ENTSO-E Completing The Map - Power System Needs in 2030 and 2040

Ten-Year
Network Completing the map

Power system needs
Development
Plan 2020
in 2030 and 2040

November 2020 · Version for public consultation
About ENTSO-E
ENTSO-E, the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity,

represents 42 electricity transmission system operators (TSOs) from 35 countries
across Europe. ENTSO-E was registered in European law in 2009 and given legal
mandates since then.
The role of Transmission System Operators has considerably evolved with the Third
Energy Package. Due to unbundling and the liberalisation of the energy market
TSOs have become the meeting place for the various players to interact on the
market place.
ENTSO-E members share the objective of setting up the internal energy market
and ensuring its optimal functioning, and of supporting the ambitious European
energy and climate agenda. One of the important issues on today’s agenda is the
integration of a high degree of renewables in Europe’s energy system, the develop-
ment of flexibility, and a much more customer-centric approach than in the past.
ENTSO-E is committed to develop the most suitable responses to the challenge

of a changing power system while maintaining security of supply. Innovation, a
market-based approach, customer focus, stakeholder focus, security of supply,
flexibility, and regional cooperation are key to ENTSO-E’s agenda.
ENTSO-E is contributing to build the world’s largest electricity market, the benefits
of which will not only be felt by all those in the energy sector but also by Europe’s
overall economy, today and in the future.
Transparency is a key principle for ENTSO-E, and requires a constant listening,

learning and improvement.
Completing the map
Power system needs
in 2030 and 2040
November 2020 · Version for public consultation
Ten-Year Network Development Plan 2020

Highlights
› Europe’s power system is evolving rapidly. ENTSO-E’s System Needs study shows where
action is needed by 2040 to ensure continuous access to electricity throughout Europe and
deliver on the climate agenda.
› In addition to the 35 GW of cross-border transmission capacity reinforcements by 2025 that
are already well-advanced, the System Needs study finds that 50 GW would be cost efficient
between 2025 and 2030 and 43 additional GW by 2040. Investing 1.3 bn € / year between
2025 and 2030 translates into a decrease of generation costs of 4 bn € / year, while investing
3.4 bn € / year between 2025 and 2040 decreases generation costs by 10 bn € / year.
› Addressing system needs puts Europe on track to realize the Green Deal, with 110 TWh of
curtailed energy saved and 55 Mtons of CO2 emissions avoided each year until 2040. Market
integration would progress, with price convergence increasing between bidding zones thanks
to an additional 467 TWh / year of cross border exchanges by 2040.
› The System Needs study expresses needs in terms of cross-border transmission capacity
increase and identifies the most cost-efficient combination of increases, but it does not
mean that the identified set of increases are the only solution. The identified needs can be
addressed in multiple ways such as increased transmission capacity, storage, hybrid offshore
infrastructure, smart grids and power to gas.
› Increased cross-border exchanges and distributed generation will also create stresses for
national grids and trigger needs for internal reinforcements. Internal reinforcements already
identified in previous studies and related to cross-border needs, especially for the 2030 horizon,
have been considered as part of the estimated cost for capacity increases, but once the needs
turn into projects, they will need to be confirmed and new needs for internal reinforcements
can also arise.
› Investing in infrastructure will be key to support the economy in the post COVID era, where
the goal of developing Europe towards a decarbonized economy is an opportunity not only to
fulfil the ambitious European objectives, but also to support the European industry. Addressing
the identified needs by 2040 would represent 45 bn € of investment, translating directly
into jobs and growth.
› Some of the identified needs are already covered by concrete TYNDP projects, while about
50 GW do not correspond to existing projects in the 2040 horizon. All options should be
considered when these needs turn into projects and coordinated planning will be needed
across sectors. This is especially important in the subsequent steps where further analyses in
terms of environmental impact, viability, benefits beyond socio-economic welfare and refined
costs are carried out in order to complement the definition of the best project portfolio.
› The energy transition is also creating needs for system operations. Trends show a reduction
of system inertia due to increasing integration of renewable energy sources and distributed
generation, leading to higher vulnerability of the system to frequency mismatches. Flexibility
options will gain in importance, both at generation and demand level, and in this context the
role of TSOs in securing network stability will be key.
4 // ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040
2020 Today’s power system
35 GW of cross-border capacity increases

in construction or planned until 2025
If Europe stopped investing With an expanded

in the grid after 2025 grid after 2025
With 50 GW of capacity increase after 2025,

representing a cost of 1.3 bn € per year
BY 2030
49 591 51 28 630 48
TWh/year Mton/year bn €/year TWh/year Mton/year bn €/year
curtailed energy CO2 emissions generation cost curtailed energy CO2 emissions generation cost
With 93 GW of capacity increase after 2025,

representing a cost of 3.4 bn € per year
BY 2040
244 446 65 134 391 55
TWh/year Mton/year bn €/year TWh/year Mton/year bn €/year
curtailed energy CO2 emissions generation cost curtailed energy CO2 emissions generation cost
ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 5

How to read this report
A Q & A answers frequently asked questions.
The Introduction presents the context behind the System Needs study.
Chapter 1 presents the needs identified in 2030 and 2040.
Chapter 2 elaborates on the benefits of addressing those needs, for Europe’s

climate ambition, market integration and security of supply. To that end, a system
where needs are addressed is compared to an alternative future where Europe
would stop investing in the grid after 2025.
Chapter 3 considers the theoretical case where there would not be any capacity
constraint on electricity transmission. This exercise sheds light on the absolute
maximum benefits that could be captured by increasing network capacity.
Chapter 4 compares the findings of this edition of the System needs study to
those of the 2018 exercise.
Chapter 5 investigates new needs appearing with the energy transition: technical
challenges for system operations caused by a combination of trends including
more renewable energy sources at all voltage levels, more power electronics, a
very variable mix of generation and large and highly variable power flows.
Chapter 6 concludes with the next steps after the System needs study release.
Chapter 7 presents the methodology of the study and is completed by Appendices.
How to use this interactive document

To help you find the information you need quickly and easily we have
made this an interactive document.
Home button Arrows Glossary Hyperlinks Visualise the data

This will take you Click on the You will find a link Hyperlinks are tyndp.entsoe.eu/
to the contents arrows to move to the glossary on highlighted in bold system-needs
page. You can backwards or each page. text and under-
click on the titles forwards a page. lined throughout
to navigate to a the report. You
chapter. can click on them
to access further
information.
Contents
Highlights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
How to read this report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Q & A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
What is the Identification of System Needs?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
An essential step in Europe’s long-term electricity infrastructure planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
An evolving tool to enable the energy transition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1 What are system needs by 2030 and 2040? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

The SEW-based capacity increases, one solution among others. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
What is the impact on the internal grid and how does the internal grid affect network expansion? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
The rise of offshore wind and offshore grid infrastructure development .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 How addressing system needs benefits Europe .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Enabling Europe to realise the Green Deal .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Towards increased market integration .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Preserving reliable access to electricity .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3 What if there was no physical constraint in the grid?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

The SEW-based Needs can deliver about 70 % of the maximum achievable benefits.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
How to increase the benefits captured?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4 How do results of the 2020 system needs study compare with 2018 results? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5 New needs in a new set-up: Challenges for system Operations – Dynamic study results .. . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Frequency management: system inertia and local f requency variations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Flexibility aspects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Transient and voltage stability related aspects.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
How to adapt? Possible solutions for future system o perations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6 Next steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7 IoSN Methodology .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
The scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
The reference grid: starting point of the IoSN study .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Zonal methodology for the identification of system needs in 2040 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Standard Net Transfer Capacity model for 2030 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Scope and limits of the identification of system needs .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Appendices .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Appendix 1 – Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Appendix 2 – List of projects included in the reference grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Appendix 3 – Candidate capacity increases and cost assumptions�� 66
Authors�� 68

Q & A
What are system needs? in most cases. This is because electricity tends to transit,
System needs show borders/areas where new solu- crossing countries on its way from places with high genera-
tions for electricity exchange are needed to reach decarbon- tion from renewable energy sources to places with high load,
isation targets and keep security and costs under control. or from bidding zones with lower prices to bidding zones with
This study focuses on needs beyond the next anticipated higher prices.
wave of cross-border grid investments (35 GW by 2025). They
use the National Trend scenarios for 2030 and 2040, which Will TSOs plan the future grid based on
means that the system needs identified exist in a world where identified system needs?
significant uptake of renewable energy sources and system The System needs study is not a network development
flexibility already happened. plan. It is a study that investigates one particular dimension of
the future, which is where increases in network capacity would
System needs or transmission needs? be the most cost-efficient from a pan-European perspective.
The System needs study describes needs, not the To plan future network development, TSOs consider a multi-
solutions to the needs. The study uses interconnection trans- tude of aspects, including socio-economic welfare but also
mission capacity to express the needs because it is based on other benefits of projects (for instance in term of security of
electricity TSOs’ expertise, data and models, but it does not supply or reductions of CO2 emissions) and other scenarios of
mean that electricity infrastructure is the unique solution. The evolution of the energy system. TSOs will use the study’s find-
methodology only provides indication of where, for example, ings as a tool to develop future National Development Plans,
market integration could be improved, but it cannot prioritise in complement to national and regional planning studies.
between possible solutions. ENTSO-E expects that addressing
tomorrow’s challenges will require the parallel development Why does the System Needs study
of all possible solutions, including for example storage, the investigate the National Trends scenario?
role of prosumers and generation, in addition to reinforcing The future investigated by the study is the National
the transmission grid. Trends scenario, which aims at reflecting the commitments
of Member States to meet the targets set by the European
Where do system needs exist? Union in term of efficiency and GHG emissions reduction
The study finds needs everywhere in Europe, with a for the energy sector. At country level, National Trends is
total of 50 GW of needs on close to 40 borders in 2030 and 43 aligned with the National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs)
additional GW on more than 55 borders in 2040. Addressing of the respective Member States, which translate the Euro-
system needs would put Europe on track to realize the Green pean targets to country specific objectives for 2030. What is
Deal, with 110 TWh of curtailed energy saved each year and necessary to achieve the objectives of the NECPs will be even
55 Mtons of CO2 emissions avoided each year until 2040. more necessary for the Green Deal, and it is anticipated that
Market integration would progress, with price convergence NECPs in future will evolve towards Green Deal objectives.
increasing between bidding zones thanks to an additional Other TYNDP 2020 scenarios – the COP21 scenarios
467 TWh/year of cross border exchanges by 2040. Investing Distributed Energy and Global Ambition, and a Current Trends
1.3 bn € each year between 2025 and 2030 translates into a sensitivity – will be investigated in the cost-benefit analysis
decrease of generation costs of 4 bn € per year, while investing of projects.
3.4 bn € each year between 2025 and 2040 decreases gener-
ation costs by 10 bn € per year. How does the TYNDP 2020 project portfolio
cover the identified needs?
The System needs study considers only Of the 93 GW of needs identified between 2025 and
cross-border capacities, does this mean that 2040, transmission projects currently under conception or
there are no needs within countries? development address about 43 GW (on some borders, more
There are needs to develop internal networks within than one project compete sometimes to address the same
countries. Although internal needs are not the focus of the need). Other technologies such as storage could also address
System needs study, they are a direct implication of the these needs.
results: increasing capacity on a border will require a rein- The remaining 50 GW of needs are left to be addressed,
forcement of the internal network of the concerned countries by all possible means. This is a considerable investment
gap to be tackled until 2040. The solution will include a How are stakeholders involved in the
combination of technologies across sectors and will require identification of system needs?
coordinated planning. To prepare for the future ‘system of The System needs package, including this report and
systems’, ENTSO-E has developed a Roadmap for coordinated the six Regional investment plans published alongside it,
multi-sectorial planning of infrastructure. The Roadmap will will be submitted to a public consultation alongside the rest
serve as an umbrella for future planning activities, to improve of the TYNDP 2020 package. The consultation is foreseen
the consideration of smart sector integration in the infra- to begin by early November 2020 and to last six weeks. To
structure planning process and will identify needs for dual or further engage with stakeholders, a webinar took place on
multiple-sector assessment of infrastructure projects. 28 September 2020.
Stakeholders comments will serve to improve the
There is no system need identified on a reports. Comments regarding the methodology itself will
border, does it mean that no infrastructure be taken into account to improve the future editions of the
should be built? System needs study, as time does not allow to re-run the
The System needs is a partial exercise that investi- study. Stakeholders wishing to discuss how the assessment
gates one specific dimension of future system needs, which of system needs could be further improved are welcome to
is where increasing cross-border capacity would be most contact ENTSO-E at tyndp@entsoe.eu.
cost-efficient. Planning electricity transmission infrastructure In January 2021, the entire TYNDP 2020 package will
requires to consider a whole area of indicators, including be submitted to ACER for a formal Opinion. ACER’s comments
costs but also for example benefits of projects in terms of will be implemented as far as possible in this edition of the
frequency system stability, reduction of CO2 emissions and System needs study, or alternatively considered for imple-
other greenhouse gases, etc. It is therefore possible that a mentation in the 2022 exercise.
project receives a positive cost-benefit analysis even when it
is on a border that is not included in the best combination of Do identified system needs stay the same as
capacity increases identified by the System Needs study. in the previous system needs study?
The 2020 system needs study identified significantly
Will the System needs study results be higher needs for the 2040 horizon than the 2018 exercise, with
considered by the European Commission to a global increase of 37 additional GW of cross-border capacity
select Projects of Common Interest? increases. The benefits captured by the needs identified in
Regulation (EU) 347/2013 makes the TYNDP the basis 2020 are also higher in terms of variable generation cost,
for the selection of Projects of Common Interest (PCIs). avoided CO2 reduction and avoided curtailment. The differ-
However, the process to select European Projects of Common ences between the 2018 and 2020 results lie mainly in the
Interest is under the responsibility of the regional groups led scenario used. Despite these differences, ENTSO-E considers
by the European Commission, who ultimately decides on that the results are consistent enough and confirm the useful-
the material to be taken into consideration. ENTSO-E stands ness of the zonal methodology approach.
ready to provide the European Commission with all required
information. In prevision of the launch of the 5th PCI process Are the data and tools to replicate the
in Q4 2020, brief summaries of the needs in each PCI corridor System needs study available?
in the 2030 horizon will be made available in September. The data used for the System needs study includes:
What is the expected impact of the revised › Datasets of scenarios National Trends 2030 and
Electricity Regulation on the System needs National Trends 2040 Download
study?
Regulation (EU) 2019/943 on the internal market › List of candidate projects and cost assumptions (avail-
for electricity specifies a minimum available cross-border able in Appendix 3)
capacity to be made available to market participants.
Depending on the modalities of enforcement of this rule, › Network dataset of the TYNDP 2020: it will be made
needs for grid reinforcement might be reduced, as already available in aggregated form in Q4 2020. The network
more market capacity could be available based on existing dataset of the TYNDP 2018 is accessible upon request.
cross-border interconnections. This has not been investigated
in this edition of the System needs study but may be consid- The tool used for this study is Antares, which is an
ered in future editions. open source tool, with an expansion module publicly available
(antaresXpansion).

Introduction
How should the electricity grid look like in 2040 to create maximum value for
Europeans, ensure continuous access to electricity throughout Europe and deliver
on the climate agenda? What would be the cost for Europeans of not having the
right electricity infrastructure by 2040? Which future challenges will be created by
the expected high increase of renewable generation units, in part small and distrib-
uted, with variable production? The cost to society of an inadequate network is
considerable due to the central role that a reliable energy supply plays for society.
What is the Identification of System Needs?

