DNV’s 2026 Energy transition outlook report, its 10th, divides the world between the energy importers and the energy exporters, and finds that it is the importers – China, India and Europe – that are driving the energy transition away from oil and gas at three times the pace of the energy exporters. That equates to an average growth in non-fossil sources of 2.2% over the last five years.

‘Importing regions are accelerating electrification, renewables and storage to reduce their exposure to the most insecure fossil-fuel markets. Exporters, meanwhile, are responding to today’s shortages by increasing investments and production. The result is a widening divide in the speed and direction of the transition,’ said DNV Energy Systems CEO Ditlev Engel.

Because of the disruption of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the organisation has reduced its prediction of the share of global oil and gas from the Middle East in 2050 to 40%, down 10 points from 50% last year.  

The report also finds that low costs are driving take-up of solar power, onshore wind and battery storage. By comparison, hydrogen and carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) are falling behind.

Although the report also predicts a big increase in electricity demand for AI, that increase is still smaller than demand from electric vehicles (EVs) and cooling (air conditioning).  

Despite the movement towards renewables, DNV predicts it will not be enough to keep to the 1.5°C warming scenario; it predicts 2.3°C.

In its Global energy perspectives 2026 report, McKinsey does not present a single narrative but seven, up from three last year, and claims there is no longer a most-likely scenario. The roster includes two reference scenarios (‘slow evolution’ and ‘sustainable transformation’) alongside others exploring continued fossil growth to accelerated decarbonisation, from integrated global markets to fragmentation.

The report found that grid investment is the crux of all the scenarios, since all countries’ renewable power plans rely on the ability to transmit power. As it says: ‘Transmission, storage, firm capacity, permitting and interconnection now determine how quickly low-cost generation becomes reliable, usable energy.’

The ‘fragmentation scenario’ found that building domestic supply chains in Europe and the US would raise the capital expenditure of solar by 20–25% and battery storage by 40–50%.

Also, as the centre of gravity of a nation’s energy system moves from molecules to electrons, so its energy security shifts to a new foundation based on electronics and digital supply chains. ‘An increasingly electrified and digitised energy system introduces critical dependencies across equipment, minerals, semiconductors, ports, grids and digital infrastructure. Energy security is now a system-architecture challenge, not simply a fuel-diversification challenge,’ McKinsey says.

Also published in October 2026 was The role of nuclear in the energy transition: complementary but limited, a new report from the Energy Transitions Commission (ETC).  

The authors argue that while nuclear power can play a role in the energy transition, that role – which could be up to 10% of global electricity supply by 2050 – should not be overstated. Even achieving 10% would require growth of 15–25GW annually until 2050, up from 5GW over the past 20 years.  

The report suggests that expanding nuclear power only makes economic sense in a few countries, mainly those with an existing nuclear fleet. For example, nuclear build costs in China and South Korea are 4–9 times less than in the US and Europe. It credits the disparity to higher standardisation and replication, and so shorter construction times, more effective regulation in fleet programmes and lower-cost financing backed by the state.  

One exception to this is the UK, where the ETC envisages that nuclear could make up to 20% of the low-carbon energy supply. This is because of what it calls expensive offshore wind and high balancing costs. It says nuclear could be a better alternative to increasing reliance on ultra-long duration storage and overbuilding renewable capacity.

Although small modular reactors (SMRs) have gained lots of publicity in the last few years, the authors argue that their reputation has exceeded their potential value as cost estimates have risen and given the relatively few pilot projects currently in construction.

Instead of nuclear, solar and wind represent better investment value for low-carbon generation expansion in most countries, the report argues.

Finally, the report concludes that the biggest safety risk in nuclear power is not safety or radioactive fuel but a concentrated supply chain. Russia controlled 40% of global enrichment in 2025, it says, and key components for new reactors are manufactured in only six countries: France, South Korea, Japan, the US, China and Russia.