Planned Wind and Solar Capacities are in Some Cases Misaligned with Targets
![Planned Wind and Solar Capacities are in Some Cases Misaligned with Targets](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.voronoiapp.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fvoronoi-Planned-Wind-and-Solar-Capacities-are-in-Some-Cases-Misaligned-with-Targets-20240510131959.webp&w=3840&q=75)
Analysis of grid plans shows that planned transmission grid developments may be insufficient to cater for the renewable uptake that is necessary to achieve energy policy targets. The energy scenarios in the latest grid plans from European Transmission System Operators (TSOs) show a high degree of misalignment with current policy targets in certain countries. This is particularly evident in the foreseen installed capacity of wind and solar in 2030. Since it takes far longer to increase grid capacity than it does to deploy wind and solar projects, grids may not be prepared to meet the scale of future increases.
In Some Countries, Grid Plans are Misaligned with National Policy Targets
Close alignment with national wind and solar targets should be expected in TSO grid plans, since national legislation related to grid planning often requires TSOs to abide by existing energy policies targets when preparing their plans. However, analysis shows that this is not always the case, with some plans significantly undershooting the national targets.
Wind and solar capacities from the 26 grid plans with adequate data available were compared to their respective 2030 country targets. Of these, ten use scenarios with lower ambition than targets. Among the rest, 13 grid plans were found to be well aligned, and four use more ambitious scenarios.
Of the ten of 26 grid plans that are based on scenarios where the combined capacity of wind and solar is lower than established national policy; the total difference is 65 GW. This is equivalent to about 8% of the total capacity targeted by these countries. While that may not seem significant at a pan-European level, the divergence at national level in certain countries is concerning. For instance, Bulgaria’s grid development plan assumes 4.1 GW wind and solar in 2030 but the country’s policy target is more than 11 GW, a difference of 63%.
When TSOs’ assessments of future infrastructure needs are based on under-ambitious scenarios, it is likely that new investments necessary to support policy targets will be overlooked and their development delayed. This means that, instead of playing an enabling role, transmission grids in a number of countries risk being unprepared to support the wind and solar roll-out expected by national policy, creating a physical barrier to the transition.
However, this is not universally the case. The four plans based on scenarios with higher capacities for wind and solar include Croatia, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands. The scenarios used by most of these TSOs are significantly more ambitious than existing targets, ranging from 50% higher for Denmark to 200% higher for Finland.
Across these four countries, the grid plans are preparing for 81 GW more wind and solar than national policy targets. This is a sensible approach that better prepares transmission networks to accommodate potential future step ups in national ambition levels. Indeed, the Finnish TSO notes its scenarios tend towards more positive outcomes as scenarios limited in ambition will not challenge Finland to prepare for the energy transition, but could only guide it to resolve short-term challenges. These more ambitious scenarios also better reflect the accelerated state of the energy transition, such as in the case of the wind and solar capacities used by the Dutch and Croat TSOs which are similar to the market outlooks for these technologies.
Dataset
Country | Grid plan category (wind) | Grid plan category (solar) |
---|---|---|
Norway | Slightly Falling Behind | Slightly Falling Behind |
Sweden | Neutral | Moderately Ambitious |
Finland | Exceptionally Ambitious | Exceptionally Ambitious |
Estonia | n/a | n/a |
Latvia | n/a | n/a |
Lithuania | Slightly Falling Behind | Significantly Falling Behind |
Denmark | Significantly Falling Behind | Exceptionally Ambitious |
Ireland | Slightly Falling Behind | Significantly Falling Behind |
United Kingdom | Neutral | Neutral |
Belgium | Neutral | Neutral |
Netherlands | Moderately Ambitious | Exceptionally Ambitious |
Germany | n/a | n/a |
Poland | Neutral | Slightly Falling Behind |
France | Neutral | Slightly Falling Behind |
Luxembourg | Moderately Ambitious | Slightly Falling Behind |
Switzerland | Neutral | Neutral |
Czech Republic | Slightly Falling Behind | Slightly Falling Behind |
Slovakia | Neutral | Neutral |
Portugal | n/a | n/a |
Spain | Neutral | Neutral |
Italy | Neutral | Neutral |
Austria | Moderately Ambitious | Neutral |
Hungary | Significantly Falling Behind | Neutral |
Romania | Slightly Falling Behind | Slightly Falling Behind |
Slovenia | Neutral | Neutral |
Croatia | Slightly Falling Behind | Exceptionally Ambitious |
Bosnia and Herzegovina | n/a | n/a |
Serbia | n/a | n/a |
Bulgaria | Significantly Falling Behind | Significantly Falling Behind |
Montenegro | n/a | n/a |
Kosovo | n/a | n/a |
North Macedonia | n/a | n/a |
Albania | n/a | n/a |
Greece | Slightly Falling Behind | Slightly Falling Behind |
Cyprus | Neutral | Neutral |
Data sources
Certain countries could not be assessed due to lack of data or, in the case of Germany, because the data corresponds to the grid plan's target years 2037 and 2045, and not 2030. Countries examined in this report include EU27, Norway, Switzerland, UK and the Western Balkans. Kosovo (XK): This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.