Suchergebnisse

In this paper, we investigate the socio-economic transition processes of Essen and Duisburg as part of the wider structural change in the Ruhr Region. In the two case studies, we explore causes and effects of the cities' development trajectories in the last 30+ years, seeking to identify differences in outcome as a function of the interventions and/or contextual differences. We analyse events, interventions and their impacts on the social and economic systems of the two cities across time. Apart from identifying the key development drivers, we investigate whether either city crossed a tipping point in their transition process (yet), away from coal towards a low-carbon but still prosperous future. Therefore, we specifically evaluate the cities' development trajectories by seeking evidence for "no", "incremental" or "radical" changes in a set of indicators. Here, we have taken a long temporal perspective, because trajectories of and trajectory changes in social systems are specifically visible in demographic dynamics, economic structures and political arrangements across time.

The economic context for renewable power in Europe is shifting: feed-in tariffs are replaced by auctioned premiums as the main support schemes. As renewables approach competitiveness, political pressure mounts to phase out support, whereas some other actors perceive a need for continued fixed-price support. We investigate how the phase-out of support or the reintroduction of feed-in tariffs would affect investors' choices for renewables through a conjoint analysis. In particular, we analyse the impact of coordination – the simultaneousness – of policy changes across countries and technologies. We find that investment choices are not strongly affected if policy changes are coordinated and returns unaffected. However, if policy changes are uncoordinated, investments shift to still supported – less mature and costlier – technologies or countries where support remains or is reintroduced. This shift is particularly strong for large investors and could potentially skew the European power mix towards an over-reliance on a single, less mature technology or specific generation region, resulting in a more expensive power system. If European countries want to change their renewable power support policies, and especially if they phase out support and expose renewables to market competition, it is important that they coordinate their actions.

The option of decarbonisation of the European power sector with the help of significant imports of renewable electricity from North Africa via a trans-continental electricity Supergrid is increasingly gaining attention. In this paper, we investigate the geopolitical risks to European energy security in such a future, and discuss cornerstones for possible policy strategies to reduce these risks. The strategies are rooted in the interdependence between exporter and importer. We come to the conclusion that fostering and deepening, as opposed to reducing, the dependence of both sides on each other may be a valuable and powerful way to reduce the geopolitical risks of renewable electricity trade between Europe and North Africa.

The option of decarbonisation of the European power sector with the help of significant imports of renewable electricity from North Africa via a trans-continental electricity Supergrid is increasingly gaining attention. In this paper, we investigate the geopolitical risks to European energy security in such a future, and discuss cornerstones for possible policy strategies to reduce these risks. The strategies are rooted in the interdependence between exporter and importer. We come to the conclusion that fostering and deepening, as opposed to reducing, the dependence of both sides on each other may be a valuable and powerful way to reduce the geopolitical risks of renewable electricity trade between Europe and North Africa.

In order to achieve the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement, the world must reach net‐zero carbon emissions around mid‐century, which calls for an entirely new energy system. Carbon pricing, in the shape of taxes or emissions trading schemes, is often seen as the main, or only, necessary climate policy instrument, based on theoretical expectations that this would promote innovation and diffusion of the new technologies necessary for full decarbonization. Here, we review the empirical knowledge available in academic ex‐post analyses of the effectiveness of existing, comparatively high‐price carbon pricing schemes in the European Union, New Zealand, British Columbia, and the Nordic countries. Some articles find short‐term operational effects, especially fuel switching in existing assets, but no article finds mentionable effects on technological change. Critically, all articles examining the effects on zero‐carbon investment found that existing carbon pricing scheme have had no effect at all. We conclude that the effectiveness of carbon pricing in stimulating innovation and zero‐carbon investment remains a theoretical argument. So far, there is no empirical evidence of its effectiveness in promoting the technological change necessary for full decarbonization.

Energy efficiency measures and the deployment of renewable energy are commonly presented as two sides of the same coin—as necessary and synergistic measures to decarbonize energy systems and reach the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement. Here, we quantitatively investigate the policies and performances of the EU Member States to see whether renewables and energy efficiency policies are politically synergistic or if they rather compete for political attention and resources. We find that Member States, especially the ones perceived as climate leaders, tend to prioritize renewables over energy efficiency in target setting. Further, almost every country performs well in either renewable energy or energy efficiency, but rarely performs well in both. We find no support for the assertion that the policies are synergistic, but some evidence that they compete. However, multi-linear regression models for performance show that performance, especially in energy efficiency, is also strongly associated with general economic growth cycles, and not only efficiency policy as such. We conclude that renewable energy and energy efficiency are not synergistic policies, and that there is some competition between them.

