Electricity- and hydrogen-based sector coupling contributes to realizing the transition towards greenhouse gas neutrality in the European energy system. Energy system and integrated assessment models show that, to follow pathways compatible with the European policy target of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, large amounts of renewable electricity and H₂ need to be generated, mostly by scaling-up wind and solar energy production capacity. With a set of such models, under jointly adopted deep decarbonisation scenario assumptions, we here show that the ensuing direct penetration of electricity and H₂ in final energy consumption may rise to average shares of around 60% and 6%, respectively, by 2050. We demonstrate that electrification proves the most cost-efficient decarbonisation route in all economic sectors, while the direct use of H₂ in final energy consumption provides a relatively small, though essential, contribution to deep decarbonisation. We conclude that the variance observed across results from different models reflects the uncertainties that abound in the shape of deep decarbonisation pathways, in particular with regard to the role of H₂.

@en

Background: The transition to a climate neutral society such as that envisaged in the European Union Green Deal requires careful and comprehensive planning. Integrated assessment models (IAMs) and energy system optimisation models (ESOMs) are both commonly used for policy advice and in the process of policy design. In Europe, a vast landscape of these models has emerged and both kinds of models have been part of numerous model comparison and model linking exercises. However, IAMs and ESOMs have rarely been compared or linked with one another. Methods: This study conducts an explorative comparison and identifies possible flows of information between 11 of the integrated assessment and energy system models in the European Climate and Energy Modelling Forum. The study identifies and compares regional aggregations and commonly reported variables. We define harmonised regions and a subset of shared result variables that enable the comparison of scenario results across the models. Results: The results highlight how power generation and demand development are related and driven by regional and sectoral drivers. They also show that demand developments like for hydrogen can be linked with power generation potentials such as onshore wind power. Lastly, the results show that the role of nuclear power is related to the availability of wind resources. Conclusions: This comparison and analysis of modelling results across model type boundaries provides modellers and policymakers with a better understanding of how to interpret both IAM and ESOM results. It also highlights the need for community standards for region definitions and information about reported variables to facilitate future comparisons of this kind. The comparison shows that regional aggregations might conceal differences within regions that are potentially of interest for national policy makers thereby indicating a need for national-level analysis.

@en

Energy models are used to study emissions mitigation pathways, such as those compatible with the Paris Agreement goals. These models vary in structure, objectives, parameterization and level of detail, yielding differences in the computed energy and climate policy scenarios. To study model differences, diagnostic indicators are common practice in many academic fields, for example, in the physical climate sciences. However, they have not yet been applied systematically in mitigation literature, beyond addressing individual model dimensions. Here we address this gap by quantifying energy model typology along five dimensions: responsiveness, mitigation strategies, energy supply, energy demand and mitigation costs and effort, each expressed through several diagnostic indicators. The framework is applied to a diagnostic experiment with eight energy models in which we explore ten scenarios focusing on Europe. Comparing indicators to the ensemble yields comprehensive ‘energy model fingerprints’, which describe systematic model behaviour and contextualize model differences for future multi-model comparison studies.@en