ENTSO - 2021-10-TYNDP - 2022 - Draft - Scenario - Report

TYNDP
October 2021
2022
Draft
Scenario
Report
Contents
Foreword 4
1 Executive summary 6
2 Purpose of the Scenario Report 8
3 Scenario descriptions and storylines 10
4 Scenario results 14
4.1 Demand 15
4.2 Supply 24
4.3 Imports 36
4.4 GHG emissions 37
5 The cost of electricity 44
6 Benchmarking 50
6.1 Final energy demand 51
6.2 Final electricity demand 51
6.3 Electricity generation 52
6.4 Gas supply 54
6.5 Biomass supply 56
6.6 Energy imports 57
6.7 Carbon capture and storage 58
7 Stakeholder engagement and how it shaped the scenarios 59
8 Improvements in the TYNDP 2022 scenarios 62

8.1 Proactive and early stakeholder engagement 62
8.2 Even more contrasting scenarios 63
8.3 Enhancements to the sector coupling methodology 63
8.4 Considerations of hydrogen system in the mid-/long term and of a wider range of electrolysis configurations 63
8.5 Vehicle-to-Grid and prosumer modelling 64
8.6 Optimisation of district heating operation 64
9 Next steps 65
10 Glossary 66
Imprint 68
ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 3

Foreword
Jan Ingwersen Sonya Twohig

General Director ENTSOG Secretary-General ENTSO-E
We are happy to present to you the gas and electricity joint Scenario Report, the third
report of its kind resulting from the close collaboration of ENTSOG and ENTSO-E to
develop scenarios for the whole energy system. Scenario work is the first important
step to capture the interactions between the gas and electricity systems and is therefore
paramount to deliver the best assessment of the infrastructure from an integrated sys-
tem perspective. The joint work also provides a basis to allow assessment for the Euro-
pean Commission’s Projects of Common Interest (PCI) list for energy, as ENTSOG and
ENTSO-E progress to develop their Ten-Year Network Development Plans (TYNDPs).
The outcomes of the work presented illustrates the unique Transparent, inclusive and active stakeholder engagement
position of the gas and electricity TSOs to provide quanti- has been a crucial element in the development of this
tative and qualitative output while also building upon the first step of the TYNDP process and will continue to be in
synergies and interlinkages between the two sectors: in future editions. We have worked closely with numerous
total almost 80 TSOs, covering more than 35 countries, stakeholders from a wide range of industries and sectors,
contributed to this collaborative process. The combined NGOs, National Regulatory Authorities and Member States,
expertise, knowhow and modelling capabilities enabled among others, in order to ensure transparency of processes
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E to build a set of ambitious and and data, robust assumptions and inputs, and data compa-
technically robust scenarios which are fully compliant with rability and availability. Scenario Report builds up on the
the Paris Agreement and with the European ambitions for feedback and recommendations received through multiple
achieving climate neutrality by 2050. The scenarios aim to stakeholder workshops covering each step of the scenario
provide a quantitative basis for infrastructure investment building process, two extensive public consultations on
planning and insights into the evolution of integrated the scenario assumptions and the scenarios themselves, as
energy system perspective, while remaining both tech- well as numerous bilateral exchanges with stakeholders. In
nology- and energy-carrier neutral. addition, the Scenario Report is accompanied by a Scenario
Building Guidelines Report offering a detailed description
of the underlying assumptions for the scenarios and the
modelling process and methodology, and all raw data and
individual datasets are published to allow readers/users
to scrutinise both individual figures per Member State and
combined figures for Europe.
4 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

A core element of ENTSO-E and ENTSOG’s scenario and electricity systems as it will support decarbonisation
building process has been the use of supply and demand efforts, interlink the two systems while further unlocking
data collected from both gas and electricity TSOs as well the potentials of renewable electricity sources to deliver
as from official EU and Member State data sources and key system flexibility and energy autonomy at European
industry projections to build robust bottom-up scenarios. scale. Moreover, the increasing integration of electricity,
This approach is used for the National Trends Scenario, the methane and hydrogen infrastructures and the efficient use
central policy scenario of this report, recognising national of electrolysis technologies will also support large-scale
and EU climate targets as reflected in the latest Member renewables’ integration and solutions to support system
States’ National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs). In flexibility needs.
view of the 1.5 °C target of the Paris Agreement and
the EU Climate Law ambition of minimum 55 % GHG Achieving net-zero emissions requires a wide range of
emission reductions by 2030 and net zero by 2050, the actions from all sectors of society, but energy efficiency
ENTSOs have also developed the Global Ambition and is key to achieve the EU climate neutrality objectives.
Distributed Energy Scenarios using a top-down approach The improvement of existing technology options and the
with a full-energy perspective. For the first time, the active participation of consumers through smart energy
scenarios utilise new sector-coupling methodologies and use and behavioural adaptations supports the efficient
dedicated modelling tools both to optimise overall system use of renewable and low-carbon technology solutions
efficiencies and flexibility use as well as to capture better for cross-sectorial decarbonisation.
the interactions and new dynamics at the interfaces be-
tween various end-use sectors (e. g., vehicle-to-grid and Last but not least, the Scenarios show that to achieve
prosumer modelling), at various geographical scales (e. g., net-zero emissions, innovation in new and existing
district heating) and with other carriers (Power-to-Gas and technologies is required to reduce the costs of energy from
Power-to-liquid). It is also the first time that the scenarios renewable energy sources, increase the efficiency of user
have modelled hydrogen and electrolysis at pan-European appliances, facilitate demand side response and consumer
scale. participation, support renewable and decarbonised gases,
develop technologies that will support negative emissions,
As ENTSOG and ENTSO-E look to the future, it is evident and reap the benefits of a circular economy, while ensuring
that energy system integration, and innovation will be key long-term sustainability for future generations.
to meeting European energy consumers’ needs, whilst also
achieving EU climate neutrality goals by 2050. The development of this comprehensive, reliable and
contrasted set of possible energy futures, as presented in
A fully integrated energy system can deliver more the Scenario Report, will allow the TYNDPs to perform a
e fficient decarbonisation solutions and enable the sound and comprehensive assessment of European energy
European production of gas and electricity to become infrastructure requirements from a whole energy system
carbon neutral already by 2050. An integrated approach perspective and will provide decision makers with better
connecting gas and electricity networks and countries information, as they seek to make informed choices that
seamlessly will support the uptake of new technologies will benefit all European consumers.
and foster regional and pan-European economies of scale,
while ensuring reliable electricity and gas supplies to We look forward to working with you again as we follow
consumer throughout the year, including peak demand the next important steps in the TYNDP process.
situations. Hydrogen will be a game changer for both gas

1 Executive summary
Building on the previous scenario reports and cooperative work of gas and electricity
planning experts across Europe, the draft joint TYNDP 2022 scenario report is more
ambitious, more inclusive and more transparent than previous editions. It includes two
COP 21-compliant scenarios and ENTSO-E and ENTSOG have gone to great lengths to
capture the impact of the fast-moving and fast-paced energy transition on electricity
and gas infrastructure. The draft joint TYNDP 2022 scenario report is the building block
of the future gas and electricity TYNDPs and contains a series of important highlights
for the future of Europe's energy system:
Net-zero can be achieved by 2050 while ensuring the security of energy supply
Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenarios low carbon technology solutions in EU Member States.
reach –55 % of GHG reduction in 2030 and net-zero in This achievement requires a wide range of actions whose
2050. These targets are achieved with an/the ambitious impact depends on an appropriate political, societal, and
development of energy efficiency and renewable and economic framework.
Energy efficiency is key to achieve the EU long-term Climate and Energy objectives
The efficiency first principle is key to minimise the chal- - Active participation of end consumers through smart
lenges of decarbonising the energy supply and requires energy use and behavioural adaptation.
among others: - Direct electrification is key to achieve the decarbon-
isation objectives when it can ensure an efficient use
- Continued improvement of existing technology options, of renewable energy. Decarbonising all energy carriers
whilst switching to new and emerging technologies is crucial to ensure a competitive, resilient, and reliable
where further efficiency gains can be obtained. energy system.
- There is a need to rapidly invest in negative emission.

Ambitious development of renewable energy across Europe
All decarbonisation and renewable technologies are need- - Fostering renewable energy production at consumer
ed to reach net-zero 2050 and European renewable energy level (e. g., prosumers, energy positive buildings …) will
will be essential: contribute to scaling up and embracing clean energy
supply.
- Long term climatic targets can be achieved through - Transmission infrastructure is needed to connect areas
sustained growth and substantial investment in all Eu- of high renewable energy potential to the high demand
ropean renewable energy sources including wind, solar, centres.
and biomethane.
- Acceptance of energy infrastructure expansion is para-
mount to achieve climatic targets
Sector Integration provides efficient decarbonisation solutions
A fully integrated system can deliver efficient decarbonisa- - The development of hydrogen and synthetic fuels by
tion solutions and enable the European production of gas electrolysis will foster further development of wind and
and electricity to be carbon neutral by 2040. solar.
- Integration of electricity, methane and hydrogen in- - District heating and urban energy planning can support
frastructures provides a wide range of opportunities smarter utility from a broader range and combination of
to solve short term and seasonal flexibility needs in a energy sources.
net-zero energy system.
Integrated energy systems: hydrogen is a game changer for gas and electricity systems
- Hydrogen can efficiently contribute to the transition of - While reducing import dependence, a European hydro-
the current gas system into a carbon neutral and more gen market is an opportunity for the EU to take part to
integrated system. a global clean energy market and import decarbonised
energy.
- Hydrogen can unlock the full potential of renewable
electricity resources. It will contribute to reinforcing the
security of supply in Europe.
Innovation is key to achieve a sustainable energy future
The scenarios depict several ways in which the European the shift towards a sustainable economy including recy-
energy system may evolve. They aim to reach climate cling and repurposing, enabling stable supply chains, use
neutrality; however, it cannot be ignored that there are of land space and scarce resources, training of workforce,
additional factors and challenges that go beyond what is financing, and citizen engagement. Innovation goes beyond
needed to understand for energy infrastructure planning. technical knowhow to ensure the energy system is made
Further attention is needed to understand the impact in sustainable in time for future generations.
The draft joint TYNDP 2022 scenario report comes with frastructure is considered. ENTSOG and ENTSO-E will con-
enlarged data sets available through a dedicated data tinue striving to improve their scenario report, engaging as
visualisation platform. These scenario data sets can be early as possible with stakeholders, increasing transparency
used by stakeholders to do their own studies on possible and usability. Both associations hope this report will give
energy futures. ENTSOG and ENTSO-E have also provided readers a qualitative insight into the impact of the energy
full transparency on how scenarios are built and how each transition on Europe's future gas and electricity networks.
factor influencing the development of gas and electricity in-

2 Purpose of the
Scenario Report
What is the purpose of the scenarios and how should they be used?
As outlined in Regulation (EU) 347/2013, ENTSOG and uncertainties which are relevant for gas and electricity
ENTSO-E are required to use scenarios as the basis for infrastructure development. As such, they primarily focus
the official Ten-Year Network Development Plans (created on aspects which determine the infrastructure utilisation.
every two years by ENTSOG and ENTSO-E) and for the Furthermore, the scenarios draw extensively on the current
calculation of the cost-benefit analysis (CBA) used to European political and economic consensus and attempt
determine EU funding for electricity and gas infrastruc- to follow a logical trajectory to achieve future energy and
ture Projects of Common Interest (PCI). The scenarios are climate targets.
designed specifically for this purpose. Where possible, they
have been derived from official EU and Member-State data The scenarios should provide the user with insight into
sources and are intended to provide an impartial quantita- the possible energy system of the future and the role of
tive basis for infrastructure investment planning. electricity and gaseous carriers in this energy system as
well as the effects of changes in supply and demand on
The scenarios are intended to project the long-term ener- the energy system. The European and global perspectives
gy demand and supply for the drafting of ENTSOG’s and for these scenarios enable the user to track supply and
ENTSO-E’s Ten-Year Network Development Plans within demand developments geographically as well as temporally
the context of the ongoing energy transition. They are and to gain greater insight into the challenges facing ener-
designed in such a way that they specifically explore those gy infrastructure during the energy transition.

What is not the purpose of the scenarios?
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E have gone to great lengths to To this end, all the scenarios in the TYNDP 2022 Scenario
build on previous Scenario Reports and to increase its am- Report remain technology and energy-carrier neutral. The
bitions, especially in considering external factors such as energy mix deployed in each of these scenarios has been
the energy transition and the impacts of decarbonisation designed to reflect a broad consensus within the energy
of the European energy system on energy infrastructure. industry and correlates to a large extent with official
Nonetheless, it is important to recognise that the scope of literature – most prominently with the EU’s own Impact
these scenarios remains focused on providing sufficient Assessment scenarios.
input data to investigate future infrastructure needs.
The TYNDP 2022 Scenario Report attempts to reflect the
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E have sought to avoid making polit- energy transition and the decarbonisation efforts of the
ical statements with these scenarios and, as far as possible, European energy system in its scenarios. This is incorpo-
to anchor key parameters in widely accepted data and rated by the use of the COP 21 Agreement (in the form
assumptions. The National Trends scenario exists within of a carbon budget calculation) as one of the key input
an input framework provided by official data sets (such as parameters for the COP 21-compliant scenarios. However,
PRIMES) and official energy and climate policies from the it is important to recognise that it is beyond the scope (and
EU Member States (the NECPs, hydrogen strategies, etc.). indeed the resources) of the scenarios to analyse political,
The goal of ENTSOG and ENTSO-E has been to maintain environmental and societal developments on the widest
a neutral perspective to these inputs. scale.
While the COP 21-compliant scenarios (Global Ambition Above all it is important to recognise the fast-moving
and Distributed Energy) have greater room for innovation nature of the energy transition in Europe. ENTSOG and
to meet more ambitious decarbonisation of the energy ENTSO-E recognise that some of the input parameters
system up to 2050, it is not the intention of ENTSOG and used in the creation of these scenarios may well need to
ENTSO-E to use these scenarios to push political agendas be adjusted in the months and years to come as the energy
attached to the use or non-use of specific energy carriers policy of the EU and its Member States evolves to meet
or technologies. The main focus of the TYNDP Scenario the challenges of climate change. The TYNDP Scenario
Report is the long-term development of energy infrastruc- Building Process is an iterative process, and it continues to
ture. As such, the differences between the two COP 21 evolve based on external influences. A scenario is a picture
compliant scenarios are predominantly related to possible of a possible future under certain defined circumstances,
variations in demand and supply patterns. not a forecast of what the future will look like. Simulta-
neously, it reflects present knowledge and the expected
challenges already foreseen today.

