The first JRC study addressed the six SET-Plan technologies (wind, solar - both photovoltaics and concen- trated solar power, carbon capture and storage, nuclear fission, bioenergy and the electricity grid) (Moss et al., 2011). The first study compared demand figures to the known supply figures in 2010. Furthermore, demand was based on the available scenarios at the time. The results are therefore re-assessed using the
same methodology as above, i.e. the results are now compared to expected supply figures rather than current supply estimates, and the scenarios take into account the latest projections in the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 (EC, 2011b). The technology descriptions are essentially unchanged but the uptake mix of the different types of technologies within a sector can vary. These are presented here. The metals re- quirement figures are presented in Chapter 4.
3.13.1 Wind energy
Recent developments have highlighted a trend to a higher share of permanent magnet electricity genera- tors (PMG) in the future market of wind turbines. Three major items suggest this trend:
• analysis of turbine prototypes introduced or announced to be introduced in the period 2011 - 2013
• the approximately 10-year commercial life of a wind turbine
• the reduction of the prices of rare earths along with the projections of abundant supply from 2014 (Nd) and 2017 (Dy).
Between 2000 and 2004, PMG had an average share of 5% of all turbine prototypes. However, since 2007 this share has grown to 35%. In absolute numbers whereas PMG were included in one or two turbine prototypes per year in 2000-03; since 2010 they have been included in 11-13 turbine prototypes.
The share between low-speed, direct-drive (DD) PMG and medium- and high-speed (MS/HS) PMG is approximately equal. However, the analysis of the turbine models presented suggests that for the off- shore turbine prototypes, DD-PMG will prevail over MS/HS-PMG.
Furthermore, based on the projections of the future energy system, it is expected that DD-PMG models will gain an increasing market share of future (2015-20) installations, for examples: Alstom's Haliade 150, Siemens SWT-6.0-154 and XEMC-Darwind / Vensys-Goldwind. These machines are likely to have a grow- ing market share because of the contracts already signed in Europe (Alstom, Siemens) and the prospects for cost reduction from Chinese manufacturers (XEMC, Goldwind).
Significant, non-DD prototypes offshore are represented by Vestas, Gamesa, Bard, REpower, Mitsubishi, Sinovel and Areva. For onshore, it is still the prototypes with electromagnets that prevail, represented by General Electric, Vestas, Alstom, Enercon, REpower, Nordex, Suzlon, and Sinovel. PMG turbines onshore are already significant at world level and therefore it is expected that the penetration of PMG onshore will continue.
3.13.2 Solar energy
A number of new scenarios for the solar energy uptake and technology mix have been identified, as well as the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 (EC, 2011b), but also recent IEA roadmaps for both photovoltaic solar and concentrated solar power (IEA, 2011b, 2011c). Analysis of the IEA scenarios showed that the projec- tions were relatively similar to those modelled in the first JRC study (Moss et al., 2011). In contrast the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 scenarios were deemed to be too pessimistic.
3.13.3 Carbon capture and storage
The results for CCS from the first JRC study highlighted vanadium and niobium as representing important materials requirements for the implementation of the EU SET-Plan. Here the results have simply been rescaled against projected supply, although it is noted that the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 scenarios (EC, 2011b), are significantly more pessimistic on the uptake of CCS before 2030.
3.13.4 Smart electricity grids
For smart electricity grids, the first JRC study modelled the metals requirements associated with ENSTO- E’s list of projects of European Significance to 2020 (ENTSO-E, 2010). No more up-to-date appropriate scenarios have been identified.
3.13.5 Biofuels
For biofuels, the first JRC study identified that the same catalysts currently used for fossil fuels would be used, and therefore there would not be any additional materials requirements. The reference scenario of the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 (EC, 2011b) is used.
3.13.6 Nuclear energy
For nuclear energy it is clear that the aftermath of the Fukushima events in Japan during 2011 have led to a number of countries that use nuclear energy to reconsider their energy policies. The vast majority of countries, however, remain firmly committed to their nuclear power programmes and – as after any major industrial accident – committed to learning lessons and improving safety. Nevertheless, some governments have turned against nuclear power and seek to implement alternatives. Within Europe, these countries are Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Italy (World Nuclear Association, 2012):
• Germany had 17 operational reactors prior to the Fukushima accident, but following the ac- cident the government decided to immediately and permanently shut down the seven old- est units and to forbid the one undergoing upgrades to restart. It has also re-instated a pre- viously held phase-out policy that, if maintained, will see the last German reactor cease op- erations by 2022.
• Belgium has decided to reverse a 2009 policy that would have seen reactors operate for about 50 years, and instead shut them down 10 years earlier, with some now due to close by 2015.
• Switzerland opted to veto the replacement of nuclear generating capacity, which means that, based on 50-year operating lifetimes, nuclear power generation in the country would cease in 2034.
• Italy had been looking at starting a nuclear energy programme, but has now cancelled these plans.
As a result of these major policy changes, it is therefore appropriate to model a scenario that assumes a significantly lower implementation of nuclear energy in Europe. The chosen scenario for this is the refer- ence scenario of the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 scenarios (EC, 2011b), which has fairly constant net capac- ity up to 2030.