Energy in the Netherlands 2.0

About this page

This website is intended to provide insight into current and future energy supply in the Netherlands.

It is a "living" version of the report The energy of the Netherlands, written by Chris Hellinga, and published on this site as The energy of the Netherlands. ( pdf of the original report)

You are cordially invited to this website - To be used with source reference and hyperlink. - To improve or to discuss - Expand

You can also e-mail reply: [mailto: energie@enipedia.tudelft.nl]

Ir. C. Hellinga

TU Delft, Delft Energy Initiative

KIVI / NIRIA - Steering Group

Delft, October 26

Colofon

The energy of the Netherlands 2.0 Today (and tomorrow?)

A living document, began as a contribution to the annual conference of KIVI NIRIA "Sustainable use of energy.

Initial author: Ir. C. Hellinga (Delft University of Technology Energy Initiative, Power Steering KIVI NIRIA) Copyright: KIVI NIRIA, Delft 2010, 2010 and its authors Enipedia

More information: www.kiviniria.nl/energy and www.energie.tudelft.nl

Credits

- The report was converted by Chris Davis to MediaWiki format.

- initial english translation, largely through Google Translate, by Gerard P.J. Dijkema

Introduction

The question of our future energy supply is one of the most urgent of this century. Our prosperity depends on the availability of adequate, affordable energy. Because of the global population growth and the increasing prosperity in the developing world, our global energy demand may double by 2050. The pressure on dwindling fossil resources will increase; the concern that the CO₂ emissions from increased use of fossil energy lead to serious climate change is an additional incentive to accelerate the provision of sustainable alternatives. Moreover, fossil fuels are used to produce essential materials and for many no alternative production routes are available. Energy is the largest commercial sector in the world; to be successful in renewable energy offers enormous economic opportunities. Our engineers have a leading role and responsibility in the energy revolution.

At the Association of Engineers of the Netherlands KIVI / NIRIA, energy features prominently on its agenda. The annual conference on October 6, 2010 "Sustainable use of energy", provided a platform to develop a sharper picture of the technical status and challenges in many sub-areas that together constitute our national energy problem. KIVI / NIRIA sees this conference as a kickoff for a structured exchange of knowledge in the coming years to develop strategies around energy-related issues. You will be informed of the possibilities for your contribution.

KIVI / NIRIA considers it one of his tasks to streamline the discussion bringing together an overall picture of our energy issues, their development and the opportunities offered by renewable sources in order to provide a broad base of support. A strong image from the engineering world can feed the major political / public debate and thus contribute to accelerate the energy transition.

The earlier publication of the "Smart Energy Mix" with its updates , is a contribution to this perception. TU Delft has performed a quick scan, which is presented on this wiki. This should be considered a starting point for further elaboration and discussion. It is an approach complementary to the "Smart Energy Mix", which we have been inspired to choose by the excellent book by Professor David Mackay "Sustainable energy - without the hot air", which is available free on the Internet (http://www.withouthotair.com/) and which offers a wealth of information about the (im) possibilities of renewable energy options.

In the first part we present a transparent energy balance as reported annually by the Dutch Statistics Office. How much energy carriers are used in our economy, and how are they used? This part is about factual information and provides us with a sense of the magnitude of the energy-challenge and of the present use of renewable sources in the various sectors of the economy. It allows one to get a first answer on questions such as "If we save 50% energy in the built environment, which part of our energy problem we have solved?"

In the second part we ask ourselves the question: "can we, by 2050, meet our energy demand from renewable sources on Dutch territory, where we consider wind, solar (PV) and biomass use only?" We ask ourselves this question to a obtain picture of the potential of renewables. It should not be read as a plea to treat the energy challenge as an isolated national issue. The transition to a sustainable energy supply has a strong international dimension, and foreign sources of course can be part of an energy mix that provides the Netherlands with energy security at affordable cost. The related analysis is outside the scope of this study.

The year 2050 serves as a "symbolic" anchor and has been chosen because of the belief that at least 80% CO₂ reduction should have been realized in order to avoid drastic climate change. Thus anchoring our presentation serves to comprehensively demonstrate and flesh-out the energy challenge. To us it is not a prediction. Whether wind, solar and biomass will break through at a significant scale or not depends on many factors. Moreover, in the next 40 years unanticipated developments may completed change the picture. Who knew in 1970 of the worldwide breakthrough of mobile telephony and the emergence of the Internet? Who would have predicted in 2009 that the recoverable gas reserves in the world in 2010 would suddenly appear much bigger? It is a fact, however, that energy developments have gained momentum in the last decade.

What we are after is to create transparency and structure in the discussion. "Does the Netherlands have sufficient surface area available for solar PV to meet our demand for energy? The first question should then be: how large is this demand for energy exactly? The second: what part of this demand is to be covered as electricity and the third question then becomes, which part of the electricity can we reasonably expect to be generated through solar PV? We will explore these questions systematically and, adopting certain assumptions, arrive at indications for the footprint of solar power, wind turbines and biomass respectively. This analysis also is important to determine how we could provide sufficient energy storage, exploit smart (international) networks to a create a sustainable energy supply that matches demand. It offers food for thought on how far away current renewable energy supply from three sources is from becoming self-sufficient for our future energy needs. Especially the future need for liquid (and gas) fuel and raw materials is an issue that deserves attention.

Your insights and contributions are always welcome to further sharpen the discussion and understanding up to date.

Abstract

• The use of fossil fuels (especially oil and gas) in our economy is about twice as large as the demand for energy as recorded as sales to the Dutch end users (including the built environment, transport, industry, agriculture and horticulture).

• In "our energy use" often mistakenly not included are the use of fossil fuels used as feedstock by the (chemical) industry (to produce plastics, fertilizers, etc.); also the significant contribution of the Netherlands to international sea and air transport and the heat losses in power plants (and refineries).

• A statement like "40% of the energy goes to the built environment" is misleading and should read: "20% of our energy is used for the built environment". Energy plus materials needed for industry requires 30% of the total energy, and transport fuels, including contributions to international transport, also 30%. Of the remainder of our energy use, 20%, about one fifth can be attributed to agriculture (4%) and four fifths to thermal losses, mainly in electric power plants (16%).

• In the transition to a sustainable energy economy a much greater use of electricity in the economy is essential.

• Many renewables produce electricity directly because, for very many applications to be deployed, with small energy losses.

• We present a scenario where demand for energy services "until 2050, rising 18%. With assumptions for energy efficiency measures, improvement of existing technologies and the deployment of new technology, we estimate that the actual demand for energy 17% lower than in 2008.
• We feed the demand for electricity at by assuming that for space heating (via heat pumps, residual and geothermal), high heat in the industry, biomass processing and bright road will be deployed. Electricity demand increases by over a factor of 3 relative to demand in 2008.

• 'There remains a significant need for liquid and gaseous fuels and raw materials over (air and maritime transport, heavy haulage and materials for the (chemical) industry), which we equipped with "biomass". It is about half of our energy needs in 2050."

