IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v134y2020ics1364032120305852.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public

Author

Listed:
  • Xexakis, Georgios
  • Hansmann, Ralph
  • Volken, Sandra P.
  • Trutnevyte, Evelina

Abstract

Model-based scenarios have become the key method to explore uncertainties in the electricity supply transition of many countries. While retrospective scenario studies show that multi-organization, multi-model scenario ensembles increase the diversity of considered uncertainties, it remains unclear whether such ensembles align with the perspectives of transition stakeholders, including the wider public. This study compares a multi-organization, multi-model ensemble of 82 Swiss electricity supply scenarios for 2035 from a review of 19 studies between 2011 and 2018 with preferred scenarios from three samples of stakeholders: citizens from an online survey (N=61), informed citizens from participatory workshops (N=46), and energy experts from another online survey (N=60). The results show that most informed citizens and experts preferred an almost 100% domestic renewable electricity supply in Switzerland in 2035. On the contrary, most model-based scenarios relied significantly on fossil fuel-based generation and net electricity imports. Possible reasons for this misalignment include the lack of broad stakeholder participation in the development of such scenarios and the modeling choices such as cost-optimization models that are known to underrepresent renewable electricity. For both scenario developers and users, this study offers a word of caution that even a rich scenario ensemble could focus on alternatives that are not preferred by stakeholders and that diverse stakeholder and public perspectives can enrich scenario ensembles. For the Swiss electricity supply transition, the results indicate that a large-scale deployment of renewable electricity before 2035 is preferred by the expert and citizen samples and, therefore, such scenarios should be modeled more in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Xexakis, Georgios & Hansmann, Ralph & Volken, Sandra P. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:134:y:2020:i:c:s1364032120305852
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032120305852
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110297?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lauren A. Fleishman & Wändi Bruine De Bruin & M. Granger Morgan, 2010. "Informed Public Preferences for Electricity Portfolios with CCS and Other Low‐Carbon Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1399-1410, September.
    2. Pietzcker, Robert C. & Ueckerdt, Falko & Carrara, Samuel & de Boer, Harmen Sytze & Després, Jacques & Fujimori, Shinichiro & Johnson, Nils & Kitous, Alban & Scholz, Yvonne & Sullivan, Patrick & Ludere, 2017. "System integration of wind and solar power in integrated assessment models: A cross-model evaluation of new approaches," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 583-599.
    3. Sandra Volken & Gabrielle Wong-Parodi & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2019. "Public awareness and perception of environmental, health and safety risks to electricity generation: an explorative interview study in Switzerland," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 432-447, April.
    4. DeCarolis, Joseph & Daly, Hannah & Dodds, Paul & Keppo, Ilkka & Li, Francis & McDowall, Will & Pye, Steve & Strachan, Neil & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Usher, Will & Winning, Matthew & Yeh, Sonia & Zeyring, 2017. "Formalizing best practice for energy system optimization modelling," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 184-198.
    5. Laugs, Gideon A.H. & Moll, Henri C., 2017. "A review of the bandwidth and environmental discourses of future energy scenarios: Shades of green and gray," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 520-530.
    6. Evelina Trutnevyte & Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Neil Strachan, 2016. "Reinvigorating the scenario technique to expand uncertainty consideration," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 373-379, April.
    7. Oliver Geden & Glen P. Peters & Vivian Scott, 2019. "Targeting carbon dioxide removal in the European Union," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 487-494, April.
    8. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    9. Scheer, Dirk & Konrad, Wilfried & Wassermann, Sandra, 2017. "The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: A qualitative study of public perceptions towards energy technologies and portfolios in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 89-100.
    10. Gabrielle Wong-Parodi & Tamar Krishnamurti & Alex Davis & Daniel Schwartz & Baruch Fischhoff, 2016. "A decision science approach for integrating social science in climate and energy solutions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 563-569, June.
    11. Schmid, Eva & Knopf, Brigitte, 2012. "Ambitious mitigation scenarios for Germany: A participatory approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 662-672.
    12. Mai, Trieu & Bistline, John & Sun, Yinong & Cole, Wesley & Marcy, Cara & Namovicz, Chris & Young, David, 2018. "The role of input assumptions and model structures in projections of variable renewable energy: A multi-model perspective of the U.S. electricity system," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 313-324.
    13. Allen, Patricia & Chatterton, Tim, 2013. "Carbon reduction scenarios for 2050: An explorative analysis of public preferences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 796-808.
    14. Pattupara, Rajesh & Kannan, Ramachandran, 2016. "Alternative low-carbon electricity pathways in Switzerland and it’s neighbouring countries under a nuclear phase-out scenario," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 152-168.
    15. Panos, Evangelos & Kannan, Ramachandran, 2016. "The role of domestic biomass in electricity, heat and grid balancing markets in Switzerland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 1120-1138.
    16. Marchenko, O.V., 2007. "Mathematical modelling of electricity market with renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 976-990.
    17. Densing, M. & Panos, E. & Hirschberg, S., 2016. "Meta-analysis of energy scenario studies: Example of electricity scenarios for Switzerland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 998-1015.
    18. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    19. Alexane Dubois & Simona Holzer & Georgios Xexakis & Julia Cousse & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2019. "Informed Citizen Panels on the Swiss Electricity Mix 2035: Longer-Term Evolution of Citizen Preferences and Affect in Two Cities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-21, November.
    20. Robert Lempert, 2013. "Scenarios that illuminate vulnerabilities and robust responses," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 627-646, April.
    21. Tabi, Andrea & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2017. "Keep it local and fish-friendly: Social acceptance of hydropower projects in Switzerland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 763-773.
    22. Dermont, Clau & Ingold, Karin & Kammermann, Lorenz & Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2017. "Bringing the policy making perspective in: A political science approach to social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 359-368.
    23. Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2016. "Does cost optimization approximate the real-world energy transition?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 182-193.
    24. Osorio, Sebastian & van Ackere, Ann, 2016. "From nuclear phase-out to renewable energies in the Swiss electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 8-22.
    25. Martin Rüdisüli & Sinan L. Teske & Urs Elber, 2019. "Impacts of an Increased Substitution of Fossil Energy Carriers with Electricity-Based Technologies on the Swiss Electricity System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-38, June.
    26. Douglas L. Bessette & Victoria Campbell‐Arvai & Joseph Arvai, 2016. "Expanding the Reach of Participatory Risk Management: Testing an Online Decision‐Aiding Framework for Informing Internally Consistent Choices," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(5), pages 992-1005, May.
    27. Jochen Markard, 2018. "The next phase of the energy transition and its implications for research and policy," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(8), pages 628-633, August.
    28. Gilbert, Alexander Q. & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2016. "Looking the wrong way: Bias, renewable electricity, and energy modelling in the United States," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 533-541.
    29. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2019. "Bad news is bad news: Information effects and citizens’ socio-political acceptance of new technologies of electricity transmission," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 531-545.
    30. Trutnevyte, Evelina & McDowall, Will & Tomei, Julia & Keppo, Ilkka, 2016. "Energy scenario choices: Insights from a retrospective review of UK energy futures," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 326-337.
    31. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2011. "Supporting energy initiatives in small communities by linking visions with energy scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7884-7895.
    32. Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2017. "Scenario techniques for energy and environmental research: An overview of recent developments to broaden the capacity to deal with complexity and uncertainty," Post-Print halshs-01579281, HAL.
    33. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Farla, Jacco C.M., 2014. "Identifying and explaining public preferences for the attributes of energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 71-82.
    34. Jobin, Marilou & Siegrist, Michael, 2018. "We choose what we like – Affect as a driver of electricity portfolio choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 736-747.
    35. Laura Díaz Anadón & Erin Baker & Valentina Bosetti, 2017. "Integrating uncertainty into public energy research and development decisions," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(5), pages 1-14, May.
    36. Paula Díaz & Oscar Van Vliet & Anthony Patt, 2017. "Do We Need Gas as a Bridging Fuel? A Case Study of the Electricity System of Switzerland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, June.
    37. Frédéric Babonneau & Philippe Thalmann & Marc Vielle, 2018. "Defining deep decarbonization pathways for Switzerland: an economic evaluation," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 1-13, January.
    38. Berntsen, Philip B. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2017. "Ensuring diversity of national energy scenarios: Bottom-up energy system model with Modeling to Generate Alternatives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 886-898.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pedersen, Tim T. & Victoria, Marta & Rasmussen, Morten G. & Andresen, Gorm B., 2021. "Modeling all alternative solutions for highly renewable energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    2. Thimet, P.J. & Mavromatidis, G., 2022. "Review of model-based electricity system transition scenarios: An analysis for Switzerland, Germany, France, and Italy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    3. Süsser, Diana & Gaschnig, Hannes & Ceglarz, Andrzej & Stavrakas, Vassilis & Flamos, Alexandros & Lilliestam, Johan, 2022. "Better suited or just more complex? On the fit between user needs and modeller-driven improvements of energy system models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PB).
