Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Unleashing the full potential of the North Sea -- Identifying key energy infrastructure synergies for 2030 and 2040

Jan F. Wiegner, Madeleine Gibescu, Matteo Gazzani

Abstract

Policy efforts have primarily focused on expanding variable renewable energy sources (vRES) to meet carbon emission reduction targets. The integration of high shares of renewables into the energy system is central to both policy making and research, focusing on the need for balancing options between vRES and demand. In this work we analyze and compare three key integration measures: grid expansions, electricity storage, and the role of production, storage and transport of low-carbon hydrogen. We focus on their potential to reduce emissions and energy system costs, individually and in combination. We take the North Sea as an exemplary region with ambitious 2030-2040 targets for offshore wind developments. The projections on installed generation and grid capacities, along with demand estimates from the Ten Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP) 2022, serve as a starting point for our energy system model. This starting model can then be further expanded with the three integration measures. Our findings show that grid expansions across the North Sea are a no-regret measure lowering costs, emissions and required renewable. The production of hydrogen and its direct use in industry has a lower cost reduction potential and emission reduction potential, while hydrogen storage and transport have little to no additional value. In the short term (2030), electricity storage can help to reduce emissions, but it is not cost competitive. In the longer term (2040), storage can help to balance investments in vRES assets by providing additional flexibility to the system. Combining the three integration measures provides additional benefits. The highest emission reductions can be achieved by combining electricity storage with an expansion of the grid. The highest economic benefits can be achieved with a combination of grid expansions and hydrogen production for direct use in industry.

Unleashing the full potential of the North Sea -- Identifying key energy infrastructure synergies for 2030 and 2040

Abstract

Policy efforts have primarily focused on expanding variable renewable energy sources (vRES) to meet carbon emission reduction targets. The integration of high shares of renewables into the energy system is central to both policy making and research, focusing on the need for balancing options between vRES and demand. In this work we analyze and compare three key integration measures: grid expansions, electricity storage, and the role of production, storage and transport of low-carbon hydrogen. We focus on their potential to reduce emissions and energy system costs, individually and in combination. We take the North Sea as an exemplary region with ambitious 2030-2040 targets for offshore wind developments. The projections on installed generation and grid capacities, along with demand estimates from the Ten Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP) 2022, serve as a starting point for our energy system model. This starting model can then be further expanded with the three integration measures. Our findings show that grid expansions across the North Sea are a no-regret measure lowering costs, emissions and required renewable. The production of hydrogen and its direct use in industry has a lower cost reduction potential and emission reduction potential, while hydrogen storage and transport have little to no additional value. In the short term (2030), electricity storage can help to reduce emissions, but it is not cost competitive. In the longer term (2040), storage can help to balance investments in vRES assets by providing additional flexibility to the system. Combining the three integration measures provides additional benefits. The highest emission reductions can be achieved by combining electricity storage with an expansion of the grid. The highest economic benefits can be achieved with a combination of grid expansions and hydrogen production for direct use in industry.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 35 sections, 21 equations, 9 figures, 14 tables.

Figures (9)

  • Figure 2: Emission reduction potential of electricity grids. Reference refers to a scenario with no grid expansions, Synergies refers to a scenario with possible expansion of storage and grid capacities as well as hydrogen conversion, storage and transport technologies.
  • Figure 3: Cost reduction potential for the expansion of electricity grids. The figure also shows resulting emission reductions and specific cost savings per ton of CO2. Reference refers to a scenario with no grid expansions, Synergies refers to a scenario with possible expansion of storage and grid capacities as well as hydrogen conversion and storage technologies.
  • Figure 4: Emission reduction potential of electricity storage capacities. Reference refers to a scenario with no grid expansions, Synergies refers to a scenario with possible expansion of storage and grid capacities as well as hydrogen conversion and storage technologies. S-All (High Power/Energy) refers to a scenario in which the fixed power-to-energy ratio is increased from 0.3 to 1 compared to S-All.
  • Figure 5: Cost reduction potential for the addition of electricity storage capacities. The figure also shows resulting emission reductions and specific cost savings per ton of CO2. Reference refers to a scenario with no grid expansions, Synergies refers to a scenario with possible expansion of storage and grid capacities as well as hydrogen conversion and storage technologies. S-All (High Power/Energy) refers to a scenario in which the fixed power-to-energy ratio is increased from 0.3 to 1 compared to S-All. Note that allowing for storage additions cannot lower costs, and thus the results for all storage scenarios are the same as Reference.
  • Figure 6: Abatement costs for different emission reduction targets for the addition of electricity storage capacities. S-All (High Power/Energy) refers to a scenario in which the fixed power-to-energy ratio is increased from 0.3 to 1 compared to S-All. Note that an emission reduction of 30% is impossible to reach in scenario S-2 (only offshore) and the bar is not shown respectively.
  • ...and 4 more figures