• This biomass requirement corresponds to five times the Dutch agricultural area, as a crop full of energy and resource use would be used. Is then calculated with the highest crop yield in our climate zone.
• The production and processing of biomass energy is again, where we provide electrically (this energy is conservatively estimated at 25% of the energy yield of the biomass). This item alone accounted for 30% of projected electricity demand by 2050.

• This is great demand for electricity for the vast majority of wind and solar PV to cover approximately 6% of the land area needed for solar cells (with the current yield), 1.5% for wind turbines on land and 3000 km ²to offshore wind farms. The use of wind power is set at 25% of the annual average electricity demand in summer, the rest filled with solar PV.

• 'Solar PV provides significantly less electricity in winter than in summer, which is somewhat offset by the fact that winter weather blowing harder. This is clearly visible that a great need for new energy storage systems that can bridge seasonally. In our scenario, we translate it "wintergat" currently in the fossil (with CO2 capture) or nuclear power plants still in 18% of future electricity demand should provide (= 75% of current electricity demand by energy users (built environment, industry -energy, national transport and agriculture)."
• But for day (/ night) fluctuations can be a sustainable energy system can only work if there is sufficient flexibility in the match between supply and demand is created (where' smart grids' next play a role in storage).
• 'Currently we are switching to conventional power plants to supply / demand balance in balance, leading to additional energy use and CO₂ emissions from these plants leads, which are in part the positive impact of wind and undo what a "double investment" leads to a certain demand for electricity to be guaranteed. In the future this will be different."

• We pay no attention to the cost of wind, solar and biomass compared with conventional alternatives in 2050 still be available. 40 years is long, and with sufficient attention to research and development is in this period lot to achieve. To build sufficient capacity to timely deliver sustainable energy systems and provides new economic opportunities, is another challenge.

• An important implication of this analysis is that we can not afford us to concentrate solely on renewable electricity, with its need for energy storage and smart grid, however great challenge even.

• When we are in 2050 a CO₂ emissions by 80% to achieve sustainable electricity supply is about half of our challenge. The remaining demand for liquid and gaseous fuels and raw materials in 2050 supplies the other half of the challenge which we will use biomass to illustrate what, in terms of land area and international dependence would imply.

• Besides biomass is also an opportunity for the production of hydrogen and hydrocarbons from CO₂ and water with sunlight or nuclear power, although there is still much development work needed for hydrogen storage, fuel cells, and new processes for the efficient formation of these hydrocarbons. Will large solar power plants along the African coast of Europe might provide fuel instead of electricity? Nuclear power is important in the shipping? What can we expect production of algae and bacteria to produce fuel (as cyanobacter) - the 3^rd generation biomass conversion?

The use of energy carriers in the Netherlands in 2008

Figure 1 The Dutch energy use in 2008

Overview

The CBS annually reports the use of energy in the Dutch economy in the energy . The information presented here uses that information as a basis. In the above figure, the CBS figures for 2008 are presented in the form of a bar chart.

An important overall figure for the Netherlands is its "internal consumption", 3334 PJ in 2008. (We will come back later to the use and definition of units). Whatever cannot be counted and thus correctly incorporated into the statistics, such as the use of fuels for the international maritime and air (the CBS post "bunkers") . For the Netherlands this is a pretty large item (20% of the use of energy), because of our transit function. Because this is a substantial oil demand, in a key sector in our economy, we take this post consistent with the statements. The total use of energy carriers in 2008 in the Netherlands rose to over 4144 PJ.

If we go directly to the right column in Figure 1, we see that "power users" account for 49% of the use of energy in our economy. Energy Customers are further broken down into the built environment, national transport, agriculture and industry (excluding energy conversion plant - power plants and refineries). When talking about "the Dutch energy" often refers only to this segment. That is why we consistently talk about the use of energy carriers, and not the energy.

These fuels are also partly because as a raw material also "products" (16%). We refer therefore to chemicals that are built from molecules in petroleum, coal and natural gas. Chemicals which are not themselves be used as energy. Plastics and fertilizer are important products.

The energy needed for these (chemical) processes falls under the heading industries - energy, part of the energy consumers. This use of fossil fuels is of course important for the CO₂ issue. The formed oxidation products will sooner or later, such as an incinerator (in the Netherlands, the cycle is already closed), still allowing the carbon as CO₂ in the atmosphere (unless incinerators CO₂ capture systems would be equipped). Also from the viewpoint of raw material and availability are the same challenges here as in supply. If we assume that in 2050 a CO₂ (equivalent) emissions by 80% to reach too drastic climate changes and to prevent the (chemical) industry would be time to switch to renewable resources, then the energy sector in the most extreme case in 2050 for virtually no CO₂ emit more.

Furthermore, we distinguish the conversion losses (16%, for the majority in power plants, refineries and to a lesser extent). These are mainly heat loss. That is, the heat is discharged into the environment (air and water), and not recovered is used for district heating and so on. We also have our own energy needs of the energy sector included (pumps, lights, etc.). At the moment we will set up sustainable sources in a power plant is unnecessary because the total energy of the central cease and revealed by deleting the heading "conversion losses".

In the left column we see that oil accounts for half of our use of energy, followed by natural gas (35%). Together with 85% so most of the use of energy. Electricity is hardly counted, which might seem odd. However, I believe only the net imports and electricity is generated directly from renewable sources (solar and wind). The amount of electricity we use is considerably higher but for the most part produced from natural gas. In the following figures, the use of electricity visible in the Netherlands.

Furthermore, we find the CBS category heat, biomass and waste (in 3.7% of national demand for energy needs). Examples of biomass include manure, vegetable, fruit and garden (VFG). Under steam heat is produced (excluding steam from nuclear energy) and hot water included. Given the modest importance of this category are no further attention.

Units

Dutch and energy consumption per

Figure 2 Energy consumption per Dutchman per day.

In the world of high energy statistics is often in PJ (Peta Joules) counted. 1 PJ = 10¹⁵ joules. One billion is a million times. For those who are not familiar with is a rather abstract measure. We demonstrated in Figure 2 also terawatt hours (TWh) see. That might have something more tangible because they are closer to the kilowatt hour (kWh) are. 1 TWh = 3.6 PJ and 1 TWh = 10 ⁹ kWh (1000000000). A 100 W lamp consumes 1 kWh in 10 hours. One billion of these lamps 1 TWh in the same time. But it is still hard to picture you in these large numbers. Following David Mackay we switch over to a size closer to our sense is: kWh per person per day (kWh / p / d). Looking at the overall use of energy carriers (1151 TWh), multiply by 1 trillion and then dividing by 16.4 million (the number of Dutch residents in 2008) and 365 days a year, we come to 193 kWh / p / d. For the future, we also assume that no population growth will occur in the Netherlands.

