Spatially Resolved Model For Studying Decarbonisation Pathways For Heat Supply and Infrastructure Trade Offs

Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy
Spatially resolved model for studying decarbonisation pathways for heat

supply and infrastructure trade-offs
F. Jalil-Vega ⇑, A.D. Hawkes
Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
h i g h l i g h t s
A new optimisation model to study heat decarbonisation approaches is presented.

Heat electrification found to be more cost-effective via district level heat pumps.
Heat network penetration (HNP) dependent on linear heat density and zone topology.
High temperature HNP over 50/60% for linear heat density over 1500/2500 kWh/m.
Mid-temperature HNP over 20/30/40% for linear heat density over 1500/2500/3000 kWh/m.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Heat decarbonisation is one of the main challenges of energy system decarbonisation. However, existing
Received 31 March 2017 energy planning models struggle to compare heat decarbonisation approaches because they rarely cap-
Received in revised form 6 May 2017 ture trade-offs between heat supply, end-use technologies and network infrastructure at sufficient spatial
Accepted 9 May 2017
resolution. A new optimisation model is presented that addresses this by including trade-offs between
Available online xxxx
gas, electricity, and heat infrastructure, together with related supply and end-use technologies, with high
spatial granularity. The model is applied in case studies for the UK. For the case modelled it is shown that
Keywords:
electrification of heat is most cost-effective via district level heat pumps that supply heat networks,
Spatially resolved model
Heat decarbonisation
instead of individual building heat pumps. This is because the cost of reinforcing the electricity grid
Energy systems for installing individual heat pumps does not sufficiently offset heat infrastructure costs. This demon-
Heat infrastructure strates the importance of considering infrastructure trade-offs. When modelling the utilisation of a decar-
bonised gas, the penetration of heat networks and location of district level heat supply technologies was
shown to be dependent on linear heat density and on zone topology. This shows the importance of spatial
aspects. Scenario-specific linear heat density thresholds for heat network penetration were identified. For
the base case, penetration of high temperature heat networks was over 50% and 60% by 2050 for linear
heat densities over 1500 and 2500 kWh/m. For the case when medium heat temperature networks were
additionally available, a mix of both networks was observed. Medium temperature heat network pene-
tration was over 20%, 30%, and 40% for linear heat densities of over 1500, 2500, and 3000 kWh/m, while
high temperature heat network penetration was over 20% and 30% for linear heat densities of under 2000
and 1500 kWh/m respectively.
Ó 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
1. Introduction Additionally, there are high costs and complexities associated with
the infrastructure transitions that are required for decarbonising
Climate change is one of the grand challenges of the 21st cen- heat, such as the installation of heat networks or the reinforcement
tury [1], and heat provision has emerged as one of the most diffi- of electricity distribution networks needed to support the potential
cult energy services to decarbonise [2]. This is because heat electrification of heat [3].
provision has historically relied heavily on fossil fuels, and incum- At the time of writing most heat decarbonisation modelling
bent low cost end-use technologies have been deeply established. either focuses on specific technologies [4,5], uses coarse tempo-
ral/spatial resolution [6,7], or considers only part of the system
[8,9]. No systematic framework exists that trades off individual
⇑ Corresponding author. building and district heat supply technologies and associated
E-mail address: fj512@imperial.ac.uk (F. Jalil-Vega).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.05.091
0306-2619/Ó 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Please cite this article in press as: Jalil-Vega F, Hawkes AD. Spatially resolved model for studying decarbonisation pathways for heat supply and infrastruc-
ture trade-offs. Appl Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.05.091
2 F. Jalil-Vega, A.D. Hawkes / Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
infrastructures at high spatial resolution. This paper formulates natural gas savings with the subsequent reduction in associated
and applies such a framework. It presents a mixed integer linear carbon emissions [5]. They are also attractive in the sense that at
optimisation model that selects gas, electricity, and heat network least part of their heat output can be classified as renewable, and
infrastructure investments, together with heat supply and end- further interest is motivated by the fact that the share of low car-
use technology investment and operation, with the objective of bon electricity generation has increased consistently in Europe and
minimising overall cost. The model is formulated as a long-term the UK in the years up until the time of writing [17]. Heat pumps
multi-period energy planning approach within a spatially disag- do face some challenges though, including the requirement to rein-
gregated region, considering distances between and within sub- forcement in the electricity network to cope with augmented elec-
regional zones for infrastructure decisions. This model is then tricity demand, high upfront equipment capital costs, and the
applied to study the case of the City of Bristol in the UK for two dif- potential need to replace internal building heat emitters with more
ferent scenarios of gas combustion emissions, reflecting the possi- expensive low temperature variants.
bility of use of natural gas or a lower carbon gas such as bio- In [18], Dodds et al. present fuel cell technologies and hydrogen
derived or synthetic methane, and for two scenarios of heat net- as alternatives for low carbon heat. Hydrogen is proposed as
work circulation temperature. replacement for gas in countries with an extensive gas infrastruc-
The article is organised as follows: the following section sets out ture, or for supplying heat networks through hydrogen CHPs. They
the background on heat decarbonisation, and a review of existing also suggest the possibility of scaling up and expanding current
analytical approaches for assessing heat decarbonisation path- hydrogen infrastructure, or building new hydrogen networks. Fur-
ways. A methodology section then presents the model formulation ther interest in this possibility has been motivated by the H21
and states the assumptions made. Results and discussion for a set Leeds City Gate project [19], which proposed that the cost of trans-
of case studies are then presented. Finally a conclusion sets out the forming the Leeds city gas network to hydrogen from a low carbon
insights gained and directions for future research. source was both plausible and potentially cost-effective.
Overall, while a broad range of approaches have been pre-
sented, the general conclusion of studies is unequivocal; overall
2. Background decarbonisation targets cannot be met without addressing heat
decarbonisation [3,20,21]. The range of options and trade-offs is
2.1. Approaches to heat decarbonisation vast, and while initial studies have recognised this problem, no sys-
tematic and comprehensive study has emerged that considers this
It is clear from most studies that the continued use of natural range with sufficient detail. Moreover, the studies cited above
gas as a core heating fuel is not likely to be consistent with long- either implicitly or explicitly show that analytical methods that
term climate change mitigation targets [10]. The literature sets consider not only the different supply and end-use options, but
out a range of approaches to heat decarbonisation, which can also infrastructure trade-offs, are needed to inform decision mak-
broadly be categorised into variants that rely on one or a combina- ers about the best pathways towards decarbonisation of heat.
tion of; (a) decarbonised electricity, (b) low or zero carbon gases
such as hydrogen or bio-derived/synthetic methane, (c) heat net-
works supplied with heat from low carbon sources, and (d) effi-
ciency and behavioural change related approaches. 2.2. Models for the assessment of heat decarbonisation
Lund et al. [11], based on the Danish case, conclude that the best
heat decarbonisation solution is a gradual expansion of district Table 1 shows a categorisation of available energy system mod-
heating supplied by combined heat and power (CHP) plants, elling approaches used to analyse heat decarbonisation or heat
together with individual heat pumps. Connolly et al. [12] propose techno-economics, based on some of the categories proposed by
a heat strategy for the European Union based on district heating [22] and other relevant categories for this study. When analysing
and individual heat pumps, which can potentially reduce primary the models that include heat supply presented in this Table, it
energy consumption and carbon emissions. When identifying chal- can be seen that there is a gap in modelling infrastructure trade-
lenges for a future non-fossil heat supply, Lund et al. [13] also pro- offs with a fine spatial resolution. The models reviewed either
pose a ‘‘4th generation” of district heating that includes lower include different distribution networks at national or regional
network temperatures, efficiency improvements, and higher inte- levels without considering spatial aspects [23,24], or model heat
gration and synergies with the rest of the energy system. Also with networks at a higher resolution without considering trade-offs
regard to heat networks, Troup [14] argues that they are a good against other distribution networks such as gas or electricity
investment for heat decarbonisation today, with a view to decar- [25,26], or do not include the lifetimes of the technologies and
bonising the supply of heat to these networks via biofuels or other infrastructure when comparing different supply alternatives
low carbon alternative towards 2030. Troup [14] also argues that [27,28]. According to [29], spatial resolution is a key challenge
the main capital investments for heat networks are in network going forwards in energy systems modelling, particularly for heat
infrastructure, which outlives the heat supply equipment, and is where demand density and infrastructure costs can potentially
therefore an important enabling measure for future low carbon lead to very different decisions.
heat. Dominković et al. [15] show that interconnecting geographi-
cally distributed heat networks can potentially reduce primary
energy consumption and CO2 emissions. This could suggest a pos-
sibility of gradually installing heat networks when economically 2.3. Research objective
feasible and interconnecting them in a posterior stage.
Heat pumps are also commonly cited as a useful alternative to Given the lack of existing analytical tools that (a) include a suf-
decarbonise heat in less dense areas [14,16], or by using central ficiently granular spatial characterisation, (b) include supply,
and booster heat pumps to supply heat networks. One potential infrastructure and end-use technologies, and (c) include a
advantage of heat pumps is that they perform well with low heat bottom-up techno-economic depiction of the technical options,
supply temperatures, and therefore could complement lower net- and (d) the importance of such an approach, the aims of this paper
work temperatures [4]. Heat pumps have been shown to generate are to:
Table 1
Different models and categorisation based on [22] and other relevant fields.
Model Purpose of the Model structure Geographical Sectoral Time Time step Technology Demand Cost inclusion Analytical Distribution Heat Other relevant
model coverage/ coverage horizon inclusion characteristic approach/ networks network comments for
spatial inclusion methodology/ inclusion modelling this research
resolution Mathematical
approach
A model for General: Demand: Urban area Heat and One year Year divided Heat supply Different Heat network Bottom-up/ Heat Heat Heat networks
structural and exploring Exogenous. divided into electricity into two technologies user-defined cost, Optimisation/ networks networks modelled in
operational Specific: heat Supply: zones month heat and technology Mixed integer included modelled in detail. Other
optimisation of supply. Modelled. intervals, with electricity costs, linear detail with distribution
distributed day/night demand operation and programming pipe lengths, infrastructure
energy systems period for profiles. maintenance (MILP). diameters, not modelled.
[25] each. (O&M) costs, and losses. No lifetime of
fuel and Binary assets
electricity variables for considered
costs. existence of
heat
networks
F. Jalil-Vega, A.D. Hawkes / Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