The identification of system needs study investigates where electricity price between neighbouring countries be more
improving the electricity flow throughout Europe could bring aligned? The study also assesses the cost of not investing in
benefits to Europeans. The present report investigates needs the needed infrastructure. The System needs study is carried
in the 2040 and 2030 horizons. For example: where could CO2 out by ENTSO-E biannually and forms part of the Ten-Year
emissions be reduced? Where could the curtailed electricity Network Development Plan (TYNDP) 2020 package.
from renewable energy sources be used? Where could the
An essential step in Europe’s long-term electricity

infrastructure planning
The TYNDP is a long-term plan on how the electricity trans- The TYNDP 2020 scenarios developed jointly by ENTSO-E and
mission grid is expected to evolve in Europe to implement the its gas counterpart ENTSOG are described in the Scenarios
EU energy. Identifying the system needs is the second step in report published in June 2020. Following the collection of
the development of the TYNDP. projects from project promoters in November 2019, the
TYNDP 2020 will perform a cost-benefit analysis of 171
transmission and storage projects and evaluate how they
contribute to meeting the system needs for 2030.
SCENARIOS SYSTEM NEEDS PROJECTS ASSESSMENT

Range of possible futures Identify where new Cost-benefit analysis
to test infrastructure needs system assets would bring benefits of transmission and storage projects
and projects in the scenarios in the scenarios
Figure 0.1 – The three main steps of the TYNDP process
June 2020 August 2020 October 2020 2021
Scenario Identification of System Needs report, TYNDP report, Insight reports, Projects of
Report Regional Investment Plans & Country factsheets Common Interest
Projects of Common Interest and Projects sheets list
Corridors needs 2030
PROJECT COST BENEFIT PROJECTS

IDENTIFICATION
SCENARIOS COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF COMMON
OF NEEDS
IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECTS INTEREST
TYNDP Projects
Process of Common Interest
Process
Figure 0.2 – TYNDP and Projects of Common Interest processes and their key deliverables
Results of the System needs study will lead to the develop- needs change, because new scenarios are being investigated,
ment of new projects addressing newly identified needs. project promoters may redefine or even terminate projects,
These projects are anticipated in future national development also considering economic profitability due to market
plans and TYNDPs. To consider these projects already in the developments.
TYNDP 2020, ENTSO-E is opening a second project-submis-
sion window on the date of publication of this report, opened Alongside this System needs report, ENTSO-E publishes six
only to future projects commissioning after 2035 addressing regional investment plans diving into details of the specific
system needs. needs at regional level for 2040 and including additional sensi-
tivity studies. ENTSO-E will also release later this summer four
Running the System needs study every two years enables brief reports providing an overview of the needs for 2030 in
the needs behind projects to be monitored. As and when each of the four TEN-E electricity priority corridors.
An evolving tool to enable the energy transition

The System needs study is an evolving tool to manage increased granularity of the results and the expansion of the
increasing uncertainty in the context of the energy transition scope to the 2030 horizon with a Net Transfer Capacity model.
and EU Green Deal. Its methodology and scope have greatly
improved compared to the previous System needs release, The methodology and assumptions are further described in
with the use of a zonal model for the 2040 horizon allowing for Chapter 7.

1 What are system needs
by 2030 and 2040?
The 2030 and 2040 scenarios are challenging from many points of view, including
for the electricity transmission network. The change in the generation portfolio,
with increased solar and onshore wind generation in the south of Europe and
onshore and offshore wind generation in the north, in parallel with the decommis-
sioning of thermal units, cause higher and variable transit flows across Europe.
These flows must be accommodated by the grid to capture all the benefits of the
energy transition.
This new challenge brought by the evolution of generation 60 GW, Demand Side Response by 10 GW and Power-to-Gas
portfolios is already partially covered by an increase of by 3.5 GW. System needs go beyond this point in order to
flexible assets within the scenario National Trends. Indeed, provide a secure, cheap and decarbonized electricity at all
from 2025 to 2040 battery capacity in Europe increases by time and in all places.
Methodology: Identifying capacity increases

To analyze system needs by 2030 and 2040, ENTSO-E determined the combination of potential increases in
cross-border network capacity that minimizes the total system costs, composed of total network investment
(including costs of related necessary internal reinforcements for most borders) and generation costs. To do
that, a panel of possible network increases was proposed to an optimizer, who identified the most cost-efficient
combination. To take into account the mutual influence of capacity increases, the analysis was performed
simultaneously for all borders. The combination of network increases minimizing costs identified through
this process is hereafter called ‘SEW-based needs’ where SEW stands for socio-economic welfare. Further
explanation on the methodology is provided in Chapter 7.
The results of the System Needs study clearly show the high grid. This considerable amount of reinforcements can be
economic interest of investing in the grid to support the explained by a conservative approach to define the 2025
energy transition. reference grid. As a result, by 2030, in addition to accompa-
nying the evolution of the electric system occurring between
› By 2025, about 35 GW of new cross-border reinforcements, 2025 and 2030, a compensation of the delay in grid rein-
depicted in Figure 1.1, are expected to be built in addition to forcement could be necessary. Slightly more than half of
the 2020 grid. These very mature projects (some of them these needs could be covered by existing TYNDP projects
are already under construction), already justified in previous while the remaining part are currently only conceptual.
TYNDP releases, correspond to the best view of the 2025
European transmission grid. In consequence they are not › By 2040, 43 GW of additional cross-border investments on
questioned in the study and serve as the starting grid for top of the increases identified for 2030 would support the
the analysis. evolution of the electricity mix. These capacity increases
represent about 28 bn € of investment. These needs are
› By 2030, the study finds that 50 additional GW of cross only partly covered by concrete TYNDP projects (14 GW).
border reinforcements would be cost efficient to support
the electric system. These capacity increases represent
about 17 bn € of investment in the European transmission
CROSS-BORDER CAPACITY INCREASES EXPECTED TO BE
COMMISSIONED BY 2025 (BASED ON TYNDP 2020 PROJECTS)
800
900
FI
NO
SE
EE RU
600
LV
1,400
DK LT
2,800 1,720
900 RU
500 BY
950 1,400
400
IE
2,000
1,400
GB
PL
900
NL 2,000
1,000 DE UA
BE 1,000 500
1,000
LU CZ
1,500
1,300 MD
SK
617
2,000 800
800 AT
HU 335
390 RO
FR
CH 1,200
SI
0 HR
150
1,200 IT RS
BA 600
1,000 BG
844
2,200 XK 800
100 ME 500 MK
TR
PT AL 240
ES
GR
1,000
1,900
CY
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 1.1 – Cross-border capacity increases, corresponding to projects under construction or in permitting phase and
expected to become effective by 2025. Identified needs in 2030 and 2040 come in addition to these capacity increases.

NEEDS < 700 MW
1,500
NEEDS 700 Ú 2,000 MW
NEEDS > 2,000 MW
FI
800
NO
SE
EE RU
LV
DK LT
500
RU
BY
700 600
IE
1,000
GB
PL
NL 4,500
2,000 DE UA
700 BE
1,400 500
3,000 LU CZ
500 SK MD
1,000 1,000
1,800 2,500 1,117
3,100 AT 2,000 HU
RO
CH 600 500 1,000 1,000
FR 1,500 SI
1,200 HR
1,600 1,000
RS
BA 500
2,000 IT
1,000 BG
1,500
XK 1,500
1,500
600 ME MK
TR
PT AL 1,000
ES
1,500 GR
1,500
CY
600
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 1.2 – Needs for capacity increases identified in the 2030 horizon, additional to the 2025 network
(SEW based needs 2030)*.
* Ireland and Northern Ireland form one wholesale electricity market area known as the Single Electricity Market (SEM). Therefore, the needs
identified between the island of Ireland and Great Britain could be satisfied by capacity increases in either Ireland or Northern Ireland.
NEEDS < 700 MW
1,500
NEEDS > 2,000 MW
FI
1,800
NO
500
SE 500
EE RU
500
LV
DK 500 LT
RU 700
BY
700
IE
1,000
GB
PL
2,000
NL 1,000 4,900
DE UA
2,000
BE 1,000
1,400 2,800
4,000 LU CZ 1,500
500 1,650
500 SK MD
1,000 1,000
1,500
1,800 3,200
3,100 AT HU 1,117
2,000 RO
3,500 1,500 1,500
CH 600 2,000
FR 1,000
SI 1,122
1,200 HR 2,500
2,000 1,600
IT RS 1,230
BA 1,350
2,000 1,144 BG
500 1,000 1,500
5,000 600 1,500XK
MK 1,000 1,500
TR
PT AL 500
ES
1,500 GR
1,500
4,000
1,000
CY
500
500
MA MT
DZ TN
(SEW based needs 2040)*.

The needs identified as transmission capacity increases Regional Investment Plans for further analysis on specific
are located all over Europe. For 2030, the highest identified capacity increases identified in Figures 1.2 and 1.3.
capacity increases are located on the German borders with
Poland, Switzerland and Austria, and on the Belgium-France The impact of these reinforcements on the power system
border, although there are many other needs to accommodate is considerable and their benefits far outweigh their costs.
flows between Southwest and Central Europe (Spain-France Additional cross-border exchange capacity allows to better
and other French borders) and between Eastern and Central mutualize generation capacity among countries as well as
Europe (from Turkey through the Balkan countries up to their differences in load profile. Chapter 2 details the impact
Austria) and to integrate the Italian peninsula. of addressing the SEW-based needs on a series of indicators,
including CO2 emissions, curtailed energy, and marginal costs
For 2040, the highest identified capacity increases are located and compares these benefits to a hypothetical situation where
in the Iberian Peninsula, especially on the France-Spain border Europe would stop investing in the grid after 2025.
with also a significant increase on the Portugal-Spain border.
As in 2030, the German borders with Poland, Switzerland As a next step, the needs found in this study will be confronted
and Austria and the Belgium-France border are among the to concrete projects (existing or new) in the TYNDP 2020
borders with the highest needs. However, in 2040 the French project portfolio, as submitted by project promoters. The
borders to Switzerland and the United Kingdom will also details of the project (capacity, location, technology...) will
require capacity increases. In Eastern Europe, where cross- allow to estimate precise costs and benefits in a variety of
border capacities are generally lower, high needs have been scenarios and assess if the investment is indeed economi-
identified on the Bulgaria-Romania border. Additional needs cally beneficial. The evolution of the energy mix and of the
require to accommodate North-South flows between the development of the grid, as well as the numerous impacts
Nordic countries through continental Europe to the Balkans, projects have on the power system beyond lowering the
between UK and Ireland with the Continent and to integrate generation costs, have to be taken into account at each
the Italian peninsula. Readers are invited to refer to the investment step through a dedicated cost-benefit analysis.
The SEW-based capacity increases, one solution

among others
The SEW-based needs are a depiction of the needed effec- therefore suggest that it is a well-identified need without being
tive cross-border transfer capacity increases necessary for part of the SEW-based solution. These network increases,
a cost-optimized operation of the 2030 and 2040 system. It identified in orange in the figures, do not constitute an alter-
is important to note that considerations in terms of system native grid solution, as they do not all belong to the same
resilience, system security, or other societal benefits are not solution. Adding one of these increases to the SEW-based
included in this analysis. The cost-optimized operation of the needs would deliver very close benefits to those delivered by
2030/2040 system is a function of the cost estimates for the addressing the SEW-based needs alone.
cross-border capacity increases and the generation costs.
In particular, considering the sensitivity of the analysis on
While the optimisation process behind this analysis has aimed the cost estimates used for the optimisation process, these
at a robust identification of the cost-optimized system, the possibilities must be considered in order to not misdirect the
inherent complexity of the power system implies that different sound development of the necessary solutions to the needs.
depictions of the needed cross-border capacity increases This is especially important in the subsequent steps where
lead to results of practically similar benefits. Figures 1.4 and further analyses in terms of environmental impact, viability,
1.5 capture this effect for those borders where a different benefits beyond SEW and refined costs are carried out in order
SEW-based solution would lead to similar benefits and would to complement the identified needs.
NEEDS < 700 MW
1,500
+500
NEEDS > 2,000 MW
ADDITIONAL CAPACITY INCREASES THAT,
WHEN ADDED ONE AT A TIME TO THE SEW-BASED NEEDS,
DELIVER SIMILAR OVERALL BENEFITS
FI
800
NO
SE +1,500
EE RU
LV
+1,000 LT
DK 500
RU
+1,000 BY
+1,000 700 +700 600
IE
1,000
GB
PL
+2,000 NL 4,500
2,000 DE UA
700 BE
1,400 500
3,000 LU CZ
500 +1,000 SK MD
1,000 1,000
1,800 2,500 1,117
3,100 AT 2,000 HU
RO
CH 500 +1,000
FR 1,500 600 1,000 1,000
SI
1,200 HR +622
+1,500 1,600 1,000
ITn RS
IT
+500 BA 500
2,000 +500 1,000 BG
1,500
+1,500 ITcn +1,500 XK 1,500
1,500
600 ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL 1,000
ES ITs
1,500 GR
ITsar 1,500
+500
CY
ITsic
600 +500
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 1.4 – Needs for capacity increases identified in the 2030 horizon, additional to the 2025 network (SEW-based
Needs 2030) and additional network increases included in grid solutions that were only slightly more expensive than
the SEW-based Needs 2030.

NEEDS < 700 MW
1,500
NEEDS > 2,000 MW
FI
1,800
NO
2,000
500
SE 500
EE RU
500 500
LV
1,000
DK 500 LT
RU 700 1,000 BY
1,000 700 700
IE
1,000
GB
PL
2,000
NL 1,000 4,900
1,400
DE UA
2,000
BE 1,000 500
1,400 2,800
4,000 LU CZ 1,500
500 1,650
1,000 500 SK MD
1,000 1,000
1,500
1,800 3,200
3,100 AT HU 1,117
2,000 RO
3,500 1,500 1,500
CH 600 2,000
FR 1,000
SI 1,122
1,200 HR 2,500
2,000 1,600
ITn IT BA 1,350
RS 1,230
2,000 1,144 BG
500 1,000 1,500
ITcn
5,000 600 1,500XK
1,000 1,000 1,500
500 ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL 500
ES ITs
1,500 GR
ITsar 1,500
4,000
1,000
CY
ITsic
500
500
MA MT
DZ TN
(SEW-based Needs 2040) and additional network increases included in grid solutions that were only slightly
more expensive than the SEW-based Needs 2040*.
* The need at the Italy-Tunisia border has been assessed only in the 2030 horizon because of methodological limitations. As a result, the absence
of any need on IT-TUN in the 2040 horizon is only due to the non-assessment of needs on this border.
What is the impact on the internal grid and how does
the internal grid affect network expansion?
Reaching the level of cross-border exchanges that result from the situation of internal grids in the national framework as well
the needs identified in the SEW-based Needs and rely on the as in the European framework, to ensure that internal grids
National Trends scenario for 2030 and 2040, will create new accommodate future flows and are fit-for-purpose in the energy
needs for reinforcement of internal networks in the European transition.
national grids. Therefore, national TSOs will need to analyse
The rise of offshore wind and offshore grid infrastructure

development
Europe has today 22.1 GW of offshore wind capacity, corre- treated as an externality, which in the case of offshore wind
sponding to 5,407 grid connected wind turbines across 12 may represent an even higher deviation from overall system
countries 1. The resource potential for offshore wind in Europe costs optimality. The study does not focus on the optimal
in several areas is very high. Furthermore, the cost of offshore connection of (all types of) generation, as this is not part
wind has declined substantially in the last decade, making of the current ENTSO-E mandate. For that reason, so called
it an attractive contributor to the European Green Deal. In "hybrid projects", i.e. the combination of interconnections and
fact, the National Trends scenario expects reaching 78 and offshore generation units, are not identified with the current
131 GW in 2030 and 2040 respectively, while the European System needs methodology.
Commission Roadmap on Offshore renewable energy
strategy anticipates over 250 GW of installed offshore wind However, the results of the present System needs study,
in 2050. merged with detailed information of offshore power plants,
will allow project promoters to define new potential hybrid
Offshore transmission infrastructure and related onshore projects (yellow areas in Figure 1.6) or adapt existing ones,
connections and reinforcements need to be built much faster thus proposing new steps towards future modular offshore
than the current onshore grids, which were developed step grid infrastructure . In particular, hybrid projects could help
by step for more than a century. Several challenges for this to decrease the cost of exchange capacity in marine areas
expansion will have to be addressed in the coming years, (submarine transmission projects tend to be expensive),
including a holistic planning and coordinated on-and-offshore hence making new capacities cost-effective, which they may
grid developments, combining the fields of grid and spatial not have been by themselves. Indeed, there are still some
planning, engineering, construction and financing. ENTSO-E’s benefits to be gained by new exchange capacities as the
first Position Paper on Offshore Development, released in differences in marginal costs on these borders are still high
May 2020, identifies the basic pillars on successful offshore (Figure 1.7).
development supporting offshore wind integration in
electricity. The benefits delivered by these types of projects with the
details of the offshore power plants will be assessed in the
For the System needs study, the wind and solar capacities cost-benefit analysis process of the TYNDP according to the
are part of the scenarios, meaning that connection costs are currently valid CBA methodology.
1 WindEurope: “Offshore wind in Europe” – key trends and statistics 2019, Feb 2020