"For you, personally" so every day is 193 kWh of energy used in the Netherlands . This is comparable with 80 lamps of 100 W that is lit (if we do not count electricity that also to be made). If you have a family of 4, is as much as 320 lamps. If you and your family car 1200 miles per day driving, it also consumes energy.

Another comparison. 193 kWh / p / d is 50 times more than the amount of electricity you use at home. If your home through solar panels or wind is powered, is in a sustainable way in only 2% of "your energy" categories.

Incidentally, this is only an indication of our true "energy footprint" - the amount of energy anywhere in the world is used for our lifestyle. We import goods produced in countries supplying energy for a certain worry. Think of automobiles, industrial production, intensive forage for our livestock, and so on. Conversely, we have a large steel and (petro) chemical industry and agriculture sector, which largely export their products. Our use of fuels for international transport will largely benefit people who live beyond our borders. The actual energy per person is another, but that's when we also disregarded.

Energy consumption by sector

Figure 3 Energy consumption by sector

The block "users" from the previous sheets here is divided into user categories: industry built environment, transport and agriculture. Among the houses built environment, and service companies understand and institutions (commercial buildings) and construction .

The built environment is the largest energy consumer in a block (41%) followed by the national transport and industry, both for about 25%. The agriculture sector is the smallest 7%, with the bulk of the greenhouse also for his accounts.

These numbers should not be construed as implying the built environment the most important sector, nor can the use of energy. If we need raw materials and fossil energy demand of the industry in question add up the industry 50% more energy than the built environment (about 30% of the total, against 20% in urban areas). If we count international transport, the entire transport sector also accounted for approximately 30% of our energy needs.

Note that currently 15% of electricity demand by energy users provides (335 PJ = 14 kWh / p / d) . If we consider the use of wind and solar energy (ie electricity) we have to specify what good energy so we think we going to cover. If we only meet current electricity demand at least we have no illusion that we have most of our energy problems are solved. On the contrary. Depending on how you pay the electricity is responsible for deploying 10-20% of our energy.

In the second part of this analysis we therefore an explicit estimate of the quantity of electricity in our economy to the current energy sources to replace. On this basis, we come to an indication of the required land area for wind and solar energy.

Destination of energy

Figure 4 is not demand but supply central. Where are the energy? (Conversion losses are thereby excluded.)

Figure 4. Destination of energy

Oil-thirds goes to the transport and use as a feedstock for the chemical industry following distance by 25%. This is more than 90% of the use of petroleum (products) are covered.

Natural gas has found its way over half the built environment, one quarter to the industry (heat and electricity), and the greenhouse requires a considerable commitment by 10%.

Electricity is the other half to the built environment and for 1 / 3 to the industry. The greenhouse is a major user of electricity. This is largely self-induced from natural gas combined heat and power (CHP) installations.

Energy consumption by sector - details

In Figures 5 to 9 per sector will be mapped out which energy sources in the quantities used.

Figure 5. Energy consumption in the built environment

Natural gas and electricity are by far the main energy of the built environment, households, institutions and service companies (commercial) and construction includes (Figure 5). If electricity is converted into "primary energy" (the amount of energy power plants to produce electricity demand), the energy demand for electricity and gas demand (heat) is similar to. 45% of this electricity is also going to the Dutch households, and 48% of gas. An average Dutch household (2.24 persons) spent in 2008 1355 m³ 3420 kWh of electricity and natural gas. Netherlands in 2008 counted 7.2 million households.

Our national transport (road transport and aviation and shipping in the Netherlands) essentially requires the use of petroleum products (Figure 6). The amount of electrical energy that the train and tram decrease is negligible (1%). Section III.5, the energy demand for the Dutch transport broken down by different categories of transport.

Striking is the magnitude of energy demand for international aviation and shipping in the Netherlands . These are only petroleum. This question is more than 60% higher than the energy demand for transport on Dutch territory. The CBS energy, this energy understandably not included in the "domestic consumption". Here we need that oil is integral with it, given the importance of international transport for the Dutch economy. In a sustainable future we will be able to provide this energy. The sector "transport" includes thus 61 kWh / p / d (1315 PJ), which represented more than 30% of our use of energy carriers.

Figure 6. Energy consumption in the transport sector

The industry requires both energy for its operations (as part of the category 'energy users (Figure 7), and the use of fossil fuels for the formation of products. These are therefore to raw materials from which such plastics (petroleum) and fertilizer ( from natural gas) are made (Figure 8). Coal is used mainly in blast furnaces for reducing iron third to hot metal. The use of electricity are mainly hydrolysis processes.

Figure 7. Energy use in industry

Figure 8. Use of feedstocks for industry.

We see that the use of fossil fuels is slightly larger than the energy demand of the industry. The total is 56 kWh / p / d (1200 PJ) slightly smaller than the oil demand in the transport sector (about 30% of the total demand for fossil fuels and raw materials).

Under the category "industry" are not the utilities (power plants, refineries, etc.). If we have a gas plant as an example, natural gas is taken in part converted into electricity. The energy content of this part of the natural gas is not "use", there is another energy source in its place and use of the electricity is discounted elsewhere. The other part is converted into heat which is lost to the environment (heat emissions into the air and surface water), or usefully, for example district heating. The lost heat is bound to the category "conversion losses". The useful heat is used, among other things purchased by the built environment.

Finally, figure 9 the energy use of agricultural and horticultural show. Horticulture was by far the largest energy consumer (with 10% of the Dutch gas demand), but the total is 3.5% of total energy use of small carriers in the Netherlands. The figures in Figure 9 differ from those of the SN energy. CBS table shows the net demand for electricity that is negative, because the large CHP (cogeneration) power in the net greenhouse supplies electricity to other customers. Here is its own electricity demand regressed, and the use of natural gas proportionately reduced, assuming that all heat from the CHP plant useful for the company is used. The total energy remains similar to those from the SN energy (144 PJ). This breakdown is relevant, because we demand for natural gas in the following sections translate into a (low grade) heat.

Figure 9. Energy use in agriculture.

== 2008 == Type of energy The use of fuels as presented in the previous section in Figure 10 aggregated to the type of energy where the energy carriers provide. Thus, the use of electricity to as "equipment" (here are also under lights).

Gas demand for the built environment and the greenhouse is designated as "low-grade heat" . This heat requirement in the future are typically equipped with heat pumps, earth and waste heat. In all these cases, a gas demand will be replaced by a demand for electricity (heat pumps run on electricity and for natural and heat pump's electrical energy. This is an important category in thinking about using more electricity for our energy needs.

The energy demand of the industry, other than electricity (in a far-reaching simplification - this should be better developed) was appointed as "high heat". The heating systems in urban areas and greenhouses can be used are less or not in place.

The transportation needs, national and international aviation and shipping as the fourth category identified. Here the question is relevant in any part of this big category we can provide electric transport. In Part 3, by decreasing energy sector made explicit how we have come to these totals.