This report contributes to the modelling work in SENTINEL and beyond in two main ways. First, we provide three social storylines that are closely linked to different governance logics and build on observed social and political drivers and barriers in the European energy transition. This is different than most other storylines used for modelling, because ours are based on governance patterns and normative assumptions of a "good future", and not on the more common geopolitical or techno-economic storyline assumptions. Second, we provide quantitative, empirical data for several important social/political parameters that can be used together with the storylines or as separate building blocks to answer specific research questions with energy models.

Energy system models are advancing rapidly. However, it is not clear whether models are becoming better, in the sense that they address the questions that decision-makers need answered to make well-informed decisions. Therefore, we investigate the gap between model improvements relevant from the perspective of modellers compared to what users of model results think models should address. Thus, we ask: What are the differences between energy model improvements as perceived by modellers, and the actual needs of users of model results? To answer this question, we conducted a literature review, 32 interviews, and an online survey. Our results show that user needs and ongoing improvements of energy system models align to a large degree, so that future models are indeed likely to be better than current models. We also find mismatches between the needs of modellers and users, especially in modelling of social, behavioural and political aspects, the trade-off between model complexity and understandability, and the ways that model results should be communicated. Our findings suggest that a better understanding of user needs and closer cooperation between modellers and users is imperative to truly improve models and unlock their full potential to support the transition towards climate neutrality in Europe.

The European Union's 2030 climate and energy package introduced fundamental changes compared to its 2020 predecessor. These changes included a stronger focus on the internal market and an increased emphasis on technology-neutral decarbonization while simultaneously de-emphasizing the renewables target. This article investigates whether changes in domestic policy strategies of leading member states in European climate policy preceded the observed changes in EU policy. Disaggregating strategic change into changes in different elements (goals, objectives, instrumental logic), allows us to go beyond analyzing the relative prioritization of different goals, and to analyze how policy requirements for reaching those goals were dynamically redefined over time. To this end, we introduce a new method, which based on insights from social network analysis, enables us to systematically trace those strategic chances. We find that shifts in national strategies of the investigated member states preceded the shift in EU policy. In particular, countries reframed their understanding of supply security, and pushed for the internal electricity market also as a security measure to balance fluctuating renewables. Hence, the increasing focus on markets and market integration in the European 2030 package echoed the increasingly central role of the internal market for electricity supply security in national strategies. These findings also highlight that countries dynamically redefined their goals relative to the different phases of the energy transition.

The decarbonisation of the European energy system is a large-scale transformation, which demands not only for a techno-economic feasibility analysis, but also for an assessment of the social and political feasibility and environmental impacts. However, most energy models are not able to fully represent the social and political developments and dynamics of the energy transition, such as preferences, acceptance and behavioural changes of citizens and decision-makers. To address this shortcoming, we developed QTDIAN (Quantification of socio-Technological DIffusion and sociAl constraiNts) − a toolbox of qualitative and quantitative descriptions of socio-technical and political aspects of the energy transition. In this deliverable, we present and discuss the linking of QTDIAN with the energy demand models DESSTINEE, HEB and DREEM, and the energy system model Euro-Calliope. The purpose of linking the models is to integrate the outputs from QTDIAN into the energy models to allow for an empirically based and thus more realistic analysis of energy system trajectories, with a higher relevance for informing pending policy decisions. The central question we address is: How can the social storylines and quantifications from QTDIAN be transferred into energy demand and systems models? We show several ways how QTDIAN's quantified variables allow for a direct application of the storylines into the modelling process of Euro-Calliope, DESSTINEE, HEB and DREEM. The qualitative storylines ensure that modellers do not create technically feasible energy systems that are outside the realms of social or political realities. In addition, the quantitative data can be used to improve the accuracy and especially the policy relevance of the modelling results by providing specific estimates for social and political variables and constraints. However, not all aspects of QTDIAN could be integrated because not all aspects of the storylines could be quantified, and the models to which QTDIAN links in this deliverable are not able to capitalise ...

Achieving the EU's commitment under the Paris Agreement, the Energy Union Strategy, and the European Green Deal, requires a significant transformation of current energy systems. Renewable energy is a major component of this transition, and thus, policymakers face the challenge of making decisions about new renewables-dominated energy systems. Because real world experimentation is in large scale not possible, models can serve as 'laboratories' by allowing policymakers to explore different decarbonisation options in a virtual world and generate a better understanding of the policy domain. While many energy policies are backed by computational models, we do not know exactly how and when policymakers use models, and to what extend policymakers influence modelling performed. We take these gaps as a starting point to empirically investigate the twofold processual interaction between computational energy modelling and energy policymaking.

