Thanks! We're also happy that we managed to stay away from the for-profit academic publishers.
23.02.2026 14:58
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Thanks! We're also happy that we managed to stay away from the for-profit academic publishers.
Tagging people who might be interested
@glenpeters.bsky.social, @macroenergysystems.org, @martavictoria.bsky.social, @joerirogelj.bsky.social, @mzjacobson.bsky.social, @stevenjdavis.bsky.social, @wilsonar.bsky.social, @gidden.bsky.social, @bjarnesteffen.bsky.social, @iain-staffell.bsky.social
Tagging people who might be interested
@jannweinand.bsky.social, @oliverruhnau.bsky.social, @maxparzen.bsky.social, @jessedjenkins.com, @weipengclimate.bsky.social, @natasja.bsky.social, @ebbekyhlgoetske.bsky.social, @transitionzero.org, @oetenergy.bsky.social, @dralaaclimate.bsky.social
Tagging people who might be interested @ioppublishing.bsky.social, @pik-potsdam.bsky.social, @wpschill.bsky.social, @hmcjeon.bsky.social, @kittelmartin.bsky.social, @fneum.bsky.social, @trutnevyte.bsky.social, @iriepin.bsky.social, @ktehranchi.bsky.social, @millinger.bsky.social
Glad to hear! Feel free to get in touch if you have questions!
🙏 Thanks to all co-authors @falkoueckerdt.bsky.social, @euronion42.bsky.social, Ivan Ramirez, @fschreyer.bsky.social, Robin Hasse, @jaruschm.bsky.social, Chen Chris Gong, @rpietzcker.bsky.social, @nworbmot.bsky.social and @gunnarenergyclima.bsky.social
Questions? Get in touch!
💸 Prices show the value of flexibility!
Supply side: Technology-specific market values are low for solar PV, high for dispatchable gas.
Demand side: Sector-specific electricity prices are low for flexible electrolysers, high for heat pumps.
These are fed back into long-term investment decisions.
📊 Short-term operation: Exemplary weeks in summer and winter show the hourly dispatch in 2045.
Summer: mid-day solar PV peaks are either absorbed by flexible demand or by batteries. Prices are low.
Winter: hydrogen turbines, remaining gas and wind (if available) ensure supply. Prices are high.
📊 Long-term investment: Solar PV + wind dominate capacities. Remaining gas power plants, hydrogen turbines and batteries ensure a stable power system.
With demand flexibility (DSM): Less capacity required overall.
Without demand flexibility (NoDSM): More batteries are required.
🔑 Soft-linking models is not new, but most existing approaches are limited. We offer several key novelties:
• Comprehensive iterative coupling (all time steps)
• Sector coupling with demand-side flexibility
• Price-based coupling: market values per technology + electricity prices per sector
❓How do we do this? Through a bi-directional, iterative and prices-based soft-coupling of the IAM REMIND and the ESM PyPSA-Eur.
💡The key idea: Leveraging complementary strengths of integrated assessment models (IAMs) and energy system models (ESMs)!
IAMs have the wide scope required for long-term cross-sectoral transformation pathways.
ESMs have the high granularity required for short-term power system operation.
🔑 Soft-linking models is not new, but most existing approaches are limited. We offer several key novelties:
• Comprehensive iterative coupling (all time steps)
• Sector coupling with demand-side flexibility
• Price-based coupling: market values per technology + electricity prices per sector
💡The key idea: Leveraging complementary strengths of integrated assessment models (IAMs) and energy system models (ESMs)!
IAMs have the wide scope required for long-term cross-sectoral transformation pathways.
ESMs have the high granularity required for short-term power system operation.
❓How do we do this? Through a bi-directional, iterative and prices-based soft-coupling of the IAM REMIND and the ESM PyPSA-Eur.
📄 In a new article in IOP Publishing's Progress in Energy, we combine the complementary strengths of the integrated assessment model REMIND and the energy system model PyPSA-Eur through a bidirectional, iterative, and price-based soft coupling.
doi.org/10.1088/2516...
🚨 New paper: Coupling integrated assessment and energy system models 🚨
Planning future energy systems requires bridging two fundamentally different scales: long-term transformation pathways spanning decades, and short-term power system operations unfolding hour by hour.
#EnergySky #PyPSA
🧵
🔥HOT OFF THE PRESS: Why the energy transition is disruptive, non-linear, hard to predict and often faster than expected.
Our paper in Nature Reviews Clean Technology shows how feedback loops create virtuous and vicious cycles that can accelerate or block change. 🧵
www.nature.com/articles/s44...
Do you like charts? Oh yes you do. I've just published hundreds of them, as I do every year. www.nathanielbullard.com/presentations
☝️ That being said, growth rates of electrolysis capacity are large, with a CAGR of >50% per year over the past five years. However, they're nowhere near as large as project announcements would make us believe.
❓ Will this finally change in 2025? While I'm still waiting for the IEA data update, it doesn't look so. Another large implementation gap between optimistic announcements and final installations is quite likely.
There's a clear wave-like pattern: Announcements rise as long as the commissioning year is still far away, but then quickly drop as it approaches. Most projects get delayed, but many also simply disappear.
📊 Has this improved in 2024? Unfortunately, no. The most recent IEA data shows that only 4% of announced electrolysis capacity was realised on time - 0.5 GW instead of the 12.5 GW announced just one year earlier (see figure above).
🚨 Update: What's the state of the green hydrogen market ramp-up?
📄 Today, one year ago, we published "The green hydrogen ambition and implementation gap" in Nature Energy (doi.org/10.1038/s415...). We found that in 2023, only 7% of announced electrolysis capacity was realised on time.
#EnergySky
What's needed to completely phase out all fossil fuels in the EU?
Have a look at our most recent paper!
Our new study an EU #fossil #phase-out is out in @natcomms.nature.com.
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Afaik, this is the first #IAM study investigating a complete fossil phase-out. How much do we need to reduce fossils for the EU 2050 goal? And would even a full fossil phase-out be possible?
🆕 Cost-effective #climate #mitigation would reduce fossil fuel consumption in the EU by around 90 percent by 2050, compared to 2020. Rapid expansion of renewable energy and widespread electrification are key drivers of this shift, researchers show. ⬇️
www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/late...
#NetZero2050
Okay, I see, thanks. And regarding production costs? In REMIND-PyPSA-Eur I observed really low electricity prices paid by electrolysis, which uses all zero-price hours in summer. That could also be due to low PV costs in REMIND, though. Or lack of demand from neighbouring countries. Or resolution?
Hi @nworbmot.bsky.social, interesting! I'm a bit surprised that you see no role of hydrogen for backup power, while PyPSA-Eur typically does. Isn't 120 EUR/MWh for production a bit high when producing in summer? Also, w.r.t storage, the EWI numbers I found were 20-50 EUR/MWh, not 120? Thanks!
Since everyone is busy "resetting", here is a more focused plea: let's manage our sustainable biomass better.
People get nervous around biomass (it's complicated!) but high costs for green hydrogen and direct air capture mean we need to take a closer look.
Blog: nworbmot.org/blog/biomass...