TY - JOUR
T1 - Three different directions in which the European Union could replace Russian natural gas
AU - Nikas, Alexandros
AU - Frilingou, Natasha
AU - Heussaff, Conall
AU - Fragkos, Panagiotis
AU - Mittal, Shivika
AU - Sampedro, Jon
AU - Giarola, Sara
AU - Sasse, Jan Philipp
AU - Rinaldi, Lorenzo
AU - Doukas, Haris
AU - Gambhir, Ajay
AU - Giannousakis, Anastasis
AU - Golinucci, Nicolò
AU - Koasidis, Konstantinos
AU - Rocco, Matteo Vincenzo
AU - Trutnevyte, Evelina
AU - Xexakis, Georgios
AU - Zachmann, Georg
AU - Zisarou, Eleftheria
AU - Colombo, Emanuela
AU - Hawkes, Adam
AU - Yarlagadda, Brinda
AU - Binsted, Matthew
AU - Iyer, Gokul
AU - Johannsen, Rasmus Magni
AU - Thellufsen, Jakob Zinck
AU - Lund, Henrik
AU - Van de Ven, Dirk Jan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/3/1
Y1 - 2024/3/1
N2 - Russia's invasion of Ukraine fuelled an energy crisis, which considerably impacted Europe given its heavy reliance on Russian natural gas imports. This study uses an ensemble of four global integrated assessment models, which are further soft-linked to two sectoral models, and explores the synergies and trade-offs among three approaches to living without Russian gas in Europe: (a) replacing with other gas imports, (b) boosting domestic energy production, and (c) reducing demand and accelerating energy efficiency. We find that substituting Russian gas from other trade partners would miss an opportunity to accelerate decarbonisation in end-use sectors while risking further fossil-fuel lock-ins, despite featuring the lowest gas price spikes and potentially reducing heating costs for end-users in the near term. Boosting domestic, primarily renewable, energy production on the other hand would instead require considerable investments, potentially burdening consumers. Energy demand reductions, however, could offer considerable space for further emissions cuts at the lowest power-sector investment costs; nonetheless, an energy efficiency-driven strategy would also risk relocation of energy-intensive industries, an aspect of increasing relevance to EU policymakers.
AB - Russia's invasion of Ukraine fuelled an energy crisis, which considerably impacted Europe given its heavy reliance on Russian natural gas imports. This study uses an ensemble of four global integrated assessment models, which are further soft-linked to two sectoral models, and explores the synergies and trade-offs among three approaches to living without Russian gas in Europe: (a) replacing with other gas imports, (b) boosting domestic energy production, and (c) reducing demand and accelerating energy efficiency. We find that substituting Russian gas from other trade partners would miss an opportunity to accelerate decarbonisation in end-use sectors while risking further fossil-fuel lock-ins, despite featuring the lowest gas price spikes and potentially reducing heating costs for end-users in the near term. Boosting domestic, primarily renewable, energy production on the other hand would instead require considerable investments, potentially burdening consumers. Energy demand reductions, however, could offer considerable space for further emissions cuts at the lowest power-sector investment costs; nonetheless, an energy efficiency-driven strategy would also risk relocation of energy-intensive industries, an aspect of increasing relevance to EU policymakers.
KW - European Union
KW - Imports ban
KW - Integrated assessment models
KW - Model inter-comparison
KW - Natural gas
KW - Russia
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85181769788&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.energy.2024.130254
DO - 10.1016/j.energy.2024.130254
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85181769788
SN - 0360-5442
VL - 290
JO - Energy
JF - Energy
M1 - 130254
ER -