Menu
Menu
Menu
Modelling aimed at creating a zero-carbon energy system by 2050 will never be perfect, but a new report shows enough knowledge now exists to make clear decisions about the infrastructure and investments needed to move forward in the right direction, writes Lisa Fischer, Senior Policy Adviser at think-tank E3G
The waves of climate activism, sparked by the Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg’s #FridayforFuture, have renewed the pressure on European policy makers to set targets for greenhouse gas emissions that genuinely improve the chances of preventing dangerous climate change. But, as Thunberg said at the UN General Assembly: “Until you start focusing on what needs to be done, rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope.”
This translates into policymaking in the EU. We need to start moving from illustrative scenarios towards real world choices. There are many choices we can make today that will affect whether we can be close to a zero-emissions energy system in 2050. Of course, we do not have all the answers, but we know what technologies and practices are not part of the picture and where we must step up our efforts.
A new report from Cambridge Econometrics and Element Energy for the European Climate Foundation illustrates what these are. The report was compiled in close consultation with experts from industry, academia and NGOs.
The modelling team examined six possible configurations of a zero-carbon energy system in 2050, integrating the road transport, heating and power sectors across two distinct climatic zones (a colder, northern European one, and a sunnier, Mediterranean one).
Three of their scenarios consider high levels of zero-carbon gas in the energy system (mainly hydrogen produced from renewable electricity) and three consider much higher levels of direct electrification, including for the heating and transport sectors.
None of the scenarios relies on 100% electrification and all contain some green molecules. But all of them show there are three things every feasible zero-carbon energy system will need. These are non-negotiable parts of the energy transition.
The first non-negotiable aspect is much higher levels of buildings efficiency. Of course, this will require investment, but the modelling finds that overall system costs could be reduced by nearly a quarter if really deep energy efficiency measures are introduced across Europe (against a reference scenario based on current EU polices). Most of these savings come from reducing peak heating demands from buildings in colder countries especially.
The second non-negotiable aspect is, perhaps unsurprisingly, clean electricity and smart flexibility. In both colder and warmer climates, smart flexibility combined with short-term battery storage will reduce the need both for thermal backup power and for the curtailment of variable renewable power. In the most cost-effective scenario, smart flexibility reduces the need for thermal back-up by more than half, while the curtailment of variable renewable power falls by over two-thirds. “Increasingly, the electricity system will move from responding to demand to responding to net-demand,” says the report.
The third non-negotiable aspect of the energy transition is innovation to solve the challenge of inter-seasonal (long-term) energy storage. Despite investments in demand side response, in colder climates there will still be days when power demand will outstrip generation. In the report, green hydrogen (generated from variable renewable sources via electrolysis) is shown to be a viable option for the storage required. This would require a serious programme of support to boost electrolyser development and renewables deployment, to ensure Europe has the capacity to produce enough green hydrogen to meet its needs — even if these end up being modest.
These three non-negotiable points should be the basis for today’s policymaking based on:
Of course, uncertainties with any cost or macroeconomic modelling to 2050 are unavoidable. But clear analysis helps move the conversation towards the management of these uncertainties. Smart electrification could be cheaper than upgrading and maintaining a hydrogen-ready gas network and, importantly, leave people with more disposable income, says the report. Just because gas networks already exist, this does not mean that repurposing them will necessarily be the most cost-effective option in the future. Decision makers should take this into consideration before introducing blanket incentives for zero-carbon gases.
Finally, the modelling shows that larger household disposable incomes, made possible by demand-side investments, will fuel the rest of the economy, resulting in additional job creation across a range of sectors. Jobs will be lost in some areas and re-skilling required for some workers. Working conditions for jobs in the growing services sectors need to improve to ensure they are attractive.
There will be challenges and there remain unanswered questions. But we know more than enough about 2050 to know where the bulk of our efforts should be going today. Time to act.
Lisa Fischer tweets at @FactFisching
Do you have a thoughtful response to the opinion expressed here? Do you have an opinion regarding an aspect of the global energy transition you would like to share with other FORESIGHT readers? If so, please send a short pitch of 200 words and a sentence explaining why you are the right person to deliver this opinion to opinion@foresightdk.com.
As policy makers grapple with the problem of how to decarbonise the transport sector, biofuels remain mired in controversy
Ignoring the energy transition is a threat to the climate, but will also undermine the ability of companies to hire the best talent and attract future clients, argues Helene Egebøl, CEO of Schneider Electric Denmark
European policymakers are convinced, the energy transition cannot rely on electrification alone. “Molecules” will be needed, but the new molecules will not be based on natural gas, and there will be a lot less of them
Burning imported waste for energy will be incompatible with climate targets in the longer term, say researchers in Denmark
In an interview with FORESIGHT, Dominique Ristori, Director General for Energy in the European Commission, explains why Europe’s heating system is too old and dirty
Spot on! I absolutely support this opinion.
Those three main points is something that has risen from many different zero carbon models in the last years. I would just like to add that while energy efficiency and (smart) electrification are pretty safe bets, there are many solutions for the third point, especially taking into account a very slow development of the hydrogen technology. There are many synthetic gases that are competing right now (some of them: dimethyl ether, hydrogen, synthetic natural gas, ethanol, methanol etc), and we need more research in this field. For the last point, it is important to bear in mind that the energy penalty of producing gases and then burning them is very large, which consequently significantly increase the need for large capacity in the power sector.
[…] Lisa Fischer from think tank E3G believes the ball is now in the gas industry’s court to prove whether and how it can get “to full climate neutrality” before policy makers agree to hand over investment aimed at giving green gas a more significant role in the European energy transition. […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More: foresightdk.com/things-not-negotiable/ […]