3 Scenario descriptions
and storylines
Scenarios have to ensure both consistency between successive TYNDP reports and to
capture new developments and expectations. For this purpose, initial storylines
proposed to stakeholders were derived from the TYNDP 2020 scenarios already taking
into account the feedback received during the Q4 2020 public consultation. The final
scenario storylines are laid out in the Final Storyline Report published in April 2021.
This chapter recaps the most important information of the Storyline Report.
Scenario drivers
Storylines aim to ensure that sufficient differences are Green transition reflects the level of GHG reduction
made between the scenarios by correctly identifying targets and is one of the most important political drivers
high-level drivers and quantifying their outcomes. The en- of energy scenarios. The European Union has ratified
ergy landscape is constantly evolving and scenarios need the Paris Agreement. This implies a commitment to the
to keep pace with the main drivers and trends affecting long-term goal of keeping the increase in global average
the energy system and in particular the gas and electric- temperature to well below 2 °C compared to pre-industrial
ity infrastructures. A key success factor in understanding levels and to pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 °C.
these drivers is the ongoing dialogue with stakeholders like The current EU decarbonisation targets consider at least
NGOs, policy makers and industrial associations. Based on –55 % greenhouse gas reduction in 2030. For 2050 there
this engagement process ENTSOG and ENTSO-E identified are non-binding decarbonisation targets (80 to 95 % cuts
four high level drivers: in GHG emission from 1990 levels). Moreover, ENTSOG

and ENTSO-E acknowledge that setting GHG emissions Energy intensity is a result of innovation and consumer
targets for 2030 and 2050 is not sufficient for keeping behaviour and can be a major factor in the transition of
temperature rise below 1.5 °C. As a result, the scenarios the energy system. New appliances and technological
will consider a carbon budget up to 2100 including emis- innovation reduce specific energy demand or facilitate
sions and removals from agriculture and from Land Use, the participation of consumers in the energy system. On
Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)1. the other side, new technologies can lead to additional
energy demand. Moreover, consumers can reduce their
Beyond climate targets, the European energy system will consumption by modal shifts, for example using the bike
be increasingly shaped by societal decisions and initiatives instead of the car for shorter distances or by more shared
acting as a driving force of the energy transition. This sce- economy through public transport and vehicle sharing. This
nario driver translates in the level of (de)centralisation and also applies to agriculture and industrial sectors, where a
energy autonomy which both strongly impact the structure drive towards circularity could lower energy demand, but
of the European energy system and therefore the need of an increase economic activity could at least partly offset
infrastructure. Currently the EU primary energy consump- the efficiency gains. Assumptions need to be made for each
tion relies strongly on centralised production sources and sector and energy application.
import from outside Europe. Whether this dependency will
remain is rather uncertain. Especially when considering Technological progress is a driver for the energy system
the current uptake of wind and photovoltaic technolo- evolution. It can act both as an enabler of other drivers
gies, enabling localised (self-)production and smart use of (e. g. more powerful wind turbine helping to further harvest
distributed energy supply. This makes it a relevant driver EU RES potential) and as a trigger (e. g. electrolysis paving
to be explored in the scenarios. the way to a hydrogen economy). Further assumptions are
made to define the market shares for different technolo-
gies/appliances, for example through technology prices2.
Scenarios will cover different time horizons

For both 20223 and 2025 a “Best Estimate” scenario is These figures reflect current national and European regu-
developed. For the quantification of this time horizon lations as stated end of 2020.
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E use data collected from the TSOs.
Global Ambition CMYK 80C 20M

RGB 0/155/217
2022 2025 2030 2040 2050
Distributed Energy CMYK 30C 100Y

RGB 184/14/128
Best Estimate National Trends

Global Ambition
National Trends 80C 20M
CMYK 60M 100Y
0/155/217
RGB 238/125/0

Distributed Energy RGB 184/14/128
Global Ambition
Global
CMYK 80C 20M
NationalAmbition
Trends CMYK
RGB 60M 100Y
0/155/217
RGB 238/125/0

TYNDP scenario horizon RGB 184/14/128
Assessment of pathways compliant wit Paris Agreement
Figure 1: Scenario framework for TYNDP 2022

National Trends CMYK 60M 100Y
RGB 238/125/0
1 For the assessment of the carbon budget, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E will build upon the work performed together with CAN Europe for the TYNDP
2020 scenarios.
2 The present scenarios only cover technologies having reached some degree of maturity in the early 2020s. Other technologies such as Direct Air
Capture or innovative ways to produce synthetic fuel are not considered in the scenarios up to 2050. But it is assumed that these technologies can
reach commercial maturity after 2050.
3 As the 2022 time horizon are not used in ENTSO-E TYNDP, the report figures for this year refer to gas TSO data collection without modelling of the
electricity system.

The long-term goals, starting from 2030, will be covered by three different scenarios, reflecting increas-
ing uncertainties towards 2050.
– The National Trends scenario is in line with national – In addition to the National Trends scenario, which is
energy and climate policies (NECPs , national long-term aligned with national policies, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E
strategies, hydrogen strategies, etc.) derived from the have developed two COP 21 compliant scenarios. These
European targets. The electricity and gas datasets for are built as full energy scenarios (all sectors, all energy
this scenario are based on figures collected from the carriers) in order to quantify compliance with EU poli-
TSOs translating the latest policy- and market-driven cies and climate ambitions. Both scenarios aim at reach-
developments as discussed at national level. The quan- ing the 1.5 °C target of the Paris Agreement following
tification of National Trends focuses on electricity and the carbon budget approach. They are developed on
gas up to 20404. ENTSOG and ENTSO-E invite stake- a country-level until 2040 and on an EU27-level until
holders to refer to the national documents to have a 2050.
more energy-wide perspective.
4 As most of national material focuses on the path to 2030, extending the National Trends scenario beyond 2040 would require additional assump-
tions no longer reflecting national policies and strategies. The expansion model for National Trends for the 2040 time horizon is not run at Draft
Scenario report stage. TYNDP 2022 scenario results for National Trends 2040 will be included in the final scenario report. For methane and hydro-
gen National Trends figures are provided up to 2040. For gas for power it used a proxy value based on data collected from the TSOs.

Storylines for COP 21 scenarios
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E applied the aforementioned sce- ment targets. It translates into the development of a wide
nario drivers and the scenario framework to create two range of renewable and low-carbon technologies (many
COP 21 compliant scenario storylines: being centralised) and the use of global energy trade as a
tool to accelerate decarbonisation. Economies of scale lead
Distributed Energy (DE) pictures a pathway achieving EU- to significant cost reductions in emerging technologies such
27 carbon neutrality by 2050 and at least 55 % emission as offshore wind, but also imports of decarbonised energy
reduction in 2030. The scenario is driven by a willingness from competitive sources are considered as a viable option.
of the society to achieve energy autonomy based on
widely available indigenous renewable energy sources. It The final storylines are the product of extensive stake-
translates into both a way-of-life evolution and a strong holder engagements and a public consultation conducted
decentralised drive towards decarbonisation through in 2020. Both storylines are designed to explore different
local initiatives by citizens, communities and businesses, pathways with regard to the identified scenario drivers,
supported by authorities. This leads to a maximization with the purpose of covering the uncertainty in the possi-
of renewable energy production in Europe and a strong ble use of energy infrastructure. This is further elaborated
decrease of energy imports. in the Scenario Matrix that was published as part of the
Final Storyline Report. Figure 2 provides an overview of
Global Ambition (GA) pictures a pathway to achieving car- the most important storyline assumptions. More informa-
bon neutrality by 2050 and at least 55 % emission reduction tion on the scenario storylines can be found in the Final
in 2030, driven by a global move towards the Paris Agree- Storyline Report.
Global Ambition CMYK 80C 20M
RGB 0/155/217
Distributed Energy Global Ambition

Higher
DistributedEuropean
Energy autonomy
CMYK 30C 100Y
RGB 184/14/128 with Global economy with
Global Ambition centralised low
CMYK 80C 20M
RGB 0/155/217
renewable and decentralised focus carbon and RES options
Green Transition At least a –55 % reduction in 2030, climate neutral

Distributed Energy in 2050CMYK 30C 100Y
National Trends CMYK 60M 100Y RGB 184/14/128
RGB 238/125/0
Transition initiated at a local / national level Transition initiated at a European / international

Driving force of the (prosumers) level
energy transition Aims for EU energy autonomy through maximisa-
National Trends CMYK 60M 100Y
High EU RES development supplemented

RGB 238/125/0
with
tion of RES and smart sector integration (P2G/L) low carbon energy and imports
Reduced energy demand through circularity and Energy demand also declines, but priority is given
better energy consumption behaviour to decarbonisation of energy supply
Energy intensity
Digitalisation driven by prosumer and variable RES Digitalisation and automation reinforce
management competitiveness of EU business
Focus of decentralised technologies Focus on large scale technologies

(PV, batteries, etc.) and smart charging (offshore wind, large storage)
Focus on electric heat pumps and district heating Focus on hybrid heating technology
Technologies
Higher share of EV, with e-liquids and biofuels Wide range of technologies across mobility sectors
supplementing for heavy transport (electricity, hydrogen and biofuels)
Minimal CCS and nuclear Integration of nuclear and CCS
Figure 2: Storylines for the two COP 21 scenarios

4 Scenario results
This chapter presents the main quantification of the scenarios for TYNDP 2022. The
level of detail provided for each scenario depends on the approach of building the data
sets. As Best Estimate and National Trends are based on TSO data, the results are limited
to electricity and gas. The final energy demand supplied by other primary fuels, such as
oil and coal are not in the focus of these scenarios. Distributed Energy and Global
Ambition are developed as full energy scenarios and results are provided for all sectors
and energy carriers. The full-energy nature of the quantification also enables the
assessment of carbon emissions for the two COP 21 scenarios.
This chapter provides a European overview of the scenario The present report aims first at providing a consistent
results for demand, supply and emissions at EU-27 level. European picture of possible evolution of the energy system
All figures are expressed in net calorific value. Data per along the pathways defined by the storyline to support the
country (including some non-EU countries which were in- public consultation. Stakeholder feedback will provide the
cluded in the modelling) can be found on the visualisation opportunity to further refine these scenarios and better
platform. take into account some country specifics in the updated
version that will be used as a basis for ENTSOG and
ENTSO-E TYNDPs.

4.1 Demand
4.1.1 Final energy demand

Energy efficiency: the EU can significantly - Variable renewables are more productive since they can
reduce its energy demand by 2050 produce renewable hydrogen whenever the electricity
demand is lower than the available renewable capacity.
In both COP 21 scenarios, the overall energy demand of
the EU significantly decreases with the combination of - The need for additional renewables and decarbonisa-
energy efficiency measures (renovation of buildings and tion capacities is more limited thanks to the integration
switch to new or more efficient technologies) and the of hydrogen from variable renewables into the gas sys-
effect of further system integration. tem and shorter-term battery solutions.
With further electrification and system integration, the EU - With significant storage capacities, the gas system
can make more efficient use of its renewable electricity can provide flexibility to the electricity system when
production, increase the efficiency of variable renewables the electricity demand is higher than the production,
and improve security of supply: especially during seasonal and extreme climatic events.
Besides its transportation tasks, the European gas in-
- Direct use of renewable electricity and responsive frastructure serves as the back-bone for the EU energy
demand can reduce the mismatch between production system.
and demand while avoiding unnecessary conversion
losses.
TWh
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Reference 2030 2040 2050 Reference 2030 2040 2050
Others Biomass Solids Liquids Methane Hydrogen Electricity
Figure 3: Final energy demand per carrier (energy and non-energy use for feedstock) for EU27
(Ambient heat from heat pumps not taken into account.)
In Distributed Energy scenario, in 2050, electricity rep- Final energy demand reduction is achieved through a wide
resents 46 % of the final demand and gaseous hydrogen range of actions such as, but not limited to:
17 %. In Global Ambition scenario, electricity and gaseous
hydrogen represent respectively 39 % and 20 % of the final - Conversion from less efficient to more efficient heating
energy demand in 2050. options, e. g., heat pump technologies, such as electric
and hybrid heat pumps (electric heat pump associated
with condensing gas boiler).

- Switch from low efficiency transport options to more - In the built environment, thermal insulation reduces
efficient modes of transport. demand for heat.
- Energy efficiency product standards continuing to - Behavioural changes where consumers actively reduce
deliver energy efficiency gains for end-user appliances. demand either by utilizing more public transport or
modifying heating and cooling comfort levels.
TWh
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Reference 2030 2040 2050 Reference 2030 2040 2050
Others Energy branch Agriculture Industry Transport Tertiary Residential
Figure 4: Energy demand per sector (energy and non-energy use for feedstock) for EU27
(Ambient heat from heat pumps not taken into account.)
The final energy consumption (including electricity losses 21 scenarios meet the 2030 binding targets set by the EU6
and excluding non-energy use5) of Distributed Energy and to reduce the final energy consumptions (FEC) for 2030
Global Ambition are respectively 906 Mtoe (10,536 TWh) under 957 Mtoe.
and 927 Mtoe (10,781 TWh) in 2030. As a result both COP
4.1.2 Direct electricity demand

Despite the fact that final energy demand in both scenarios Electricity demand from transport sector to rise
decreases over time, direct electricity demand share grows 8 to 11-fold by 2050 due to uptake of electric
up to 47 % in Distributed Energy scenario, and 36 % in vehicles.
Global Ambition scenario compared to the reference
year7. This is mainly caused by the replacement of fossil The main driver of electricity demand growth is the trans-
fuel powered solutions with electric ones. port sector. The primary energy source for this sector is
currently oil. The radical shift to electric transportation
Growth in electricity demand can be seen in every sector. does not only eliminate local emissions from vehicles, but
However, a strong focus on efficiency gains helps slow this also contributes to energy efficiency as electric motors
process (e. g., high-efficiency consumer appliances, better are much more efficient that internal combustion engines
thermal insulation of buildings). (ICE). In both COP 21 compliant scenarios, electricity
demand from the transport sector will increase by an order
of magnitude of between 8 and 11 until 2050 compared to
2015 (reference year for mobility).
5 Non-energy uses amount for 1484 TWh in Distributed Energy and 1,834 TWh in Global Ambition
6 Directive (EU 2018/2002) aiming to reduce the final energy consumptions (FEC) for 2030 under 957 Mtoe.
7 For residential and tertiary sectors, the historic values are based on 2018. For the other sectors (industry, agriculture, energy branch, mobility) 2015
values are the most recent with sufficient level of detail.