    4. Prina, Matteo Giacomo & Nastasi, Benedetto & Groppi, Daniele & Misconel, Steffi & Garcia, Davide Astiaso & Sparber, Wolfram, 2022. "Comparison methods of energy system frameworks, models and scenario results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Nikas, A. & Gambhir, A. & Trutnevyte, E. & Koasidis, K. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Mayer, D. & Zachmann, G. & Miguel, L.J. & Ferreras-Alonso, N. & Sognnaes, I. & Peters, G.P. & Colombo, E. & Howe, 2021. "Perspective of comprehensive and comprehensible multi-model energy and climate science in Europe," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PA).
    6. McGookin, Connor & Ó Gallachóir, Brian & Byrne, Edmond, 2021. "Participatory methods in energy system modelling and planning – A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    7. Martínez-Jaramillo, Juan Esteban & van Ackere, Ann & Larsen, Erik, 2023. "Long term impacts of climate change on the transition towards renewables in Switzerland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).
    8. Heinisch, Verena & Dujardin, Jérôme & Gabrielli, Paolo & Jain, Pranjal & Lehning, Michael & Sansavini, Giovanni & Sasse, Jan-Philipp & Schaffner, Christian & Schwarz, Marius & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2023. "Inter-comparison of spatial models for high shares of renewable electricity in Switzerland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).
    9. Alexander Titov & György Kövér & Katalin Tóth & Géza Gelencsér & Bernadett Horváthné Kovács, 2021. "Acceptance and Potential of Renewable Energy Sources Based on Biomass in Rural Areas of Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    10. Franziska Steinberger & Tobias Minder & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2020. "Efficiency versus Equity in Spatial Siting of Electricity Generation: Citizen Preferences in a Serious Board Game in Switzerland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexane Dubois & Simona Holzer & Georgios Xexakis & Julia Cousse & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2019. "Informed Citizen Panels on the Swiss Electricity Mix 2035: Longer-Term Evolution of Citizen Preferences and Affect in Two Cities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Berntsen, Philip B. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2017. "Ensuring diversity of national energy scenarios: Bottom-up energy system model with Modeling to Generate Alternatives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 886-898.
    3. Wen, Xin & Jaxa-Rozen, Marc & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2022. "Accuracy indicators for evaluating retrospective performance of energy system models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    4. Wen, Xin & Jaxa-Rozen, Marc & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2023. "Hindcasting to inform the development of bottom-up electricity system models: The cases of endogenous demand and technology learning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
    5. Jobin, Marilou & Siegrist, Michael, 2018. "We choose what we like – Affect as a driver of electricity portfolio choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 736-747.
    6. Franziska Steinberger & Tobias Minder & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2020. "Efficiency versus Equity in Spatial Siting of Electricity Generation: Citizen Preferences in a Serious Board Game in Switzerland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    8. Escribano, Gonzalo & González-Enríquez, Carmen & Lázaro-Touza, Lara & Paredes-Gázquez, Juandiego, 2023. "An energy union without interconnections? Public acceptance of cross-border interconnectors in four European countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    9. Wachtmeister, Henrik & Henke, Petter & Höök, Mikael, 2018. "Oil projections in retrospect: Revisions, accuracy and current uncertainty," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 138-153.
    10. Hanna, Richard & Gross, Robert, 2021. "How do energy systems model and scenario studies explicitly represent socio-economic, political and technological disruption and discontinuity? Implications for policy and practitioners," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    11. Müller, Jonas & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Spatial projections of solar PV installations at subnational level: Accuracy testing of regression models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    12. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    13. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    14. Arndt, Christoph, 2023. "Climate change vs energy security? The conditional support for energy sources among Western Europeans," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Spampatti, Tobia & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Brosch, Tobias, 2022. "Short and long-term dominance of negative information in shaping public energy perceptions: The case of shallow geothermal systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    17. Thimet, P.J. & Mavromatidis, G., 2022. "Review of model-based electricity system transition scenarios: An analysis for Switzerland, Germany, France, and Italy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    18. Prina, Matteo Giacomo & Nastasi, Benedetto & Groppi, Daniele & Misconel, Steffi & Garcia, Davide Astiaso & Sparber, Wolfram, 2022. "Comparison methods of energy system frameworks, models and scenario results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    19. Huntington, Hillard G., 2021. "Model evaluation for policy insights: Reflections on the forum process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    20. Yu, H. & Reiner, D. & Chen, H. & Mi, Z., 2018. "A comparison of public preferences for different low-carbon energy technologies: Support for CCS, nuclear and wind energy in the United Kingdom," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1826, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:134:y:2020:i:c:s1364032120305852. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.