EnerGis [26] General: Demand: heat Urban area Heat Medium User-defined, Heat supply Demand for Investments, Bottom-up/ Heat Heat Heat networks
exploring demand divided into supply term 4 periods in technologies heat in fuel costs, heat Simulation, networks networks modelled in
Specific: modelled for zones. this research. different network optimisation/ included modelled as detail. Other
geographical different building infrastructure Analytical methods MILP. distribution
information building types types costs, fuel and MILP. Integer infrastructure
system for a based on (residential, electricity variables for not modelled
more detailed measured and public/ costs. existence of
assessment of simulated data. commercial, heat
heating options.. Supply: industrial). networks
Modelled. between
zones and
within zones
EnergyPLAN [30] General: Technologically National, Electricity, 1 year and Hourly Renewables Demand for Fuel costs, Bottom-up/ Electricity, Optimises The model
forecasting, detailed. regional heat, medium for electricity electricity investments, Simulation, gas, and heat operation of optimises the
exploring Demand: transport. term by supply, heat and heat in O&M, carbon. operation networks user-defined operation of a
Specific: energy Exogenous. aggregating supply buildings. optimisation/ networks user-defined
supply and Supply: years technologies Analytical and system. No
demand Modelled. in buildings programming technologies published
studies
include fine
spatial
resolution for
heat
ESME [24] General: Models major UK divided Whole Short and Seasons and Renewables, Residential Annualised Bottom-up/ Not included District Model does
Exploring energy flows. into 12 energy long term intraday recoverable heat and investment, Optimisation, heating not consider
Specific: Demand: regions. sector, divisions heat, national transport O&M, fuel Monte-Carlo/Linear supply sub-regional
Demand, supply, Exogenous. including and regional supply not costs, energy programming options spatial aspects
environmental Supply: heat in level included. import costs. modelled as nor detailed
impacts Modelled. buildings. cost per KW network
infrastructure
MARKAL [23] General: Technologically National, local Energy Medium- User-defined. Renewables Detailed Annualised Bottom-up/ Gas, Distribution Networks are
exploring detailed. sector long term for electricity electricity investment, Optimisation/ electricity, is modelled not spatially
Specific: energy Demand: generation. and heat O&M, fuel Linear heat, and as exchange explicit in UK
supply Exogenous. Detailed demand in costs, energy programming, other processes MARKAL or US
Supply: transport buildings. import costs, dynamic commodities EPA MARKAL
Modelled. modes. costs and programming distribution
revenues of included
(continued on next page)
3
4
Table 1 (continued)
Model Purpose of the Model structure Geographical Sectoral Time Time step Technology Demand Cost inclusion Analytical Distribution Heat Other relevant
model coverage/ coverage horizon inclusion characteristic approach/ networks network comments for
spatial inclusion methodology/ inclusion modelling this research
resolution Mathematical
approach
exogenous
energy and
material
imports/
exports,
energy taxes
and subsidies,
carbon costs.
Multi-objective General: Demand: No spatial Electricity, One year. Hourly Distributed Given user Capital costs, Bottom-up/ Networks not No networks No networks
design Exploring Exogenous. representation cooling demands for heat, demand O&M. Optimisation/ modelled modelled modelled, no
optimisation Specific: Supply: and four electricity, includes Multi-objective spatial
of distributed Distributed Existence, heating. representative and cooling electricity, linear programme representation
energy energy systems types, sizes, and season days. supply domestic hot
F. Jalil-Vega, A.D. Hawkes / Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