TWh
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Reference 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
National Trends Distributed Energy Global Ambition
Others Energy branch Agriculture Industry Transport Tertiary Residential
Figure 5: Final electricity consumption (excluding transmission and distribution losses) for EU27
As it was described in the TYNDP 2022 Scenarios Final Electric vehicles are emblematic of efficiency first
Storyline Report, Electrical Vehicles (EVs) are emblematic of principle and reduction of air pollution.
the energy transition and strong growth in sales is evident
across Europe. From a demand perspective their develop- Figure 6 shows the TYNDP 2022 scenario assumptions for
ment is driven by air pollution concerns, energy efficiency EVs including battery (BEV)8 and fuel cells (FCEV). For pas-
and CO₂ emission reduction. Passenger vehicles currently senger cars a strong uptake of EVs is considered in Distribut-
account for the highest share in the total transport fleet. ed Energy, reaching almost 90 % share of total fleet in 2050.
To reach the climatic targets, the decarbonisation of the
passenger sector will be driven mainly by a fast uptake of Global Ambition considers a wider range of clean mobility
EVs. technologies with fuel cells as a meaningful option for long
distance travel, high usage rate and power requirement, and
shows a comparable EVs market share for 2050.
%
100
80
60
40
20
0
2030 2050 2030 2050 2030 2050 2030 2050
DE GA DE GA
Passenger cars Heavy trucks
ICE FCEV BEV
Figure 6: Share of transport technologies for EU27
8 Including plug-in hybrid

For heavy trucks the Distributed Energy scenario also vide flexibility to the electricity system with Vehicle-to-Grid
follows a higher electrification rate reaching a 56 % market (V2G) services provided by prosumers’ EVs. Both COP 21
share in 2050 broken down into 22 % for BEVs and 34 % scenarios consider a significant development of all technol-
for FCEVs. Global Ambition scenario achieves a 53 % ogies but to a different extent depending on the scenario
electrification of heavy trucks in 2050 broken down as storyline.
11 % for BEVs and 42 % for FCEVs.
TYNDP 2022 country level market shares for the different
Overall, the uptake of BEVs in the heavy goods transport technologies and transport categories can be found in the
category is more limited than for passenger cars. This is Visualisation Platform.
because BEVs are considered less suitable for transporting
heavy loads over long distances. Both scenarios foreseen an increase in term of final
electricity demand with Distributed Energy that will exceed
Beyond road transport, electric engines have a role in 4,000 TWh in 2050 (a 50 % increase compared to 2018).
s hipping and aviation since they can be powered by The average peak will reach 700 GW and 740 GW in 2050
batteries or hydrogen fuel cells. Furthermore, whatever for Global Ambition and Distributed Energy (57 % and 67 %
technology they use (hydrogen or batteries) they can pro- increase compared to 2018).
TWh GW
5,000 1,000
4,000 900
4,500 800
3,500 700
3,000 600
2,500 500
2,000 400
1,500 300
1,000 200
500 100
0 0
2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2040 2050
Historical Data [GW] National Trends [GW] Global Ambition [GW] Distributed Energy [GW]
Historical Data [TWh] National Trends [TWh] Global Ambition [TWh] Distributed Energy [TWh]
Figure 7: Evolution of average electricity demand and peak (including transmission and distribution losses) for EU27
(For historical data, Malta is missing)
4.1.3 Gas demand

Methane and Hydrogen: two complementary en- os. Therefore, for cost and energy efficiency reasons both
ergy carriers for an efficient use of the resources. methane and hydrogen demand coexist in both scenarios,
to a different extent and with different evolutions depend-
Europe has significant potentials for producing renewable ing on the storylines.
methane (biomethane) and hydrogen. Methane can also
be associated with carbon capture and storage (CCS) The comparison of National Trends and the COP 21
technologies to be decarbonised and, using steam methane scenarios shows that, in many countries, current national
reforming (SMR), pyrolysis or other technology, convert- policies do not always have a long-term vision post 2030
ed to hydrogen. The analysis of the supply potentials for and do not consider yet a shift of the gas demand from
methane and hydrogen shows that for an efficient decar- methane towards hydrogen, nor do they consider signifi-
bonisation and to limit its dependence on imports, the EU cant CCU/S capacities.
needs to make use of all its sources of renewable energy
in both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenari-

With electrification, gas demand for power Furthermore, as the energy system relies on variable re-
becomes more seasonal and critical. newables to produce electricity and gas, the gas supply
becomes sensitive to climatic events as well as the energy
As electrification increases significantly in Global Ambition demand. This combined climatic sensitivity increases the
and to a greater extent in Distributed Energy, the structure need for flexibility. This translates in the scenarios by a
of the gas demand evolves as the demand for electricity higher winter demand for power, especially during climatic
becomes more seasonal and variable, requiring more flex- events like Dunkelflaute9 when gas demand for power gen-
ibility from the gas system. As electrification increases, the eration increases to compensate for the absence of wind
seasonality of the gas demand remains significant since the and solar energy during periods of several days.
heating demand shift towards electrification is compensat-
ed by the increasing seasonality of the electricity demand.
4.1.3.1 Methane demand
National policies rely more on methane until in the private heating sector. The country specific values
2040, whilst hydrogen kicks in after 2030. can be seen in the visualisation platform.
At EU level, national policies show a large role for methane COP 21 scenarios: methane demand decreases and
as a gas energy carrier with very limited evolution of the decarbonises over time.
demand until 2030. After 2030 however, the methane
demand decreases with the implementation of the strate- Following the evolution of the production capacities,
gy of some Member States which see the uptake of their the methane demand decreases as hydrogen develops
hydrogen demand. after 2030. However, in the scenarios, methane remains
necessary to cover the EU energy demand until 2050.
The development of final methane demand differs from The demand for methane is generally sustained by the
region to region. Due to a high dependence on coal and final demand of different biomethane end uses (879 TWh
coal-to-methane switch policies, methane demand for in Distributed Energy 2050) and the indirect demand of
heating rather increases in Central and Eastern Europe, abated natural gas for hydrogen production (1,390 TWh
whereas other regions head towards more electrification in Global Ambition 2050).
TWh
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2025 2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Reference National Trends Global Ambition Distributed Energy
Residential & Tertiary Transport Industry Agriculture Consump. Energy Branch Power Generation
Figure 8: Methane demand per sector for EU27
9 “Kalte Dunkelflaute” or just “Dunkelflaute” (German for “cold dark doldrums”) expresses a climate case, where in addition to a 2-week cold spell,
variable RES electricity generation is low due to the lack of wind and sunlight.

TWh
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
2025 2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
National Trends Global Ambition Distributed Energy
Summer Final demand Summer G4P Winter Final demand Winter G4P
Figure 9: Methane demand seasonality (gas seasons: summer 1 Apr – 30 Sept and winter 1 Oct – 31 Mar) for EU27
Peak Methane Demand National Trends observes the most limited change as con-
sumers invest in more traditional technologies, although
The high daily-peak and 2-week demand for methane they are considered less efficient.
reflect the changing nature of residential and commercial
demand, as temperature-depending space heating typically The significant development of variable electricity RES
drives peak methane consumption. As a result, the meth- capacities in both scenarios influences the role of the gas
ane demand for end use during peak days and 2-week cold infrastructure to back-up the variable power generation.
spells decreases in all scenarios due to efficiency measures With significant variable RES capacities in the e nergy
with an even further decrease in Distributed Energy, partly system, the methane demand may be impacted by
due to a higher penetration of electrical heating systems. Dunkelflaute events more often and more intensely.
GWh/y
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2025 2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Peak 2 Week DF Average
Figure 10: Methane demand in high demand cases (Peak, 2-Week cold spell, Dunkelflaute) for EU27

4.1.3.2 Hydrogen demand
In all scenarios, the demand for hydrogen develops as of Distributed Energy and Global Ambition: Hydro-
2030 and hydrogen becomes the main gas energy carrier in gen as a key element to reach carbon neutrality.
both COP 21 scenarios in 2050. Today, hydrogen is mainly
used as a feedstock for the industry and quantified in kg Both COP 21 scenarios require significant amounts of
or tonnes10. However, as the demand for clean gaseous hydrogen to meet the COP 21 and EU climate and Energy
energy increases to meet the COP 21 and EU climate and targets and reach carbon neutrality by 2050. Hydrogen can
energy targets, hydrogen is mainly used for its energy be produced indigenously in the EU to a significant extent
content by 2040 – quantified in TWh – and its use as and in some extra-EU countries11 have significant poten-
feedstock becomes more marginal over time. tials to produce renewable hydrogen and can be actors
of a global clean hydrogen market. In addition, methane
National Trends reflects contrasted policies decarbonisation solutions (e. g. SMR + CCS) can support
across the different Member States. the development of the hydrogen demand by securing the
supply. Furthermore, applied with biomethane, those decar-
National Trends considers the different national policies bonisation capacities can become carbon negative and help
of the EU Member States. Whereas some countries plan to recover from the carbon budget overshoot after 2050.
for the development of hydrogen to replace natural gas
with objectives defined for 2030, some other countries In Distributed Energy as well as in Global Ambition, both
plan for a more stepwise approach to move away from indigenous production and imports of renewable hydrogen
the most carbon intensive fuels, especially in the coal are needed. However, following their storylines, the sce-
mining regions. Therefore, at EU level, this translates into narios show different evolutions of the hydrogen demand12:
a slower development of the hydrogen demand which is Distributed Energy sees a development of the hydrogen
nevertheless steadily accelerating between 2025 and 2040 demand following the development of production capac-
at EU level. ities in the EU (1,522 TWh in Distributed Energy 2050)
while reducing the energy imports and Global Ambition
Most of the current hydrogen produced locally in the in- sees a more rapid development of the hydrogen demand
dustrial clusters is not included in the figures since they are supported by the access to an international clean hydro-
not connected to any regional or national networks. These gen market, in the context of a global energy transition
figures are shown as methane demand. (468 TWh of renewable hydrogen imports in Global Ambi-
tion 2050).
TWh
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2025 2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Reference National Trends Global Ambition Distributed Energy
Residential & Tertiary Transport Industry Agriculture Consump. Energy Branch Power Generation
Figure 11: Hydrogen demand per sector for EU27 (excluding hydrogen from by-products)
10 The hydrogen specific energy content is about 33 kWh/kg NCV

11 Scenarios assume hydrogen production in the UK, Norway, North Africa, Russia and Turkish hub.
12 The hydrogen demand displayed is not considering H2 supplied via by-products.

TWh
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
2025 2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Summer Final demand Summer G4P Winter Final demand Winter G4P
Figure 12: Hydrogen demand seasonality (gas seasons: summer 1 Apr – 30 Sept and winter 1 Oct – 31 Mar) for EU27
Hydrogen Peak Demand
In the COP 21 scenarios, the development of hydro- peak and 2-week demand, especially in the Global Ambi-
gen-based technologies in the residential and tertiary tion scenario.
sectors as well as in the power sector results in increasing
GWh/d
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2025 2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Peak 2 Week DF Average
Figure 13: Hydrogen demand in high demand cases (Peak, 2-Week cold spell, Dunkelflaute) for EU27

4.1.3.3 M
ethane and Hydrogen demand for transport
Beyond EVs the decarbonisation of the transport biomethane (LNG), and can foster the switch from liquids
sector requires the contribution of all energy to gas- and electricity-based fuels, thus accelerating the
carriers. decarbonisation of the transport sector and reducing the
need for additional decarbonisation capacities for liquid
The transport sector represents about 35 % of the energy fuels.
consumed in the EU and is largely dominated by Internal
Combustion Engines (ICE) using oil or other liquid deriv- Hydrogen for transport is predominant for heavy duty
atives as fuel and those liquid fuels are mainly fossil and road transport, shipping and aviation (mainly fuel cells
almost entirely imported. technology for electric mobility and partly as e-fuel for
ICEs) in Distributed Energy and Global Ambition. It also
To decarbonise the transport sector, both COP 21 scenari- has a significant share in passenger cars in Global Ambition.
os consider the necessary contribution of all energy sectors In 2050 hydrogen accounts for 28 % (550 TWh) and 33 %
and behavioural changes to reduce the demand of the sec- (773 TWh) of the energy demand for transport respectively
tor, especially for passenger cars. The increasing availability in Distributed Energy and Global Ambition. Methane share
of decarbonised energy in the gas and electricity sector can follows a similar pattern with respectively 10 % (197 TWh)
be used to produce decarbonised liquids, including liquid 13 % (319 TWh) in the two COP 21 scenarios.
TWh
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2015 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Historic Distributed Energy Global Ambition
Electricity Hydrogen Methane Liquids
Figure 14: Transport demand per energy carrier for EU27

4.2 Supply
The scenarios explore contrasted possible evolutions of emissions of the EU and to assess their compliance with
the energy market in Europe, and outside Europe, which the EU climate and energy targets and to compare them
translate into different primary energy mixes. with the carbon budget. National Trends is based on the
different national policies and does not allow for a com-
As COP 21 and Green Deal compliant scenarios, Global prehensive and consistent interpretation of national data
Ambition and Distributed Energy take a holistic approach for all energy carriers and cannot be entirely assessed in
to the European energy system, including all primary en- this section.
ergy carriers, allowing the ENTSOs to compute the GHG
4.2.1 Primary energy supply

The European energy supply decarbonises with electricity and gas production are fully decarbonised by
the development of renewable capacities and 2040 and coal as well as oil are completely phased out
energy efficiency measures. by 2050. Natural gas supply declines sharply, in particular
after 2030. By 2050 only 24 TWh of indigenous abated
Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition aim at en- natural gas production are considered in Global Ambition.
ergy efficiency and decarbonisation of the primary energy Overall, natural gas supply declines with between 89 % and
supply reaching around 15 % and 40 % reduction in primary 99 % compared to 2015 level.
energy demand in 2030 and 2050 compared to 2015. The
TWh
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2015 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Other Wind PV Hydro (excl pumping) Nuclear Biomass
Imported biofuels Imported hydrogen Natural gas Oil Coal
Figure 15: Primary energy supply in the two COP 21 scenarios (for energy and non-energy use) for EU27

%
100
80
60
40
20
0
2015 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Other Wind PV Hydro (excl pumping) Nuclear Biomass
Imported biofuels Imported hydrogen Natural gas Oil Coal
Figure 16: Primary energy supply mix in the COP 21 scenarios (for energy and non-energy us) for EU27
Both scenarios register a significant increase in renewables from waste materials. Low carbon sources like nuclear or
energy production. The renewable energy (RES) share in blue hydrogen imports also contribute to decarbonise the
Global Ambition reaches 80 % by 2050 and 96 % in Distrib- energy system, especially in the Global Ambition scenario,
uted Energy. The vast majority of the energy supply stems with a market share between 2 % and 14 % of primary
from solar PV and wind generation. Renewable electricity energy supply.
production is complemented with biomass and energy
%
100
80
60
40
20
0
2015 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Renewable Low carbon Fossil fuel
Figure 17: Share of fossil, low caron and renewable energy in the primary energy supply mix (including non-energy)

4.2.2 Biomass supply
Both COP 21 scenarios foresee an uptake of biomass purposes in the scenarios. It is directly used for heating and
supply compared to today’s level. As biomass generally in industrial processes. Furthermore, biomass is used as a
represents a localised supply, the highest growth trajecto- feedstock to produce biofuels, biomethane and electricity.
ry is projected in Distributed Energy where biomass also As such the biomass is converted to other energy carriers,
comes from wastes which are locally converted to energy. which are subsequently used in the end use sectors for
This is illustrated in Figure 18. Biomass is used for different mobility, heating and other applications.
TWh
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Current 2030 2040 2050 Current 2030 2040 2050
For electricity For biomethane For biofuels Direct use
Figure 18: Biomass utilisation

