TY - JOUR A1 - McKenna, Russell A1 - Pfenninger, Stefan A1 - Heinrichs, Heidi A1 - Schmidt, Johannes A1 - Staffell, Iain A1 - Bauer, Christian A1 - Gruber, Katharina A1 - Hahmann, Andrea N. A1 - Jansen, Malte A1 - Klingler, Michael A1 - Landwehr, Natascha A1 - Larsén, Xiaoli Guo A1 - Lilliestam, Johan A1 - Pickering, Bryn A1 - Robinius, Martin A1 - Tröndle, Tim A1 - Turkovska, Olga A1 - Wehrle, Sebastian A1 - Weinand, Jann Michael A1 - Wohland, Jan T1 - High-resolution large-scale onshore wind energy assessments BT - a review of potential definitions, methodologies and future research needs JF - Renewable energy N2 - The rapid uptake of renewable energy technologies in recent decades has increased the demand of energy researchers, policymakers and energy planners for reliable data on the spatial distribution of their costs and potentials. For onshore wind energy this has resulted in an active research field devoted to analysing these resources for regions, countries or globally. A particular thread of this research attempts to go beyond purely technical or spatial restrictions and determine the realistic, feasible or actual potential for wind energy. Motivated by these developments, this paper reviews methods and assumptions for analysing geographical, technical, economic and, finally, feasible onshore wind potentials. We address each of these potentials in turn, including aspects related to land eligibility criteria, energy meteorology, and technical developments of wind turbine characteristics such as power density, specific rotor power and spacing aspects. Economic aspects of potential assessments are central to future deployment and are discussed on a turbine and system level covering levelized costs depending on locations, and the system integration costs which are often overlooked in such analyses. Non-technical approaches include scenicness assessments of the landscape, constraints due to regulation or public opposition, expert and stakeholder workshops, willingness to pay/accept elicitations and socioeconomic cost-benefit studies. For each of these different potential estimations, the state of the art is critically discussed, with an attempt to derive best practice recommendations and highlight avenues for future research. KW - onshore wind KW - resource assessments KW - social acceptance KW - planning constraints KW - research priorities Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.10.027 SN - 0960-1481 VL - 182 SP - 659 EP - 684 PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Süsser, Diana A1 - Martin, Nick A1 - Stavrakas, Vassilis A1 - Gaschnig, Hannes A1 - Talens-Peiró, Laura A1 - Flamos, Alexandros A1 - Madrid-López, Cristina A1 - Lilliestam, Johan T1 - Why energy models should integrate social and environmental factors BT - assessing user needs, omission impacts, and real-word accuracy in the European Union JF - Energy research & social science N2 - Energy models are used to inform and support decisions within the transition to climate neutrality. In recent years, such models have been criticised for being overly techno-centred and ignoring environmental and social factors of the energy transition. Here, we explore and illustrate the impact of ignoring such factors by comparing model results to model user needs and real-world observations. We firstly identify concrete user needs for better representation of environmental and social factors in energy modelling via interviews, a survey and a workshop. Secondly, we explore and illustrate the effects of omitting non-techno-economic factors in modelling by contrasting policy-targeted scenarios with reality in four EU case study examples. We show that by neglecting environmental and social factors, models risk generating overly optimistic and potentially misleading results, for example by suggesting transition speeds far exceeding any speeds observed, or pathways facing hard-to-overcome resource constraints. As such, modelled energy transition pathways that ignore such factors may be neither desirable nor feasible from an environmental and social perspective, and scenarios may be irrelevant in practice. Finally, we discuss a sample of recent energy modelling innovations and call for continued and increased efforts for improved approaches that better represent environmental and social factors in energy modelling and increase the relevance of energy models for informing policymaking. KW - energy modelling KW - energy planning KW - energy policy KW - ecological crisis KW - social acceptance KW - environmental impacts Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102775 SN - 2214-6296 VL - 92 SP - 102775 EP - 102775 PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam ER -