systemsthrough numbers of technologies, water, space
cost devices and thermal heating, and
and exergy modelled, with energy space cooling
assessments corresponding storage.
[31] daily operation
strategy.
Multiobjective General: Demand: No spatial Electricity One year Hourly Heat and Electricity Annualised Bottom-up/ Heating Heating Networks not
optimisation of Exploring Modelled in a representation and heat electricity and heat investment Simulation, distribution distribution modelled in
energy systems Specific: Energy first step supply demand for costs, fuel optimisation/multi- networks networks detail and no
and building systems and simulation technologies different costs objective modelled as a modelled as spatial
envelope retrofit building Supply: in buildings. building optimisation/ binary a binary representation
in a residential retrofitting Modelled Retrofitting categories. Multi-objective variable variable
community [32] technologies measures MILP associated to associated
sizes, and cost to cost
operation
strategies.
Retrofit
modelled.
Sifre [33] General: Demand: User One zone or All energy User Hourly Energy User- Total operating Bottom-up/ Gas, Distribution Networks are
Exploring specified.User- region system specified, conversion, specified costs Optimisation/MILP electricity, is modelled not spatially
Specific: specified energy one year in transmission energy heat, and as exchange represented.
Optimising system, this and end-use service other processes Capital
energy systems Modelled research technologies., demands. commodities expenses not
operation operation distribution included in
included the model
TIMES [34] General: Technologically Global, Energy Medium- User defined As MARKAL As MARKAL As MARKAL As MARKAL Gas, Gas, Networks are
exploring detailed. national, sector long term Seasonal, electricity, electricity, not spatially
Specific: Demand: regional, local weekly, daily heat, and and heat explicit in UK
decarbonisation Exogenous. variation time other distribution TIMES
pathways, least Supply: slices. commodities are
cost technology Modelled. distribution modelled as
assessment included exchange
processes
F. Jalil-Vega, A.D. Hawkes / Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 5
Formulate and apply a spatially-resolved model of energy sup-

Other relevant
comments for
infrastructure
ply, infrastructure, end-use technology and demand to study
this research
technologies
not consider
Model does
lifetimes of
cost effective heat decarbonisation pathways.
Include within this model the three key different distribution
and
networks (electricity, gas and heat), different temperature heat
networks, lifetime of technologies and of network infrastruc-
the network.
all buildings
via distance
connected,
can access
zones. If a
modelling
ture, explicit infrastructure trade-offs, and different demand

Networks
Optimisation/MILP gas, and heat modelled
One pipe
between
between
network
zone is
profiles.
zones
Heat
size
Apply this model to study least-cost heat decarbonisation path-
ways for a case study area in the UK in order to demonstrate the
Distribution
types of insights that it can generate.

Electricity,
networks
networks
inclusion
The presented research addresses the gap in existing energy

planning models, which rarely capture the before mentioned
trade-offs at a sufficient spatial resolution for evaluating heat
decarbonisation approaches. It is relevant for this special issue as
methodology/
Mathematical
Bottom-up/
it covers topics such as grid infrastructure trade-offs, energy sys-

approach/
Cost inclusion Analytical
approach
tems modelling, and distributed versus centralised heat supply

technologies. In a broader perspective, this research concerns the
optimal use of energy resources, and how to develop plan and
prices, carbon
Capital costs,
develop more sustainable and optimised energy systems.