4.2.3 Electricity supply
For electricity to fully play its role in the achievement of fication and electrolysis-based energy (hydrogen, synthetic
carbon neutrality in 2050, it is necessary to decarbonise methane and liquids). While all scenarios anticipate a de-
its generation possibly before this time horizon. This is velopment of electrolysis-based fuels, the magnitude of
of particular importance when synthetic fuels (hydrogen, the associated electricity demand depends on the scenario
methane and liquids) are produced based on electrolysis. storyline. The generation figures of the present chapter
include the power generation for both final electricity
Sector coupling induces a faster development of power demand and electrolysis.
generation as electricity has to supply both direct electri-
TWh
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
2018 2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Historic National Trends Distributed Energy Global Ambition
Final demand (incl. T & D losses, excl. Storage losses) Demand for electrolyser
Figure 19: Electricity demand for final use and electrolysis for EU27
In 2050, electricity demand for electrolysis accounts for solar for electrolysis). In both scenarios, variable renewa-
close to one third of the overall electricity demand. bles (wind and solar) are the major source with respectively
68 % and 75 % of power generation in Global Ambition and
Both COP 21 scenarios follow the line of an early reach of Distributed Energy compared to 49 % to 52 % in 2030 and
carbon neutrality of the power generation mix. In 2040, 15 % in 2018. In 2050, the electricity generation is fully
renewable and nuclear power generation amount to decarbonised and amounts to 5,933 and 5,593 TWh for
around 95 %13 of EU27 electricity supply in Global Ambi- respectively Distributed Energy and Global Ambition.
tion and Distributed Energy (including dedicated wind and
13 Assuming a share of renewable methane of 46 % in Distributed Energy and 34 % in Global Ambition in 2040

%
100
80
60
40
20
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Wind and solar Other RES Nuclear
Figure 20: Share of electricity demand covered by low carbon generation in EU27
While wind, solar and nuclear capacity differs between the needs are such that this technology sees a significant
COP 21 scenarios, these technologies are complemented development.
by a wide range of other renewable energy sources (e. g.
hydro, biomass … ) which capacity is the same for all sce- In Global Ambition, final electricity demand is slightly lower
narios based on bottom-up data as strongly influenced by than in Distributed Energy while electricity demand for
country specifics. Among these other renewable energy synthetic fuels is much lower due to the ability to import
sources, hydro is the most prominent. It is currently the low-carbon molecules therefore the total electricity supply
largest source of renewable energy, with 342 TWh14 increases slower. In addition, nuclear capacity will decrease
produced in 2018. While its share will reduce with the in some extent compared to today (moving from 139 GW
development of wind and solar, the capacity will continue in 2018 to 86 GW in 2050) as new nuclear units will partly
to increase from 136 GW in 2018 to 169 GW in 2030 and compensate the decommissioning of existing ones. As a
174 GW in 2040. result, the need for wind and solar capacity will be strong
but lower than in Distributed Energy (2,087 GW in 2050
A strong increase in wind and solar capacity is constitu- to compare with 252 GW in 2018 and 2,497 GW in 2050
tive of all scenarios, but the magnitude depends on the for Distributed Energy).
storyline of each scenario.
As part of the renewable capacity, offshore wind will be
In Distributed Energy, a focus on lowering nuclear capacity the second source in 2050 with 408 GW generating 1,545
and energy imports supplement the decarbonisation ob- TWh in 2050 (28 % of power generation) shortly after on-
jective. As a result, investment in wind and solar capacity shore wind (1,781 TWh).
reaches the highest level in order to meet both direct electri-
fication and the need for synthetic fuels to replace imports. National Trends, based on national strategies and policies,
From a technology perspective, there is an emphasis on shows a higher ambition in terms of electricity demand and
decentralised sources such as onshore wind and solar PV. As renewable generation share compared to the TYNDP 2020
they have lower load factors than offshore wind, the need for edition. It illustrates the integration of the Green Deal am-
installed capacity increases sharply. In accordance with more bition at national level. In 2030, electricity generation15
developed prosumer behavior in Distributed Energy, rooftop reaches 3,152 TWh compared to 2,775 TWh in 2018. The
PV capacity reached 363 GW in 2050 for Distributed Energy share of renewable and nuclear generation reaches 79 %16
in comparison with 325 GW for Global Ambition. (2,550 TWh) with solar and wind accounting respectively
for 423 TWh and 989 TWh in 2030. At that time horizon
Even if offshore wind is more expensive in this scenario their capacity reaches 352 GW for solar and 349 GW of
compared to Global Ambition, the renewable electricity wind.
14 including reservoir, run-of-river and pump storage

15 excluding batteries, DSR and hydro pump storage
16 Assuming a share of renewable methane of 4 % National Trends in 2030

GW
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Wind Onshore Wind Offshore Solar Biofuels Small Scale RES Hydro and pumped storage Nuclear
Coal & Other fossil Oil Methane CHP and Small Thermal Hydrogen Battery DSR
Figure 21: Capacity mix for EU27 (including prosumer PV, hybrid and dedicated RES for electrolysis)17
TWh
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Wind Onshore Wind Offshore Solar Biofuels Small Scale RES Hydro and pumped storage Nuclear
Coal & Other fossil Oil Methane CHP and Small Thermal Hydrogen Battery DSR
Figure 22: Power generation mix for EU27 (including prosumer PV, hybrid and dedicated RES for electrolysis)
In all scenarios, coal and lignite are under pressure of The role of gas in power generation strongly evolves
phase-out policies in many countries as well as high CO₂ along the time horizon. First there is a need to distinguish
price. In 2030 beyond small units, they only represent methane from hydrogen. In the present scenarios The in-
around 170 TWh in Distributed Energy, Global Ambition creasing role of hydrogen in final demand translates into a
and National Trends in comparison with 540 TWh in 2018. similar evolution for gas-fired power generation replacing
At European level, the role of these two sources becomes progressively part of methane in this sector for the 2040
negligible in 2040. and 2050 time horizon.
17 Thermal capacity in the graph does not fully take into account adequacy needs. A first evaluation on climatic years 1995, 2008 and 2009 shows
an additional need of around 80 GW in Distributed Energy and 60 GW in Global Ambition in 2050 to ensure a LOLE below 5 hours in average. The
quantification of such capacity will be further investigated in a later stage of the scenario building process. All figures in the report are not taking
into account this additional capacity.

Secondly methane is progressively decarbonised offering Gas-fired power generation moves from an electricity to
the opportunity of flexible low carbon generation. While a flexibility source. It is pictured by the path followed
methane is now mostly natural gas, the share of biome- by capacity and generation. For Distributed Energy and
thane increases along the time horizon to become fully Global Ambition, capacity increases up to the 2030 – 2040
decarbonised by 2050 in Distributed Energy, as illustrated period (in parallel to coal and nuclear phase-out) before it
in Figure 27 on Methane supply. decreases in 205018 back to present levels while generation
decreases by 53 % on the same period. The subsequent
Finally, the development of variable RES at zero marginal reduction of running hours may trigger new challenges in
cost has a strong influence on the way that thermal plants terms of market design which are beyond the remit of the
are operated (which is also true for nuclear in lower extent). present report.
GW TWh
250 500
450
200 400
350
150 300
250
100 200
150
50 100
50
0 0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Capacity (GW) Generation (TWh)
Figure 23: Evolution of methane and hydrogen fired power capacity and generation for EU27
Hours
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Figure 24: Evolution of full load hours of methane and hydrogen fired power generation units for EU27
18 Not taking into account additional units for adequacy.

When Other Non-Renewables (mainly small-scale CHP) In Distributed Energy, the climatic exposure will be at the
play a lesser role in the European electricity system today, highest as a result of heating electrification and maximum
they also need to be decarbonised in order to be able to wind and solar development. At the same time flexible
achieve carbon neutrality. For CHP still using fossil fuels, power generation (including nuclear) will strongly decrease.
it means either a switch to low-carbon equivalent or de- In addition, the development of prosumer behaviours will
commissioning on the long run. result in a high development of battery (being residential
or EV) providing shortterm storage solutions. The develop-
Flexibility need will increase as well as the range of tech- ment of district heating will also contribute to an optimised
nologies to answer it. The electrification of the heating use of connected heat pumps enabling to switch them off
sector and the development of wind and solar will increase for a certain duration thanks to alternative heat sources.
the climate dependency of the electricity system. At Finally, the need to produce synthetic fuels to replace
the same time, we already observe the impact of global imports will also offer the opportunity of seasonal flex-
warming on the variability of weather conditions. As a ibility by coupling the electricity and hydrogen systems.
result, the decarbonisation of the electricity mix must go Electrolysis and hydrogen storage will then be beneficial
in parallel with the development of flexibility solutions in to the security of the energy system.
order to maintain the security of supply. The extent of the
flexibility needs and the development of technologies to In Global Ambition, the climatic exposure of the electricity
meet depend on the scenario storylines. The Scenarios will system will increase relatively slower both on the demand
therefore differ in the balance between upstream flexibil- and supply side. The commissioning of new nuclear units
ity (generation side) as today and downstream flexibility will also provide some degree of flexibility. The develop-
(consumer side). ment of flexible demand (EV, demand-side response …) will
be less critical.
TWh
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Peaking units DSR Battery
Figure 25: Main flexibility sources for adequacy for EU27 19
19 Peaking units are to be understood at methane-fired open cycle units and Battery cover utility-scale, prosumer and V2G batteries.

4.2.4 Gas supply
All renewable and decarbonisation technologies The EU gas production can decarbonise by 2040
are needed to meet the EU energy and climate in both COP 21 scenarios.
objectives.
With the development of renewable hydrogen, biomethane
The decarbonisation of the gas supply can be done in many and decarbonisation technologies, the EU can decarbonise
ways. Gas can either be produced from renewable energy its gas production by 2030 in Global Ambition and by 2040
such as biomass producing biomethane or wind and solar in Distributed Energy. The EU indigenous production is
energy producing hydrogen. Furthermore, decarbonised largely decarbonised in 2040 in National Trends but not
hydrogen can be produced with natural gas with different entirely with 100 TWh of remaining unabated Natural gas.
technologies such as steam methane reforming associated
with carbon capture and storage technologies20. Distributed Energy shows the highest development of
indigenous production capacities (2,400 TWh produced
Both COP 21 scenarios consider all types of technologies in 2050) and a higher role for biomethane and hydrogen
to a greater or lesser extent following their storyline. Each since local production is prioritised. In Global Ambition,
technology comes with its level of decarbonisation that is the indigenous production of methane and hydrogen
considered in the computation of the GHG emissions of also significantly increases (roughly 2,000 TWh produced
each scenario to keep track of their carbon budget expens- in 2050) but to a lesser extent compared to Distributed
es. For instance, biomethane can be considered as carbon Energy.
neutral or carbon negative if associated with CCS21.
TWh
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Current National Trends Distributed Energy Global Ambition
Natural gas (unabated) Natural gas (decarbonised) Biomethane Hydrogen (P2H2)
Figure 26: EU27 annual gas production per scenario
The contrasted approach towards the supply configura- flow patterns. Whereas Global Ambition represents an
tions is essential when assessing the infrastructure for evolution of the energy system towards more integration in
the next twenty years since it directly impacts the energy the global transition with large scale solutions with longer
flows and way the European gas system is used. Distrib- destinations but more steady flow patterns.
uted Energy represents an evolution of the energy system
towards more autonomy with shorter flow distribution
with more frequent changes and higher variations in the
20 For steam methane reforming an efficiency factor of 77 % is used. For CCS processes a conservative capture rate of 90 % is considered, to account
for the part of the CO� that cannot be captured in the process and that is therefore released in the atmosphere.
21 Also known as bio-energy carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS).

4.2.4.1 Methane supply Import levels are reduced and decarbonised by
2050 in both COP 21 scenarios.
Figure 27 provides an overview of the methane supply in
all three TYNDP 2022 scenarios. All scenarios consider As a scenario focusing on energy autonomy, Distributed
similar decrease of the conventional indigenous natural Energy considers a high level of indigenous production
gas production. The indigenous renewable methane pro- of renewable and decarbonised methane. With around
duction, such as biomethane and synthetic methane, differ 902 TWh in 2050, Distributed Energy projects the highest
across the scenarios in accordance with the storylines. biomethane production of all scenarios. The same accounts
for the production of synthetic methane, with an amount of
National Trends shows an increase of biomethane produc- 130 TWh in 2050. On the other side, imports are reduced
tion over time and the production of synthetic methane from 75 % to 11 % between 2020 and 2050, accounting
through electrolysis is rather limited. The overall produc- for3,125 TWh in 2040, and 971 TWh in 2050. The level
tion of renewable gases is enough to compensate for the of imports in Distributed Energy is the lowest of all three
decline in conventional natural gas, in order to maintain scenarios and does not consider any natural gas in 2050.
current EU gas production. However, as the reduction in
the methane demand starts later than in the other scenar- As a scenario focusing on the integration of the EU into
ios, National Trends shows the highest import dependence the global energy transition, Global Ambition combines
on methane until 204022. both high decarbonisation levels and access to global and
diversified markets for renewable methane (1,010 TWh in
Biomethane: an essential source of renewable 2050). Furthermore, thanks to energy efficiency measures,
methane. methane imports decrease from 76 % to 26 % by 2050
compared to current levels (9,159 TWh) and natural gas
Biomethane plays a major role in the decarbonisation of imports are reduced to 892 TWh, essentially to be decar-
the methane supply and is the main source of decarbon- bonised to produce hydrogen.
isation of the gas supply in both COP 21 scenarios until
2035. Synthetic methane and renewable imports are key to
complement the supply needs and reach carbon neutrality
by 2050.
TWh
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2030 2040 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Natural gas (Domestic) Biomethane (Domestic) Synthetic methane (Domestic)
Natural gas (Import) Biomethane (Import) Synthetic methane (Import)
Figure 27: Methane supply for EU27
22 As the GHG emissions are not assessed for National Trends, the production means of the imported methane (fossil, low carbon, renewable) is not
specified.