Although energy models advance rapidly in terms of technical and techno-economic details, social and political aspects and environmental burdens beyond greenhouse gas emissions are currently underrepresented. However, in light of the European Green Deal and the EU Energy Union Strategy, models must advance in terms of social and environmental considerations to support decision- and policymakers in adequately addressing that environmental burden and to put "citizens at its core" of the energy transition. In this deliverable, we present key user-needs for environmental and social aspects that need to be better represented in energy system models (Section 2), and how we have developed and adapted the modelling tools ENVIRO, QTDIAN, and ATOM in response to the identified user needs. We show three main user needs regarding social aspects, specifically (i) social impacts on energy politics and policies, (ii) the social acceptance of energy technologies and infrastructure, and (iii) consumers' behavior in energy models. We furthermore show that users consider relevant the following factors within the environmental aspects of energy scenarios: (iv) demand of raw materials/ circularity, (v) the implications on nature and biodiversity, as well as (vi) full life-cycle impacts and externalization. ENVIRO and QTDIAN are being developed within SENTINEL in a participatory process by engaging with stakeholders in the information and development stages of the model implementation. In contrast, ATOM is adapted by considering user-needs especially in the implementation stage. We conclude that we have benefited from the insights of model users and other stakeholders, and that this will allow us to make our modelling tools fit-for-purpose. All three modelling tools will support decision-makers by answering the most important of the questions users have risen within the SENTINEL stakeholder engagement process. Model-linking within the WP2 and other WPs will ensure that the understanding of environmental and social aspects is ...

To achieve the European Union's target for climate neutrality by 2050 reduced energy demand will make the transition process faster and cheaper. The role of policies that support energy efficiency measures and demand-side management practices will be critical and to ensure that energy demand models are relevant to policymakers and other end-users, understanding how to further improve the models and whether they are tailored to user needs to support efficient decision-making processes is crucial. So far though, no scientific studies have examined the key user needs for energy demand modelling in the context of the climate neutrality targets. In this article we address this gap using a multi-method approach based on empirical and desk research. Through survey and stakeholder meetings and workshops we identify user needs of different stakeholder groups, and we highlight the direction in which energy demand models need to be improved to be relevant to their users. Through a detailed review of existing energy demand models, we provide a full understanding of the key characteristics and capabilities of existing tools, and we identify their limitations and gaps. Our findings show that classical demand-related questions remain important to model users, while most of the existing models can answer these questions. Furthermore, we show that some of the user needs related to sectoral demand modelling, dictated by the latest policy developments, are under-researched and are not addressed by existing tools.

In a decarbonised future electricity system, Europe will rely on fluctuating renewable sources, such as solar PV and wind power, to a much larger extent than today. This means that Europe as a whole and each individual country on the continent must increase the availability of flexibilityoptionsin order to balance the grid. Such flexibility options include dispatchable renewable sources (e.g. concentrating solar power (CSP)with thermal storage), electricity storage, anddemand-response. We start from the notion that the future does not happen, but it is madeby a series of policy decisions between now and then. If this is true, then the electricity system of 2050 is determined by the sum of all policy decisions affecting the power system – the policy pathway – in all legislations in Europeuntil 2050. In this report, we take the first steps towards identifying the potential future role for dispatchable renewables – specifically CSP with thermal storage – as a function of policy decisions that either increase the need for power system flexibility (e.g. fluctuating renewables) or provide flexibility (e.g. storage, dispatchable renewables, flexible demand). We draw on the energy transition logics framework developed by Foxon and colleagues. This framework poses that the space of possible energy transition pathways is a triangle with three distinct policy logicsin its corners: a state-centred logic, in which the central government leads or carries out the transition; a market-centred logic, in which the government sets the framework but leaves all other decisions to market actors; and a grassroots-centred logic, in which the transition is carried out locally with the resources available to each community. Any transition strategy will consist, in some constellation, of policies from these corner. We investigate policy strategies in France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Switzerland and of the European Union as a whole. For each case, we define one dominant pathway, consisting of currently valid, implemented policies of the ...

We investigate whether political ideology has an observable effect on decarbonization ambition, renewable power aims, and preferences for power system balancing technologies in four European countries. Based on the Energy Logics framework, we identify ideologically different transition strategies (state-centered, market-centered, grassroots-centered) contained in government policies and opposition party programs valid in 2019. We compare these policies and programs with citizen poll data. We find that ideology has a small effect: governments and political parties across the spectrum have similar, and relatively ambitious, decarbonization and renewables targets. This mirrors citizens' strong support for ambitious action regardless of their ideological self-description. However, whereas political positions on phasing out fossil fuel power are clear across the policy space, positions on phasing in new flexibility options to balance intermittent renewables are vague or non-existent. As parties and citizens agree on strong climate and renewable power aims, the policy ambition is likely to remain high, even if governments change.