O&M, fuel
It is emphasised that improving heat decarbonisation modelling

in terms of temporal resolution is beyond the scope of this article.
prices
As discussed below, the framework is intended to capture seasonal

and diurnal variations of flows, but not to account for second-to-
characteristic
Residential,
electricity)
second or minute-to-minute variations. It is noted that the relative

(heat and
inclusion
Demand
demand
service
energy
flexibility of the supply-demand balance in heat provision may

offer value to the overall energy system, and these finer time res-
olutions will be considered in future research.
technologies
in buildings,
Technology
and time steps, electricity

Time periods Heat and
inclusion
specified
user-specified. supply
user-
3. Methodology
3.1. General description of the model

Time step
The model formulated in this research, named HIT (Heat Infras-

tructure and Technology) model, is a mixed-integer linear program
optimisation that minimises the cost of supplying heat and elec-
long term
Medium-
tricity to a spatially-disaggregated region through to 2050. The

horizon
planning time horizon is divided into time periods, which are fur-
Time
ther subdivided into time slices, in order to reflect diurnal and sea-
sonal demand variations. Additionally, different demand profiles
Electricity
and heat.
coverage
Sectoral
for different consumer types are modelled.

The region is subdivided into smaller zones, taking electricity
and heat demand per zone and time slice as inputs. The outputs
cities divided
Model structure Geographical
varying sizes
are the optimal investments in heat supply technologies in each

Urban scale,
into smaller
and shapes.
resolution
coverage/
zone and time period; the investments in infrastructure for heat,

zones of
spatial
gas, and electricity networks in each zone and time period; the
optimal operation of heat supply technologies in each zone and
time slice; and the consumption and generation of gas, electricity,
and electricity).
demands (heat
energy service
All prices and
and heat across all networks in each zone and time slice. Further
exogenous.
Exogenous
Modelled.
networks can be added in the framework developed, as has been

Demand:
costs are
Supply:
done in this article for a second lower temperature heat network.

The total system cost (investments, operations and carbon cost)
are minimised for the whole planning time horizon. Lifetimes of
Specific: Energy
Purpose of the
infrastructure and equipment are considered to inform commis-

integrated
sioning and decommissioning decisions. Table 2 describes the

Exploring
approach
General:
supply,
model
input data used.

For calculating network costs, two complementary approaches
were adopted; an element of cost for connections between zones,
and another element for costs within zones. Costs between zones
Table 1 (continued)
TURN model,
are average costs per unit length and power [£/kW km], in order
[27,28]
to account for different pipe or cable sizes connecting two zones

Model
and the length of these connections. The general methodology

for calculating this was the following: First, cost data for different
cable or pipe diameters per unit length was gathered for gas, heat,
Table 2
Description of input data.
Input Description Comments

