The optimal is not always the best

Life cycle impacts of near-optimal energy systems

Journal Article (2025)
Author(s)

A. De Tomás Pascual (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)

Laura Pérez-Sánchez (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)

M. Sierra Montoya (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, TU Delft - Energy and Industry)

F. Lombardi (TU Delft - Energy and Industry)

Stefan Pfenninger-Lee (TU Delft - Energy and Industry)

Inês Campos (Universidade de Lisboa)

Cristina Madrid (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)

Research Group
Energy and Industry
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.126487
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Energy and Industry
Volume number
399
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Energy system optimization models (ESOMs) can be used to guide long-term energy transitions but often overlook environmental impacts and the diversity of solutions close to the cost-optimal one. Here, we combine an ESOM using Modelling to Generate Alternatives (MGA) with Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to evaluate 260 near-optimal and technologically diverse carbon-neutral energy system designs for Portugal in 2050 across five environmental indicators: climate change, land use, water use, ecotoxicity, and materials. Using the Calliope energy modelling framework and ENBIOS for environmental assessment, we find that system designs whose cost is within 10 % of the minimum feasible cost provide up to 50 % lower environmental impacts. Our results reveal a trade-off between technological diversity and environmental performance, showing that while diversity enhances resilience, this may come with a significant increase in environmental drawbacks. Solar photovoltaic and battery technologies dominate the environmental impacts, particularly in water consumption and critical material use. This study shows that traditional cost-optimal energy system designs may not be environmentally optimal. Exploring near-optimal alternatives reveals lower-impact solutions and supports more inclusive planning for energy transitions.