4.2.4.2 Hydrogen supply undergo a complete transformation over the next 30 years
and be traded mainly as an energy carrier to become the
A game changer. main gas energy carrier by 2050 with a marginal role for
its demand as feedstock. The main drivers of this trans-
Today the EU-27 hydrogen supply is a domestic produc- formation of the hydrogen market are the significant EU
tion of about 350 TWh, mainly used as a feedstock. About and global potentials for producing hydrogen from variable
75 % is produced with SMR, the remaining volumes are renewable electricity and water, including sea water. Figure
by-products from other industrial processes23. However, 28 provides an overview of the hydrogen supply in the
both COP 21 scenarios consider the hydrogen market will three TYNDP 2022 scenarios.
TWh
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Unspeciﬁed By-products SMR SMR & CCS
Low carbon import Renewable import P2G for H2 P2G for P2L
Figure 28: Hydrogen supply for EU27
National Trends considers a limited uptake of Distributed Energy, as a decentralised scenario with high
hydrogen production. energy autonomy, considers a high level of domestic
production of renewable hydrogen – similar to the high
National Policies generally reflect various and shorter-term domestic methane production. Since both decarbonisa-
visions of the EU Member States. And most policies have tion and a higher self-sufficiency are the main drivers of
not been significantly updated since the National Energy and the Distributed Energy Scenario, it requires a significant
Climate plans were published in 2019. Therefore, the role of increase in renewable electricity generation to meet the
hydrogen to meet the 2050 objectives is not fully captured P2G demand (1,521 TWh in 2050). The uptake of hydrogen
by the National Trends scenario (for some countries this imports is limited (241 TWh renewable hydrogen in 2050),
also applies for Distributed Energy and Global Ambition) with an import share of 13 %.
and only an incomplete picture of the hydrogen supply can
be provided. Most of the current hydrogen produced locally Global Ambition, as a scenario considering larger scale
in the industrial clusters is not included in the figures since solutions and the EU as an actor of the global energy
they are not connected to any regional or national networks. transition, combines both high decarbonisation levels with
These figures are shown as methane demand. access to a global and diversified clean hydrogen market.
Hydrogen produced from renewables in the EU play an
COP 21 scenarios: the key role of hydrogen to important role in the supply mix (1,366 TWh) and clean
decarbonise the energy system. hydrogen imports are key to ensure the supply and demand
adequacy of the EU, providing 936 TWh of decarbonised
Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition integrate all and renewable hydrogen, resulting in an import share of
sectors to provide a holistic vision of the European energy 37 %.
system.
23 As part of the hydrogen supply is produced with natural gas, methane and hydrogen demand should not be summed.

GW
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Figure 29: Electrolyser capacity for EU27
TWh
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Electricity from the market Hybrid PV Hybrid Onshore wind Hybrid offshore wind
Dedicated PV Dedicated Onshore wind Dedicated offshore wind
Figure 30: Origin of the electrolyser supply for EU27 (Hybrid renewables are connected to both the electricity grid as well as to an
electrolyser.)
All unabated production of hydrogen is decom- important role in the early stage of the transition when
missioned by 2030. supply must be secured while renewable capacities devel-
op. In the longer term SMR will be decreased. In Global
These scenarios have in common that until 2030, all SMR Ambition the supply of low carbon hydrogen remains im-
without carbon capture and storage will be either decom- portant for decarbonising energy supply in the longterm,
missioned, retrofitted with CCS or replaced by SMR with SMR capacity remaining constant over time.
CSS. In Distributed Energy low carbon hydrogen plays an

4.3 Imports
Imports decrease significantly with renewable the different energy systems significantly reduce the en-
capacities and further sector integration. ergy demand. Furthermore, both Distributed Energy and
Global Ambition scenarios see the significant development
In both COP 21 scenarios, the combination of the energy of indigenous renewable capacities for electricity and gas,
efficiency measures combined with further integration of reducing the need for imports.
TWh
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Current 2030 2040 2050 Current 2030 2040 2050
Solids Liquids Hydrogen Methane
Figure 31: Energy imports for EU 27
System integration fosters clean energy produc- In 2050, the Global Ambition scenario considers the EU
tion and contributes to energy independency. as an actor of the international clean energy market and
the global energy transition. This scenario shows similar
With increasing system integration, the EU energy system import levels compared to the EC CPRICE scenario but
increasingly relies on electricity and gas renewables to with a significantly higher level of decarbonisation. The
satisfy its energy demand since significant production Distributed Energy scenario considers an increasing e nergy
capacities can be developed in the EU. Therefore, the a utonomy of the EU and shows significantly reduced
EU energy demand only marginally relies on coal and oil, i mports compared to all scenarios of the EC Impact
and liquids in general, which reduces the need for carbon Assessment with similar levels of decarbonised imports.
intensive energy imports.

4.4 GHG emissions
Distributed Energy and Global Ambition: designed Energy efficiency first: reducing the energy
for integrated infrastructure planning assessment demand is the most efficient way to reduce GHG
and to meet the EU Climate and Energy objectives. emissions.
Both COP 21 scenarios, Distributed Energy and Global Both COP 21 Scenarios consider the development of en-
Ambition, are built considering the possible interactions ergy efficiency measures like renovation of buildings and
with all different sectors and designed along contrasted increasing efficiency of developing technologies. A signif-
storylines making them capable for assessing in which con- icant decrease in primary energy demand combined with
trasting ways the EU energy infrastructure can support the increasing shares of renewables and decarbonised energy
transition towards net-zero 2050, meeting the EU climate in the EU supply mix is a necessary condition of meeting
and energy objectives. the EU climate and energy objectives.
A carbon tracker to compare the scenarios with Renewable and decarbonisation capacities need
the Green Deal and COP 21 objectives. significant increase.
While they are designed to meet the EU objectives, the Whereas electricity generation has already undergone
COP 21 scenarios are fully fledged scenarios taking a holis- some level of transition (1,300 TWh produced from hydro,
tic approach to the European energy system, capturing all wind and solar in 2019), the EU needs a significant increase
interdependences across the different sectors and there- in renewable and decarbonised capacities including for
fore allowing to track the carbon emissions. The carbon hydrogen and methane to decarbonise the whole energy
budget was firstly introduced in TYNDP 2020 and allows system. Just for wind and solar generation, this represents
to monitor the evolution of the carbon budget left to meet an increase from 400 TWh produced in 2019 to 2,500 or
the EU climate targets with each new TYNDP. 3,000 TWh in 2050 in Global Ambition and Distributed
Energy respectively.
4.4.1 Role of non-energy sectors

All sectors need to decarbonise. scenarios rely on data provided in the Impact Assessment
and Long-Term Strategy of the European Commission. As-
The fully integrated COP 21 scenarios confirm that reach- sociated assumptions are the same for both Distributed
ing a net-zero economy by 2050 requires the contribution Energy and Global Ambition. Non-CO₂ emissions reduce in
of non-energy related sectors, such as the decarbonisation both scenarios from 627 Mt in 2022 to 288 Mt in 205024.
of agriculture and meat production, and requires further af- This is also illustrated in Figure 32. Negative emissions
forestation. It should be noted, that for non-CO₂ emissions from LULUCF increase from 264 Mt in 2018 to 425 in
(methane, N₂O, F-gases) and LULUCF, the TYNDP 2022 205025, as shown in Figure 33.
24 Non-CO� emissions for 2030 are also taken from the Impact Assessment (MIX-non-CO� scenario). The Impact Assessment does not provide
appropriate non-CO� emissions for 2050. Therefore the post 2030 figures were taken from the EC Long Term Strategy and consider consumer
preference changes and technical mitigation.
25 Figures are based on the LULUCF+ scenario for 2030 and the Net-zero GHG scenario for 2050.

Mt
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Current 2025 2030 2040 2050
F-gases N2O Methane
Figure 32: Non-CO� emission assumptions
Mt
200
100
− 100
− 200
− 300
− 400
− 500
2018 2040 2050
Other Agriculture Land Forest Land Net LULUCF sink
Figure 33: Emissions and negative emissions from LULUCF
The TYNDP 2020 scenario building exercise has already Global Ambition scenario shows an increased application
shown that to decarbonise all sectors as well as all fuel of carbon capture and storage (CCS), with up to 662 Mt per
types, additional measures such as CCU/S are needed, also year by 2050. This assumption was based on the Net Zero
in combination with bioenergy. The TYNDP 2022 scenario by 2050 study from IEA26. Distributed Energy foresees
assumptions for CCS are summarised in Figure 34. The some limited use of CCS (up to 64 Mt).
26 This study assumes up to 7.6 Gt of carbon capture by 2050 globally. For TYNDP 2022 it was assumed that 10 % of the global CCS is accounted for by
the EU-27. This assumption is based on the current share of the EU-27 in the global GHG emissions. IEA also foresees the application of direct air
capture (DAC), but these negative emissions are not considered in the calculations.

Mt
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Current 2030 2040 2050 Current 2030 2040 2050
Post-combustive Pre-combustive
Figure 34: Carbon capture and storage assumptions
4.4.2 Compliance with the EU Climate and Energy objectives

Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition comply with Union. On 17 September 2020 the European Commission
the European climate and energy objectives, in particular reconfirmed its proposal of reducing GHG emission by at
the greenhouse gas reduction targets. On 11 December least – 55 % by 2030 and reach climate neutrality by 2050.
2019 the European Commission has announced the Euro- This was accompanied by a supporting impact assessment.
pean Green Deal and since then published several policy
strategies, among others the Energy System Integration COP 21 scenarios meet the 2030 targets and reach
strategy (ESI) and EU Hydrogen strategy for the European carbon neutrality by 2050.
Mt
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Historic Distributed Energy Global Ambition Target
Figure 35: GHG emissions in Distributed Energy and Global Ambition

Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition foresee a The EU needs to become carbon negative in 2050.
reduction of GHG emissions of at least 55 percent by 2030
compared to the 1990 level. Distributed Energy reaches The development of large-scale decarbonisation technol-
carbon neutrality by 205027 and Global Ambition already ogies can contribute to accelerate the decarbonisation of
achieves carbon neutrality around 2045. the European economy and reaching carbon negativity af-
ter 2045 – 2050 to be on the trajectory to meet the COP 21
objectives. Reaching carbon negativity in the second half
of the century is necessary to recover from the overshoot
of the carbon budget defined to comply with the COP 21
objective of limiting the amount of GHG by the end of the
century to limit the global temperature increase to +1.5 °C.
4.4.3 Carbon budget assessment

The European Union has ratified the Paris Agreement. This ENTSO-E into a carbon budget to stay below +1.5 °C at the
implies a commitment to the long-term goal of keeping the end of the century with a 66.7 % probability. The calcula-
increase in global average temperature to well below 2 °C tion of the carbon budget is based on the exchange with
compared to pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to CAN Europe for the TYNDP 2020 Scenarios. It includes
limit the increase to 1.5 °C. For the purpose of the TYNDP emissions and removals from agriculture and from Land
scenarios, this target has been translated by ENTSOG and Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF).
Between 2018 and 2020, the EU already consumed 17 % to 21 % of its CO� budget left until 2100.
In TYNDP 2020 ENTSOG and ENTSO-E used an EU-28 sions in 2018 and 2019. Table 1 provides an overview of
carbon budget based on population for the period the estimated carbon budget threshold following different
2018 – 2100. For TYNDP 2022 ENTSOG and ENTSO-E methodologies. In 2018 and 2019 the EU already con-
benchmark their scenarios against a carbon budget based sumed a substantial part of the remaining carbon budget.
on population, as well as a carbon budget based on equi- As a result, the remaining EU-27 carbon budget is 35.1
ty28. To this end, the carbon budgets were recalculated, GtCO2eq by population and 26.7 GtCO2eq by equity.
now considering the EU-27 scope and the historic emis-
Method Based on population Based on equity
Period 2018 – 2100 2020 – 2100 Delta 2018 – 2100 2020 – 2100 Delta
EU-27 42.2 35.1 –17 % 33.8 26.7 –21 %
UK 6.2 5.3 –15 % 4.7 3.8 –20 %
EU-28 48.5 40.4 –17 % 38.5 30.5 –21 %
Table 1: Remaining carbon budget expressed in Gt of CO� equivalents
Carbon budget overshoot before 2035 seems provides an overview. It can be concluded that with the
inevitable. current pace of annual GHG emissions, an overshoot of
the calculated budget seems unavoidable. By 2022 it is
The cumulative emissions of Distributed Energy and Global expected that the EU-27 already consumed between 30
Ambitions have been assessed and benchmarked against and 40 % of the remaining carbon budget, depending on
aforementioned carbon budget thresholds. Figure 36 the calculation method. Despite the ambitious decarbon-
27 Carbon neutrality (or net-zero) means having a balance between emitting carbon and absorbing carbon from the atmosphere in carbon sinks.
Removing carbon oxide from the atmosphere and then storing it is known as carbon sequestration, for example through land use, land use
change and forestry (LULUCF).
28 The main approaches to define the European share in the global carbon budget are based on population or on equity. A methodology based on
population assumes that all earth citizens are allowed to emit the same amount. A methodology based on equity assumes that developed nations
should take responsibility for their high-carbon path to industrialisation during the 19th and 20th centuries. The calculation based on equity pro-
vides a lower carbon budget for the EU than a calculation based on population.

isation trajectories set in both the scenarios, the carbon carbon budget overshoot. Total cumulative emissions add
budget based on population is reached around 2032. The up to 45.4 Gt by 2050, which means an overshoot of 10.2
budget based on equity is reached around 2027. Gt based on population and 18.6 Gt based on equity. Dis-
tributed Energy shows slightly higher cumulative emissions
Technologies to achieve negative emissions are of 50.0 Gt, which represents an overshoot of between 14.9
essential to meet the COP 21 objectives. and 22.2 Gt. This means that in both scenarios net negative
emissions have to be achieved after 2050 to reach the
In Global Ambition the net cumulative emissions peaks 1.5 °C target by 2100, with CCS on bio-energy (BECCS) or
around 2045. Renewable energy combined with CCS direct air capture (DAC) technologies for example.
contributes to bending the curve and recovering from the
Mt Cumulative GHG emissions Distributed Energy (Mt)
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
−10,000
−20,000
2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044 2046 2048 2050
Mt Cumulative GHG emissions Global Ambition (Mt)

70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
−10,000
−20,000
2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044 2046 2048 2050
CO2 emissions Non-CO2 emission LULUCF CCS Net emissions Population budget Equity budget
Figure 36: Cumulative emissions in the COP 21 scenarios

4.4.4 Carbon footprint of energy
Electricity generation
Aiming at an earlier decarbonisation, emissions of the The decarbonisation of flexible thermal power generation
electricity sectors already strongly decrease to reach be- necessary to the reliability of the system is ensured by a
tween 157 and 230 Mt/CO₂ in 2030 which is a decrease switch from natural gas, coal and oil to biomethane and
of at least 85 % and 71 % compared respectively to 1990 synthetic methane. Such an approach is more economic
and 2018. In 2040 emissions of the COP 21 scenario only than capital intensive investments in CCU/S for power
represent 63 Mt/CO₂ for Distributed Energy and 67 Mt/ generation due to the decreasing number of running hours.
CO₂ for Global Ambition.
MtCO2
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
1990 2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Figure 37: Emission of electricity generation for EU27
It has to be noticed that such decrease occurs in parallel tion carbon intensity is divided by a factor 4 between
to a fast-growing power generation supporting both direct 2030 and 2040 moving from 46 to 12 tCO₂/MWh) for
electrification and electrolysis-based fuels. As an illustra- Distributed Energy, the most electrified scenario.
tCO2/MWh
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1990 2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Figure 38: Carbon intensity of power generation for EU27

