<p>The UK government has made formal commitments to reduce GHG emissions (e.g. under the Climate Change Act 2008 and subsequent amendments) and to protect/improve natural capital and the environment (e.g. as part of the 25 Year Environment Plan published in 2018). Meeting these objectives requires an integrated approach to two parallel challenges i) decarbonising the energy system and ii) better understanding and valuation of natural capital and ecosystem services. From an academic perspective this involves bringing together two substantial, but rather weakly connected bodies of research, while also acknowledging that this integration in a UK setting needs to recognise the international context (i.e. a whole systems perspective).</p><p>The ADVENT project (ADdressing Valuation of Energy and Nature Together) has been funded by the UK National Environment Research Council to develop conceptual frameworks and modelling tools which &#8216;integrate the analysis of prospective UK energy pathways with considerations relating to the value of natural capital&#8217;. A methodology has been implemented to downscale the outputs of pathways from national energy system models and incorporate environmental impacts into the assessment of different options. This has required defining spatially-optimised distributions of investments in new energy infrastructure using a range of financial and welfare criteria. These distributions are then compared in terms of their construction, transport and land opportunity costs, as well as the implications for biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions, recreation, visual amenity and water resources.</p><p>This paper will present results from comparing different UK energy pathways through to 2050 in terms of the implications of electricity generation from three types of renewables (bioenergy, solar and onshore wind). The results illustrate that i) individual pathways can vary appreciably in their environmental impacts, ii) overall societal welfare can be enhanced by using spatial modelling to incorporate valuations of such impacts into implementation of pathways and iii) assessment outcomes can be sensitive to modelling assumptions (e.g. regarding the proportion of biomass feedstock from domestic or international sources). More broadly, the results demonstrate how important improvements can be achieved in the integration of environmental considerations into the assessment of future energy pathways at regional and national scales. The approach is now being further refined through the UK Energy Research Centre Phase 4 programme and ADVANCES Landscape Decisions project in the UK, as well as the five-country IRENES project funded by Interreg Europe.&#160;</p>
Transitioning to a low carbon energy future is essential to meet the Paris Agreement targets and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To understand how societies can undertake this transition, energy models have been developed to explore future energy scenarios. These models often focus on the techno-economic aspects of the transition and overlook the long-term implications on both society and the natural environment. Without a holistic approach, it is impossible to evaluate the trade-offs, as well as the co-benefits, between decarbonisation and other policy goals. This paper presents the Energy Scenario Evaluation (ESE) framework which can be used to assess the impact of energy scenarios on society and the natural environment. This conceptual framework utilises interdisciplinary qualitative and quantitative methods to determine whether an energy scenario is likely to lead to a publicly acceptable and sustainable energy transition. Using the SDGs, this paper illustrates how energy transitions are interconnected with human development and the importance of incorporating environmental and socio-economic data into energy models to design energy scenarios which meet other policy priorities. We discuss a variety of research methods which can be used to evaluate spatial, environmental, and social impacts of energy transitions. By showcasing where these impacts will be experienced, the ESE framework can be used to facilitate engagement and decision-making between policymakers and local communities, those who will be directly affected by energy transitions. Outputs of the ESE framework can therefore perform an important role in shaping feasible and energy transitions which meet the Paris Agreement targets and SDGs.
<p>As countries transition to net zero emissions, the number of land use conflicts between energy generation, nature conservation and food production are expected to rise. Models typically restrict energy deployment from land deemed as providing high societal value (e.g. National Parks, peatland) when exploring future energy pathways to resolve these conflicts. This study applies the spatially explicit ADVENT-NEV model to Great Britain to determine the lower-bound of the implied value being placed on the land excluded<strong>.</strong> It compares the &#8216;optimal&#8217; locations for new renewable energy when strict restrictions are applied against those identified when a natural capital approach is used.</p><p>When energy development is restricted from Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks and high-grade agricultural land the cost of the energy system is shown to increase by approximately 10%. Even limited bioenergy crop expansion is unfeasible if strict restrictions are applied. In particular, results indicate that such restrictions would not be compatible with net zero emissions targets. These restrictions also result in an increase in the spatial footprint of solar farms, wind farms and bioenergy power stations by up to 13.4%, 79.6% and 15.8% respectively.</p><p>Incorporating the valuation of ecosystem services into renewable energy modelling provides a more nuanced approach than a binary exclusion, highlighting how strict restrictions may not always be best for society. The natural capital approach makes trade-offs between energy, nature conservation and food production more explicit for decision-makers allowing them to take a more holistic approach. <strong><br></strong></p>
Abstract As countries decarbonise, the competition for land between energy generation, nature conservation and food production will likely increase. To counter this, modelling, and sometimes energy policies, use exclusion zones to restrict energy deployment from land deemed as important to society. This paper applies the spatially-explicit ADVENT-NEV model to Great Britain to determine the cost imposed on the energy system when either environmental or food production exclusion zones are applied. Results show that exclusion zones impose a cost of up to £0.63 billion (B), £19.17 B and £1.33 B for the solar, wind, and bioenergy pathways. These costs give an indication of the value being placed on protecting these areas of land. When multiple exclusions are imposed on bioenergy, the high pathway is infeasible indicating a more flexible approach may be needed to meet net zero ambitions. The model also shows how the value of ecosystem services changes when exclusion zones are applied, highlighting how some exclusions increase non-market costs whereas others decrease them. In several cases exclusion zones are shown to increase social costs, the opposite of their intended use. For these exclusions to be justifiable, the unobserved values missing from the model must be as large as these increases.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