NEEDS < 700 MW
1,500
NEEDS > 2,000 MW
LOCATION OF OFFSHORE WIND GENERATION
OR HYBRID INFRASTRUCTURE
FI
1,800
NO
2,000
500
SE 500
EE RU
500 500
LV
1,000
DK 500 LT
RU 700 1,000 BY
1,000 700 700
IE
1,000
GB
PL
2,000
NL 1,000 4,900
1,400
DE UA
2,000
BE 1,000 500
1,400 2,800
4,000 LU CZ 1,500
500 1,650
1,000 500 SK MD
1,000 1,000
1,500
1,800 3,200
3,100 AT HU 1,117
2,000 RO
3,500 1,500 1,500
CH 600 2,000
FR 1,000
SI 1,122
1,200 HR 2,500
2,000 1,600
ITn IT BA 1,350
RS 1,230
2,000 1,144 BG
500 1,000 1,500
ITcn
5,000 600 1,500XK
1,000 1,000 1,500
500 ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL 500
ES ITs
1,500 GR
ITsar 1,500
4,000
1,000
CY
ITsic
500
500
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 1.6 – Location of potential hybrid offshore infrastructure (interconnection and generation) and needs for
capacity increases identified for the 2040 horizon (SEW-based Needs 2040)
< 2.00 €/MWh
2.00–5.00 €/MWh NO 1
5.00–10.00 €/MWh
> 10.00 €/MWh
SE 1
SE 2
FI
NO 2
NO 3
SE 3 EE RU
LV
SE 4
DKW 1 LT
NI DKE 1 RU
BY
IE
UK
PL
NL
DE UA
BE
LU CZ
SK MD
AT HU
RO
CH
FR
SI
HR
IT
ITn RS
BA
BG
ITcn XK
ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL
ES ITs
GR
ITsar
CY
ITsic
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 1.7 – Difference in marginal costs between neighbouring bidding zones in potential locations of hybrid
offshore infrastructure (SEW-based Needs 2040) (For the spread in marginal cost in all potential futures for 2030 and
2040, see Chapter 2.2)
The complexity of the offshore system requires a combination looking into methodologies for identifying potential hybrid
of various technical solutions and designs in order to ensure project needs in future TYNDPs. Future TYNDPs will analyse
overall system efficiency. In anticipation of the integration the offshore grid infrastructure further based on the advance-
of significant offshore generation capacities, ENTSO-E is ment of national and regional development plans.

2 H
ow addressing system needs
benefits Europe
In this chapter we compare the SEW-based needs presented in Chapter 1 to a
hypothetical future where there would not be any further increase in transmis-
sion capacity after 2025. This comparison highlights the benefits delivered by
increased network capacity on a range of indicators, in terms of reduced curtailed
energy, reduced CO2 emissions, reduced price divergence between neighbouring
countries … Addressing system needs will be key for Europe to preserve security
of electricity supply, deliver the Internal Energy Market and make the Green Deal
a reality.
Enabling Europe to realise the Green Deal
110 TWh of curtailed energy saved each year by 2040

Increasing the exchange capacity in Europe helps the inte- volume increases to 244 TWh / year by 2040. This represents
gration of renewable energy by offering more opportunities a share of over 1 % of annual RES generation in 2030 and 5 %
to RES power plants to be used. Indeed, without network rein- in 2040 2.
forcements after 2025, the RES generation would be so high
at some time in some countries that some energy has to be By taking advantage of the different energy mix over Europe
curtailed: by 2030, 49 TWh / year would be spilled whereas this and the different RES peaking period between countries,
Curtailed energy in TWh/year

250
225
110 TWh of RES energy are
200 saved each year by 2040
175 when building the grid
150
125
100
75
47 TWh of RES energy are
50 saved each year by 2030
25
when building the grid
0
2030 2040
No investment after 2020 No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs
Figure 2.1 – Curtailed energy in TWh / year in the 2030 and 2040 horizons
2 As far as hydrological losses are concerned, curtailed energy values does not include water that is not used because generation turbine capacity is not
high enough.
the SEW-based needs decrease drastically the curtailed The impact on RES integration is even more important
energy. With the evolution of the energy transition (RES because, in case Europe stops investing in grid reinforcement,
installed capacity in Europe increases by 28 % between 2030 RES promoters would not build their units in the first place
and 2040), this effect increases over time: the reduction is knowing they will not be able to sell their generation to foreign
21 TWh / year in 2030 and reaches 110 TWh / year in 2040. markets.
Germany and Spain are the most impacted countries due to
their high national share of RES generation.
TWh
30
25
20
15
cut
12
10
0
AL AT BA BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV ME MK MT NL NO PL PT RO RS SE SI SK U K
Figure 2.2 – Curtailed energy in TWh in 2030, in No investment after 2020, No investment after 2025 and
SEW-based Needs
TWh
80
70
60
50
40
30
cut
15
10
0
No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs
Figure 2.3 – Curtailed energy in TWh/year in 2040, in No investment after 2025 and SEW-based Needs

Over 40 Mton of CO� emissions avoided each year by 2030
By allowing a better integration of non-CO2 emitting gener- in 2040 to reach in Europe 591 Mton /year in 2030 and 391
ation, increased cross-border network capacity leads to a in 2040 3.
significant reduction of European CO2 emissions. This high-
lights the important role of the network in the path toward If Europe stopped investing in the grid after 2020, the negative
carbon neutrality. Compared to a path with no investment effect would be even larger: by 2030, CO2 emission would be
after 2025, CO2 emissions of the power sector decrease by higher by 60 Mton / year compared to the SEW-based Needs.
7 % (40 Mton) per year in 2030 and 12 % (55 Mton) per year
CO2 emissions in Mton/year

700
600 60 Mton CO2/year:

reduction in CO2 emissions
500 per year when building the grid
400 55 Mton CO2 are saved

each year by 2040
300 when building the grid
200
100
0
2030 2040
Figure 2.4 – Yearly CO� emissions from the power sector in the 2030 and 2040 horizons
Mio. Tons
120
100
80
60
cut
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 2.5 – CO� emissions in 2030, in ’No investment after 2020’, ‘No investment after 2025’ and SEW-based
Needs 2030
3 The overall European emission decreases between 2030 per country and 2040 because of the highest share of renewable energy in 2040 associated with
an increase in the ETS CO2 cost considered at this horizon.
Mio. Tons
50
40
30
20
cut
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs
Figure 2.6 – CO� emissions in 2040 per country, in the SEW-based Needs 2040 and in ‘No investment after 2025’
Because the current identification of system needs method- are not sufficient to properly decrease CO2 emissions to an
ology focuses on benefits in terms of socio-economic welfare extent consistent with EU climate ambitions. This explains the
and integration of renewable energy sources, the network relatively reduced impact of the SEW-based Needs especially
increases composing the SEW-based Needs are not optimal in the first decade to come, compared to a future with no
with regard to CO2 emissions reduction. CO2 is partially taken investment after 2025, when using the current ETS CO2 price.
into account in socio-economic welfare via the ETS CO2 price
which producers have to pay when they emit CO2, because To investigate the impact if the CO2 price was increased,
it is included in the generation cost. However, the ETS CO2 ENTSO-E has run a sensitivity study for 2030 with a price of
prices of 28 EUR/ton of CO2 in 2030 and 75 EUR/ton in 2040 100 €/ton of CO2 4.
‘No investment after 2025’ SEW-based Needs 2030 ‘No investment after 2025’ SEW-based Needs 2030
with the current with the current with a CO2 price of with a CO2 price of
ETS CO2 price of 28 €/ton ETS CO2 price of 28 €/ton 100 €/ton 100 €/ton
Increased capacity in GW – 50 – 74
Curtailed energy in TWh / year 49 28 49 23
CO2 emissions in Mton / year 630 591 527 477
Figure 2.7 – Key indicators in 2030 in No investment after 2025 and SEW-based Needs, with a CO� price of 28 €/ton
and 100 €/ton
By increasing the marginal cost of electricity generation for In a second step, a higher CO2 price implies a higher level of
highly emitting plants, increasing CO2 price changes the merit investment in cross-border network capacity until 2030, with
order in the 2025 starting grid, with plants with high CO2 emis- an additional 24 GW of capacity increase (compared to the
sions being substituted by plants with lower CO2 emissions. increase with a lower CO2 price). These investments in turn
As a result, CO2 emissions in the ‘No investment after 2025’ decrease CO2 emissions even more, by reducing curtailed
case with a higher CO2 price would already be reduced by energy by an additional 5 TWh / year.
122 Mton / year.
4 100€/ton corresponds to the central climate change avoidance cost at this horizon according to DG MOVE Handbook on external costs of Transport
(2019)

Towards increased market integration
By connecting more consumers with more producers, grid costs in some countries, with direct impact on consumers’
development allows a better use of the cheapest generation. electricity bills. If Europe stops to invest in grid after 2025,
As a result, European countries can exchange electricity to exchanges would be constrained leading to an average
replace expensive generation with cheaper one. On the oppo- marginal cost difference 5 of 7 € / MWh between bidding zones
site, limiting exchange capacity alters market integration and by 2030. The impact is even stronger by 2040 with an average
would result in splits between regional market prices. Frag- marginal cost difference of 35 € / MWh.
mented markets therefore lead to artificially high marginal
Generation costs decrease by 10 billion euro per year by 2040

The capacity increases found in the SEW-based Needs have › In 2030, the main drivers of the investments are the better
a major impact on generation costs: they lead to a reduction access to RES generation (mainly in Germany, Spain and
of costs for Europeans of about 3 bn € / year in 2030 and the Netherlands) and nuclear generation (mainly in France)
10 bn € / year in 2040. These gains far outweigh the cost of that replaces expensive thermal generation (in particular
building the grid, of 17 bn € for the SEW-based Needs 2030 gas in Italy and Poland and coal in Poland).
and 45 bn € for 2040. They are the result of a better use of the
European generation mix:
TWh
60
40
20
-20
-40
Avoided Curtailment Coal Gas Nuclear
Figure 2.8 – Difference in the generation mix of the ENTSO-E area in 2030, between the ‘No investment after 2020’
case and the SEW-based Needs 2030 (in TWh)
TWh
30
20
10
-10
-20
-30
Figure 2.9 – Difference in the generation mix per country in 2030, between the ‘No investment after 2020’ case and
the SEW-based Needs 2030 (in TWh)
5 The price differences discussed here are taken in absolute value (the yearly mean is the mean of the absolute value of the hourly spread) in order to give
some insight on the interest of the exchange.
› In 2040, the main driver remains better access to RES
generation, with the highest avoided curtailed energy
in Germany, Spain, Portugal and Sweden, that replaces
thermal generation from gas mainly in Italy, Greece and
Poland.
TWh
150
100
50
-50
-100
Figure 2.10 – Difference in the generation mix of the ENTSO-E area in 2040, between the ‘No investment after 2025’
case and the SEW-based Needs 2040 (in TWh)
TWh
40
30
20
10
-10
-20
Figure 2.11 – Difference in the generation mix per country in 2040, between the ‘No investment after 2025’ case and
the SEW-based Needs 2040 (in TWh)

Higher electricity exchanges and price convergence between countries
Cross-border capacities increases allow European countries to In addition, increasing cross-border capacities converges Euro-
exchange more energy: in total an additional 256 TWh / year and pean marginal costs 6 to an average spread under 4 € / MWh
467 TWh / year would be exchanged in 2030 and 2040 respec- and 8 € / MWh in 2030 and 2040 respectively. For example,
tively, relative to the situation where Europe would not invest in with no grid investments after 2025, the French-Italian border
the grid after 2025. This brings the total exchange volume to would be congested 95 % of the time in 2030 with an average
909 TWh / year in 2030 and 1,176 TWh / year in 2040. price difference of 24 € / MWh. The SEW-based Needs reduce
< 2.00 €/MWh

2.00–5.00 €/MWh NO 1
5.00–10.00 €/MWh
> 10.00 €/MWh
SE 1
SE 2
FI
NO 2
NO 3
SE 3 EE RU
LV
SE 4
DKW 1 LT
NI DKE 1 RU
BY
IE
UK
PL
NL
DE UA
BE
LU CZ
SK MD
AT HU
RO
CH
FR
SI
HR
IT
ITn RS
BA
BG
ITcn XK
ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL
ES ITs
GR
ITsar
CY
ITsic
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 2.12 – Difference in marginal costs between neighbouring bidding zones in 2030, in ‘No investment after 2020’
case (left) and the SEW-based Needs 2030 (right)
6 Countries with high marginal costs tend to see these costs decrease and countries with low marginal costs tend to see an increase.
annual congestion to 85 % and reduce the average annual price Nevertheless, zeroing electricity market differences between
difference by 13 € / MWh, to an absolute value of 11€/MWh. neighbouring countries is not an objective in itself, as local
By 2040, without any investment after 2025 the French-Italian conditions and grid development costs must be taken into
border could face an average marginal cost difference close account.
to 41 € / MWh. With investment, this price difference would
decrease by 52 % bringing it close to 19 € / MWh.
< 2.00 €/MWh

2.00–5.00 €/MWh NO 1
5.00–10.00 €/MWh
> 10.00 €/MWh
SE 1
SE 2
FI
NO 2
NO 3
SE 3 EE RU
LV
SE 4
DKW 1 LT
NI DKE 1 RU
BY
IE
UK
PL
NL
DE UA
BE
LU CZ
SK MD
AT HU
RO
CH
FR
SI
HR
IT
ITn RS
BA
BG
ITcn XK
ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL
ES ITs
GR
ITsar
CY
ITsic
MA MT
DZ TN

< 2.00 €/MWh
2.00–5.00 €/MWh NO 1
5.00–10.00 €/MWh
> 10.00 €/MWh
SE 1
SE 2
FI
NO 2
NO 3
SE 3 EE RU
LV
SE 4
DKW 1 LT
NI DKE 1 RU
BY
IE
UK
PL
NL
DE UA
BE
LU CZ
SK MD
AT HU
RO
CH
FR
SI
HR
IT
ITn RS
BA
BG
ITcn XK
ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL
ES ITs
GR
ITsar
CY
ITsic
MA MT
DZ TN
Figure 2.13 – Difference in marginal costs between neighbouring bidding zones in 2040, in ‘No investment after 2025’
(left) and in the SEW-based Needs 2040 (right)
< 2.00 €/MWh
2.00–5.00 €/MWh NO 1
5.00–10.00 €/MWh
> 10.00 €/MWh
SE 1
SE 2
FI
NO 2
NO 3
SE 3 EE RU
LV
SE 4
DKW 1 LT
NI DKE 1 RU
BY
IE
UK
PL
NL
DE UA
BE
LU CZ
SK MD
AT HU
RO
CH
FR
SI
HR
IT
ITn RS
BA
BG
ITcn XK
ME MK
ITcs TR
PT AL
ES ITs
GR
ITsar
CY
ITsic
MA MT
DZ TN

