How to formulate robust guidelines for the Belgian energy transition under commissioning time uncertainty?

Details

Supervisors

Contino, Francesco ; Coppitters, Diederik

Faculty

Ecole polytechnique de Louvain

Degree label

Master [120] : ingénieur civil en génie de l'énergie , à finalité spécialisée

Abstract

Energy system models are increasingly used to guide decarbonisation policy, but most treat an investment decision as immediately available capacity. This ignores the time needed for planning, permitting, and construction, producing overly optimistic deployment schedules and overestimating system flexibility. This study extends EnergyScope Pathway—a linear whole-energy-system optimisation model applied to Belgium's transition to 2050—by adding a commissioning time from investment decision to operation for seven power-sector technologies. The extension gives the model an explicit notion of decision timing: it identifies not only what to build, but also when the decision must be taken for the capacity to be available on time. Three analyses quantify the effect of commissioning time. A comparison against the standard model shows that commissioning times increase total operational costs. The main drivers are higher gas reliance through gas cogeneration of heat and power and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine before nuclear power comes online, and higher renewable-methanol imports after 2040. Since commissioning time varies widely, each technology's uncertainty is characterised by an illustrative log-normal distribution and propagated using Polynomial Chaos Expansion. As a result, nuclear and onshore wind commissioning times are the main drivers of the transition cost uncertainty. When these technologies face delays, the model offsets higher gas consumption and reduces coal use in high-temperature industrial heat, keeping overall emissions within the carbon budget. Moreover, the result confirms that delays cost more than accelerations saves. Benchmarked against four economic uncertainties, contribution of commissioning time uncertainty to the transition cost is marginal compared to that of the fossil-fuel prices. These findings translate into clear robust guidelines related to the Belgian energy transition such as urgent decisions required, preserving existing assets and preparing future decision