Modelled area City of Bristol
Spatial resolution 55 zones corresponding to Bristol Middle Layer Super Bristol was spatially disaggregated into the Office for National Statistics [35] into
Output Areas (MSOAs). See Fig. 1. MSOAs.
Modelled time horizon 2015 to 2051, plus 2013 calibrated base year.
Time periods Investment/decommissioning decisions from 2015 to
2050, every 5 year periods.
Time slices 16 time slices to reflect seasonal and diurnal Annual demand weighted for different time slices. Time slices and heat demand
variation. allocation into time slices drawn from the UK TIMES model [36], and electricity
demand allocation into time slices derived from Elexon profile classes [37].
Elexon profiles are used by the electricity system operator in the UK to allocate
unmetered consumption into a profile shape for balancing and settlement
purposes.
Demand types modelled Domestic and commercial. A simplifying assumption was made that annual demand was constant
throughout the modelled time horizon. According to [38], although energy
efficiency in domestic buildings has risen over time, the average internal
temperature in homes has risen as well. This combined with housing growth has
offset energy efficiency gains over time.
Heat and electricity demand Commercial and domestic electricity and gas average Gas consumption data was converted into heat demand assuming an efficiency of
annual demand data obtained from [39,40] for each 81% [27]. Unallocated consumption for a given area for domestic and commercial
MSOA. was distributed proportionally over all MSOAs for each sector. Demand weighted
into time slices as explained previously.
Gas and electricity prices Prices for gas and electricity [41], central scenario. Retail prices for commercial and domestic properties for gas and electricity
obtained from [41] where multiplied by 0.84 to discount the price of distribution
[42], as the model endogenously includes the cost of distribution networks.
Wholesale fuel prices used for district technologies.
Emission factors Emission factors for gas and electricity [43] by sector.
Carbon prices Non-traded carbon price projections [43] central
scenario for the UK.
Table 3
Calculation assumptions for network costs between zones.
Network Cost data sources and assumptions Sources and assumptions for maximum power through pipes/cables R2
calculations
Electricity Unit costs for overhead and underground lines, for different distribution Maximum current for different cable diameters obtained from catalogues 0.995
voltage levels [44]. The cost for different distribution voltage level was [46] for different voltage distribution levels. With distribution voltage and
weighted by the split of overhead and underground lines for each voltage maximum current, the maximum power was calculated for each cable
level in the UK obtained from [45]. diameter.
Gas Wales & West Utilities mains replacement matrix [47]. Low pressure (LP) lines were assumed, as 83% length of distribution lines 0.973
are LP [48]. Maximum power calculated for different diameters by
assuming gas calorific value at standard conditions as 35.4 [MJ/m3] [49], a
line pressure of 50 [mbar], line temperature of 5 °C, and maximum gas
velocity of 20 [m/s][50].
Heat Cost data obtained from [51] for 2015, 2030, and 2050. Maximum flow velocity for different diameters obtained from [52] for 0.881
maximum pressure drop of 200 Pa/m. Assumed temperature difference of
30 °C between supply and return.
and electricity networks. Then, the maximum power transporting mum capital cost per length of non-bulk schemes shown in [55].
capacity for each cable and pipe size was calculated for the three Table 4 shows the parameters used for modelling networks.
networks [kW]. Finally, a linear regression was calculated between Table 5 shows technology parameters used herein for individual
cost data and maximum power for different diameters, with the and district heat and electricity supply technologies. Capital and
slope being the cost per unit length and unit power needed. Table 3 fixed maintenance costs for individual heat and electricity supply
shows the data sources, assumptions and coefficient of determina- technologies were modelled as zone dependant in order to account
tion (R2) for the linear regressions for the three networks. for properties needing to purchase equipment in standard sizes
Costs within zones are average costs per length for a typical net- rather than the exact power to supply peak demand. To do this,
work. Costs for the three networks were obtained from the cost the capital (or maintenance) cost for a given size in Table 5 was
sources in Table 3 for different pipe and cable sizes. The percentage divided by peak heat demand, obtaining a cost per kW of after
of the distance per each voltage distribution level with respect to diversity peak demand for each technology and zone. This method
the total electricity distribution distance in the South West Region ensures that the cost reflects the actual size of technologies, and
was obtained from [53]. This was then further weighted by the implies that the heat and electricity supply capacity decision vari-
split between overhead and underground lines for each voltage able reflects the actual after diversity peak demand served by each
level from [45], obtaining an average cost per km considering the technology, rather than containing a fraction of spare capacity
split between different voltage distribution levels and the split within it.
between overhead and underground lines. For gas networks, mains
lengths by pipe diameters were obtained from [47], obtaining the
share of each pipe size per unit length which was weighted by 3.2. Model formulation
the costs per pipe size. Finally for heat networks, the pipe size split
per unit distance of network was taken from a real heat network The following sections give a general description of the model
case [54], obtaining an average network cost similar to the maxi- and state the main constraints and objective function. The
Table 4
Network parameters.
Name Description Capital cost within zones Capital cost Distribution losses Lifetime [years]
[£2015/km] between zones
[£2015/kW km]
2015 2030 2050 2015 2030 2050
Elecn Electricity network 96,603 96,603 96,603 3.4 3.4 3.4 Accounted for in electricity prices 40 [56]
Gasn Gas network 115,461 115,461 115,461 3.03 3.03 3.03 Accounted for in gas prices 50 [57]
HeatnT1 Heat network supply/return temperature 80/50 °C 573,291 554,821 530,328 5.8 5.61 5.37 13% of generation [58] 50 [51]
HeatnT2 Heat network supply/return temperature 70/40 °C Costs are considered as HeatnT1 costs multiplied 5% of generation [58] 50
by a factor of 1.41 obtained from comparing
network costs in [58] for both cases in Scenario 2.
Table 5
Heat and electricity supply techno-economic parameters.
Supply Description Thermal Efficiency Lifetime Capital cost Capital cost Capital cost Operation cost Reference Demand
technology output (Thermal/ [Years] 2015 2030 2050 all years source type b
code capacity Electric) [£2015] [£2015] [£2015] [£2015] served
[kW]
Individual level heat supply technology
ASHPsmall Air source heat pump 12 2.54 20 11,100 9290 9290 54 [59,60] Dom/
Comm
ASHPbig Air source heat pump 100 2.54 20 45,260 39,060 39,060 1300 [60] Comm
GSHPsmall Ground source heat pump 12 3.27 20 24,900 20,840 20,840 65 [60,61] Dom/
Comm
GSHPbig Ground source heat pump 100 3.27 20 200,100 167,380 167,380 430 [60,61] Comm
Boilersmall Gas boiler 24 0.89 15 1737 1737 1737 87 [51,62] Dom/
Comm
Boilerbig Gas boiler 100 0.89 15 7236 7236 7236 362 [51] Comm
Eradiator Electric resistance radiator 12 0.9 15 2182 2182 2182 0 [59] Dom/
Comm
CHPindsmall Gas CHP unit 12 0.52/0.28 15 12,052 12,052 12,052 1085 [51] Dom/
Comm
CHPindbig Gas CHP unit 100 0.52/0.28 15 100,434 83,870 83,870 6775 [51] Comml
HXT1/HXT2 Heat exchanger unit (HIU) and heat 12 1 20 2007 1792 1505 60 [51] Dom/
meter high/medium temperature Comm
network
HXT1big/ Heat exchanger unit (HIU) and heat 100 1 20 2276 2032 1707 68 [51] Comm
HXT2big meter high/medium temperature
network
Individual level electricity supply technology
PVdom Solar photovoltaics 2.5 5030 3420 3420 Dom/
Comm
PVcomm Solar photovoltaics 10 15,640 10,650 10,650 Comm
District level heat supply technology
CHPdist1 Gas CHP unit 10000 0.52 30 8,390,000 8,390,000 8,390,000 677,456 [51] District
CHPdist2 Gas CHP unit 20000 0.52 30 14,300,000 14,300,000 14,300,000 1,011,368 [51] District
CHPdist3 Gas CHP unit 30000 0.52 30 19,560,000 19,560,000 19,560,000 1,184,745 [51] District
Boilerdist Gas boiler 10000 0.9 30 900,000 900,000 900,000 36,180 [51] District
ASHPdist Air source heat pump 10000 2.54/2.8 For 20 4,262,361 3,678,476 3,678,476 21,530 [61] District
Tsupply = 353 K/
343 K
GSHPdist Ground source heat pump 10000 3.27/3.5 For 20 37,500,000 31,314,400 31,314,400 10,765 [61] District
Tsupply = 353 K/
343 K
complete nomenclature and model formulation can be found in a given time slice can be at most the total installed capacity of that
Appendix A and B respectively. technology. Equivalent constraints are valid for district level heat
and electricity supply technologies (Appendix B).
3.2.1. Main constraints OCHIbhiind jy 6 TCHIbiind jy 8bhiind jy ð1Þ
3.2.1.1. Installed and working heat and electricity supply capacities
In this model there are three groups of supply technologies: Variables for new capacities of installed technologies are
Individual or end-user heat supply technologies, district level heat expressed in [kW] of a new purchased heat or electricity supply
supply technologies, and individual or end user electricity supply technology. Eqs. (2) and (3) enforce that only whole units of district
technologies. General constraints on installation and lifetime of heat supply technologies can be installed or decommissioned.
technologies can be found in Appendix B. Eq. (1) states that the
NDidist jTy CapDidist T ¼ NCHDidist jTy 8idist jTy ð2Þ
capacity of a given individual heat supply technology working on
X
NDDidist jTy CapDidist T ¼ DCHDidist jTy0 y 8idist jTy ð3Þ after diversity peak heat demand. This means that the ratio of
y0 <y installed heat supply technologies consuming gas, electricity, or
heat, to the total peak heat demand is the percentage of demand
3.2.1.2. Networks served by each network within a zone. Multiplying this by the total
The model considers two variables for network capacities: net- road length per zone gives the necessary length of each network
works within zones, and networks between zones. Networks within zones. Eqs. (4) to (6) show these constraints for heat, elec-
between zones are built along the linear distance between two tricity, and gas networks respectively. Note that Eq. (4) should be
zones, and the decision variable is expressed in power units for each temperature level of heat networks modelled.
[kW], reflecting that the decision is the pipe/cable diameter con- X
necting two zones. Networks within zones are assumed to be built TCHIbiind jy
b;iind ¼HXT
X H
Rlj 6 TLNjheatnðT Þy 8jT y ð4Þ
following the roads within each zone. The decision variable is
b
Dem bpeakjy Numbjy
expressed in length units [km], and the built network length
within each zone is proportional to the percentage of peak heat Electricity networks need to be able to at least supply electricity
demand served by a given network. Section 3.1. explains how the consuming heat supply technologies plus electricity demand. Note
costs associated to both formulations were calculated. Initial net- that for electricity networks Eq. (5) assumes all electricity demand
works for electricity and gas are assumed as described in Sec- is still supplied by the electricity grid, plus the additional demand
tion 3.1. These initial networks are decommissioned linearly generated by the installation of new electricity consuming heat
throughout the modelling time horizon. supply technologies.
The following three equations impose that heat, electricity, and 0X 1
gas networks need to be able to supply at least technologies TCHIbiind jy
installed in each zone. Because of the way new capacity and capital @ b;iind ¼ASHP;GSHP;eradiators
X þ 1A Rlj 6 TLNjelecny 8jy ð5Þ
H
Dem bpeakjy Num bjy
costs are modelled (explained in Section 3.1), the installed capacity b
of individual heat supply technologies is the capacity that serves
Fig. 1. Spatial disaggregation for modelled zones in the City of Bristol.
Fig. 2. Heat density in the City of Bristol based on MSOA statistics [kWh/m2].
Gas network needs to be able to supply at least all gas consum- 3.2.2. Objective function
ing heat supply technologies: Finally, Eq. (10) shows the objective function to be minimised
X which corresponds to the present value of the total system’s costs
b;iind ¼boilers;CHPs
TCHIbiind jy throughout the modelling time horizon. The total system’s costs
X H
Rlj 6 TLNjgasny 8jy ð6Þ include the annual operation and maintenance of technologies,
b
Dembpeakjy Numbjy
capital costs for technologies and networks, fuel and electricity
Regarding networks between zones, Eq. (7) ensures that there annual costs, decommissioning costs, income for selling electricity
can only be flow between zones if a network is in place and also to the grid, and the salvage value of assets at the end of the mod-
determines the size of the connection. Additional constraints for elling period. The definitions of all these individual costs are
networks include only allowing energy flows between neighbour detailed in Appendix B.
zones and others listed in Appendix B. minCOSTS ¼ MNT þ OP þ FE þ CRB þ CPT þ DEC SLV ES ð10Þ
0
F hjj0 ny 6 TCN jj0 ny 8hjj ny ð7Þ
3.3. Calibration, constraints, and scenarios
3.2.1.3. Energy balance in each zone
Eq. (8) constrains the energy balances in each zone for different A base year calibration (chosen as 2013) was adopted for deter-
networks. In power units, this equations states that the energy in mining network capacities and technologies in place at the begin-
heat, gas or electricity that is entering a zone minus the energy ning of the modelling time horizon. A minimum cost optimisation
leaving the zone, needs to equate the energy being consumed in was run for one year of operation in order to determine base year
the zone minus the energy being generated in it. More details on network topology.1 The assumptions and constraints for the base
energy flows can be found in Appendix B. year were that heat demand is supplied exclusively by gas boilers,
electricity demand is supplied exclusively by the electricity grid,
X X
F IN OUT
hjny F hjny þ F hj0 jny F hjj0 ny F CONS GEN
hjny þ F hjny ¼ 0 8hjny ð8Þ and no heat networks are in place. Only three city boundary zones
j0 j0 were available as entry points for gas and electricity. These are zones
14, 31 and 50 shown in Fig. 1. Domestic properties were not allowed
Eq. (8) for electricity ensures electricity demand is met. Eq. (9) to purchase district level heat supply technologies (Table 5). In zones
ensures individual heat demand is supplied by individual heat
supply technologies:
X 1
This is a necessary assumption due to lack of available data on existing network
OCHIbhiind jy P DemHbhjy Numbjy 8bhjy ð9Þ topology. It is noted that if pre-existing network topology data were available, this
iind could be provided to the model as an input, negating the need for this step.
where commercial after diversity peak heat demand was higher than were applied for entry points of gas and electricity and for domes-
12 kW, commercial properties were not allowed to purchase domestic and commercial property purchases. Fig. 1 shows the modelled
tic heat supply technologies apart from small gas boilers, and when zones and their labels, Fig. 2 shows their heat densities, and Fig. 3
their peak demand was higher than 24 kW they were only allowed shows their linear heat densities.
to purchase larger technologies. Finally, two scenarios were defined for study in this research:
The base year results were used as initial conditions for net- Scenario 1 used all parameters as explained in Section 3.1. In con-
works and installed boilers in each zone when running the case trast, Scenario 2 assumes that gas combustion emissions are half of
from 2015 to 2051. Additional constraints were imposed for emissions associated to natural gas for district level technologies.
decommissioning initial capacity. Networks were enforced to This is intended to depict a scenario where bio-derived or synthetic
decommission linearly over the modelling time horizon. One half methane, mixed with natural gas, is utilised by these technologies.
of initially installed gas boilers were enforced to be decommis- For Scenario 1, two cases were run: Case 1 where only high tem-
sioned in 2015, and half in 2020, reflecting the average life of gas perature heat networks were available, and Case 2 where medium
boilers in the market. The same constraints as for the base case temperature heat networks were also available.
Fig. 3. Linear heat density in the City of Bristol based on MSOA statistics and road lengths [kWh/m].
Fig. 4. Percentage of total individual heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 1, Case 1.
The commercial software GAMS v28.8.3 was used for imple-

