Coordinación Regional No. 4

In the participatory scenario-building workshop (see case-study presentation), the scenario parameters, the scenario storylines and consequently the final set of scenarios have been discussed and decided upon. Four scenario parameters were defined and five scenario storylines along with their key technologies were selected by the stakeholders to be modelled and evaluated in further detailed scenarios. The scenarios were commonly understood as descriptions of the variable renewable energy profiles of Austria in 2020, which aim to have an optimistic-realistic character in order to increase future options. The overall increase in capacity of renewables till 2020 was a result of the modelling exercise, mainly determined by the definition of particular key technologies and their respective growth potentials till 2020.

The first scenario parameter is the time frame of the underlying decision. Depending on the time frame, short term or long term, distinct strategies that entail particular renewable energy technologies appear reasonable. The second scenario parameter describes what kinds of innovations are desirable, based on a gradient between systems innovations and individual technology innovation. The third scenario parameter addresses the institutional changes that are needed for unfolding the scenarios. Finally, the fourth scenario parameter points to the degree of decentralisation of the renewable energy system in 2020. As discussed in more detail in the case study presentation, the scenario parameters were changed fundamentally in the scenario workshop.

The following five scenario storylines were selected to be translated into a quantitative technology profile and modelled as forecasting scenarios by the researcher:

Scenario A: “Fast and known”

In this scenario, the main logic is a short-term optimisation of available resources and renewable capacity building in established ways. The focus is primarily on technologies that exhibit low specific investment costs and promise rapid capacity expansion. Existing institutions are seen as sufficient since known pathways are used. Individual technology innovation is the centre of attention, since there is no long-term thinking of a systems change being inherent but an economic rationale of harvesting ‘low hanging fruits’ and of gaining a quick reduction of carbon emissions. By trend, large-scale technologies are preferred in order to gain capacities quickly.

(Figure 16)

Figure 16. Characterization of Scenario A

short term long term

(A) Time frame

systems innovation individual technology

innovation (B) Innovations

using existing

institutions need for new

institutions (C) Institutions

decentral central (D) Capacity of technology and scale of decision-making

Scenario A is the most short-term scenario among the alternatives. Austria’s known and well-established technologies such as biomass and wind power have increased markedly, as well as solar thermal and sewage gas plants, both offering a very easy and reasonably inexpensive source of energy. The use of biomass resources in particular is carried out in such a way that the domestic potentials of biomass residue are more or less self sufficient (i.e. no need for large biomass imports).

Key technologies: solar thermal, biomass (heat and CHP only), wind power, sewage gas.

The enforced new construction of low-energy buildings is an efficiency mean that accompanies the scenario storyline well.

Scenario B: “Extension of competitive advantage”

The main strategy in this scenario is to enforce those technologies in Austria which currently have the highest technology export success. It is therefore an economically-driven strategic scenario combining trade policy aims and, energy and environmental policy aims.

Austria is a successful technology exporter for certain renewable energy technologies such as solar thermal plates, biomass district heating plants, rotor components for wind turbines, etc.

Offering incentives to develop those technologies for the domestic market provides certain competitive advantages to domestic producers of the technology on the world market. The important goal is to retain technological leadership. In this scenario, the immediate economic potentials of a change in the energy system are the main focus. The reduction of CO2 emissions is not primary in this mindset but a generally proactive environmental policy might be a supportive image campaigning for the technology producers.

The time frame is still rather short term in the sense that only existing trade advantages are on the radar rather than a long-term investment in technology leadership in less mature technologies. The technical improvement of the individual technologies, such as increased efficiency, plays a key role in the innovation policy. By contrast, systems innovations can not be traded and therefore do not create a profitable competitive advantage. (Figure 17)

Figure 17. Characterization of Scenario B

The existing institutions are sufficient and already well adapted to trade policy. The scenario is understood to follow a rather central logic in the sense that trade policy is a matter of federal policy, even though the key technologies are of small scale.

Key technologies: community-based biomass cogeneration (CHP), small hydropower plants, small-scale biomass heat production, solar thermal power, wind power, geothermal power

Edificial efficiency means for this scenario could involve passive housing, since Austria has a well-established passive house domestic and export market.

Scenario C: “Investments into the future”

Scenario C concerns a long-term investment strategy which takes the necessity of a structural change of the energy system into account. In this concept, it is obvious that extensive investments have to be made now in order to develop and establish new production and consumption structures in the future, ultimately building a new and more sustainable energy system. Great importance is placed on R&D and innovation policy is a characteristic of this scenario. In this context, the decentralised generation of electricity is seen as a promising development, opening up the strict role division between energy producer and consumer towards a more heterogeneous system with a more aware and responsible handling of energy.

This scenario is characterised by the highest degree of systems innovation. Synergies are used wherever possible, such as cascade energy use or the local combination of energy production

short term long term

(A) Time frame

systems innovation individual technology

innovation (B) Innovations

using existing

institutions need for new

institutions (C) Institutions

decentral central (D) Capacity of technology and scale of decision-making

and energy use (multifunctional energy centres). This focus does require new institutions to give structures and incentives for developing such intelligent energy systems. (Figure 18)

Figure 18. Characterization of Scenario C

The promotion of capital-intensive but at the same time promising technologies (e.g.

photovoltaic, PV) are at the technological centre point. Growing electricity demand can only be met partially by the slowly increasing contribution of renewables, but trend-setting structural investments in building stock are being made (e.g. equipping public buildings with PV systems).

Key technologies: PV (primarily on rooftops and façades), biogas feed-in, geothermal energy

In this mind set, energy conservation due to efficient energy supply systems, more efficient energy infrastructure, passive and zero energy buildings (new constructions), and the renovation of old building stock, plays a very important role.

Scenario D: “Extensive use of biomass”

The focal point in this scenario is a far-reaching utilisation of biomass resources from the agriculture and forestry sectors. In this view, Austria is seen as a biomass-abundant country with large unused potentials and a long tradition of biomass utilisation. An additional feature of this scenario is the expansion of the market, which would create positive employment perspectives for Austrian agriculture. To a certain extent, this scenario represents a conservative Austrian environmentalist mind-set - that seeks to combine agricultural, agroeconomic and

short term long term

(A) Time frame

systems innovation individual technology

innovation (B) Innovations

using existing

institutions need for new

institutions (C) Institutions

decentral central (D) Capacity of technology and scale of decision-making

environmental objectives. Energy plantations are regarded as an important future strategy. The realisation of a biomass-based energy system shows, though, the inevitable need to import biomass. Even today, large amounts of timber or oil bearing fruits are imported from e.g. East European countries, mainly due to economic reasons. (Figure 19)

Figure 19. Characterization of Scenario D

Scenario D is seen as a medium-term solution since the natural potentials and especially the economic potentials are not sufficient within Austria, or even, for that matter, within the EU in the long run. Biomass represents a land-intensive energy source that is in direct competition with alternative area needs, e.g. for natural habitats and for the production of comestible goods.

Regarding the type of innovation, scenario D discriminates neither against systems innovation nor individual technology innovations and takes a neutral position. The existing institutions are to a large extent sufficient based on the agricultural and forestry interests groups and regulations. To achieve large-scale capacity, this scenario strives toward large-scale technologies and therefore fits into the structure of agriculture production today.

Key technologies: biomass combustion and gasification (esp. CHP), where the biomass used also stems from dedicated energy plantations and from imports, biogas (esp. CHP), solar thermal, and wind farms.

Since this scenario is mostly characterised by a certain resource focus, no specific efficiency mean was associated with it.

decentral central

short term long term

(A) Time frame

systems innovation individual technology

innovation (B) Innovations

using existing

institutions need for new

institutions (C) Institutions

(D) Capacity of technology and scale of decision-making

Scenario E: “Large impact in small-scale use”

Scenario E envisages a considerable structural change of the energy system towards extensively decentralised energy generation modes. Local initiatives and the local availability of resources govern the concrete development of renewable energy technologies. The traditional split between energy producers and energy consumers becomes obsolete. Single households are increasingly involved in making decisions regarding the source of heat and electricity. They are also often owners or co-owners of the power plant. Within this mindset, there is the attending assumption that energy is consumed in more responsible ways. Therefore, one can surmise that decentralised generation gives more incentives for energy saving. This scenario offers more individual, local or regional independence regarding energy-related matters and decisions.

The time frame of scenario E is long term. Time is needed to adapt infrastructures to a decentralised energy system and to build up new institutions (new policy incentives, establishing decentralised decision modes, organising feed-in regulations) and build infrastructure which is compatible with a decentralised generation mode, etc. (Figure 20)

Figure 20. Characterization of Scenario E

The scenario aims towards an increase in systems innovation, which is an important aspect to consider when optimising the small energy supply units and responding to peak demand. It is the most decentralised renewable energy scenario of all those considered.

Key technologies: biomass (individual and communal CHP plants with district heating), biogas (single systems, CHP), heat pumps, wind power, solar thermal, photovoltaic

short term long term

(A) Time frame

systems innovation individual technology

innovation (B) Innovations

using existing

institutions need for new

institutions (C) Institutions

decentral central (D) Capacity of technology and scale of decision-making

The building of passive houses is also part of this scenario, and is seen as a necessary and applicable edificial energy efficiency mean.

An overview of the qualitative descriptions of the scenarios can be found in the appendix Table A. 4.