for batteries on the market; advocate for the gradual increase of standards to reduce impact; advocate for requirements for battery components to be recyclable and use recycled material when possible; help set legal requirements for batteries to be replaceable; advocate for the use of product passports for batteries, ensuring the passport includes operationally-relevant information such as diagnostics, individual identification numbers, and information on repair, reuse, and recycling (in addition to environmental impact information). 
  • Advocate for increased funding for agencies responsible for road safety and encourage strong enforcement of safety regulations; help plan for expanding safety measures, such as improving infrastructure and road conditions, enforcing speed management, implementing legal requirements for helmets, and introducing load limits to reduce risks; support public education initiatives and the creation of visible road signage; encourage the use of reflective gear and protective clothing for drivers and passengers; develop and enforce laws for alcohol impairment while driving; consider mandating speed governors.
  • Call on policymakers to require dedicated parking spots for electric scooters and motorcycles, ensuring equitable distribution; advocate for incentives for placing charging stations at these lots if possible.
  • Help create one-stop shops for information on electric scooters and motorcycles, including demonstrations and educational resources on cost savings, environmental impact, and maintenance; include information helpdesks to support retailers and consumers. 
  • Join international efforts to promote environmental and human rights standards and ensure those standards are met with regard to electric scooter and motorcycle supply chains.
  • Create, support, or join partnerships that offer information, training, and general support for electric scooters and motorcycle adoption.

Further information:

Technologists and Researchers
  • Conduct research and development on promising battery technology, such as sodium-ion and solid-state batteries.
  • Help create modular designs for batteries to improve maintenance, recovery of materials, and battery swapping.
  • Create more durable batteries to withstand high heat; create safeguards against overcharging and electrolyte leakage; improve performance, range, and rate of discharge of batteries.
  • Improve recyclability and circularity of supply chains for electric scooter and motorcycle vehicles and batteries.
  • Design batteries to reduce the required amount of critical minerals.
  • Innovate low-cost methods to improve safety, labor standards, and supply chains in mining for critical minerals.
  • Develop methods of converting fossil fuel–powered scooter and motorcycle manufacturing and infrastructure to electric.

Further information:

Communities, Households, and Individuals
  • If purchasing a new scooter or motorcycle, purchase an electric model; consider upgrading fossil fuel–powered ICE models to their electric counterparts.
  • Take advantage of any financial incentives offered, such as tax breaks, subsidies, or grants for purchases.
  • Share your experiences with electric scooters and motorcycles through social media and peer-to-peer networks, highlighting cost savings, benefits, incentive programs, and troubleshooting tips.
  • Help shift the narrative around electric scooters and motorcycles by demonstrating the vehicles’ capability and performance.
  • Advocate for financial incentives for consumers, retailers, and manufacturers, such as subsidies, tax breaks, grants, and low-interest loans; recommend providing targeted incentives and support for battery swapping stations to help develop the market for electric scooters and motorcycles; advocate for financial assistance to low- and middle-income communities to purchase electric scooters and motorcycles.
  • Propose increased funding for agencies responsible for road safety and encourage strong enforcement of safety regulations; help plan for expanding safety measures, such as improving infrastructure and road conditions, enforcing speed management, implementing legal requirements for helmets, and introducing load limits to reduce risks; support public education initiatives and the creation of visible road signage; encourage the use of reflective gear and protective clothing for drivers and passengers; develop and enforce laws for alcohol impairment while driving; consider mandating speed governors.
  • Call on policymakers to require dedicated parking spots for electric scooters and motorcycles, ensuring equitable distribution; advocate for incentives for placing charging and battery-swapping infrastructure at these lots if possible.

Further information:

“Take Action” Sources
Evidence Base

Consensus of effectiveness in decarbonizing the transport sector: High

A high level of consensus exists among major organizations working in the climate solutions arena that mobilizing electric scooters and motorcycles can offer a substantial reduction in GHG emissions. This segment of the transportation sector is already the most electrified in road transport globally, with roughly 79 million electric scooters and motorcycles on the road – or about 9% of the global fleet. IEA (2024) notes that full electrification of this segment is “within reach” with stronger policy support. Worldwide, road transport was responsible for more than 6 Gt CO₂ ‑eq emissions in 2024; more than 90% of those emissions came from cars and vans (60%) and trucks (33%), whereas only 7% of those emissions were generated by scooters and motorcycles (IEA, 2025a). 

Electric scooters and motorcycles have been found to reduce external environmental costs as well, suggesting they can help accelerate the shift toward more sustainable transport systems (Carranza et al., 2022). Electric scooters and motorcycles generally outperform fossil fuel–powered scooter and motorcycle models in terms of environmental indicators (Montoya-Torres et al., 2023), and can retain advantages even when charged using electricity generated primarily from hard coal (Cox & Mutel, 2018).

The results presented in our analysis summarize findings from 14 original studies and seven reports reflecting current evidence from 23 countries. We recognize this limited geographic scope creates bias, and hope this work inspires research and data sharing on this topic in underrepresented regions.

Updated Date
Subscribe to Fuel Switching
back to top