Preserving reliable access to electricity
Connecting generation and demand in a reliable manner at The current System needs study did not focus on analyzing
reasonable costs is one of the main tasks of TSOs. Exchange energy-not-served, meaning the amount of final demand
capacities play an important role in this task as they allow that cannot be supplied within a region due to a deficiency
countries to help each other during stressed periods of time of generation or interconnector capacity. Studying energy-not-
(for example a cold wave or a low wind generation period). served requires complex and time-consuming analysis with
multiple climate years to obtain reliable values. However, the
As a consequence, no investment beyond 2025 would have contribution of projects composing the TYNDP 2020 portfolio
a tangible impact on Europeans’ economy and quality of life to security of supply will be assessed in the cost-benefit anal-
by putting at risk the reliability of access to the electricity ysis performed for each project, to be released in November
infrastructure. If renewable energy sources and new elec- 2020.
tricity uses keep developing as foreseen, failure to deliver on
transmission investments could lead to unacceptable levels In addition, the new European Resource Adequacy Assess-
of load shedding, meaning that the final demand could not ment (ERAA) substituting the former Mid Term Adequacy
be supplied at some time. This could result in damaging busi- Forecast (MAF) will address this topic in detail. The first ERAA
ness operability. In order to avoid these consequences, some release will be published in 2021 and will analyze up to the
additional generation would have to be built leading to higher 2030 horizon.
costs for European consumers.
In addition to this mutual support in case of extreme situa-

tions, daily management and reserve sharing would not be
possible at the required level by the 2030 and 2040 scenarios.
3 W
hat if there was no physical
constraint in the grid?
Chapter 2 investigated a future where the transmission grid would be very
constrained with the No investment after 2025 and 2020 cases. The present
Chapter looks at the opposite situation: what would happen if there was zero
limitation to transmitting electricity across Europe? In the following figures there
is unlimited available transmission capacity between countries. This situation is
called ‘copperplate’.
It is important to stress that this is an entirely theoretical In a copperplate situation, by 2030 Europe would save
exercise. In no possible future could all grid constraints 5.4 bn € / year in the copperplate compared to the No
ever be removed, because the copperplate ignores network investment after 2025 situation. Curtailed energy would be
capacity limitations and relies on infinite economic support. reduced by 47 TWh / year and CO2 emissions would be cut
However, the value of the copperplate exercise is to reveal by 76 Mton / year. By 2040 system cost savings would reach
the maximum benefits that could be captured by reinforcing 13.7 bn euro/year, with 191 TWh of avoided curtailed energy
the grid. When compared to the situation where Europe would and 75 Mton / year of saved CO2 emissions.
stop investing in the grid after 2025 presented in the previous
Chapter, the copperplate indicates the absolute maximum
benefits that – in a very theoretical case – could be captured
by unlimited increased cross-border network capacity.
TWh
80
70
60
50
cut
20
15
10
0
No investment after 2025 Copperplate
Figure 3.1 – Curtailed energy in TWh in ‘No investment after 2025’ and Copperplate 2040

Mio. Tons
50
40
30
20
12
cut
10
0
No investment after 2025 Copperplate
Figure 3.2 – CO� emissions in Million tons in ‘No investment after 2025’ and Copperplate 2040
The SEW-based Needs can deliver about 70 % of the

maximum achievable benefits
The copperplate analysis delivers the most insights when The maximum reduction in CO 2 emissions reaches
compared to the benefits delivered by potential network 75 Mton / year in the copperplate in 2040 compared to
increases. To that end, the next figures compare the copper- the situation with no investment after 2025, of which the
plate with the IoSN SEW grid. For both the 2030 and 2040 SEW-based Needs capture 55 Mton / year, so about 70 %.
horizons, the IoSN SEW grid catches a share of the maximum These numbers must be considered while keeping in mind
benefits of the copperplate of about two thirds or 70 %, that the System needs methodology is focusing on opti-
depending on the indicator. Put differently, this means that mizing generation and transmission costs and is not fit to
the combination of potential network increases that optimizes capture all potential CO2 emissions reductions (as explained
system costs up until 2040 would deliver about two thirds of in Section 2.1).
all benefits that can possibly be captured.
The remaining CO 2 emissions in the copperplate, 552
It is important to remember that the ‘No investment after Mton / year in 2030 and 371 Mton / year in 2040, are inherent to
2025’ grid includes projects that will commission between the scenario National Trend. If the scenario being investigated
today and 2025. Benefits delivered by these projects, that foresaw higher levels of RES, such as scenario Distributed
are currently either under construction or in the permitting Energy, remaining CO2 emissions in the copperplate would
phase, are not considered in the 70 %. Therefore, the real share be lower.
of benefits captured by network increases that are either
currently under construction, in permitting phase, planned or In the 2040 horizon, the SEW-based Needs capture
only conceptual is higher than 70 %. 110 TWh / year of the maximum possible saved curtailed
energy of 191 TWh / year, about 57 %.
bn€/year Mt/year
14 650
13 600
12 Copper- 550
11 plate
500
10
450
9
400
8
350
7
300
6
SEW-based 250
5 Copper- Needs
4 plate 200
3 150
2 SEW-based 100
Needs
1 50
2030 2040
0 0
2030 SEW 2040 SEW No No
investment SEW-based Copperplate investment SEW-based Copperplate
Needs Needs
after 2020 after 2025
/ SEW-based Needs / remaining to Copperplate 2030 2040
CO2 CO2
Figure 3.3 – Share of the maximum possible increase in Figure 3.4 – Share of the maximum possible reduction
socio-economic welfare (copperplate) that is captured by in CO� emissions from power generation (copperplate)
the SEW-based Needs, in 2030 and 2040. that is captured by the SEW-based Needs, in 2030 and
2040.
TWh/year
250
225
Why is there still curtailed
200
energy in the copperplate?
175
150 Even in a world without physical constraints

125 for the grid there would still be curtailed energy.
This is due in part to non-dispatchable gener-
100
ation from renewable energy sources, as wind
75
and solar will sometimes be higher than the
50 load on windy and/or sunny days. In addition,
25 some non-RES power plants cannot be turned
0 on and off every hour.
No No
SEW-based Copperplate investment SEW-based Copperplate
investment Needs Needs
after 2020 after 2025
2030 2040
Curtailed energy Curtailed energy
Figure 3.5 – Share of the maximum possible reduction

in curtailed energy (copperplate) that is captured by the
SEW-based Needs, in 2030 and 2040.

How to increase the benefits captured?
As visible in the previous figures, the SEW-based Needs do saved curtailed energy are left to be captured. Several solu-
not capture the entirety of the maximum achievable bene- tions may lead to increasing the captured benefits beyond
fits. In 2040, 4.2 billion euro/year in system costs savings, the SEW-based Needs.
21 Mton / year of avoided CO2 emissions and 81 TWh / year of
There is room for other technologies 0 20 TWh
than transmission
The interplay between other technologies, such as storage
or power-to-gas and transmission, could play a role to
improve the share of the maximum benefits captured by the
SEW-based Needs. In addition, non-transmission technolo-
gies could deliver benefits not included in the copperplate.
Because the System needs methodology is based on cross-
border capacity increases, it does not capture entirely the
potential benefits of non-transmission technologies that do
not translate into increase of cross-border network capacity.
The copperplate must be understood as the maximum poten-
tial benefits that could be achieved by increasing cross-border
network capacity. Other solutions combined with network
increases could take Europe even further.
For example, Figure 3.6 shows the countries with curtailed

energy left in the SEW-based needs 2040, representing a total
of 81 TWh that could be captured by i.e. storage projects.
Another example is that of maritime areas, where the
remaining differences in marginal cost between countries in
the SEW-based needs case show that there is still benefits Figure 3.6 – Curtailed energy in TWh in 2040, difference
to be captured, potentially by hybrid offshore infrastructure between the curtailed energy avoided in the SEW-based
(see Chapter 1). Needs and the curtailed energy left in the Copperplate
Transmission projects with lower costs, a different location, with new tech
nologies or with additional benefits not captured by the current System needs
methodology could contribute to capturing part of the remaining benefits
The 2020 System needs methodology is focused on Most importantly, the benefits delivered by the SEW-based
socio-economic welfare and integration of renewable energy Needs depend on the proposed list of network increases
sources, so benefits of proposed network increases driven provided to the optimizer (see Methodology Chapter). It is
by other considerations, such as CO2 emissions reduction or possible that some of the proposed capacity increases were
security of supply, have not been properly captured. Another too expensive considering the border at hand and the benefits
limitation is that the current System needs methodology does provided, and were therefore not selected in the SEW-based
not identify offshore hybrid projects, i.e. the combination of Needs. It follows that less expensive increases on the same
interconnections and offshore generation. This is due to the border, maybe with a different technology, may have been
fact that identifying optimal generation connection is not included.
among the tasks of the TYNDP. Thus, generation units are
generally part of the scenarios and the cost and routing of Finally, on some borders the copperplate is not attained while
their connection to the network are not part of the System the remaining price spread between bidding zones is high: this
needs optimisation task. indicates potential for additional network increases that have
not yet been thought off by transmission project promoters
and were not proposed to the optimisation.
4 H
ow do results of the 2020
system needs study compare
with 2018 results
The challenges of the current SEW-based Needs, that is, the capacity increases
identified in this 2020 exercise for the 2040 horizon, are significantly higher
than the ones identified in the 2018 exercise, both in the NTC and the zonal test
approaches.
Compared to the 2018 system needs exercise, the 2020

exercise for the 2040 horizon finds a global increase of 37
additional GW of cross border capacity increases, with indi-
vidual capacity increases on almost half of the borders (at
least additional 1 GW on half of them). The highest increases
compared to the 2018 system needs are on the German-Polish
border (with additional 5 GW) and on the Spanish-Portuguese
border (with additional 2.5 GW). 15 borders see less need
for capacity increases that in the 2018 exercise with at least
1 GW less.
The benefits captured by the 2020 SEW-based Needs are also

higher in terms of variable generation cost (socioeconomic
welfare), avoided CO2 reduction and avoided curtailment.
Figure 4.1 illustrates the increase or decrease of the cross-

border capacity needs for 2040, in MW, between the System
needs study of the TYNDP 2018 (realised with an NTC model)
and the System needs study 2020 (done with a zonal model).
The variation corresponds to the difference in the final NTC
values on each border after addition of the identified system
> CY
needs for both studies7.
Comparing the results with the same zonal modelling Figure 4.1 – Increases (blue) and decreases (grey)
approach, the main reasons for the differences in the results of identified needs in the 2020 System needs study
are the scenarios themselves that affect heavily the results, compared to the 2018 System needs study
and the reference grid used that in 2017 was based on the
2027 horizon, while in 2020 is based on the 2025 horizon. This Although results show some differences, ENTSO-E considers
difference with a reduced network as the starting point results that they are consistent enough, confirm the usefulness of the
in higher capacity needs for the 2040 horizon. zonal methodology approach and require continuous evolu-
tion, improvement and consistency check in future System
needs studies.
7 This is a rough comparison considering that the characteristics of a zonal and NTC modeling are quite different

5 N
ew needs in a new set-up:
Challenges for system
Operations – Dynamic study
results
Based on the TYNDP scenarios, previous editions of the to successfully meet the decarbonisation goals at their full
TYNDP System needs study revealed the trends in which extension.
the system is evolving: more RES at all voltage levels, more
power electronics either in generation or HVDC connections, Some of the needs may be addressed through the specifi-
a very variable mix of generation and also large and highly cation of capabilities and services that users (generation or
variable power flows. This combination of trends, observed demand) are expected to provide as part of their connection.
in all synchronous areas, translates to technical challenges in However, additional nationally and regionally defined network
several aspects such as in frequency, voltage or congestion reinforcement projects can also be expected as projects to
management control. address the specific dynamic stability needs.
Having in mind the ambitious political goals set out in the The challenges are real for the system’s security, during the
Clean Energy Package and the European Green Deal, aiming transition and towards a future decarbonized power system.
at making Europe climate neutral in 2050, those trends, and However, for this future decarbonized power system, there
its technical challenges, are becoming more and more evident are also available technical solutions with different levels of
even in areas where the immediate concerns are more miti- maturity and to be applied at all voltage levels. Hence, there
gated, such as Continental Europe. This is reflected in the is a need for strong transmission/distribution coordination,
present report. to involve all system users and to maintain an aligned coop-
eration with research and development.
In order to achieve the climate targets adopted by the EU,
more and more renewable energy generation plants need In the midterm, until these new technical solutions are imple-
to be built. The future system will also need to be operable mented, it may be necessary to take additional measures (e.g.
in real-time by TSOs. The changing environment radically RES or power flow limitations) to ensure system security. As
transforms the way this will be done, leading to new technical such, there is a need to work decisively on the target solu-
needs for the system. It must also be noted that the identified tions and to make them available when necessary so that
needs go beyond the successive incremental steps from the the midterm and probably costly limitations does not last too
changing environment. It is necessary to shift the perspec- long.
tive into creating today the effective boundary conditions
Methodology: Dynamic stability analysis

This chapter looks into the way the system would physically respond to the 2030 and 2040 conditions described
in the TYNDP2020 scenarios. The results it presents are based on analysis of the hourly demand and generation
profiles, testing operational parameters such as inertia, operational requirements such as flexibility, and availa-
bility of ancillary services such as reactive power support, frequency response, and contribution to short circuit
current. It is also based on a collection of more local or regional issues identified across Europe. An explanation
of the technical concepts presented in these chapters, as well as more detailed results and further analysis is
presented in the report ‘Dynamic and operational challenges’ published alongside this System Needs report.
Frequency management: system inertia and local
frequency variations
Frequency variations occur in power systems due to power output of their plants to restore the balance between
mismatches between active power generation and demand. generation and demand. Consequently, the level of inertia
Once a mismatch takes place, the energy stored in the provides a useful assessment of the system operability
rotating masses of the synchronous generating units, by emerging challenges.
virtue of their intrinsic mechanical inertia, provides means
of instantaneously balancing any mismatch. The immediate The following analogy provides a description of the problem
inertial response results in a change in rotor speeds and, having in mind the current trend of more and more synchro-
consequently, the system frequency. Whereas this does nous generators being replaced by converter connected
not solve the power mismatch problem in a sustainable generators… now from the perspective of a tightrope walker
manner, it is essential for instantaneously balancing this where the balancing pole provides instantaneous inertia
mismatch until frequency reserve response providers are support that allows time for his slower stabilising actions
able to respond to the change of frequency and vary the after the tightrope swings …
PREVIOUSLY TODAY IN THE FUTURE

Inertia of the generators the synchronous generators very low levels of inertia will occur
immediately compensated deviations are less and less often connected to the grid – (wihtout balancing pole)
(long balancing pole) Inertia decreases
(balancing pole gets shorter and shorter)
Taking into account the TYNDP 2020 scenarios, the following the synchronous generating units there is inherently that the
duration curves present the percentage of hours in a full year system can benefit from. Inertia contribution from demand
where, for all Synchronous Areas, the intrinsic inertia from is neglected, it has been considered that the self-regulating
generators is above any given value within the curve. This effect of loads is decreasing from the traditional value of
estimated equivalent system inertia H[s] is calculated on the 1–2 %, which provides a conservative approach without
basis of an estimated online generators capacity. The larger impact on the trend identification and scale of the challenge.
the area, the more stored energy in the rotating masses of

Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – CE Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – Nordic
Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – Baltic Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – IE
System inertia trends