Figure 10. Type of energy in 2008

Can we provide a sustainable energy future, with wind, solar and biomass of Dutch origin?

Introduction

In the media lot of competing messages about the need for land and sea surface for a sustainable energy system. Some speak of the Netherlands when we fill-in solar panels, we have not in 25% of our energy can provide, others believe that 3% of the land area is sufficient. Such press reports give much confusion. Besides the question if everyone makes math correctly, is of course also to the underlying assumptions. Which part of our energy are we talking? This is usually not carefully specified. "Our current electricity demand is a very different premise than" our future energy demand. " There's an energy factor of 10 in between. One reason for this analysis was to discuss the land area required for a sustainable energy to provide an explicit basis. We do make the necessary assumptions, but if you have other insights, you can use the approach proposed here formulate your own answers.

We do not pretend to predict. We charge only by the consequences if we assume that wind and solar energy in the distant future, the major electricity suppliers . We're not worried about the future price of solar and wind energy in relation to the alternatives, nor even on the feasibility of an electricity system that the vast majority of solar PV and wind based, as is clear to everyone that much of our energy infrastructure must change that to make a serious option. On windless, overcast days we have a problem at night no sun shines, and much less in winter than in summer (though the wind is louder than average). If in the future we do not have good energy storage (batteries, hydrogen, hydropower, etc.) in both fluctuations over the day and seasonal fluctuations may be expected, the more difficult a story. Backup power (eg fossil and / or nuclear power plants) are expensive (we invest in "double" for the same energy), and at the expense of energy and CO₂ performance. A recent article calculated that the large deployment of wind energy in Germany may have little energy and has contributed to the German _{CO 2} emissions due to a change in the yield loss of conventional power plants when the wind blows . This shows above all that our energy is insufficient to set the use of sustainable, "intermittent" sources not demand-driven work.

Whether the Netherlands is large enough in its own sustainable energy provision should also not be construed as a plea for a national approach to energy issues. The deployment of renewable energy sources, requires good electricity networks ("smart grids") with international exchanges to fluctuations in supply and demand as closely as possible to cope. This reduces the need for storage. Within a European framework to renewable resources easier on the best, cheapest places to be installed. The wind blows not equally hard, the sun supplies in southern Europe is significantly more energy than in Northern Europe and hydropower is not everywhere available. The possible development of CSP (Concentrating Solar Power) plants in North Africa, or the sufficient supply of biomass from abroad, places the energy issue in an international perspective. Incidentally smart grid will also not 100% guarantee to give "sufficient electricity at any moment." Think of the day / night and seasonal fluctuations in Europe almost coincide. Liquid (or gaseous) fuels from biomass can be stored in times of shortage of electricity to supplement, but we will see that the pressure on the biomass already very high from energy needs that (being) difficult to electricity is provided. Issues of adequate storage and availability of sustainable fuels and raw materials for molded applications where electricity is less or not useful often remain underexposed in the energy debate but are crucial to our energy future, as we shall see.

We choose 2050 as the year we want to make a statement about. This choice is mostly symbolic. The conviction grows that we are mid-century international CO₂ emissions by 80% should have been reduced to a risk too great to prevent climate change, despite the expectation that global energy demand will double over . Also, given that "sustainable sources" never fully CO₂ neutral and the fact that certain greenhouse gas emissions are difficult to reduce (as methane from livestock and nitrous oxide by nitrogen-from agriculture), developing economies now long-term investment in such coal plants do, does this balance out our energy supply by 2050 approximately fully "sustainable" will be, if we embrace this principle.

We build our analysis in a few steps. First we make a assumption about the increase in our need for "energy function". Our economy is based on growth and it is unlikely that it will not translate into more transport kilometers, more light, more buildings, air conditioning, more ICT equipment, etc.. In a second step, we save over there. Common equipment is energy efficient (efficient cars already on the market count's rarely in the energy performance of transport, etc.) and there is still much to do in terms of better insulation, saving in industry and so on. Then we go "system change" presentation. That part of the (road) transport that lends insight into the current electric drive electric and we we're in the heat entirely with electricity. We obtain an estimate of electricity demand over time. We keep a energy on where we go with biomass in place, but more carefully worded, it is the need for liquid (and gas) energy and raw materials for industry. If we fully translate into a demand-biomass as done here-is there a specific land area to be attributed, but developments such as in the synthesis of hydrocarbons from hydrogen and CO₂ under the influence solar energy (along the North African coast?) to the image needed to significantly change footprint.

Assumptions about future energy needs (2050)

Figure 11. A possible development of the demand until 2050

To estimate the energy demand in 2050 Figure 11 shows the results of these 3 steps. The left column is taken from Figure 10 and shows the energy demand by type of energy back in 2008.

Below is the outline below. Details of the assumptions are found in Part 3.

1) Increasing energy function (2^nd from the left column)

We rely on the development of energy demand in Dutch society over the past 9 years. In figure 12, the CBS data show since 1990 for the total of the categories "domestic consumption" and the Dutch contribution to international aviation and shipping (bunkers).

We see a steady growth over the past 19 years, with a flattening after 2005 and a decrease after 2007. Here the economic crisis plays a role in course. From 2000 to 2009 average growth rate of 0.68% per year. These figures run growth to functionality and availability of energy efficient technology / austerity measures obviously overlap. We go for the next 40 years of growth in a growing need for energy functions of 0.4% per year. This was in 2050 an increase of 18.3% compared to 2008 mean. We divide the proportionate growth of the different energy functions.

Figure 12. Increase of the Dutch energy demand in the past 19 years. The total of the CBS categories "Domestic consumption" and "bunkers" (international maritime and aviation) is plotted.

2) Savings and technology improvement (3^th from the left column)

Then we lay on the austerity measures and growth assumptions for efficiency improvement (conventional) systems. The most important are:

• In 2050 the heat in the built environment per m2 floor area with 50% down on 2008.
• The energy efficiency for the entire car, air and maritime "park" has increased by 20%.
• In the greenhouse, 25% savings achieved on the heat (per hectare of land area).

The net result is a drop in energy demand by 8% in 2050.

3) systemic changes (right column)

Finally, we introduce new technology. The main changes we adopt here are:

• That part of the road that it is here eminently suitable for that (passenger and light cargo) with electric motors fitted which ("tank to wheel") 66% energy savings .
• In the low-grade heat (housing and greenhouses) is electrically provided. This means that heat pumps are widely introduced, but that the contribution type and / or waste grows. Once again this is electric pump energy. This switch to electric heating makes a big energy savings.

After these changes on the demand side, we can estimate the amount of electricity in the future can be used (Figure 13). By and large we arrive at 40% of the use of energy. 50% relates to the use of feedstocks for chemical products and transportation by air, sea and heavy - Long distance transport - road.

Here are several options, but we summarize it here together under the heading "biomass".

