Skip to content

Türkiye Sectors

What is Türkiyeʼs pathway to limit global warming to 1.5°C?

1.5°C aligned targets
Current targets

Power sector in 2030

Under 1.5°C aligned pathways, renewable energy’s share of total power generation in Türkiye would need to reach up to 86% by 2030. Renewable energy already made up 44% of the country’s total power generation in 2019, up from 29% just two years earlier, demonstrating that a rapid transition to renewables is possible.5

While gas-fired power generation was cut in half between 2019 and 2014, it has been rising again in the past two years. Under a 1.5°C compatible pathway, fossil gas-fired power generation needs to decline to 8–13% by 2030 and phase out late 2030’s.

However, the government plans to partly replace the electricity from fossil gas-fired power generation with new coal capacity. This is incompatible with the 1.5°C limit which requires a coal phase-out by 2035.

Towards a fully decarbonised power sector

The emissions intensity of the power sector would need to be cut by at least 80% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels. The emissions intensity should be no more than 80 gCO₂/kWh in 2030 and near zero around 2040.

With an enormous potential for wind and solar development, Türkiye is well positioned to reach 100% renewables-based power generation by 2040 in line with its 1.5°C compatible pathways. A high renewable energy share could limit or completely eliminate the need for carbon removal technologies. This is demonstrated by one analysed pathway that shows an 86% share of renewable energy in the power mix in 2030, reaching 100% in 2050, with no need for carbon removals in subsequent decades.

1 Government of Turkey. On bi̇ri̇nci̇ kalkinma plani (2019-2023) (11th Development Plan (2019-2023)). 2019.

2 Turkish Statistical Institute. Turkish Greenhouse gas inventory report 1990–2018. 2020.

3 Republic of Turkey Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources. Turkey Energy Strategy 2019-2023. 2019.

4 Global Energy Monitor. Global Coal Plant Tracker Database (July). Global Energy Monitor. 2020.

5 Climate Transparency. Turkey – Climate Transparency Report 2020. Climate Transparency Report. 2020.

6 Turkish Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources. Türkiye Ulusal Enerji Planı [Türkiye National Energy Plan]. 2022. Preprint at

7 Republic of Turkey Ministry of Environment and Urbanization. Turkey’s Fourth Biennial Report. 2019.

8 Kurum, M. Türkiye – High-level Segment Statement COP 27. UNFCCC. 2022. Preprint at

9 Government of Turkey. National Energy Efficiency Action Plan (NEEAP) 2017-2023. 2017.

10 Government of Turkey. Turkey. 2022 Common Reporting Format (CRF) Table. 2022.

11 Government of Turkey. Transport and Logistic Master Plan 2053. 2020.

12 While global cost-effective pathways assessed by the IPCC Special Report 1.5°C provide useful guidance for an upper-limit of emissions trajectories for developed countries, they underestimate the feasible space for such countries to reach net zero earlier. The current generation of models tend to depend strongly on land-use sinks outside of currently developed countries and include fossil fuel use well beyond the time at which these could be phased out, compared to what is understood from bottom-up approaches. The scientific teams which provide these global pathways constantly improve the technologies represented in their models – and novel CDR technologies are now being included in new studies focused on deep mitigation scenarios meeting the Paris Agreement. A wide assessment database of these new scenarios is not yet available; thus, we rely on available scenarios which focus particularly on BECCS as a net-negative emission technology. Accordingly, we do not yet consider land-sector emissions (LULUCF) and other CDR approaches which developed countries will need to implement in order to counterbalance their remaining emissions and reach net zero GHG are not considered here due to data availability.

13 LULUCF projections by 2030 are based on a ten-year average of the latest available historical LULUCF emissions from Türkiye assessed by the Climate Action Tracker.

Türkiyeʼs power mix

terawatt-hour per year

SSP1 Low CDR reliance
SSP1 High CDR reliance
Low energy demand
High energy demand - Low CDR reliance
  • Renewables incl. biomass
  • Unabated fossil
  • Nuclear and/or fossil with CCS
  • Negative emissions technologies via BECCS

Türkiyeʼs power sector emissions and carbon intensity


  • Historical emissions
  • High energy demand - Low CDR reliance
  • SSP1 Low CDR reliance
  • SSP1 High CDR reliance
  • Low energy demand

1.5°C compatible power sector benchmarks

Carbon intensity, renewable generation share, and fossil fuel generation share from illustrative 1.5°C pathways for Türkiye

Decarbonised power sector by
Carbon intensity of power
70 to 80
−60 to 0
−70 to 0
2038 to 2039
Relative to reference year in %
−83 to −80%
−114 to −100%
−115 to −101%
Year of phase-out
Share of unabated coal
3 to 6
Share of unabated gas
8 to 13
2037 to 2040
Share of renewable energy
84 to 86
Share of unabated fossil fuel
14 to 16


Demand shifting towards the power sector

The 1.5°C compatible pathways analysed here tend to show a strong increase in power generation and installed capacities across time. This is because end-use sectors (such as transport, buildings or industry) are increasingly electrified under 1.5°C compatible pathways, shifting energy demand to the power sector. Globally, the “high energy demand” pathway entails a particularly high degree of renewable energy-based electrification across the various sectors, and sees a considerable increase in renewable energy capacities over time. See the power section for capacities deployment under the various models.

Türkiyeʼs renewable electricity investments

Billion USD / yr


Yearly investment requirements in renewable energy

Across the set of 1.5°C pathways that we have analysed, annual investments in renewable energy excluding BECCS increase in Turkey to be on the order of USD 7 to 20 billion by 2030 and 9 to 25 billion by 2040 depending on the scenario considered. The ‘High CDR’ scenario, which shows comparatively lower annual investments into renewables, has lower levels of electrification and at the global level relies more on carbon capture and storage and negative emissions technologies – which themselves can require high up-front costs and face sustainability constraints.