Electrolysers are supplied both by dedicated RES and the to 2030 and hydrogen supply and demand requirement
electricity market. When the first source ensures a carbon may result in electrolyser operating on few hours with a
free production of synthetic fuels, electrolysis from the low carbon content. Such a situation may be considered
market may still be based on carbon emitting sources. As as being favourable to the reach of carbon n eutrality
the electricity and hydrogen system is price-driven, the if the a lternative would be more carbon intensive.
model avoids running electrolyser if it triggers fossil power Otherwise, certificates of origin may guarantee carbon-free
generation. Nevertheless, some must-run constraints up electrolysis.
Hydrogen
Pure hydrogen contains no carbon and produces water - carbon neutral if produced from renewable or nuclear
when burned with oxygen, making it a fully carbon free electricity and electrolysis,
energy carrier. It can replace methane in almost all appli-
cations where it is used for its energy, not as a feedstock, - carbon negative if produced from renewable biometh-
and is an acknowledged candidate to decarbonise energy ane associated with CCS (BECCS for Bio Energy + CCS)
intensive sectors. Furthermore, the hydrogen production
potential in the EU is rather significant since it can be The model used by the ENTSOs is built to minimise overall
produced in various ways. However, not all production system costs (including CO₂ emission costs). Therefore,
technologies are equivalent in terms of CO₂ emissions and it does not ensure that no carbon-emitting plants are in
hydrogen can either be: operation at the same time as electrolysers and that the
carbon footprint of the hydrogen is exactly 0 g CO₂/kg,
- as carbon intensive as methane if directly produced although the footprint is likely to be low, because produc-
from Steam Methane Reforming (SMR), ing hydrogen from fossil-based electricity would be very
expensive and likely non-competitive due to high CO₂
- low-carbon content if it is produced from SMR with costs. In addition the following graph illustrate the fact that
c arbon capture and storage (CCS) with a current solar and wind increase far exceeds the need to replace
efficiency of 95 %, fossil fuels. It ensures that the additive principle of parallel
RES and electrolysis development can be met.
TWh
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Fossil fuel substitution Electrolysis demand Wind and Solar development
Figure 39: Evolution of electricity demand for electrolysis compared to RES development

5 The cost of electricity
The cost of electricity covers different concepts:
– the short run marginal price at a given time step (usually one hour or less) pictures
the balance between demand and production. It represents the price of the last unit to
be activated in the merit order at that time in a particular bidding zone;
– the levelised costs of electricity (LCOE) covering the overall system costs (CAPEX and
OPEX as well as fuel and CO� prices).
The energy transition will impact both due to the building order based on the efficiency, fuel cost and carbon price of
of significant wind and solar capacity forming the bulk of power generation. Compared to previous edition, a higher
future electricity generation and the strong increase of CO₂ cost assumption has induced a rise in marginal prices
CO₂ price impacting remaining fossil thermal generation. of all scenarios. In some markets, zero or negative mar-
The definition of TYNDP scenarios is based on a system ginal prices may appear due to oversupply that cannot be
perspective looking at the minimisation of the overall sys- stored or transported to another markets. By offering new
tem cost. The evolution of wind, solar and thermal capacity and flexible opportunity to use electricity, sector coupling
follows an energy only approach. reduces the occurrence of such price situations.
Marginal prices With the expected development of wind and solar, the
shape of the marginal price curve across the year is likely to
Today marginal price is set by thermal units for most of change with more hours at very low prices induced by RES
the hours of the year. Prices range according to a merit either directly or through storage discharge. When residual

demand (final electricity demand reduced by variable RES The development of electrolysis for the production of
production) will remain high, marginal prices are likely to synthetic fuels (hydrogen, e-gas and e-liquids) will link the
increase compared to nowadays as fuel and CO₂ prices will price of electricity with those of other sources of mole-
be higher. As a result, the volatility of marginal electricity cules. At the same time the increase of marginal prices
price throughout the year may will be higher than today. triggered by electrolysis demand will create an incentive
for the development of additional RES capacity.
€/MWh
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2025 2030 2030 2040 2050 2030 2040 2050
Figure 40: Marginal price in the electricity market (EU27 marginal price is built as the weighted average of hourly marginal price
for each hour and bidding zone based using hourly electricity generation as a weight).
Levelised cost of electricity hour of the year. As a result, LCOE becomes a less rele-
vant criteria to compare renewable and other investment
The concept of LCOE has been used for many years to options of very different nature as generation, flexibility
compare the cost between electricity sources. It enables and grid. For this reason, the investment model used to
an easy comparison of unit costs between technologies by build Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenarios
combining CAPEX, OPEX and load factor on the economic relies on all CAPEX and OPEX of investment candidates
lifetime of the asset. together with fuel and CO₂ prices for a reliable electricity
system. It ensures that the CAPEX and fixed costs of a
In a system where most of the generation is ensured by technology are recovered over the economic/technical life-
flexible thermal units, LCOE is a meaningful criterion as time of the investment also taking into account the value
the integration of wind and solar does not trigger massive of lost load. The Draft 2022 Scenario Building Guidelines
adaptation of the system to accommodate their variability. provide an overview of the investment CAPEX and fixed
In fact, such technologies continue to develop despite de- cost assumptions for each of the technologies considered
creasing incentive schemes as they are becoming mature. by the scenario building process.
In many cases their LCOE are already significantly lower
compared to low carbon equivalent (e. g., CCGTs with CCS) The investment model selects the investment candidates
and soon with unabated fossil thermal units due to an in- ensuring the minimisation of the overall system cost for
creasing CO₂ price. the whole geographic perimeter. It also prevents over-
investment in a particular technology, such as solar PV,
When building scenarios aiming at climate neutrality in as their similar generation profiles reduce the marginal
2050, the very high penetration rate reached by wind and price on sunny hours, so that further investment is not
solar beyond 2030 changes the operation of the electricity economically viable. Flexibility options such as batteries
system. Flexibility and other services offered today by ther- and interconnection benefit from higher marginal price by
mal units will have to be provided by other technologies delivering later (through storage) or in another bidding zone
in order to ensure a reliable operation of the system every (through interconnection).

%
0
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
35
40
45
5
10
15
MT 20
LT0
0 00
IE0 ES0
0 0
SE0 PT0
4 0
GR0 CY0
3 0
FI0 ITS
0 A
HU ITS
00 1
DKE
1 ITS
I
SE0
3 GR0
3
SE0
2 BG0
0
CZ0
0 ITC
DKW S
1 GR0
PL0 0
0 ITC
BE0 N
0 RO0
FR0 0
0
ITN
SE0 1
1
FR0
AT0
0 0
HU
EU2 00
7
HR SI0
00 0

DE0 EU2
0 7
RO0 HR
0 00
NL0 AT0
0 0
PT0 SK0
0 0
BG0
0 CZ0
0
ES0
0 BE0
0
Figure 41: Solar PV load factor for the Climatic year 2009 – Distributed Energy 2040
ITS
1 DKE
1
LV0
0 PL0
Figure 42: Onshore wind load factor for the Climatic year 2009 – Distributed Energy 2040
0
ITS
A NL0
EE0 0
0 DKW
LUG 1
1 SE0
ITC 4
N SE0
ITS 3
I
LT0
ITC 0
S
IE0
MT
00 0
LV0
ITC
A 0
EE0
GR0
0 0
SK0 SE0
0 2
CY0 FI0
0 0
ITN SE0
1 1
SI0
0 DE0
0
%
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
7
0
N
ITS
DKW
DKE
ITS
ITN
EU2
SE0
SE0
SE0
IE0
DE0
ES0
NL0
BE0
LV0
PL0
FR0
EE0
LT0
GR0
PT0
FI0
BG0
ITS
ITC
Figure 43: Offshore wind load factor for the Climatic year 2009 – Distributed Energy
While LCOE may no longer fit the purpose of comparing fossil fuels. These technologies will also need to compete
investment candidates within a wide range of technologies, against other forms of flexibility, such as interconnectors,
it is still useful to compare the location for a given technol- demand side response, batteries and hydrogen storage.
ogy as it takes into account resource availability both in a
geographical and climatic sense. Nuclear is a specific technology as the choice to build new
units not only depends on the economics of the facility
The cost of technology for residential PV is stable across but also on political and industrial decision considering the
Europe however its load factor is wholly dependent on the overall value chain. As a result, the development of new
geographical location. For example, solar PV average load capacity is an input to the scenarios with no new units in
factor is 18 % in Spain and only 10 % in Finland. Based on Distributed Energy while Global Ambition follows a trend
cost assumption for Distributed Energy in 2050, it results set by high trajectories from the relevant TSOs of countries
in a LCOE of ~14 €/MWh in Spain compared to ~26 €/ anticipating new nuclear. Therefore, nuclear generation is
MWh in Finland. only influencing the marginal prices of the scenarios.
With competitive RES, the decision on building new As a result, the comparison of economic competitiveness
conventional thermal plants will be increasingly driven by of new power generation units could be clustered in two
the flexibility need of the electricity system rather than groups:
delivering energy across the year. Their role will be to meet
the residual demand and ensure national and regional - Wind and solar as the main electricity source in terms
security of supply through interconnections. The choice of energy delivered on annual basis;
between cheaper units (e. g., OCGT) and more sophisticat-
ed, expensive and efficient units (e. g. CCGT) will depend - Thermal generation as a source of flexibility on the gen-
on the number of running hours required to balance the eration side (in competition with other flexibility tools
system and the price of low carbon equivalent to present such as batteries, DSM or interconnections).

€/MWh
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Market- Decicated Market- Decicated Market- Decicated Prosumer
connected to electrolysis connected to electrolysis connected to electrolysis
Wind onshore Wind offshore Solar PV Farm Solar PV Rooftop
Figure 44: LCOE of wind and solar under different configurations – Distributed Energy 2040
€/MWh
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Market- Decicated Market- Decicated Market- Decicated Prosumer
connected to electrolysis connected to electrolysis connected to electrolysis
Wind onshore Wind offshore Solar PV Farm Solar PV Rooftop
Figure 45: LCOE of wind and solar in different configurations – Global Ambition 2040

€/MWh
200
150
100
50
0
80 % 50 % 30 % 10 %
CCGT OCGT
Figure 46: L
COE of flexible methane generation under different load factors – Distributed Energy 2040
Fuel cost is based on a 57 %/30 %/13 % mix between natural gas, biomethane and synthetic methane with a CO� cost of
123 €/tCO�. LCOE are very similar for Global Ambition.)
The previous graphs illustrate the cost assumed for wind - Wind offshore in Global Ambition linked to the devel-
and solar in each scenario based on their driver and the opment of large-scale RES solution.
grid connection saving for RES dedicated to electrolysis.
As a comparison with National Trends, the cost decrease The graphs also show the impact of running hours on the
focuses on: choice of flexible thermal generation. The increasing cost
of fuels and CO₂ result in a premium for most efficient
- Solar PV and onshore wind in Distributed Energy is units with OCGT becoming competitive against CCGT for
linked to the development of prosumer behaviour and load factors between 10 % and 30 %.
decentralised focus;

6 Benchmarking
While developing the TYNDP 2022 scenarios, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E make use and
benchmark against relevant external studies as captured in the technologies ranges of
the Final Storyline Report published in April 2021. The purpose of the exercise is to
understand whether or not the input assumptions and methodologies that ENTSOG and
ENTSO-E employ result in credible and plausible outcomes compared to other expert
opinion and methods.
As part of their internal quality process for scenario build- 2020. This chapter provides comparisons for a variety of
ing, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E have compared the TYNDP topics and parameters. All comparisons consider EU-2730
2022 Scenarios to the European Commission’s Impact results by sector and energy vector for 2050.
Assessment Scenarios “Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate
ambition” published in September 202029. Such comparison TYNDP 2022 and EC Impact Assessment scenarios refer
is key to ensure that the selection of Project of Common to EU27 and take into account the shipping sector and
Interest is built upon scenarios consistent with European ambient heat. TYNDP 2020 scenarios have been scaled
Commission policy scenarios. Furthermore, the TYNDP to a scope enabling a consistent comparison with the new
2022 scenarios are compared with the previous TYNDP scenarios.
29 Comparisons are made with REG and CPRICE, which are the scenarios with the lowest and highest energy demand respectively.
30 TYNDP 2020 covered the EU-28 perimeter. In order to make a proper comparison with TYNDP 2022 and Impact Assessment, UK was excluded
from the TYNDP 2020 results

6.1 Final energy demand
2050 final energy demand (excluding non-energy use) Agriculture and Other demand is included in Residential
from TYNDP 2022 COP 21 scenarios is compared with the & Tertiary category.
previous TYNDP 2020 scenarios and with the EC Impact
Assessment CPRICE and REG scenarios. Global Ambition and Distributed Energy show a strong
alignment in Final energy demand with EC Impact Assess-
For the benchmark with the EC Impact Assessment sce- ment in 2050. Differences between Global Ambition and
narios the COP 21 TYNDP 2022 scenarios include inter- CPRICE and between Distributed Energy and REG scenar-
national transport and ambient heat demand. Whereas ios are lower than 4 %.
TWh
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
GA DE CPRICE REG
TYNDP 2022 Impact Assessment
Transport Industry Tertiary Residential
Figure 47: Final energy demand benchmark for EU27
As final demand of TYNDP 2020 scenarios did not take Global Ambition scenarios show almost the same final en-
into account shipping and ambient heat (from heat pumps) ergy demand, and TYNDP 2022 Distributed Energy shows
while covering transmission and distribution losses and 3.5 % less final energy demand than TYNDP 2020.
United-Kingdom, it has been necessary to use a consistent
scope for comparison with TYNDP 2022 scenarios.
6.2 Final electricity demand

Final electricity demand from TYNDP 2022 COP 21 share. Shares are calculated as the electricity final demand
scenarios is compared with the previous TYNDP 2020 over the overall final demand (including international trans-
scenarios and with the EC Impact Assessment CPRICE and port and ambient heat). TYNDP 2022 Distributed Energy
REG scenarios. scenario is a bit more ambitious than the Commission’s
REG scenario (45 % vs 42 % share).
TYNDP 2022 Global Ambition scenario is aligned with the
Commission’s CPRICE scenario, showing both almost 40 %

TWh
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
GA DE CPRICE REG GA DE
TYNDP 2022 Impact Assessment TYNDP 2020
Aggregated Industry Transport R&T
Figure 48: Benchmark electricity demand in 2050 for EU27
Both TYNDP 2022 scenarios show higher electricity Commission’s scenarios (10 % higher than REG) and Global
demand than those of TYNDP 2020. Distributed Energy Ambition scenario remains aligned with the Commission’s
scenario has a higher electricity consumption than the CPRICE scenario (lower than 5 % difference).
6.3 Electricity generation

In 2050, COP 21 scenarios consider a strong increase of tion. It means a redesign of the power generation mix with
both final electricity demand and electrolysis. By that time scenario dependent options being among wind and solar
horizon, there will be no more fossil-based power genera- technologies or nuclear.
GW
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
GA
DE
ice
REG
in
ax
DE
GA
ice
REG
in
ax
DE
GA
ice
REG
in
ax
ne M
ne M
ne M
ne M
ne M
ne M
CPr
CPr
CPr
r yli
r yli
r yli
r yli
r yli
r yli
Sto
Sto
Sto
Sto
Sto
Sto
Onshore wind Offshore wind Solar
Figure 49: Benchmark of RES technologies in 2050 for EU27

TWh
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
DE GA CPRICE REG Storyline Min Storyline Max
Figure 50: Benchmark of the overall level of wind and Solar PV capacity in 2050 for EU27
Distributed Energy reaches the ambitious RES targets for Global Ambition shows a higher offshore wind develop-
onshore wind as set in the Final Storyline Report based ment compared to EC Impact Assessment scenarios follow-
on public consultation. It also exceeds the wind and solar ing its narrative focusing on centralised technology. Solar
capacity of the most ambitious EC Impact Assessment and onshore wind capacity is below EC Impact Assessment
scenario (CPRICE). Nevertheless, it does not use the level as the scenario requires less power generation due to
extended solar trajectory as following the storyline public the import of part of hydrogen and synthetic fuel demand
consultation. Such behaviour certainly derives from the when they are all produced in n Europe in European
priority given to onshore wind due to lower CAPEX and Commission scenarios.
higher load factor.