On the supply side, we then electricity much wind and solar energy introduced, allowing a large power plants and refineries redundant (under the assumption that we have sufficient energy storage capacity), thus no energy losses anymore. That saves energy.

However, there remains a certain number (fossil) power to the power shortage in winter to provide (through a limited amount of sunlight). These stations we rest with CO2 capture and storage (CCS - Carbon Capture and Storage), which is quite a lot of energy (20% increase in primary energy demand of the plant) and the energy thus rise. Incidentally, we have assumed that the mean central return or increased to 50% (currently slightly above 40%).

Finally, the use of even large amounts of biomass energy for the production of fertilizer, the conversion of biomass to useful fuels and raw materials and transportation. Because much technology is still developing, this item is difficult to quantify. We go carefully here that this energy does not exceed 25% of the energy crop supply. This is an additional item for "energy loss", to which we electrically (ie wind and solar energy) are provided.

Returning to Figure 11, these system changes in the rightmost column discounted, which on balance lead to a further drop in energy demand. We'll be at a savings of 17% compared to the use of energy in 2008. Note that the block "conversion losses" have. This is mainly due to the assumed energy needed for biomass production and conversion, which alone accounts for 30% of total electricity demand.

By comparison, the authoritative International Energy Agency (IEA) is in its reference scenario ("existing policies) for the development of energy demand in Europe for a stabilization per capita in 2030 (coupled with a minimal population growth) . In the more progressive "Scenario 450" - aimed at limiting the long-term atmospheric CO₂ concentration to 450 ppm, starts from a drop in energy demand per capita by 5% in 2030. Under the assumption that in particular the system change on a large scale only after 2030 people coming, our approach is "reasonably consistent" with the IEA scenario.

Deployment of energy for the estimated energy

Figure 13. Assuming use of energy resources to meet the demand for energy sources by 2050 needs.

Here we make a translation of the energy functional adopted in 2050 (left column, taken from Figure 11) to the use of energy (right column).

In the second column from the left we show the energy we're committed to a certain energy functional. In the 3^th column of links that just regrouped. In the right column we fill the demand with biomass, wind, solar and fossil or nuclear power. The justification of this distribution is found in Section 3. We aim to outline a contribution of wind energy 25% of the annual average electricity demand cover, and the remaining electricity demand in the summer, fully equipped with solar PV. Because wind energy poses less electricity in summer than in winter, this means that solar PV in the summer 80% of electricity demand must be met. In the winter we walk to a shortage of electricity due to lower solar radiation, which are "conventional" power stations are used. Annual average the solar and wind electricity shortage in our calculations 18%. If by 2050 we would have good energy storage, these are not needed surgery, but in that case we of course, about 18% more wind turbines or solar panels.

Corresponding area needed for wind, solar PV and biomass

Based on the calculated demand for wind, solar and biomass is fairly easy to calculate with any footprint that corresponds. We follow again David Mackay, the energy yield for various renewable sources table shows according to their energy per unit area (Figure 14).

As an example we mentioned the 0.5 W / m² for biomass production. It means that on average every second year to 5,000 J of energy per hectare (10,000 m²) produced by plant growth. This is 3600 * 24 * 365 * 10,000 = 1.58 * 10¹¹ J per hectare per year, or 158 GJ per hectare per year (1 GigaJoule = 10⁹ joule), or 0.000007 kWh per person per hectare per day. For 1 kWh / p / d is 136,000 hectares needed (1360 km ²) and the full energy of biomass to provide 2008 (193 kWh / p / d) 262,000 km ², if we disregard the energy demand of the crop production and processing of biomass into useful materials and fuels. More than ten times the available farmland in the Netherlands. Incidentally, 158 corresponds GJ per ha with a good energy crop, such as wood in our temperate climate, or palm oil in the tropics. In practice with a variety of power washing, the surface area larger than calculated here. Information on the energy yield per hectare for different crops and many other items all around biomass production can be found in .

Figure 14. Assumptions in calculating the surface area of wind turbines, solar PV and biomass.

Solar PV provides a 10-40 times higher per hectare yield than biomass energy, depending on the efficiency of solar cells, and the place on earth. In the Netherlands, a modern solar cell annual yield of about 100 kWh / m² (the installed capacity of 120 Wp (Watt peak) / m²). 1000/365/24 * 100 = 11 W / m², the figure is tabulated above.

Offshore wind blows harder than the average country, the difference between the figures stated in Figure 14. Incidentally, in reference provide the sea surface wind energy yield per hectare in the coming decades could rise by 50%.

The "footprint" of wind turbines is considerably larger than that of solar panels. Here the primary concern is that wind turbines on a considerable distance from each other so they should be in line "wind shadow" position. But the space between the turbines is obviously for other applications, such as (by country) for crop cultivation or solar panels. The word "footprint" has a completely different wind loading so than solar panels. Do you need a row of wind turbines on a dike footprint qualify? Here it is much more to visual pollution and noise. To determine the size of plots at sea for the placement of wind farms is the required surface obviously relevant, but here too, the open space between the turbines for other forms of energy can be used.

Figure 15. Resulting surface requirements for the use of wind and solar and biomass by 2050.

If these figures for energy use per unit surface area required for a sustainable energy supply in 2050 "we come to calculate the indications from Figure 15.

The backgrounds of the calculations are given in Section 3.

We pick-year average-57% of our electricity demand, which is about three times greater now than in 2008, from solar PV (solar PV produces in summer along with wind-than-average, our total electricity demand). This requires 2150 km ² (40 to 50 km, the area of the province of Flevoland, 6.4% of the Dutch land surface). The available roof area in the Netherlands for the installation of solar PV is also approximately 10% of this value. We base this estimate on the yield of good-commercial-available solar cells in 2010 is feasible. If the efficiency of solar cells over the next 40 years increases, decreases the area to the course accordingly (see Annex 1).

Wind turbines provide in our scenario 25% of the annual average electricity demand. We have assumed in figure 15 that a doubling of current energy production from wind turbines on land to the maximum feasible (this is 4GW of installed capacity-GWI-), and places the other turbines. The yield per wind turbine there is 60% larger than on land because of the higher wind speeds, but at present a significantly higher cost per kWh of electricity - currently a factor of 2-3). In area to the wind farms that this translates into 500 km ² on land and 3250 km ² to cover the North Sea.

Figure 15 also shows that we are covering the "solar PV hole" in the winter 18% of our electricity by fossil-fired or nuclear plants. The calculations for the loss of energy conversion are also based on gas or coal, not nuclear. We count with an additional energy required for CO₂ capture and storage, what about nuclear power is not needed.

Of the estimated footprint of wind and solar deemed feasible or not is a matter of debate.