As we move from the situations in 2025 to the
2030 and 2040 visions with a higher integra-
tion of RES and more distributed generation,
inertia in all synchronous areas will decrease.
The reduction is noticeable even in large area
such as Continental Europe.
With very low inertia, the system becomes

more vulnerable to experience high frequency
Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – GB excursions and even blackout as result of a
relatively low mismatch between generation
and demand. The impact of this inertia reduc-
tion is especially significant in small synchro-
nous areas.
Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – Main Italian Peninsula Synchronous Area Inertia (H[s]) – Iberian Peninsula
The above duration curves present the percentage of hours A system split is more prone to occur across congested
in a full year where the intrinsic inertia from generators, in the transit corridors and thus interrupting these transits. As
main Italian peninsula and the Iberian Peninsula, is above a transfer of power is increasing in magnitude, distance and
given value. volatility, the power imbalance following a system split event
is likely to increase. This will need to be compensated by
Given the trend of more non-synchronous sources without fast frequency response including fast control reserves or
intrinsic inertia, the same level of imbalance between gener- frequency related defence measures, e.g. the Limited-Fre-
ation and demand today will create a faster and greater quency-Sensitive-Mode Over-frequency technical capability of
change in system frequency in the future. This is because generators or Low Frequency Demand Disconnection (LFDD).
of the reduced levels of inertia to oppose this change. This
trend towards higher frequency sensitivity to incidents for In a system split event the synchronous area splits into sepa-
generation-demand imbalances is important to quantify. If rate islands. In this situation the resulting imbalances and the
frequency changes to quickly or far from nominal the system resulting equivalent system inertia in each island will depend
may become unrecoverable and blackouts will occur. on the specific conditions in the instant they occur. Under
those conditions, it is reasonable to consider the existence of
Whereas small synchronous areas would see large and large initial rate-of-change of frequency (ROCOF) exceeding
rapid frequency excursions that could last for several tens of 2Hz/s (typical value for defence plans and RfG withstand
seconds after a normal generation loss, large synchronous capability for generators). Defence plans 8 are designed
areas would see smaller frequency excursions (unless a to help during severe disturbances but cannot stabilize all
significant disturbance occurs such as a system split event). system split scenarios with extreme imbalances.
The behaviour of RES units must be further developed

so that they react immediately to deviations …
The enhanced capabilities will be as more effective to the system
as they are more widespread and across all voltage levels …
8 According to the SOGL: system defence plan means the technical and organisational measures to be undertaken to prevent the propagation or
deterioration of a disturbance in the transmission system, in order to avoid a wide area state disturbance and blackout state.

Different solutions and mitigation measures contribute being shaped in concert with the changing needs of power
to securing the power system performance in case of systems around the world. In this context, ENTSO-E estab-
disturbances related to frequency (such as synchronous lished the technical group HPoPEIPS (High Penetration of
condensers). These services are more difficult to be obtained Power Electronic Interfaced Power Sources) with the purpose
from variable renewables, and significant effort is likely to of analysing the grid forming capabilities according to the
be needed to develop the existing capacities and bring new system needs, considering also the existence of current
promising technologies into the system such as Grid-forming converter technologies 9, i.e. grid following converters.
Converters (GFC).
The constructive dialogue between all involved parties, TSOs,
Grid-forming Converters are power electronics devices DSOs, research institutes, manufacturers, system users and
designed in control and sizing in order to support the oper- policy makers, should start now to define the relevant tech-
ation of an AC power system under normal, disturbed, and nical requirements for those capabilities, replacing missing
emergency conditions without having to rely on services capabilities inherent to synchronous generators, and a
from synchronous generators. The technology is still under roadmap to make them available to the system in time.
definition. Research is still ongoing as characteristics are still
Flexibility aspects
Unlike conventional generation with costly but controllable Residual load ramps exhibit the changes of residual load (all
sources of primary energy, RES utilize primary energy sources demand minus variable RES) from one hour to the following
that are free but have a variable nature. Hence, the high hour. These curves express the response (in MW/hour) that
installed capacity of RES and their close-to-zero marginal needs to be provided by controllable resources (generating
costs cause conventional generation to be displaced from units, demand and storage) in order to maintain balance
the market. between generation and demand. They also provide an addi-
tional measure into the challenges of operating a system
The variability in the power output from RES, which is driven with reduced amount of controllable generating units, high
by the variability of the primary energy resource, must be flexibility needs in normal operation, and a requirement to
balanced, including forecast output deviations. The response guarantee the necessary volume of frequency reserves in all
(in MW/hour) that needs to be provided by controllable timescales for the cases of unforeseen imbalances between
resources (generating units, demand and storage) to main- active power generation and demand.
tain the balance between generation and demand provide an
additional measure into the challenges of operating a system The following plots display the duration curves of residual
with reduced amount of controllable generating units, high load ramps as the changes of residual load from one hour to
flexibility needs in normal operation, and a requirement to the following one in a synchronous area on a full year. RES
guarantee the necessary volume of frequency reserves in all includes all RES sources except hydro.
timescales for the cases of unforeseen imbalances between
active power generation and demand.
9 Other relevant projects, such as MIGRATE (https://www.h2020-migrate.eu/) and OSMOSE (https://www.osmose-h2020.eu/) accounted with the
collaboration of TSOs.
Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – CE Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – Nordic
Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – GB Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – IE
Residual load ramps

High response (in MW/hour) that needs to be
provided by controllable generating units in
order to maintain balance between generation
and demand is verified in all synchronous
areas.
It is necessary to guarantee the necessary

volume of frequency reserves in all timescales
Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – Baltic for the cases of unforeseen generation and
demand imbalances
Flexibility sources will be necessary both from

the generation and demand side.
Strong interconnection between countries will

be essential to exchange the power flows from
flexibility sources.

Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – Italy Hourly ramps of residual load (MW/h) – Iberian
Peninsula
In a more detailed example, the above plots display the dura- the network side, strong interconnection between areas of
tion curves of residual load ramps as the changes of residual production and consumption will be essential to enable the
load from one hour to the following one in the main Italian power flows from flexibility sources.
peninsula and in the Iberian Peninsula.
Investments to allow large power flows covering vast
In order to cope with this situation new flexibility sources distances, flexibility rewards to providers (also at a local level)
will be necessary both from the generation, storage and and innovations in power electronics (inverters) will be central
demand side. This includes new roles for thermal plants, RES aspects to the solution.
participation, demand side response, and storage. Also from
Transient and voltage stability related aspects
Short-circuit power
Short-circuit power has been commonly used as an indi- Synchronous generation provides greater short circuit current
cator of the system strength and, consequently, the ability than equivalently rated converter connected RES. Therefore
of a synchronous generating unit to remain connected to the as it is replaced by RES, the short circuit level will reduce. Also
network following a large disturbance and remain in synchro- the contribution of a generator to provide short circuit power
nism with the system. A strongly meshed system with enough reduces the further away it is, so as the power generated has
synchronous generation running at all times will have a high to be transmitted by over a long distances to demand centres,
short-circuit level. the short-circuit power level will drop to very low levels.
This will result in faults causing deeper voltage dips, affecting

the efficiency and security of the system.
Reactive power fluctuations

A constant and reliable source of reactive power is essential The technological capabilities of transmission connected
to maintain system voltage, a shortfall will reduce voltage and synchronous generation to provide or absorb reactive power
an excess will raise system voltage. Both high and low volt- is generally significantly higher compared to embedded RES
ages can lead to equipment failure, and consequentially loss with convertor power electronic interfaces. Therefore, reac-
of demand and ultimately blackouts. Some reactive power tive power reserves available on the transmission system
devices on the system also monitor and try to respond to are diminishing as mainly convertor connected RES replaces
correct any excess or shortfall accordingly. Fluctuations can synchronous connected generation and some of this gener-
also lead to errors in these corrective actions which can also ation will connect to the distribution system. Due to this fact
impact on security of supply. it is necessary to ensure that sufficient alternative measures
are made available in order to ensure that voltage excursions
The fluctuations in reactive power demand and reactive can be managed within permissible limits. As seen above,
losses are increasing. This is driven by a number of factors a uniform distribution is the most effective way to control
including: the system voltage. Given the high variability of power tran-
sits and generation mix combinations a good mix between
› the higher reactive power losses associated with larger network-based solutions and generator-based solutions will
power transits; be necessary.
› the reduced reactive demand due to the changing nature The exact location and technology of projects to address the
of the demand, and; assessed needs for increased capacity in 2040 is not known at
this time. These will be highly influential on the future changes
› the increased reactive gain from lightly loaded circuits in system strength and reactive power provision compared to
during low demand periods or during times of high output those at present. Consequently, the corresponding projects
of embedded generation. to compensate these changes to provide adequate dynamic
behaviour can also not be determined at this time. However,
The large fluctuations in reactive power demand and reac- ENTSO-E is committed to and will conduct further studies to
tive losses and the reduction in short-circuit power generally assess the mitigating needs and projects for the scenarios
result in an increase in both instantaneous change in voltage 2040 as capacity related projects are developed.
(voltage step) and the final settled voltage after automated
corrective actions have occurred (post-fault voltage).

How to adapt? Possible solutions for future
system operations
The situation described above and in more details in the › New roles for existing generators, who would become
side-report System dynamic and operational challenges will service providers able to react to changing operating condi-
lead to new needs, whose exact nature and scale will need tions in real time, temporarily or permanently for instance
to be assessed in detail by System Operators. These are from decommissioned nuclear power plants (Germany).
expected to require significant Research and Development
efforts as well as a redefinition of the roles and responsibil- › Real-time monitoring of system inertia to ensure minimum
ities of system participants, and possibly new cross border level of inertia is in the system at all times.
and internal transmission lines. The possible solutions could
include: › Procurement of inertia and reactive power as an ancillary
service and activation when necessary (e.g. during high
› The connection codes technical requirements are essential RES production), using possibly aggregated sources coor-
to ensure that the necessary technical capabilities from dinated with DSOs.
generators, HVDC and demand related to dynamic stability
are enabled. › Constraining RES and placing synchronous generation
with intrinsic inertia in the unit commitment. This measure,
› In the future new capabilities, not yet available, such as which is easy to implement as a short-term solution could
grid-forming converters 10 are currently promising to be be less efficient in the long term.
capable of providing immediate inertial response. Grid
forming converters will need research and development › Investments on the network side: Additional voltage-sup-
so they could prove to be a solution and can in the future porting units are required in the transmission network.
be incorporated in the grid 11. TSOs, DSOs, manufacturers, These units (synchronous condensers, SVCs, STATCOM,
research institutes and policy makers must make an effort HVDC especially with grid forming capabilities) must be
in establishing the scenarios where Grid-forming Converters well distributed so that the various situations and faults can
(GFC) are needed and thus, GFC technical requirements be handled, maintaining stability and avoiding curtailment
must be clearly defined in the future. of RES generation.
› Immediate inertial response can only be presently met by › Observability and controllability of distributed resources by
synchronous generators. After immediate inertial response, the TSOs and DSOs as well as strong coordination between
fast frequency response by other sources than synchronous both operators.
generation are needed: converter-connected generation,
demand side response, storage (including batteries), and
reserves shared between synchronous areas using HVDC.
› Dynamic system needs could lead to a limitation of cross

border exchanges between large and small synchronous
areas in some situations.
10 Implementation Guiding Document – High Penetration of Power Electronic Interfaced Power Sources.
11 An example of related investigations is the MIGRATE project – Massive InteGRATion of power Electronic devices.
6 Next steps
New projects to address the needs
ENTSO-E expects that System needs study results will allow current System needs study or not captured by this study
promoters to study new projects for the long term addressing due to limitations of the methodology. These Future projects
the newly identified needs. That is why ENTSO-E is opening will be assessed in the TYNDP 2020 with a subset of CBA
on the date of publication of this report a second submission indicators. CBA results are expected to be released by early
window to the TYNDP 2020, opened only to projects commis- November, in addition to the 171 projects already included in
sioning after 2035 addressing system needs identified in the the TYNDP 2020 portfolio.
A closer look at 2030

To support the 5th PCI process, ENTSO-E released in addition 2030 at PCI Corridor level (Power System Needs Briefs) and
to this report brief reports providing an overview of needs in at country level (Country Factsheets).
Cost-benefit analysis of transmission and storage projects

The TYNDP 2020 will perform a cost-benefit analysis of 146 Trends. The consistency between the findings of the System
transmission and 25 storage projects 12 and evaluate how they needs study for the 2030 horizon and the CBA results will be
contribute to meeting the system needs for 2030. The CBA analysed and an overview will be included in the TYNDP 2020
considers a wide range of indicators and for the 2030 horizon report, expected to be released by November 2020.
will assess projects in two scenarios in addition to National
Public consultation and ACER opinion

This System needs report and the six Regional investment In January 2021, the entire TYNDP 2020 package will be
plans published alongside it will be submitted to a public submitted to ACER for Opinion. ACER’s comments will be
consultation alongside the rest of the TYNDP 2020 package. implemented as far as possible in this edition of the System
The public consultation is foreseen to begin in November needs study, or alternatively considered for implementation
2020 and to last six weeks. Stakeholders comments will serve in future System needs studies.
to improve the reports. Comments regarding the methodology
itself will be taken into account to improve the future editions
of the System needs study, as the available time does not
allow to re-run the study.
Perspectives for future System needs studies

Each new release of the System needs study allows the needs needs study is an evolving tool to manage increasing uncer-
behind projects to be monitored in future years so that as and tainty in the context of the energy transition. Perspectives for
when needs change, because new scenarios are being inves- future System needs studies are diverse and will be discussed
tigated, projects may be confirmed or redefined. The System with ACER and the European Commission.
12 Draft list of projects in the TYNDP 2020 portfolio

7 IoSN Methodology
The process to identify system needs can be divided into two main steps: (1)
the preparatory step in which the inter-zonal impedances, capacities and loop
flows are determined and bundled as constraints for the zonal model and (2) the
implementation phase where necessary grid reinforcements are identified and
quantified in their impact on the change in social-economic welfare, CO2 emissions
and RES-penetration. The outcome of the System Needs study is a list of target
capacities that provide the most economically efficient means of reducing cross-
border congestion and total system costs.
NODAL DK
SCENARIO NATIONAL TRENDS 2030 & 2040
MARKET
STUDY SZ
DE
CLUSTERING Subdivide countries into

smaller zones grouped by
consumption and generation
DE potentials of each region
SEW-BASED
CAPACITY
ZONAL MARKET INCREASES
REFERENCE PREPARATION STUDY 2040 IMPLEMENTATION
GRID PHASE AND NTC MARKET PHASE
STUDY 2030 SYSTEM NEEDS
ZONAL The zonal model is built. Zonal study allows the

GENERATION Equivalent capacities, changes in Social Economic
AND LOAD mesh rules modelling Welfare, CO6 emissions and
ASSUMPTIONS impedances and loop flows participation of renewable
are implemented as binding generators to be calculated
constraints for the market tool. in response to the impact of
identified system needs.
Figure 7.1 – Overview of the IoSN inputs, process and outputs
The scenarios
The TYNDP 2020 Scenario edition published in June 2020 Projects of Common Interest (PCI) list for energy, as ENTSO-E
represents the first step to quantify the long-term challenges and ENTSOG progress to develop their respective TYNDPs.
of the energy transition on the European electricity and gas
infrastructure. We strongly recommend the reader familiarises themselves
with the content included in the Scenarios Report and Data
The joint work of ENTSO-E and ENTSOG, stakeholders and visualisation platform, as these provide full transparency on
over 80 TSOs covering more than 35 countries provided a the development and outcomes of the scenarios mentioned
basis to allow assessment for the European Commission’s in this report.
ENTSOs 2020 scenarios
The joint scenario building process presents three storylines Distributed Energy (DE), a full energy scenario as well
for TYNDP 2020 compliant with the 1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement,
presents a decentralised approach to the energy transition.
National Trends (NT), the central policy scenario, based On this ground, prosumers actively participate in a society
on the Member States National Energy and Climate Plans driven by small scale decentralised solutions and circular
(NECPs) as well as on EU climate targets. NT is further approaches. Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition
compliant with the EU’s 2030 Climate and Energy Framework reach carbon neutrality by 2050.
(32 % renewables, 32.5 % energy efficiency) and EC 2050
Long-Term Strategy with an agreed climate target of 80–95 % The scenarios are referred to simply by their names (National
CO2-reduction compared to 1990 levels. Trends, Global Ambition and Distributed Energy) to reduce
redundancy.
Global Ambition (GA), a full energy scenario in line with the
1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement, envisions a future char-
acterised by economic development in centralised generation.
Hence, significant cost reductions in emerging technologies
such as offshore wind and Power-to-X are led by economies
of scale.
2020 2025 2030 2040 2050
BEST ESTIMATE NATIONAL TRENDS
n/a 19 % 29 % 12 % 21 % 42 % 15 % 16 % n/a n/a n/a
n/a 8 %
n/a n/a n/a
n/a 20 %
4 % 0 % 12 % 1 % n/a n/a
n/a n/a
4 % 13 % n/a
1 % 1 %
84 % 83 % n/a
1 % 1 %
DISTRIBUTED ENERGY
78 % 85 %
29 % 14 % 21 % 42 % 18 % 21 % 54 % 19 % 23 %
29 % 45 % 54 %
6 % 3 % 18 % 17 % 33 % 32 %
12 % 47 % 86 %
RES-E wind
79 % 60 % 35 %
RES-E solar
RES-E hydro
GLOBAL AMBITION
Direct electrification 32 % 10 % 21 % 45 % 13 % 16 % 50 % 15 % 29 %
27 % 35 % 41 %

Domestic RES Gas Biomethane
Domestic RES Gas Power-to-gas 5 % 0 % 12 % 6 % 19 % 11 %
Decarbonisation of gas supply 11 % 46 % 86 %
Gas import share 83 % 78 % 70 %
Figure 7.2 – Key parameters of the TYNDP2020 scenarios storylines

Bottom-Up: This approach of the scenario building process collects supply and demand data from gas and
electricity TSOs.
Top-Down: The “Top-Down Carbon Budget” scenario building process is an approach that uses the “bottom-up”
model information gathered from the Gas and Electricity TSOs. The methodologies are developed in line with
a Carbon Budget approach.
Full energy scenario: a full energy scenario employs a holistic view of the European energy system, thus
capturing all fuel and sectors as well as a full picture of primary energy demand
DECARBONISATION AMBITION LEVEL
80 % 100 % Lenght of arc reflects

DE-CENTRALISATION
the range of possible

Game Changer & 2050 outcomes
60 % DE-CENTRALISED
Cost Reduction 2040
Management INNOVATION
50 % 2040 Scenario Year &
2030 Scenario Button
National Trends
40 %
National Trends
2025 NECP alignment
2025 Merit Order Switch

STATUS QUO 20 % 100 % Gas before Coal
2030
Global Ambition
2040
2050 Distributed Engery
40 %
CENTRALISATION
2030
50 %
Game Changer &
2040
Cost Reduction
2050 CENTRALISED
Management 60 % INNOVATION
80 % 100 %
Figure 7.3 - Key drivers of scenario storylines
Central role of National Trends in the System Needs study

National Trends is the central scenario of the TYNDP 2020 In the next phase of the TYNDP, a cost-benefit analysis
and the only scenario employed in the System needs study. (CBA) of electricity transmission and storage projects will be
Because it was designed to reflect EU Member States’ performed for National Trends (2025 and 2030 time horizons).
National Energy and Climate Plans (NECP), its use ensures Additionally, to illustrate the robustness of the proposed infra-
the relevance of identified needs with respect to EU energy structure projects, they will also be assessed with a subset of
and climate targets. CBA parameters for Distributed Energy and Global Ambition
scenarios (2030 time horizon). Projects will also be assessed
in a ‘Current Trends’ sensitivity, as requested by ACER.
National Trends alignment with NECPs
The bottom-up scenario National Trends relies on best-avail- on the governance of the energy union and climate action
able information for the timeframe 2020 to 2040, directly (EU/2018/1999)) for the period 2021 to 2030 (and every
collected from the gas and electricity TSOs. The National subsequent ten year period). Member States had to submit
Trends related data collection provided an important opportu- draft NECPs by 31 December 2018. Most of the draft NECPs
nity to collect in-depth information stemming from the National provide an impact assessment regarding energy consump-
Energy and Climate Plans, National Development Plans and tion and supply and ensure that the Union’s 2030 targets for
other nationally recognized studies. Since most of the NECPs greenhouse gas emission reductions, renewable energy, energy
are based on an impact assessment until 2030, the TSOs’ efficiency and electricity interconnection are met.
knowledge was key to build a consistent scenario until 2040.
After NECPs submission by Member States on December 2018,
National Trends follows the trends developing the climate the European Commission published its review on June 2019,
policies on a national level. The governance of the energy including specific recommendations. Member States were then
union and climate action rules, which entered into force on required to update their NECP and submit a final version to the
December 2018, requires EU member states to develop NECP European Commission possibly by the end of 2020.
that cover the five dimensions of the energy union (Regulation
Scenarios outlook for power to gas
Power to gas: Technology that uses electricity to produce hydrogen (Power to Hydrogen – P2H�) by splitting
water into oxygen and hydrogen (electrolysis). The hydrogen produced can then be combined with CO� to
obtain synthetic methane (Power to Methane – P2CH�).
With increasing climate ambitions and progressing energy ENTSO-E and ENTSOG have assessed the integration of P2G
transition both the electricity and gas sector face challenges facilities in their scenarios by developing methodologies for
to achieve the decarbonisation target, and one of them is the their quantification, distribution and optimisation. For instance,
interaction of these two sectors. Renewable electricity gener- in National Trends the economic viability of Power to Gas facil-
ation is usually asynchronous and at present, the electricity ities is quantified by calculating the minimum full load hours
grid is pushed to its limits in the integration of further variable for the facility to be economic viable in a country. The actual
generation. On the other hand, the gas sector needs to be P2G production can vary depending on other factors, such
decarbonised in order to be able to implement an option in a as the distance of the RES facilities to the grid and the local
strongly or completely decarbonised energy system. Power to excess electricity duration curve. A detailed description of this
gas offers a solution to both problems, relieving stress in the and the P2G methodologies used for Distributed Energy and
electrical grid by storing excess electricity from renewables in Global Ambition (National Trends considers the information
carbon neutral gaseous fuels. provided by TSOs and NECPs) can be found in the Scenario
Building Guidelines.

GW
500
400
300
200
100
0
Distributed Energy Global Ambition National Trends Distributed Energy Global Ambition National Trends
2030 2040
Solar PV Wind Offshore Wind Onshore Electrolyser Capacity
Figure 7.6 – Capacity for hydrogen and derived fuels production
TWh
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Distributed Energy Global Ambition Distributed Energy Global Ambition National Trends
2030 2040
Curtailed RES Solar PV Wind Offshore Wind Onshore
Figure 7.7 – Generation mix for hydrogen and derived fuels production
he reference grid: starting point of the identification of

T
system needs
Every study of the transmission grid aimed at identifying In the TYNDP 2020, the same reference grid is being used for
system needs requires a single reference point against which the identification of system needs and for the cost-benefit
all scenarios and needs combinations can be compared to. analysis of projects (included in the TYNDP 2020 report, to be
This single reference point, called ‘reference grid’, is usually released later this year). Figure 7.8 illustrates how the refer-
composed of the existing grid and of the projects that are ence grid serves as starting point for the System Needs study.
likely to be implemented by the date of the scenario that is
considered in the study.
Role of the Reference Grid in the System Needs Studies: starting Point
Existing situation: Starting point: A methodology allows to End point:

no action Reference Grid identify successive network optimal IoSN SEW grid
improvements
Figure 7.8 – Role of the Reference Grid in the System needs study
Elements taken into consideration when building the starting point
Lessons learnt from the TYNDP 2018
In 2018 as in previous TYNDPs, the reference grid was built › On the one hand, the reference grid should include at least
based on fixed criteria including the commissioning year and the most mature projects. These include the transmission
project status. This approach presented two major drawbacks: projects that are currently under construction and those in
Fixed criteria have the inconvenience of not being consistently the permitting process for which it is fairly certain that they
applicable across Europe, because they rely on indicators which will be completed by the year considered as the reference.
are not consistently described in all European countries. For When commissioned, these projects will address system
instance, the stages of the permitting procedure differ among needs already identified in previous TYNDPs. By including
countries. Additionally, some criteria, such as the commis- these projects in the reference grid, the study will more
sioning year, rely on information supplied by project promoters accurately show the needs for less certain additional rein-
and is not verifiable by regulatory authorities or by ENTSO-E. forcements to the system.
To maximise the reliability of the results, a realistic and tech- › On the other hand, the reference grid must be compact
nically sound starting point is required. More specifically, the enough to identify areas where the current projects are not
reference grid for the system needs study should strike a sufficient to respond to the system needs, and to check
balance between an unnecessarily underestimated grid and whether planned projects exceed the system needs. Results
an overly-developed one: will then allow to confirm existing projects or redefine
projects’ scope and timeline.
Compliance with the CBA Guideline
According to the draft CBA Guideline 3.0, only those projects process, which is the case of the System Needs study, the CBA
whose timely commissioning is reasonably certain can Guideline recommends to apply expert’s judgement supported
be included in the reference grid, and if the study involves by studies with a conservative forecast of the future grid, such
countries with different procedures regarding the permitting as ENTSO-E’s Mid-Term Adequacy forecast (MAF) 13.
13 For more details, read the draft CBA Guideline (3rd CBA Guideline for cost benefit analysis of grid development projects, version submitted to ACER for
opinion, February 2020)

Step 1: MAF 2025 as a basis
Considering the elements detailed above, ENTSO-E decided Because it is used for adequacy assessment, the MAF 2019
to use the MAF 2019 grid as the base for the TYNDP 2020’s reference grid (hereinafter MAF2025) is conservative by
reference grid. The MAF grid contains all projects under nature. Adequacy studies require realistic assumptions on
construction or for which there is a high confidence in their the network and market capacity available. Overestimated
availability, high enough to be used as a basis for security of available interconnection capacities would lead to underes-
supply analysis. It is built for the year 2025 and is based on timating adequacy issues while underestimating network
expert knowledge. capacities would most likely lead to overestimating adequacy
issues in the mid-term.
Step 2 – Expert view

The MAF2025 grid consists of net transfer capacities implemented for this TYNDP, more on this below. This was
(NTCs) per border and direction that are not attributed to done by adding to the existing network a list of projects
specific transmission projects. To build the TYNDP 2020 (internal or interconnectors), either already under construction
reference grid, TSO experts had to attribute these NTCs to or foreseen to be available by 2025, that, aggregated, matched
specific projects to prepare the inputs for the methodology the expected transfer capacities.
Step 3 – Input of ACER and NRAs

ENTSO-E shared an initial version of the reference grid with grid. However, ENTSO-E decided to keep the above-mentioned
the European Commission, ACER and national regulatory expert knowledge approach. Therefore, not all ACER recom-
authorities in June 2019. ACER and NRAs provided recommendations have been implemented.
mendations for projects to be included or excluded, according
to fixed criteria chosen by ACER for inclusion of projects in The list of projects considered in the reference grid is included
the reference grid. This exchange allowed ENTSO-E to imple- in Appendix 2.
ment corrections and improve the robustness of the reference
onal methodology for the identification of
Z
system needs in 2040
The main improvements developed in this release are consid- This methodology was already tested in the TYNDP 2018
ering market and network in one model together, and a model process as an alternative approach of identification of system
expansion algorithm. The objective with these improvements needs. The identification of system needs in 2018 was based
was to have more granularity than in previous System Needs purely on NTC with one zone per country. The zonal method-
exercises, consider physical flows (by considering Kirchhoff’s ology was tested separately, based on the model developed
Laws) but at the same time have reasonable computation by e-Highway2050.
times.
The 2020 System needs study is based on about 100 nodes,
Therefore, for the purpose of the Identification of System a reduced grid model is produced to link these nodes with
Needs, a zonal model has been used. This zonal model repre- each other. Some constraints are applied on the links between
sents a compromise between: nodes in order to simulate Kirchhoff’s Laws. As a result, the
optimal dispatch can be assessed at the European level,
› Market simulations, which compute the optimal generation taking into account some physical limits on the network. This
dispatch but for which the grid is only taken into account is a great advantage of this methodology that merged both
through the exchange capacities applied between bidding market and network simulations in one single step avoiding
zones. loops between market and network models.
› Network simulations, which compute the flow on each

line but for which optimal dispatch cannot be computed in
reasonable time.
Division of Europe into zones

Starting from thousands of nodes over the pan-European For this study, the division has taken inspiration from the
network of the reference grid, the grid is reduced to a reason- e-Highway 2050 study (2013). The criteria to select the zones
able and workable number of zones (around 100). In order were the administrative regions mixed with some adjustments
to better model the flow, this grid reduction has to take into in order to better fit network physical bottlenecks.
account the bottlenecks that occur on the actual network.
Figure 7.9 - Grid reduction: from a nodal to a zonal model (each circle represents a zone)

Generation and load assumption at zonal level
For each of the zones defined, the local electric system hypoth- The climate model is also differentiated into zones in order to
esis, corresponding to the scenario under study, were collected: take into account climate sensitive specificities of the zones
(e.g. RES load factor, hydro inflows and thermal sensitive load).
› The installed capacity for each generation type; Thus, for each zone, the time series 14 for load, non-dispatchable
› The load level taking into account the load types specific generation, hydro inflows and thermal generation availabilities
to each zone (industry, tertiary, residential area …). are defined. The sum, at country level, of these zonal hypoth-
eses must result into the corresponding national hypothesis.
Grid reduction: from a detailed to a simplified AC network

Based on a detailed grid topology, a simplified network is built dummy characteristics of the simplified network, Kirchhoff’s
between the zones. This network must abide by Kirchhoff’s circuit laws can be applied through binding constraints over
voltage and current laws. To do so, each of the links has to the flow of each link. These constraints approximately mimic
be defined through dummy technical characteristics of the the flows seen on a detailed grid model 15.
lines such as impedance and maximal capacities. These
dummy technical characteristics are computed using the Because the grid within a zone is not modelled, no congestion
actual impedance and maximal capacities of each network can occur inside a zone. But, in order to take into considera-
component: they are obtained through an optimization process tion that each zone is in reality made of several actual nodes,
that minimizes the difference between the behaviour of this some loop flows are modelled on the reduced network.
reduced grid and the one of the detailed network. With the
Figure 7.10 – European zonal model used for the identification of system needs (including the reference grid)*
* Countries outside of the ENTSO-E area, Turkey excepted, are not modelled. Exchanges are taken into account through a time series profile.
14 For different climate years

15 M. Doquet, "Zonal Reduction of Large Power Systems: Assessment of an Optimal Grid Model Accounting for Loop Flows," in IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 503-512, Jan. 2015.
Expansion model and computation of needs
The System needs study assesses the potential optimal The final list of investments is the one that will give the total
interconnection level between countries. Starting from the system cost closest to the lower bond.
reference grid, an expansion model optimizes the total
system costs based on optimal interconnection capacity The optimizer takes in the input all possible increases, but not
increases. From a panel of possible network increases the all of them are included in the solution. If several projects are
model chooses the best combination that minimizes the possible solutions to the same need, the optimizer will select
total system costs, composed of total network investment the best one to fulfil the final objective of minimizing the total
and generation costs. The cost assumptions of the intercon- system costs.
nection capacity increases are derived from the cost assump-
tions of the TYNDP 2020 projects and additional conceptual With the resulting 2040 optimized grid, the benefits provided
projects, provided by member TSOs, that are available at the to the electric system by these investments can then be
assessed borders. computed:
The optimisation plan is run on an expansion module that › The decrease of generation costs (socio-economic welfare)
implements an iterative approach to reduce total system due to the additional possible exchange between countries.
costs. This process is summarized in the following algorithm:
› The CO2 emission reduction due to the change in the gener-
1. T
he expansion model selects a set of potential capacity ation plan.
increases from the available list 16.
› The reduction in curtailed energy due to the additional
2. T
he capacity increases are implemented on the zonal possible exchange.
model. The investment costs are given by the costs
assumptions provided by the available project portfolio.
3. A
market simulation is run on an hourly dispatch on the
zonal grid.
a) The dispatch model outputs the optimal dispatch per

hour in the target year and allows the total generation
costs of the dispatch pool to be calculated.
b) The total system cost is then computed by adding the

investment costs of identified investment candidates
to the previously calculated total generation cost. In
other words, the total system costs can be calculated
as following:
Total System Costs
= Total Generation Costs (existing dispatch units)
+ Total nework investment Costs (investment
Candidates)
4. T
he expansion model assesses a lower bound to the total
system costs.
5. I f the difference between the resulting total system cost

and the lower bound is greater than an acceptable range,
the process returns to Step 1.
16 At the first iteration, the set is chosen randomly, while at the following ones, it is chosen using the result of the previous iteration.

