• Energy Research
• 7. Clean energy close
• 6. Clean water close
• 9. Industry and infrastructure close
• NL close
• Utrecht University close

Data set with reference scenarios. As it is not possible to include the entire dataset in this report, we only include two Tables on final energy demand. Table 1 shows the Final Energy Demand projections per industrial subsector and EU28 country in the Reference Scenario and Table 2 the Final Energy Demand projections per industrial subsector and EU28 country in the Frozen Efficiency Scenario. The full dataset, including physical production (in ktonnes) and fuel and electricity demand (in TJ) per industrial sub-sector, per fuel type and per EU 28 country is available upon request to the project coordinator.

Energy Climate dataset consistent with ENTSO-E Pan-European Climatic Database (PECD 2021.3) in CSV and netCDF format TL;DR: this is a nationally aggregated hourly dataset for the capacity factors per unit installed capacity for storage hydropower plants and run-of-river hydropower plants in the European region. All the data is provided for 30 climatic years (1981-2010). Method Description The hydro inflow data is based on historical river runoff reanalysis data simulated by the E-HYPE model. E-HYPE is a pan-European model developed by The Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI), which describes hydrological processes including flow paths at the subbasin level. E-hype only provides the time series of daily river runoff entering the inlet of each European subbasin over 1981-2010. To match the operational resolution of the dispatch model, we linearly downscale these time series to hourly. By summing up runoff associated with the inlet subbasins of each country, we also obtain the country-level river runoff. The hydro inflow time series per country is defined as the normalized energy inflows (per unit installed capacity of hydropower) embodied in the country-level river runoff. A dispatch model can be used to decides whether the energy inflows are actually used for electricity generation, stored, or spilled (in case the storage reservoir is already full). Data coverage This dataset considers two types of hydropower plants, namely storage hydropower plant (STO) and run-of-river hydropower plant (ROR). Not all countries have both types of hydropower plants installed (see table). The countries and their acronyms for both technologies included in this dataset are: Country Run-of-River Storage Austria AT_ROR AT_STO Belgium BE_ROR BE_STO Bulgaria BG_ROR BG_STO Switzerland CH_ROR CH_STO Cyprus CZ_ROR CZ_STO Germany DE_ROR DE_STO Denmark DK_ROR Estonia EE_ROR Greece EL_ROR EL_STO Spain ES_ROR ES_STO Finland FI_ROR FI_STO France FR_ROR FR_STO Great Britain GB_ROR GB_STO Croatia HR_ROR HR_STO Hungary HU_ROR HU_STO Ireland IE_ROR IE_STO Italy IT_ROR IT_STO Luxembourg LU_ROR Latvia LV_ROR the Netherlands NL_ROR Norway NO_ROR NO_STO Poland PL_ROR PL_STO Portugal PT_ROR PT_STO Romania RO_ROR RO_STO Sweden SE_ROR SE_STO Slovenia SI_ROR SI_STO Slovakia SK_ROR SK_STO Data structure description The files is provided in CSV (.csv) format with a comma (,) as separator and double-quote mark (") as text indicator. The first row stores the column labels. The columns contain the following: first column (or A) contains the row number Label: unlabeled Contents: interger range [1,262968] second column (or B) contains the valid-time Label: T1h Contents represent time with text as [DD/MM/YYYY HH:MM]) column 3-52 (or C-AY) each contain the capacity factor for each valid combination of a country and hydropower plant type Label: XX_YYY the two letter country code (XX) and the hydropower plant type (YYY) acronym for storage hydropower plant (STO) and run-of-river hydropower plant (ROR) Contents represent the capacity factor as a floating value in the range [0,1], the decimal separator is a point (.). DISCLAIMER: the content of this dataset has been created with the greatest possible care. However, we invite to use the original data for critical applications and studies. The raw hydro data was generated as part of 'Evaluating sediment Delivery Impacts on Reservoirs in changing climaTe and society across scales and sectors (DIRT-X)', this project and therefor, Jing hu, received funding from the European Research Area Network (ERA-NET) under grant number 438.19.902. Laurens P. Stoop received funding from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) under Grant No. 647.003.005.

Three distinct dataset used to forecast the development of marine energy in Europe in the upcoming three decades: - European offshore wind farms - tidal energy converter deployements in Europe - wave energy converter deployements in Europe

Projections of Sea Level Rise (SLR) under RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 (AR5) along the Mekong Coast, Published1 by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE), Hanoi, Vietnam. Projections of Mekong River discharge during the dry season under RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 at Kratie, Cambodia. The data contains the cumulative, minimum and maximum dry season (January-1st to April-30th) discharge from 5 different climate models. PCR-GLOBWB2 was run at 5 arc-min spatial resolution and forced with the data based on output from five ISIMIP CMIP5 global climate models (HadGEM2-ES, GFDL-ESM2, IPSL-CM5A-LR, MIROC-ESM-CHEM, NorESM1-M). 1. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE), V. Climate change and sea level rise scenarios for Vietnam, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2016). 2. Sutanudjaja, E. H. et al. PCR-GLOBWB 2: a 5 arcmin global hydrological and water resources model. Geosci. Model Dev. 11, 2429–2453 (2018). {"references": ["Sutanudjaja et al. (2018)", "Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (2016)"]}

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to outline a comprehensive picture of the coverage of various certification schemes and sustainability principles relating to the entire value‐added chain of biomass and bioenergy and comparing them accordingly.Design/methodology/approachA tri‐dimensional approach (sustainability issues; technical biomass conversion routes; physical trade flows) was developed for testing the coverage of various sustainability dimensions in different phases of the value‐added chain with the chosen certification schemes and sustainability principles.FindingsUsing the tri‐dimensional approach, a comparison of the chosen schemes and principles demonstrated that the application of existing schemes and the development of new ones have placed a major emphasis on the primary production of biomass. Economic and social dimensions related to biofuels and bioenergy processing and trade were either emphasised less or they were covered inadequately. In view of this, the schemes sometimes seem to ignore that the utilisation of renewable energy as such guarantee no positive or neutral climate impact and may not be economically sustainable, especially when bioenergy can often be more expensive than energy generated from fossil energy sources.Originality/valueThe analysis showed that the tri‐dimensional model is an applicable framework that could facilitate policy makers to formulate policies that comprehensively take into consideration the various sustainability dimensions throughout the entire value‐added chain, now and in the future. It can be applied to the future outlining and completion of certification schemes and sustainability principles for biomass and bioenergy, as well as in the testing of their applicability in the implementation.

The European Geosciences Union (EGU) brings together geoscientists from all over the world covering all disciplines of the Earth, planetary and space sciences. This geoscientific interdisciplinarity is needed to tackle the challenges of the future. One major challenge for humankind is to provide adequate and reliable supplies of affordable energy and other resources in efficient and environmentally sustainable ways. This Energy Procedia issue provides an overview of the contributions of the Division on Energy, Resources & the Environment (ERE) at the EGU General Assembly 2017.

Renewable energy will be a crucial ingredient in the transition to a more sustainable future. The renewable energy sector requires a variety of financial support mechanisms in order to further consolidate and expand. Currently, the most prominent renewable energy support mechanisms are feed-in tariffs and renewable energy auctions. Although these mechanisms have been used and analyzed extensively in Western countries and, more recently, economies in transition, they have rarely been examined in the Arab Gulf region. Yet, particularly the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states have undertaken important steps towards renewable energy adoption, which could be greatly facilitated with the use of financial support mechanisms. This paper analyzes the feasibility of feed-in tariffs and renewable energy auctions adoption in GCC. Based on an extensive meta-analysis of the literature on these two mechanisms in both developed and developing countries, the paper identifies a set of conditions necessary for success and evaluates the presence of favorable these conditions in the GCC context. Our findings reveal that while conditions that would ensure political feasibility are largely absent for both types of mechanisms, auctions could be a more successful strategy at the moment.

This paper analyses the impact of postponing global mitigation action on abatement costs and energy systems changes in China and India. It compares energy-system changes and mitigation costs from a global and two national energy-system models under two global emission pathways with medium likelihood of meeting the 2 °C target: a least-cost pathway and a pathway that postpones ambitious mitigation action, starting from the Copenhagen Accord pledges. Both pathways have similar 2010–2050 cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis shows that postponing mitigation action increases the lock-in in less energy efficient technologies and results in much higher cumulative mitigation costs. The models agree that carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear energy are important mitigation technologies, while the shares of biofuels and other renewables vary largely over the models. Differences between India and China with respect to the timing of emission reductions and the choice of mitigation measures relate to differences in projections of rapid economic change, capital stock turnover and technological development. Furthermore, depending on the way it is implemented, climate policy could increase indoor air pollution, but it is likely to provide synergies for energy security. These relations should be taken into account when designing national climate policies.