menting and solving the problem. For Scenario 1-Case 1, Scenario
1-Case 2, and Scenario 2, the problem has 4,047,186, 5,688,606,
and 4,047,186 variables respectively, and takes approximately
6 h, 2.5 days and 11 h to solve with a relative termination tolerance
of 0.001.
4. Results and discussion
Figs. 4–6 show the total share of individual heat and electricity
supply technologies for both scenarios. Results show that
individual-building electricity generation systems (e.g. PV) are
not cost effective in the case studies, as all electricity is purchased
from the grid. Scenario 1 shows that the most cost-effective path-
way for heat supply in the domestic and commercial sectors is the
adoption of heat networks, together with the use of individual Fig. 7. Total district heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 1, Case 1.
dwelling gas boilers. In Scenario 1, the optimal heat supply for Case
2 is given by a mix of high and medium temperature heat net-
works, with an overall lower heat demand supplied by gas boilers. that for the topology studied heat electrification is more effectively
For Scenario 2, when lower emissions of gas for district heating is reached through introducing heat grids and supplying them via
assumed, there is a faster penetration of heat networks for both the heat pumps, rather than installing individual heat pumps for single
commercial and domestic sectors. buildings. This highlights the importance of considering the associ-
Figs. 7–9 show the district heat supply technologies over time ated infrastructure costs when comparing different end use tech-
for both scenarios and cases. For Scenario 1, heat networks are nology options, not only stand-alone technology life cycle costs
mainly supplied by air-source heat pumps, while Scenario 2 is (capital, operation and maintenance, carbon, decommission, etc.).
additionally supplied by district level boilers, with a strong adop- In essence, there are trade-offs between infrastructure costs and
tion of district level air-source heat pumps from 2030 onwards. end-use technology costs which can lead to less obvious solutions.
These results together with the results shown in Figs. 4 and 5 show In this case this is demonstrated through the fact that costs of rein-
Fig. 5. Percentage of total individual heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 2.
Fig. 6. Percentage of total individual heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 1, Case 2.
are both heat dense and linear heat dense. They are neighbours,
and both are also neighbours with zone 30. For both scenarios nei-
ther zone 22 nor zone 25 present a high installation of district heat
technologies. Instead, a large number of district heat technologies
are installed in zone 30. Therefore the location of district heat tech-
nologies is dependent on linear heat density and on zone-to-zone
connectivity, which reflects the ability to aggregate demands and
build larger heat networks. On the other hand, when comparing
high and low temperature network cases in Scenario 1, results
show that when two temperature networks are available, district
heat supply technologies are more distributed among zones. For
example, the total capacity of district heat technologies installed
in zone 30 in Case 2 is lower than for Case 1, while other zones
such as 1, 13, 17, and 51 have higher overall installed capacities.
This shows that when medium heat networks are available there
is a wider spread of supply technologies, and smaller and more dis-
Fig. 8. Total district heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 2.
tributed heat grids are built.
Fig. 11 shows the penetration of heat networks over time for
both scenarios. Comparing these figures with Figs. 2 and 3, there
is a correlation between heat network penetration and heat den-
sity, although linear heat density is a better indicator. For example
zone 51 has a relatively low heat density with a relatively high lin-
ear heat density, and for both scenarios there is a relatively high
penetration of heat networks within it. The comparison between
both scenarios shows that determining linear heat density thresh-
olds for heat network penetration is case specific. The thresholds
vary for emission levels of gas considered in both scenarios for dis-
trict heating technologies. When comparing Case 1 and Case 2 for
Scenario 1, a higher overall penetration of heat networks is
achieved when two temperature networks are available. Also, as
in for the case of district heat technology locations, heat networks
penetration also depends on zone connectivity. This makes it even
more challenging to determine a universal linear heat density
threshold for heat network adoption.
Despite these caveats, in general terms it can be said that for
Scenario 1-Case 1, for linear heat densities of over 1500 KWh/m
there is a heat network penetration of more than 50% by 2050,
Fig. 9. Total district heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 1, Case 2. and for linear heat densities of over 2500 kWh/m there is a heat
network penetration of over 60% by 2050. For Scenario 2, for linear
heat densities of over 1500 KWh/m there is a heat network pene-
forcing the electricity grid makes it more effective to electrify heat tration of more than 50% by 2050, and for linear heat densities over
via district technologies than through individual level 2000 kWh/m there is over 60% of penetration of heat networks.
technologies. These thresholds however are general guidelines, as they do not
For Scenario 1 results for Case 1 and Case 2 show that when take into account the aspect of connectivity between zones, which
medium temperature heat networks are also available the optimi- these results show can materially influence cost effectiveness.
sation model selects these (Fig. 9) to the detriment of high temper- When two heat network temperatures are available, there is a
ature heat networks and gas boilers. Also, there is a higher less direct heuristic threshold. For Scenario 1-Case 2, the tempera-
participation of air-source heat pumps supplying both networks, ture networks complement each other. For the medium tempera-
with lower participation of district level gas boilers. This means ture heat network, when linear heat density is greater than 1500
that the higher network cost of the medium temperature network kWh/m, 2500 kWh/m, and 3000 kWh/m, penetration is over 20%,
is counterbalanced by the higher coefficient of performance of heat 30%, and 40% respectively. Although high temperature heat net-
pumps operating at medium temperatures, and by the lower networks are also present at these higher linear heat densities, no
work losses. This again shows the importance of trade-offs clear thresholds of adoption were identified. However, when linear
between infrastructure and end-use technologies. heat densities are lower than 2000 kWh/m, heat network penetra-
Fig. 10 shows in which zones district heat supply technologies tion of high temperature networks is over 20%, and when linear
are installed over time for both scenarios. Comparing these with heat density is lower than 1500 kWh/m, more than 30% of high
Fig. 2, it can be seen that district heat technologies are installed temperature heat network penetration can be observed. Overall,
in the most heat dense zones. Comparing these results with when two heat network temperatures are available a higher total
Fig. 3 however shows that there is a better correlation with linear heat network penetration was observed. Clearly zone-specific heat
heat density and location of district heat technologies. For example density becomes less relevant, with demand topology and spatial
zone 4 has a low heat density, but a higher linear heat density, and topology playing a greater role.
particularly in Scenario 2 there is a high installation of district Finally, a sensitivity analysis was conducted for low and high
technologies in it. However, heat density and linear heat densities price scenarios for gas and electricity [41] and for carbon price sce-
are not the only factors to be considered in the decision of where to narios [43]. Each parameter was changed to the low and high price
install district technologies. Connectivity with other heat dense scenarios while leaving the other two constant at central price sce-
zones is also a determining factor. For example, zones 22 and 25 narios. Figs. 12–14 show the total heat network penetration over
(a) Scenario 1, Case 1, 2015 (b) Scenario 1,Case 1, 2030 (c) Scenario 1, Case 1, 2050 (d) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2015,
High temperature heat
network
(e) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2030, (f) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2050, (g) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2015, (h) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2030,
High temperature heat High temperature heat Medium temperature heat Medium temperature heat
network network network network
(i) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2050, (j) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2015, (k) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2030, (l) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2050,
Medium temperature heat All temperature heat All temperature heat All temperature heat
network networks networks networks
(m) Scenario 2, 2015 (n) Scenario 2, 2030 (o) Scenario 2, 2050

Fig. 10. Location of district heat supply technologies, [kW]
time for the three scenarios. Fig. 15 shows the total system’s cost, nario that shows to considerably affect total heat network penetra-
total cost of carbon, and total system CO2 equivalent emissions, tion by 2050 is the low carbon price scenario, in which total heat
normalised to the highest value for each. These results show that network penetration is around 40% instead of 60%. In this scenario
the final heat network penetration by 2050 does not vary consider- a larger share of individual level gas boilers is observed. Although
ably when changing gas and electricity prices. By 2050 the total the total heat network penetration by 2050 is not largely affected
heat network penetration is around 60% for all these scenarios, by gas, electricity and medium and high carbon prices, Figs. 12–14
as well as for central and high carbon price scenarios. The only sce- show that the pathway for heat network penetration does vary
(a) Scenario 1, Case 1, 2015 (b) Scenario 1, Case 1, 2030 (c) Scenario 1, Case 1, 2050 (d) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2015.
High temperature heat
network
(e) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2030. (f) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2050, (g) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2015. (h) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2030.
High temperature heat High temperature heat Medium temperature heat Medium temperature heat
network network network network
(i) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2050. (j) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2015. (k) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2030. (l) Scenario 1, Case 2, 2050.
Medium temperature heat All temperature heat All temperature heat All temperature heat
network networks networks networks
(m) Scenario 2, 2015 (n) Scenario 2, 2030 (o) Scenario 2, 2050