Standard Net Transfer Capacity model for 2030
For the horizon 2030, the System needs study did not use phase of the TYNDP, i.e. the cost-benefit analysis of projects
a zonal model but a standard net transfer capacity model which also relies on an NTC model. Related to this alignment
(NTC), with a model that only considers one zone per country with the CBA, the NTC model included Tunisia, which is not
and the cross-border capacity is the NTC. The use of an NTC included in the 2040 horizon.
model for the 2030 horizon ensures consistency with the next
250 NTC (MW)

1,000 NTC (MW)
2,500 NTC (MW)
5,000 NTC (MW)
10,000 NTC (MW)
ZONE/COUNTRY
DIRECTION
Figure 7.11 – NTC in 2025 in direct (left) and opposite (right) direction
These are the only two differences in methodology between
the two time horizons. The methodology for the expansion
model and computation of needs described in section 7.3.4
applies identically to the 2030 horizon.
250 NTC (MW)

1,000 NTC (MW)
2,500 NTC (MW)
5,000 NTC (MW)
10,000 NTC (MW)
ZONE/COUNTRY
DIRECTION

cope and limits of the identification of
S
system needs
Like all modelling endeavours, the System needs study the numerous quality checks performed and the consistency
has a number of limitations related to the data, tools and checks done with the preliminary results of the cost-benefit
assumptions used. It is important to note that the identifica- analysis of TYNDP 2020 projects tend to confirm the robust-
tion of system needs is a partial exercise and that different ness of the results.
assumptions may lead to different conclusions. However,
A partial exercise focused on the optimisation of overall system costs

The System needs methodology is not designed to identify generation. This is due to the fact that identifying optimal
potential increases that might be beneficial on other grounds generation connection is not among the tasks of the TYNDP.
than overall system costs, such as improving security of Thus, generation units are generally part of the scenarios and
supply or reduction of CO2 emissions. However, benefits of the cost and routing of their connection to the network are not
capacity increases in terms of decreased CO2 emissions are part of the System needs study optimisation task.
taken into account via generation costs and ETS CO2 price.
Among the costs considered, the identification of system
Another limitation is that the current identification of system needs methodology does not consider network losses.
needs methodology does not identify offshore hybrid projects, Losses of specific projects will be assessed in the costs-ben-
i.e. the combination of interconnections and offshore efit analysis phase of the TYNDP.
Scenarios and climate year

The System needs study investigates one potential future, for three climate years, a wet year (2007), a dry year and an
described in the scenarios National Trends 2030 and National ‘average’ year. 2007 was chosen for the System needs study
Trends 2040. National Trends is aligned with the National because it is more representative in terms of hours per year
Energy and Climate Plans of the respective Member States, and weighs for 50 % in the CBA results. Because 2007 is a
which translate the European targets to country-specific wet year, the values for expected generation capacities are
objectives for 2030. Country-specific data was collected not necessarily reflective of reality and may be subject to
from TSOs for 2030 and 2040. Different assumptions, such an over-estimation of hydro penetration. As hydro capacity
as those made in other TYNDP 2020 scenarios Distributed plays an important role in the stability of the European system,
Energy and Global Ambition, would likely bring different acting as its international battery and providing significant
results. balancing and inertial services, an over-estimation of this
generation asset may distort the results slightly. The impact
System needs computations used data from ENTSO-E’s is likely the strongest on the results for Nordic countries with
pan-European Climate Database Climate for the year 2007. high share of hydro generation, for example when considering
By comparison, the CBA of TYNDP projects is performed the net balance.
Costs data
As described in section 7.3.4, the optimisation model identi- higher than that of the most cost-efficient combination has
fies the best combination of network increases that minimizes been investigated in Chapter 1.
total system costs, composed of total network investment
and generation costs. Regarding network investments, the In addition, costs are not fully reflective of costs associated
cost assumptions of the capacity increases were collected with internal reinforcement and congestion management
from project promoters. Because their commissioning could that would be required to make the increases in cross-border
be distant from now and because they are not yet precisely capacity possible. In many cases, in particular in Eastern
defined (some reinforcements correspond to completely new Europe, increasing cross-border capacity would require signif-
ideas), their costs are still uncertain. Because variations in icant reinforcement of internal networks because electricity
costs may impact the outcome of the optimisation, an tends to transit, crossing countries on its way from places
overview of network increases belonging to combinations with high RES generation to places with high load, or from
of increases for which the total system cost is just slightly places with lower prices to places with higher prices.
Modelling tool
Because of resources constraints, the decision was taken
to run the study on only one tool (Antares). The consistency
checks performed with the preliminary CBA results have
shown that results are coherent.

Appendices
Appendix 1 – Glossary
Term Acronym Definition
EU Agency established in 2011 by the Third Energy Package legislation as an independent body to
Agency for the Cooperation of Energy
ACER foster the integration and completion of the European Internal Energy Market both for electricity and
Regulators
natural gas.
One of the four priority corridors for electricity identified by the TEN-E Regulation. Interconnections
Baltic Energy Market Interconnection between Member States in the Baltic region and the strengthening of internal grid infrastructure, to end
BEMIP Electricity
Plan in electricity the energy isolation of the Baltic States and to foster market integration; this includes working towards
the integration of renewable energy in the region.
This approach of the scenario building process collects supply and demand data from Gas and
Bottom-Up
Electricity TSOs.
This is the amount of carbon dioxide the world can emit while still having a likely chance of limiting
Carbon budget average global temperature rise to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, an internationally agreed-upon
target.
Carbon Capture and Storage CCS Process of sequestrating CO2 and storing it in such a way that it will not enter the atmosphere.
The captured CO2, instead of being stored in geological formations, is used to create other products,
Carbon Capture and Usage CCU
such as plastic.
Combined Heat and Power CHP Combined heat and power generation.
The revenue derived by interconnector owners from the sale of the interconnector capacity through
Congestion revenue / rent auctions. In general, the value of the congestion rent is equal to the price differential between the two
connected markets, multiplied by the capacity of the interconnector.
The revenue derived by interconnector owners from the sale of the interconnector capacity through
auctions. In general, the value of the congestion rent is equal to the price differential between the two
connected markets, multiplied by the capacity of the interconnector.
Means a situation in which an interconnection linking national transmission networks cannot
accommodate all physical flows resulting from international trade requested by market participants,
Congestion
because of a lack of capacity of the interconnectors and/or the national transmission systems
concerned.
21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
COP21
organised in 2015, where participating states reached the Paris Agreement.
Cost-benefit analysis CBA Analysis carried out to define to what extent a project is worthwhile from a social perspective.
Curtailment is a reduction in the output of a generator from otherwise available resources (e. g. wind or
sunlight), typically on an unintentional basis. Curtailments can result when operators or utilities control
Curtailed electricity
wind and solar generators to reduce output to minimize congestion of transmission or otherwise
manage the system or achieve the optimum mix of resources.
Consumers have an active role in softening peaks in energy demand by changing their energy
Demand side response DSR
consumption according to the energy price and availability.
Study funded by the European Commission aimed at building a modular development plan for the
e-Highway2050 EH2050 European transmission network from 2020 to 2050, led by a consortium including ENTSO-E and 15
TSOs from 2012 to 2015 (to e-Highway2050 website).
Four priority corridors for electricity identify by the TEN-E Regulation: North Seas offshore grid (NSOG);
North-south electricity interconnections in western Europe (NSI West Electricity); North-south
Electricity corridors
electricity interconnections in central eastern and south eastern Europe (NSI East Electricity); Baltic
Energy Market Interconnection Plan in electricity (BEMIP Electricity).
Expected amount of energy not being served to consumers by the system during the period considered
Energy not served ENS
due to system capacity shortages or unexpected severe power outages.
Represents the aggregated capacity of the physical infrastructure connecting nodes in reality; it is not
only set by the transmission capacities of cross-border lines but also by the ratings of so-called
Grid transfer capacity GTC “critical” domestic components. The GTC value is thus generally not equal to the sum of the capacities
of the physical lines that are represented by this branch; it is represented by a typical value across the
year.
To harmonise and liberalise the EU’s internal energy market, measures have been adopted since 1996
to address market access, transparency and regulation, consumer protection, supporting interconnec-
Internal Energy Market IEM
tion, and adequate levels of supply. These measures aim to build a more competitive, customer-cen-
tred, flexible and non-discriminatory EU electricity market with market-based supply prices.
Term Acronym Definition
Investment (in the TYNDP) Individual equipment or facility, such as a transmission line, a cable or a substation.
ENTSO-E’s yearly pan-European monitoring assessment of power system resource adequacy spanning
Mid-term adequacy forecast MAF
a timeframe from one to ten years ahead.
The maximum total exchange programme between two adjacent control areas compatible with security
Net transfer capacity NTC standards applicable in all control areas of the synchronous area and taking into account the technical
uncertainties on future network conditions.
The rule according to which elements remaining in operation within a TSO’s responsibility area after a
N-1 criterion contingency from the contingency list must be capable of accommodating the new operational
situation without violating operational security limits.
National Energy and Climate Plans are the new framework within which EU Member States have to
plan, in an integrated manner, their climate and energy objectives, targets, policies and measures for
the European Commission. Countries will have to develop NECPs on a ten-year rolling basis, with an
National Energy and Climate Plan NECP
update halfway through the implementation period. The NECPs covering the first period from 2021 to
2030 will have to ensure that the Union’s 2030 targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions,
renewable energy, energy efficiency and electricity interconnection are met.
One of the four priority corridors for electricity identified by the TEN-E Regulation. Integrated offshore
electricity grid development and related interconnectors in the North Sea, Irish Sea, English Channel,
North Seas offshore grid NSOG
Baltic Sea and neighbouring waters to transport electricity from renewable offshore energy sources to
centres of consumption and storage and to increase cross-border electricity exchange.
North-south electricity interconnections One of the four priority corridors for electricity identified by the TEN-E Regulation. Interconnections and
in central eastern and south eastern NSI East Electricity internal lines in north-south and east-west directions to complete the EU internal energy market and
Europe integrate renewable energy sources.
One of the four priority corridors for electricity identified by the TEN-E Regulation. Interconnections
North-south electricity interconnections between EU countries in this region and with the Mediterranean area including the Iberian peninsula, in
NSI West Electricity
in western Europe particular to integrate electricity from renewable energy sources and reinforce internal grid
infrastructures to promote market integration in the region.
Technology that uses electricity to produce hydrogen (Power to Hydrogen – P2H2) by splitting water
Power to gas P2G into oxygen and hydrogen (electrolysis). The hydrogen produced can then be combined with CO2 to
obtain synthetic methane (Power to Methane – P2CH4).
Either a single investment or a set of investments, clustered together to form a project, in order to
Project (in the TYNDP)
achieve a common goal.
A project which meets the general and at least one of the specific criteria defined in Art. 4 of the TEN-E
Project of common interest PCI Regulation and which has been granted the label of PCI project according to the provisions of the
TEN-E Regulation.
Methodology that considers each new network investment/project (line, substation, PST or other
Put IN one at the Time PINT transmission network device) on the given network structure one by one and evaluates the load flows
over the lines with and without the examined network reinforcement.
The existing network plus all mature TYNDP developments, allowing the application of the TOOT
Reference grid
approach.
Cross-border capacity of the reference grid used for applying the TOOT/PINT methodology in the
Reference capacity
assessment according to the CBA.
A set of assumptions for modelling purposes related to a specific future situation in which certain
Scenario conditions regarding electricity and gas demand and supply, infrastructures, fuel prices and global
context occur.
A set of assumptions for modelling purposes related to a specific future situation in which certain
Take Out One at the Time TOOT conditions regarding electricity and gas demand and supply, infrastructures, fuel prices and global
context occur.
The Union-wide report carried out by ENTSO-E every other year as (TYNDP) part of its regulatory
Ten-Year Network Development Plan TYNDP
obligation as defined under Article 8, para 10 of Regulation (EC) 714 / 2009.
The “Top-Down Carbon Budget” scenario building process is an approach that uses the “bottom-up”
Top-Down model information gathered from the gas and electricity TSOs. The methodologies are developed in
line with the Carbon Budget approach.
Policy focused on linking the energy infrastructure of EU countries. It identifies nine priority corridors
Trans-European Networks for Energy TEN-E
(including 4 for electricity) and three priority thematic areas.