6.4 Gas supply
6.4.1 Methane supply

A more limited and more decarbonised methane supply.
In 2050, the COP 21 scenarios consider an increasing In Distributed Energy natural gas is completely phased out
hydrogen demand and as methane decarbonisation is not by 2050 and Global Ambition considers about 350 TWh of
the main source of hydrogen production, both Distributed natural gas supply, which is primarily imported. The quan-
Energy and Global Ambition show a reduction in the over- tities of renewable methane in TYNDP 2022 scenarios are
all methane supply in TYNDP 2022 compared to TYNDP quite comparable with the EC Impact Assessment scenar-
2020 and substantially lower quantities than the EC Impact ios. These levels are slightly higher than in the previous
Assessment (between –500 TWh and –1,200 TWh). TYNDP 2020, especially in Global Ambition.
TWh
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
DE GA REG CPRICE DE GA DE GA
TYNDP 2022 Impact Assessment TYNDP 2022 TYNDP 2020
Including shipping Excluding shipping
Synthetic methane Biomethane Natural gas
Figure 51: Methane supply benchmark for EU27
6.4.2 Hydrogen supply

Hydrogen supply transformation: from carbon emitting feedstock to fully decarbonised energy carrier.
By 2050, both COP 21 scenarios consider exclusively re- Global Ambition considers hydrogen supply levels compa-
newable or decarbonised hydrogen supply. Methane con- rable to the EC Impact Assessment and Distributed Energy
version into low carbon hydrogen through SMR combined rather lower levels as a consequence of higher electrifica-
with CCS has a minor role in Global Ambition and has fully tion and reduced final energy demand due to higher energy
disappeared in Distributed Energy. It leaves the possibility efficiency assumptions. However, both scenarios consider
to use decarbonisation technologies with renewable meth- a need for imports to complement the EU production to
ane to produce carbon negative hydrogen. satisfy the demand and the hydrogen supply mix differs
from the EC scenarios. In Distributed Energy the hydrogen

produced from electrolysis is quite comparable with the an access to a global clean hydrogen market and shows a
Impact Assessment but hydrogen for e-gas and e-liquids higher contribution of imports to the hydrogen supply and
is lower in Distributed Energy. Global Ambition considers a lower production from electrolysis.
TWh
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Electrolysis for e-liquid Electrolysis for e-gas Imports SMR Electrolysis for H�
Figure 52: Hydrogen supply benchmark for EU27
With regard to hydrogen supply, the range observed in the e-gas and e-liquids production, especially in Distributed
TYNDP 2022 is quite comparable to TYNDP 2020. Howev- Energy.
er, TYNDP 2022 shows a higher hydrogen supply for direct
us whereas TYNDP 2020 shows hydrogen feedstock for

6.5 Biomass supply
As discussed in chapter 4.2.2, the TYNDP 2022 scenarios the new Distributed Energy scenario foresees the highest
foresee the use of biomass for several applications, e. g. in biomass supply compared to Global Ambition, consistent
power generation or in biomethane production. In order with the energy autonomy storyline. The biomass supply
to ensure that the scenarios do not overestimate the bi- level observed in Distributed Energy is comparable but
omass potential available to these applications, ENTSOG slightly lower than the assumptions in the EC Impact As-
and ENTSO-E benchmark the biomass supply against other sessment scenarios.
studies.
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E acknowledge however that Impact
Figure 53 provides a comparison of the TYNDP 2022 Assessment scenarios do not necessary explore the lower
biomass supply assumptions against the EC Impact As- end of the range for biomass. That is why Global Ambi-
sessment, EC Long Term Strategy and the previous TYNDP tion explores a lower level, which is quite similar to the
2020. The biomass supply levels are quite similar to the 1.5 LIFE-LB (low biomass) scenario in the EC Long Term
assumptions in the Final TYNDP 2020 scenarios. However, Strategy.
TWh
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Figure 53: Biomass supply benchmark for EU27

6.6 Energy imports
Figure 54 compares the TYNDP 2022 assumptions on energy imports in 2050 with the EC Impact Assessment and with
the previous TYNDP 2020.
TWh
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Biomass Coal Liquids Hydrogen Methane
Figure 54: Energy imports benchmark (excluding nuclear fuels) for EU27
As Distributed Energy focuses on higher European energy foresees less import of oil and more import of (renewable)
autonomy, this scenario foresees the lowest levels of gas including hydrogen. The higher gas import however
energy import. By 2050 the total energy imports are stems explicitly from the scenario storyline of this scenario.
reduced to slightly less than 1,100 TWh. This is well
below the energy imports in the EC Impact Assessment Compared to the previous TYNDP edition, total imports
scenarios. Total energy import in Global Ambition is with in Distributed Energy are about 35 % lower and in Global
about 2,600 TWh quite comparable with the EC Impact Ambition about 8 % lower.
Assessment. However, the type of imported energy carrier
differs. Compared to the EC scenarios, Global Ambition

6.7 Carbon capture and storage
The EC Impact Assessment does not provide any figures for Distributed Energy assumes up to 64 Mt of CCS in 2050.
CCS. That is why the TYNDP 2022 scenario assumptions This means a reduction compared to the previous TYNDP
where benchmarked against some other studies. Table 2 edition, where for Distributed Energy up to 130 Mt was
provides an overview. The following studies were used: assumed. Furthermore, the CCS level in the Distributed
Energy scenario for TYNDP 2022 is comparable to the
- ENTSOG and ENTSO-E TYNDP 2020 lower scenarios in the LTS. Global Ambition assumes up
to 761 Mt of carbon capture and storage, based on IEA.
- European Commission (2018), Long Term Strategy This is more than the assumption in TYNDP 2020 and
(2018) also exceeds the figures in the Long-Term Strategy from a
- IEA (2020), Net Zero by 2050 few years ago. It is however still well below the CCS levels
reached in the Hydrogen for EU study that was released
- Hydrogen for EU (2020), Charting pathways to enable recently.
net-zero
Study Scenario CCS in 2050 (Mt/y)
Global Ambition 463

TYNDP 2020
Distributed Energy 130
IEA Net Zero 2050 662
Technology Diversification 1,505

Hydrogen for EU
Renewable Push 1,325
ELEC 65
H2 63
P2X 77
EE 65
EC Long Term Strategy CIRC 52
COMBO 67
1.5TECH 373
1.5LIFE 130
1.5LIFE-LB 152
Global Ambition 662

TYNDP 2022
64
Table 2: Benchmark of carbon capture and storage assumptions

7 Stakeholder engagement and
how it shaped the scenarios
Three core principles/values for stakeholder Engagement

Transparency
Developing three scenarios that project energy demand provide full transparency for all stakeholders. This entails
and supply until 2040 and 2050 is a highly complicated delivering a full explanation of all assumptions that have
process. ENTSOG and ENTSO-E recognise that it is not been made and making all raw data fully accessible via the
sufficient to merely publicise the results of scenario mod- dedicated website. Our goal is to create scenarios that
elling or to provide only a general overview of the meth- could be replicated plausibly by third parties.
odologies used. Therefore, the TYNDP scenarios aim to
Inclusiveness
Due to the significance of the TYNDP scenarios for EU be offered sufficient opportunities to do so. This is made
infrastructure planning, it is important to ensure that the possible through the organisation of multiple fully public
scenarios reflect the general opinions of EU citizens both stakeholder events (such as consultation workshops and
in their scope and in their goals. ENTSOG and ENTSO-E subject-specific webinars) and two written stakeholder
believes that any organisation or individual who wishes to consultations.
share their views on the scenario building process should
Efficiency
The energy transition is dynamic and fast-paced. New most up-to-date data and assumptions are utilised in the
technologies and new developments are constantly influ- TYNDP scenarios. Interacting with stakeholders offers us
encing the long-term outlook for the energy system of the the chance to learn from their experiences and to test our
future. ENTSOG and ENTSO-E recognises that thorough methodologies against real world conditions. An efficient
stakeholder engagement is necessary to ensure that the scenario building process relies on stakeholder input.

What did we learn from the last process?
The transparency and stakeholder interaction in the These elements have therefore served as the basis for
TYNDP 2020 Scenario Report was deeper and more de- further expansion of the stakeholder engagement in the
tailed than in any previous process. Stakeholder feedback TYNDP 2022 scenario building cycle. However, the lack
played a key role in shaping the scenarios from the outset of information on the determination of certain key pa-
and the results and the publication of full final data sets as rameters was criticised as untransparent. In particular, the
well as a detailed Scenario Methodology Report allowed qualitative parameters used in the Storyline Report in June
stakeholders deeper insight into the development process 2019 were considered too vague to provide a sound as-
and the subsequent results. sessment basis. In addition, stakeholders requested greater
transparency regarding publication of consultation results.
External feedback on the 2020 cycle showed that the
following elements of the process were well-received: For the 2022 scenario building cycle the Scenario Building
Team have increased their ambition on stakeholder en-
- The Scenario Methodology Report offering a detailed gagement as a key topic building upon the valuable lessons
description of the condition the underlying assumptions learned from the TYNDP 2020 Scenario Report. In order to
for the scenarios and modelling process. ensure the credibility and integrity of the Scenario Report,
the Scenario Building Team has focused on further enhanc-
- The publication of datasets on the TYNDP Scenario ing transparency and stakeholder engagement.
website allowing all users to scrutinise individual figures
and break down results to a Member-State level. In the development of the TYNDP 2022, the Scenario
Building Team set four principal goals for the stakeholder
- The two public consultations (one on the storylines engagement process.
and one on the scenarios) giving all interested parties
two occasions to offer input on the scenario building
process.
- The multiple stakeholder workshops providing regu-

lar updates on the process, detailed presentations of
specific issues and offering all users a platform to ask
questions and share opinions.
Stakeholder engagement from Day One

In the 2022 Scenario Report-cycle, the Scenario Building As with the kick-off meeting, the questions received at this
Team agreed to include stakeholders from the very begin- event or otherwise have been answered by the Scenario
ning. This began at the kick-off meeting for the process on Building Team and published as part of the Final Storyline
3 July 2020, where stakeholder questions were document- Report. This stakeholder engagement has continued since
ed (via an interactive Q & A app used during the event), completion of the Storyline Report.
answered and subsequently published on the 2022 TYNDP
Storyline Report website. In May 2021, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E hosted a dedicated
workshop on extra-EU supply potentials, with the goal of
During the public consultation of the draft storylines, we sharing their own assumptions and receiving stakehold-
received about 30 responses from a variety of stakeholder er feedback. After the publication of the Draft Scenario
(including NGOs, associations, energy companies and Report, stakeholders will once again be offered to the
research institutes). At the Draft Storyline Consultation opportunity to share their views, both in written form (via
Workshop on 2 December 2020, more than 60 partici- a six-week public consultation) and via a public workshop.
pants were in attendance and 46 questions were received.

Input on key parameters
During the 2020 scenario building process, ENTSOG and In order to provide greater transparency on key data
ENTSO-E engaged with the NGO CAN Europe to calculate parameters and assumptions used throughout the scenario
a carbon budget for the two COP 21 compliant scenarios. building process, the Scenario Building Team decided to
This approach gave the carbon budget more credibility and document and publish all interactions via bilateral meet-
provided ENTSOG and ENTSO-E with important insights ings conducted with external stakeholders (e. g. research
from external experts that enhanced the final scenarios. institutions, industry organisations etc.). After publishing
After the success of this cooperation in the TYNDP 2020 an initial list of bilateral meetings as part of the Storyline
Scenario Report, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E decided to ex- Report, this list has been updated for the publication of the
pand their interaction with external organisations. Draft Scenario Report and made available on the TYNDP
Scenarios website. This documentation provides greater
transparency and shows clearly the wide range of organi-
sations that have contributed to the creation of the report.
Consultation on hard data – not just concepts

After criticism of the qualitative “storyline matrix” pro- ranges on key parameters (e. g. development trajectories
duced for the 2020 Storyline Report, the Scenario Build- for important technologies or energy carriers) based on
ing Team chose to completely revise this element of the data from reputable external studies. This gave stakehold-
scenario building process. For the 2022 Storyline Report, ers the opportunity to directly influence the underlying
the Scenario Building Team included not only qualitative assumptions for the scenarios.
questions in their public consultation, but also quantitative
Transparent documentation of feedback and interactions

In order to ensure stakeholders that their consultation The scenario building team often receives feedback from
responses have been considered as part of the scenario external stakeholders outside of the planned consultation
building process, the scenario building team decided to windows. While the team has always made every effort to
publish all consultation feedback received in the storyline respond to this feedback and answer any questions, it was
consultation of November – December 2020. decided that this correspondence should also be published
as part of the 2022 cycle. This information is available on
the TYNDP Scenarios website. This publication enhances
transparency and provides further insight into the process.

