The global transition towards low-carbon energy systems is expected to significantly increase demand for critical materials needed in electrification technologies. Although Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) provide consistent long-term decarbonization pathways, they typically do not represent technology-specific material requirements. This study addresses this gap by integrating outputs from a national IAM with a technology-level material accounting framework to assess critical materials demand under different technological configurations. Using Brazil as a case study, projections from the Brazilian Land-Use and Energy Systems (BLUES) model are combined with the Material Assessment for Technology in Energy Systems (MATE) framework to estimate material requirements for power generation, energy storage, and transport electrification under a net-zero pathway consistent with Brazil’s most recent Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). Four technological sensitivity scenarios are evaluated. Results indicate that batteries can become the main driver of cumulative demand for critical materials, particularly in passenger battery electric vehicles, while stationary energy storage demand peaks around 2030 before declining. Possible changes in battery chemistries, electric motors, permanent magnets, and photovoltaic technologies significantly alter the demand for copper, graphite, lithium, manganese, silicon, and rare earth elements. Technology substitution reduces reliance on some elements but increases dependence on others, revealing trade-offs between material intensity and criticality. Temporal concentration of demand may create supply-chain bottlenecks during rapid adoption of low-carbon technologies. Our findings highlight the importance of representing technological heterogeneity in energy-transition assessments and provide policy insights for emerging economies aligning decarbonization with industrial and critical-mineral strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Freret et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: