Data Energy and Climate Change Consultancy
Modelling future possibilities
National Grid Future Energy Scenarios - Review
Net Zero - Initial View
NG Future Energy Scenarios were published on 11th July ahead of the official launch on 18th July, to give people time to digest its
contents to help people engage at the launch.
Its Net Zero sensitivity is really interesting addition.
National Grid’s Net Zero main points and recommendations align well with the CCC's Net Zero work:
"Reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2050 is achievable. However, this requires immediate action across all key technologies and policy areas."
This is almost exactly what the CCC said yesterday in its “Reducing UK emissions – 2019 Progress Report to Parliament” report and May’s “Net Zero” report
There is strong consensus here from two leading industry benchmarks.
National Grid’s Net Zero is a sensitivity not a main scenario. This is because there has only been limited time to produce it since the publication of the CCC’s Net Zero report; so producing a sensitivity is a sensible approach. As a result, there is less detail published on it than the main scenarios. This article uses my experience from working as lead climate change energy modeller in the FES team for some years to read between the lines and add a little insight to the key outputs from Net Zero.
The key points of the analysis of Net Zero in 2050 are:
•Total energy demand needs to reduce via greater emphasis on energy efficiency.
• All road transport is low carbon – with some reduction in demand
• There is almost no unabated gas supply. Other than 10 Mt CO2e emissions from chemical industrial processes, all gas used has its emissions captured via CCUS.
• All heating is low carbon. There are no domestic gas boilers.
• There is a lot of hydrogen, especially for heating, via hydrogen networks.
• There is a lot of CCUS (Carbon Capture Use and Storage)
• Peak electricity demand is higher than Two Degrees due to higher electrification of heat to achieve net zero instead of 80% carbon reduction.
• Some BECCS (Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) is needed
The hydrogen and CCUS echoes the work that the CCC did in their net zero report. Increasing ambition from 80% emissions reduction to 100%, significantly increases the need for hydrogen and CCUS. This is ultimately because there are no other options left, especially for decarbonising heating (directly via hydrogen or indirectly via CCUS to help peaks electricity demand from electrified heating).
In 2050 peak electricity demand nearly doubles. This is mainly due to increased electrification of heat and transport - even with considerable smart charging adopted by 65% of EVs at peak.
Electricity generation capacity is about 250% greater than today. It is met entirely by low carbon sources, mainly renewable. Generation capacity is 20% higher than Two Degrees. The difference is met almost entirely by extra Natural Gas CCUS power generation (which also replaces the little remaining unabated gas generation that exists in Two Degrees).
Other than some industrial processes, there is no longer any unabated gas burnt in industrial commercial or domestic sectors.
• Industrial sector sees an increase in the use of hydrogen, electricity, alongside gas paired with CCUS, plus some use of bioenergy.
• Domestic heating is nearly 50% supplied by hydrogen. Most of the remainder is via heat pumps (including hybrid heat pumps). About a tenth is supplied by District heating.
o There would have to be hydrogen networks for this to happen. The gas distribution networks are doing great work looking into this conversion, especially ensuring the safety case is absolutely paramount . Early results here are very positive.
• Domestic heat demand from a typical house is 36% lower than today
Hydrogen is mainly produced from gas with CCUS, via a Steam Methane Reforming process. About 20% of hydrogen production is from electrolysis. This will be mainly from excess renewable generation and will be one of the many options used to help balance the electricity system.
BECCS is needed to create around 37mtCO2 negative emissions. This is needed to offset some of the emissions that are hardest to decarbonise, such and industry and aviation and shipping.
Vehicle 2 Grid has 11% participation. This is the same as with Two Degrees. This is so difficult to predict as it is such a big unknown, with such significant implications on the dynamics of the electricity and wider energy system. – My view is FES have probably stayed conservative here due to the massive unknowns around this and the far reaching implications this could have. If was to be higher there would be significantly less requirement for flexibility options for power production.
One interesting interpretation looking at Net Zero, is it looks like a sensitivity of Two Degrees not Community Renewables and hence looks like a more centralised as a opposed to decentralised, view. As cost optimised Whole Energy System Modelling is used for this analysis, it could be interpreted National Grid’s analysis indicates a more centralised approach is the least cost option. There is still decentralisation in Two Degrees and, but not as much as other scenarios. This would be because a more joined up energy system has greater ability to smooth out regional supply and demand variations by moving more energy around the country to where to where there is surplus or deficit.
There are many other points in the document. Please read the document for more information. Hopefully, this summary proves useful.
National Grid Future Energy Scenarios can be found at: