sixth framework programme - needs 2009 · web viewlong term scenarios incorporating...

SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Project no: 502687

NEEDSNew Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability

INTEGRATED PROJECT

Priority 6.1: Sustainable Energy Systems and, more specifically,Sub-priority 6.1.3.2.5: Socio-economic tools and concepts for energy strategy.

2nd PERIODIC ACTIVITY REPORT

M13-M24

Due date of deliverable: 31 August 2006Actual submission date: 15 October 2006

Start date of project: 1 September 2004 Duration: 48 months

Lead Contractor: ISIS – Institute of Studies for the Integration of Systems

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PUBLISHABLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................4

1 SECTION 1 – PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND MAJOR ACHIEVEMENTS DURING THE SECOND REPORTING PERIOD (M 13-24).......................................................................................................................11

1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND OBJECTIVES........................................................................................111.1.1 Overall objectives of the IP........................................................................................................................111.1.2 The IP structure..........................................................................................................................................12

1.2 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM FIRST ANNUAL REVIEW............................................121.3 RESEARCH STREAMS’ OBJECTIVES & ACHIEVEMENTS (M12-24).............................................13

1.3.1 RS Integration Objectives & Achievements................................................................................................131.3.2 RS 1a Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................161.3.3 RS 1b Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................171.3.4 RS 1c Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................201.3.5 RS 1d Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................231.3.6 RS 2a Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................261.3.7 RS 2b Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................311.3.8 RS 3a Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................341.3.9 RS 3b Objectives & Achievements..............................................................................................................36

2 SECTION 2 – RESEARCH STREAMS PROGRESS OF THE PERIOD (M13-24)......................................392.1 RS INTEGRATION........................................................................................................................39

2.1.1 Workpackages Progress.............................................................................................................................392.1.2 Lists of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones............................................................................46

2.2 RS 1A: LIFE CYCLE APPROACHES TO ASSESS EMERGING ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES....................482.2.1 Workpackages Progress.............................................................................................................................482.2.2 Lists of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones............................................................................71

2.3 RS1B: DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF A METHODOLOGY TO ESTIMATE EXTERNAL COSTS OF ENERGY.......................................................................................................................75

2.3.1 Workpackages Progress.............................................................................................................................752.3.2 Lists of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones............................................................................89

2.4 RS 1C: NEW EXTERNALITIES ASSOCIATED TO THE EXTRACTION AND TRANSPORT OF ENERGY932.4.1 Workpackages Progress.............................................................................................................................932.4.2 Lists of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones..........................................................................102

2.5 RS 1D: EXTENSION OF GEOGRAPHICAL COVERAGE.................................................................1042.5.1 Workpackage progress..............................................................................................................................1042.5.2 Lists of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones..........................................................................108

2.6 RS 2A: ENERGY SYSTEMS MODELLING AND INTERNALISATION STRATEGIES, INCLUDING SCENARIOS BUILDING...............................................................................................................109

2.6.1 Workpackages Progress...........................................................................................................................1092.6.2 List of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones...........................................................................130

2.7 RS2B: ENERGY TECHNOLOGY ROADMAP AND STAKEHOLDERS PERSPECTIVE.........................1332.7.1 Workpackages Progress...........................................................................................................................1332.7.2 List of Deliverables, Technical papers and Milestones............................................................................153

RS 3A: TRANSFERABILITY AND GENERALISATION................................................................................1552.8.1 Workpackages Progress...........................................................................................................................1552.8.2 List of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones...........................................................................159

2.9 RS 3B: DISSEMINATION AND COMMUNICATION......................................................................1602.9.1 Workpackages Progress...........................................................................................................................1602.9.2 List of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones...........................................................................163

3 SECTION 3 – CONSORTIUM MANAGEMENT...........................................................................................1643.1 CONSORTIUM MANAGEMENT TASKS AND THEIR ACHIEVEMENT..............................................1643.2 CONTRACTORS..........................................................................................................................1643.3 PROJECT TIMETABLE AND STATUS...........................................................................................1653.4 COORDINATION ACTIVITIES......................................................................................................171

3.4.1 Communication between partners............................................................................................................1713.4.2 Project meetings.......................................................................................................................................1723.4.3 Possible co-operation with other projects/programmes etc.....................................................................173

ANNEX 1– PLAN FOR USING AND DISSEMINATING THE KNOWLEDGE...................................................174

ANNEX 2– COMPLETE LIST OF DELIVERABLES AND TECHNICAL PAPERS (13-24).............................178

2

Publishable Executive SummaryObjectives of the NEEDS Integrated ProjectThe NEEDS IP addresses Priority 6.1 of the 6th RTD Framework Programme of the EU: Sustainable Energy Systems and, more specifically, Sub-priority 6.1.3.2.5: Socio-economic tools and concepts for energy strategy.The ultimate objective of NEEDS is to evaluate the full costs and benefits (i.e. direct + external) of energy policies and of future energy systems, both at the level of individual countries and for the enlarged EU as a whole.From the scientific and technological viewpoint, this entails major advancements in the current state of knowledge in the following main areas of:

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of energy technologies Monetary valuation of externalities associated to energy production, transport,

conversion and use Integration of LCA and externalities information into policy formulation and

scenario building

An additional, important goal is to increase awareness, acceptability and actual use of externality data in policy formulation, calling for dedicated efforts in assessing stakeholders perceptions, facilitating the access to usable externality data, disseminating and communicating results to all involved stakeholders.The NEEDS consortiumThe consortium includes 65 partners (of which some 15% are SMEs), representing 26 Countries (12 EU Member States, 9 NAS, 3 Mediterranean Countries, and 2 Countries from other parts of the World). It presents a balanced mix of Universities, Research Institutions (both public and private), Industry, NGOs. Most leading institutions in the area of energy externalities research are represented.NEEDS is coordinated by the Italian research and consultancy firm ISIS (Istituto di Studi per l’Integrazione dei Sistemi - Rome, Italy – www.isis-it.com). Mr Andrea Ricci is the IP coordinator ([email protected]).

The IP is built as a series of “streams”, each addressing a specific area of research. Innovation and S&T advancements lie both within each stream and in their overall integration. According to their specific objectives and area of research, the streams can be grouped in three main “blocks”.The first block corresponds to new developments, updating, enhancement of the current state of the art in the field of energy externalities and includes the following research streams (RS):

1a LCA of new energy technologies 1b New and improved methods to estimate the external costs of energy

conversion1c Externalities associated to the extraction and transport of energy1d Extension of the geographical coverage of the current knowledge of energy

externalitiesThe second block addresses long term strategies and includes the two following streams:

2a Modelling internalisation strategies, including scenario building2b Energy Technology Roadmap and Stakeholder Perspectives

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.isis-it.com/

The third block focuses on providing input to policy making, dissemination and other communication issues, and includes the following two streams:

3a Transferability and generalisation3b Dissemination/communication

As for the Integration Stream, it ensures that all interlinkages between research activities are fully recognised, their design continuously validated and enhanced, and their implementation appropriately carried out.

The IP management is ensured through a multi layered organisational structure, featuring (i) the IP Coordinator, (ii) the Project Management Committee (regrouping all Stream leaders), and (iii) 9 Stream Management Committees (regrouping all contractors involved in each stream)

Work performed during the first year and results achieved

As per the original work programme, 7 of the 9 Streams have been active during the entire second period, while Streams 1d (Extension of the geographical coverage of the current knowledge of energy externalities) and 3a (Transferability and generalisation) started their work on months 19 (March 2006).

A summary of the work performed in the first period by the 9 active Streams is provided below.

1cExternalities associated

to extraction and transport

of energy

1bNew and improved

methods to estimate external

costs

1aLCA/costs of

new technologies

3aTransferability

&generalisation

2aModelling

internalisation strategies and

scenario building

3bCommunication

& Dissemination

2bStakeholders acceptability and assessment & Energy technology roadmap and forecast

1dEx

tens

ion

of g

eogr

aphi

cal

cove

rage

5

Stream 1a: LCASpecification of interfaces to the assessment of externalities and energy modelling: The LCA methodology has been further refined where necessary. This specification is provided with the first deliverable (D.1.1).Technology foresight in LCA: a scheme for reporting key drivers on technology development, leading to the specification of long term future technology configurations for each technology cluster has been adoptedExperience curves: the experience curves for the reference technologies have been finalisedSpace and time dependencies in LCI: development of a preliminary methodological concept for the parameterisation (identification of key parameters for each system; representation and modelling; quantification of the parameterisation; operationalisation in LCA and LCIA/external costs modelling)LCI/cost database: The LCA database system was established. The LCI data interfaces was implemented and refinements included that facilitate the work. Test runs with datasets from RS1a partners were successfully carried out.Assessment of individual energy technologies the assessment has notably advanced (Submitted Technical Papers from T7.1 T7.2 to T14.1 T14.2, two papers per each WO )Stream 1b: External costs of energy conversionAtmospheric modelling: input have been provided and SR-matrices for the regional modelling have been calculated Water and soil modelling: the basic methodology for estimating concentration degradation in animal tissue has been improved and, in some cases, modelled and tested.Exposure response relations: Transferability of study results, and especially from the US cohort studies to case studies in Europe, has been found as justified. A case study on the externalities of the use of indoor combustion sources, raised particular interest from stakeholders.Assessment of biodiversity: A methodology for the estimation of external costs of biodiversity losses due to land use changes and emissions of air-borne pollutants has been developed. (Submitted Deliverable D4.2)Assessment of climate change: The FUND model and the European Agricultural Sector Model were further developed.Morbidity and mortality valuation: A questionnaire on the valuation of mortality and morbidity risks due to pollution was developed Improvement of Methodology and Tools for the Impact Pathway Assessment: The implementation of the new tools for external costs assessment has been started. Moreover, in this WP consistency between the developments within the different workpackages and outside this stream was analysed and discussedLinking external cost estimation with economic/energy/environmental modelling and life cycle analysis: the methodology of interfaces between external cost estimation and life cycle assessment as well as economic/energy/environmental modelling has been further developed in collaboration with WP4 of RS IntegrationStream 1c: Externalities associated to the extraction and transport of energy

6

Oil and gas: a comprehensive supply flow scenario (for 2004, 2010, 2020, and 2030), on which the externality assessment will be based on, has been carried out..Electricity: the work is in advanced stage. The backbone of the accounting framework to be developed has been The main technical reports (T3.1,3,2 and 3.3) are completed.Hydrogen: the work is well advanced. A detailed analysis of possible burdens generated during the transportation phase of the selected energy vectors (hydrogen, biofuels ethanol and biomass) has been carried out. The main technical reports (T4.3 and T4.5) are completed.Stream 1d –Extension of geographical coverageThe RS started the 1st of March 2006. Data requirement templates have been developed and the national data availability investigation for reference energy technologies is started. External costs for Polish, Slovakian and Czech reference technologies were recalculated by revised EcoSense version 4.0Stream 2a Modelling internalisation strategies, including scenario buildingModel Design and Interfaces: the essential tools for acquiring the basic data and for constructing the 28 country models have been all developed or adapted in a first working version.Country specific models implementation: A list of reference technologies was established and approved by the entire stream, as well as the characterisation of technologies. A draft of a first scenario hypotheses was presented and discussed at the 2a meetings (and during the RS 3b Policy Workshop). A number of possible scenario variant cases had been also outlinedPan-European Model Implementation: test runs and calibration of country models are in progress and a first document describing the structure of the Pan-European trade variables and trade structure for RPPs has been circulated.Full Cost Interactive Analyses: this WP is at its beginning. The integration of Pan-European model with ExternE/LCA and the implementation of scenarios policies will be conducted during the next working periodTraining, documentation and reporting: training activities have been conducted throughout the entire 12-month period to install, experiment and update the software. A comprehensive documentation on the Templates and interfaces has been released.Stream 2b Energy Technology Roadmap and Stakeholder PerspectivesExamination of the candidate set of social criteria and indicators.: the initial set of criteria and indicators was re-examined and recommendations for further use of social criteria and indicators were formulated.Establishment of a preliminary full set of criteria and indicators. A preliminary full set of criteria and indicators, covering economy, environment and social aspects was proposed. Practical constraints were taken into account, including prospects for successful quantification in view of expected inputs from other streams.Initiation of indicator quantification tasks. Most quantification tasks are in the initial phase but some are more advanced. For economic indicators the focus has been on the examination of proposed indicators and establishment of contacts with relevant WPs in streams 1a and 2a. For environmental indicators the feasibility of country-specific adjustments of generic LCA-indicators to be generated within RS1a was addressed and elaborated; such adjustments are considered to be feasible. Extensive Internet and

7

literature searches were made for social indicators demonstrating the very limited availability of relevant data. Thus, most of the social indicators will have to be measured by conducting expert interviews. Definition of requirements and selection of suitable method(s) and tool(s) for multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). An extensive review of candidate methods for MCDA was carried out taking into account the requirements. The methodology has already been specified but some further research is necessary. Due to uncertainties involved in such a development process the possibility of using an existing method in parallel or as an alternative is kept open.Case-study based exploration of the acceptability of monetary valuation methods and their potential role in the energy policy making process. The WP has been successfully carried out. Several interviews were made with US and UK industry representatives. The report shows quite a large variation between the considered countries in the uses of externality valuation in the policy. The existence of official requirements to consider full costs and benefits of proposed regulations and/or official guidelines appears to be crucial to explain this pattern. Preparation of Survey 1 on externalities and stakeholder database development. A draft of a survey questionnaire on the externality concept, results and uses has been prepared and intensely discussed. A stakeholder database has been established. Further extensions are desirable, in particular for France, Germany and Italy, in order to enable elicitation of inputs relevant for MCDA. The corresponding, adequate stakeholder database has been established for Switzerland. Stream 3a Transferability and generalisationThe RS started the 1st of March 2006. There have not been any technical reports or deliverables for RS3a for this period, and the main work load will be during the two last working periods. Two WP started working during the past 6 months:Generalisation model: development of basic methodology for Model Preparation, Methodology and Calculations for Toxic substances in Air, Water and Soil / Effect modelling Value Transfer Technique: development of valid transfer units and proceduresStream 3b Dissemination/communicationOrganisation of the first policy workshop (Brussels – Early spring 2006) on Models scenarios and related policy issuesUpgrading of the NEEDS website and publication of the 1st NEEDS newsletter.Further development of the internal communication website with the adding of an online cost statement procedureIntegration StreamIntegrated interface management: design, development and continuous updating of detailed Input/Output tables representing the flow of information between research streams (Submitted Technical Papers T2.3-T2.4).Submission of the 1st integrated report highlighting the main integration issues faced in NEEDS, the tasks carried out to address them and the achievements so far.Preparation of the full set of reporting documents associated to the first annual review (including the DoW for the third 18-month period submitted with this Activity Report).

8

Expected end resultsQuantification of energy externalitiesMore and better data on energy externalities Methodological developmentsBetter methods and tools for the valuation of mortality and morbidity, the estimation of uncertainties, accounting for the precautionary principle, the dynamic valuation of externalities, etc. Enhancement and improvement of existing methods. in the valuation of health effects from air pollution, the transport and chemical conversion of pollutants, the updating and improvement of Exposure/Response functions, etc.Coverage of new energy technologiesNew and emerging energy technologies, notably: fuel cells and other hydrogen-based technologies, advanced fossil fuels, advanced nuclear, etc., and, in general, renewable energy technologies for which the current knowledge is insufficient (e.g. offshore wind, photovoltaics, bioelectricity, etc.)Coverage of new categories of socio-environmental costsNew cost categories and impact pathways (e.g. loss of biodiversity, water and soil pathways, indoor combustion sources, etc.), establishment of the most appropriate valuation methods and calculation of the corresponding monetary values. Calculation of the external costs associated to the transport of energy, with particular regard to oil spills.Inputs to long term strategies for internalisationLong term scenarios incorporating internalisation strategies for Europe, and their potential effects on energy demand and supply, environmental performances, and sustainability of the economy at large, feeding directly into policy formulation.Better forecasting methodsEnergy Technology Roadmap, mainly based on stakeholders assessment and on the deployment of a Multi Criteria Decision Analysis, to supplement the analytical (modelling) platform and provide additional insights on how to cope with the uncertainties and differences in perception. Increased acceptabilityAssessment of stakeholders and users acceptability.Harmonisation at EU levelCommon modelling platform, consistently documented and used across EU Member States, NAS and Mediterranean Countries, and systematic assessment of the terms, conditions, methods and tools to ensure transferability of external cost data from one context to another, and the paths to generalisation.Coverage of New Accession States, Mediterranean area, developing countriesExtension of the knowledge base on energy externalities to countries for which current knowledge is under developed.Expected impacts and use of resultsReduction of energy external costsExternalities of energy will be reduced, both as a result of increased awareness, and as a result of the generalised application of the users pay principle (through internalisation policies). In particular, environmental damages, negative impacts on human health, global warming will be reduced.Security of supply

9

Through the systematic incorporation of externalities associated to security of energy supply, it will be possible to re-orient supply policies towards those energy carriers that minimise vulnerability of the energy systems.Enlargement and harmonisationIn the perspective of a single, enlarged European energy market, harmonisation of taxation, and of energy pricing policies in general, is a prerequisite to avoid distortions and to guarantee that a level playing field is achieved in energy trade. NEEDS will make this possible, for what concerns both the valuation inputs to policy formulation and the consistency of energy strategies at large.EquityInternalising external costs is the a prerequisite for the systematic application of the users pay principle, which in turn will yield increased social equity.Market efficiencySetting the prices right (through appropriate externality accounting and internalisation) will lead to increased efficiency of the energy market. Energy supply policies will also benefit from accurate cost/benefit analyses, leading to optimal allocation of resources.Awareness and acceptabilityAs previously mentioned, awareness and acceptability are essential on behalf of both policy makers and users, in order to ensure the success of pricing reforms and other externality-driven energy policies.RTD priorities orientationThe extensive comparison of the socio-economic performances of alternative energy technology options will lead to a more reliable prioritisation of RTD in the energy area.

10

1 SECTION 1 – Project objectives and major achievements during the second reporting period (M 13-24)

1.1 Project overview and objectives

The NEEDS Integrated Project addresses Priority 6.1: Sustainable Energy Systems and, more specifically, Sub-priority 6.1.3.2.5: Socio-economic tools and concepts for energy strategy.The consortium includes 65 partners (of which some 15% are SMEs), representing 26 Countries (12 EU Member States, 9 NAS, 3 Mediterranean Countries, and 2 Countries from other parts of the World). It presents a balanced mix of Universities, Research Institutions (both public and private), Industry, NGOs. Most leading institutions in the area of energy externalities research are represented.

1.1.1 Overall objectives of the IP

The ultimate objective of the NEEDS Integrated Project is to evaluate the full costs and benefits (i.e. direct + external) of energy policies and of future energy systems, both at the level of individual countries and for the enlarged EU as a whole.From the scientific and technological viewpoint, this entails major advancements in the current state of knowledge in the following main areas of:

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of energy technologies Monetary valuation of externalities associated to energy production, transport,

conversion and use Integration of LCA and externalities information into policy formulation and

scenario building Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), to examine the robustness of the

proposed technological solutions in view of stakeholder preferences.

Based on current state-of-the-art, achieving such advancements requires a sizeable innovation effort in a number of research fields, including:

The analysis of new energy technologies options (e.g. fuel cells and other hydrogen-based technologies, advanced fossil fuels, advanced nuclear, etc.), and, in general, of renewable energy technologies for which the current LCA knowledge is insufficient (e.g. offshore wind, photovoltaics, bioelectricity, etc.)

The development of new and improved tools for the monetary valuation of externalities of energy, targeting major innovation at several stages of the Impact Pathway Approach (IPA), in terms of: (i) methods (e.g. valuation of mortality and morbidity, estimation of uncertainties, accounting for the precautionary principle, dynamic valuation of externalities, etc.), of (ii) impacts so far insufficiently addressed (e.g. loss of biodiversity, water and soil pathways, indoor combustion sources, oil spills, etc.), and of (iii) the availability and reliability of quantitative evidence (improved Exposure/Response functions, extension of the geographical coverage of available externality data, etc.)

The development of a consistent and robust analytical platform allowing to integrate the full range of information and data on LCA and external costs into a Pan-European modelling framework, and to build scenarios of future energy

11

equilibria that must reflect the foreseeable evolution of energy supply and technology uptake, as well as steakeholders priorities and their acceptance of externality-based policy options.

1.1.2 The IP structureThe IP is built as a series of “streams”, each addressing a specific area of research. Innovation and S&T advancements lie both within each stream and in their overall integration. According to their specific objectives and area of research, the streams can be grouped in three main “blocks”.

The first block corresponds to new developments, updating, enhancement of the current state of the art in the field of energy externalities and includes the following research streams (RS):

1a LCA of new energy technologies 1b New and improved methods to estimate the external costs of energy

conversion1c Externalities associated to the extraction and transport of energy1d Extension of the geographical coverage of the current knowledge of energy

externalitiesThe second block addresses long term strategies and includes the two following streams:

2a Modelling internalisation strategies, including scenario building2b Energy Technology Roadmap and Stakeholder Perspectives

The third block focuses on providing input to policy making, dissemination and other communication issues, and includes the following two streams:

3a Transferability and generalisation3b Dissemination/communication

As for the Integration Stream, it ensures that all interlinkages between research activities are fully recognised, their design continuously validated and enhanced, and their implementation appropriately carried out.

1.2 Summary of recommendations from first annual reviewThe comments and recommendations provided by the externals reviewers in the first Consensus Project Annual Review Report have been taken into account in the NEEDS activities of Year II.

Overall the recommendations of the external reviewers can be synthesized as follow: To add the “Marine Technologies” to the set of new technologies analysed by

the project To restructure the Dissemination and Communication activities in order to better

“engage the policy community with the project in a sustained and productive manner”.

To downgrade many of the stream deliverables “from contractual obligations to internal documents” to allow effective contractual control.

In accordance to these inputs the following corrective mechanisms have been established: Added a new WP (WP 16) to the 1a Stream (Life cycle approaches to assess

emerging energy technologies)

12

Restructured both the dissemination and communication strategy and the RS 3b organisation. In practise: The leadership of Stream 3b has been taken over by ISIS, the project coordinator

in order to better integrate the dissemination and communication activities with the general project management and coordination

Two out of the formerly six planned Fora have been replaced with three Policy Workshops

Two Fora have been maintained: Forum on “The role of externalities and Kyoto mechanisms to achieve a sustainable development energy scenario in the Mediterranean Partner countries” and the Forum on the “Energy Supply Security – Present and Future Issues”.

A permanent “Policy Advisory Group” has been established and will be kept alive through the organisation of the Policy Workshops (the first one has been successfully organised in Rome on 7 April 2006)

A community of users has been identified and contacts collected in a comprehensive database.

The majority of the former project deliverables have been downgraded into internal technical papers.

1.3 Research Streams’ Objectives & Achievements (M12-24)

1.3.1 RS Integration Objectives & Achievements

RS Integration RS LEADER: ISIS

RESEARCH STREAM Integration PROGRESS

Overall objectiveWithin the general objectives of the NEEDS project, the Integration Stream concretely aims at:

developing a common language among the basic methodological frameworks and tools above, which are normally used to represent, assess and model the same or similar systems by means of different analytical tools, with different degrees of detail, system scopes, mathematical representations, etc.

ensuring the actual exchange (Input/Output) of data from one tool to the other developing a structured “protocol” to facilitate the widespread use of the

integrated analysis frameworkIn particular, a major contribution of this Stream to the overall IP implementation is to ensure that Stream 2a (Modelling) receives the required inputs from all other IP activities, and provides the expected feedback to them, thus allowing for the construction of an appropriate, balanced set of long term scenarios.Lastly, and most importantly, the IPC together with the Stream Leaders are responsible, in close liaison with the EC, for the identification and detailed description of the policy packages to serve as a reference for the building of long term scenarios (stream 2a).The basic analytical frameworks to be integrated through the research and management

13

activities carried out within this Stream are: ExternE, which calculates the external costs associated to the supply of

electricity and heat based on the most relevant – both current and future - technological options (RS 1b);

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), which calculates “cradle to grave” energy, environment, material and economic resources used by the most relevant power supply options (RS 1a);

The Integrated MARKAL- EFOM System (TIMES), which generates technology rich partial equilibrium solutions for the long term development of energy - environment systems (RS 2a);

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), which allows examining the robustness of the proposed technological solutions in view of stakeholder preferences (RS 2b).

Under this point of view, the IP intends to combine the strengths of each analytical framework within a robust, integrated methodology. Through the development of suitable new interfaces, a direct feedback between changes in the overall energy system and the life cycle inventories of specific technologies and impact evaluations is ensured, whereby:

ExternE provides LCA with the economic evaluation of damages related to main power supply options, whereas LCA adds to the ExternE procedure a “cradle to grave” assessment of resources depletion;

ExternE feeds into the energy models detailed damage functions per emission / burden, whereas energy models provide equilibrium average commodities / technologies mix for improving ExternE calculations and energy system wide externalities for different policy scenarios:

LCA feeds into the energy models detailed “cradle to grave” resources “costs” for power supply options, including learning ratios, whereas scenario dependent fuel mixes and technology markets are used to tune long term LCA of key technologies.

The implementation of the various components above are coordinated and enforced in this Stream, and the final Integrated Report will provide a full and detailed representation of the results achieved.

The Integration Stream is thus structured in the following 5 WPs:

1. Inception, completed during the first year of activity.2. “Integrated interface management”, whose objective is to continuously validate, and

to progressively contribute to the further specification of the detailed nature and operation of interlinkages between streams and activities, and to concretely ensure that they are adequately implemented. This WP has produced till now three periodic reports on interfaces providing a substantial contribution to the monitoring of the processes associated to the exchange data flows between Streams; paragraph 2.2 on the input/output flows is clear example of the outputs of this work.

3. “Detailed DoW for further IP phases” whose aim is to assess the state of development of the workplan towards the end of each working year and produce the new detailed Workplans for the following periods

4. “Harmonisation of models and methodologies”, that aims at analyse the scientific

14

contents as well as the methodological approaches of the main analytical frameworks the IP is based on: bottom-up models generator, LCA, externalities assessment and MCDA, highlighting the mutual harmonisation requirements, the possible constraints to the integration process and the general added value of this operation.

5. “Policy conclusions and integrated reporting”, that is the WP that produces the periodic Integrated Report by reporting on the integration process between the various IP streams, and formulating policy conclusions accordingly.

Objectives for the reporting period Monitoring and update of Input/output tables representing the flow of

information between all RSs produced in Year II, and further specification of RSs interfaces

Consolidate and refine the integration methodology adopted in Year I as reported in the ‘Interim Report on harmonization of models and methodologies’ (published the past year)

Assess integration of the IP results and formulation of the corresponding policy conclusions

Progress achievedIntegrated interface management:The set of detailed Input/Output tables representing the flow of information between research streams have been continuously reviewed and updated following the work progress in the individual RSs. Potential critical pathways with respect to timing were identified and the transfer of data between RSs has been harmonised.

Analysis of the NEEDS integration requirementsThe main focus of Year II was to examine in detail the mechanisms by which the data and results will flow between the various RSs. Specific interfaces were defined and constructed within the respective RSs to facilitate the capture and transmission of these data.

Integrated assessment of the IP results and formulation of policy conclusionsIn the first Integrated Report, the progress made in the overall integration process, the difficulties encountered, and the provisions made for the smooth advancement of integration in future project phases has been thoroughly described.

Meetings held in the framework of the integration and management activitieso 27 October 2005, Brussels, third PMC-Integration meetingo 7 April 2006, Rome, Policy Workshopo 19-20 June, Prague, fourth PMC-Integration meetingoDeviations from workprogrammeD5.1 was produced in M24 instead of M20

Dissemination ActivitiesNo specific dissemination activities have been carried out within this RS during the seond accounting period, nevertheless this meeting has collaborated with the stream 3b

15

to the organisation of the first Policy Workshop (see RS 3b, WP2)

1.3.2 RS 1a Objectives & Achievements

RS 1a - Life cycle approaches to assess emerging energy technologies

RS LEADER: DLR

RESEARCH STREAM 1a PROGRESS

Overall objectiveThe Research Stream will provide data on costs and life cycle inventories for a wide range of key emerging energy technologies, with a focus on long term technical developments. Based on these results, in cooperation with RS1b technology specific external costs are quantified in particular for future technologies.

Objectives for the reporting period- Set-up of centralised LCA database; standardisation of LCA data processing

between RS partners and centralised database- Finalisation of experience curves for reference technologies- Generation of final life cycle inventories for current configurations of the

reference technology clusters.

Progress achieved- LCA database: the central LCA database (operated by esu-services) has been put

into operation. A training session on data processing routines, including specification of naming conventions etc., has been carried out. After a first test-round with exemplary technologies from all related WPs, final life cycle inventory data have been generated for current configurations of the reference technology clusters. The use of the central database ensures the highest possible degree of consistency with respect to the use of data on underlying background processes.

- Specification of future technology configurations: A scheme for reporting key drivers on technology development, leading to the specification of long term future technology configurations for each technology cluster has been adopted. Based on this approach, a final specification of the future reference technologies will be available early in the next reporting period.

- Assessment of future costs based on experience curves: The final report from WP3 on experience curves for all technology clusters is available. Progress ratios have been derived based on a critical survey on the experience curve literature, on a bottom-up assessment of technical development potentials, and to a limited extend on expert interviews. The progress ratios will be used for the long term cost projections for the reference technologies to be finalised early in the next reporting period.

- Harmonisation of interfaces between Research Streams: Continuous work has

16

been carried out on the specification and harmonisation of data requirements and interfaces across Research Streams.

Deviations from work programmeNo significant deviation from the work programme specified in the second DoW.

- The final report from WP3 (Experience curves) has been labelled as ‘Deliverable 3.1’ rather than ‘Technical paper 3.3’, to emphasise its character as the final WP document to be released for publication.

Dissemination activities

A specific session on ‘LCA and energy’ has been organized at the next SETAC Europe annual conference, which is the main scientific LCA conference in Europe. The session is chaired by RS1a team members, and contributions from NEEDS are particularly invited.

1.3.3 RS 1b Objectives & Achievements

RS 1b - Development and improvement of a methodology to estimate external costs of energy

RS LEADER: USTUTT.TFU

RESEARCH STREAM 1b PROGRESS

Within the framework of RS1b, the following work was carried out:

WP1 (atmospheric modelling): Input data were provided; the SR-matrices for the EMEP model for hemispheric scales were delivered. SR-matrices for the regional modelling have been calculated. With regard to the local scale a tool for distinction of complex and no-complex area has been developed and provided. It has been decided on the choice of models for the local scale to be tested and implemented.WP2 (water and soil modelling): The approaches to model human exposure via milk and meat as well as human exposure towards Hg via the marine environment have been developed. The basic methodology of estimating concentration degradation in animal tissue was improved, a bilateral trade model was implemented and tested, and substances to which the exposure assessment framework needs to be extended were identified.Armines has developed a simple mass balance model for trace elements (especially Mercury) in the marine environment including fish exposure.WP3 (exposure response relations): SR-matrices for the regional modelling have been calculated in NEEDS. Transferability of study results, and especially from the US cohort studies to case studies in Europe, has been found as justified.WP4 (assessment of biodiversity): A methodology for the estimation of external costs of

17

biodiversity losses due to land use changes and emissions of air-borne pollutants has been developed.WP5 (assessment of climate change): The FUND model and the European Agricultural Sector Model were further developed. Marginal damage cost estimates and marginal avoidance cost estimates have been estimated.WP6 (morbidity and mortality valuation): A questionnaire on the valuation of mortality and morbidity risks due to pollution was developed. It was applied successfully and the results have been prepared in a common format, suitable for data analysis. WP7 (Improvement of Methodology and Tools for the Impact Pathway Assessment)The implementation of the new tools for external costs assessment has been started. The implementation into the web based EcoSense model of the findings from WP1 regarding SR-matrices for hemispheric scales, WP4 regarding loss of biodiversity, as well new values for the estimation of external costs caused by the release of Green house gases and of Mercury has been prepared. In addition to this basic work, in WP7 consistency between the developments within the different workpackages and outside this stream was analysed and discussed. Furthermore, the development of EcoSense versions for different geographical regions in the context of life cycle analysis has continued.Uncertainty assessment was improved. On the methodology for the implementation of the precautionary principle has been reported.Within WP8 (linking external cost estimation with economic/energy/environmental modelling and life cycle analysis) the methodology of interfaces between external cost estimation and life cycle assessment as well as economic/energy/environmental modelling has been further developed. The work on consistency and interfaces was done in close collaboration with WP4 of RS Integration.

Deviations from workprogramme WP1: It has been found out that non-linearities with regard to regional modelling can not be described completely with the planned methodology. Alternative approaches will be developed instead.

WP2 ended in M24 but final report is due in M30. Work regarding implementation of findings, testing and development of a parameterized model for implementation in EcoSense Web is still ongoing .After preparation of the deliverable D2.1 the obligations of EPFL will be concluded. Therefore, USTUTT.TFU will be the WP leader.

WP3: The case study on indoor air pollution impacts was for demonstration purposes and to test the importance of combustion sources indoor, the topic gained a lot of interest and attention, e.g. from stakeholders. This required additional work to put the case study in perspective (in relation to population average exposures and to exposures from outdoor air pollution). An additional data search has been performed, but the data are incomplete, making it difficult to give a balanced conclusion. This work is still ongoing and will be included in the final deliverable D3.7 (M30).

18

Dissemination activities

Regarding WP1:Non refereed literature:J. E. Jonson, P. Wind, M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, O. A. Søvde, H. Klein, I. S. A. Isaksen and L. Tarrasón "First results from the hemispheric EMEP model and comparison with the global Oslo CTM2 model" EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/06, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway

Non refereed literature:J. E. Jonson, P. Wind, M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, O. A. Søvde, H. Klein, I. S. A. Isaksen and L. Tarrasón "First results from the hemispheric EMEP model and comparison with the global Oslo CTM2 model" EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/06, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway

Regarding WP2:PhD thesis:Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2006): CKow – A More Transparent and Reliable Model for Chemical Transfer to Meat and Milk. In Rosenbaum R (2006). Multimedia and Food Chain Modelling of Toxics for Comparative Risk and Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Section Science et Ingénierie de l'Environnement, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, 192 pp.Journal papers:Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2006): CKow – A More Transparent and Reliable Model for Chemical Transfer to Meat and Milk. in preparation.Conference presentations:Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2006): Reducing uncertainties in biotransfer modelling in meat and milk developing a new cow model, 16th annual meeting of SETAC Europe, The Hague, Netherlands, May 2006.

Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2005): Reducing uncertainties in biotransfer modeling in meat and milk, 26th annual meeting of SETAC North America, Baltimore, U.S., November 2005.

Rosenbaum R, Margni M, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2005): Advances in biotransfer modelling in meat and milk, 15th annual meeting of SETAC Europe, Lille, France, April 2005.

Regarding WP4:To disseminate the results, a 30-page summary of the WP4-research was turned into a journal article which was submitted to "Environmental and Resource Economics" in July 2006.The methodology as well as preliminary external cost findings were presented by the work package leader on the SETAC international annual conference in Den Haag (9 th of May 2006)

19

1.3.4 RS 1c Objectives & Achievements

RS 1c: New Externalities Associated to the Extraction and Transport of Energy

RS LEADER: OME

RESEARCH STREAM 1c PROGRESS

The objective of RS 1c is to assess the externalities associated with the extraction of oil and gas, as well as transport of oil, gas, electricity and other energy vectors such as hydrogen. These issues are analysed separately in a work package for each of the mentioned fuels. In addition, the Stream includes a workpackage on review and overall assessment of the results and their transferability, as well as on stream coordination.

During the first 24 months, most of the efforts have focused on the four first workpackages dealing with assessment of externalities of oil, gas, electricity and hydrogen. The methodology followed is the general impact pathway methodology with risk analysis assessing for each stage of the fuel cycle the activities, for each activity the burdens, for each burden the impact, and for each impact the economic valuation.

Work progressFor oil and gas (WP1 and WP2), a comprehensive supply flow scenario (for 2004, 2010, 2020, and 2030), on which the externality assessment will be based on, has been carried out. These scenarios include a supply-demand balance for Europe and supplier countries, along with import flows and routes to Europe. Present and future supply-demand balance assessments for oil (T1.1) and gas (T2.1) could not be finalised by the end of the first reporting period since the expected input from the RS2a concerning European oil and gas demand figures had not been obtained. In order not to have further delays, RS1c (in agreement with RS2a) made use of available EC studies and prepared three different scenarios (reference, high case and low case). These will be integrated into the model of RS2a and will allow (thanks to an interpolation approach) modellers a dynamic use of RS1c externality assessment results.

Consequently, the reports on future oil and gas flows and routes (T1.2 and T2.2) were also shaped around those three scenarios. This meant that instead of doing one set of supply-demand balance and corresponding flows and routes, we prepared three sets. The above mentioned technical reports have been finalised and submitted.

The technical report on the most critical passages of oil transport routes (T1.3) has also been finalised and submitted.

Report 1.4 (on the risk reduction potential due to new technology and regulations) has been delayed due to the necessity of further analysis of new EU regulations very recently implemented. The report will be available in M28.

Technical Report 1.6 (assessment of impact on the environment, health, economy and socio-economic activity), which was planned to be delivered in M33 (during the next

20

reporting period), has been split into two parts (one dealing with maritime oil transport, and the other with extraction and pipeline transport). The first part dealing with maritime oil transport (T1.6a) is finalised and has already been submitted (ahead of schedule).

Similarly, Technical Report 1.7 (Assessment of additional potential externalities due to accidents by risk analysis) has been divided into two parts. The first part (T1.7a) which describes the methodology is finalised and has already been submitted (ahead of schedule).

Report on burdens and impacts associated to natural gas transport (T2.3) is finished and has been submitted.

The work on electricity (WP3) is already in advanced stage. The combined reports of T3.1 and 3.2, as well as T3.3 are completed. T3.4 will be completed towards February 2007, which is after the planned date but which will allow more time for review and consistency with other WP’s of Needs.

The work for Hydrogen and other energy vectors (WP4) is well under way. First two reports T4.1 (present transport schemes) and T4.2 (future penetration of hydrogen as an energy carrier) were delivered during the first reporting period.

In the current reporting period, Technical Reports 4.3 (burdens associated to hydrogen transport) and 4.5 (externalities due to accidents in the hydrogen chain) have been finalised and submitted. Furthermore, an additional report, called T4.3 Addendum, on the simultaneous transmission of chemical and electric power over long distances using a superconducting cable, has also been provided.

The report on impacts (T4.4) is well advanced but will be integrated into a combined report with task T4.6. Hence a slight delay for T4.4 itself but on time as far as the final T4.6 is concerned. The combined T4.4 and T4.6 is due for M27.

In sum, so far, the work is well under way, and no significant delay or obstacle is expected for the overall completion of RS 1c.

Meetings held:- 10-11 October 2005, Brest, France: Work progress meeting with all partners for all

WPs (and with a special emphasis on WP1)- 30-31 January 2006, Milan, Italy: Work progress meeting with all partners and for all

WPs (and with a special emphasis on WP1). - 22-23 May 2006, Bergen, Norway: Work progress meeting for all WPs and with all partners

21

Dissemination Activities

So far the following dissemination activities that reference to NEEDS by the RS1c participants have been undertaken:

25.01.05 – Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE): Presentation to stakeholder about Needs methodology and relevance for NVE. (SWECO)

08.04.2005 - Statkraft Norfund Power Invest (SN Power): SN Power (Statkraft Norfund Power Invest AS), is a Norwegian limited company owned by Statkraft SF and Norfund (Norwegian Investment Fund for Developing Countries). SN Power seeks profitable development of greenfield projects and acquisition / upgrading of existing assets in developing countries in cooperation with local communities. Presentation to the management team about Needs methodology and relevance for SN Power activities. (SWECO)

02.05.2005 – Statkraft: Statkraft Group is the largest Norwegian and the third largest producer of power in the Nordic region, as well as the second largest producer of power based on renewable energy sources in Europe. Presentation for management team in Statkraft about Needs methodology and its relevance to Statkraft. (SWECO)

21.06.2005 – Norwegian Research Council: Presentation of the Needs project, including description of work, aim, methodology, potential results, workshops and project structure to the board of directors in the research programme RENERGI (English: Clean energy programme). (SWECO)

21.09.2005 - Shell Technology Norway (STN): STN is a subsidiary of A/S Norwegian Shell, which has been established to develop technology within fields where Norwegian industry and Norwegian research environments have a leading position. Presentation for researchers in SNT about the Needs methodology and potential co-operation particularly relating development of LCA analysis. (SWECO)

28.10.2005 – Statnett: Statnett co-ordinates supply and demand, and own large sections of the main Norwegian power grid. Presentation for Statkraft stakeholders about Needs methodology and its relevance for Statnett. (SWECO)

World Hydrogen Technology Convention - WHTC 2005 - October 2005, Singapore: The paper makes direct reference to the NEEDS project and is derived from the work done in Deliverable 4.1. It was included in the proceedings of the Conference. (POLITO)

Bigano, A. and Sheehan, P (2006). Assessing the Risk of Oil Spills in the Mediterranean: the Case of the Route from the Black Sea to Italy Fondazione Eni E. Mattei Working Papers n. 32.06, Milan, Italy. (FEEM)

22

OME has written small articles about the NEEDS project and in particular RS1c and its advancements in the OME Newsletters of October 2004, January 2005, July 2005, November 2005, June 2006, and October 2006. The OME Newsletter is printed quarterly with a wide diffusion (1500 copies) targeting the Euro-Mediterranean energy community.

OME has repeatedly presented the NEEDS activities on the occasion of the OME General Assembly meetings (gathering twice a year some 30 leading energy companies in the Euro-Mediterranean region and represented mostly at the CEO level), as well as at the OME “hydrocarbons” committee, “electricity” committee, and “renewable energy and sustainable energy” committee (these committees are formed by high level specialists of the energy industry in the Euro-Mediterranean region).

OME’s activities in NEEDS is also thoroughly presented in the OME 2005 Annual Report.

1.3.5 RS 1d Objectives & Achievements

RS 1d - Extension of geographical coverage

RS LEADER: CUEC

RESEARCH STREAM 1d PROGRESS

ObjectivesThis research stream mainly aims at bringing additional countries up to par with those for which the current state of knowledge on energy externalities is more advanced, primarily as the result of the ExternE work. Two main groups of countries will be targeted: 1) newly associated countries and other Central and Eastern European countries (NAC): Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovak Republic, and 2) Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries, namely Egypt, Morocco, and Tunisia. The general idea is that externality calculations will be performed on a country-specific base for the following fuels and technologies: i) combustible fuels, wood and if relevant a mixture of these energy carriers, ii) cogenerations in Central Europe will be focused in particular, iii) nuclear energy will be assessed, and iv) relevant type of renewable energy will be assessed at least in one partner country mainly by applying the ExternE methodological body of knowledge, including, as and when possible, advancements developed within the previous streams.

Main progress and actionsWith aim to keep collaboration of partners vivid before the stream will start in month 19 of IP NEEDS, the partners – mostly on their own costs – were wished to attended workshop related with the ExternE method and/or externality estimation. For that reason, a workshop on “EcoSense and RiskPoll tools for estimating external costs:

23

demonstration and explanation” that followed up MAXIMA workshop on “External costs of electricity production: dialogue on estimation in new EU member states” was organised in Krakow, March 1st, 2005. Six RS1d partners attended for events: AEKI, CUEC, MEERI, PROFING, SEI, USTUTT.TFU; while EPT-LEGI prepared and circulated a presentation. Vivid collaboration was also supported by several bilateral meetings of PROFING and CUEC. The description of work, objectives, time plan, deliverables, interlinkages between WPs and expected problems in WP 1 were discussed on kick-off meeting in Prague 23rd

March, 2006. Basics of the ExternE method and software tools was presented and discussed at the 1st RS1d partners’ workshop (Prague, March 24th, 2006). The main materials on ExternE methodology and its applications were distributed among the partners; the older ExternE volumes have been scanned ad put freely on the ExternE website.Data requirements and its specification were discussed at the 1st Workshop and a draft template for environmental data collection was developed based on previous experience with the EcoSense model. Data requirement for reference technologies dataset were presented by CUEC and USTUTT.TFU at the 1st workshop. National data availability for reference energy technologies has started to be checked by several partners; data collection can, however, start after the case study will be specified during the third year. A special attention was paid for possible methods for emission allocation of heat and energy generation and impact assessment of nuclear power. External costs for Polish, Slovakian and Czech reference technologies were recalculated by revised EcoSense version 4.0.

DeliverablesThere is only one deliverable finished – according to the DoW: Workshop on “Basics of the ExternE methodology and its application“ that was held in Prague (March 2006) after the kick-off meeting. Next deliverables are due after the second year of the IP NEEDS.

DeviationsDue to the delay in a payment transferred particularly to MPC partners (these partners have not received any payment from the European Commission up to the end of the second year of the project; the others received their first payment in the end of month 24), relevant work couldn’t be worked out in sufficient scope and depth. Because this reason and following standard rules applied in partners’ institutions, the MPC partners also cannot attend the second project meeting and workshop held in Nessebur (Bulgaria). Therefore the additional project meeting need will have to be organized in November (likely in Prague). The final version of the country reports and the Final Summary Report can be thus finalized after this additional meeting and will be due to the end of December 2006 (3 month after the original deadline). Similarly, the case studies can be identified later as it has been planned. This deviation in the stream time-plan will not, however, have any negative effect on overall time-plan of stream’s activities.


Peer reviewed articles:

24

Kudelko M., ExternE methodology for external costs assessment of energy producers (in Polish), The Scholl of Economics and Management in Coal Industry, University of Science and Technology in Krakow Publisher, Krakow, September 2006.

Presentations at conferences, workshops, seminars MelicharJ., Havránek, M., Cremenescu, N.: External costs of energy production: applying ExternE methodology in the New Member States and Romania; The Centre for Sustainable Energy, Transilvania, Presented at the Conference on Sustainable Energy, 7-8 July2005, Brasov, Romania.Melichar, J.: External costs induced by energy production: applying ExternE methodology in the New Member States and in Countries in Accession - Romanian case; Romanian Energy Regulatory Office, Presented at the Seminar of Romanian Energy Regulatory Office, 13 October 2005, Sinaia, Romania.Ščasný, M., Quantification of external costs from electiricity and heat production in the Czech Republic and their internalization; Seminar on Economic instruments in environmental regulation – German experiences in ecologic tax reform; Freie Universität Berlin Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik, CUEC, 6 March 2006, Prague, Czech Republic.Melichar, J., Calculation of external costs - the case of the Czech energy production; University of Economics, Prague, The Czech Republic. Presented at the Conference on political economy. 22 April 2006, Prague, Czech Republic.Ščasný, M., Melichar, J., Havránek, M., Assessment of external costs by ExternE methodology; Discussion Fora on “Ecologic Tax Reform: a right step? 11 May 2006, Liberální institute, Prague, Czech Republic.Ščasný, M., Melichar, J., Ecological tax reform, externalities and energy sector; Seminar on Ecologic Tax Reform and its effects on coal and energy sector. 25 May 2006, VUHU, Most, Czech RepublicMelichar, J., External costs from energy production in the Central and Eastern European countries; European Business Council for Sustainable Energy, E-turn21 Conference series - Challenges, perspectives and obstacles of the European energy sector, 8 June 2006, Brno, Czech Republic.

Other productsThe ExternE method was also presented by the stream leader in Romania in order to expand the ExternE knowledge more widely. CUEC also calculate the external costs for overall 20 reference technologies operated in Romania by using actual version of EcoSense version 4.0 in order to illustrate its typical results. The results were discussed at the Romanian Energy Regulatory Authority, Sinaia (October 10-14, 2005) with participation of representatives from Romanian Ministry of the Environment and further presented at the Conference on Sustainable Energy in Brasov, Romania, 7-9 July 2005. Although Romanian partner (RERA) expressed its strong interest to use the ExternE methodology and be actively involved in IP NEEDS activities, its budget constraints do not allow it to fulfil its interest. Participation of Romanian partner in this stream is however welcome.

Energy taxes proposed to be introduced within a revenue-neutral Environmental Tax Reform were designed by the Czech Ministry of the Environment on the base of the Czech results on relevant external costs had being calculated within NEEDS.

25


RS 2a Energy systems modelling and internalisation strategies, including scenarios building

RS LEADER: IMAA - CNR


Overall objectiveThe RS 2a work is aimed to generate via The Integrated MARKAL- EFOM System (TIMES) partial equilibrium, technology rich, energy-environment models of 28 EU countries and of the EU as a whole (Pan-European model), including the most important emissions, materials, and damage functions produced by LCA and ExternE, in the long term development of their energy systems. These energy-environment models will allow the user to obtain a country specific, an EU, and a worldwide perspective. Some key environmental data will be obtained from the other Research Streams. Stream RS 2a will in turn provide the other streams with equilibrium quantities and prices for the achievement of environmental protection and economic development targets and for the identification of the most robust technological options and prioritised developments for the promising ones taking into account their performance under economic and environmental criteria (jointly with RS2b).

The main issues for the second year of the project were concerned with the construction and implementation of the basic country models, testing their consistency in the reference scenario (Business as Usual – BAU), the finalization of the common database of technologies and the definition of the Pan European model design and interfaces.

The main detailed objectives for the reporting period were the following: Characterisation of the reference technologies Implementation of the country specific models Definition of the optimal configuration relatively to energy vectors, technologies

and emissions pathways for various scenarios Definition of the equilibrium prices of commodities Identification of Pan – EU trading variables, parameters and values of the

trading conditions between the countries Identification of ExternE/LCA parameters which will be integrated in the Pan

European Model Extension of spreadsheet interfaces to accommodate the Pan-European model

trading variables; Implementation of finalized VEDA-FE and BE interfaces for the management of

the models and the results; Implementation of the Pan European model Definition of the context parameters of reference and alternative scenarios

State of art and Progress achievedState of the artWP1:

26

The first year was by far the most active year for the development of the tools and interfaces, as witnessed by the large amount of completed work as of August 2005. At the start of the second year, the essential tools for acquiring the basic data and for constructing the 28 country models were all available in a first working version. These tools are:

- The TIMES model equations and GAMS code- The common Reference Energy System for all country models, describing the

structure of each country energy model (commodities, and their interrelationships)

- The common data sources to be used for the country models- The Excel templates, used to describe in a uniform fashion the energy

characteristics of a country model in the initial period- The first version of VEDA-FE, a front-end interface for creating, organising, and

managing each country model- A first version of the technology repository, containing the techno-economic

data on new technologies

WP2:A list of reference technologies was established and approved by the entire stream, as well as the characterisation of technologies. As concerns the definition of scenario parameters, a draft of a first scenario hypotheses was presented and discussed at the Maratea meeting (and during the RS 3b Policy Workshop). This included a reference scenario based on a business as usual assumptions and some policy cases that could be of interest to the stakeholders. A number of possible scenario variant cases had been outlined. Formally this task is a part of RS 2a but it is the responsibility of the entire project. As concerns the modelling activities (training in use of the packages and implementation of the basic country models) at the starting point, the modellers were trained to use the software packages and most of them were filling in the basic country templates and beginning the calibration to the base year.

WP3:At the starting date (February 2006), test runs and calibration of country models were in progress and a first document describing the structure of the Pan-European trade variables and trade structure for RPPs was circulated.

WP5:Training activities were conducted throughout the entire 12-month period to install and update the software, experimenting with basic and advanced functions of VEDA-FE and VEDA-BE. A comprehensive documentation on the Templates and interfaces, as well as a first report on Integration of ExternE, LCA and MARKAL/TIMES have been also released (all documentation and the workshop proceedings are available on the NEEDS website). Progress achievedWP1 The country templates were essentially completed and released in year 1, but further modifications were made by KANLO in the second year, to facilitate work of the country modellers, and to adapt to special data issues arising in some countries. In addition, the technology repository (subRES) was finalised after many discussions with

27

country teams, in particular ECN, POLITO, and KUL. The format of the repository was adapted to accept the forthcoming LCA and external cost data from other streams, in coordination with WP4 of RS Integration.A large number of changes were made by KANLO to the VEDA-FE interface (a first version of which had been completed during the first year) in order to facilitate data and scenario handling, as well as the construction of demand projections. In addition, the VEDA-BE interface for exploiting results was slightly changed. Most changes were triggered by interactions with the country modellers members of WP2.

The TIMES model generator underwent several improvements to include the “Damage Functions” and to fix the minor bugs found by the modellers. The model generator’s improvements were made by VTT on behalf of ETSAP and no part of NEEDS budget was spent for the actual implementation work, as only the designs and requests for improvements had to be made and coordinated among the NEEDS partners.

The trade structure and the trade variables adopted for the Pan European Model were defined as extensively illustrated in Technical Paper T 1.6, which describes also the new tools designed to handle these variables. The elaboration of the trade variables was made by KANLO in consultation with KUL, USTUTT, PSI, and IMAA. The tool for creating, managing, and modifying the structure and data of the trade variables is fully integrated in VEDA-FE, as well as the new Trade Scenario functionality.

WP2:The characterisation of the listed technologies covered a number of aspects concerned with the performance and cost of the different technologies, and has been carried out by some of the groups involved in stream 2.2. The list of technologies preliminary defined and approved in task 2.1 was used as the basis for the characterisation. The work was divided into the sectors Heat and power supply, Industry, Residential, Commercial and Transport. Later Upstream technologies were added. The data collection was based on a data format template proposed by ECN (the 2.2 task coordinator). This template contains information as capacity, activity, economic lifetime, start year, process output and input, availability, efficiency, total investment cost, fixed and variable O&M costs and emissions. As concerns the definition of the context parameters of reference and alternative scenarios, the DGTREN baseline scenario of 2005 is chosen as background reference and four key issues were selected for policy analysis: a post-Kyoto scenario; the application of policies on the penetration of renewable; a constraint to maximise the use of endogenous resources in EU; the internalisation of local and global externalities. An internal paper was circulated among partners and scenarios, firstly presented at RS2a workshop in month 13 were further discussed at the RS2a workshop in month 18. The list of scenarios was sent to coordinator for circulation among stakeholders and presented at a policy workshop in month 19. However this task is under responsibility of the entire project.As concerns the implementation of the country models, after reproducing the existing detailed energy balances of the base year, the activities were devoted to the implementation of the reference scenario hypothesis, taking into account country specific data and constraints. Business as usual analysis for the country models has been carried out and is being finalised by the end of month 28, taking into account the

28

minimum data requirements of the Pan – European model.Two or three day training sessions were conducted at each RS2a meeting (Maratea, Athens, Gothenburg) and special regional sessions were held as well (Stockholm, Turin) to allow the modellers to be trained on use of the new features of VEDA FE and their application in practice and to support the less experienced teams.

WP3The different country models were linked together to implement the Pan-European model. Preliminary test runs without trades were carried out. After the definition of the trade links variables and Pan EU spreadsheet interfaces (developed jointly with task 1.6 of WP1 with the technical support of KANLO), the linkage was tested in subsequent test runs.

WP5Accordingly to the development of WP2 activities, additional technical session were held at the RS2a Workshops, to support the modellers in country models implementation and to train in use the new VEDA FE and BE features. The RS2a modelling activities are witnessed by the deliverables D 5.14 “ National Reports” and D5.15 “ Analytical overview of RS2a”

Deviations As concerns the general status of implementation of the 18- month time plan, a number of minor delays which in turn have caused other minor delays. In particular, the necessary work and time involved in the completion of task 2.2 and data harmonisation with the preliminary subRES were much underestimated. Other problems were caused also by the unreliability of Eurostat energy balances, that affected the calibration of country models, with particular regards to CHP modelling for most of the countriesAlthough these problems, the main expected results were achieved and there were no major overall time schedule changes.

Synthesis of the achieved results Definition of Pan – EU trading variables (with reference also to ExternE/LCA

parameters) parameters and values of the trading conditions between the countries

Implementation of finalized VEDA-FE and BE interfaces; Updated version of the TIMES model generator Definition of the context parameters of reference and alternative scenarios at Pan

EU level Common reference technologies database Country specific energy models Optimised configuration of the country specific energy systems in the BAU

scenario (equilibrium prices of commodities, energy vectors (in particular, oil and gas) demands by each country, technologies and emissions pathways)

A short report and a set of preliminary result sheets for the BAU scenario for each modelled country.

Implementation of the Pan European model


29

ETSAP Semi-Annual Workshop and 25th International Energy Workshop (Cape Town, South Africa, June 27 - July 1, 2006)The latest ETSAP Semi-Annual Workshop was held in Cape Town (South Africa) from June 27 - July 1, 2006, jointly with the 25th International Energy Workshop, organized by IIASA, EMF (Stanford), the IEA and the Energy Research Centre of the University of Cape Town. The International Energy Workshop (IEW) is an informal network of analysts concerned with international energy issues. Its main goals are to compare energy projections and to understand the reasons for diverging views of future developments. Topics of current interest are discussed at annual meetings attended by individuals involved in the wide field of energy. The ETSAP workshop was addressed to explore venues open to its experts that could be help to achieve the objectives outlined in the G8 Leaders, July 2005 Communiqué (The Gleneagles Communiqué at http://www.iea.org/G8/index.htm) and to present an update of the MARKAL – TIMES modelling activities as well as the recent ETSAP tools enhancements. In this framework the modelling activities concerning the NEEDS TIMES model were presented. For further information:http://www.etsap.org/index.asphttp://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ECS/IEW2006/index.htmlGianCarlo Tosato: [email protected]

International Conference on Environmental Economics 2006The RS2a activities were presented in the framework of the First International Conference on Environmental Economics and Investment Assessment that was held in Mykonos, Greece from 13 to 15 September 2006. This Conference, organised by the Wessex Institute of Technology, UK and the National Technical University of Athens - Department of Mechanical Engineering, Greece, addressed the topics of Investment Assessment and Environmental Economics in an integrated way, in accordance with the principles of sustainability, considering social and environmental impacts of new investments. In particular it is aimed to help developing a sound methodological framework on these problems, considering the fundamental issues of sustainability. For further information http://www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2006/economics06/index.html

Workshop on “Integrated Modeling of Environment and Energy Policy” (January 2007, Lisbon)The Workshop II: Integrated Modeling of Energy and Environment Policy will take place in Lisbon, Portugal on January 24 (tentative date). This workshop, organized by the Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, New University of Lisbon (FCT-UNL), is the second workshop within the Portuguese funded research project E2POL (http://air.dcea.fct.unl.pt/projects/e2pol/). E2POL’s main objective is to use the TIMES model to quantify synergies and antagonisms between energy and environment policy instruments, using the Portuguese electricity system as a case-study.The objectives of this workshop are two fold: to present the implementation of the TIMES energy model for Portugal, and to illustrate how similar models are relevant for

30

http://www.wessex.ac.uk/conferences/2006/economics06/index.html


http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ECS/IEW2006/index.html

http://www.iea.org/G8/index.htm

EU policy development. The participation is restricted to invited national energy and environment stakeholders from public administration, academia energy companies, and industry. For further information: Sofia Simões: [email protected]

Published papers:C. Cosmi, M. Blesl, A. Kanudia, S. Kypreos, R, Loulou, K. Smekens, M. Salvia, D. Van Regemorter and V. Cuomo “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for supporting EU policies” In “Environmental Economics 2006”, WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment Vol. 95 (ISSN 1743-3541). Eds. C.A. Brebbia, WIT Press Southampton (UK) and Boston (USA), 2006


RS 2b: Energy Technology Roadmap and Stakeholder Perspectives

RS LEADER: Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI)

RESEARCH STREAM 2B PROGRESS

General objective:

The central objective of this Research Stream is to broaden the basis for decision support beyond the assessment of external costs and to extend the integration of the central analytical results generated by other Research Streams. The ultimate results of the technology roadmap will include mapping the sensitivity of sustainability performance of technological options to stakeholder preference profiles. Furthermore, within this stream stakeholder acceptance of the external cost concept, results and uses is examined.

Objectives for the reporting period:

Examination of the candidate set of social criteria and indicators Establishment of a preliminary full set of criteria and indicators covering the three

dimensions of sustainability, i.e. economy, environment and society Initiation of indicator quantification tasks Definition of requirements and selection of suitable method(s) and tool(s) for multi-

criteria decision analysis (MCDA) Case-study based exploration of the acceptability of monetary valuation methods and

their potential role in the energy policy making process Preparation of Survey 1 on externalities and stakeholder database development.

Progress achieved:

Examination of the candidate set of social criteria and indicators. Based on responses to a questionnaire obtained from 52 European experts and stakeholders, and on a Delphi workshop with 11 contributors, the initial set of criteria and indicators was re-examined. These exercises confirmed that the scope and content of the set are fully relevant. Furthermore, some prioritisation was made indicating the possibilities for reducing the

31


set. On this basis recommendations for further use of social criteria and indicators were formulated.

Establishment of a preliminary full set of criteria and indicators. A preliminary full set of criteria and indicators, covering economy, environment and social aspects was proposed. Practical constraints were taken into account, including prospects for successful quantification in view of expected inputs from other streams and from relevant WPs within RS2b. The proposed set was reviewed within the stream and by other streams. This resulted in a number of modifications.

Initiation of indicator quantification tasks. Most quantification tasks are in the initial phase but some are more advanced. For economic indicators the focus has been on the examination of proposed indicators and establishment of contacts with relevant WPs in streams 1a and 2a. For environmental indicators the feasibility of country-specific adjustments of generic LCA-indicators to be generated within RS1a was addressed and elaborated; such adjustments are considered achievable. The ENSAD database on severe accidents, to be used for risk evaluations, was reviewed. The scope and content of the planned updates and extensions was defined. This will include integration of some additional databases. The analysis framework for simplified Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) that will be used for the assessment of nuclear risks was defined. Extensive internet and literature searches were made for social indicators demonstrating the very limited availability of relevant data. Thus, most of the social indicators must be measured by conducting expert interviews. A preliminary selection of experts has been made and the methodology to be used in interviews has been chosen.

Definition of requirements and selection of suitable method(s) and tool(s) for multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). The requirement analysis provides a detailed specification of the problem in terms of the analytical context, discussion of relevant features of the set of criteria and technological alternatives, and addresses the participation of stakeholders. This is supplemented by the discussion of the planned problem analysis process, leading to the specification of requirements for multicriteria analysis. An extensive review of candidate methods for MCDA was carried out taking into account the requirements. Although many methods for analysis of discrete sets of alternatives exist, none of them is perfectly suited for analysis of the problem in RS2b. Thus, the decision was made to develop a consistent methodology for the whole multicriteria analysis process. The methodology has already been specified but some further research is necessary. Due to uncertainties involved in such a development process the possibility of using an existing method in parallel or as an alternative has been kept open.

Case-study based exploration of the acceptability of monetary valuation methods and their potential role in the energy policy making process. Additional interviews were made with US and UK industry representatives. The report shows quite a large variation between the countries considered in the uses of externality valuation in the policy. The existence of official requirements to consider full costs and benefits of proposed regulations and/or official guidelines appears to be crucial to explain this pattern. Furthermore, the uses of monetary valuation of externalities and cost benefit analysis are more extensive in other areas (e.g. transport, water policy) than in the energy sector. This is due to credibility and uncertainty issues associated with quantification of some energy-specific burdens or impacts such as nuclear wastes and climate change. Simple models were also developed to contrast two ways of collecting information on environmental externalities: monetary valuation methods and discussions with green lobby groups (informational lobbying). This economic analysis shows that communication with green lobbies tends to be more efficient when the divergence of interests between the green group and the regulator is limited.

32

Preparation of Survey 1 on externalities and stakeholder database development. A draft of a survey questionnaire on the externality concept, results and uses has been prepared and intensely discussed. A stakeholder database has been established. Further extensions are desirable, in particular for France, Germany and Italy, in order to enable elicitation of inputs relevant for MCDA. The corresponding stakeholder database has been adequately established for Switzerland.

Deviations from work programme

All three deliverables planned for the second period were made available, one on time (D14.1), one with a delay of two months (D2.3) and one with a delay of five months (D11.1). As intended, five technical reports were generated (T6.1, T9.1, T9.2, T12.1 and T12.2). They were all delivered either on time or with quite small delays; as intended some are preliminary and require further elaboration (T6.1, T12.1 and T12.2). Among eight milestones seven were reached either on time or with small delays while one had to be postponed due to later than expected availability of necessary information from other streams. Due to logistic reasons the formulation of the second stakeholder survey had to be postponed to the next period (this can be done only when the report on the full set of criteria and indicators becomes available; the report is planned for month 27).

Suitable adjustments were made in planning of the next 18 months period and the few delays are not considered to constitute a problem for the timely achievement of stream objectives.

Two major scope deviations are noted. First, the MCDA method/tool selection task concluded that it is desirable to develop a method tailored for the needs of RS2b. This development will be attempted in RS2b WP10 in the next period. Some limited budget shifts are planned for this purpose. As a matter of precaution the option of using a standard method has been kept open. Second, the intended application of MCDA to four countries calls for suitable adaptations of generic LCA indicators that will be delivered by RS1a. These adaptations will be carried within RS2b WP6, an effort that was not originally planned.

Dissemination activities by RS2b Stream Leader S. Hirschberg (PSI):

The Integrated Project “NEEDS – New Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability”, Invited Talk, EU Conference on Safety and Security of Energy Infrastructures in a Comparative View, Brussels, Belgium, 14-16 November 2005 (presentation made by S. Hirschberg on behalf of A. Ricci and S. Faberi, ISIS).

Hirschberg S., "External Cost Assessment: Methodology, Recent results and Issues", Seminar, University of Zurich, 10 April 2006 (included extensive information about NEEDS).

Hirschberg S., "Energy Systems Analysis at the Paul Scherrer Institut", Seminar for Nordschweizerische Kraftwerke, Baden, 21 April 2006 (included extensive information about NEEDS).

Informed about NEEDS activities at Generation IV International Forum, Experts Group Meeting, Villigen, 7-8 June 2006.

Dissemination activities by other RS2b participants:

Brukmajster, D./ Hampel, J. “NEEDS: New energy externalities development for sustainability. In: Newsletter of the University of Stuttgart: ZIRN&DIALOGIK, Vol.2

33

October 2006.

Hélène Connor, Robert Gould, Rod Janssen, & Christophe Rynikiewicz, HELIO International, “New governance imperatives for energy planning in liberalised European markets?”, Eceee 2005 Summer Study “Energy Savings: What Works & Who Delivers?”, Mandelieu, Côte d'Azur, France, 30 May-4 June 2005, September 2006.

Hélène Connor, The CUB (Citizen Utility Board): North American experience. “Towards a European experimentation? Towards European energy awareness”, 3rd Eden International Conference on Energy Awareness & Innovation, Agora Einstein, Sophia Antipolis, 12 & 13 October 2006.

J. Granat, M. Makowski, A. Wierzbicki, Hierarchical reference approach to multi-criteria analysis of discrete alternatives, presented at: CSM'06: 20th Workshop on Methodologies and Tools for Complex System Modeling and Integrated Policy Assessment, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, 28-30 August 2006.


RS 3a: Transferability and generalisation RS LEADER: SWECO Grøner AS


The overall objective of Research Stream 3a is to develop a simple way of calculating, transferring and present the uncertainty of default values for average/aggregate external costs, that can be used for energy modelling, assessing different technologies and energy systems, LCA (especially for renewable energy characterised by direct aesthetic and ecosystem/biodiversity impacts), cost-benefit analyses, green accounting and other policy advice. Full energy chains need to be considered in line with the scope of external cost assessment.

Work progress: The stream started in month 19 and SWECO organised a stream 3a kick-off meeting for more detailed work plans for each work package and to plan interactions between partners. There have not been any technical reports or deliverables for RS3a for this period, and the main work load will be during the two last working periods. The Kick-off meeting was organizes in Lillehammer in Norway 9 – 10 March 2006, and representatives for all RS3a partners, except ARMINES and AUTH attended. The meeting had the following main achievements: i) Agree on a more detailed definition of the WPs, time schedule, distribution of tasks, and how WPs can be planned to support and compliment each other in the best possible way and; ii) Defined the inputs from other RSs of use for RS3a and iii) Defined in more detail the outputs from RS3a to other RSs Most of the stream progress have been related to planning and preparation, as the stream depends on input from other parts of the project and will have deliverables late in the project progress. However, some work in WP1 – Generalisation model, has been performed (described in detail under the work progress report for this WP). The WP has worked on Model Preparation, Methodology and Calculations for Toxic substances in Air, Water and Soil / Effect modelling, Moreover, work regarding development of recommendations to account for non-linearity and based on model runs with the EMEP model and the relation between marginal damage and the total emissions

34

of pollutants is parameterised. The WP has also worked on Methodology and Calculations: Regional and Local Air Quality, Requirements for Policy. WP2 - Value Transfer Technique, has worked on developing valid transfer units and procedures, which can be applied in cost-benefit analysis, green accounting, energy modelling and assessment of energy technologies. A more detailed list of milestones and time scheme have been planned, and the WP has carried out a review of the most commonly used methods for benefit transfer procedures; unit value transfer (with or without income adjustment), Function transfer and Meta analysis. WP3, WP4 and WP5 have mainly had planning activities relating to the kick off meeting in addition to identifying main input/output to the WPs respectively. WP6 – stream co-ordination has been involved in identifying input and cooperation necessary between WPs and streams, and a list of connections and required co-operations was distributed within the stream after the Lillehammer Kick-off meeting. Due to kick-off meeting and revision of the DoW, WP6 has had its main work load related to planning and reporting tasks for the stream.


As the stream has just started, and no deliverables or technical reports have been written, there has not been any Peer reviewed articles or refereed literature so far. However, SWECO has performed presentations at conferences, and seminars in the following forums: 28.10.2005 – Statnett Statnett co-ordinates supply and demand, and own large sections of the main Norwegian power grid. Presentation for Statkraft stakeholders about Needs methodology and its relevance for Statnett. 25.01.05 – Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) Presentation to stakeholder about Needs methodology and relevance for NVE 08.04.2005 - Statkraft Norfund Power Invest (SN Power) SN Power (Statkraft Norfund Power Invest AS), is a Norwegian limited company owned by Statkraft SF and Norfund (Norwegian Investment Fund for Developing Countries). SN Power seeks profitable development of greenfield projects and acquisition / upgrading of existing assets in developing countries in cooperation with local communities. Presentation to the management team about Needs methodology and relevance for SN Power activities. 02.05.2005 – Statkraft With a total power production of 42 TWh, the Statkraft Group is the larges Norwegian and the third largest producer of power in the Nordic region, as well as the second largest producer of power based on renewable energy sources in Europe. The group has 2,000 employees. Presentation for management team in Statkraft about Needs methodology and its relevance to Statkraft. 21.06.2005 – Norwegian Research Council Presentation of the Needs project, including description of work, aim, methodology, potential results, workshops and project structure to the board of directors in the research programme RENERGI (English: Clean energy programme) 21.09.2005 - Shell Technology Norway (STN) STN is a subsidiary of A/S Norwegian Shell, which has been established to develop technology within fields where Norwegian industry and Norwegian research

35

environments have a leading position. STN seeks within the frameworks of sustainable development to focus on research and development in subsea oil and gas production brought to shore, deepwater technology and renewable energy. Presentation for researchers in SNT about the Needs methodology and potential co-operation particularly relating development of LCA analysis.


RS 3b - Dissemination and Communication

RS LEADER: ISIS

RESEARCH STREAM 3b PROGRESS

According to the recommendations raised by the project external reviewers in their Annual Review Report for the 1st year, the RS3b has been restructured and activities reorganized. ISIS took over the leadership of the RS. The recommendations from the reviewers have been taken as the main objectives of the second period: Develop a public web-site proportionate to the importance of the project and its

function of public utility Identify key users of the project products and engage with them Define scenarios and a precise policy case, based upon preoccupations of the policy

community, through which to demonstrate the main mechanisms and the utility of the product.

Based upon that “demonstration case” organise engagement and reflection with the policy community in the European institutions and in member states

Accordingly, the new communication strategy has been based on the following streamlines: Identification of a “Community of Users”, i.e. the main target groups the

project will address in its dissemination and communication activities (T6.2 Mailing lists).

Establishment of a restricted “Policy Advisory Group”, which would form a continuous bridge between the internal project activities and the external world.

Reduction of the original number of planned Fora from 6 to 4.

Replacement of two of the original planned Fora by 3 Policy workshops, in which the most sensitive and relevant policy topics elaborated by the project would be presented and discussed.

36

The new NEEDS events planning was established as follows:

Policy workshop 1 (Brussels – Early spring 2006)Modelling scenarios and related policy issues

Policy workshop 2 (Ljubljana - December 2006)Public acceptability and stakeholders preferences for what concerns the impact of the internalisation of the energy production external costs

NEEDS Forum 2 (Krakow - June 2007)Energy supply security – present and future issues

NEEDS Forum 3 (Cairo - November 2007)Externalities and Mediterranean Countries

Policy workshop 3 (Zürich or other European city - March 2008)Contents to be decided

NEEDS Forum 4 (Brussels - June/July 2008)Final Dissemination Conference

In accordance with this new plan the Stream has been structured in 6 WPs as follow: WP1: NEEDS Forum one. The WP has been completed the past year WP2: Policy workshops organisation. This WP substitutes the former WP 2

(second forum) and WP 3 (third forum) and has the objective to organise the three policy workshops foreseen in the dissemination plan. The first Policy Workshop has been held during the second reporting period. The WP is leaded by ISIS in collaboration with the partners of the former WPs 2 and 3: JIS, STEM-UA, ETHZ and CIRED.

WP3: NEEDS Forum two – “Energy Supply Security – Present and Future Issue”. This WP is the former WP 5 and keeps the same aims and contents. WP leader: AGH.

WP4: NEEDS Forum three: “The role of externalities and Kyoto mechanisms to achieve a sustainable development energy scenario in the Mediterranean Partner countries”. This WP is the former WP 4 and also in this case aims and contents are not changed. WP leader: OME

WP5: NEEDS Final Dissemination Conference. This WP is the former WP 6 and maintains the same format and contents. WP leader: ISIS

WP6: “Internal and external project communication structures and dissemination of results from project streams”. The format, aims and contents of this WP are the same of the former WP 7. WP leader ISIS

Dissemination ActivitiesPer definition, the overall work undertaken within the present Stream has to be considered as ‘Dissemination activity’

37

2 SECTION 2 – Research Streams progress of the period (M13-24)

2.1 RS Integration

2.1.1 Workpackages Progress


WP N° 1 – Inception Report WP LEADER - ISIS

Start Month: 1 End Month: 4

Finalised M4


WP N° 2 - Integrated interface management

WP LEADER: DLR/USTUTT.TFU

Start Month: 2 End Month: 36OBJECTIVES:To continuously validate, and to progressively contribute to the further specification of the detailed nature and operation of interlinkages between streams and activities, and to concretely ensure that they are adequately implemented.The objective of the second reporting period (months 12-24), was as follows:

Review and update of Input/Output tables representing the flow of information between all RSs

Further specification of interfaces between Research Streams.PROGRESSTwo meetings related to RS In WP2 took place:

- Integration Stream meeting, Brussels, 27 October 2005, with a dedicated WP2 session, and

- Integration Stream meeting, Prague, 19-20 June 2006, with a dedicated WP2 session

The Input/Output tables representing the flow of information between research streams has been continuously reviewed and updated following the work progress in the individual Research Streams. Potential critical pathways with respect to timing were identified, and the transfer of data between Streams has been harmonised.

DEVIATIONS none

39

PARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

CUEC Participation in meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4

DLR Participation in the meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; drafting of technical papers; cooperation with WP4

IMAA-CNR Participation in meetings; active participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4

ISIS Participation in the meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4

OME Participation in meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4

PSI Participation in meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4

SWECO Participation in meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4

USTUTT.TFU Participation in the meetings; participation in the discussion and review process; cooperation with WP4


WP N° 3 – Detailed DoW for further IP phases

WP LEADER - ISIS

Start Month: 10 End Month: 36OBJECTIVESThe objective is to assess the state of development of the workplan towards the end of the second period and produce a revised detailed workplan for the third period (M 25-42)

PROGRESSThe workprogramme for the third period (M25-42) has been produced on the basis of the progress achieved in the first and second year of the project (M1-24), and on the feedback of the first Annual project Review.

40

The objectives, timing, expected outputs, roles and responsibilities have been described in detail together with a full list of deliverables, technical papers and detailed resource allocation per WP.

DEVIATIONS none

PARTNERS CONTRIBUTIONCUEC Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream levelDLR Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream levelIMAA-CNR Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream levelISIS Drafting of D3.2 & D3.3; coordination of

partners; review of partners contributionsOME Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream levelPSI Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream levelSWECO Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream levelUSTUTT.TFU Active contribution to drafting of D3.3;

coordination of partners inputs at Stream level


WP N°4 – Harmonisation of models and methodologies

WP LEADER: KANLO

Start Month : 3 End Month : 46OBJECTIVES

WP4 is aimed at analysing the scientific contents as well as the methodological approaches of the main analytical packages the IP is based on: bottom-up model generator, LCA, ExternE and MCDA. The mutual harmonisation requirements, the possible constraints to the integration process and the general added value of this operation will be highlighted. The work will thus ensure consistency among the analytical methodologies used within the different Streams, clarifying the mathematical background, the analytical implications and the scientific and economic significance of the “Needs integrated method”. This WP will also highlight the added value of the method used to generate technology/scenario rankings based on the results of MCDA applications.

41

A particular attention is given to the technologies considered within the Streams 1a, 1b, 2a and the ones taken into account when building the technological roadmap within stream 2b. Possible harmonisation strategies will be suggested.

During the first 18 months this WP has started the analysis outlined above focusing in particular on the scientific contents and the methodological approaches of the concerned Streams. The integration requirements and the possible constraints have been outlined. The analysis will be gradually improved considering the achievements of the parallel analytical interface WPs (WP1 of RS 1a and WP8 of RS 1b). At the end, the final “Needs integration method” will be specified.

This WP will produce the following three deliverables:

Interim integration report (within the first 18 month period and after 12 months) Final integration report (after 30 months) Final description of the Needs integration method (at the end of the project)

STARTING POINT AT BEGINNING OF SECOND PERIOD (MONTH 13)

The research conducted during year 1 had led to the description of a coherent integration methodology between the five streams: RS1A (LCA), RS1B (External Costs), RS1C (Externalities linked to imports), RS2A (Integrated Energy Modeling), and RS2B (MCDA and Social acceptance). The representatives from the various streams had agreed on that methodology and an ‘Interim Report of the Harmonisation of models and methodologies’ was produced by KANLO with co-authors from all partners involved in WP4, and delivered in August 2005.

PROGRESS

During year 2, the main activities were: a) to consolidate and refine the methodology adopted during Year 1 (and reported in the Interim Report on harmonization of models and methodologies); and

b) to define and implement the types of interfaces required within the Pan European Model to accept the forthcoming data from Streams RS1a (LCA data) and RS1b and RS1c (External Cost data).

The main focus of the work done in period 2 was to examine in detail the mechanisms by which the data and results will flow between the various streams. Specific interfaces were then defined and constructed within the respective streams, to facilitate the capture and transmission of these data.

In the case of RS2a, the TIMES model’s Technology Repository was modified to accommodate the emissions and external cost data that will be forthcoming from Streams 1a, 1b, and 1c.

42

In the case of RS1b the work related to improvements of the methodology to estimate external costs continues. With regard to the geographical dimension, the necessity of the subdivision of Europe into regions was further discussed. RS1b will derive external costs caused by emissions in each country.

In the case of RS2b adjustments of the proposed set of criteria and indicators were implemented to increase the compatibility with the inputs expected from the other streams.

An integration technical session took place in Brussels in October 2005, where the details of the integration method described in the Interim Report were outlined and all partners had an opportunity to make comments and suggestions for future work.

Another Integration meeting was conducted in Prague in June 2006, during which a full discussion of the integration methodology took place, which confirmed and described in full detail the flows of data between the various streams. During that meeting, a short update report was provided by KANLO, KUL and PSI (it was also integrated in the NEEDS First Integrated Report produced by ISIS with contributions from all streams). A presentation of that update was made by USTUTT.DEVIATIONS none

PARTNERS CONTRIBUTIONCNR - INFM Provided, in collaboration with IMAA –

CNR, inputs related to a minimum list of commodities issued by ESU in Research Stream 1A.

Actively attended the Integration technical session in Brussels (October 2005) and the Integration meeting in Prague (June 2006)

DLR Provided inputs related to the participation of Stream 1A in Integration Stream, i.e. related to LCA


Coordinated the interactions between Stream Integration and Stream 1A

ESU Provided inputs related to the participation of Stream 1A in Integration Stream, i.e. related to LCA, and more particularly on the interfaces required to facilitate communication between LCA data and the TIMES model

Reviewed the successive drafts and made many suggestions for improvements

43

Actively attended the March 7 Paris meeting of the Integration stream, and the May 23 Brussels meeting of Integration Stream.

KANLO Acted as WP leader, coordinating exchanges between all partners involved in Integration.

Coordinated (along with KUL and PSI) the interactions between Stream Integration and Stream 2A


KUL Provided expertise on integration methods, based on previous experience with Energy Modeling, ExternE, and LCA analysis.

Jointly coordinated (along with KANLO and PSI) the interactions between Stream Integration and Stream 2A

Contribution to the development of the interface between the streams. The focus has been on the integration of the data from LCA and external cost in the modelling framework, to limit the interchange of data and avoid double counting of impact

PSI (RS2b) and PSI (RS2a) Actively attended the Integration technical session in Brussels (October 2005) and the Integration meeting in Prague (June 2006)

Provided inputs related to the participation of Stream 2b in Integration Stream, i.e. related to MCDA, other indicators, and social acceptance

Coordinated (along with KANLO and KUL) the interactions between Stream Integration and Stream 2B and 2A

USTTUT-ESA / USTUTT-TFU

Provided inputs related to the participation of Stream 1B (External costs) and stream 2A (energy modeling) in the Integration Stream


Coordinated the interactions between Stream Integration and Stream 1B


44

WP N° 5 – Policy Conclusions and Integrated Reporting

WP LEADER - ISIS

Start Month: 15 End Month: 48OBJECTIVESWP5 is responsible for the integrated assessment of the IP results, and for the subsequent formulation of the corresponding policy conclusions.

Specific objectives:To issue the first Integrated Report, illustrating the progress made in the overall integration process, the difficulties encountered, the provisions made for the smooth advancement of integration in future project phases will be jointly drafted by stream leaders, within the framework of the PMC.

PROGRESSThe First Integrated Report has been finalised with active contributions from all Stream leaders and in particular by those involved in the setting of the NEEDS analytical frameworks (1a, 1b, 2a, and 2b). It has also taken into consideration the discussion of the first NEEDS Policy Workshop, which took place in Rome on 7 April 2006 (see RS 3b WP2).

The objective of the Integrated report has been to highlight the main integration issues faced in NEEDS, the tasks carried out to address them and the achievements so far

DEVIATIONSD5.1 was due in M20 but it has been issued in month 24. The reason of this delay is that it has been decided to expect the final outputs of WP 2 (integrated interfaces management) and in particular the final updating of the NEEDS input/output data flow before to release the report.


CNR - INFM Active contribution to drafting chapter 5 of D5.1

DLR Active contribution to drafting paragraphs 2.2 and 4.1of D5.1

ISIS Structuring, final editing of the report and drafting of chapters 1, 2, 5 and 6

KANLO Active contribution to drafting paragraph 4.2 of D5.1

OME Review of the report PSI Active contribution to drafting paragraph

4.3 of D5.1SWECO Review of the report

45

USTTUT.TFU Review of the report

2.1.2 Lists of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones


LIST OF DELIVERABLES

Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature

Dissemination Level

Delivery

Due date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviat

ionD. 3.2 Analytical

overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream Integration

R PU 24 24

D 3.3 Workprogramme for phase III

R RE 24 24

D.5.1 First integrated report

R RE 20 24 Delay due to the decision to take into account the outputs of the Technical papers T2.3 & T2.4

46


LIST OF TECHNICAL PAPERS

Title Due for Deviations

T2.3 - Third periodic report on interfaces M18 T2.3 and T2.4 have been merged in one document

T2.4 - Fourth periodic report on interfaces M24 T2.3 and T2.4 have been merged in one document


LIST OF MILESTONES

M Milestone Due for Achieved in /Expected for

M 2.3 Third Integration meeting

M 14 M 14

M 2.4 Fourth Integration meeting

M 22 M 22

M 3.2 Acceptance of the workprogramme for phase III by the EC

M 25

M 4.1 Agreement reached within the PMC on the basic harmonisation requirements

M 14 M 14

M 5.2 Acceptance of the first integrated report by the EC

M 25

47

2.2 RS 1a: Life cycle approaches to assess emerging energy technologies


RS 1a: Life cycle approaches to assess emerging energy technologies

RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 1: Specification of interfaces to the assessment of externalities and energy modelling

WP LEADER: ESU

Start Month: 1 End Month: 36OBJECTIVESThe final objective of the WP is to provide:Life Cycle Assessment methodology and Life Cycle Inventory data are adapted in order to be useful as an input to energy externality quantification on one hand and energy modelling on the other. This Workpackage aims at developing and / or specifiying the standard LCA methodology with respect to spatial and temporal resolution, proper system definition and drawing of boundaries, and definition of additional inventory parameters. Software interfaces are specified and an exchange format is developed in order to facilitate data exchange between the LCA and the energy modelling tools.The objective of the second reporting period (months 13-24), was as follows:

Further refinement of the LCA methodology Further refinement of the LCA database interface within RS 1a Further refinement of the LCA database interface to other RS

PROGRESS• Refinement of the LCA methodology to be appliedThe LCA methodology has been further refined where necessary. This specification is provided with the first deliverable.• Refinement of the LCA database interface:The modelling and computation of consistent future scenarios with LCI data from more than 10 different partners was successfully tested. The LCA software interface that allows data transfer within the RS1a. partners was used for the first calculations of the LCAs of current energy systems. The results interface, in particular the list of pollutants to be reported was discussed among the partners and finally accepted.• Data interface to external cost assessment and energy modellingThe interfaces to research streams RS 1b and RS2were further discussed.

LCA data from RS1a: LCA data will be supplied in spreadsheet-Format and in EcoSpold format.

Energy modelling results from RS2: The LCA data format in Excel is sufficient.DEVIATIONS nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

48

AMBIT n/aCHALMERS n/aDLR Contribution to the specification of interfaces

between RS1a, RS1b and RS2, considering LCA data, technical data and cost data. Drafting of D1.1.

ESU ESU worked on the data interface between RS1a, RS1b and RS2. Discussions with representatives from RS1b and RS2 lead to adjustments of the deliverable D1.1 co-written with DLR. ESU lead the discussion about the minimum list of pollutants to be reported in the LCA work packages.

IFU IFU worked on the further development of the central LCA database import and export interfaces. Tests and validations have been performed, in order to ensure proper functioning of the component with current LCI data. IFU's own LCA software tool was used to serve as a test environment for the interface for LCI data exchange.

KANLO KANLO served as intermediary between RS1a and RS2a. The principal activities by KANLO were to coordinate the LCA requirements between the two streams, to ensure that all partners in RS2a understood the nature and format of the LCA data being developed by RS1a, and to devise electronic interfaces within the TIMES energy-emission model to accommodate the LCA data (forthcoming from RS1a during year 3).

PSI Commented matters regarding LCA/External Costs integration.

USTUTT.TFU Contribution to the discussion on data interface between RS1a and RS2a in terms of LCA modelling and energy modelling in TIMES.


RS LEADER: DLR

49

WP N° 2: Technology foresight in LCA WP LEADER: RISOE

Start Month : 1 End Month : 24OBJECTIVESThe objective of Work Package 2 is to develop and describe a methodological framework of technology foresight (TF) integrated with LCA in order to deal with technological changes and uncertainties in the long-term developments of the energy technology area. The methodological framework is to be used to assess the implications of long term technological changes on the life cycle inventories of emerging reference technologies within WP 7 to WP 14.

By the start of the reporting period, a preliminary draft of the methodological framework was made and experimental application of the method had begun. The objective of the second period is to give guidance on method application in other key technology areas. This builds on among other things the test of the method framework in selected technology areas (offshore wind, solar thermal technology and photovoltaics). The method development is reported and communicated to relevant partners in RS1a and in the NEEDS project in general.

PROGRESSThe work of the work package has been finalized and the objectives have been reached. The methodological framework of technology foresight integrated with LCA has been further developed and is now defined in its final version. The method is structured in a general part, common for all, and a part with a number of individual support tools that can be applied on an individual basis. The common part is centred round a one-page method scheme with a clear three-step structure. This ensures that it is easily accessible for the users despite the complicated subject. The background for the method has been described. Further description concerning handling of uncertain aspects in the future technology developments has been made. The adjustments leading to the final method builds on experiences from the work on experimental method application and on the communication more generally in the research stream.

A reporting on the experimental application of the methodological framework in the areas of offshore wind power, solar thermal technology and photovoltaics systems has been made. The report includes a number of practical examples from the technology foresight work that can be used in the other technology areas.

Guidelines for use of the methodological framework by the RS1a partners working with each individual technology has been made and communicated to the partners. The guideline work is summed up and collected in the ‘Report on methodological guidelines’. As part of the guiding work, a survey of future-oriented literature on energy and a review of drafts of the technology specification reports in the different technology area have been carried out.

The assessment of the connection and possibilities of integration between the technology foresight work and the experience curve work (WP3) has continued. This is reflected in the reporting from WP3 led by LUND.

50

The final reporting on the technology foresight methodology and the method development work is done. Most of the WP2 work has been carried out by RISOE, however with DLR contributing to the general method development, the experimental method application, the reporting, the guidance and the coordination with other research streams. Elsam and Ambit made contributions to the report on experimental method application.

DEVIATIONS nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

Ambit Contributing to experimental method application and the reporting on this

DLR Contributing to: experimental method application method coordination in RS1a and with

NEEDS more generally, including guidance to other RS1a partners

reporting on experimental method application and final reporting on technology foresight method

Elsam Contributing to reporting on experimental method application

RISOE Development of methodological framework (final version)

Experimental method application Reporting on experimental method application Guidelines for method use in other technology

areas Survey of relevant future-oriented literature Review of future-oriented parts of Reports on

technical specification of reference technologies

Comments on other drafts from individual technology areas

Individual support to technology WPs Reporting on the guidelines for method use in

other technology areas Assessment and connection of foresight and

experience curves (with WP3) Final reporting on technology foresight

method WP coordination and management Method coordination and dialogue RS and

51

NEEDS including participation in RS project meetings

Identifying Danish stakeholders for NEEDS Management of Risø participation in NEEDS Contributing to the search of a new NEEDS

partner that can analyze the area of ocean technology


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 3: Methodological framework for future cost data

WP LEADER: LUND

Start Month :4 End Month : 24OBJECTIVESThe goal of WP3, M 12-24, is to assess and develop the experience curve methodology. The work-package will provide information and critical analysis on cost development, experience curves and sources of cost reductions for the technologies covered in WP7 to 14. The information related to cost development and experience curves will be used as input to the final report of RS1a and as an input to RS2a assessing future energy systems.

The objective of M12-24 is to finalise the work within this work-package, i.e,

to finalise the work covering analysis of experience curves and cost reductions. For each technology area studies based on experience curves will be collected and a critical analysis of the data in these studies will be finalised. The work is to be done by LUND and reviewed and supported by the partners in WP7-14.

to finalise the work covering analysis of sources of cost reduction. Reports covering historical and future analysis of sources of cost reduction are to be collected; these will be critically analysed and used to discuss future possible sources of cost reduction. These studiers will be done by LUND (advanced nuclear, fuel cells, wind turbines, photovoltaics (PV), solar thermal power plants and hydrogen technologies and hydrogen production) and IER (advanced fossil fuel technologies and bio-energy technologies), and reviewed and supported by the partners in WP7-14. Sources of cost development will also be analysed and discussed based on “expert opinions”. New information on sources of cost reduction will be gathered in interviews. The questionnaire used for gathering information is developed by RISOE and LUND; the reporting of the results is done by RISOE.

PROGRESSThe work and contribution of WP 3 has been finalised. The work methodology to be use has been defined, using three different approaches. First, cost development has been analysed and discussed based on experience curves. For each technology area studies

52

based on experience curves has been collected and a critical analysis of these studies performed. The partners of WP7-14 have been asked to support the work by providing studies on experience curves and data for new experience curve if available (however, no new data has been obtained). Guidelines for how to construct experience curves have been distributed. Second, cost development will be analysed and discussed based on reports on sources of cost reduction. Reports covering historical analysis of sources of cost reduction has been collected, critically analysed and used to discuss future possible sources of cost reduction. Third, cost development has been analysed and discussed based on “expert opinions” of sources of cost reduction. New information on sources of cost reduction has been gathered in interviews, performed in cooperation with WP2. The three methodological approaches should not be seen as three distinct analyses. They will to some extent overlap. Based on the result of the study, and supported by the complementing methods describing sources of cost reductions, we recommend what experience curves (i.e. progress ratios) to use in the final report of RS1a and as an input to RS2a.

DEVIATIONS The methodology of experience curves has been developed and assessed as planed. The focus has been on a critical analysis of experience cuvees available in literature. This due to the difficulties of finding new relevant and good data for the various technologies. Additional to the planned work, data related to sources of cost related data have be collected and analysed – through literature reviews and interviews.

PARTNERS CONTRIBUTIONLUND Defined the methodological framework to be

used for this work-package (see three approaches discussed above). This methodology has been accepted by all partners in RS1a.

Collected studies based on experience curves and done a critical analysis of the studies.

Performed the bottom-up assessment of sources of cost reduction based on literature reviews for advanced nuclear, fuel cells, wind turbines, photovoltaics (PV), solar thermal power plants and hydrogen technologies and hydrogen production.

Methods on how to analyse “expert opinions” of sources of cost reduction has been developed together with RISOE and a questionnaire has been distributed.

Co-ordinated and finalised the final report of WP3.

RISOE Methods on how to analyse “expert opinions” of sources of cost reduction has been developed by RISOE and LUND.

53

Contributed to the description and reporting of the methodology

Support and contribution to 'expert opinion' based analysis in the areas wind, PV and solar thermal technology.

USTUTT.TFU Performed the bottom-up assessment of sources of cost reduction based on literature reviews for advanced fossil fuel technologies. The bottom-up assessment of sources of cost reduction based on literature reviews for bio-energy technologies is missing.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 4: Development of parameterisationmethods to derive transferable life cycle inventory

WP LEADER: PSI

Start Month : 18 End Month : 30OBJECTIVES: The final objective of this work package is the development of a parameterisation method that facilitates the description of space- and time-dependent life cycle data for energy systems. Results will support the efficient specification of region- and time-specific LCI datasets in reasonable resolution. This will improve the possibilities to assess space- and time-dependent impact and external cost effects.The objective of the this second reporting period (actually, start of activities had been planned and occurred in M18) was as follows:

Conceptual design of the methodology in order to identify and describe key parameters which are most important for LCA with respect to space and time.

Development of a questionnaire in order to get more information on space- and time-dependent parameters from the experts on different emerging energy technologies involved in NEEDS.

PROGRESSTraditionally, life cycle analyses and life cycle impact analyses do not consider space- and time-dependencies. Thus the envisaged parameterisation is a pioneering task, in particular in view of the very detailed technological description of the involved systems. Consequently, basic methods for parameterisation have to be built up at first.• Conceptual design and structuringBecause WP4 started only during the second reporting period, the first task was the development of a preliminary methodological concept for the parameterisation. The following major issues were identified and discussed: identification of key parameters for each system; representation and modelling (e.g. it is currently an open issue which geographical measures are most appropriate to characterize the space-dependency of all

54

systems); quantification of the parameterisation; operationalisation in LCA and LCIA/external costs modelling.• QuestionnaireA questionnaire on space- and time-dependent parameters in life cycle inventories was developed. The goal is to collect specific information on space- and time-dependency related to the single energy systems from the corresponding technology expert groups. The structure of the questionnaire and the drafted questions have been presented and discussed at the RS1a stream meeting in May 2006. The questionnaire has been finalized by PSI and sent to the partners within RS1a. The analysis of the answers will be a task of the next working period.

DEVIATIONS nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTIONPSI The work described above has been

performed by PSI.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 5: Database on life cycle inventories and cost data

WP LEADER: ESU

Start Month: 13 End Month: 39OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:Life cycle inventory (LCI) and cost data for new energy technologies, energy supply chains and background processes are accommodated, processed and calculated in a central database. LCA results and the information needed by Streams 1.b and 2.a are delivered in a standardised data exchange format. LCA results are made publicly available via the Internet.The objective within the second reporting period (months 13-24) was as follows:

- establish the central LCA database and its data interface- specify and implement the LCA results export interface- run LCA calculations for all technology-oriented WPs within RS1a for the

"current situation"PROGRESS

The LCA database system was established. The LCI data interfaces was implemented and refinements included that facilitate the work. Test runs with datasets from RS1a partners were successfully carried out. Finally, results of the energy systems' LCIs (current situation) were provided to all partners of technical WPs within RS1a, including dominance analyses. The minimum pollutants' list jointly developed within WP1 was used.

55


ESU Preparation of the LCA database contents that form the basis for the energy system specific LCIs.

Import and calculation of the LCI data from RS1a partners.

Calculation of LCI results and supply of LCI results to the RS1a partners.

Discussion with IFU about import and export interface features and tests of their implementation.

IFU Specification and implementation the first version of the LCA database.

Tests and validations are performed an the basis of actual available energy system data.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 6 Quantification of technology specific external costs

WP LEADER: DLR

Start Month: 35 End Month: 41OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:The quantification of external costs per unit electricity or heat generation requires the combination of the environmental interventions per kWh for each technology assessed (e.g. SO2-emissions per kWh, m2-land use per kWh, CO2-emissions per kWh) with the external costs per unit environmental interventions (e.g. Euro per tonne of SO2 emitted at a specific place). The environmental interventions are taken from the LCI database managed under WP5, the external costs per unit environmental intervention are a result from Stream 1b.PROGRESSAs planned, no work in the reporting period.


none

56


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 7: Advanced fossil fuels WP LEADER: PSI

Start Month: 4 End Month : 36OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:

- a detailed technical specification of the most relevant advanced fossil fuels technologies,

- a description of expected future technical developments,- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy and material flows covering the full

life cycles of all technologies under concern, and- a quantification and extrapolation of the future investment costs.

The objective of the second reporting period (months 13-24) was as follows: finalize the choice of key current technologies/systems; delivery of datasets for current systems in EcoSpold format for LCA

calculations; report on LCA for current technologies (deliverable M24); address specification of the technologies for CO2 capture & storage (finalization

M27); consolidation of the collection of LCA and cost data for future technologies

(continuing till M36); modelling of new technologies (continuing till M36); support of WP3 to provide experience curves and progress ratios for solar

thermal technologiesPROGRESS• Final definition of “current” technologiesPerformed for lignite, hard coal, and natural gas power plants, also including gas CHPs.• Life Cycle Inventory- LCI datasets including material flows and emissions were established for the selected power plant average in Europe. Differentiation due to e.g. efficiency variations for different climatic condition and/or different fuel origin is on going as sensitivity and will be refined/finalized in the following months.- Research of data on future technologies as well as efficient CO2 capture and storage (CSS) technologies is a continuing activity within the project. Relevant preliminary LCI datasets are being worked out.• Quantification of costsCosts estimation for current and future reference fossil technologies, with and without CSS, has been performed based on literature, past experience within the participant organizations, and venture information. The bottom-up analysis for costs has been also provided to WP3, and constitutes one Chapter in D3.3.• Report on LCA results for current technologiesIssuing of T7.2 (just an intermediate report to serve internal WP7 and RS discussions in order to converge on a common format reporting for next deliverables) and T7.3, which includes technology description, data on costs and LCI inputs, as well as LCI results.

57

DEVIATIONS Interaction with RS1c for the establishment of key parameters to modify upstream chains for future time horizons with respect to the LCA description of oil/gas systems only at initial stage. No consequences are expected for the project for time ahead is more than sufficient to cope with the issue.PARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

PSI Contributed with description of current best available: natural gas CC, CHP, and Turbine; hard coal PC; and, lignite BoA technology.

Contributed with LCA data collection and modelling. Provided information on cost data.

Established current upstream chains. USTUTT.TFU Contributed with description of current best

available IGCC technology, and LCA data collection and modelling.

Provided detailed information on cost data to support this WP7 as well the bottom-up analysis of current and future fossil technologies for the deliverable D3.3 of WP3.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 8 Life cycle inventory and costs of hydrogen technologies

WP LEADER: INE

Start Month : 4 End Month: 36 OBJECTIVESTo analyse the environmental impact from state of the art hydrogen technologies from an LCA approach. To deliver in technical report 8.2 a screening LCA and cost assessment and in technical report 8.3 results of environmental impact from current technologies, including material and energy flow data and cumulative emissions and resource consumptions. This is an input to WP 5. WP8 should be considered in context with WP7-15 (especially WP9) because hydrogen is energy carrier that can be made from all energy sources, electricity generation from hydrogen will mostly occur with fuel cells.

PROGRESSThe objectives have been reached. LCA screening report 8.2 was furthered in technical report 8.3 containing the LCA for the equipment has been delivered as well. Also because of foreseeable lack of time during the period September – November 2006 the bulk of the work for the deliverable 8.4 has also been carried out but not delivered. and outline in detail the future development of hydrogen technologies as can be

58

foreseen in the next 45 years.The work effort has mostly gone into analysing the life cycle environmental impacts of electrolyser technology and to obtain information on the foreseeable future progress within the technology. Needles to say the hydrogen technology is quite new and therefore a lot of interviews were conducted in order to map what is considered a reasonable yet optimal development of the technology. Information was collected from the projects HyWays, Roads to Hycom, From the asian energy foresight, Nordic energy foresight and industrial companies. Four people were involved in the work on behalf of Icelandic New Energy, but a national project (Úthrif – externalities) has been running parallel with NEEDS and good discussions and dissemination about the background of NEEDS has occurred within important stakeholders for local energy systems. Also major help came from the project partners in Risö (WP 3)

DEVIATIONS In the first work period (Sept 2004 – Aug 2005) less work was carried out than expected so 2 man months were deliberately set aside for the second period. These man months have been used, extra staff hired and the technical reports are ready as well as work for deliverable 8.4. Therefore the financial claims are for actual work which will again be less during the third working period.


Ambiente Italia Review of documents.POLITO Contribution to technology specification.


RS LEADER: POLITO

WP N° 9: Life cycle inventory and costs of fuelcell systems

WP LEADER: POLITO

Start Month : 4 End Month: 36OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:

- a detailed technical specification of the relevant fuel cell combined heat and power generation technologies and the technical developments that are expected to take place until 2050

- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy- and material flows related to the full life cycle of electricity and heat generation from fuel cell power plants (life cycle inventory), and

- a quantification and extrapolation of the investment costs.

The objective of the second reporting period (months 13-24) was as follows: final definition of the “current” fuel cell technologies (2000);

59

final life cycle inventory (energy and material flows) of current technologies to be delivered in ecospold-format to ESU-Services;

report on LCA results for current technologies; cost assessment of current technologies; support of WP 3 to provide experience curves and progress ratios for fuel cell

technologies development of a road mapping for future fuel cell systems to be used for further

technology specification, LCA and cost assessment of 2025 and 2050 technologies

PROGRESS• Final definition of “current” technologiesThe following power plants were finally defined as “current” fuel cell technologies:o solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) of two different sizes (1 and 250 kW)o molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC), 250 kW sizeo proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC), 2 kW sizeThe technical specification of the systems was provided within the first deliverable D 9.1. The fuel cells are supposed to be fuelled with natural gas.• Life Cycle InventoryFor each of the four reference technologies the energy and material flow net was implemented within the software Umberto. In a second step, inventory data were transferred into an excel template provided by WP Ia.5 (ESU-Services) and converted into the ecospold format. The final ecospold files were created in July (m23). • Report on LCA results for current technologiesThe technical paper T9.2 provided results from a first screening LCA of current systems and a cost assessment. Based on the data received from WP Ia.5 after processing the ecospold input data,final LCI results for the current reference systems are reported in the technical paper T9.3. • Quantification of costsThe cost data delivered in the first reporting period was refined and used by WP Ia.3 to implement experience curves for fuel cells power plant technology.• RoadmappingA roadmap for fuel cells power plants until 2050 was developed in D 9.1. Based on the analysis of potential drivers influencing the technical development of fuel cell systems, a technology development pathway for each fuel cell technology was derived. The technical and economic characteristics of future system configurations are specified based on these technology roadmaps in the next reporting period.


DLR Worked on the SOFC power plants’ implementation in Umberto and ecospold, the data transfer between WP Ia.5 and Ia.9 for both SOFC technologies, the description of

60

costs, and the specification of a technology roadmap.

IFEU Worked on the MCFC power plant specification technologies, the description of costs, and the discussion of the results.

POLITO Worked on PEMFC system, providing energy and material flows description to be implemented in Umberto and ecospold.

Coordinated data transfer between WP Ia.5 and Ia.9 for PEMFC and MCFC.

Worked on the description of costs, and the specification of a technology roadmap for PEMFC


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 10 Life cycle inventory and costs ofoffshore wind power plants

WP LEADER: Elsam

Start Month: 4 End Month: 36OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:

- a detailed technical specification of the present offshore wind energy technologies and the technical developments that are expected to take place until 2050

- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy- and material flows related to the full life cycle of electricity generation from offshore wind power plants (life cycle inventory), and

- a quantification and extrapolation of the investment costs based on experience curves and demand scenarios.

The objective of the second reporting period (months 13-24), was to: - provide a detailed technical specification of the present offshore wind energy

technologies;- identify and asses the key barriers and drivers for the technical developments of

offshore wind in order to draw a road map for offshore wind until 2050 - make a technical specification of offshore wind energy technologies to be used for

LCA modelling in the three time horizons; today, 2025 and 2050;- produce an LCI of the energy and material flows for the present wind power plant;- describe the investment cost; and- the potential socio-economic implications of offshore wind energy

PROGRESS• Technical specification of the relevant technology

61

The reference technology for offshore wind has been defined as a 2 MW, three bladed, upwind, pitch-regulated turbine with horizontal axis. Other technical concepts have been described.

• Life Cycle InventoryA reference technology for the offshore wind technology has been identified and based on this identified reference technology a Life Cycle Inventory data was collected. LCA model for the present offshore technology was completed and final datasets in the EcoSpold format were prepared and sent to WP5. The LCA results of the current offshore technology have been reported in the technical paper no. T10.3.

• Quantification of costsThe investment and production costs of wind power plants have been examined and decribed. . Based on an empirical study of the installed offshore wind power plants since the beginning 1990’s the investment costs are assessed in relation to progress ratios according to theory of experience curves. The empirical results will be used for the estimation of future costs in cooperation with WP3.


ELSAM prepared the report on offshore wind energy technology

delivered final LCI-data for the present offshore wind energy technology in the EcoSpold dataformat

prepared the technical paper no. T10.3 on the final results of the LCA model for the current offshore wind technology

developed a road map for future offshore wind development based on an assessment of key barriers and drivers and demand scenarios from the EC.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 11: Life cycle inventory and costs ofphotovoltaic systems

WP LEADER: Ambit


62

OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:- a detailed technical specification of the photovoltaic (PV) technologies and the

technical developments that are expected to take place until 2050- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy and material flows related to the full

life cycle of electricity generation from photovoltaic systems (life cycle inventory), and

- a quantification and extrapolation of the investment costs.The objective of the second reporting period (months 13-24) was as follows:

final definition of the “current” photovoltaic technologies in function of semiconductor technology (e.g. advanced crystalline silicon, advanced thin films) and kind of application (e.g. building-integrated, ground mounted);


report on LCA results for current technologies; cost assessment of current technologies; support of WP 3 by providing experience curves and progress ratios for PV

technologies development of a road mapping for future PV systems to be used for final

technology specification, LCA and cost assessment of 2025 and 2050 technologies

PROGRESS• Final definition of “current” technologiesThe following PV systems were finally defined as “current” photovoltaic technologies:

- ground mounted power plant- tilted roof, retrofit- flat roof, retrofit- tilted roof, integrated- vertical façade integrated

For each system two photovoltaic technologies have been considered: sc-Si and mc-Si PV, which account for roughly 90% of the market share in 2004.Two location have been selected: “Southern Europe”, with a solar irradiation of 1,800 kWh/(m2,a) and “Central/northern Europe”, with a solar irradiation of 900 kWh/(m2,a). • Life Cycle InventoryFor each reference technology inventory data were collected and inserted into an excel template provided by WP Ia.5 (ESU-Services) and converted into ecospold format. In a second moment the inventories were transferred into SimaPro6 in order to cross check the final results. The final ecospold files were created in July (m23). • Report on LCA results for current technologiesThe first draft of T11.2 paper provided preliminary LCA results and costs of selected current PV systems. The T11.3 reports the final LCA results for current PV systems. The final data have been calculated by ESU for each selected system, and a “minimum air pollutant list” (defined between RS 1a and RS 1b), to be used for the external cost assessment, has been produced and employed. • Quantification of costsThe cost data delivered in the first reporting period was refined and used by WP Ia.3 to implement experience curves for photovoltaic technology.• Roadmapping

63

A roadmap for PV systems until 2050 was developed. A technological development pathway for photovoltaic systems was defined taking into account potential drivers influencing the technical development of PV systems, and potential scenarios for future energy supply systems. The finalization of the technical and economic characteristics of future system configurations will be completed in the next reporting period (see DoW m25-42).DEVIATIONS nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

Ambit Ambit worked on the implementation of inventories into excel templates, the data transfer between WP Ia.5 and Ia.11, the description of costs, and the specification of a technology roadmap.

ESU No contribution expected for the reporting period.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 12: Life cycle inventory and costs of solar thermal power plants

WP LEADER: DLR

Start Month: 4 End Month : 36OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:

- a detailed technical specification of the relevant solar thermal electricity generation technologies and the technical developments that are expected to take place until 2050

- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy- and material flows related to the full life cycle of electricity generation from solar thermal power plants (life cycle inventory), and


final definition of the “current” solar thermal technologies (2000); final life cycle inventory (energy and material flows) of current technologies to

be delivered in ecospold-format to ESU-Services; report on LCA results for current technologies; cost assessment of current technologies; support of WP 3 to provide experience curves and progress ratios for solar

thermal technologies development of a road mapping for future solar thermal systems to be used for

further technology specification, LCA and cost assessment of 2025 and 2050 technologies

64

PROGRESS• Final definition of “current” technologiesThe following power plants were finally defined as “current” solar thermal technologies:o parabolic trough system of type SEGS (thermo-oil, no storage)o central receiver system of type PHOEBUS (atmospheric air receiver, thermal concrete storage)o solar updraft tower (system originally planned for Australia)The technical specification of the systems was provided within the first deliverable D 12.1. The size of the plants was scaled to 100 MWel based on the size originally built or planned. The plants are assumed to be located in the “sun belt”, with a solar irradiation of 2,337 kWh/(m2,a). To make them comparable with the technologies of the other work packages which are located in Europe, electricity transport to Europe via a high voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission line is included in the LCA.• Life Cycle InventoryFor each of the three reference technologies the energy and material flow net was implemented within the software Umberto. In a second step, inventory data were transferred into an excel template provided by WP Ia.5 (ESU-Services) and converted into the ecospold format. The final ecospold files were created in July (m23). • Report on LCA results for current technologiesThe technical paper T12.2 provided results from a first screening LCA of current systems and a cost assessment. Based on the data received from WP Ia.5 after processing the ecospold input data,final LCI results for the current reference systems are reported in the technical paper T12.2. • Quantification of costsThe cost data delivered in the first reporting period was refined and used by WP Ia.3 to implement experience curves for solar thermal power plant technology.• RoadmappingA roadmap for solar thermal power plants until 2050 was developed in T12.1. Based on the analysis of potential drivers influencing the technical development of solar thermal systems, and taking into account development targets for solar thermal electricity in a future energy supply system, a technology development pathway for solar thermal power plants was derived. The technical and economic characteristics of future system configurations are specified based on these technology roadmaps in the next reporting period.


CIEMAT CIEMAT worked on the specification of the selected technologies, the description of costs, the review of existing studies, and the discussion of the results.

65

DLR DLR worked on the power plants’ implementation in Umberto and ecospold, the data transfer between WP Ia.5 and Ia.12, the description of costs, and the specification of a technology roadmap.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 13: Life cycle inventory and costs ofbioenergy systems

WP LEADER: IFEU


- a detailed technical specification of the relevant biomass CHP generation technologies and the technical developments that are expected to take place until 2050

- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy- and material flows related to the full life cycle of electricity and heat generation from biomass CHP plants (life cycle inventory), and


final definition of the “current” biomass paths and bioenergy technologies (2000);


report on LCA results for current technologies; cost assessment of current technologies; support of WP 3 to provide experience curves and progress ratios for bioenergy

technologies development of a road mapping for future bioenergy systems to be used for

further technology specification, LCA and cost assessment of 2025 and 2050 technologies

PROGRESS• Final definition of “current” technologiesThe following paths were finally defined as “current” bioenergy utilisation paths:o poplar from short rotation forestry (Central/Northern Europe) in a steam turbine CHP plant o poplar from short rotation forestry (Southern Europe) in a steam turbine CHP plant o cereal straw as a agricultural residue in a steam-turbine CHP plant o poplar from short rotation forestry (Central/Northern Europe) in a gasifier/gas motor CHP plant o poplar from short rotation forestry (Southern Europe) in a gasifier/gas motor CHP plant

66

o residual forest wood in a gasifier/gas motor CHP plantThe technical specification of the systems was provided within the first deliverable D 13.1. On the basis of different literature data, generic high-efficiency CHP plants have been displayed. The size of the plants was set to 30 MW (steam turbine) and 20-25 MW (gasifier) biomass input. For the energy crop poplar, the yield, but also the agricultural inputs depend on the climate. Therefore, two different scenarios have been created – for Central and Northern European conditions and for Southern European conditions. • Life Cycle InventoryFor each of the six biomass paths, the energy and material flow net was implemented on the basis of the LCA tools used at IFEU. In a second step, inventory data were transferred into an excel template provided by WP Ia.5 (ESU-Services) and converted into the ecospold format. The final ecospold files were created in June (m22). • Report on LCA results for current technologiesThe technical paper T13.2 provided results from a first screening LCA of current systems and a cost assessment. Based on the data received from WP Ia.5 after processing the ecospold input data, final LCI results for the current reference systems are reported in the technical paper T13.2. • Quantification of costsThe cost data delivered in the first reporting period was refined and used by WP Ia.3 to implement experience curves for biomass CHP plant technology.• RoadmappingA preliminary roadmap for bioenergy plants until 2050 was developed in T13.1 and further developed during the reporting period. Based on the analysis of potential drivers influencing the technical development of bioenergy systems, and taking into account development targets for green electricity in a future energy supply system, a technology development pathway for biomass CHP plants was derived. The technical and economic characteristics of future system configurations are specified based on these technology roadmaps in the next reporting period.


IFEU IFEU worked on the CHP plants’ software implementation, the LCI data transfer between WP Ia.5 and Ia.13, and the specification of a technology roadmap.

USTUTT.TFU USTUTT.TFU worked on cost assessment of current technologies and starting from this on cost development during the time horizons considered in NEEDS. Results of this work have been conveyed to WP3 as support for the development of experience curves and progress ratios.

67


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 14: Life cycle inventory and costs ofadvanced nuclear technologies

WP LEADER: EDF


- a detailed technical specification of the relevant nuclear electricity generation technologies and the technical developments that are expected to take place until 2050

- a detailed inventory of the relevant energy- and material flows related to the full life cycle of electricity generation from nuclear power plants (life cycle inventory), and


final definition of the “current” nuclear technologies (2000); final life cycle inventory (energy and material flows) of current technologies to

be delivered in EcoSpold-format to ESU-Services; report on LCA results for current technologies; cost assessment of current technologies; support of WP 3 to provide experience curves and progress ratios for nuclear

technologies

PROGRESS• Final definition of “current” technologiesThe following power plant type was finally defined as “current” nuclear technology:o Pressurized water reactor (PWR), The technical specification of the systems was provided within the first deliverable D 14.1. • Life Cycle InventoryFor these reference technologies the energy and material flow, based on data from Dones (2003), were transferred into an excel template provided by WP 1a.5 (ESU-Services) and converted into the EcoSpold format. • Report on LCA results for current technologiesBased on the data received from WP Ia.5 after processing the EcoSpold input data, final LCI results for the current reference systems are reported in the technical paper T14.3 “Intermediate report on LCA results for current advanced nuclear”.• Quantification of costsThe cost data delivered in the first reporting period was further refined, and finally reported in the technical paper “Intermediate report on LCA results for current advanced nuclear”.• Supporting WP3Available information on experience curves and progress ratios has been provided.DEVIATIONS

68

nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

EDF Choice of a nuclear system for study purpose, proposition and modification of choice

Redaction of the progress report : technical part, socio-economic part, economic calculations

Data research Test of methodology asked by WP 1-6 and 15

PSI The data used were extracted from the Swiss ecoinvent database, whose nuclear part was established by PSI (Dones, 2003).

Commented all reports and provided propositions and ideas


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 15: Background processes WP LEADER: ESU

Start Month: 4 End Month: 30OBJECTIVES: The final objective of the WP is to provide:Energy conversion technologies such as wind power plants or fuel cells require commodities such as structural steel, road transport services or waste treatment services but also highly specialised materials for electrolytes and cathodes of fuel cells. The modelling of these so-called background processes needs to be consistent with respect to the scenarios used in the energy modelling and in assessing environmental external costs. Hence, LCA data are required which take into account regional variability (if relevant) as well as temporal variability (e.g., change in requirements and emissions due to technology and / or market developments). In this work package LCA data are compiled for the most important and frequently used basic commodities (construction materials, chemicals, transport and waste treatment services).The objective of the second reporting period (months 13-24), was as follows:

development of life cycle inventory data valid for the time horizons (today; 2025; 2050) of selected materials

PROGRESS• life cycle inventories of selected materialsBased on the specification developed during the first reporting period, life cycle inventory data of cement production, steel production, and aluminium production have been established, valid for the time horizons today, 2025 and 2050 and three different scenarios of future energy sector developments.This resulted in a draft report on the LCIs of these materials.DEVIATIONS

69

The analysis of future material production processes turned out to be much more demanding in terms of investigation time. That is why the list of background datasets to be analysed within WP 15 has to be reconsidered substantially.PARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

ESU ESU worked on the life cycle inventories of material supply datasets, including a differention in time and future scenarios, applying the specification developed in the former reporting period.

IFEU IFEU worked on the future development of transport processes, setting the boundary conditions for the three scenarios and defining the development for the emission and consumption data for different rail and road transport processes.


RS LEADER: DLR

WP N° 16: Assessment of electricity generation from ocean energy

WP LEADER: SPOK

Start Month: 26 End Month: 36This WP has been added further to the request that the EC made at the first NEEDS Annual review. During the reporting period the WP Leader has been identified. Activities will start in M26.

70



RS LEADER: DLR


Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature

Dissemination Level

Delivery

Due date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviat

ionD2.2 Final report on

technology foresight methods

R PP 24 24

D 3.1 Cost development – an analysis based on experience curves

R PU 24 24

D15.1 LCA of background processes (first draft)

R RE 18 18

D17.1 Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 1a

R PU 24 24

71


RS LEADER: DLR



T2.1 Report on methodological guidelines on how to reflect future technical change in LCA through foresight methods

M18

T3.1 Description on methodological framework M15

T3.2 Guideline of data requirement for construction of learning curves

M15

T5.1 Database setup M18

T7.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current fossil fuel systems

M18

T7.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current fossil fuel systems

M24

T8.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current hydrogen technologies

M18

T8.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current hydrogen technologies

M24

T9.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current fuel cell systems

M18

T9.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current fuel cell systems

M24

T10.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current offshore wind systems

M18

T10.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current offshore wind systems

M24

72

T11.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current PV systems

M18

T11.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for PV systems

M24

T12.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current solar thermal power plants

M18

T12.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current solar thermal power plants

M24

T13.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current biomass power plants

M18

T13.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current biomass power plants

M24

T14.2 Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current nuclear power plants

M18

T14.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current nuclear power plants

M24


RS LEADER: DLR

LIST OF MILESTONES

Milestone Due for Achieved in /Expected for

M2.1 Note on experimental application in the areas wind, PV, and solar thermal

M18 M18

M2.2 Reporting of method development and of work in WP2

M24 M24

M3.1 Guideline on data requirement for construction of learning curves available

M15 M15

73

M3.2 Report on learning curves for selected reference technologies available.

M24 M24

M4.1 Questionnaire distributed M18 M24

M5.1 LCA/cost database operational M18 M18

M5.2 First preliminary LCA results available for Research Stream partners

M24 M24

M7.1 LCA of current systems (fossil fuels) available

M24 M24

M8.1 LCA of current systems (hydrogen technologies) available

M24 M24

M9.1 LCA of current systems (fuel cells) available

M24 M24

M10.1 LCA of current systems (offshore wind) available

M24 M24

M11.1 LCA of current systems (PV) available M24 M24

M12.1 LCA of current systems (solar thermal) available

M24 M24

M13.1 LCA of current systems (biomass) available

M24 M24

M14.1 LCA of current systems (nuclear) available

M18 M18

M15.1 LCA of background processes (first draft) M18 M18

74

2.3 RS1b: Development and improvement of a methodology to estimate external costs of energy


RS 1b: Development and improvement of a methodology to estimate external costs of energy


WP N° 1: Improvement of Atmospheric Modelling

WP LEADER: MET.NO

Start Month: 2 End Month: 30OBJECTIVESThe main objective of this work package is to substantially improve the modelling of transport and chemical transformation of pollutants emitted in the atmosphere normally used for estimating external costs by coupling hemispheric, regional and local scale approaches.

PROGRESSTask 1. Source-receptor calculations in the hemispheric scale were already delivered in the last reporting period. The work on this period has concluded with a comprehensive evaluation of the hemispheric model performance and a report exist now on these results for 2001.Task 2. Sub-regionalisation of source-receptor calculations. This has been the main activity for the reporting period. Source-receptor relationships for the European region usually involve 50 country-to-grid simulations. For NEEDS, we have added additional 60 areas, so that large countries are now divided in separate emission regions, allowing for a larger flexibility in the optimisation routines for external costs. Additionally, European wide source-receptor matrices per sector have also been produce, allowing an extra degree of freedom to the analysis in ECOSENSE.Task 3. Coupling regional and local model. A tool for distinction of complex and no-complex area has been developed and provided. It has been decided on the choice of models for the local scale to be tested and implemented.

DEVIATIONS It has been found out that non-linearities with regard to regional modelling can not be described adequately with the methodologies originally planned. There have been different proposal for alternative approaches and the role of EDF is still under discussion. However, alternative approaches will be developed instead by met.no, mainly securing that ECOSENSE has available two different sets of SR for different chemical regimes: one set with 2010 chemical regime and 5 years meteorology, the other set a low emission scenario for 2020 chemical regime and 5 years meteorology.


AUTH Local scale a tool for distinction of complex

75

and no-complex area has been developed and provided.

Agreement reached on what choice of models for the local scale to be tested and implemented in next period.

EDF Discussion with met.no on parametrisation of SR results and how to allow for non-linearities in ECOSENSE

MET.NO Identification of criteria and areas for subregionalisation

Production of SR regional and subregional source receptor calculations. Emissions for 2010 and meteorological year 2000.

Delivery of 2010 source receptor regional SR calculations for 5 different years

Evaluation of hemispheric model and report on SR calculations (ref. J. E. Jonson, P. Wind, M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, O. A. Søvde, H. Klein, I. S. A. Isaksen and L. Tarrasón "First results from the hemispheric EMEP model and comparison with the global Oslo CTM2 model" EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/06, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway)

USTUTT.TFU Data with regard to emissions have been collected, processed and provided to met.no. Moreover, datadata regarding topology and landcover data has been provided.

Testing of SR matrices regarding hemispheric scale

Co-operation with AUTH regarding local modelling.

RS 1b: Development and improvement of a methodologyto estimate external costs of energy


WP N° 2: Impact Pathway Analysis via Soil and Water

WP LEADER: EPFL (after M24 USTUTT.TFU)

Start Month: 6 End Month: 24OBJECTIVESImprovement of the indirect exposure assessment of the impact pathway approach with respect to biotransfer in biota and to the inclusion of trade of food as well as consumption of fish from high sea catches.

76

Extension of the impact pathway approach with respect to indirect exposure to hazardous substances that are not yet included in the methodology.The implementation is still due.

PROGRESS Task 2.1: EPFL completed the milestone 12 months elapsed: Human exposure via

milk and meat calculated. Task 2.2: EPFL completed the milestone 12 months elapsed: Human exposure via the

marine environment calculated. Results of Task 2.1 and 2.2 need to be implemented. Task 2.3: USTUTT.TFU has completed the milestone “Data acquisition with respect

to trade food modelling finalized”. The data have been processed to meet the modelling needs and implemented into the EcoSense multimedia extension WATSON.

The bilateral trade model was tested. At the European level, the change in human exposure was small towards the earlier more simple trade modelling approach. Given the difficulties to have appropriate national mass balances on the traded food items it was concluded to keep the earlier trade of food model. Task 2.4: In collaboration with RS1a, USTUTT.TFU has compiled a list of substances

for which the external cost assessment is to be carried out (milestone: “Identification of substances for which the existing indirect exposure assessment framework needs to be extended”). Heavy metals, POPs (i.e., PAHs, PCDD/Fs), benzene and formaldehyde require multimedia modelling approaches. The EcoSense multimedia extension WATSON can directly be used for non-volatile metals, while for the other substances some adaptations need to be made or different models may need to be employed. For Hg, the approach developed under task 2.5 will be followed whereas for volatile organic substances an extension of the WATSON environmental fate module to also include an air compartment is needed. A concept was detailed and needs implementation. For radioactive substances, the approach taken by ExternE (methodology update in 1999) will be followed.

Task 2.5: Armines will complete this task towards finalisation of WP2.

DEVIATIONS 1 p/m for Armines has been transferred from WP3 to WP2.USTUTT.TFU is now WP leader of WP2


Armines Completion of this small task (1 p/m) is foreseen towards the end of WP2 when the needs for additional simple models will be clear.

EPFL Development and evaluation of a key-process based cow model for implementation in exposure pathway model.

Identification and provision of state-of-the-art

77

bioaccumulation model and data for implementation in exposure pathway model.

USTUTT.TFU Implementation and testing of a bilateral trade of food model completed.

The effects of food processing techniques on contaminant levels were reviewed.

The data needed for human exposure assessment such as agricultural production of crops have been updated.

Human exposure towards drinking water was introduced in the exposure assessment.

Getting an overview on radionuclide assessments in the context of ExternE.

RS 1b: Development and improvement of a methodology to estimate externalcosts of energy


WP N°3: Causal links between pollutants and health impacts

WP LEADER: VITO

Start Month: 1 End Month: 30OBJECTIVES

Develop a more realistic model for quantification of health effects from air pollution taking into account individual exposure patterns.

Perform sensitivity analyses:- to assess implications of different causality mechanisms;- to evaluate different hypotheses about the geographic transferability of study results.

Estimate the importance of health effects due to indoor combustion sources.

PROGRESSThe Workpackage 3 was set up to update and develop a more realistic model for quantification of health effects from air pollution. The main purpose is a set of concentration-response functions, and is now presented in TP3.2. IOM led this task, with assistance of Armines and VITO. This set is a necessary deliverable for the stream 1b. Secondary goals in relation to the overall goal of this WP are elaborated in the subsequent tasks 3.3 (evaluating different hypotheses about the geographic transferability) and T3.6 (assessing implications of different causality mechanisms). All partners were involved in developing and discussing the reports of task 3.3 and 3.6. The technical papers now serve as input for the final report, where there is still room to add recent information on quantification of air pollution related health effects.

78

Although the case study on the potential externalities of the use of indoor combustion sources (T3.5) was for demonstration purposes and to test the importance of combustion sources indoor, the topic gained a lot of interest and attention, e.g. from stakeholders. This required additional work to put the case study in perspective (in relation to population average exposures and to exposures from outdoor air pollution). An additional data search has been performed, but the data are incomplete, making it difficult to give a balanced conclusion. This is still ongoing. This task has been developed by VITO.

DEVIATIONS Finalizing the case study on indoor combustion sources and indoor exposure took more time. The TP3.5 has been delayed, but there should be no problem in delivering these findings by the end of the WP (M 30). The final results will now be integrated in the final report D3.7.

Additional questions and topics that were not foreseen in the planning of this WP, but were brought up by the stream and IP management are being dealt with and will be incorporated in the final report. Additional topics are: concentration-response functions for soil and water pathways, for carcinogenic air pollutants and radionuclides.


Armines Study of toxicological mechanisms to explain concentration-response functions;

Research on the quantification of life expectancy loss due to air pollution.

selection of concentration-response functions for use in soil and water modelling

Writing technical reportsIOM Literature review on epidemiological

studies; selection of concentration response functions Summary of available concentration response functions. Research on health impact assessment methods, background health data…

Writing technical reportsVITO WP management.

Literature review on epidemiological studies

Writing and editing the technical reports. Case study on indoor combustion

RS 1b: Development and improvement of a methodology to estimate external


79

costs of energy

WP N°4: Assessment of Biodiversity Losses

WP LEADER: Econcept

Start Month: 13 End Month: 24OBJECTIVESProvide input data of external costs per m2 and type of land use change as well as of external costs due to the deposition of airborne pollutants (SOx, NOx and NH3) for WP2, RS 1a and other research streams. WP4 does not calculate fuel cycle costs for different technologies and countries any more. Validation of external costs obtained by the restoration cost approach with the results of approaches basing on individual preferences. Provision of the final report (Delivery 4.2) of workpackage 4 until end of month 24.

PROGRESSThe methodology for the estimation of external costs was further developed and first external cost calculations were revised and refined. External costs per m2 and type of land use change as well as external costs due to the deposition of airborne emissions (per kg deposition of SOx, NOx and NH3) were determined for 32 European countries. The results were presented in the Thessaloniki- and Paris-stream meetings ((November 2005 and May 2006 respectively) and in depth discussed with the stream leader as well as with staff members of workpackage 2 from research stream 1a in Stuttgart (June 2006). The external costs calculated with the restoration cost approach were validated using different willingness to pay (WTP) studies assessing the value of biodiversity aspects. For the sake of methodological discussions of validating by WTP studies, we organised a meeting with WTP-expert Stale Navrud in Zurich, who procured the access to data banks, containing WTP-studies from all over the world. The validation supports the plausibility of the results obtained with the restoration cost approach. The final report, Deliverable D4.2, will be finalised in August 2006.On the occasion of an internal meeting in Stuttgart with staff members of the stream leader as well as with members of WP2, Stream 1a, the final details and needs for applying the results as inputs for future research and external cost calculation models within NEEDS were discussed.To disseminate the results, a 30-page summary of the WP4-research was turned into a journal article which was submitted to "Environmental and Resource Economics" in July 2006.The methodology as well as preliminary external cost findings were presented by the workpackage leader on the SETAC international annual conference in Den Haag (9th of May 2006)

DEVIATIONS As reported already for the second reporting period (months 13-24), research is well ahead of initial planning at the very beginning of NEEDS to provide inputs for other NEEDS-workpackages. The final report, Deliverable D4.2 will be submitted in August 2006 as agreed at the end of the first reporting period (after 12 months).

80


ECO NC EPT See above: Development of methodology for estimating

external costs of biodiversity losses due to land use changes and airborne emissions: Calculation of restoration cost for 20 different kinds of land use changes

Determination of minimal costs per unit of decrease of potentially disappeared fraction (PDF) by a restoration cost approach for the NL

Validation of results by comparing the external costs determined by the applied restoration cost approach with biodiversity valuations in WTP studies

Production of final Deliverable D4.2 Participation in meetings in Thessaloniki, Paris

and Stuttgart as well as in Zurich (the latter with Stale Navrud)

ESU Services Starting with external costs due to land use changes and deposition of airborne emissions in the Netherlands: Calculation of external costs of land use changes and airborne emissions for 31 European countries, taking into account existing acidification and eutrophication stress in the particular countries as well as the purchasing power parities for these countries.

Workpackage-meetings in Zurich with Econcept



WP N° 5: Assessment of Climate Change WP LEADER UniHH

Start Month: 4 End Month: 31OBJECTIVES• To estimate marginal external costs of greenhouse gas emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, PFCs, HCFs)• To estimate average and marginal avoidance costs of greenhouse gas emissions (CO2,

81

CH4, N2O), with a particular emphasis on European land use

PROGRESST5.1 Description of the updated version of the impacts module of FUND, T5.2 Description of the extended atmospheric module of FUND as well as T5.3 (Description of the ESAM database for the EU accession) have been delivered in time. The Description of the ESAM database for the EU accession (T 5.3) documents the agricultural database for EU+10, which serves as prerequisite for the estimation of marginal and average greenhouse gas abatement cost in the agricultural sector. T5.4 will be delivered with a slight delay. (see below) T5.5 has been delivered. The marginal damage cost of a) carbon dioxide emissions b) methane emissions, c) nitrous emissions, and d) sulfur hexafluoride were computed for four alternative discounting assumptions (0%, 1%, 3%, Weitzman), 2 regional aggregation assumptions (with and without equity weighing), and 10 time steps covering 2005 to 2095. The marginal abatement cost for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions in 2050 were computed for four alternative concentration targets.DEVIATIONS With regard to T5.3 some of the described economic data contain preliminary values because of reporting delays by some new member states. However, all farm surveys of EU+10 are expected to be available in Fall 2006. As data are updated the abatement cost analysis with the European Agricultural Sector Model (EASM, deliverable T5.4) will be repeated and reported to the NEEDS stream coordinator.


UniHH FUND update (inclusion of international tourism, amenity, river floods and diarrhoea, improved representation of regional changes in precipitation and temperature)

Description of the updated version of the impacts module of FUND

Description of the extended atmospheric module of FUND

Scenario analysis with FUND Report on marginal external costs inventory of

greenhouse gas emissions Report on the analysis on average and

marginal avoidance costs of greenhouse gas emissions

EASM database compilation Inclusion of EU accession countries in EASM Description of the EASM database for the EU

accession countries EASM scenario analysis

82



WP N° 6: New approaches for valuation of mortality and morbidity risks due to pollution

WP LEADER UParis

Start Month: 1 End Month: 24OBJECTIVES Test the questionnaire (developed during the first 12 months) in France, UK,

Spain, Switzerland, Hungary and Poland, and modify it as necessary. Apply this questionnaire in France, UK, Spain, Hungary and Poland. Develop a procedure for transferring the results to other countries, and test it in

two countries (one each in EU and in Accession Countries). Compare resulting value of a life year with values implied by current medical

practice. Compare with values implied by relation between life expectancy and GDP/capita. Establish a monetary value for a QALY, to allow the monetary valuation of

morbidity impacts by means of QALYs.

PROGRESSDescription of work The work during months 12-24 has been carried out in the following phases (by teams, with leaders in bold face):Task 6.2 ( UParis , UAB, UNEW, EdF, SIU-IEM, WUDES) Based on the experience with this test phase, a final version of the questionnaire will be prepared. It will be applied to a representative sample population of 100 in each of: France, UK, Spain, Hungary and Poland. Task 6.3 ( SWECO , UParis, UAB, Ubath, CUEC) A procedure for the transfer of the values to other countries will be developed by expert consensus of the participating teams. This procedure will take into account GDP per capita, age, state of health, as well as cultural differences, especially with regard to risk perception. It will be tested in at least two countries (in EU and in Accession Countries, to be chosen by the experts for the transfer procedure), by comparing the transferred values with the results of applying the questionnaire to samples of 100 each. Task 6.4 ( UNINE , Ubath, ARMINES, CUEC) Carry out survey of costs and benefits (in terms of life years saved) of medical interventions, in order to determine value of a life year implicit in current practice. This will be based on a survey of the published literature, supplemented by interviews of health professionals in the UK, France and Switzerland.Task 6.5 ( ARMINES ) Determine an upper limit for an appropriate VOLY from the relation between GDP/capita and life expectancy, based on the work of Keeney in the USA, but reformulating it in terms of life expectancy rather than number of deaths and using worldwide, and especially European, data.

83

Task 6.6 ( ARMINES , all) Make recommendations for the most appropriate choice of a VOLY for air pollution.Task 6.7 ( ARMINES , UNEW, Ubath) Use this value to calibrate the QALY scale in monetary units and thus determine unit costs for morbidity impacts. Compare with the unit costs, based on CV studies, that have been used for morbidity by ExternE until now.

DEVIATIONS The technical papers expected for M24 have been all incorporated in one single deliverable (D6.7)PARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

ARMINES Task 6.4 Have carried out survey of costs and benefits (in terms of life years saved) of medical interventions, in order to determine value of a life year implicit in current practice. Task 6.5Have determined an upper limit for an appropriate VOLY from the relation between GDP/capita and life expectancy; it is in the range of 100,000 to 300,000 €, depending on discount rate.Task 6.6 ( ARMINES , all) Make recommendations for the most appropriate choice of a VOLY for air pollution. Task 6.7QALY and DALY scales have been reviewed to obtain an estimate of the cost of chronic bronchitis, using the VOLY recommended in this WP.

CUEC Task 6.2The final version of the questionnaire has been prepared, tested (3 testing phases) and applied to a sample population of Prague (N=229). Task 6.3 Have participated in testing the procedure for the transfer of the values to other countries (incl. new member states)Task 6.4Have carried out survey of costs (in terms of life years saved) of medical interventions, in order to reveal the threshold for cost effectiveness (cost per QALY) implicit in current practice. Task 6.6Have madee recommendations for the most appropriate choice of a VOLY for air pollution.

EDF Task 6.2

84

Helping UParis in applying the final version of the questionnaire in France.

SIE-UEM Task 6.2The final version of the questionnaire was applied to a representative sample of the population of 118 in Budapest, Hungary.

SWECO Task 6.3A procedure for the transfer of the values to other countries has been developed and tested successfully.

UAB… Task 6.2The questionnaire was adapted to Spanish and Catalan, and a survey of 100 interviews was undertaken. Task 6.3 UAB has undertaken some calculations and for the transfer estimations.

UBath Task 6.3Initial econometric testing of the survey results to explore benefit transfer procedures. Use of equivalence testing and unit value transfer procedures.Task 6.4Undertaken literature review of survey of costs and benefits (in terms of life years saved) of medical interventions.Task 6.6Made provisional recommendations for the most appropriate choices of VOLYs for air pollution.Task 6.7Started work on calibration of the QALY scale in monetary units to address morbidity end-points.

UNEW Task 6.2The final version of the questionnaire has been prepared and applied to a representative sample population of 150 in UK. Application carried out solely by UNEW (as opposed to UNEW and UBath), as such UNEW withdrew from Task 6.7). Applied a further validity test to UK data (sample population 152)

UNINE… Task 6.2The final version of the questionnaire was translated and adapted to local specificities. It was then applied to a representative sample of 180 of the Swiss population. Country data were analysed and a report was produced. Task 6.4 Have carried out survey of costs-effectiveness studies of medical interventions for Switzerland, Spain, Italy

85

and Greece, in order to determine value of a life year implicit in current medical practice. …Task 6.7Did some literature search about the QALY weight and monetary value associated to chronic bronchitis.

UParis Task 6.2The final version of the questionnaire has been prepared and applied to a representative sample population of 101 in France. Task 6.3 Have participated in testing the procedure for the transfer of the values to other countries.

WUDES Task 6.2carrying out verbal protocols, 31 individual interviews with inhabitants of Warsaw, results presented on the meeting in Budapest, September 2005;implementation of the final questionnaire on VOLY on representative sample of Warsaw inhabitants, November 2005; country report elaborated in April 2006; discussion of the final results received in the national samples and the benefit transfer model, participation in the final report, meeting in Prague, August 2006.

A special thanks to NERI (National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark) who contributed to Task 6.2 translating the final version of the questionnaire into Danish and applying it to a sample of 136 in Copenhagen, Denmark.



WP N° 7: Improvement of Methodology and Tools for the Impact Pathway Assessment, Application and Quality Assessment

WP LEADER: USTUTT.TFU

Start Month: 3 End Month: 42OBJECTIVESImprovement of Methodology and Tools for the Impact Pathway Assessment, Application and Quality Assessment

• To implement the improved methodology of external costs assessment (into the tools)• To extend the geographical coverage of the methodology• To estimate uncertainties of the methodology

86

• To integrate the precautionary principle in the methodology PROGRESSGeographical extension of the tools A number of datasets could already be received and processed.Data on emissions were assessed in a collaboration with work package 1 of the research stream and represent also an input for hemispheric modeling. The usage of the same data for the assessment of external costs outside Europe and for hemispheric modeling ensures consistency in the emission data. The gathered data represents a good starting point for the geographical extension of the models. Thus, it builds the basis for the assessment of external costs from up- and down-stream processes with emissions outside Europe and for the estimation of generalised cost values applicable in life cycle analyses which will be derived in research stream 3a later on. The data basis will be updated with more detailed data, especially on population and emissions, as far as it can be provided from partners in the project. The data sets will prospectively be improved particularly for the Mediterranean and Eastern European countries. The whole research stream 1d concentrates on the specific implementation of the models for these countries.

Methodology for the consideration of uncertaintiesTwo methods are presented for estimating the uncertainties of the ExternE damage costs. The first is the classic Monte Carlo method. The second is the analytic approach based on lognormal distributions, as developed by Rabl & Spadaro [1999]. Preliminary results are presented for specific impacts, especially mortality due to air pollution. This report also examines the uncertainty of the sum of damage costs over different impacts, for instance health and agricultural losses, and offers a simple approximation.

Methodology for the implementation of the precautionary principleWhereas the precautionary principle is valuable as a general guideline, the difficulty lies in its application to specific situations because there are no implementation rules that are sufficiently explicit. In fact, it would be problematic if not downright impossible to formulate specific implementation rules because each situation requires an analysis of the specific circumstances.

ConclusionsWhilst the burden of application of the precautionary principle should fall on those appointed or elected to make decisions, analysts at all levels need to be aware of the need to provide sufficient detail of the quality of their analysis and any doubts that they may have about it. Without this, the ultimate decision makers may have a very skewed impression of the issues relevant to a precautionary stance. There is no general way of implementing a “precautionary principle” in the estimation of external cost figures.

DEVIATIONS No significant Deviations from the project workprogramme.


87

ARMINES/Ecole des Mines Writing technical papers Work regarding consideration of uncertainties

and implementation of the precautionary principle

USTUTT.TFU WP management Collecting and processing global data Writing technical paper



WP N°8: Methodology for linking external cost estimation with economy/energy/environmental models and with LCA data

WP LEADER: KUL

Start Month 2 End Month 30OBJECTIVES• Development of a methodology to integrate the external cost computation based on the 'impact pathway approach' into different modelling frameworks (macroeconomic models/sectoral, energy models, local/national/multinational models) and its application to the energy modelling developed in this project.• Test of the methodology by applying it to the analysis of both a 'local' and a country policy aiming at the internalisation of externalities.• Development of a methodology and definition of interfaces between LCA inventory data and external cost estimations, together with the corresponding task in stream 1a).PROGRESSThe general approach for the integration of the external cost in models was defined in the first year following the approach defined in the RSIn WP4. The second year was concentrated on the specification of the data exchange and of the model equations for the energy model and its implementation of the model code. The model is therefore ready for the second task related to the test of the methodology to be done in the next period.The link with LCA was also specified and allows an easy implementation when the data become available. DEVIATIONS There are no general deviations from the program. However to start the second task in the next phase (testing the model specification with a policy) the data/functional form for linking air quality and emissions and the damage data have to be ready. PARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

88

KUL Specification of the model equations and data exchange for the linkage of external cost and LCA data within the energy models.

USTUTT.ESA Specification of the data exchange for the linkage of external cost and LCA data within the energy models.

USTUTT.TFU Specification of the interface between external cost and LCA Specification of the data exchange for the linkage of external cost and LCA data within the energy models.





Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature

Dissemination Level

Delivery

Due date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviat

ion

D1Analytical overview of the technical and scientificproduction of the stream 1b

R PU 24 25

D4.2Assessment of Biodiversity Losses - Final Report

R PU 24 24

D6.7 Final Report on monetary valuation of mortality andmorbidity risks from air pollution

R PU 24 25

RS 1b: Development and improvement of a RS LEADER: USTUTT.TFU

89

methodology to estimate external costs of energy



T1.1 Report on source-receptor hemispheric level

18

T1.2 Report on Source-receptor analysis of linearities at regional Europe level - grid to grid-

24 Postponed

T3.2 A set of Concentration-Response functions 18

T3.3 A priority list of transferability factors 18

T3.5 A case study on indoor air pollution impacts

18 Postponed to M30, to be incorporated in the final deliverable

T3.6 A methodology to evaluate alternative toxicological assumption

18

T5.1 Description of the updated version of the impacts module of FUND

18

T5.2 Description of the extended atmospheric module of FUND

18

T5.3 Description of the ESAM database for the EU accession

18

T5.4 Report on marginal external costs inventory of greenhouse gas emissions

24

T5.5 Report on the analysis on average and marginal avoidance costs of greenhouse gas emissions

24

T6.2 Results of applying the questionnaire 24 Incorporated in D6.7

90

T6.3 A VOLY implied by current medical practice

24 Incorporated in D6.7

T6.4 A VOLY implied by relation between life expectancy and GDP/capita


T6.5 A consensual and credible set of reference values for a VOLY (one in EU and one in Accession Countries, as well as a combined value to be used in the future)


T6.6 A QALY based alternative to the conventional monetary valuation of morbidity impacts


T7.1 Description of the basic database for the geographical extension of the tools

18

T7.2 Report on the methodology for the consideration of uncertainties

18

T7.3 Report on the methodology for the implementation of the precautionary principle

18

T8.1 Specification of the interface between external cost computation and economy and energy modelling, inclusive the associated data

18 T8.1-T8.2-T8.3 have been merged in one document

T8.2 Model specification for the integration of external cost in economy and energy modelling and integration of the model specification into the energy system modelling framework (first part)


T8.3 Specification of the interface between external cost and LCA




LIST OF MILESTONES


91

M1.1: Delivery of TP1.1 in month 18 M18 M18

M1.2 Delivery of TP1.2 in month 24 M24 M25

M3.1 Agreement on the result of the epidemiological and toxicological review

M18 M18

M3.2 Agreement on the in- or exclusion of new transferability factors

M18 M26*

M3.4 Proposal of toxicological hypotheses M18 M18

M4.1 final report will be submitted in month 24 M24 M24

M5.1. Delivery of T5.1 in month 18M5.2. Delivery of T5.2 in month 18M5.3. Delivery of T5.3 in month 18

M18 M18

M5.4. Delivery of T5.4 in month 24M5.5. Delivery of T5.5 in month 24

M24 M24

M6.1 Results of applying the questionnaire. M18 M24

M7.1 Delivery of T7.1, month 18M7.2 Delivery of T7.2, month 18M7.3 Delivery of T7.3, month 18

M18 M18

*The delay in M3.2 is due to personal problems which occurred to part of the working team. Also, there is a lot of discussion going on. The delay won’t endanger the final report deadline (M 30)

92

2.1 RS 1c: New Externalities Associated to the Extraction and Transport of Energy



RS LEADER: OME

WP N° 1: Assessments of Externalities Concerning the Extraction and Transport of Oil

WP LEADER : FEEM

Start Month: 1 End Month: 36OBJECTIVESIn WP1, externalities related to the supply of oil will be assessed. Both extraction (including flaring) and transport (maritime and by pipeline) of oil shall be addressed. In addition to a thorough assessment of externalities associated to the operational burdens and impacts linked with extraction and transport of oil (both maritime and by pipeline), this study will also assess the potential externalities due to major accidents, i.e. the “probabilistic externalities”. Those externalities concern mostly spills deriving from oil tankers as well as oil pipeline leakages.

PROGRESSThe present and future supply sources to satisfy EU oil imports (T1.1) as well as oil flows and routes from producing areas to Europe (T1.2) have been completed by OME. Originally, it was planned to receive the EU demand figures from RS2a and to equilibrate supply volumes and flows from different sources according to a specified EU demand level. During project evolution, it became clear that RS2a was unable to deliver demand figures during the first reporting period (as requested by RS1c) but only around M30, and that it would in any case be much better if the externality figures delivered by RS1c to RS2a can be integrated dynamically into the model. Therefore, in agreement with RS2a our WP utilised existing EC studies and derived three demand scenarios – baseline, high case and low case. That is why, oil balance assessments as well as flows and routes analysis had to be performed for each of those scenarios, tripling our work. As a result, a considerable delay could not be avoided for the reports T1.1 and T1.2. Fortunately, those delays did not affect the other tasks in WP1. The advantage is now that the results of WP1 can be integrated dynamically into the RS2a model through interpolation.

Task 1.3 has also been completed (by CEDRE) and has assessed the most critical passages on the oil tanker routes.

Task 1.4 is still going on (by CEDRE) and it is currently dealing with the assessment of the risk reduction potential due to future penetration and use of new tanker technology and safety regulation. The deliverable is expected to be finished in the last quarter of

93

2006, a slight delay.

Task 1.5 dealing with the assessment of the major burdens is currently under way (by FEEM). Particular attention has been given to the Mediterranean situation with a case study on the Aegean conducted by EPU-NTUA.

Task 1.6 has started earlier than originally planned. It is already well under way with case study analysis and with the assessment of the impacts in terms of use values and non use values by comparing damage claims and compensations. The first report covering these aspects for export tanker routes to Europe (T1.6a) has already been produced by CEDRE ahead of schedule. Further work will entail the application of benefit transfer methodology to non-use impacts, and the analysis of the impacts related to the extraction phase and pipeline transportation (by FEEM/SWECO).

Task 1.7: In the previous assessment period it was agreed to start pre-testing, before the planned working period, risk assessment methodology. The pre-testing exercise has been completed and consists in fine-tuning risk-assessment methodologies and applying them to a selected oil tanker route of European relevance. A methodological note describing the methodology adopted and the results of the pre-testing exercise has been drafted by FEEM as Technical report 1.7a ahead of schedule. DEVIATIONS Concerning Tasks 1.1 and 1.2, and as had already been reported in the First Assessment Report, the European oil demand figures could not be obtained in time from RS2a, RS1c (with the agreement of RS2a) relied therefore on existing EC studies and derived three different scenarios. This caused a long delay for the reports because the assessments in each report had to done three times (one for each scenario) both for supply demand balance, and for flows and routes. This delay did not have any impact on the other tasks of the work package. The advantage is that the results of RS1c WP1 can now be used dynamically in the RS2a model.

Moreover, since it is impossible to carry out a full screening of externalities for the import routes to the EU, a set of sample routes has been agreed upon. Externality assessment will focus on the following routes :

the tanker route from Novorossiysk to Augusta; the tanker route from Ras Tanura (Persian Gulf) to Rotterdam a pipeline from Russia to Europe (to be identified); a pipeline across the Balkans bypassing the Bosporus: pipeline from Costanza to

Trieste, the tanker route from Primorsk to Rotterdam.

Task 1.4 has been slightly delayed due to the necessity of further analysis of new technologies and new regulations very recently implemented;Task 1.6 has anticipated a good part of its analysis and a first report (T1.6a) has been delivered ahead of schedule;Task 1.7 has further expanded the development of the risk assessment methodology before the planned working period and the first part dealing with methodology (T1.7a) has been delivered ahead of schedule.

94


CEDRE Task 1.3: Carried out the work on critical passages, as well as technology and regulations.

Contributed to the impact and burden analysis of oil transport to Europe.

EPU-NTUA Task 1.5: Performed a case study of the burdens of oil spills in the Aegean Sea.

FEEM Tasks 1.1 and 1.2: gave input to OME in preparing the reports.

Tasks (1.4, 1.5 and 1.7): In close cooperation with POLITO, initiated the pre-testing of risk assessment methodology for the evaluation of the risks involved in transporting oil by tanker route to Europe.

Developed and completed of the risk assessment methodology.

Organised RS1c coordination meeting in Milan (January 2006)

OME Task 1.1 and 1.2: In cooperation with FEEM examined and assessed present and future (2010-2020-2030)a) Oil reserves and resources potential in the countries b) Production capacity in potential suppliersc) Domestic demand in supplier countriesd) Export potential in supplier countries

Based on those, OME assessed oil import requirements as well as oil flows and routes to Europe under three different scenarios.

Based on flows and routes assessments, OME also gave input to be considered for critical passages (Task 1.3).

POLITO Task 1.7: Collection of data to perform risk analysis in oil transportation


RS LEADER: OME

95

WP N° 2: Assessments of Externalities Concerning the Extraction and Transport of Gas

WP LEADER : OME

Start Month: 1 End Month: 36OBJECTIVESIn WP2, externalities related to the supply of natural gas will be assessed. Both extraction and transport (including pipeline and LNG) of gas shall be addressed. This work-package will also assess the potential externalities due to accidents, i.e., probabilistic externalities. Externalities associated to the extraction of natural gas refer mostly to venting, flaring (operational) and blow-outs (accidental). As far as gas pipelines are concerned, the major source of operational externalities are linked to atmospheric emissions due to the compression of gas as well as gas leakage in the valves and due to cracks in the pipe. Accidental externalities may occur in case pipeline breaks due to corrosion or intervention from outside contractors. These leaks and breaks can lead to explosions with damages on goods and people in addition to the atmospheric emission of green-house gases. Operational externalities associated to the LNG chain refer mostly to the auto-consumption at the LNG plant as well as to the fuel consumption of LNG tankers along the journey.

PROGRESSThe work has started with the assessment of present and future (2004, 2010-2020-2030) European gas supply-demand balance (Task 2.1). The aim of this Task was to determine the expected amount of potential gas imports to Europe by supplier country.

Task 2.2 assessed present and future gas flows and routes, which is based on the results obtained in Task 2.1.

The present and future supply sources to satisfy EU gas imports (T2.1) as well as gas flows and routes from producing areas to Europe (T2.2) have been completed by OME. Originally, it was planned to receive the EU gas demand figures from RS2a and to equilibrate supply volumes and flows from different sources according to a specified EU demand level. During project evolution, it became clear that RS2a was unable to deliver demand figures during the first reporting period (as requested by RS1c) but only around M30, and that it would in any case be much better if the externality figures delivered by RS1c to RS2a can be integrated dynamically into the model.

Therefore, in agreement with RS2a our WP utilised existing EC studies and derived three demand scenarios – baseline, high case and low case. That is why, gas balance assessments as well as flows and routes analysis had to be performed for each of those scenarios, tripling our work. As a result, a considerable delay could not be avoided for the reports T2.1 and T2.2. Fortunately, those delays did not affect the other tasks in WP2. The advantage is now that the results of WP2 can be integrated dynamically into the RS2a model through interpolation.

Assessments of Burdens (Task 2.3) and Impact on the environment, health and economy (Task 2.4) are combined together, and are studied separately for

96

transportation of gas and gas extraction. Burdens and Impacts on gas transportation (pipeline, LNG tankers and regasification) is finished (is called T2.3) and on gas extraction and LNG production (T2.4) is well advanced.

DEVIATIONS Concerning Tasks 2.1 and 2.2, and as had already been reported in the First Assessment Report, the European gas demand figures could not be obtained in time from RS2a, RS1c (with the agreement of RS2a) relied therefore on existing EC studies and derived three different scenarios. This caused a long delay for the reports because the assessments in each report had to done three times (one for each scenario) both for supply demand balance, and for flows and routes. This delay did not have any impact on the other tasks of the work package. The advantage is that the results of RS1c WP2 can now be used dynamically in the RS2a model.

Tasks 2.3 and 2.4 which deliver T2.3 (delivered according to plan) and T2.4 (to be delivered according to plan) have been slightly modified: T2.3 deals with both burdens and impacts of gas transportation (instead of only burdens of gas extraction and transport), T2.4 will deal with both burdens and impacts of gas extraction and liquefaction (instead of only burdens of gas extraction and transport).


FEEM Completed the report (T2.3) on burdens and impacts of gas transportation. Currently work on a similar report on natural gas extraction and liquefaction (T2.4) which will be finalised soon.

OME Completed T2.1 (assessing gas import requirement of Europe by supplier country) and T2.2 (gas flows and routes to Europe) under three alternative scenarios.

Gave input to FEEM concerning possible impacts and burdens of gas transportation and natural gas extraction, based on expertise gained in OME as well as advises obtained from its Member companies.

POLITO Participated to report T2.3 by collection of data and development of risk analysis oriented simulations from gas leakages from pipeline failures.


RS LEADER: OME

97

WP N° 3: Assessments of Externalities concerning the transmission of electricity

WP LEADER : Vito

Start Month: 1 End Month: 25OBJECTIVESElectricity exchanges relate to electricity interconnections between EU countries as well as to electricity imports by EU countries from bordering countries/regions. The latter refer mostly to existing projects to build gas fired power plants in Russia and/or North Africa and to export electricity to the EU either by overhead high voltage lines, cables or by submarine cables. The options of interest to the EU are influenced mainly by the direct costs of the alternatives but also by the relative external costs associated with them. The work package will select few case studies with a source in the EU and an alternative source outside. Although electricity transmission is essential for European electricity market, and the installation of new lines are often controversial, there are neither generic data nor models to assess externalities associated with transmission. Therefore, this work package aims to develop an accounting framework for the key impacts, select key parameters and values from literature and demonstrate its application in a case study.

PROGRESSThe Work Package 3 has been successful in developing the backbones of the accounting framework to be developed, and for the identification of the basic scientific information and data to fully develop the framework.

T3.1 (description of technologies and approach) and T3.2 (Identification and assessment of burdens) were combined together in a single report and submitted in the first planning period.

T3.3 (identification and impact assessment of priority impacts (transmission losses, pubic health impacts, visual intrusion, loss of property values, disruption of supply, impacts from material use and construction ) is also finished. Some review of calculations if needed and valuation has to be updated based in line with information in stream 1c.

A start has been made with the final steps valuation of the impacts and case studies (T3.4). It is planned to be finalised by February 2007 (final report).

The work package leader has suggested a quick update by the end of the project.


EPU-NTUA EPU-NTUA gave input to literature review as well as to data collection for burdens and

98

impacts, and started preparatory work for case study in Greece.

FEEM Contributed to literature review and review of the approach followed.

OME OME contributed to the assessments of priority impacts and development of the generic indicators.

SWECO In collaboration with Vito, development of approach, with specific attention to valuation issues and visual intrusion issues.

Collection and first review of literature related to economic valuation of visual impacts from transmission lines.

Identification of sources for valuation of health impacts.

VITO Carried out the work and finalised Task 3.3


RS LEADER: OME

WP N° 4: Assessment of externalitiesconcerning the import/transportof other energy vectors (in particular hydrogen)

WP LEADER : POLITO

Start Month: 1 End Month: 27OBJECTIVESMain objective of WP 4 is to assess externalities related to transportation of some energy vectors: hydrogen, syngas, coal-water slurry, hythane, town gas, coal-oil mixtures and biofuels.

In the first reporting period the most profitable transportation schemes for the proposed new energy vectors were individuated (Task 4.1) and a selection of the reference technologies was performed based on the market penetration potentials analysed in the Task 4.2.

In this second year the WP focused on the development of activities within the Task 4.3, Task 4.4 and Task 4.5.

In particular, in Task 4.3 (assessment of burdens) a detailed analysis of possible burdens generated during the transportation phase of the selected energy vectors (hydrogen, biofuels ethanol and biomass) was performed. Emissions due to internal combustion engines of various transportation means were quantitatively evaluated. The burdens evaluated refer to normal operation conditions. An additional (initially not planned) report was provided (T3.4Addendum) dealing with the burdens of simultaneous

99

transmission of chemical and electric power over long distances using super conducting cables.

In Task 4.5 (assessment of the additional potential externalities due to accidents by risk analysis) a detailed risk analysis was performed on the transportation systems in use for hydrogen. Risk was quantitatively evaluated in terms of died/year. The risk analysis, thus allowed evaluating burdens deriving from accidental conditions.

In Task 4.4 (assessment of impact on the environment, health and economy (local, regional and global)) the evaluation of impacts onto the environment and health according to different scenarios (normal operation and accidental) has started.

Task 4.6 will assess economic valuation of impacts.

PROGRESSA detailed analysis of possible burdens generated during the transportation phase of the selected energy vectors (hydrogen, biofuels ethanol and biomass) has been carried out. The burdens evaluated refer to normal operation conditions. Detailed risk analysis was performed on the transportation systems in use for hydrogen, and risk was quantitatively evaluated in terms of died/year. The risk analysis, thus allowed to evaluate burdens deriving from accidental conditions.

Task 4.3 led to the completion of Technical paper 4.3: Quantitative and qualitative report on burdens associated to hydrogen (and other energy carriers) transport. Moreover, an additional (initially not planned) report was provided (T3.4Addendum) dealing with the burdens of simultaneous transmission of chemical and electric power over long distances using super conducting cables.

Task 4.5 led to the completion of Technical paper 4.5: Report on additional potential externalities due to accidents in the hydrogen chain.

The work on T4.6 is under way in parallel with T4.4 (see below).

DEVIATIONS Technical report 4.4 on impacts will be merged with T4.6 on economic evaluation of impacts due to transportation of hydrogen and other future energy vectors. The methodology for evaluating impacts and costs deriving from transport has been already developed in details in the ExternE project and further updates are foreseen in RS 3a but after the completion of this WP.


FEEM FEEM has helped risk analysis assessments.OME OME gave input for technology and burden

assessmentPOLITO POLITO carried out the work in completing

100

the Technical papers T4.3, T4.3Addendum, and T4.5.

SWECO SWECO is contributing to the economic valuation of impacts.


RS LEADER: OME

WP N° 6: Scientific and technical Coordination

WP LEADER : OME

Start Month: 1 End Month: 48OBJECTIVESThe complexity of the stream and the number of participants require an efficient scientific co-ordination and management within the stream to ensure the achievements of specified objectives.

PROGRESSOrganised regular research stream coordination meetings. Three general progress and coordination meetings were organized:

10-11 October 2005, Brest, France: Work progress meeting for all WPs and with all partners (and with a special emphasis on WP1).

30-31 January 2006, Milan, Italy: Work progress meeting for all WPs and with all partners (and with a special emphasis on WP1).

22-23 May 2006, Bergen, Norway: Work progress meeting for all WPs and with all partners

Regularly updated NEEDS website concerning RS1c section.

DEVIATIONS none


OME See, progress.



RS LEADER: OME


101

Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature

Dissemination Level

Delivery

Due date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviat

ion6.3 Analytical

overview of the technical and scientific production of the Stream 1c

R RE M24 M24


RS LEADER: OME

LIST OF TECHNICAL PAPER


T1.1: Present and future supply sources to satisfy EU oil imports

M16

T1.2: Present and future oil flows and routes from producing areas to Europe

M18

T1.3: The most critical passages of maritime oil routes to supply Europe

M21

T1.4: Oil transport accident risk-reduction potential due to new technology and regulation

M18 Postponed

T1.6a: Impact on the environment, health, economy and socio-economy for maritime oil transport

M33* New – the TP has been anticipated

T1.7a: The role of risk aversion and lay risk in the probabilistic externality assessment for oil tanker routes to Europe: A methodological note

M33* New – the TP has been anticipated

T2.1: Present and future supply sources to satisfy EU gas imports

M16

T2.2: Present and future natural gas flows and routes from producing areas to Europe

M18

T2.3: Gas transportation: burdens and impacts M24

T3.3: Case studies, burdens and impacts of electricity transmission (integrated report 3.1-3.3)

M21

102

T4.3: Burdens associated to hydrogen (and other energy carriers) transport

M15

T4.4: Impacts associated to hydrogen (and other energy carriers) transport (combined with T4.6)

M21 Postponed (merged with

T4.6)T4.5: Additional potential externalities due to accidents in the hydrogen chain

M24


RS LEADER: OME

LIST OF MILESTONES


Identification of maritime and pipeline oil routes (and LNG and pipeline gas routes) to be focused on

M14 M14

Selection of critical oil passages M15 M15

Review of the new technology and regulations in terms of accident risk reduction potential

M16 M16

Determination of local, regional and global burdens

M21 M21

Literature review to identify key parameters to evaluate impacts and to identify generic indicators

M16 M16

Determination of burdens associated to the O&M activities of hydrogen and other energy carriers networks

M13 M13

Identification of impacts of burdens on the environment , health and economy

M18 M18

Selection of additional potential externalities due to accidents

M20 M20

Survey of environmental and health valuation studies

M24 M24

103

2.2 RS 1d: Extension of geographical coverage

2.2.1 Workpackage progress

RS 1d: Extension of geographical coverage

RS LEADER: CUEC

WP N° 1: Energy market and policy, measures addressing the externalities

WP LEADER: MEERI

Start Month: 19 End Month: 25OBJECTIVES Analyse energy sector, policy and the most significant problems for countries being

relevant for further externality assessment. Identification of interesting and appropriate case studies based on energy policy

issues in the participating countries from NAC and MPCPROGRESSThe description of work, objectives, time plan, deliverables, interlinkages between WPs and expected problems in WP 1 were discussed on kick-off meeting in Prague 23-24 March, 2006. As regards the first objective, each CEEC and MPC partner analyzed 1) the energy sector, 2) energy and environmental policy and 3) main factors influencing the development of energy and environmental issues. First point concentrates on primary energy balance and its structure, key energy and environmental indicators and energy market structure in relevant country. This is a starting point to evaluate the second issue - energy and environmental policy, i.e. energy policy objectives, highlighting the most important linkages between energy and environment for each country. The last part discusses main factors influencing the development of energy and environmental policy; for instance future energy consumption, fuel mix and emissions of air pollutants. Prospect on energy/environmental regulation, economic instruments introduced in order to internalise externalities particularly, follow. All three parts will be included in Country Reports and, then, summarised for each of 9 involved countries in Technical Report. Template and content of such reports were discussed and agreed within the team. Drafts of country reports being prepared by each CEEC partner were discussed within the second project meeting (the drafts of MPC reports will be discussed during an additional project be held in Prague (see below). The content of the final version of the Report was discussed in the second workshop held in 22nd September 2006 in Nessebur (Bulgaria). With reference to the second objective of WP1, a preliminary list of the reference energy technologies was set up on the first workshop in Prague. The CEEC case studies was discussed and identified – also considering the results from the country reports and reflecting national specifics – at the second workshop; the case studies of MPC partners will be discussed at the additional meeting be held in Prague.

104

DEVIATIONS Due to the delay in a payment transferred particularly to MPC partners (these partners have not received any payment from the European Commission up to the end of the second year of the project; the others received their first payment in the end of month 24), relevant work couldn’t be worked out in sufficient scope and depth. Because this reason and following standard rules applied in partners’ institutions, the MPC partners also cannot attend the second project meeting and workshop held in Nessebur (Bulgaria). Therefore the additional project meeting need will have to be organized in November (likely in Prague). The final version of the country reports and the Final Summary Report can be thus finalized after this additional meeting and will be due to the end of December 2006 (3 month after the original deadline). Similarly, the case studies can be identified later as it has been planned. This deviation in the stream time-plan will not, however, have any negative effect on overall time-plan of stream’s activities.PARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

AEKI, CDER, CUEC, EPT, MEERI , NREA, PROFING, SEI, UNWE

Country energy market and policy described in a draft of the reports and presented at the meeting followed up MAXIMA workshop (Krakow, March 1st, 2005) and RS1d project meetings. Country case studies worked out and discussed at the 2nd RS1d workshop. Work done by particularly by CDER, NREA and UNWE had to be done in limited scope due to the delay in financial payment transferred.

OME The MPC partners coordination and provision of advice in order to identify the case studies.


RS LEADER: CUEC

WP N°2: Methodology of energy externality estimation

WP LEADER: USTUTT.TFU

Start Month: 19 End Month: 26OBJECTIVESThe expansion of knowledge about the methodology, principles and typical results of the EcoSense and ExternE methodPROGRESSPartners from NAC and MPC have been familiarized with the methodology, the principles and typical results of method based on the EcoSense model. USTUTT.TFU provided relevant information and presented the methodology, principles and typical

105

results of EcoSense model in the workshop. Partners from NAC and MPC presented the relevant models which had been applied in their countries to estimate energy (and other) externalities. Methods were discussed in the first workshop held in Prague, March 2006. All ExternE methodological volumes were provided; the older ExternE Volumes (EC 1995; 1998; 2000) were scanned and put on the ExternE website (www.externe.info) being free accessible for RS1d partners as well as general public.

DEVIATIONS none


AEKI, CDER, LEGI-EPT, MEERI, PROFING, SEI, UNWE

Partners participated to the workshop held in Prague on March 24th, 2006. Methodology learnt; comments and question discussed at the 2nd meeting and workshop. Based on the previous experience with the older versions of EcoSense software, AEKI and MEERI got familiarized with the current version of the model.

USTUTT.TFU Presented the methodology, the principles and typical results of method based on the EcoSense model. Scanning of the Externe methodological volumes.

CUEC Presented the methodology, the principles and typical results of method based on the EcoSense model and hosted the workshop. Scanning of the Externe methodological volumes.


RS LEADER: CUEC

WP N°3: Data collection and update of databases

WP LEADER: AEKI

Start Month: 21 End Month: 24OBJECTIVESData collection at local as well as regional level, if necessary, to update EcoSense model. It includes data on relevant emissions, meteorological data, needed topographical data, data on crops and materials, regional population density data.Starting point: The data requirement of the EcoSense model was presented to the partners at Workshop 1 (WP2).PROGRESSTask 3.1. Reference environment database, which includes receptor data such as

106

http://www.externe.info/

population, crops and materials.Data requirements and its specification such as reference year, NUTS categories, data format, information on data quality were discussed at the 1st Workshop. A draft template for environmental data collection was developed based on previous experience with the EcoSense model. Examples of data collection and problems faced by Hungarian partner were presented by AEKI. A methodology of input data preparation for the EcoSense model was developed by PROFING, using existing National Emission Inventory System (NEIS). The availability of country-specific population, crops and materials data were checked by each partner. Task 3.2. Reference technology database, which contains data of energy generation technologies Data requirement for several reference technologies were presented by CUEC and USTUTT.TFU at the 1st workshop. National data availability for reference energy technologies was checked by partners; data collection can, however, start after the case study will be specified in WP1. Possible methods for emission allocation of heat and energy generation were reviewed by PROFING and commented by partners. Task 3.3. Monetary valuesCUEC presented data requirements at the workshop. Further work will be performed during the third year.DEVIATIONS nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

AEKI The possible sources of the necessary environmental and technology data were presented to the other partners through examples of data collection for Hungary. A template for environmental data collection was developed based on previous experience with the EcoSense model. Availability of recent environmental data for Hungary was checked.

CUEC National dataset on Czech reference technology was extended.

MEERI National dataset on Polish reference technology was extended.

PROFING Data from available national statistics were collected for population, land use and existing data of pollutant ambient concentration (using existing National Emission Inventory System). Approaches for emission allocation of heat and energy generation were tested.

CDER, LEGI-EPT, NREA, OME, SEI, UNWE

No work performed so far.

WP4, WP5, and WP6 have not started yet.

107


RS 1d: Extension of geographical coverage RS LEADER: CUEC


Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature

Dissemination Level

Delivery

Due date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviat

ion

D 2.1 Workshop1: Basics of the ExternE methodology and its application

Workshop

M19 M19

D7.1 Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 1d

R PU M24 M24



Title Due for Achieved in /Expected for

None


LIST OF MILESTONES


Workshop 1: Basics of the ExternE methodology and its application – jointed with kick-off meeting

M19 M19

108

2.3 RS 2a: Energy systems modelling and internalisation strategies, including scenarios building


RS 2a: Energy systems modelling and internalisation strategies, including scenarios building

RS LEADER: IMAA

WP1: Model Design and Interfaces WP LEADER: KANLO

Start Month: 1 End Month: 30OBJECTIVESThe general objective of WP No 1 is the design of a common, comparable and combinable methodology for modelling the EU-25 Member State and other European countries. The chosen approach will not only cover the typical boundaries of energy systems models but also take into account externalities and other flows (energy, materials, emissions) occurring from “cradle to grave” (LCA approach and external cost approach). The detailed objectives are best described by means of the six tasks as follows:Task 1.1 Design of the Reference Energy System (RES) common to all country models. This task determines the basic model structure, i.e. the list of energy service demands, energy carriers, materials, and emissions. The RES needs to be agreed upon by all country modellers, before starting the construction of the country models, and before the designing the data interfaces (see Task 1.3). Note that the determination of the common list of technologies and their characterisation belongs to other work packages and is postponed until month 12 or later. Start: Month 1 – End: Month 4 CompletedTask 1.2Selection of the main common data sources to feed into the country models. Examples of common data sources include IEA World Energy Outlook, Eurostat, etc. which establish the models initial year’s calibration. Some data sources that are specific to individual countries are not part of this task. Start: Month 3 – End: Month 4. CompletedTask 1.3Design and implementation of spreadsheet interfaces that establish the model’s basic structure and hold the fundamental assumptions, with energy commodities, material flows, energy service demands, technological data, emissions and damage functions consistent with ExternE/LCA base needs, according also to the guidelines of WP8 of RS1b. This task includes the preparation and use of custom conduits to read data from the principal data sources, in their original form as well as the set-up of input/output formats and reporting tables for soft-linking and integration with ExternE/LCA, to ensure a transfer of data, direct or manual. Start: Month 4 – End: Month 18 CompletedTask 1.4

109

Update of the VEDA database interface that allows the user to do a variety of changes on top of the basic structure, like changing assumptions on demands or technologies, changing/adding user-defined relationships, etc. Start: Month 4 – End: Month 10 CompletedTask 1.5 Improvement and update of the TIMES model generator; Start: Month 8– End: Month 14 CompletedTask 6. Setup the Pan – EU trading variables, in order to ensure the linkage between the countries (export and import of energy) in the open EU energy market, technology spill-over as well as the integrability of the 25 country models; Start: Month 10 – End: Month 18STARTING POINT (September 2005) Year 1 was by far the most active year for the development of the tools and interfaces, as witnessed by the large amount of completed work as of August 2005. At the start of year 2, the essential tools for acquiring the basic data and for constructing the 28 country models were all available in a first workable version. These tools are:

- The TIMES model equations and GAMS code- The common Reference Energy System for all country models, describing the

structure of each country energy model (commodities, and their interrelationships)

- The common data sources to be used for the country models- The Excel templates, used to describe in a uniform fashion the energy

characteristics of a country model in the initial period- The first version of VEDA-FE, a front-end interface for organising and

managing each country model- A first version of the technology repository, containing the techno-economic

data on new technologiesPROGRESS during year 2

We now describe the progress achieved on each of the six tasks listed in the Objectives:

Tasks 1 (RES) and 2 (selection of data sources) were completed during year 1.

Task 3 (templates) was essentially completed in year 1, but some modifications to the templates were made by KANLO in year 2, to facilitate work of the country modelers, and to adapt to special data issues arising in some countries. In addition, the technology repository was finalised after many discussions with country teams, in particular ECN, POLITO, and KUL. The format of the repository was adapted to accept the forthcoming LCA and external cost data from other streams, in coordination with WP4 of RS Integration.

Task 4 (VEDA-FE interface) was 80% done in year 1, but a large number of changes were made by KANLO to the interface during year 2, in order to facilitate data handling, scenario handling, and the construction of demand projections. In addition, the VEDA-BE interface for exploiting results was slightly changed. Most changes were triggered by interactions with the country modellers’ members of WP2.

110

Task 5 (Model generator) was completed in year 1.

Task 6 (Pan-European trading variables) was mostly accomplished during year 2, and culminated in Technical Paper T 1.6, which duly describes the trade variables adopted for the European Model and the new tools designed to handle these variables. The elaboration of the trade variables was made by KANLO in consultation with KUL, USTUTT, PSI, and IMAA. The tool for creating, managing, and modifying the structure and data of trade variables is fully integrated in VEDA-FE, as the new Trade Scenario functionality..DEVIATIONS There were no substantial deviations from the plan. However, the completion and delivery of Technical Paper T 1.6 (Pan-European Trade Variables) was somewhat delayed (from March to May 2006), due to the excessively long discussions on the list of trade variables that took place within RS2a. The two-month delay did not have any negative impact on other tasks, since Trade Variables are not needed in order to operate and test the Country Models. The Trade variables will only be needed for operating the Pan European model, scheduled for Fall 2006.

Another change compared to the initial plan was to expand the duration of each workshop in order to provide more time for the training of the partners in the use of the templates and the VEDA interface.


The nature of this work package implied that the bulk of the work had to be done by the developers of the software and database tools, i.e. KANLO, which is the leader of the WP.

In this leading role, KANLO was assisted by IMAA for the logistical tasks, i.e. the exchanges of information between the various partners, the organization of the workshops, etc.

Each of the partners did a common set of activities as follows: :- reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions

for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE. - actively attended the training sessions (September 2005 in Maratea, Italy,

February 2006 in Athens, May 2006 in Gothenburg)- trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software

(interacting with KANLO when needed), and - used the tools to implement their country model(s) (although this task

straddles WP1 and WP2)

In addition, as noted above, KUL, PSI, ECN, and USTUTT made additional specific contributions described in the Progress section of this table.In the following, it is reported the contribution of each partner with reference to the above set of activities, and to the additional specific activities performed by some

111

partners.

CHALMERS Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.

actively attended the training sessions (September 2005 in Maratea, Italy, February 2006 in Athens, May 2006 in Gothenburg)

trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting with KANLO when needed), and

used the tools to implement energy models for Sweden, Norway and Iceland, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

CIEMAT Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.



used the tools to implement energy models for Spain and Portugal, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

CRES Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.



used the tools to implement energy models for Greece, Cyprus and Malta, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

ECN Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the

112

design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.



used the tools to implement energy models for The Netherlands and Ireland, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

Co-authored (with KANLO, KULeuven, IMAA, PSI, USTUTT-IER) the paper: “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for supporting EU policies” presented at the Conference EEC 2006

In addition, actively led and participated in the implementation of the subRES for Industry and Upstream

ENERO Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.


trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting with KANLO when needed and performing an additional training with POLITO, Torino on 10-11 May 2006), and

used the tools to implement the energy model for Romania, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

IMAA - CNR Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.

Co-organised with KANLO and actively attended the training sessions (September 2005 in Maratea, Italy, February 2006 in Athens, May 2006 in Gothenburg)

trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting

113

with KANLO when needed) used the tools to implement the energy

model for Italy, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

Co-authored (with KANLO, KULeuven, IMAA, PSI, USTUTT-IER) the paper: “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for supporting EU policies” presented at the Conference EEC

2006

INFM Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.


trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting with KANLO when needed),

used the tools to implement the energy model for Slovenia, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

KANLO Acted as WP leader Co-organised with IMAA the training

sessions (September 2005 in Maratea, Italy, February 2006 in Athens, May 2006 in Gothenburg) coordinating the interactions between RS2a partners.


KUL Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.


trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting

114

with KANLO when needed), and used the tools to implement energy models

for Belgium and France, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO


Defined the demand projections by sectors by using the Gem – E3 model and trained the modellers in specialising the resulting values by countries

POLITO Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.



used the tools to implement model the energy model for The United Kingdom, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

PSI Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.


trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting with KANLO when needed)

used the tools to implement the energy model for Switzerland, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO


115

RISOE Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.


trained themselves to become proficient in the use of the various software (interacting with KANLO when needed)

used the tools to implement the Danish model, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

TTU Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.



used the tools to implement energy models for Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

USTUTT- ESA Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.



used the tools to implement energy models for Germany, Austria, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

Co-authored (with KANLO, KULeuven, IMAA, PSI, USTUTT-IER) the paper: “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for

116

supporting EU policies” presented at the Conference EEC 2006

In addition, actively participated in the implementation of the subRES of the energy sector

VTT Reviewed proposals made by KANLO, and contributed its own suggestions for the design of the various tools: RES, templates, VEDA-FE.


used the tools to implement the Finnish model, filling in the templates prepared by KANLO

In addition, reviewed the model generator’s code and implemented several changes to correct errors, improve the model’s performances and enable advanced features (under a separate budget).


RS LEADER: IMAA

WP N°2 Country specific models implementation

WP LEADER: Chalmers

Start Month: 4 End Month: 28OBJECTIVESOnce the main model structure has been defined and the main methodological questions solved, individual national teams are devoted to implement the basic country models, specialising them to the country features and testing their consistency in the reference scenario.

The detailed objectives are best described in the following tasks:Task 2.1 List of technologies Determination of a common list of technologies based on the already existing MARKAL/TIMES models (e.g. EFDA, SAGE- MARKAL, MARKAL Western Europe, TIMES – EE,) including in particular abatement technologies for different pollutants. The list should be agreed upon by all country modellers and integrated in the common basic RES, accordingly to task 1.1. Start: Month 4 – End: Month 8 CompletedTask 2.2. Characterisation of technologies Characterisation of the listed technologies and individuation of specific options for the

117

different countries. The resulting database will be made up by the existing databases provided by the RS2a participants, and country specific data and the information made available by the LCA/ExternE. Start: Month 6 – End: Month 15 Completed

Task 2.3. Definition of scenario parameters Definition of the context parameters of reference and alternative scenarios, according to the policies identified by the Scientific Committee. In particular, existing boundary conditions will be taken into account, as well as selected strategy parameters will be included to integrate the information from ExternE/LCA. Moreover in policy scenarios it will be analysed the response of the national energy systems to the variation of boundary conditions (e.g., emission limits, market allocation of new technologies and renewable). Start: Month 4 – End: Month 16 CompletedTask 2.4. Training in use of the packages and implementation of the basic country modelsTraining in use of the packages (see task 1.3) and implementation of the 25+ MS and NAS EU energy partial equilibrium basic country models.Start: Month 8 – End: Month 12 CompletedTask 2.5. Test runs and calibration of country modelsTest runs and calibration of EU-25 Member State and other European countries energy partial equilibrium basic models (MSM) which fully reproduce the existing detailed energy balances in the base year, and takes into account the existing system boundaries (context parameters of the reference scenario).Start: Month 10 – End: Month 18 CompletedTask 2.6. Implementation of the country specific runs and casesImplementation of the country specific models runs and cases with partial and /or full costs. Scenario analysis.Start: Month 16 – End: Month 28 90% Completed

STARTING POINT (September 2005):

During year 1, task 2.1 list of technologies, was completed. A list of reference technology was established by a working group and approved by the entire stream in month 10, slightly behind schedule.

Task 2.2, Characterisation of technologies, did commence in month 8 but the major part of task 2.2 could not be done until task 2.1 was completed. At the starting point, September 2005, the work with this large task was already in progress but the major share of the task was still to be carried out. The work of task 2.2 was partly based on a number of already existing, at the starting point, technology databases of different RS partners.

In task 2.3, definition of scenario parameters, a draft of a first scenario analysis existed at the starting point. This included a reference scenario based on a business as usual assumptions and policy cases of interest for EU stakeholders. A number of possible cases had been outlined. Formally this task is a part of RS 2a but it is a responsibility of the entire project.

118

In task 2.4, training in use of the packages and implementation of the basic country models, at the starting point, most partners were in the process of completing the country templates and basic training in use of the packages and some are in the process of implementing the basic country models.

PROGRESSThe second annual activity report of WP2 is concerned in particular with tasks 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, and 2.6, and, therefore, the progress achieved is described with reference to these tasks.Task 2.1 Completed Month 10.Task 2.2. Completed Month 22.The characterisation of the listed technologies covered a number of aspects concerned with the performance and cost of the different technologies, and has been carried out by some of the groups involved in stream 2.2. The work was divided into the sectors Heat and power supply, Industry, Residential, Commercial and Transport. Later Upstream technologies were added. The work was assumed o be based on existing data in existing data bases. However, the existing data was found not to cover all the needed data and an extensive data search had to be carried out in order to cover all the technologies of some of the sectors. This was unforeseen and led to some delays of the work. The data collection was based on a data format template from the ECN. ECN also coordinated the task, was responsible for the industry sector, and the fossil part of the Upstream sector, CIEMAT was responsible for the Residential sector, IER was responsible for the Heat and power supply sector, and Chalmers was responsible for the Commercial, Transport and biofuel part of the Upstream sector. The individuation of specific options for the different countries is ongoing. The list of technologies, task 2.1 is used as the basis for the characterisation. The work is coordinated by ECN with major contributions from CIEMAT. A data template is used for the structuring of the characterisation containing information as capacity, activity, economic lifetime, start year, process output and input, availability, efficiency, total investment cost, fixed and variable O&M costs and emissions. An initial set of data is available based on the contributions of ECN and CIEMAT. The Reference technology database was delivered in Month 22. Task 2.3 Definition of the context parameters of reference and alternative scenarios. Completed Month 18.A first draft on scenarios was circulated among partners and the DGTREN baseline scenario for 2004 Is chosen as reference (the assumptions should be corrected on the basis of actual oil prices). As concerns policy analysis, four key issues was selected: a post-Kyoto scenario; the application of policies on the penetration of renewable; a constraint to maximise the use of endogenous resources in EU; the internalisation of local and global externalities. Scenarios were firstly presented at RS2a workshop in month 13, further discussed at the RS2a workshop in month 18. The list of scenarios was sent to coordinator for circulation among stakeholders and presented at the I Policy Workshop in April 2006 (month 20). An extra work is required to specify the scenario variants according to the stakeholders’ preferences, but this work is beyond the task objectives and will not affect the RS2a activities.

Task 2.4 Training in use of the packages. Completed Month 12.

119

Additional working sessions were organised at the RS2a Workshop of Athens and Gothenburg, to allow the modellers to be trained on use of the new features of VEDA FE and their application in practice.

Task 2.5. Test runs and calibration of country models (MSM) Completed Month 20Test runs and calibration of EU-25 Member State and other European countries energy partial equilibrium basic models (MSM) which fully reproduce the existing detailed energy balances in the base year, and takes into account the existing system boundaries (context parameters of the reference scenario).

Task 2.6. Implementation of the MSM specific runs and cases. To be completed.After reproducing the existing detailed energy balances of the base year, the first part of this task was devoted to the implementation of the reference scenario hypothesis, taking into account country specific data and constraints. Business as usual analysis for the country models has been carried out and will be finalised by the end of month 28. IER, POLITO and IMAA is coordinating the activities related to the achievement of the final results.

DEVIATIONS As concerns the general status of WP2 there have been a number of minor delays which in turn have caused other minor delays but these will not result in any major overall time schedule changes.In particular, the necessary work and time involved in the completion of task 2.2 and data harmonisation with the preliminary SubRES were much underestimated. Other problems were caused once more by the unreliability of Eurostat energy balances that affected the calibration of country models, with particular regards to CHP modelling for most of the countries.It is therefore necessary to harmonize the country models to requirements of the Pan European model in order to obtain comparable levels of details both at Pan – EU and at national scale, to get and use the information (in modified way) for scenario analysis.


CHALMERS WP leader. Characterisation of commercial, transport and

bio fuel upstream sectors. Country specific modelling (Sweden, Iceland,

Norway).CIEMAT Characterisation of residential sector.

Country specific modelling (Spain, Portugal – UNL).

CRES Country specific modelling (Greece Cyprus, Malta).

ECN Coordinator of task 2.2. Development of task 2.2 template.

120

Characterisation of industry and fossil fuel upstream sectors.

Country specific modelling (The Netherlands, Ireland.

ENERO Country specific modelling (Romania).IMAA Coordinator of task 2.6.

Support to Chalmers in coordination of WP2 activities

Country specific modelling (Italy). Input to technology characterisation: several

revision of the technology repository.INFM Country specific modelling (Slovenia)

Revision of the technology repository.IPTS – JRC Contribution to CIEMAT for the

characterisation of Residential Technologies Contribution to CHALMERS for the

characterisation of Transport Technologies, based on the POLES-TRANSTOOLS database.

KANLO Support to the national teams for the implementations of country models

Harmonisation of Techrep and subRESKUL Scenario development

Demand projections Country specific modelling (Belgium, France).

POLITO Input to technology characterisation and testing of the SubRES versions

WG1 coordinator for the final results Country specific modelling.

PSI Coordinator of task 2.3. Input to technology characterisation (nuclear) Scenario development Country specific modelling (Switzerland).

RISOE Country specific modelling (Denmark).TTU Country specific modelling (Estonia, Latvia,

Lithuania)USTUTT - IER Coordinator of tasks 2.4 & 2.5.

Characterisation of heat and power sectors. Country specific modelling (Austria, Czech R.,

Germany, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia)VTT Input to technology characterisation.

Country specific modelling (Finland).

121


RS LEADER: IMAA

WP 3 Pan-European Model Implementation WP LEADER: USTUTT.ESA

Start Month: 19 End Month: 30ObjectivesThe general objective of WP3 is to implement the Pan European model and to check its consistency towards variations of boundary conditions. The country models will be jointly optimised in a multi-region mode for long term scenarios which take the EU stakeholders’ perspective into account. The detailed objectives are best described by means of the following tasks:Task 3.1. Test runs and calibration of the Pan-European model, to check the integrability of the 25 country models in respect to the Pan- EU trading variables Start: Month 19 – End: Month 27 Task 3.2.Integration of Pan-European model with ExternE/LCA. Start: Month 23 – End: Month 27.Task 3.3.Implementation of the Pan-European reference scenarios (Business As Usual - BAU), taking into account the overall existing system boundaries and considering the policies identified by the Scientific Committee. Start: Month 27 – End: Month 30STARTING POINT (March 2006): At the starting date, test runs and calibration of country models were in progress and a first document describing the structure of the Pan-European trade variables and trade structure for RPPs was circulated.Progress Task 3.1. Test runs and calibration of the Pan-European model, to check the integrability of the 25 country models in respect to the Pan- EU trading variables Start: Month 19 – End: Month 27 The different country model were linked together to implement the Pan-European model. Preliminary test runs without trades were carried out. After the definition of the trade links variables and Pan EU spreadsheet interfaces (developed jointly with task 1.6 of WP1 with the technical support of KANLO), the linkage was tested in several test runs.Task 3.2.The integration of Pan-European model with ExternE/LCA is at its beginning.

DEVIATIONS none

122


The bulk of the work was done by IER which is the leader of the WP.

In this leading role, IER was assisted by IMAA for the logistical tasks, i.e. the exchanges of information between the partners and collection of templates, and by KANLO for the issues concerning the implementation of interfaces.


RS LEADER: IMAA

WP 4 : Full Cost Interactive Analyses WP LEADER: KULeuven

Start Month: 24 End Month: 44ObjectivesThis WP concentrates on the simulation of policy scenarios with the fully developed models. The policy scenarios will be defined by the Scientific Committee in close interaction and iteration with the different streams. The full impact of the policies on the energy system and its full cost, the choice of technologies, the energy commodities and the environment will be computed. The equilibrium values for energy vectors, the market penetration for technologies will also serve as inputs for some policy scenarios computation in stream 1a (LCA approach). The macroeconomic consistency of the baseline and the scenarios will be ensured by the use of the general equilibrium model GEM-E3 covering the EU-25 Member State and other European countries. The detailed objectives are best described by means of the following tasks:Task 4.1. Combined use of general equilibrium models and the Pan-European partial equilibrium energy model to implement the set of scenarios decided by the Scientific Committee, in agreement with EU macro values; Start: Month 24 – End: Month 36.Task 4.2Evaluation of the impact of the policy scenarios on the energy system and its cost, the choice of technologies and the externalities and LCA burdens, based on the methodology developed in this IP Start: Month 30 – End: Month 44STARTING POINT (August 2006):This WP is strongly connected to WP3 that is concerned with the implementation of the Pan European model and the Reference scenario analysis, taking advantage from WP3 progresses and results. At the starting point (August 2006) the structure of the Pan European model trade links variables and Pan EU spreadsheet interfaces were defined and preliminary test runs were carried out. The macroeconomic background and the reference demand projections were derived with GEM-E3.

Progress

123

The WP 4 is at its beginning. The integration of Pan-European model with ExternE/LCA (WP3) and the implementation of scenarios policies (WP4) will be conducted jointly

DEVIATIONS none


RS LEADER: IMAA

WP5: Training, documentation and reporting WP LEADER: IMAA - CNR

Start Month: 4 End Month: 48OBJECTIVESThe general objective of WP 5 is to provide training, documentation and reporting on the models features and methodological interfaces (Integration of ExternE, LCA and MARKAL/TIMES) and to draw up the workshops proceedings.The detailed objectives are best described in the following tasks:Task 5.1 Training on use of software and country models: Start: Month 8 – End: Month 10 Completed

Task 5.2. Documentation on methodological interfaces and models features: Start: Month 8 – End: Month 30 90% Completed

Task 5.3. Preparation of National Reports: Start: Month 19 – End: Month 24 90% Completed

Task 5.4. Documentation on the Pan European model. Start: Month 28 – End: Month 34 Task 5.6. Workshops proceedings: Released in due time Start: Month 4 – End: Month 46 (1 month after each workshop) STARTING POINT (September 2005):

At the end of the first year (September 2006) several documents acknowledged the achievements of the main results, constituting a useful technical support to the modelers for the development of the country models and data management.

PROGRESSThe progress achieved is described with reference to the specific tasks.

124

Task 5.1 Completed in the first year. Accordingly to the development of WP2 activities, additional technical session were held at the RS2a Workshops of Athens and Gothenburg, to support the modellers in the development of the country models as well as to train in use of new software elements (additional to the ones developed in the first year) which allows the construction of users constraints and trade links among countries, enabling entry and processing of data specifically needed for constructing and operating the Pan European NEEDS model

Task 5.2. Completed. The Technical Paper “T 1.6: Interfaces for the Pan-European TIMES model” delivered in the framework of WP 1 activities provides an additional documentation on the spreadsheet interfaces, and could be considered an integral part of documentation released in the first year.

In the framework of this task the paper “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for supporting EU policies” which summarise the main features of the RES as well as the main steps of the work, was presented at the EEC 2006 Conference and was accepted for publication in “Environmental Economics 2006”, WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment Vol. 95 (ISSN 1743-3541). Eds. C.A. Brebbia, WIT Press Southampton (UK) and Boston (USA), 2006 (in press).

Task 5.3. CompletedThis activity is witnessed by the deliverable D5.14 “National Reports” that presents an overview of the national models for the 28 EU considered countries, which constitute the basis of the Pan – EU model, explaining in detail the main modelling assumptions as well as the preliminary results obtained for the BAU scenario. The eventual final results by country model will be presented at the nest RS2a Meeting, that will held in Stuttgart, November 2006, and an updated documentation will be released by month 28.The responsibility for revision and coordination of reporting activities on country models (D5.14 and T2.11) were shared among partners. Three working groups were defined as follows:WG1: POLITO, IMAA, INFM, CIEMAT, UNL, ENERO Coordinator: IMAA WG2: IER, CHALMERS, RISOE, VTT, TTU Coordinator: RISOEWG3: CRES, ECN, PSI, KUL, CMA-ENSMP Coordinator: CRES

The WG coordinators were responsible for revising the draft versions and informing the partners of the eventual modifications to be done. The overall coordination was under the responsibility of IMAA.

Task 5.6 Workshops proceedings were carried out and released on due time, under the responsibility of the Stream Leader and are available on the NEEDS website in the section Events of RS2a.The main outcomes of the RS2a activities for the second year in terms of deliverables, technical papers and other products are illustrated in more detail in the deliverable “D 5.15 Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”.DEVIATIONS

125

As concerns the general status of implementation of WP5 relatively to the 18- month time plan, there were not significant deviations in time scheduling. Milestones were achieved in due time, and the delay on time schedule due to connected task was minimised sharing the burdens among the partners. A strong collaboration between KANLO, IMAA – CNR and POLITO was also held, cooperating for the organisation of additional training activities and for supporting the less experienced groups in the achievement of the results.


CHALMERS Actively attended the RS2a meetings and training activities

Organised, in collaboration with IMAA - CNR, the V RS2a Workshop (Technical Session and Plenary Meeting) – Gothenburg May 29, June 2, 2006)

Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings Drafted the country reports of Iceland, Sweden

and NorwayCIEMAT Actively attended the RS2a meetings

Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings Drafted the country reports of Spain and

Portugal (UNL)CRES Organised, in collaboration with IMAA - CNR,

the IV RS2a Workshop “Assessment of draft country models results (WS2)” Athens, February, 20-22, 2006

Actively attended the RS2a meetings Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings

and other RS2a documentation Co-ordinated the National reports drafting for

WG3 countries Drafted the country reports of Cyprus, Greece

and MaltaECN Actively attended the RS2a meetings and

training activities Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings

and other RS2a documentation Contributed to the “Analytical overview of the

technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”

Drafted the country reports of Ireland and The Netherlands

ENERO Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings Drafted the country report of Romania

IMAA - CNR Acted as WP leader, coordinating exchanges between all partners involved in RS2a.

126

Organised and actively attended the RS2a meetings: IV RS2a Workshop “Assessment of draft country models results (WS2)” Athens, February, 20-22, 2006; V RS2a Workshop (Technical Session and Plenary Meeting) – Gothenburg May 29, June 2, 2006

Co-organised (with KANLO) and actively attended the additional training activities

Prepared and submitted the workshops proceedings.

Drafted the country report of Italy Prepared, revised and submitted the National

Reports, Co-ordinated the National reports drafting for

WG1 countries Co-ordinated, prepared and submitted the

“Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”

Co-ordinated, prepared and submitted the RS2a Second year activity report and DoW M 25 -42;

Provided inputs related to the participation of RS2a in RS IN

INFM Actively attended the RS2a meetings and training activities

Drafted the country reports of Slovenia Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings

and other RS2a documentation IPTS – JRC Reviewed the drafts of the workshop

proceedings and other RS2a documentationKANLO Coordinated the interactions between RS2a and

Stream Integration Actively attended the RS2a meetings Co – organised (with IMAA - CNR) additional

training activities Reviewed the drafts of the workshop

proceedings and other RS2a documentation Contributed to the “Analytical overview of the


Prepared as WP coordinator the sections concerning WP1 activities of the RS2a Second year activity report and DoW M 25 -42;

Coordinated together with IMAA - CNR the interactions between RS2a, Stream Integration, and Stream 1A.

KUL Actively attended the RS2a meetings and the additional training activities, supporting the

127

country models in the implementation of specific issues

Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings and other RS2a documentation

Drafted the country reports of Belgium and France (CMA - ENSMP)

Coordinated with KANLO the interactions between RS2a, Stream Integration and Stream 1A.

POLITO Actively attended the RS2a meetings and training activities

Co- organised, with IMAA – CNR and KANLO additional training activities to support WG1 partners

Drafted the country report of United Kingdom Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings

and other RS2a documentationPSI Actively attended the RS2a meetings and

training activities Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings

and other RS2a documentation Contributed to the “Analytical overview of the


Drafted together with KUL the Internal Paper “Key Drivers for Energy Trends in EU; Specification of the Baseline and Policy Scenarios”

Presented the paper “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for supporting EU policies” at the EEC 2006 Conference

Drafted the country report of Switzerland Provided inputs related to the participation of

RS2a in Integration StreamRISOE Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings

and other RS2a documentation Actively attended the RS2a meetings and

training activities Drafted the country report of Denmark Co-ordinated the National reports drafting for

WG2 countriesTTU Actively attended the RS2a meetings and

training activities Reviewed the drafts of workshop proceedings Drafted the country report of Estonia, Latvia and

Lithuania

128

USTUTT -ESA Actively attended the RS2a meetings and training activities


Contributed to the “Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”

Drafted the country reports of Austria, Czech R., Germany, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia

Contributed to the drafting and revision of the “Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”

VTT Actively attended the RS2a meetings and training activities


Contributed to the “Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”

Drafted the country report of Finland Contributed to the drafting and revision of the

“Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a”

129

2.6.2 List of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones


RS LEADER: IMAA


Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature Dissemination Level

DeliveryDue date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for

Deviation

D2. 9 Milestone 2: Workshop – Assessment of draft country models results (WS2)

O RE 18 18

D5.14 National reports

P PU 24 25 Delayed time schedule of preliminary tasks

D 5.15 Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 2a

R PU 24 24


RS LEADER: IMAA


130

Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title


DeliveryDue date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviation

T1.5 Updated TIMES code

P PU

T1.6 Spreadsheet interfaces for the Pan-European model

P PU 18 22 Necessity of harmonising the interfaces with the finalised country models and LCA/ExternE requirements which lead to excessively long discussions on the list of trade variables that took place within RS2a. The delay did not affect other tasks, since Trade Variables are only needed for operating the Pan European model, scheduled for Fall 2006.

T2.7 Reference technology database

P PU 17 22 Necessity of harmonising the data of the reference technology database with the ones of the technology repository (SubRES) used in the finalisation of country models.

T2.8 Draft results on country models

P RE 18 22 Necessity of better refining the templates and fixing the problems

131

arisen from the calibration steps, due mainly to inconsistencies and lack of data found in the Eurostat database.

T2.11 Final reports on country models

P PU 24 25 Delayed time schedule of preliminary tasks


RS LEADER: IMAA

LIST OF MILESTONES

MilestoneMilestone 2: Workshop – Assessment of draft country models results (WS2)

Due forMonth 18

Achieved inMonth 18 (February, 2006)

132

2.7 RS2b: Energy technology roadmap and stakeholders perspective



RS LEADERPaul Scherrer Institut (PSI)

WP N° 2: Establishment of social criteria

WP LEADER: University of Stuttgart (USTUTT. SOZ)

Start Month (actual)1 (September 2004)

End Month (actual)20 (May 2006)

OBJECTIVESThe aim of WP2 is to define a set of social criteria and indicators for the assessment of social effects of energy systems. A set of criteria and indicators established within deliverables D2.1/D2.2 was available at the beginning of the reporting period for use as input to an expert Delphi study. PROGRESSIn Workpackage 2, a set of social criteria and indicators for the assessment of social effects of energy systems has been developed, both by looking at previous attempts to conceptualize this problem and by the development of our own theoretical framework for the study of social sustainability. In order to focus this set of social indicators, a stakeholder and expert Delphi study was done within WP 2, where stakeholders and experts were asked about their opinion concerning the developed set of social criteria and indicators. To start this process, a questionnaire, which was based on our initial set of social indicators and criteria, was developed and sent to 52 European experts and stakeholders in November 2005. The experts and stakeholders were asked to evaluate the developed criteria and indicators regarding to their ability and importance for measuring social effects of energy systems. The answers to these questionnaires were analyzed and provided the basis for the discussions on the stakeholder Delphi workshop, which was organized on January 23 rd and 24th 2006 in Brussels. The Delphi workshop was attended by eleven participants, who came from the following stakeholder groups (the numbers are in brackets): industry (2), economic research (1), energy research (2), trade unions (1), political and administrative institutions (2), NGOs (2), and others (1). It was the aim of the Delphi workshop to examine to what extent the general structure of criteria and indicators is supported by the participants and thus can be used in the further research process. Having the results of the Delphi workshop, the research team of WP2 re-examined their initial set of social criteria and indicators, taking into account the results of the Delphi meeting. Considering the fact that the multi-criteria analysis will encompass all dimensions of sustainability the question was asked whether the originally developed set of 26 social criteria could be further condensed by employing a “ranking” procedure. This was done by taking into account the following three aspects:

First of all the research team focused on the recommendations of the participants in the exercise and attempted to rank the indicators in a way that suitably demonstrates the opinions of stakeholders. Second, the research team ranked the indicators by taking into account the availability of data and considered the feasibility of getting the data. Third, the output of this procedure is the final set of recommended social criteria and indicators that must be measured in WP 8.

133

The preliminary report D2.1 (set of candidate social criteria and indicators from literature review), which has been available since March 2005, was further extended by deliverable D2.2 (revised set of social indicators that satisfy basic requirements for the evaluation), including the results of the Delphi meeting and recommendations for the final set of criteria and indicators.

DEVIATIONS The work programme of WP2 has been modified. The first deliverable (D2.1) was made with one month delay. The first deliverable (D2.1) was provided in March 2005 and the second (D2.2) in August 2005. Both were integrated in the available report. The reasons for this delay were the difficulties encountered in the search for relevant indicators due to apparent lack of established social indicators meeting the requirements of the NEEDS-project. As a result, an intense discussion process and many iterations were needed before acceptable results could be documented in a report. As a consequence, the development of the questionnaire for the possible Delphi participants and for those finally selected also had to be postponed because it had to be based on an established set of indicators. The update of D2.2, based on the Delphi exercise, constitutes deliverable D2.3, which has been shifted from month 12 to month 20. These delays can be accommodated within the overall schedule and will not have negative consequences on the implementation of other WPs as margins were built into the original plan.


Partner 1:University of Stuttgart (USTUTT.SOZ)

Acted as WP2 Leader Convened activities of WP2 Participated actively at meetings within the

research stream and internal to the WP: February 2nd 2006 in Stuttgart, September 11th

and 12th 2006 in Rome Developed questionnaire needed for the

stakeholder Delphi Created stakeholder survey Analyzed survey results Planned stakeholder Delphi Invited stakeholders Hosted and managed Delphi procedure Analyzed Delphi results Disseminated information concerning Delphi

Meeting and recommended criteria and indicators

Extended report on social indicators and criteria by including a description of the survey and the Delphi procedure and results

Formulated recommendations on social indicators and criteria

Partner 2: GLOBE EUROPE Suggested potential Delphi participants Participated in the stakeholder Delphi

Partner 3: HELIO International Suggested potential Delphi participants Participated in the stakeholder Delphi Commented on report drafts

Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI) Acted as stream leader, coordinating

134

(Formally not a participant in WP2; direct involvement was necessary in order to assure compatibility with project goals and requirements on the overall set of indicators)

exchanges between all partners Conveyed the Stuttgart meeting on February

2nd 2006 Provided written comments on drafts and

working proposals Supported the production of the deliverables

of WP2 compatible with the goal of generating an energy technology roadmap under stakeholder perspectives

Supported the development of the questionnaire and suggested Delphi participants

Disseminated information concerning the choice of social indicators and the Delphi Meeting



WP N° 3: Establishment of full set of criteria and indicators

WP LEADER: Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI)

Start Month: 10 End Month: 33 OBJECTIVESThe goal of this package is to establish the full set of criteria and indicators that will be quantified to the extent possible. The set will include economic, environmental and social indicators. Review of sustainability criteria and indicators (WP1; D.1.1) and the preliminary set of social criteria and indicators (WP2;D2.1/D2.2) were available as input to WP3.

PROGRESSThe WP3 leader PSI performed an initial analysis of outputs from WP1 and WP2 with due concern to the needs of the project. A preliminary full set of criteria and indicators, consisting of economic, environmental and social criteria was then proposed by the WP3 leader (simultaneously the stream leader). The main considerations taken into account for the choice of specific indicators were as follows:

Results of a literature survey on sustainability indicators in general (past experience). Social indicators generated within a dedicated WP in a pioneering effort, which also

included a Delphi exercise. Capturing the essential characteristics of technologies and enabling differentiation

between them. Assuring that indicators are representative (if not necessarily complete). Keeping the number of indicators to a reasonable level and striving for balance in

terms of number of indicators from different pillars. Avoiding excessive overlapping. Limited aggregation of indicators provided that this involves no or minimum

subjectivity. Assuring practicability and feasibility; in particular having confidence that the

135

indicators can be generated within research stream RS2b or will be available from other NEEDS research streams.

From the practical point of view prospects for successful quantification belong to the most important requirements. The compatibility of the proposed set with the scope and level of detail implemented in the streams providing a part of the quantitative indicators (RS 1a, RS b, RS 1c, RS 2a) has been considered. Exchanges with relevant research streams to examine the feasibility of implementation took place. Compromises have shown to be necessary.

The proposed set of indicators was submitted to WP3 partners (including NGOs and an utility, which should enable some consideration of various internal stakeholder perspectives) and to leaders of all streams within NEEDS for comments. The WP3 leader presented the proposed set at the meeting of RS1a, the primary contributor of environmental indicators. Comments were received both directly at the meeting and later in writing. Comments received were implemented to the extent possible with due consideration of the constraints above.

Further steps include writing a summary report and implementing feedback from stakeholders to be based on a survey that will be carried out in WP12.

DEVIATIONS The preliminary set of indicators was slightly delayed, i.e. from Month 18 (February 2006) to Month 21 (May 2006). This was due to prolonged discussions with WP2 on the implications of the results of the Delphi exercise for the set of social indicators and on the most suitable harmonisation with economic and environmental indicators. Furthermore, the discussions within RS2b and with other streams took somewhat longer time than planned. The stakeholder survey on criteria and indicators (Survey 2; WP12) is not affected by this delay; the questionnaire for the survey can be generated only when the report on the full set will be available (the report was from the beginning planned for the next period). Furthermore, before implementing the survey the stakeholder database needs to be consolidated. Due to these logistic reasons preparation of Survey 2 has been shifted to the next period. The delays can be accommodated within the overall schedule and will not have negative consequences on the overall implementation of RS2b as some margins were built into the original plan.


CESIRICERCA Examined the full set of criteria and indicators prepared by PSI and indicated potentially missing ones

EDF Provided comments on the proposed set of criteria and indicators

GLOBE EUROPE No specific contribution in this reporting periodHELIO INTERNATIONAL Provided input and recommendations for

criteria and indicators to be used Participated and helped organise the Montreuil

Workshop, Paris 12-13 September 2005IIASA Commented the proposed set of criteria and

indicators having in mind later implementation of specific candidate MCDA methods

ISIS Provided comments on the proposed set of criteria and indicators

136

PSI Acted as WP2 Leader Provided initial proposal on the full set of

criteria and indicators Discussed the proposal with partners and

representatives from other streams Implemented feedback into the proposed set

University of Stuttgart (USTUTT. SOZ)

Clarified a number of issues concerning social criteria and indicators

Discussed representation and harmonisation of social criteria and indicators in the full set



WP N° 4: Extended technology characterisation and prospective advancements

WP LEADER: CESIRICERCA

Start Month: 15 End Month: 42OBJECTIVESThe objective of this package is to identify and examine credible improvements of technological characteristics of future electricity supply options to be considered in the sustainability evaluation and to provide relevant input for corresponding sensitivity studies. The package was initiated within the reporting period.

PROGRESSThis WP is divided into three components. The work done in the reporting period concerns the first component, that is “Review of reference technologies selected in RS 1a (WP 7-14) and in RS 2a, and identification of possible gaps from the perspective of the roadmap”. The corresponding milestone M5 has been achieved.

The following draft reports on technical specification of reference technologies (RS 1a) have been reviewed and commented:

Advanced fossil fuels (Draft Deliverable n° 7.1) Generation, storage and distribution systems for hydrogen (Draft Deliverable n° 8.1) Fuel cells (Draft Deliverable n° 9.1) Offshore wind (Draft Deliverable n° 10.1) Photovoltaic systems (Draft Deliverable n° 11.1) Solar thermal (Draft Deliverable n° 12.1) Biomass (Draft Deliverable n° 13.1) Advanced nuclear (Draft Deliverable n° 14.1)

For each of these Reports a working document was drafted where comments on specific statements and suggestions to improve the report content are reported. In the cases of Fuel Cells and Solar Thermal specific suggestions were made to consider some additional technologies. As regard Fuel Cells we suggest considering PAFC and MCFC for large CHP as they look more reliable than PEMFC. As regards Solar Thermal we suggest also considering the parabolic dish Stirling technology as it fits into scenarios with dispersed applications. For Solar Photovoltaic an update of economic indicators is recommended as this data dates back to 2004 and the

137

market is growing and changing fast. Finally, for Biomass some further primary energy supply chains are worth considering, such as agricultural waste, biomass from industrial processes and liquid fuels from vegetable matter.

Familiarisation with preliminary LCA for the current systems has taken place, followed by considerations of compatibility with the proposed set of environmental criteria and indicators.

DEVIATIONS There are no deviations.


CESIRICERCA Reviewed draft reports RS1a WP 7-14; comments and suggestion forwarded to RS2b leader.

Familiarisation with preliminary LCA and analysis of available data.

EDF No specific contribution in this reporting period.

PSI Exchanged ideas with WP-leader on the most appropriate course of actions.

Provided information on the inputs that will become available from stream 1a.

Reviewed comments on technologies received from WP-leader.



WP N° 5: Quantification of economic indicators

WP LEADER: EDF

Start Month: 19 End Month: 39 OBJECTIVESThe aim of this work package is the quantification of economic indicators defined in WP 3 (“Establishment of full set of criteria and indicators”). The economic indicators are a part of the full indicator set that also includes environmental, risk, and social indicators as defined in WP3. These indicators will serve as the direct input to the multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in WP10. The package was initiated within the reporting period and will be fully implemented between Month 19 and Month 39.

PROGRESS Contacts were made with other relevant streams aiming at gathering of inputs

- From RS 1a : Data on generation costs and hypothesis regarding resources (WP 7 to 15); learning curves (WP 3)

- From RS 2 a: Data and assumptions used in TIMES scenarios regarding generation

138

costs, fuel costs (hypothesis regarding resources) and learning curves.

Implications for WP5 of the criteria and indicators proposed within WP3 of RS 2 b were discussed.

DEVIATIONS No formal documents were due until end of year 2 Milestone: The consistency check that was planned for month 25 was delayed to month

27 due to the limited availability of the expertise needed.


CESIRICERCA No specific contributions in this reporting period.

EDF Gathered information from RS 1a and 2a relevant for economic indicators


RS LEADERPaul Scherrer Institut (PSI)

WP N° 6: Quantification of environmental indicators

WP LEADER: PSI

Start Month: 19 End Month: 39 OBJECTIVESThe objective of WP6 is to quantify the relevant ecological indicators defined in WP3. These indicators will serve as the direct input to the multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in WP10. WP6 was initiated within the reporting period and will be fully implemented between Month 19 and Month 39.PROGRESSThe fundamental issue for this package has been to resolve the question of which of the needed health and environmental indicators will be available from RS1a and RS1b and to what extent will they need to be adjusted to the needs of MCDA. In this context agreements have been reached with RS1a meaning that for advanced technologies generic indicators will be available. However, since RS2b would prefer to use country-specific indicators, these would need to be generated within RS2b through appropriate adjustments of the generic ones. The feasibility of such adjustments were addressed and elaborated with PSI’s experts on LCA and external cost assessment. As a result the adjustments are considered achievable and will be implemented.

DEVIATIONS There are no deviations until now. Nevertheless, the original expectation was that country-specific environmental indicators will be generated externally to RS2b. Thus, this WP will come under a substantial pressure in the next reporting period.

139


CESIRICERCA No specific contribution in this reporting period.

PSI Investigated the expected availability of ecological indicators within streams 1a and 1b that could be used as input to MCDA.

Identified gaps and needs of adjustments and discussed these issues with LCA and impact assessment specialists.

Provided necessary inputs to RS2b WP3, serving the purpose of specifying indicators that realistically can be quantified for use in MCDA.



WP N° 7: Quantification of risk indicators WP LEADER: Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI)

Start Month: 19 End Month: 39OBJECTIVESThe objective of WP7 package is to estimate quantitative indicators for severe accident risks for the set of technologies considered within NEEDS. These indicators are being defined in WP3. Results will be based on PSI’s severe accident database ENSAD, except for nuclear systems, for which predictive analyses need to be performed. The risk indicators generated will serve as an input to the multi-criteria decision analysis in WP10. WP7 was initiated within the reporting period and will be fully implemented between Month 19 and Month 39.

PROGRESSCurrent content of PSI’s severe accident database ENSAD (status year 2000) has been reviewed. The accident records stored in ENSAD will be updated to the year 2005 as part of the NEEDS project. A list of primary information sources to be used for this purpose has been compiled. Updates of relevant databases selected for survey have also been acquired. Surveying and querying of primary information sources, extraction of relevant accident records and their subsequent harmonization within the ENSAD framework has been initiated (e.g., databases MHIDAS, HSELINE/LLP, ARIA/BARPI, Fireworld).

For the nuclear chain a simplified Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) will be used. The corresponding analysis framework has been defined and a plan for the implementation has been developed.

DEVIATIONS Deviations from the project workprogramme, and corrective actions taken/suggested: identify the nature and the reason for the problem, identify contractors involvedNo deviations from the project workprogramme have currently been identified, i.e. evaluation of primary information sources and their subsequent implementation in ENSAD is proceeding according to schedule. Also no deviations occurred within the current reporting period regarding

140

the implementation of the simplified PSA for the nuclear chain .


EDF Reviewed the selection of primary information sources.

Provided conceptual input on potential risk indicators to be used within WP7

PSI Provided input to RS2b WP3 for the selection of risk indicators to be quantified

Compiled of a list of primary information sources to be surveyed for updating PSI’s database ENSAD

Evaluated primary information sources and their integration into ENSAD

Defined simplified PSA framework and plan for implementation



WP N° 8: Quantification of social indicators WP LEADER: University of Stuttgart (USTUTT.SOZ)

Start Month: 19 End Month: 30 OBJECTIVESThe aim of WP 8 is the quantification of the social indicators formulated in WP2 of Stream 2b and adapted by WP3 of Stream 2b. The operation of the empirical work of the WP has been specified. The quantification of indicators will be done for four selected countries: Italy, Switzerland, Germany and France. The package was initiated within the reporting period.

PROGRESSIn Workpackage 2 a set of criteria and indicators has been developed to assess the social effects of energy systems. This set of criteria and indicators forms an input into an overall set of indicators where it has been adopted subject to some restructuring and harmonisation with the environmental and economic sets in WP3.

The next step for Stream 2b is the quantification of indicators which is done for the social indicators by workpackage 8., Two methodological strategies are applied for this quantification:

1. a research on existing datasets which allows to quantify the social indicators which are the outcome of workpackage 3

2. where data are not available or are not existing, own research will be done.

As a first step, ,the research team of WP8 started in May 2006 to get an overview of existing datasets which might be useful for the needs of workpackage 8. In order to do so, An an extensive internet and literature search was done,and existing databases for energy indicators as well as social scientific databases were also searched. The best sources are the Eurobarometer

141

Surveys or Eurostat, dealing with the public perception of energy systems. But these datasets also raise serious problems. General problems with these available datasets include the specification of technologies used in the surveys and the time periods for which data are available. An additional problem is that data are available only for a few indicators. There are also differences in the levels of scale between the NEEDS indicator set and the existing datasets. Some data are only available on a nominal scale level, while at least an ordinal scale level is needed. Some existing data can only be used to substantiate indicators, but most of the social indicators must be obtained by conducting expert interviews.

This means that most indicators must be quantified. Expert interviews are performed for this purpose within WP 8. As a first step in this process, experts must be selected who can be interviewed. We have already searched for experts in France, Switzerland, Germany and Italy who are able to give the information needed by the project. The time schedule of the interviews must be coordinated with other workpackages, especially workpackage 3, which must decide on the final set of indicators. The interviews will be carried out once the final set of technologies has been settled and the set of indicators frozen, i.e. after evaluating the 2 nd survey of WP12. It is thus expected that the interviews will be conducted in April/May 2007 (month 32/33). It is not planned to conduct a standardized expert survey but to do semi-standardized interviews. This means that the experts who are interviewed do not get a questionnaire with fixed response alternatives, but ratherthat the interview is done with guidelines in order to also get the experts’ justification for their statements. This methodology allows a better understanding of the experts’ views on the questions asked in the interviews . DEVIATIONS Up to now there are no deviations.


GLOBE EUROPE, HELIO International

These partners will contribute actively from month 25. Their main task will be to provide feedback on the selected experts for interviews and the half standardised interviews.

PSI(Formally not a participant in WP8; direct involvement was necessary in order to assure compatibility with project goals and requirements on the overall set of indicators)

Acted as Stream leader, coordinating exchanges between all partners.

Participated in the Stuttgart meeting on February 2nd 2006.

Provided support for the quantification process.

University of Stuttgart (USTUTT.SOZ)

Workpackage Leader Hosted the Stuttgart meeting on February 2nd

2006 Convened activities of WP8 Searched for existing data in the existing

literature Searched for existing data in the internet Disseminated information concerning selected

experts Disseminated information concerning

literature and data research

142



WP N° 9: MCDA approach and tool selection

WP LEADER: IIASA

Start Month: 13 End Month: 24 OBJECTIVESThe objective of this WP is to select the MCDA approach and software best suited for the purpose of NEEDS. Interactions with stakeholders will be taken into account when making the choice.

PROGRESSThe WP was finished, achieving the objectives according to the workpackage description for the period M13-24.

The results of the work are documented in two deliverables, i.e.:

the report on requirement analysis for the multicriteria analysis planned for RS2b (deliverable T9.1);

the report on multicriteria methodology for the NEEDS project (deliverable T9.2).

The requirement analysis took more time than originally planned because more interactions with the other teams participating in RS2b were required than originally expected.

In order to make the requirement analysis consistent with the actual needs of RS2b, to make a realistic assessment of data and to have the possibility of stakeholder interaction, the requirement analysis process was organized in three stages:

1. Discussions with partners within RS2b, including in-depth discussions between PSI and IIASA staff contributing to WP9.

2. A Workshop on requirement analysis, open to all interested parties, was organized at IIASA on January 26-27, 2006.

3. Follow-up discussions between PSI and IIASA teams, and preparation of several drafts of the extensive report on the requirement analysis.

The report on the multicriteria analysis has been developed in parallel with the requirement analysis report. The original plan was to analyze the available methods and tools for multicriteria analysis, and to propose one of the established methods to be applied for the NEEDS RS2b. However, although many methods exist for the analysis of a set of discrete alternatives, none of them was optimally suited for NEEDS RS2b. This might be a surprising conclusion therefore the report provides a detailed analysis of the features of such methods and compares the features with the characteristics of the problem defined in the requirement analysis presented. The report therefore providesan extensive overview of methods pertinent to multicriteria analysis of sets of discrete alternatives that have a large set of alternatives and a large number of criteria organized into hierarchical structures.

The report proposes a consistent methodology for the whole process of multicriteria analysis, tailored to the requirements analysis. The corresponding method and tool will be developed and

143

tested in the next phase. Because of uncertainties involved in such a development process at this stage we do not exclude the possibility of using an existing method (weighted sum approach or reference point method) in parallel or as an alternative. Data mining methods will be used with both the new, proposed approach and the existing method to analyze patterns in stakeholder preferences and rankings for individual and group profiles. Some methodological elements require more research but the experienced staff involved feel the proposed approaches are likely to be successful.

DEVIATIONS The original deadline for the requirement analysis report was postponed in order to make the analysis consistent with the actual needs of RS2b, with a realistic assessment of data and the possibility of interactions with stakeholders in the requirement analysis process.

Although the first technical report was delayed, this had no negative influence on the results of the WP9. Instead, it made it possible to not only deliver the final results of the WP9 on time, but also to achieve the consistency with the objectives of the RS2b. Moreover, the scope of the WP9 was extended because the examination of the requirement analysis and the existing multicriteria methods and tools showed that there is no off-the-shelf method or tool that is fully suitable for the purpose of the work. Therefore, in addition to the original plan an outline of a new approach has been elaborated. The second technical report used the first as the core input and was delivered according to the original schedule.


IIASA Coordinated the WP. Organised Workshop on MCDA Requirement

Analysis, Vienna, 26-27 January 2006. Co-authored report on MCDA requirement

analysis. Authored report on methodology and tool

selection. Provided knowledge of, and experience with,

a wide selection of multicriteria methods and tools, as well as model-based decision-support methods and applications (especially in policy-making), data-mining methods, and web-based database-oriented distributed applications..

PSI Actively contributed to the Workshop on MCDA Requirement Analysis, Vienna, 26-27 January 2006.

Co-authored report on MCDA requirement analysis.

Commented report on methodology and tool selection.

Provided knowledge of, and experience with, application of multicriteria methods to analysis of energy problems, experience with model-based decision-making support in energy, including interactions with

144

stakeholders, knowledge of definitions and structures of criteria to be used in RS2b, characteristics of the sets of alternatives to be analyzed, and of the stakeholders to be involved in the analysis process.



WP N° 10: Evaluations and analysis integration

WP LEADER: Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI)

Start Month: 19 End Month: 48OBJECTIVESThe objective of this WP is to perform the actual MCDA ranking of NEEDS technologies and scenarios, including 1) selection or design of a MCDA preference elicitation survey compatible with the methodology chosen in WP9, 2) implementation of this survey, 3) collection and coordination of multicriteria data from other tasks, 4) performance the actual MCDA rankings for individuals, 5) analysis of group preferences and rankings, and 6) comparison with total cost rankings.

PROGRESSThis task is strongly end-weighted in the NEEDS schedule, as it is interdependent with the choice of MCDA method by WP9 and dependent upon data from other tasks. For this period (M19-24) the primary emphasis has been on the preparations for the implementation of MCDA. This includes: 1) considerations of criteria and indicator structure and content; 2) issues for the establishment of method(s) to be used; 3) characteristics of stakeholders to be engaged, and 4) design issues related to the elicitation of stakeholder preferences.

As a preparatory stage to the analysis it was necessary to explore the following issues that were needed as input to the requirement analysis (and consequently, to the proposed methodology of multicriteria analysis). Two streams of activities were performed:

1. The properties of technological options were analyzed, similar to the technology and scenario alternatives expected in RS2b. The results of this analysis were used in test cases exploring the approaches considered for the multicriteria analysis report of WP9.

2. Diverse approaches to the treatment of the hierarchical structure of criteria (developed in WP3) were analyzed from the perspective of the multicriteria analyses reported in WP9. This structure is represented as an unbalanced tree (with the depth of branches ranging from two to four), thus it implies non-standard requirements for the multicriteria analysis methods to be applied in RS2b.

The design aspects of the of the multi-criteria preference survey that were addressed include:

Coordination with WP9 on survey requirements as part of the requirements analysis for the choice of MCDA methodology,

Choice of basic survey method (i.e. online survey v. paper-based mail survey), driven by the need to- Provide iterative elicitation of stakeholder preferences for improved quality

145

- Reduce administrative labour required,- Reduce the time between survey and results at the end of the NEEDS schedule,

Design of basic survey interface (general design of interactive graphic webpages), and Survey of available software for implementation of webpage survey.

The choice of an interactive web-based survey means that several of the objectives must be combined in the software implementation, i.e. that the graphical interface must provide preferences to the MCDA methodology that combines them with the database of results to produce a ranking that is immediately reflected back to the user by interactive graphics for their iterative modification or approval. The conceptual design for this process has been advanced, including consideration of the hierarchical structure of the criteria, the selection of interface templates from prior work, and the relative advantages of different graphics interfaces based on the browser/client requirements. DEVIATIONS WP9 has shown that the MCDA requirements cannot be best met by an existing MCDA methodology, requiring new methodological developments. This means that the survey website implementation will require close coordination with the method being developed, and preferably the ability to also elicit preferences for an existing, less satisfactory method if a parallel or alternative implementation is deemed necessary. (Future deviations, not requiring action in the period reported.)


IIASA Meeting, information exchanges and discussions with PSI, coordination of research with WP9

Performed tests with data sets characterising various technological options

Examined various approaches to the treatment of hierarchical structure of criteria

PSI Coordination of WP10 Meeting, information exchanges and

discussions with IIASA; coordination of research with WP9

Carried out initial design of stakeholder preference survey

Defined stakeholder categories



WP N°11: Acceptability of monetary valuation methods and their potential role in the energy policy making process

WP LEADER: ARMINES

146

Start Month: 1 End Month: 18OBJECTIVESWP 11 dealt with the acceptability of monetary valuation methods and their potential role in energy policy making processes. Its ultimate goal was to identify the factors promoting or hindering the use of monetary valuation techniques and results in the actual energy-policy making processes at the Member State level.It included two core components:

1. a set of case studies analysing how monetary valuation and other methods are embodied in energy policy making processes in three countries : France, the UK and the USA.

2. a modelling exercise using the political economy tools to understand how such methods can interact with informational lobbying in policy making games.

The milestone was the identification of the conditions favouring use of external costs for energy policy making.

PROGRESSWe describe the progress made for the case studies and the theoretical analysis separately.

Case studies on the use of monetary valuation studies in policy making in U.S., U.K. and France :

Most of the work was carried out during the previous reporting period. We made a few additional phone interviews in October and November 2005 with US and UK industry representatives. Then we drafted a first version of the final case study report integrating points made at the Paris meeting in September 2005 and comments by Helio International in December 2005. The updated draft was sent for comments at the end of May 2006. The report was revised and finalised in July 2006.

The main conclusions of the report are that the diffusion of monetary valuation of externalities in the policy arena varies significantly across countries. The existence of official requirements to consider full costs and benefits of proposed regulations and/or official guidelines appears to be crucial to explain this pattern.

In addition, the use of monetary valuation of externalities and CBA is much more limited in the policy process dealing with energy than in other areas (e.g., transport, water policy). A key explanation lies in the lack of credibility and the size of the uncertainty when using these methods to quantify impacts which are specific to the energy policy field, e.g. the long term impacts of nuclear waste or the impacts of climate change. Further research in these areas should be a priority.

Theoretical analysis/modelling:

Having made the literature review in the previous period, we developed simple models to contrast two ways of collecting information on environmental externalities in November 2005: monetary valuation methods and the simple discussion with green lobby groups (informational lobbying).

We prepared a theoretical report in January focusing on two questions How does the efficiency of MVE compare with simple informational lobbying? How can MVE be inserted efficiently in policy making processes?

147

It was sent for comments in May 2006. We revised and finalised in July 2006.

The report addresses two questions: How does the efficiency of Monetary Valuation of Externalities compare with simple informational lobbying? And how can MVE be inserted efficiently in policy making processes? This economic analysis shows that communication with the green lobbies tends to be more efficient when the divergence of interests between the green group and the regulator is limited.

DEVIATIONS There was one deviation from the plan in schedule. We sent the two reports for comments at the end of May (instead of February). Since WP11 was independent from other WPs this had no consequences for the progress of the stream.


ARMINES Acted as WP leader Made interviews in France, UK and the US Wrote a case study interim report and a

theoretical report Collected comments on the two reports from

other research teams of the NEEDS project. Revised accordingly the reports

RS 2b: Energy Technology Roadmap and Stakeholders Perspectives


WP N° 12: Organisation and management of the surveys

WP LEADER: ISIS

Start Month: 3 End Month: 42OBJECTIVESThe general objective of the WP is to organise and coordinate the surveys addressed to stakeholders. In the first 12 months, 4 sets of surveys had been identified with the following respective focuses: 1) acceptability of the externality concept; 2) acceptability of a set of criteria and indicators to be used in the MCDA analysis; 3) acceptability of the internalisation principles; 4) MCDA analysis (see RS2b_D12.1).

The specific objectives for the M13-30 period had been established as follows:

Organisation of a database of contacts representing different categories of stakeholders, Run of surveys n°1 (acceptability of the externality concept) and n° 2 (acceptability of a

set of criteria and indicators)

PROGRESSOrganisation of a database of stakeholdersThe organisation of a database of contacts has been a major concern during the second period. Names and full contact details of stakeholders across Europe have been collected and organised according to main categories and further sub-categories.

148

The European stakeholders’ database currently contains around 750 names (see RS2b_T12.2), excluding Switzerland for which a more comprehensive set has been produced, containing around 1200 contacts. A further update is planned in order to achieve a better balance between the various countries as well as between stakeholder categories within the countries. This should ensure a more representative sample at the end for the surveys and the MCDA analysis. Particular attention will be given to the four countries selected for the MCDA analysis: France, Germany, Italy and Switzerland.

Run of surveysFollowing various iterations with the RS Leader and the other RS partners, it was decided to merge survey n° 3 (acceptability of the internalisation principles) and n° 1, as questions on the internalisation principles and methods will be included in the first survey. Furthermore, the survey n° 4 (MCDA analysis) will be part of the work carried out by WP10 (MCDA evaluations and analysis integration). As for the remaining surveys n° 1 and n° 2, it was decided that they will be carried out separately in M 27 and M 30 respectively.

A draft of the survey questionnaire n°1 has been produced (see T12.3), while the survey questionnaire n°2 has been postponed to M 28 (see ‘deviations’)

DEVIATIONS Due to logistic reasons the formulation of the second stakeholder survey was postponed to the next period (it can only be done when the report on the full set of criteria and indicators becomes available; the report is planned for month 27).


EDF Worked on the French stakeholder list.

GLOBE EUROPE No specific contributions in this reporting period

.HELIO INTERNATIONAL Worked on the French and European

stakeholder list

ISIS Coordinated activities related to the organisation of both the database and the surveys

Collected stakeholders’ contacts and their organisations according to selected categories

Drafted the first questionnaire for the first run of surveys

PSI Strongly supported the coordination of activities related to organisation of both the database and the surveys.

Set up a comprehensive list of stakeholders for Switzerland

USTUTT.SOZ Worked on German Stakeholder list

Provided input and comments on

149

questionnaire for the first survey



WP N° 13: Analysis and Elaboration of the Results and Management of the Communication Aspects

WP LEADER: ISIS/PSI/USTUTT.SOZ

Start Month: 13 End Month: 48 OBJECTIVESThis WP is the communication work package in research stream 2b, oriented towards multiple goals. WP13 will process information within research stream 2b as well as well as information between research stream 2b and other streams, particularly RS 3c. This includes also preparation and management of communication workshops. WP13 will be fully implemented between Month 19 and Month 48.

PROGRESSProgress towards objectives – tasks worked on and achievements made with reference to planned objectives, identify contractors involvedParticipants in this WP were engaged in discussions on the content and structure of surveys, in particular surveys concerning the acceptability of the externality concept, assessment results and their uses. In addition to regular general meetings between partners, bilateral meetings also took place leading to agreements on specific desirable features of the surveys, the intended processing of information, division of responsibilities and priorities for communication. Agreements have been made and will be implemented once the surveys are ready for processing.

DEVIATIONS Deviations from the project workprogramme, and corrective actions taken/suggested: identify the nature and the reason for the problem, identify contractors involvedThe level of activity in this WP was somewhat lower than planned. This is reflected in the relatively low use of resources allocated to this package. Though contributions were made as intended to support WP12, due to the delay in implementation of the surveys information processing planned within WP13 was postponed. Also, the communication activities can only take place when the results from surveys are available and analysed. It is expected that activities within WP 13 will intensify in the next period.


ARMINES No specific contributions in this reporting period

CESIRICERCA No specific contributions in this reporting period

EDF No specific contributions in this reporting period

150

GLOBE INTERNATIONAL No specific contributions in this reporting period

HELIO INTERNATIONAL Participated in the NEEDS First Meeting of the Policy Advisory Group in Rome 6-7 April 2006

Participated in the FP7 consultation by DG Research, Brussels 2-3 June 2006 P 13

IIASA No specific contributions in this reporting period

ISIS No specific contributions in this reporting period

PSI Co-initiated and conducted discussions on the structure and content of the surveys to assure that the data and other information that are required for further processing within specific WPs will be delivered by the surveys

USTUTT.SOZ Provided comments concerning the organisation of communication workshops

2.7.2 List of Deliverables, Technical papers and Milestones




Deliverable

N°

Deliverable Title


DeliveryDue date

DeliveryActual/Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviation

D2.3 Updated report on social indicators accommodating Delphi results

R PU 18 20 Consequence of earlier encountered difficulties with identifying relevant technology-specific social indicators

D11.1 Report on the use of external costs in energy policy decisions

R PU 18 23 Extension of scope and of review process

D14.1 Analytical overview of the technical and

R PU 24 24

151

scientific production of the stream 2b




Title Due in Deviations

T6.1: Specification of health and environmental indicators to be directly available from other streams needs to be generated or adapted by WP5, WP6, WP7 and WP8 respectively (integrated in a note on the full set of criteria and indicators)

21

T9.1: Report on the requirement analysis 18

T9.2: Report on the survey of suitable MCDA tools, including recommendations for use in NEEDS

24

T12.2: Database of stakeholders (preliminary) 18 Continuous; preliminary version available since month 18 is being further expanded

T12.3: Survey questionnaire No. 1 (draft) 21



LIST OF MILESTONES

Milestone Due in Achieved/Expected in

152

M1: Delphi workshop 17 17

M2: Preliminary set of criteria and indicators 18 22

M5: Examination of advanced electricity technologies covered in RS1a and RS2a and identification of gaps

21 23

M7: Resolution of scope issues based on outputs of WP3, RS1a and RS1b

24 24(few points still remaining)

M9: Selection of experts for interviews 21 21(preliminary selection)

M11: Internal workshop on requirements 17 17

M12: Selection of technological options and analysis cases in view of availability of indicators and stakeholder inputs

24 28(due to later than expected availability of necessary information from other streams)

M13: RS2b Internal workshop for the discussion of the survey content and structure(Workshop was replaced by a number of bilateral meetings)

21 24

153

RS 3a: Transferability and Generalisation


RS 3a: Transferability and generalisation RS LEADER SWECO Grøner

WP N°1: Generalisation Model WP LEADER USTUTT.TFU


OBJECTIVES The objective is to develop a methodology to generate averaged and aggregated external cost estimates with features as needed for policy purposes, life cycle impact analysis and energy modelling. Default data and equations for deriving approximate values will be produced to review criteria and indicator sets for the assessment of energy systems, proposed and/or used within international and selected national projects. Particular attention will be paid to criteria and indicators addressing sustainability of energy supply. PROGRESS As the WP has just started mostly been planning and integration activities The tools and data sets developed in stream 1 b will be used to perform a number of model runs for individual sources and regions with different emission and receptor patterns. Based on those runs a methodology will be developed to parameterise and generalise the results in order to make them transferable to other policy situations, taking into account the different population densities and meteorological conditions as far as possible. Furthermore, a set of generalised values will be derived which can be used for different policy purposes without loosing the site- and region specific characteristics of the estimates. Work is ongoing - however, results are not produced up to now.

DEVIATIONS No deviation from the project workprogramm - No planned deliverables during project month 13 - 30


AUTH Model Preparation, Methodology and Calculations: Local Air Qualità Work regarding parameterisation of results of local models

ISIS Requirements for Policy

Met.no Work regarding development of recommendations to account for non-linearity, especially the case for impacts from secondary pollutants, which form in the air like ozone and PM10. Based on model runs with the EMEP model the relation between marginal damage and the total emissions of pollutants is parameterised. Model

154

Preparation, Methodology and Calculations: Regional Air Quality

USTUTT.TFU WP management Interaction with other WPs and RSs. Model Preparation, Methodology and Calculations: Toxic substances in Air, Water and Soil / Effect modelling

RS 3a: Transferability and generalisation RS LEADER: SWECO Grøner

WP N°2: Value Transfer Technique WP LEADER: SWECO Grøner


OBJECTIVES The objective of this work package is to develop valid transfer units and procedures, which can be applied in cost-benefit analysis, green accounting, energy modelling and assessment of energy technologies. PROGRESS Review different benefit transfer techniques: i. unit transfer with and without corrections for different income level ii. benefit functions iii. meta analysis The WP has started clarifying the links and input from other streams to consider these topics. Moreover the WP has started a review of transfer methodologies to be used for the WP-objectives. DEVIATIONS none


WP N°3: Uncertainty WP LEADER ARMINES


OBJECTIVES The objective is to develop a methodology to estimate the uncertainty of the transfer/ generalisation of ExternE results, use this methodology to estimate the uncertainty of external costs in policy applications, and develop suitable ways of presenting the uncertainties and communicating them to policy makers and stakeholders.

PROGRESS This work begins with the uncertainties of the damage costs for each of the individual burdens (e.g. the cost per kg of pollutant emitted by a power plant) that have been calculated in WP7 of stream 1b. But for policy applications one needs to take into account additional issues, such as: i. what is the time frame of the policy application in question; ii. what technologies are under consideration, iii. which countries are affected, and iv. how representative are the generalizations of the damage costs of WP1? The WP has started clarifying the connections and input from other streams to consider these topics.

155

DEVIATIONS none


WP N°4: Cost-Benefit Analysis WP LEADER: U Bath


OBJECTIVES To develop and test extended CBA methodologies, through the exchange of information, experiences and results between the research streams 3.a on one hand, 1.b, 1c and 1.d on the other. While the work there in is focused on micro scale analysis, cost-benefit analyses are carried out at a macro scale, and will be applied to an EC measure or directive in one Member country and one Accession Country.

PROGRESS Application of cost-benefit analysis is necessary for evaluating social, economic and environmental effects of measures and policies realizing in energy sector. If external costs were included in the extended CBA analysis, it is necessary to include a factor for the discounted environmental (or external) cost associated with energy system. Monetary costs of pollution control will be compared with an environmental impact statement on the effects of pollution, including the distribution of those effects both geographically and over time. The work was therefore mostly targeted at a review of ongoing research particularly worked out within the stream 1b (e.g. impact extension, new monetary valuations, MSC of carbon sensitivity on discount rate anf functional form…) and 1d (identification of case studies for CBA). Hence, the work in the second periodic report has been mostly related to the kick-off meeting and planning activities. The WP has also been working on list of suggested case studies preformed in WP4/WP5. The possible methods and approaches for conducting CBA case studies have been continuously reviewing. The guide will be prepared in month 32 and presented at the joined meeting with the stream 1d in that the CBA case studies are planned to be performed. DEVIATIONS none

RS 3a: Transferability and generalisation RS LEADER: SWECO Grøner

WP N°5: Green Accounting WP LEADER: CUEC


156

OBJECTIVES This WP intends to: i. analyse appropriate, scientifically and policy relevant accounting methods ii. use estimation methods on energy externalities for adjustments of national accounts as GDP (capital and income account), and propose relevant indicators, with particular reference to the newly associated countries and the Mediterranean Partner countries involved in the IP (Stream 1d)

PROGRESS The work will rely on the latest results from the EC-project GREENSENSE. Analysis of current analyses, based on the work of SEEA-2003 is performed. The methods for calculating depletion of non-renewable energy resources, physical accounts as well as methods for adjusted national accounts are included in SEEA- 2003. An assessment of current analyses from Eurostat, WB and UN will be performed. The WP has been working with on planning an coordination with other streams including and review of state-of-the-art methods. Most of the work load will however come later in the NEEDS-progress. DEVIATIONS none


WP N°6: Coordination WP LEADER SWECO Grøner


OBJECTIVES The goal is to assure that appropriate interactions between tasks take place, that progress is according to the plans and the quality of work is highly satisfactory. While the overall IP co-ordinator is responsible for the administrative co-ordination, there is a need for co-ordination of research work to be carried out within the various WPs.

PROGRESS The co-ordination has included: • Organising a stream Kick-off meeting in Lillehammer March 2006 • discussing and resolving issues in co-operation with partners • monitoring compliance of the work progress with the project plan and, where necessary, taking appropriate actions to correct deviations from the schedule • establishing and maintaining links to other Research Streams • representing stream 3a in the NEEDS steering committee.

DEVIATIONS D6.1 “Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 3a” has not been produced as neither deliverables nor technical papers were expected for the reporting period.

157

2.8.2 List of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones No planned Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones during project months 13 - 30

158

2.9 RS 3b: Dissemination and Communication


RS 3b: Dissemination and Communication

RS LEADER: ISIS

WP N° 2 - Policy workshop organization WP LEADER: ISIS

Start Month: 17 End Month: 44OBJECTIVESTo establish a restricted “Policy Advisory Group”, which would form a continuous bridge between the internal project activities and the external world, allowing NEEDS to face and discuss its crucial policy and scientific achievements with a competent and advised audience, being in turn fed and counselled by it.

To organise the first Policy Workshop in Spring 2006 to primarily discuss and validate a set of policy scenarios to serve as the reference for future modelling work.

PROGRESSA list of around 50 stakeholders and policy makers in the field of energy externalities has been compiled with inputs provided by all Stream leaders, the aim being their recruitment in the NEEDS Policy Advisory Group.

The first Policy Workshop took place in Rome on 7 April 2006 and all collected contacts of the PAG were invited. The workshop welcomed 24 delegates, 14 coming from external institutions and 10 from the NEEDS project.

The Workshop was divided in two parts: the first one provided a general overview of the Energy supply and demand forecasting models extensively used within the EC on the one side and the NEEDS- TIMES model as well as three policy scenarios which will serve as the reference for the future NEEDS modelling work on the other side. The second part was structured in the form of a Q&A session where stakeholders had the opportunity to know more about NEEDS and the TIMES model and at the same time provided useful recommendations.

All in all, the NEEDS Policy Advisory Group initiative proved extremely well perceived and useful, both in terms of content and attendance. The lively debate provided the NEEDS team with significant inputs for future work, while a feeling of commitment and interest towards the NEEDS activities was generally felt within the Group.DEVIATIONS none


159

ISIS ISIS was the main responsible for all activities described. Support and inputs from all RS leaders have been regularly provided

RS3b Dissemination and Communication

RS LEADER: ISIS

WP N° 6 (former 7): Internal internet-based project communication/ Dissemination of results from project streams

WP LEADER: ISIS

Start Month: 13 End Month: 31OBJECTIVESThe objective is to set up communication structures within the project that allow an effective communication to a wide public. The workpackage will also ensure continuous dissemination of results from the different project streams through the public website.

Task 6.1 Further development and maintenance of internal Internet-based project communication structuresTask 6.2: Dissemination of results from the different project streams(public website and newsletters)

PROGRESSTask 6.1 Further development and maintenance of internal Internet-based project communication structuresAn efficient internal communication structure had been set up by ISIS since the very beginning of the project in order to:• Ease communication at different levels of participation (between Stream leaders, within a single Stream,general communication to all contractors, etc)• To keep record of documents• To follow meetings and resultsThis structure has been further improved by ISIS and continuously updated by the coordinator and all Stream leaders. The internal website has become a concrete point of reference for all documents produced and meetings organised.

Task 6.2: Dissemination of results from the different project streams(public website and newsletters)The public part of the project website has widely improved and enhanced with results from the different research streams and from the NEEDS events (in particular the NEEDS Policy Workshop). The website has also been enriched with links to projects related to NEEDS and other methodologies used in the project.

160

The first newsletter has been produced and is downloadable from the NEEDS website. It contains information on the NEEDS research activities at Stream level and events organised by the Streams and by the project as such. It also includes a ‘window’ on the ‘externalities world’ with information on other projects and publications related to NEEDS.DEVIATIONS nonePARTNERS CONTRIBUTION

ISIS ISIS was the main responsible for all activities described. Support and inputs from all RS leaders have been regularly provided

2.9.2 List of Deliverables, Technical Papers and Milestones

RS 3b: Dissemination and Communication RS LEADER: ISISLIST OF DELIVERABLES

Deliverable N°

Deliverable Title

Nature

Dissemination Level

Delivery

Due date

DeliveryActual/

Foreseen date

Reasons for Deviat

ion

D2.1NEEDS Policy workshop 1

O PU 19 19

D2.2 Proceedings of the first workshop

R PU 20 20

D6.2 Newsletter R PU 19 21

D.6.3 Overview on the Communication Stream activities

R PU 24 24

RS 3b: Dissemination and Communication RS LEADER: ISIS



T6.2 Mailing lists 15

161

3 SECTION 3 – Consortium management

3.1 Consortium management tasks and their achievement

The NEEDS management tasks include: 1) administrative and financial coordination and 2) scientific coordination. Both activities have been carried out successfully according to the original description of work.

The multi-layer approach and sharing of tasks and responsibilities between the IPC (Integrated Project Coordinator) and the Stream Leaders (SLs) has been maintained as it proved to be successful.

The diagram below schematically illustrates the NEEDS management structure:

Project Management Committee (PMC) meetings

The PMC met 2 times during months 12-24:o Third PMC-integration meeting: 27 October 2005, Brusselso Fourth PMC-integration meeting: 19-20 June 2006, Prague

The minutes of all meetings are available on the NEEDS project website (reserved area).

3.2 ContractorsTwo major changes in contractors participation occurred over the months 13-24

162

The partner FhG/ISI left the project on December 31st 2005 The new partner SPOK enters in the project starting from the 1st September 2006 The partners CNR-INFM, CESI Spa and E-CO have been transferred their

contractual rights and obligations to respectively the firms INFM, CESI RICERCA and SWECO. The change of ownership happened respectively the 30th of May 2005, the 1st and the 9th of January 2006.

Two amendments to the NEEDS contract have been sent to the Commission to take into account these changes. The first, concerning CNR-INFM and CESI Spa was sent the 9th of April 2006 and was accepted one month later and the second was sent the 6th of October 2006. In this last case the Commission answer is still pending.

As a consequence of the leaving of the partner FhG/ISI, ISIS assumed the leadership of the RS 3b.

3.3 Project timetable and status

The figures in the following pages show the planned and actual Gantt diagrams per each Research Stream. The dark bar inside the blue one indicates the completion status. A bar that terminates at the 24th month indicate that the corresponding WP is completed.

Overall there are little variations to the planned scheduling and, when the variations happen they are not critical in the sense that do not cause delay to the subsequent activities.

163

Gant Diagram RS Integration

Gant Diagram RS 1a

164

Gant Diagram RS 1b

Gant Diagram RS 1c

165

Gant Diagram RS 1d

Gant Diagram RS 2a

166

Gant Diagram RS 2b

Gant Diagram RS 3a

167

Gant Diagram RS 3b

168

3.4 Coordination activities

3.4.1 Communication between partnersDuring months 12-24 the Reserved Area of the NEEDS website has become a real point of reference for all partners. The reserved area proved to be particularly useful and effective for the following items:

Calendar/events: SLs regularly updated the calendar with the meetings and events organised and uploaded all relevant documents (agendas, PPT presentations, minutes). This tool not only eased the organisation of the events themselves but can now be considered as a valuable ‘working archive’.

Deliverables: SLs regularly uploaded the deliverables and technical papers produced. Also in this case the ‘deliverables section’ represents a valuable archive of the NEEDS scientific and technical production.

Contact details: the IPC regularly updated the NEEDS partners’ database when changes in contact persons or addresses occurred.

Cost statement online: the major innovation of Year II was the adoption of a user friendly software produced by the IPC, which allows all partners to make their costs statements directly online. Guidelines on how to use the tool have been drafted by the IPC and sent to all contractors.

Through simple steps, contractors were able to fill the tables on the person/months as well as budget management:

169

Once all data were inserted, contractors could consult a series of summary tables which presented their overall cost statement. They could finally confirm the data and send them to the IPC.

3.4.2 Project meetings

The following table presents the meetings, which were organised in the Year II (M12-24) at different levels.

RS title date placePMC-In 3rd meeting 28 October 2005 BrusselsPMC-In 4th meeting 19-20 June 2006 Prague1a 4th meeting 23-24 May 2006 Villigen1b 4th meeting 15-16 May 2006 Paris1c 3rd meeting 10-11 October 2005 Brest1c 4th meeting 30-31 January 2006 Milan1c 5th meeting 22-23 May 2006 Bergen1d KO meeting 23-24 March 2006 Prague2a 3rd meeting 12-14 September Maratea2a 4th meeting 20-22 February 2006 Athens2a 5th meeting 30 May-2 June 2006 Goteborg2b 2nd meeting 12-13 September 2005 Paris2b 3rd meeting 11-12 September 2006 Rome3a KO meeting 9-10 March 2006 Lillehammer

170

3.4.3 Possible co-operation with other projects/programmes etc.

Cooperation with other EU projects has been established or is planned in future periods. In particular:

MAXIMA: NEEDS presentation at the Conference organised on 9 December 2005. METHODEX: NEEDS presentations at Methodex events and invitation of Methodex

partners at NEEDS forums. WETO-H2: exchanges on political scenarios. CASES: is the project which presents more synergies potential with NEEDS. On 13

September 2006, a meeting has been successfully organised between NEEDS and CASES representatives in order to establish a cooperation agreement and coordinate future activities. CASES representatives have also been invited at the occasion of the NEEDS Annual Review (9-10 November 2006) were a restricted workshop will be organised to facilitate the exchanges and collaboration between EU projects that bear some relevance to the NEEDS themes.

171

ANNEX 1– Plan for using and disseminating the knowledge

Partner responsi

ble/Involved

Planned/

actual dates

Type DESCRIPTION

RS3b NEEDS publication

Newsletter1

RS1b (WP1)

Non refereed literature

J. E. Jonson, P. Wind, M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, O. A. Søvde, H. Klein, I. S. A. Isaksen and L. Tarrasón "First results from the hemispheric EMEP model and comparison with the global Oslo CTM2 model" EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/06, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway

RS1b (WP1)

Non refereed literature

J. E. Jonson, P. Wind, M. Gauss, S. Tsyro, O. A. Søvde, H. Klein, I. S. A. Isaksen and L. Tarrasón "First results from the hemispheric EMEP model and comparison with the global Oslo CTM2 model" EMEP/MSC-W Technical Report 2/06, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway

RS1b (WP2)

Journal paper

Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2006): CKow – A More Transparent and Reliable Model for Chemical Transfer to Meat and Milk. in preparation.

RS1b (WP2)

PhD thesis Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2006): CKow – A More Transparent and Reliable Model for Chemical Transfer to Meat and Milk. In Rosenbaum R (2006). Multimedia and Food Chain Modelling of Toxics for Comparative Risk and Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Section Science et Ingénierie de l'Environnement, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, 192 pp.

RS1b (WP4)

Journal article

To disseminate the results, a 30-page summary of the WP4-research was turned into a journal article which was submitted to "Environmental and Resource Economics" in July 2006.

RS1c (FEEM)

Working paper

Bigano, A. and Sheehan, P (2006). Assessing the Risk of Oil Spills in the Mediterranean: the Case of the Route from the Black Sea to Italy Fondazione Eni E. Mattei Working Papers n. 32.06, Milan, Italy

RS1c (OME)

Article OME has written small articles about the NEEDS project and in particular RS1c and its advancements in the OME Newsletters of October 2004, January 2005, July 2005, November 2005, June 2006, and October 2006. The OME Newsletter is printed quarterly with a wide diffusion (1500 copies) targeting the Euro-Mediterranean energy community.

RS1c (OME)

Report OME’s activities in NEEDS is also thoroughly presented in the OME 2005 Annual Report.

RS1d (CUEC)

Sept2006

Peer reviewed

article

Kudelko M., ExternE methodology for external costs assessment of energy producers (in Polish), The Scholl of Economics and Management in Coal Industry, University of Science and Technology in Krakow Publisher, Krakow.

172

Rs2a Team

members

Published paper

C. Cosmi, M. Blesl, A. Kanudia, S. Kypreos, R, Loulou, K. Smekens, M. Salvia, D. Van Regemorter and V. Cuomo “Integration of country energy system models in a Pan European framework for supporting EU policies” In “Environmental Economics 2006”, WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment Vol. 95 (ISSN 1743-3541). Eds. C.A. Brebbia, WIT Press Southampton (UK) and Boston (USA), 2006

RS2b (USTUTT.SOZ)

October 2006

Published article

Brukmajster, D./ Hampel, J. “NEEDS: New energy externalities development for sustainability. In: Newsletter of the University of Stuttgart: ZIRN&DIALOGIK, Vol.2 October 2006.

RS3a (SWEC

O)

25 January

2005

Presentation to

companies/associations

Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE): Presentation to stakeholder about Needs methodology and relevance for NVE.

RS1b (WP2)

April 2005

Conference presentation

Rosenbaum R, Margni M, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2005): Advances in biotransfer modelling in meat and milk, 15th annual meeting of SETAC Europe, Lille, France.

RS3a(SWEC

O)

2 May 2005

Presentation to


Statkraft: Statkraft Group is the largest Norwegian and the third largest producer of power in the Nordic region, as well as the second largest producer of power based on renewable energy sources in Europe. Presentation for management team in Statkraft about Needs methodology and its relevance to Statkraft.

RS3a(SWEC

O)

21 June 2005

Presentation to


Norwegian Research Council: Presentation of the Needs project, including description of work, aim, methodology, potential results, workshops and project structure to the board of directors in the research programme RENERGI (English: Clean energy programme).

RS1d (CUEC)

7-8 July2005


MelicharJ., Havránek, M., Cremenescu, N.: External costs of energy production: applying ExternE methodology in the New Member States and Romania; The Centre for Sustainable Energy, Transilvania, Presented at the Conference on Sustainable Energy, Brasov, Romania.

RS3a(SWEC

O)

21 Sept 2005

Presentation to


Shell Technology Norway (STN): STN is a subsidiary of A/S Norwegian Shell, which has been established to develop technology within fields where Norwegian industry and Norwegian research environments have a leading position. Presentation for researchers in SNT about the Needs methodology and potential co-operation particularly relating development of LCA analysis. (SWECO)

RS1d (CUEC)

13 October

2005

Seminarpresentation

Melichar, J.: External costs induced by energy production: applying ExternE methodology in the New Member States and in Countries in Accession - Romanian case; Romanian Energy Regulatory Office, Presented at the Seminar of Romanian Energy Regulatory Office, Sinaia, Romania.

RS1c (POLIT

October 2005


World Hydrogen Technology Convention - WHTC 2005 - Singapore: The paper makes direct reference to the NEEDS

173

O) project and is derived from the work done in Deliverable 4.1. It was included in the proceedings of the Conference.

RS1b (WP2)

November

2005


Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2005): Reducing uncertainties in biotransfer modeling in meat and milk, 26th annual meeting of SETAC North America, Baltimore, U.S.

RS1d (CUEC)

6 March 2006

Seminarpresentation

Ščasný, M., Quantification of external costs from electiricity and heat production in the Czech Republic and their internalization; Seminar on Economic instruments in environmental regulation – German experiences in ecologic tax reform; Freie Universität Berlin Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik, CUEC , Prague, Czech Republic.

RS3a(SWEC

O)

8 April 2005

Presentation to


Statkraft Norfund Power Invest (SN Power): SN Power (Statkraft Norfund Power Invest AS), is a Norwegian limited company owned by Statkraft SF and Norfund (Norwegian Investment Fund for Developing Countries). SN Power seeks profitable development of greenfield projects and acquisition / upgrading of existing assets in developing countries in cooperation with local communities. Presentation to the management team about Needs methodology and relevance for SN Power activities.

RS2b (HELIO)

30 May-4 June 2005


Hélène Connor, Robert Gould, Rod Janssen, & Christophe Rynikiewicz, HELIO International, New governance imperatives for energy planning in liberalised European markets?, Eceee 2005 Summer Study Energy Savings: What Works & Who Delivers ? Mandelieu, Côte d'Azur, France,. Accessed September 2006.

RS3a (SWEC

O)

28 Oct 2005

Presentation to


Statnett: Statnett co-ordinates supply and demand, and own large sections of the main Norwegian power grid. Presentation for Statkraft stakeholders about Needs methodology and its relevance for Statnett.

RSIn 14-16 Nov 2005


The Integrated Project “NEEDS – New Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability”, Invited Talk, EU Conference on Safety and Security of Energy Infrastructures in a Comparative View, Brussels, Belgium. (presentation made by S. Hirschberg on behalf of A. Ricci and S. Faberi, ISIS).

RS3b 7 Nov 2007

NEEDS Event

Policy Workshop 1

RS2b (PSI)

10 April 2006


Hirschberg S., "External Cost Assessment: Methodology, Recent results and Issues", Seminar, University of Zurich,. (included extensive information about NEEDS).

RS2b (PSI)

21 April 2006

Seminarpresentation

Hirschberg S., "Energy Systems Analysis at the Paul Scherrer Institut", Seminar for Nordschweizerische Kraftwerke, Baden,. (included extensive information about NEEDS).

RS1d (CUEC)

22 April 2006


Melichar, J., Calculation of external costs - the case of the Czech energy production; University of Economics, Prague, The Czech Republic. Presented at the Conference on political economy., Prague, Czech Republic.

174

RS1b (WP4)

9 May 2006


The methodology as well as preliminary external cost findings were presented by the work package leader on the SETAC international annual conference in Den Haag.

RS1b (WP2)

9 May 2006


Rosenbaum R, McKone TE, Jolliet O, (2006): Reducing uncertainties in biotransfer modelling in meat and milk developing a new cow model, 16th annual meeting of SETAC Europe, The Hague, Netherlands

RS1d (CUEC)

11 May 2006

Forapresentation

Ščasný, M., Melichar, J., Havránek, M., Assessment of external costs by ExternE methodology; Discussion Fora on “Ecologic Tax Reform: a right step? Liberální institute, Prague, Czech Republic.

RS1d (CUEC)

25 May 2006

Seminarpresentation

Ščasný, M., Melichar, J., Ecological tax reform, externalities and energy sector; Seminar on Ecologic Tax Reform and its effects on coal and energy sector. VUHU, Most, Czech Republic

RS2b (PSI)

7-8 June 2006

Forapresentation

Informed about NEEDS activities at Generation IV International Forum, Experts Group Meeting, Villigen

RS1d (CUEC)

8 June 2006


Melichar, J., External costs from energy production in the Central and Eastern European countries; European Business Council for Sustainable Energy, E-turn21 Conference series - Challenges, perspectives and obstacles of the European energy sector, Brno, Czech Republic.

RS2a Team

members

27 June - 1 July 2006


ETSAP Semi-Annual Workshop and 25th International Energy Workshop (Cape Town, South Africa)The Workshop was held jointly with the 25th International Energy Workshop, organized by IIASA, EMF (Stanford), the IEA and the Energy Research Centre of the University of Cape Town. The ETSAP workshop was addressed to explore venues open to its experts that could be help to achieve the objectives outlined in the G8 Leaders, and to present an update of the MARKAL – TIMES modelling activities as well as the recent ETSAP tools enhancements. In this framework the modelling activities concerning the NEEDS TIMES model were presented.

RS2b (IIASA)

28-30 August 2006

J. Granat, M. Makowski, A. Wierzbicki, Hierarchical reference approach to multi-criteria analysis of discrete alternatives, presented at: CSM'06: 20th Workshop on Methodologies and Tools for Complex System Modeling and Integrated Policy Assessment, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.

RS2a Team

members

13-15 Sept 2006


The RS2a activities were presented in the framework of the First International Conference on Environmental Economics and Investment Assessment 2006, Mykonos, GreeceThis Conference, organised by the Wessex Institute of Technology, UK and the National Technical University of Athens - Department of Mechanical Engineering, Greece, addressed the topics of Investment Assessment and Environmental Economics in an integrated way, in accordance with the principles of sustainability, considering social and

175

environmental impacts of new investments.

RS1c (OME)

Presentation to


OME has repeatedly presented the NEEDS activities on the occasion of the OME General Assembly meetings (gathering twice a year some 30 leading energy companies in the Euro-Mediterranean region and represented mostly at the CEO level), as well as at the OME “hydrocarbons” committee, “electricity” committee, and “renewable energy and sustainable energy” committee (these committees are formed by high level specialists of the energy industry in the Euro-Mediterranean region).

RS2b (HELIO)

12 & 13 October

2006


Hélène Connor, The CUB (Citizen Utility Board): North American experience. Towards a European experimentation? Towards European energy awareness, 3rd eden International Conference on Energy Awareness & Innovation, Agora Einstein, Sophia Antipolis,

RSIn 9 Nov 2006

NEEDS event Needs Annual Review and annexed Workshop

RS1a Team

members

2007 Conference presentation

Specific session on ‘LCA and energy’ at next SETAC Europe annual conference, which is the main scientific LCA conference in Europe

RS2a Team

members

Jan2007

Workshoppresentation

Workshop on “Integrated Modeling of Environment and Energy Policy” The Workshop will take place in Lisbon, Portugal on January 24 (tentative date). This workshop, organized by the Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, New University of Lisbon (FCT-UNL), is the second workshop within the Portuguese funded research project E2POL (http://air.dcea.fct.unl.pt/projects/e2pol/). E2POL’s main objective is to use the TIMES model to quantify synergies and antagonisms between energy and environment policy instruments, using the Portuguese electricity system as a case-study.The objectives of this workshop are two fold: to present the implementation of the TIMES energy model for Portugal, and to illustrate how similar models are relevant for EU policy development. The participation is restricted to invited national energy and environment stakeholders from public administration, academia energy companies, and industry.

RS3b Jan 2007

NEEDS event Policy Workshop 2 - The second workshop will take place at in January 2007 and will discuss the RS 2b surveys results on the acceptability of the “externality concept”. To this end practical studies on the role of the externalities in the Central vs. Decentralized Production of Useful Energy will be illustrated to link the survey analysis with possible implementation cases. Forward-looking contributions will focus on sustainable energy development paths; achievable goals, means and strategies and practical instruments for allocation and internalisation of costs will be presented and discussed. The second policy workshop is addressed to the constituted Policy Advisory Group integrated by a smaller expert audience of typically 30-40 persons.

RS3b June 2007

NEEDS event NEEDS Forum 2: will focus on the issue of supply security and the particular issue of supply security externalities and

176

form indications for the future development of energy development strategies in the European Union. The discussion will occur in the light of the strategy outlined in the European Commission Green Paper on Energy Security.

RS3b Nov2007

NEEDS event NEEDS Forum 3 - Externalities and Mediterranean Countries

RS3b March 2008

NEEDS event Policy workshop 3 Content to be decided

RS3b July2008

NEEDS event NEEDS Forum 4 Final Dissemination Conference

ANNEX 2– Complete list of Deliverables and Technical papers (13-24)

DELIVERABLES

RS WP Del. N° Deliverable title Delivery date Nature Disseminati

on level Deviations

RS 1a 2 D2.2 Final report on Technology Foresight methods 24 R PP

RS 1a 3 D3.3 Cost development - an analysis based on experience curves 24 R PP

New- It was planned as technical

paper

RS 1b 4 D4.2 Assessment of Biodiversity Losses - Final Report 24 R PU

RS1b 6 D6.7Final Report on the monetary valuation of mortality and morbidity risks from air pollution

25 R PU

New – it incorporates T6.1-6.2-6.3-6.4-6.5-6.6

RS 1d 2 D2.1 Workshop 1: Basics of the ExternE methodology and its application 19 D PU

RS 1d 7 D7.1Analytical overview of the technical and scientific production of the stream 1d

24 R PU

RS 2a 2 D2. 9Milestone 2: Workshop – Assessment of draft country models results (WS2)

18 O RE

RS 2a 5 D5.14 National reports 24 P PU

Delayed time schedule of preliminary tasks

RS 2b 11 D11.1 Report on the use of external costs in energy policy decisions 18 R PU

RS 2b 2 D2.3 Updated report on social indicators accommodating Delphi results 18 R PU

RS 3b 2 D2.1 NEEDS Policy workshop 1 19 O PURS 3b 2 D2.2 Proceedings of the first workshop 20 R PURS 3b 6 D6.2 Newsletter 19 R PURSInt 3 D3.3 Workprogramme for phase III 24 R RERSInt 5 D5.1 First Integrated Report 20 R PU

177

TECHNICAL PAPERS

RS WP TP Paper title Delivery Nature Dissemination Deviations

RS1a 2 T2.1

Methodological guidelines on how to reflect future technical change in LCA through foresight methods

18 R RE

RS1a 3 T3.1 Description on methodological framework 15 R PP

RS1a 3 T3.2Guideline of data requirement for construction of learning curves

15 R RE

RS1a 5 T5.1 Database setup 18 P RE

RS1a 7 T7.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current fuel cell technologies

18 R RE

RS1a 7 T7.3Intermediate report on LCA results for current fossil fuel systems

24 R RE

RS1a 8 T8.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current hydrogen technologies

18 R RE

RS1a 8 T8.3Intermediate report on LCA results for current hydrogen technologies

24 R RE

RS1a 9 T9.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current fuel cell technologies

18 R RE

RS1a 9 T9.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current fuel cells 24 R RE

RS1a 10 T10.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current off-shore wind energy technologies

18 R RE

RS1a 10 T10.3Intermediate report on LCA results for current off-shore wind energy technologies

24 R RE

RS1a 11 T11.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment for current PV systems

18 R RE

RS1a 11 T11.3 Intermediate report on LCA results for current PV systems 24 R RE

RS1a 12 T12.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment (solar thermal power plants)

18 R RE

RS1a 12 T12.3 Intermediate report on LCA 24 R RE

178

results for current solar thermal power plants

RS1a 13 T13.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment (bioenergy systems)

18 R RE

RS1a 13 T13.3Intermediate report on LCA results for current bioenergy systems

24 R RE

RS1a 14 T14.2

Progress report, including screening LCA and screening cost assessment (advanced nuclear)

18 R RE

RS1a 14 T14.3Intermediate report on LCA results for current advanced nuclear

24 R RE

RS1a 15 T15.1 LCA of background processes (first draft) 18 R RE

RS1b 1 T1.1Report on source-receptor calculations at hemispheric level M18 R PP

M18 R PP

RS1b 1 T1.2

Report on Source-receptor analysis of linearities at regional Europe level - grid to grid-

M24 R PP Postponed

RS1b 3 T3.2 A set of Concentration-Response functions. M18 R PU

RS1b 3 T3.3 A priority list of transferability factors. M18 R PU

RS1b 3 T3.5 A case study on indoor air pollution impacts. M18 R PU

Postponed to M30, to be incorporated in the final deliverable

RS1b 3 T3.6A methodology to evaluate alternative toxicological assumption.

M18 R PU

RS1b 5 T5.1Description of the updated version of the impacts module of FUND

M18 R PU

RS1b 5 T5.2 Description of the extended atmospheric module of FUND M18 R PU

RS1b 5 T5.3 Description of the ESAM database for the EU accession M18 R PP

RS1b 5 T5.4Report on marginal external costs inventory of greenhouse gas emissions

M22 R PUT5.4 and T5.5 have been merged

RS1b 5 T5.5

Report on the analysis on average and marginal avoidance costs of greenhouse gas emissions

M22 R PUT5.4 and T5.5 have been merged

RS1b 6 T6.2 Results of applying the questionnaire. M24 R PU Incorporated

in D6.7

RS1b 6 T6.3 A VOLY implied by current medical practice. M24 R PU Incorporated

in D6.7

179

RS1b 6 T6.4A VOLY implied by relation between life expectancy and GDP/capita.

M24 R PU Incorporated in D6.7

RS1b 6 T6.5

A consensual and credible set of reference values for a VOLY (one in EU and one in Accession Countries, as well as a combined value to be used in the future).


RS1b 6 T6.6

A QALY based alternative to the conventional monetary valuation of morbidity impacts.


RS1b 7 T7.1Description of the basic database for the geographical extension of the tools

M18 R CO

RS1b 7 T7.2 Report on the methodology for the consideration of M18 R PU

RS1b 7 T7.3Report on the methodology for the implementation of the precautionary principle

M18 R PU

RS1b 8 T8.1

Specification of the interface between external cost computation and economy and energy modelling, inclusive the associated data

M18 R PU

T8.1-T8.2-T8.3-T8.4 have been merged in one document

RS1b 8 T8.2

Model specification for the integration of external cost in economy and energy modelling

M18 R PU

T8.1-T8.2-T8.3 -T8.4 have been merged in one document

RS1b 8 T8.3

Integration of the model specification into the energy system modelling framework (first part)

M18 R PU


RS1b 8 T8.4Specification of the interface between external cost and LCA

M18 R PU


RS1c 1 T1.1Present and future supply sources to satisfy EU oil imports

M16 R CO

RS1c 1 T1.2

Present and future oil flows and routes from producing areas to Europe including some pairs of “maritime” versus “pipeline” oil transport

M18 R CO

RS1c 1 T1.3 The most critical passages of oil transport routes M21 R CO

RS1c 1 T1.4 Oil transport accident risk-reduction potential due to new M18 R CO Postponed

180

technology and regulation

RS1c 1 T1.6

Impact on the environment, health, economy and socio-economy for maritime oil transport

M33 R CONew – the TP has been anticipated

RS1c 1 T1.7

The role of risk aversion and lay risk in the probabilistic externality assessment for oil tanker routes to Europe: A methodological note

M33 R CONew – the

TP has been anticipated

RS1c 2 T2.1Present and future supply sources to satisfy EU gas imports

M16 R CO

RS1c 2 T2.2 Present and future natural gas flows and routes M18 R CO

RS1c 2 T2.3 Burdens associated to natural gas extraction and transport M24 R CO

RS1c 3 T3.3

Impact assessment and economic valuation of transport of electricity key parameters and data per impact category

M21 R CO

RS1c 4 T4.3Burdens associated to hydrogen (and other energy carriers) transport

M15 R CO

RS1c 4T4.3

addendum

Burdens associated to hydrogen (and other energy carriers) transport

M16 R CO

RS1c 4 T4.4Impacts associated to hydrogen (and other energy carriers) transport

M21 R COPostponed (merged with T4.6)

RS1c 4 T4.5Additional potential externalities due to accidents in the hydrogen chain

M24 R CO

RS2a 1 T1.5 Updated TIMES code 15 P PU

RS2a 1 T1.6 Spreadsheet interfaces for the Pan-European model 18 P PU

RS2a 2 T2.11 Final reports on country models 24 P PU

RS2a 2 T2.7 Reference technology database 17 P PU

RS2a 2 T2.8 Draft results on country models 18 P RE

RS2b 6 T6.1

Specification of health and environmental indicators that will be directly available from other streams respectively need to be generated or adapted by WP5

21 R Internal to

Part of the milestone note produced within WP3

RS2b 9 T9.1 Report on the requirement analysis 18 R RE

RS2b 9 T9.2 Report on the survey of suitable MCDA methods and 24 R RE

181

tools, including recommendations for use in NEEDS

RS2b 12 T12.2 Database of stakeholders 18 R RERS2b 12 T12.3 Survey questionnaires No. 1 21 R RE

RS3b 6 T6.2 Mailing lists 15 O CO Corresponds to RS2b_12.2

RSInt 2 T 2.3 Third periodic report on interfaces 18 R RE

T2.3 and T2.4 have been merged in one document

RSInt 2 T 2.4 Fourth periodic report on interfaces 24 R RE

T2.3 and T2.4 have been merged in one document

182

sixth framework programme - needs 2009 · web viewlong term scenarios incorporating...

Documents