Appendix 2 – List of projects included in
the reference grid
The TYNDP2020 reference grid is composed of the existing grid and of the projects listed in the following table. Most of these
projects are included in the TYNDP2020 portfolio.
Project ID Project name In TYNDP2020 portfolio?
1 RES in north of Portugal Yes
4 Interconnection Portugal-Spain Yes
13 Baza project No
16 Biscay Gulf Yes
21 Italy-France No
23 FR-BE I: Avelin/Mastaing-Avelgem-Horta HTLS Yes
26 Reschenpass Interconnector Project Yes
28 Italy-Montenegro Yes
33 Central Northern Italy Yes
36 Kriegers Flak CGS Yes
37 Norway – Germany, NordLink Yes
39 DKW-DE, step 3 Yes
48 New SK-HU intercon. – phase 1 Yes
62 Estonia-Latvia 3rd IC Yes
75 Modular Offshore Grid (MOG) No
77 Anglo-Scottish -1 No
78 South West Cluster Yes
81 North South Interconnector Yes
85 Integration of RES in Alentejo Yes
92 ALEGrO Yes
94 GerPol Improvements Yes
103 Reinforcements Ring NL phase I Yes
110 Norway-Great Britain, North Sea Link Yes
111 3rd AC Finland-Sweden north Yes
120 MOG II: connection of up to 2 GW additional offshore wind Belgium Yes
123 LitPol Link Stage 2 Yes
124 NordBalt phase 2 Yes
127 Central Southern Italy Yes
132 HVDC Line A-North Yes
134 N-S Western DE_section South No
135 N-S Western DE_parallel lines No
138 Black Sea Corridor Yes
142 CSE4 Yes
144 Mid Continental East corridor Yes
164 N-S Eastern DE_Central section No
167 Viking DKW-GB Yes
172 ElecLink Yes
173 FR-BE II: PSTs Aubange-Moulaine Yes
183 DKW-DE, Westcoast Yes
Project ID Project name In TYNDP2020 portfolio?
186 East of Austria Yes
190 NorthConnect Yes
191 OWP TenneT Northsea Part 2 No
192 OWP Northsea TenneT Part 3 No
197 N-S Finland P1 stage 2 Yes
200 CZ Northwest-South corridor Yes
203 Morella-La Plana (previosly Aragón-Castellon) No
207 Reinforcement Northwestern DE Yes
208 N-S Western DE_section North_1 Yes
209 Reinforcement Northeastern DE No
230 GerPol Power Bridge I Yes
236 Internal Belgian Backbone West: HTLS upgrade Horta-Mercator No
240 380-kV-grid enhancement between Area Güstrow and Wolmirstedt No
242 Offshore Wind Baltic Sea (I) No
245 Upgrade Meeden – Diele Yes
248 Offshore Wind Baltic Sea (II) No
254 HVDC Ultranet Osterath to Philipsburg Yes
255 Connection Navarra-Basque Country No
258 Westcoast line Yes
262 Belgium-Netherlands: Zandvliet-Rilland Yes
266 Swiss Ellipse I Yes
269 Uprate the western 220kV Sevilla Ring No
299 SACOI3 Yes
309 NeuConnect Yes
312 St. Peter (AT) – Tauern (AT) Yes
313 Isar/Altheim/Ottenhofen (DE) – St.Peter (AT) Yes
320 Slovenia-Hungary/Croatia interconnection Yes
336 Prati (IT) – Steinach (AT) Yes
337 Conneforde-Merzen No
348 NoordWest380 NL Yes
350 South Balkan Corridor Yes
378 Transformer Gatica Yes
379 Uprate Gatica lines Yes
1055 Interconnection of Crete to the Mainland System of Greece Yes
348 NoordWest380 NL Yes
350 South Balkan Corridor Yes
378 Transformer Gatica Yes
379 Uprate Gatica lines Yes
1055 Interconnection of Crete to the Mainland System of Greece Yes

Appendix 3 – Candidate capacity increases and
cost assumptions
The following capacity increases were proposed to the optimiser. The capacity increases listed in this appendix include projects
submitted to the TYNDP 2020 and conceptual increases that do not correspond to existing projects. Cost assumptions are
theoretical assumptions that include the assumed costs of reinforcement of internal networks that would be necessary for the
cross-border capacity increases. When there are several values on the same border, a sequential consideration of the capacity
increases has been proposed to the optimiser.
Border Capacity CAPEX Border Capacity CAPEX Border Capacity CAPEX Border Capacity CAPEX
(MW) (M€) (MW) (M€) (MW) (M€) (MW) (M€)
AT00-CH00 400 114 ES00-FR00 1500 1470 AT00-ITN1 1000 1305 CY00-GR03 500 1000
AT00-CH00 200 41 FI00-SE02 800 488 AT00-SI00 500 127 CY00-GR03 1000 1700
AT00-DE00 1500 197 FR00-IE00 700 930 AT00-SI00 1000 688 CY00-GR03 1500 3000
AT00-DE00 460 174 FR00-UK00 1400 850 AT00-SK00 1000 456 CY00-GR03 2000 4300
AT00-DE00 100 649 HR00-RS00 600 19 BA00-HR00 500 192 CZ00-DE00 1000 1450
AT00-DE00 1000 206 HU00-RO00 1117 200 BA00-HR00 1000 384 CZ00-DE00 2000 2900
AT00-DE00 140 44 IE00-UKNI 570 396 BA00-ME00 500 58 CZ00-DE00 3000 4340
AT00-ITN1 500 135 ITCN-ITCS 1000 564 BA00-ME00 1000 116 CZ00-DE00 3500 5800
AT00-SI00 260 210 ITCN-ITN1 1000 564 BA00-ME00 1500 174 CZ00-PL00 500 650
AT00-SI00 240 175 ITCS-ITS1 200 378 BA00-ME00 2000 225 CZ00-PL00 1000 780
BA00-HR00 500 83 ITCS-ITSI 1000 1135 BA00-RS00 500 45 CZ00-PL00 1500 1170
BA00-HR00 644 160 ITCS-ME00 600 362 BE00-DE00 1000 750 CZ00-SK00 500 293
BA00-RS00 850 142 ITN1-SI00 1000 755 BE00-DE00 2000 1450 CZ00-SK00 1000 328
BA00-RS00 500 53 ITSA-ITSI 1000 1135 BE00-DE00 3000 2250 DE00-DKE1 500 460
BE00-DE00 1000 600 ITSI-TN00 600 524 BE00-FR00 1000 236 DE00-DKW1 1000 2430
BE00-FR00 1000 90 LT00-PL00 700 1907 BE00-FR00 2000 371 DE00-DKW1 2000 2650
BE00-LUG1 500 210 ME00-RS00 500 83 BE00-FR00 3000 749 DE00-FR00 1000 1000
BE00-NL00 1000 50 ME00-RS00 500 53 BE00-NL00 1000 890 DE00-FR00 2000 2000
BE00-NL00 1000 185 NL00-UK00 2000 850 BE00-NL00 2000 1960 DE00-FR00 3000 3000
BE00-NL00 1000 1090 RO00-RS00 622 40 BE00-UK00 1000 1250 DE00-LUG1 1000 350
BE00-UK00 1400 900 SE02-SE03 2000 2281 BE00-UK00 2000 2750 DE00-NL00 500 1850
BG00-RS00 730 77 SE02-SE03 1000 2038 BG00-GR00 500 65 DE00-NL00 1000 2075
CH00-DE00 1500 428 AL00-GR00 500 40 BG00-GR00 1000 95 DE00-NL00 2000 2650
CH00-DE00 1000 58 AL00-GR00 1000 45 BG00-GR00 1500 150 DE00-NL00 3000 3225
CH00-DE00 600 124 AL00-GR00 1500 45 BG00-GR00 2000 220 DE00-NOS0 1000 3500
CH00-FR00 1000 35 AL00-GR00 2000 99 BG00-MK00 500 51 DE00-NOS0 2000 4300
CH00-FR00 500 60 AL00-ME00 500 24 BG00-MK00 1000 83 DE00-PL00 500 422
CH00-ITN1 200 212 AL00-ME00 1500 35 BG00-MK00 1500 147 DE00-PL00 1000 542
CH00-ITN1 200 57 AL00-MK00 500 48 BG00-RO00 500 147 DE00-PL00 2000 662
CZ00-DE00 500 321 AL00-MK00 1000 67 BG00-RO00 1000 318 DE00-PL00 3000 782
CZ00-DE00 150 974 AL00-MK00 1500 114 BG00-RO00 1500 430 DE00-SE04 500 660
CZ00-SK00 500 86 AL00-RS00 500 25 BG00-RO00 500 75 DE00-SE04 1000 1320
DE00-DKE1 600 460 AL00-RS00 1000 33 BG00-RO00 1000 117 DE00-UK00 500 3100
DE00-FR00 1500 94 AL00-RS00 1500 58 BG00-RO00 1500 192 DE00-UK00 1000 3600
DE00-FR00 300 49 AT00-CH00 1000 582 BG00-RS00 500 51 DE00-UK00 2000 4400
DE00-LUG1 1000 166 AT00-CH00 2000 1054 BG00-TR00 500 58 DKE1-PL00 500 571
DE00-NL00 1000 200 AT00-CH00 3000 2620 BG00-TR00 1000 116 DKE1-PL00 1000 1242
DE00-PL00 1500 270 AT00-CH00 4000 6221 BG00-TR00 1500 174 DKE1-PL00 2000 2484
DE00-PL00 400 2597 AT00-CZ00 1000 454 CH00-DE00 1000 1000 DKE1-PL00 3000 4476
DE00-SE04 700 660 AT00-CZ00 1500 842 CH00-DE00 2000 2000 DKE1-SE04 500 150
DE00-SE04 700 660 AT00-DE00 1000 3000 CH00-FR00 1000 550 DKE1-SE04 1000 300
DKE1-PL00 600 655 AT00-HU00 1000 547 CH00-FR00 2000 1100 DKE1-SE04 1500 450
ES00-FR00 1500 1170 AT00-HU00 2000 1215 CH00-ITN1 1000 850 DKW1-NL00 1000 1550
Border Capacity CAPEX Border Capacity CAPEX Border Capacity CAPEX
(MW) (M€) (MW) (M€) (MW) (M€)
DKW1-NL00 2000 3100 GR00-ITS1 1000 1200 LT00-SE04 1000 1800
DKW1-NOS0 500 600 GR00-MK00 500 5 LT00-SE04 1000 1800
DKW1-NOS0 1000 850 GR00-MK00 1000 39 LT00-SE04 1000 1800
DKW1-NOS0 1500 1150 GR00-MK00 1500 260 ME00-RS00 500 18
DKW1-NOS0 2000 1500 GR00-TR00 500 87 MK00-RS00 500 14
DKW1-UK00 1000 1720 GR00-TR00 1000 92 MK00-RS00 1000 47
DKW1-UK00 1500 2725 GR00-TR00 1500 92 MK00-RS00 1500 54
DKW1-UK00 2000 3266 HR00-HU00 500 187 NL00-NOS0 1000 2100
EE00-FI00 500 370 HR00-HU00 1000 307 NL00-NOS0 2000 4200
EE00-FI00 1000 740 HR00-HU00 1500 436 NL00-NOS0 3000 6300
EE00-FI00 1500 1110 HR00-RS00 500 13 NL00-NOS0 4000 8400
EE00-FI00 2000 1480 HR00-RS00 1000 58 NL00-UK00 1000 1135
EE00-LV00 500 120 HR00-SI00 500 53 NL00-UK00 2000 2270
EE00-LV00 1000 250 HR00-SI00 1000 100 NOM1-SE02 500 250
EE00-LV00 1500 380 HR00-SI00 1500 144 NOM1-SE02 1000 500
EE00-LV00 2000 510 HR00-SI00 2000 200 NOM1-SE02 1500 750
ES00-FR00 2000 2500 HU00-RO00 500 375 NON1-SE01 500 250
ES00-FR00 4000 5700 HU00-RO00 1000 600 NON1-SE01 1000 500
ES00-PT00 500 61 HU00-RS00 500 60 NON1-SE01 1500 750
ES00-PT00 1000 87 HU00-RS00 1000 170 NON1-SE02 500 250
ES00-PT00 1500 120 HU00-RS00 1500 342 NON1-SE02 1000 500
ES00-PT00 500 87 HU00-SI00 500 124 NON1-SE02 1500 750
ES00-PT00 1000 90 HU00-SI00 1000 247 NOS0-SE03 500 250
ES00-PT00 1500 114 HU00-SI00 1500 371 NOS0-SE03 1000 500
ES00-PT00 500 157 HU00-SI00 2000 500 NOS0-SE03 1500 750
ES00-PT00 1000 233 HU00-SK00 500 196 NOS0-UK00 500 1015
ES00-PT00 1500 268 HU00-SK00 1000 378 NOS0-UK00 1000 1530
ES00-PT00 500 176 HU00-SK00 1500 567 NOS0-UK00 1500 1945
ES00-PT00 1000 295 IE00-UK00 500 521 NOS0-UK00 2000 2350
ES00-PT00 1500 331 ITCS-ME00 1000 1000 PL00-SE04 500 700
FI00-NON1 500 500 ITN1-SI00 1000 750 PL00-SE04 1000 1400
FI00-NON1 1000 1140 ITSI-MT00 500 500 PL00-SE04 1500 2100
FI00-NON1 1500 1710 ITSI-MT00 1000 1000 PL00-SK00 500 550
FI00-NON1 2000 2280 ITSI-MT00 1500 1500 PL00-SK00 1000 551
FI00-SE01 1000 915 ITSI-MT00 2000 2000 PL00-SK00 1500 827
FI00-SE01 2000 2196 LT00-LV00 1000 500 RO00-RS00 500 57
FI00-SE03 1000 1830 LT00-LV00 2000 1000 RO00-RS00 1000 169
FI00-SE03 2000 4392 LT00-LV00 3000 1500 RO00-RS00 1500 208
FR00-IE00 700 1000 LT00-LV00 4000 2000 RO00-RS00 2000 278
FR00-ITN1 1000 1260 LT00-PL00 500 970 UK00-UKNI 500 782
FR00-ITN1 2000 2520 LT00-PL00 1000 1400 UK00-UKNI 1000 822
FR00-UK00 1400 906 LT00-PL00 2000 2800 UK00-UKNI 1500 1429
FR00-UK00 3400 2306 LT00-SE04 1000 1800 UK00-UKNI 2000 1488

Authors
Lead contributors
Guillermo Areosa Bäuml. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Amprion
Ilyes Borgi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Léa Dehaudt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Jérémy Dubois .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Patricia Labra Francos . . . . . . . . . . . Red Eléctrica de España
Mamadou Lo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Etienne Meyruey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Joao Moreira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REN
Jean-Baptiste Paquel .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Dante Powell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Nestor Sawadogo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Andriy Vovk .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Radek Vrábel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CEPS
Thank you to
Fabiola Aravena .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Rodrigo Barbosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Jean-Michel Berton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RTE
Maria-Chiara Cavarretta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Johannes Moolman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Simon Norambuena. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ENTSO-E
Pernille Søderkvist Jakobsen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Energinet
Members of Drafting Team Planning Standards
ENTSO-E
Rue de Spa 8 . 1000 Brussels . Belgium

ENTSO-E Completing The Map - Power System Needs in 2030 and 2040

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENTSO-E Completing The Map - Power System Needs in 2030 and 2040

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENTSO-E Completing The Map - Power System Needs in 2030 and 2040

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ten-Year

Network Completing the map

in 2030 and 2040

ENTSO-E, the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity,

ENTSO-E is committed to develop the most suitable responses to the challenge

Transparency is a key principle for ENTSO-E, and requires a constant listening,

Ten-Year Network Development Plan 2020

35 GW of cross-border capacity increases

If Europe stopped investing With an expanded

With 50 GW of capacity increase after 2025,

With 93 GW of capacity increase after 2025,

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 5

A Q & A answers frequently asked questions.

Chapter 1 presents the needs identified in 2030 and 2040.

Chapter 2 elaborates on the benefits of addressing those needs, for Europe’s

Chapter 7 presents the methodology of the study and is completed by Appendices.

How to use this interactive document

Home button Arrows Glossary Hyperlinks Visualise the data

How to read this report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1 What are system needs by 2030 and 2040? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2 How addressing system needs benefits Europe .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3 What if there was no physical constraint in the grid?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 7

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 9

What is the Identification of System Needs?

An essential step in Europe’s long-term electricity

SCENARIOS SYSTEM NEEDS PROJECTS ASSESSMENT

Figure 0.1 – The three main steps of the TYNDP process

PROJECT COST BENEFIT PROJECTS

An evolving tool to enable the energy transition

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 11

Methodology: Identifying capacity increases

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 13

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 15

The SEW-based capacity increases, one solution

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 17

The rise of offshore wind and offshore grid infrastructure

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 19

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 21

Enabling Europe to realise the Green Deal

110 TWh of curtailed energy saved each year by 2040

Curtailed energy in TWh/year

No investment after 2020 No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs

No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 23

CO2 emissions in Mton/year

600 60 Mton CO2/year:

400 55 Mton CO2 are saved

No investment after 2020 No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs

No investment after 2025 IoSN SEW-based Needs

Curtailed energy in TWh / year 49 28 49 23

CO2 emissions in Mton / year 630 591 527 477

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 25

Generation costs decrease by 10 billion euro per year by 2040

Avoided Curtailment Coal Gas Nuclear

Avoided Curtailment Coal Gas Nuclear

ENTSO-E Completing the map – Power system needs in 2030 and 2040 // 27

< 2.00 €/MWh

< 2.00 €/MWh

Cost-benefit analysis of transmission and storage projects

he reference grid: starting point of the identification of