4.8 Article

The transformation of integrated electricity and heat systems-Assessing mid-term policies using a model comparison approach

Journal

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
Volume 160, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112270

Keywords

Combined heat and power; power-to-heat; coal phase-out; renewable energy; energy system transformation; electricity market modeling; model comparison

Funding

  1. German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) within the MODEX-POLINS project [03ET4075]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The development of European power markets is influenced by integrated electricity and heat systems. This study compares five market models in the context of potential benefits of integrated electricity and heat systems in decarbonization. The models agree qualitatively but have considerable quantitative differences.
The development of European power markets is highly influenced by integrated electricity and heat systems. Therefore, decarbonization policies for the electricity and heat sectors, as well as numerical models that are used to guide such policies, should consider cross-sectoral interdependencies and need evaluation. Many model-based policy assessments evaluate potential benefits of combined heat and power. However, the extent of benefits, such as emissions reductions, found in existing studies is subject to considerable variations. While scenarios and model inputs may partly explain such variations, differences in results may also be related to the model formulation itself. Against this background, this study is the first to compare electricity market models in the context of potential benefits of integrated electricity and heat systems in decarbonization. Five large-scale market models covering electricity and heat supply were utilized to study the interactions between a rather simple coal replacement scenario and a more ambitious policy that supports decarbonization through power-to-heat. With a focus on flexibility provision, emissions reduction, and economic efficiency, although the models agree on the qualitative effects, there are considerable quantitative differences. For example, the estimated reductions in overall CO2 emissions range between 0.2 and 9.0 MtCO(2)/a for a coal replacement scenario and between 0.2 and 25.0 MtCO(2)/a for a power-to-heat scenario. Model differences can be attributed mainly to the level of detail of combined heat and power modeling and the endogeneity of generation investments. Based on a detailed comparison of the modeling results, implications for modeling choices and political decisions are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available