The area requirement for biomass growth for use as raw material / energy (5 times the current arable land) clearly indicates that our energy future an international dimension. If we take the raw materials for our chemical industry and the need for liquid / gaseous fuels from biomass could indeed get Netherlands is too small. We base the calculation of the area are also required to "1^st generation biomass - crops full of energy and raw materials production are grown and used. This country is no longer available for such food. In the second generation biomass (energy from waste streams) is crop production (and other forms of biomass production) for food combined with other forms of biomass. The required area to the benefit of the energy and commodity production increases than against the mentioned figures, because only a portion of the crop for energy or as feedstock for the chemical industry are used, which also display other hand, still rest-/afvalstromen unused available. The third-generation biofuels from algae or bacteria (like cyanobacterium) are not bound to (fertile) land, but are still in their infancy. Potentially, these technologies with a much higher yield per hectare is possible. The actual area to the over 40 years for the use of biomass is one other than the ones estimated, especially when alternatives to hydrocarbon production economisch attractive will be (as hydrocarbon production from water and carbondioxide with sunlight ).

Recognition of the scenarios used in Part 2

Built environment ==> 2050? ==

Figure 16. Assumed power in urban areas in 2050.

In this and the following sheets for each sector the current use of energy carriers (3^th column) in a few steps translated into the use of energy in 2050 (6 ^th column) . First we translate the current use of energy to a functional need (column 4). For the built environment we see above that we are "electricity" translating the energy of "equipment" (including lighting), and other energy sources, particularly natural gas translates into space (and water - small item) heating .

For 2050, we adopted than the growth (18% for each sector) and then go to save energy. Here we assume that every m² floor space in 2050 half the heating energy demands through better insulation (column 5). The 6^th for the new column, we use energy demand. For heat, we opt for full power (column 6). This means that we choose a mix of heat pumps, earth and waste heat. On balance, this means that the energy of the built environment by a factor of 3 decline in spite of growth (read: more homes).

The switch to electric space here is so important assumption. A heat pump uses less electricity than it emits thermal energy. This is reflected in the COP (Coefficient Of Performance), defined as the thermal energy delivered divided by the recorded electrical energy. Modern heat pumps achieve a COP of 4 (if one is not too large temperature difference to bridge).

As waste heat or geothermal energy (geothermal energy) is used, there are electric pumps needed for water. That of course be expressed in a COP value. Geothermal for a COP of 25 feasible (depending on the structure of the surface) and the water pumped by the aardwarmteput used locally, such as a gardener. If this source also for example district heating is linked to the COP decreases (possibly to below 10). We count here with a COP of 4.4 (0.23 kWh of electricity equals 1 kWh of heat). This is equivalent to the assumption that 80% of heat is provided by heat pumps with a COP of 3, and 20% of earth or waste heat with a COP of 10. Other assumptions, the average COP value of course a different value. Our assumption means that space (and water) heating in the future, 75% less energy than in 2008 .

Upon heating of the built environment would also be passed from biomass burning. We do not do that because in our approach has a very high demand for applications where biomass is as yet no other alternatives seem to exist.

Industry - Products> 2050?

Figure 17. Adopted use of raw materials for the (chemical) industry in 2050.

In need of raw materials (chemical) industry can-at least not directly-with electricity. This is the molecular composition of these materials (instead of mass) energies. Again assuming an increase of 18% to 2050, we opt for biomass feedstock supplies. Furthermore we expect (wrongly) the need for biomass directly on the basis of energy content. 1 kWh 1 kWh of natural gas is replaced by biomass. A more careful analysis is necessary taking into account the new chemical conversion processes, leading to a different material (and energy) needs to lead.

We assume further that material losses in the current conversion process has been minimal, and that "more products" translates into proportionately more resources. It is obviously worthwhile here to make an accurate analysis.

Industry - Energy> 2050?

Figure 18. Adopted by the energy industry in 2050.

For the energy supply industry, we also back a few simple assumptions. Further study is needed for clarification. We assume that the current electricity demand (which is the electricity that is taken from the network) remains intact (pump energy, lighting, etc.). The use of other energy carriers is translated into "high heat". This is certainly questionable, since such a part of the natural gas in industrial cogeneration plants in electricity (and heat) is converted.

For the possible energy savings, we assume that the use of energy per unit of output decreases by 25% (this would be 0.7% annually from 2008 to 2050).

That future high heat demand, we completely filled with electricity (we then also automatically cover the current own electricity) but are now no high COP value. Heat pumps are not very effective when high temperatures to be achieved, and geothermal resources in the Netherlands will not deliver very high temperatures (130C maximum drilling depth of 4 km). We continue the use of fossil fuels so on a 1 to a demand for electricity (1 kWh of natural gas is replaced by 1 kWh of electricity, etc.).

Agriculture and horticulture> 2050?

Figure 19. Assumed power in agriculture and horticulture in 2050.

Agriculture and horticulture take a modest place with 3.5% of the national use of energy carriers. Most of this goes to the greenhouse. The future demand of the agriculture sector is particularly sensitive to developments in the horticultural sector. We also are consistent 18% growth for 2050 was adopted, but expansion of the existing greenhouse area of approximately 10,000 ha is not generally expected. Furthermore, it is questionable whether the relatively high energy intensification in recent years (partly because the expansion of the cogeneration power) will further continue. We may exaggerate the growth is here. The current demand for electricity (ie light energy) is taken from We provide here a decrease in heat by 25%, mainly motivated by expected improvements in the moisture in the greenhouses. This will reduce the current need for heat of vaporization. As in the built environment, we also here that the heat electrically operated, with a COP of 4.4.

Transport by national-transportation segment - 2008

File:Energievoorziening van Nederland - Uitsplitsing van de energievraag t.bv transport binnen Nederland Figuur 20.jpg

Figure 20. Breakdown of energy for transportation within the Netherlands.

In anticipation of an estimation of future energy demand of transport, here we distinguish the different forms of transport at the national level . As one of the most important changes in the transport system is currently the electrification of road transport seen. This gives a substantial energy gain is partly independent of road oil, and provides opportunities for buffering power in the batteries of cars, where fluctuations in wind and solar energy offer (somewhat) it can be buffered.

Time being, electric transport especially feasible for the lighter forms of road transport. We therefore prudent to assume that only the passengers, light freight and equipment (collectively, a small 60% of the energy demand for transportation within the Netherlands) are eligible for electrification and segments that run entirely on electricity. So we take that battery technology is adequately developed in 2050 for this in terms of range and pricing possible, and that charging way possible. For heavy trucks that travel long distances are likely other solutions are required. For city buses, refuse collection, etc. is different, but details have mentioned here.

Transport> 2050?

File:Energievoorziening van Nederland - Uitsplitsing van de energievraag t.bv transport binnen Nederland Figuur 21.jpg

Figure 21. Breakdown of energy for transportation within the Netherlands.

Again the assumption that the functional energy in 2050 has increased by 18% (more kilometers by road, sea and air). We assume that the trucking industry, the (inter) national maritime and aviation industry in 2050 not lend themselves to electric power because of the great mass of the required batteries. For all these forms of transportation we use biomass.

