The TYNDP 2024 highlights several new elements, marking significant advancements compared to the previous edition, and reflecting a more ambitious, inclusive, and transparent approach to energy system planning.
3.1 Stakeholder engagement
- In TYNDP 2024, ENTSOG has for the first time applied the provisions of the revised TEN-E Regulation. These amplify stakeholder engagement, adding extensive consultation requirements to ‘key phases […] such as the scenario development, infrastructure gaps identification and the cost-benefit analysis methodology for project assessment’1. A total of five stakeholder consultations have been organised for assumptions, guidance documents, as well as final deliverables. Consultations included hybrid presentation and discussion events, details about which can be found here.
- In particular for the TYNDP 2024 Scenarios process, a new, independent advisory forum was formally established and started its activities in November 2023. The SRG), as required by the revised TEN-E Regulation and the ACER Framework Guidelines for the joint TYNDP scenarios, brought complementing expert input to the development of scenarios. The SRG members are: associations of the gas and electricity markets, energy efficiency solutions, heating and cooling, CCS and CCU, demand response and supply operators, the EU DSO Entity, energy consumer organisations, independent aggregators and experts representing all relevant sectors. The balanced group composition brought improvements to engagement efficiency and effectiveness of Scenarios. More information about the 22 member associations of the SRG and the activities of its working groups is available here.
- The revised TEN-E added new processes for provision of formal opinions by the EC and ACER, in particular to scenario development, infrastructure gaps identification and the cost-benefit analysis methodology for project assessment. These complemented regular, informal exchanges, reinforcing the alignment process between the organisations. However, this change impacted the TYNDP process in terms of duration. Currently, total opinion and/or approval periods total 14 months2. To these, six months for approval of the Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) methodology are added, at least every 5 years, when the methodology is reviewed3.
1 Recital 25 of regulation (EU) 2022/869, updated in May 2022. See also articles 11, 12 and 13 for detailed consultation requirements
2 3+3 months for the Scenarios report (Reg (EU) 2022/869 , Art. 12, points 5, 6), 3+3 months for the IGI report (Reg (EU) 2022/869, Art. 13, points 3, 4) and two months for the Draft TYNDP (Reg (EU) 2024/1789, Art 27, point 2 )
3 Reg (EU) 2022/869, Art. 11, point 13
3.2 Scenarios
- The alignment of network planning for electricity, hydrogen, and methane, as required by the revised TEN-E Regulation, improved. It is the fourth joint exercise, performed in cooperation between ENTSO-E and ENTSOG.
- The NT+ scenario, which aggregates supply and demand values from national energy and climate plans, now covers all energy carriers, expanding beyond just electricity and gas. The assessment against regulated targets is therefore more comprehensive.
- The ‘+’ in ‘NT+’ represents another innovation: the gap-filling methodology. This ensures that the scenario fully aligns with the EU’s mandated energy and climate targets, including 2030 targets for energy and climate, the 2050 climate neutrality objective, and the energy efficiency first principle.
- Modelling and transparency: the Energy Transition Model (ETM) was used for demand quantification for the first time in TYNDP 2024. The model and input parameters are openly accessible online. Therefore, interested third parties can replicate the scenarios. The full package is available on the joint Scenarios website.
3.3 System-level assessments
- TYNDP 2024 system-level assumptions fully align with an updated hydrogen cost-benefit analysis methodology, completed as part of the 5-yearly revision cycle prescribed by the revised TEN-E Regulation4, after a comprehensive review with stakeholders, including the EC and ACER. This ensures consistency with project-specific CBA. Alignment points include: the models used, infrastructure levels, time horizons, among others.
- A hydrogen-electricity interlinkage was added to the existing natural gas and hydrogen modelling. Thus, interactions between the hydrogen, natural gas and electricity sectors are better captured, using a tool called Dual Hydrogen Electricity model (DHEM) and the previously developed Dual Gas Model (DGM).
- To apply the DHEM to NT+ scenario data, an electrolyser capacity redistribution methodology is newly employed. In practice, this is done to attribute NT+ electrolysis capacity data to the separate zones modelled with the DHEM. A zone represents the main interconnected hydrogen infrastructure system and another represents hydrogen supply and demand areas that are not connected to the main system, like electrolysers connected to the electricity market or renewable energy capacity dedicated hydrogen production. The usage of such zones enables a more granular analysis of energy flows and infrastructure needs.
- System-level assessments for hydrogen (Infrastructure Gap Identification Report – IGI) and natural gas (System Assessment Report – SA), have been published for the first time as self-standing documents. These should be read along with ENTSO-E’s Identification of System Needs (IoSN) Report, providing an integrated sector perspective.
- The Natural Gas System Assessment report should be read along with ENTSO-E’s ERAA, for a complementing perspective not only from the point of view of the electricity sector, but also regarding the target years and scenario used.
- The IGI assessment is performed for two infrastructure levels – PCI/PMI and Advanced – providing a complementing perspective on infrastructure performance under a wider deployment of hydrogen-related projects.
- New sensitivities were introduced, for a series of hypothetical infrastructure cases with unlimited capacity. The aim is to investigate any system limitations due to potential bottlenecks without taking into account the development of specific projects.
- The natural gas system assessment and hydrogen infrastructure gaps identification are interdependent. The SA simulations build not only on the TYNDP 2024 Scenario Report but also on results from the IGI: electrolysis production, hydrogen demand, including for electricity, as well as natural gas demand for electricity. Furthermore, the SA report considers both natural gas and hydrogen infrastructure levels, i. e., Low natural gas and Advanced natural gas, combined with PCI/PMI hydrogen and Advanced hydrogen infrastructure levels, within the Dual Gas Model.
4 Reg. (EU) 2022/869, Article 11, point 13
3.4 Project assessment
- New hydrogen classification categories are added to the TYNDP 2024, representing the continued shift towards hydrogen and other energy transition projects since the TYNDP 2022. Hydrogen projects are now presented under more varied subcategories: hydrogen transmission, reception facilities, storage, electrolysers, and mobility projects, and other categories, such as biomethane and CO₂ infrastructure.
- The prioritisation of deliverables related to hydrogen (requested by ACER and EC) in TYNDP 2024 is also visible though a change in cost-benefit analyses (CBA) performed, which is mainly for hydrogen-related projects. Natural gas-related projects are no longer covered by project-specific CBA, as they are no longer eligible for PCI/PMI status – with minor exceptions – in line with the updated provisions of the revised TEN-E.
- A simplified design for project fiches is used, in a more accessible, visualised, online format.