This paper reviews the classification schemes used for bottom-up energy system modelling and proposes a novel one as re-elaboration of the previous schemes. Moreover, this paper identifies that the main challenges of this research field rotate around the concept of resolution. A matrix of challenges in which four main fields are identified: resolution in time, in space, in techno-economic detail and in sector-coupling. These main fields are divided into different levels of resolution: low, medium and high. The use of a low resolution introduces errors in the modelling as demonstrated by different studies. Several existing bottom-up energy system models are reviewed in order to classify them according to the proposed approach and map them through the proposed matrix. 13 different models are analyzed in the category of bottom-up short-term and 9 as bottom-up long-term energy system models. The following mapping shows how several models reach a high level of resolution in one or more than one area. However, the ultimate challenge is the simultaneous achievement of high resolution in all these fields. The literature review has shown how this final aim is not reached by any model at the current stage and it highlights the gap and weaknesses of this branch of research and the direction versus which is important to work to improve this type of modelling.

Classification and challenges of bottom-up energy system models - A review / Prina, M. G.; Manzolini, G.; Moser, D.; Nastasi, B.; Sparber, W.. - In: RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS. - ISSN 1364-0321. - 129:(2020). [10.1016/j.rser.2020.109917]

Classification and challenges of bottom-up energy system models - A review

Nastasi B.;
2020

Abstract

This paper reviews the classification schemes used for bottom-up energy system modelling and proposes a novel one as re-elaboration of the previous schemes. Moreover, this paper identifies that the main challenges of this research field rotate around the concept of resolution. A matrix of challenges in which four main fields are identified: resolution in time, in space, in techno-economic detail and in sector-coupling. These main fields are divided into different levels of resolution: low, medium and high. The use of a low resolution introduces errors in the modelling as demonstrated by different studies. Several existing bottom-up energy system models are reviewed in order to classify them according to the proposed approach and map them through the proposed matrix. 13 different models are analyzed in the category of bottom-up short-term and 9 as bottom-up long-term energy system models. The following mapping shows how several models reach a high level of resolution in one or more than one area. However, the ultimate challenge is the simultaneous achievement of high resolution in all these fields. The literature review has shown how this final aim is not reached by any model at the current stage and it highlights the gap and weaknesses of this branch of research and the direction versus which is important to work to improve this type of modelling.
Bottom-up; Challenges; Classification; Energy planning; Energy system modelling
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Classification and challenges of bottom-up energy system models - A review / Prina, M. G.; Manzolini, G.; Moser, D.; Nastasi, B.; Sparber, W.. - In: RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS. - ISSN 1364-0321. - 129:(2020). [10.1016/j.rser.2020.109917]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Prina_Classification_2020.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.58 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.58 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1414406
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 80
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 70
social impact