Electrical transport, we only import the road passenger and light cargo transport, which account for 56% of current energy demand (Figure 21). We go from taking out a factor of three electric motors that are more efficient than current internal combustion ("tank to wheel", including the loss of the charge and discharge the batteries). A car with a gasoline engine that runs 1l to 15 km, will be replaced by an electric car that requires 0.21 kWh of electricity per km . We see in Figure 21 that the demand for electricity than what is less than the demand for biofuels. That may give a distorted picture, because you 1 kWh of electricity about three times more mileage you like on 1 kWh of biofuels. With that small amount of electricity so more miles are driven.

For the other modes is assumed that 20% more efficient engines to cut fuel demand is possible.

The use of wind, solar PV and conventional power plants.

We go as fully as possible with wind and solar power in section II.3 projected electricity demand for 2050 with (64 kWh / p / d, or 1380 PJ). This is also more than three times the total electricity use in 2008! We fill a shortage of seasonal fluctuations in fossil fuel-fired or nuclear power, to illustrate what the result of inadequate storage capacity at that time.

We start with the assumption that the wind turbines annum in 25% of the electricity demand can provide (due to grid stability), although here different views on . 25% average year means that under almost all wind power wind electricity. We further impose the restriction that onshore wind relative to the current installed capacity (2 GWI) may still double to 4 GWI, the rest of the wind we get from the North Sea.

In summer (we charge for the convenience of 6 winter and summer, where wind and solar energy revenues are constant) we completely with solar electricity.

The following figures give an impression of the seasonal fluctuations in solar and wind in northwestern Europe.

Figure 22. Monthly yield factor of wind turbines in Germany .

Figure 23. Monthly solar radiation in London and Edinburgh .

We see in the right figure that the maximum difference in solar radiation (this corresponds quite well with the proceeds of a solar cell) is about a factor of 1910 (July versus December).

Wind energy is the seasonal pattern reversed (left figure). In August, the yield of wind turbines around half of that in February. Wind and solar power is partially offset each other for seasonal influences. Moreover, the average "capacity factor" (return ) in Figure 22-ca. 20% - lower than that of a modern wind turbine in a good position to land in the Netherlands. That is 25%. The efficiency of offshore wind in the North Sea is approximately 40%.

We translate these data into a simple algorithm:

	Winter (6 months)	Zomer (6 months)
Zon-PV opbrengst (kWh/m2/6 maanden)	30	70
Bijdrage van zon-PV aan de elektriciteitsvraag (%)	34	80
Bijdrage van wind aan de elektriciteitsvraag (%)	30	20
Wind op land (% rendement)	30	20
Wind op zee (% rendement)	48	32

The annual yield of a solar cell is thus set at 100 kWh / m², which with modern solar cell in the Netherlands currently feasible (with an installed capacity of 120 Wp / m² ).

With these data we therefore fully consekwenties of solar and wind generation into the "summer" measure. Naturally we would also demand an end to the breakdown summer and winter months to make. Because we in the heat with electricity are provided, it is logical to think that electricity demand in the winter months is higher than in summer. But we will also take into account the advent of air conditioning systems and / or heat pumps for cooling in the summer, with the movement behavior in summer and winter because of the electrical transport and so on. This complex analysis we considered here, and we count with a "flat" pattern decreased from 690 PJ per 6 months.

This yields:

	Winter (6 months)	Zomer (6 months)	Winter (6 months)	Zomer (6 months)	Oppervlak
	PJ	PJ	kWh/p/d1)	kWh/p/d	km2
Vraag	690	690	32	32
Aanbod
Zon-PV	237	552	11	26	2190
Wind totaal	207	138	10	6,6
Waarvan wind op land	19	13	0,9	0,6	500
Waarvan wind op zee	188	126	9	5,8	3318
Totaal	444	690	21	32
Nog te dekken	246	0	11	0

1. On an annual basis (not over 6 months).

In winter, this set is an electricity demand of 11 kWh / p / d (246 PJ) over. Observe that as many as 75% of the electricity demand of energy users in 2008 (14 kWh / p / d - Figure 3). This requires an installed electrical capacity of 16 GW, for half the year's work, or sixteen coal, gas, nuclear power plants.

On a windless winter would also have a much larger back-up power "should be available. This illustrates how important it is that we in the use of renewable sources do not have sufficient storage and sharing capabilities (smart grids) with renewable sources elsewhere to seasonal factors to overcome, but obviously also for much more rapid fluctuations (on the day) in the wind and solar supply well on the question to vote.

Here we choose for fossil-fired plants, the requirement that the CO₂ is caught and underground secured. This requires 20% more energy (on four plants should stand next to a CO2 capture). The electric plant in 2050, we return to 50%. For the production of this 11 kWh / p / d is 28 kWh / p / d of fossil fuels. This is slightly higher than the current (2008) gas demand for the built environment. The extra energy loss by CO₂ storage would fall if we were to choose nuclear power.

Comments

After an estimate of future demand for energy carriers, for 2050 we distinguish between the energy which according to current views - technically can be provided with electricity and the remaining demand for energy. The latter would consist of the international maritime and aviation, heavy (long distance) transport by road, and the use of raw materials for industrial production of particular plastics and fertilizers.

If we do our best to electricity demand "to the maximum" to carry the electricity demand in 2050 would be tripled compared to those in 2008. We have about half of our demand for energy carriers covered in this scenario.

If we in the remaining energy and commodity demand will indeed provide biomass, our calculation shows that we needed a land area reflect that five times as large as the current agricultural acreage in the Netherlands. This is also a conservative estimate because we a high energy yield per hectare out (as fast-growing timber in our climate zone). For a more differentiated crop requirements, the surface may be considerably increased.

In addition, we assume that all plant products harvested from a hectare for the production of fuels and raw materials for the chemical industry. We will be taking careful consideration to the fact that agricultural production, transport and conversion of biomass into useful fuels and raw materials much additional energy demands (which is very careful to 25% of the biomass energy yield down). How biomass is going to translate in the claims on land (and water) surface and the 2^nd generation biomass (from residues) and 3 ^th generation (from algae and bacteria) to develop, we discussed here. It is certainly important biomass supply as an international issue to see, because our territory is limited.

A sharp view on the future biomass availability and associated energy production, is essential to our picture of our future energy and raw materials. Naturally, this includes more attention to the emission of greenhouse gases in the biomass chains. In a recent opinion of the CDB to the Ministry of Housing is also possible in 2050 indicated that one third of a possible doubling global energy and commodity demand can be met with biomass . We come here for the Netherlands on a requirement of 50%, but that is partly due to our relatively large share in international transport. This raises the feeling that our estimate against the limits of biomass availability starting, but it would not be correct to infer that such a large biomass deployment is completely unrealistic. The future will tell.

The fact that we biomass urgent need for energy and raw-material applications where we are less easily electricity can provide means that we must be careful with us for the future government to deal with the use of biomass for electricity, heat and light road, as happens in many scenarios. In the short and medium term, which we still existing technology (the engines in our cars and combustion in power stations) have to use, it is different.

