Is a 100% renewable European power system feasible by 2050?

Zappa, William; Junginger, Martin; Broek, Machteld van den

doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.08.109

Cited by 435 publications

(229 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

220

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland have decided to phase out nuclear power, while Finland and France are building new nuclear power plants.The cost difference for decarbonizing the electricity system with and without nuclear power has been subject to recent debate in the scientific community [9][10][11][12]. Some studies show that excluding nuclear power increases the electricity system cost modestly [13][14][15], while others claim that the increase in cost is substantial [16,17]. Jägemann et al [13] investigated the decarbonization pathways of the European electricity sector and found that the total electricity system cost, together with the cost of decarbonization, would increase by 11% if nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS) were excluded.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Jägemann et al [13] investigated the decarbonization pathways of the European electricity sector and found that the total electricity system cost, together with the cost of decarbonization, would increase by 11% if nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS) were excluded. Zappa et al [14] evaluated the cost of a 100% renewable power system for Europe and found that the system cost would be 30% higher than a carbon-neutral electricity system which excludes nuclear and CCS. Pattupara and Kannan [15] analyzed the low-carbon electricity pathways in Switzerland and its neighboring countries and showed that the net electricity system cost in the deep decarbonization scenario would increase by 15% if nuclear power were not included.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden

Kan

Hedenus

Reichenberg

2020

Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To achieve the goal of deep decarbonization of the electricity system, more and more variable renewable energy (VRE) is being adopted. However, there is no consensus among researchers on whether the goal can be accomplished without large cost escalation if nuclear power is excluded in the future electricity system. In Sweden, where nuclear power generated 41% of the annual electricity supply in 2014, the official goal is 100% renewable electricity production by 2040. Therefore, we investigate the cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power for Sweden. We model the European electricity system with a focus on Sweden and run a techno-economic cost optimization model for capacity investment and dispatch of generation, transmission, storage and demand-response, under a CO2 emission constraint of 10 g/kWh. Our results show that there are no, or only minor, cost benefits to reinvest in nuclear power plants in Sweden once the old ones are decommissioned. This holds for a large range of assumptions on technology costs and possibilities for investment in additional transmission capacity. We contrast our results with the recent study that claims severe cost penalties for not allowing nuclear power in Sweden and discuss the implications of methodology choice.2 for electricity supply [4][5][6]. In the case of Sweden, the government has set a goal of 100% renewable power production for the electricity sector by 2040 [7]. Currently, nuclear power accounts for 41% of the annual electricity production [8], however the nuclear fleet is aging and decommissioning is planned in the coming decades for economic reasons. This has spurred a political discussion about replacing the old nuclear reactors with new ones. Nuclear power is facing an uncertain future in the transition towards a low-carbon electricity system in Europe due to the risk of radiation leakage, social acceptance, and high investment cost, among other factors. Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland have decided to phase out nuclear power, while Finland and France are building new nuclear power plants.The cost difference for decarbonizing the electricity system with and without nuclear power has been subject to recent debate in the scientific community [9][10][11][12]. Some studies show that excluding nuclear power increases the electricity system cost modestly [13][14][15], while others claim that the increase in cost is substantial [16,17]. Jägemann et al. [13] investigated the decarbonization pathways of the European electricity sector and found that the total electricity system cost, together with the cost of decarbonization, would increase by 11% if nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS) were excluded. Zappa et al. [14] evaluated the cost of a 100% renewable power system for Europe and found that the system cost would be 30% higher than a carbon-neutral electricity system which excludes nuclear and CCS. Pattupara and Kannan [15] analyzed the low-carbon electricity pathways in Switzerland and its neighboring countries and showed that t...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden

Kan

Hedenus

Reichenberg

2020

Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Zappa et al [51] developed their model with seven scenarios that can be compared to the basic scenario for the 2050 European energy system, considering the different levels of future demand and technology utility on a 100% RES basis. The developed scenario models were analyzed through the PLEXOS (North Adelaide, Australia) program, which brings the MILP solution for the RES integration and system adequacy and which has been used in numerous studies.…”

Section: The Literature Of Optimization In Terms Of Res Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimum Renewable Energy Investment Planning in Terms of Current Deficit: Turkey Model

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, a methodology was suggested for wind and solar energy investment plans through linear optimization model for the countries with an energy-based current deficit problem. The originality of the study is that it is a renewable energy investment model based on the functioning of the balance of payments for current deficit reduction, which has not previously been encountered in the literature. While creating the model, without causing external economic imbalance, certain parameters were taken into consideration such as profit transfers for the foreign direct investments, interest payments for the domestic investments, import rates for the wind and solar energy systems, energy electric power production values, electric power load balance, electricity transmission infrastructure, CO 2 emission, future electric power demand projection, and import source rates in the electric power production. It was proven that the model, for the 2019-2030 period in Turkey, not only is an opportunity for decreasing the current deficit but also ensures reaching the CO 2 emission reduction target. Additionally, through the investments in wind and solar energy, it was calculated that fossil-based electric power production will decrease by 80%, and a CO 2 reduction will be provided, which is equivalent of 100 million tonnes GWh natural gas. As a more general result, an optimization model was created which provides a solution for countries coping with energy-based current deficit in economic terms, energy-based air pollution in environmental terms, and renewable energy technology insufficiency.

show abstract

“…in the European Union after 2021 [27]. Zappa et al [28] estimate the cost for building a 100% renewable European power system until 2050 to be 560 billion Euro p.a.. These costs are to a large extent driven by the cost of the capital needed to make investments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How regional differences in cost of capital influence the optimal design of power systems

Schyska¹,

Kies

2020

Applied Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions of the power sector, high shares of renewable power sources need to be integrated into existing systems. This will require vast amounts of investments. Cost of the capital needed for these investments are unevenly distributed among European regions. They show a clear North-South and West-East divide, which has not exhibited significant signs of narrowing in recent years. Power system studies investigating a continent-wide European power system, however, usually assume homogeneous cost of capital.The objective of this paper is to investigate how regional differences in cost of capital affect the result of these studies with respect to the optimal power system design. Our analysis is based on power system optimization with inhomogeneous cost of capital in Europe. We find that assuming homogeneous cost of capital leads to estimates on the levelized costs of electricity in a highly renewable European power system, which are too conservative. The optimal system design is significantly affected compared to an inhomogeneous scenario. In particular, we show that inhomogeneous cost of capital favors overall wind power deployment in the case of Europe, while the investment in solar power decreases.

show abstract

Is a 100% renewable European power system feasible by 2050?

Cited by 435 publications

References 73 publications

The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden

The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden

Optimum Renewable Energy Investment Planning in Terms of Current Deficit: Turkey Model

How regional differences in cost of capital influence the optimal design of power systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About