8 Improvements in the
TYNDP 2022 scenarios
Both ENTSOG and ENTSO-E consistently work to improve their data, tools and method-
ologies between each TYNDP scenario release. As such, the TYNDP 2022 scenarios
have built upon the lessons learned from each of the previous editions. Improvements
for TYNDP 2022 scenarios were prioritised based on the stakeholder feedback received
in previous TYNDP scenario consultations. Some of the key improvements for the
TYNDP 2022 scenarios are described in this chapter. The methodologies used by both
ENTSOs to produce the scenarios are presented in detail in the Draft TYNDP 2022 Sce-
nario Building Guidelines report, which is published separately.
8.1 Proactive and early stakeholder engagement

To ensure transparency, inclusiveness and efficiency, and one public consultation on the scenario storylines. In
ENTSOG and ENTSO-E have included stakeholders from addition, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E also bilaterally engaged
the very beginning of the TYNDP 2022 scenario building with key stakeholders to factor in further expert knowl-
process, through most notably organising three workshops edge.

8.2 Even more contrasting scenarios
During the public consultation of the TYNDP 2020 scenar- ing was proposed in the draft TYNDP 2022 Storyline Re-
io report several stakeholders perceived a lack of differen- port which was released on 3 November 2020. These main
tiation between the scenarios. Although this concern was drivers where publicly consulted with stakeholders as part
addressed in the updated TYNDP 2020 scenario report of the draft storylines consultation. Based on stakeholder
published in June 2020, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E aim to feedback the main drivers were adapted, in particular for
further improve this for the TYNDP 2022 edition. To this example with regard to the energy intensity assumptions,
end, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E extensively analysed the main which were considered to show too much variation. The
scenario drivers to be explored in the storylines in order final list of main drivers used in the TYNDP 2022 scenario
to ensure appropriate differentiation between the TYNDP building was released together with the Final Storyline
2022 scenarios. A list of main drivers for the scenario build- Report in on 26 April 2021.
8.3 Enhancements to the sector coupling methodology

Today the energy system is very much built along a linear ing) and with other carriers (e. g. P2G and P2L). In order to
value chain from primary energy to final use. Interaction better picture these new interfaces and their role in the
between energy carriers is restricted to power generation energy transition, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E have established
and consuming sectors are barely involved in the design a wider and closer cooperation with the representatives of
and operation of the energy system. other sectors with in particular:
Such a system is easy to understand but it prevents taking - District heating with EuroHeat & Power;
advantage of new synergies between energy carriers and - E-mobility and prosumers with DSO associations
sectors. With the energy transition, it is necessary to build (CEDEC, E.DSO, Eurelectric, Eurogas, GEODE);
new bridges enabling a more efficient use of primary ener-
gy and providing flexibility to an energy system dominated - Hydrogen and Power-to-Gas with Hydrogen Europe.
by solar and wind energy.
It has paved the way for new and innovative joint analysis
While electricity and gas transmission systems are likely to and the sector coupling modelling improvements imple-
stay a major component of the European energy system, mented in this edition that would not have been possible
it is necessary to capture the possible new dynamics at without the constructive mind-set and inputs of such
their interface with other energy consuming sectors (e. g., partners.
mobility), at various geographical scales (e. g., district heat-
8.4 Considerations of hydrogen system in the mid-/long term and of

a wider range of electrolysis configurations
The TYNDP 2020 Scenario report brought valuable infor- The different configurations intend to capture the different
mation about the amount of RES capacity to be developed uses of hydrogen (e. g., end-use and further transformation
to supply a growing hydrogen demand through electrolysis. into synthetic fuels) and the evolution of the European
It was expected that following editions will further investi- hydrogen system. Electrolysers will operate differently de-
gate the interactions between energy carriers. pending on their combination with other hydrogen sources
and/or flexibility tools. As a result, the scenarios bring
Taking into account the development of hydrogen, from a original information on the interaction, mostly synergies,
strategy and industrial perspective, and the growing need between electricity and hydrogen systems.
for flexibility, the improvement of hydrogen and electroly-
sis modelling has been considered as a priority by ENTSOG From a wider perspective, scenarios also provide new
and ENTSO-E. Such improvements have materialised by insights on the other sources of hydrogen such as prices,
the definition of a wide range of electrolysis configurations type (renewable or low carbon) and geographical perspec-
and the development of a hydrogen system on the medium tive. It brings transparency on the level of integration of
and long term. Europe in its surroundings in line both with national strat-
egies of non-EU countries (e. g. Morocco and Norway) and
the EU Hydrogen Strategy (e. g. 40 GW of electrolysis to be
installed in surrounding regions).

8.5 Vehicle-to-Grid and prosumer modelling
The development of e-mobility, residential batteries and ket and those installed by prosumers, meaning that their
solar panels provides new opportunity for citizens to in- development and operation were optimised at European
teract with the overall electricity system. system level. This did not reflect more specific and local
drivers such as the willingness of prosumers to reduce their
In the previous edition of the scenario report (TYNDP dependence from the grid.
2020), such interactions were defined as static inputs
to the electricity system modelling. This approach was For this edition, passenger cars and prosumers have been
meaningful to capture smart charging but was not fully explicitly modelled as specific components of the electric-
taking into account some more integrated strategies such ity system. As a result, it is possible to capture their evolu-
as Vehicle-to-Grid. tion according to hybrid signals: the wholesale electricity
market price on one hand and specific drivers such as the
In addition, PV and battery capacities did not distinguish reduction of connection cost or mobility needs.
infrastructures directly connected to the electricity mar-
8.6 Optimisation of district heating operation

In previous editions, the air and water heating market was At this stage the optimisation is run independently from
split between a wide range of technologies being installed the dispatch of the electricity system and focuses on
at end-user facility or as part of a district heating network. climatic parameters. Future editions will provide the op-
However, each technology was modelled as if individually portunity to investigate the reactiveness of district heating
installed. This hindered the ability to take into account to electricity price in a wider context.
the optimisation potential offered by district heating in
combining different heat sources together with flexibility
options (network inertia or dedicated thermal storage).
For this edition, a specific modelling step has been intro-

duced prior to the electricity system modelling. The aim
is to define the capacity and electricity load profiles of
heat pumps installed on district heating networks. With
the combination of heat technologies partly taken into
account, the design and load factor of heat pumps have
been optimised compared to their equivalent installed at
end-user level.

9 Next steps
In this report ENTSOG and ENTSO-E propose the draft scenarios for TYNDP 2022. The
publication of this draft scenario report marks the start of the official scenario consul-
tation. The next steps are the following:
- With the publication of this draft scenario report an - The updated scenarios’ report feed into the TYNDP
online public consultation is launched. Stakeholders are 2022 development process. The electricity and gas draft
invited to share their opinion and give feedback on the TYNDPs are expected to be published in Q3 2022 for
proposals within this report. Stakeholder comments are public consultation.
greatly welcomed and are considered an essential part
of the scenario development process. - Further to receiving the public consultation feedback
as well as ACER’s opinion, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E will
- The completion of electricity market modelling for the publish their respective TYNDPs.
National Trends scenario for the 2040 time horizon
enabling the quantification of coupling between the - Both TYNDPs will support the 6th PCI selection process.
electricity, methane and hydrogen systems.
In the meantime, ENTSOG and ENTSO-E are currently
- Upon receiving the stakeholder feedback, ENTSOG and working together on the further development of their
ENTSO-E will update and finalise the scenario report Interlinked Model for the identification of projects worth
and submit it to ACER for its opinion. This updated a dual assessment on both gas and electricity systems.
scenario report for ACER submission is expected to be
published in early 2022.

10 Glossary
Biomethane Gaseous renewable energy source derived COP 21 Legally binding international treaty on climate
from agricultural biomass (dedicated crops, by-products change, adopted by 196 Parties at COP 21 in Paris on 12
and agricultural waste and animal waste), agro-industrial December 2015. In this report it also refers to the COP
(waste from the food processing chain) and the Organic 21 scenario building approach which enables full energy
Fraction Municipal Solid Waste (OFMSW). scenario development and carbon emission assessment.
BEV Battery electric vehicle Direct electrification Electricity demand for direct use
in the final demand sectors (residential, tertiary, industry
Carbon budget This is the amount of carbon dioxide the etc). Electricity which is converted to other energy carriers
world can emit while still having a likely chance of limiting through power to gas or power to liquids is referred to as
average global temperature rise to 1.5 °C above pre-indus- indirect electrification.
trial levels, an internationally agreed-upon target.
DSR Demand Side Response. Consumers have an active
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis carried out to define to what role in the balancing of energy supply and demand by
extent a project is worthwhile from a social perspective. changing their energy consumption according to the ener-
gy price and availability. For example, by softening demand
CCS Carbon Capture and Storage. Process of sequestrating peaks in case of congestions, or by increasing energy use
CO₂ and storing it in such a way that it won’t enter the during surplus supply.
atmosphere.
EC European Commission
CHP Combined heat and power
EV Electric vehicle
FCEV Fuel cell electric vehicle

GHG Greenhouse gas NGO Non-governmental Organisation
Hybrid Heat Pump heating system that combines an elec- P2G Power to gas. Technology that uses electricity to pro-
tric heat pump with a gas condensing boiler to optimise duce hydrogen (Power to Hydrogen – P2H₂) by splitting
energy efficiency. water into oxygen and hydrogen (electrolysis). The hydro-
gen produced can then either be used directly or indirectly
IA Impact Assessment released by the European to produce other fuels, where it is combined with CO₂ to
Commission on 17 September 2020: Communication obtain synthetic methane (Power to Methane – P2CH4) or
COM/2020/562: Stepping up Europe’s 2030 climate am- can be converted to other energy carriers like for example
bition Investing in a climate-neutral future for the benefit synthetic ammonia (P2NH3).
of our people
P2L Power to liquids. Combination of hydrogen from elec-
ICE Internal combustion engine trolysis and Fischer-Tropsch process to obtain synthetic
liquid fuels.
IEA World Energy Outlook
PCI Project of Common Interest
LNG Liquefied natural gas
Power-to-Hydrogen/P2Hydrogen Hydrogen obtained
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change from P2H₂
LTS Long Term Strategy released by the European Com- Power-to-Methane/P2Methane Renewable methane,
mission on 28 November 2018: A Clean Planet for all. could be biomethane or synthetic methane produced by
A European strategic long-term vision for a prosperous, renewable energy sources only.
modern, competitive and climate neutral economy.
RES Renewable energy source
LULUCF Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry. Sink of
CO₂ made possible by the fact that atmospheric CO₂ can SMR Steam methane reforming, an industrial process to
accumulate as carbon in vegetation and soils in terrestrial produce hydrogen with natural gas. Can be outfitted with
ecosystems. carbon capture technologies
NECPs National Energy and Climate Plans are the new Synthetic fuel Fuel (gas or liquid) that is produces from
framework within which EU Member States have to plan, renewable or low carbon electrical energy
in an integrated manner, their climate and energy ob-
jectives, targets, policies and measures to the European TEN-E Trans-European Networks for Energy, EU policy fo-
Commission. Countries will have to develop NECPs on cused on linking the energy infrastructure of EU countries
a ten-year rolling basis, with an update halfway through
the implementation period. The NECPs covering the first TSO Transmission System Operator
period from 2021 to 2030 will have to ensure that the
Union’s 2030 targets for greenhouse gas emission reduc- TYNDP Ten-Year Network Development Plan
tions, renewable energy, energy efficiency and electricity
interconnection are met.

I Imprint
Joint-Publishers
ENTSOG ENTSO-E
European Network of European Network of
Transmission System Operators Transmission System Operators
for Gas for Electricity
Avenue de Cortenbergh 100 Rue de Spa, 8
1000 Brussels, Belgium 1000 Brussels, Belgium
www.entsog.eu www.entsoe.eu
Co-authors
Alexander Kättlitz Sub-Team leads of the Joint WG Scenario
Maria Chiara Cavarretta Building
Nalan Buyuk Joint WG Scenario Building
Olivier Lebois
Pieter Boersma ENTSOG WG Scenarios
ENTSO-E Regional Groups
Design
DreiDreizehn GmbH, Berlin | www.313.de
Cover artwork: ZN Consulting, Brussels | www.znconsulting.com
Pictures
p. 6: courtesy of GASCADE
p. 8: courtesy of Gas Connect Austria/Monika Aigner
p. 10: courtesy of Gas Connect Austria
p. 12: courtesy of TenneT/©siemens_ag_ulrich_wirrwa
p. 14/59: courtesy of National Grid
p. 26: courtesy of Gasgrid Finland
p. 44: courtesy of PSE Operator
p. 49/53: courtesy of RWE
p. 50: courtesy of GRTgaz
p. 55: ©iStockphoto.com/petmal
p. 61: courtesy of TAP
p. 62: courtesy of ONTRAS/petereichler.com
p. 65: ©aerogondo – stock.adobe.com
p. 66: courtesy of Elia
Publishing date
October 2021

ENTSO - 2021-10-TYNDP - 2022 - Draft - Scenario - Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENTSO - 2021-10-TYNDP - 2022 - Draft - Scenario - Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENTSO - 2021-10-TYNDP - 2022 - Draft - Scenario - Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TYNDP

2 Purpose of the Scenario Report 8

3 Scenario descriptions and storylines 10

5 The cost of electricity 44

7 Stakeholder engagement and how it shaped the scenarios 59

8 Improvements in the TYNDP 2022 scenarios 62

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 3

Jan Ingwersen Sonya Twohig

4 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 5

6 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

Sector Integration provides efficient decarbonisation solutions

Innovation is key to achieve a sustainable energy future

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 7

8 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 9

10 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

Scenarios will cover different time horizons

Global Ambition CMYK 80C 20M

Distributed Energy CMYK 30C 100Y

Best Estimate National Trends

Distributed Energy CMYK 30C 100Y

Distributed Energy CMYK 30C 100Y

Assessment of pathways compliant wit Paris Agreement

Figure 1: Scenario framework for TYNDP 2022

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 11

12 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

Distributed Energy Global Ambition

­renewable and ­decentralised focus ­carbon and RES options

Green Transition At least a –55 % reduction in 2030, climate neutral

Transition initiated at a local / national level Transition initiated at a European / international

High EU RES development supplemented

Focus of decentralised technologies Focus on large scale technologies

Minimal CCS and nuclear Integration of nuclear and CCS

Figure 2: Storylines for the two COP 21 scenarios

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 13

14 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

4.1.1 Final energy demand

Others Biomass Solids Liquids Methane Hydrogen Electricity

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 15

Others Energy branch Agriculture Industry Transport Tertiary Residential

4.1.2 Direct electricity demand

16 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

Others Energy branch Agriculture Industry Transport Tertiary Residential

ICE FCEV BEV

Figure 6: Share of transport technologies for EU27

8 Including plug-in hybrid

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 17

4.1.3 Gas demand

18 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

4.1.3.1 Methane demand

Figure 8: Methane demand per sector for EU27

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 19

Peak 2 Week DF Average

20 // ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report

10 The hydrogen specific energy content is about 33 kWh/kg NCV

ENTSO-E // ENTSOG TYNDP 2022 Draft Scenario Report // 21

Hydrogen Peak Demand

Peak 2 Week DF Average

renewable and decentralised focus carbon and RES options

Figure 29: Electrolyser capacity for EU27