However, it is wise to have sufficient focus on "biomass alternatives." The energy yield of biomass per unit land area is relatively low, and when we solar (or wind) energy to fuel the production of liquid and gaseous fuels that reduces the pressure on the surface needs. Hydrogen production from wind, solar or nuclear power, technology is available with reasonable efficiency, but it still lacks good storage technologies and fuel cells that can be deployed widely in society. Hydrogen can be converted to methane or liquid hydrocarbons, which are energy conversion and storage problems easier, but it still requires a significant technology development.

Incidentally, this gives an interesting picture regarding the ability of the harvest of solar energy in North Africa for Europe. Objections to electricity from CSP plants (Concentrating Solar Power - the mirrors in the desert ")" in the Sahara include the need for a new Europe-wide coverage grid that small energy losses gives dependence on dubious regimes and vulnerability to terrorist attacks power lines. If these plants are not electricity, but fuel from CO₂ and water (along the African coast) produce, which stocks can be built and whose distribution is more dispersed, less weight to these concerns. But we will also alternative forms of energy not to lose sight. Think of nuclear power in international shipping, military applications already a given.

Conclusions

• Challenges to the sustainability of our energy and raw materials needed for the chemical industry can not be separated from one another. Both are seizing fossil resources.

• The international transport is often disregarded in our energy needs. If we, together with the raw materials demand from the chemical industry, count is the use of energy in the economy, about twice as large as the energy demand by customers, which often is equated with "The Dutch energy".

• To achieve a reliable picture of the possibilities for use of renewable sources to come, it is vital from the integral use of energy to argue.

• Next, use the ability of electricity to be made explicit. Only based on an estimate of future electricity demand, reliable conclusions about the required surface for solar PV, wind turbines, and so on.

• In a rough approximation we estimate that electricity demand in the Netherlands in 2050 by a factor of 3 can be increased compared to 2008.

• If we particularly wind energy (25% of the national electricity demand during the year, the capacity of onshore wind we double, rest at sea generated) and solar PV (80% of electricity demand in the summer ) to go with, we have the current generation yields 2150 km² (6% of land area) needed for solar PV, wind farms on land and 500 km² cover and the North Sea 3250 km².

• For the economy almost entirely on renewable electricity generating sources to run, which is not controllable for their current offers, our energy should become more flexible supply and demand matching. Topics such as energy and smart grids are very essential for this scenario to be able to be reality. The strong seasonal fluctuations in solar PV yield are an example of the challenges we face.

• If solar PV, as here, is full sized renewable electricity in the summer, there is a serious gap in the winter electricity, where we are-illustrative-fossil or nuclear power plants provide. In our scenario is about 18% of annual electricity demand in 2050 (247 PJ).

• In addition to the electricity demand remains is a question of commodity chemicals and liquid and gaseous fuels for international air and sea transportation and the trucking industry. This estimate is that about half of our total energy demand.

• How to fill this need in the future will be is still an open question. Here, we only biomass, to feel the consequences of that assumption to get. We will in the future, but also undoubtedly shaped synthetic fuels see that (partly) with the use of solar energy produced (eg (via) hydrogen from electrolysis (and CO ₂)). But will changing insights regarding the potential for electrifying a larger share of the transport and so on.

• Reinforcement of this initial analysis will lead to understanding and advancing to lead to different conclusions. The results are presented here not as a "prediction" to be read, but bad as a framework for further discussion.

Notes on Annex 1 (sustainable) energy options

We have fully concentrated on the use of wind energy, solar PV and biomass. Obviously there will be more resources available. Below we make a few comments about them. Also refer to background information on the expected developments in solar PV and wind energy.

Solar PV

There is deliberately not considered the extent to which the deployment of large quantities of biomass, solar PV and wind power economically feasible. That question has a lot of aspects, yet unforeseeable developments in the next 40 years could be decisive for the reply. One of these aspects is of course the development cost of solar PV power. A reasoned analysis of the European PV Technology Platform can be found in reference :

Table 1. Expected development of PV technology over the coming decades - figures are rounded and indicated, and should be interpreted with reference to the provisos listed below.

	1980	Today	2015/2020	2030	Long term potential
Typical turn-key system price (2007 €/Wp, excl. VAT)	> 30	5	2.5/2.0	1	0.5
Typical electricity generation costs southern Europe (2007 €/kWh)	>2	0.30	0.15/0.12 (competitive with retail electricity)	0.06 (competitive with wholesail electricity)	0.03
Typical commercial flat-plate module efficiencies (see below)	up to 8%	up to 15%	up to 20%	up to 25%	up to 40%
Typical commercial concentrator module efficiencies (see below)	(~10%)	up to 25%	up to 30%	up to 40%	up to 60%
Typical system energy pay-back time southern Europe (years)	>10	2	1	0.5	0.25

Wind

Prospects for the (price) wind energy development in Europe (onshore and offshore) are given in reference example, where the figure below is taken from:

An interesting indication in this reference is that the energy per unit area of offshore wind by 2030 could increase by 50%.

Fusion

Around 2050 there may view commercial application of fusion. It is unlikely that by that time, is a significant contribution to electricity supply.

Fission

Expectations are that by 2030 the IV-th generation nuclear reactors available. These give a smaller waste problem, and use natural uranium significantly better (up to a factor of 100) than current reactors. This is the social basis for the use of nuclear energy. The development of the "nuclear battery" (a nuclear reactor in a shipping container) should be monitored for the 'local energy needs, where with "undisputed renewable" sources is difficult to provide.

Tidal and wave energy

Dutch conditions are not particularly favorable for this application. Future exploitation takes place in the appropriate atmosphere percent.

Blue Energy

(Electricity from the concentration difference of salt and fresh water). The contribution to the Dutch electricity demand will probably amount to at most a few percent, due to infrastructure bottlenecks.

Hydrogen

Expectations for a hydrogen economy are strong tempered, including the advantage that electric transport in hydrogen propulsion has received. Yet that is what a short term view. For long-term storage and for the synthesis of brand-/grondstoffen is hydrogen may play an important role. Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. It will be "artificial" to be formed. For a considerable commitment of time on hydrogen, the chain efficiency of the use of hydrogen (production, storage and conversion) thus is critical for our overall energy demand. This is still very active.

Internet Suggestions

For more background on renewable energies, we refer you to the work of David Mackay www.withouthotair.com.

It is recommended also by the company Quintel Internet offered energy transition model that allows you to supply the Netherlands (and some other European countries) can define and among others may rely on cost and CO₂ emissions: [http: / / www.energietransitiemodel.nl www.energietransitiemodel.nl].

Finally, it referred to a website of the independent European Climate Foundation (www.roadmap2050.eu) where a multitude of information available about the issues that the transition to a European low surround-carbon economy.