Fig. 11. Heat network penetration.
for the scenarios studied. The uptake of heat networks is faster for heat pumps are used. Finally, regarding gas prices, the lowest car-
high gas prices, for low electricity prices, and for high carbon bon emissions are reached in the high gas price scenario, as this
prices. Fig. 15 shows that for low carbon prices the cost of carbon generates the lowest participation of gas boilers.
and total system’s cost are the lowest while total carbon emissions As set out by [20], action is required now in the UK for lowering
are the highest, as more individual gas boilers are operating. For carbon emissions from heat. Opportunities include installing indi-
electricity prices on the other hand, the low price scenario gener- vidual building heat pumps, low carbon heat networks in cities, or
ates lower carbon emissions, carbon costs, and total cost than the increasing biomethane injection into the gas grid. This model pro-
central and high price scenarios, as more district level air-source vides a tool for studying the most cost effective pathways for
Fig. 12. Sensitivity analysis – Heat network penetration for low, medium, and high Fig. 15. Sensitivity analysis – Normalised total system cost, carbon cost, and total
gas price scenarios. CO2 emissions for low, medium, and high price scenarios.
Council is planning to install heat networks across the City for sup-
plying low carbon heat and power, in order to achieve their CO2
emissions reduction targets of 80% by 2050 (and intermediate
milestones as well). Among others, one example of how this model
can be applied for energy policy planning would be implementing
a cap on total carbon emissions for different time periods in order
to achieve specific reduction targets, and finding cost-effective
strategies to achieve these targets.
5. Conclusions
This paper has presented a spatially resolved model for the

analysis of heat decarbonisation pathways. The model includes
economic and technical characterisation of the whole heat supply
chain, including primary energy costs, end use technologies, and
Fig. 13. Sensitivity analysis – Heat network penetration for low, medium, and high infrastructure. The novelty of this model is that it captures trade-
electricity price scenarios. offs between heat supply, end use technologies, and gas, electricity
and heat network infrastructure at a high spatial resolution. This
paper has applied the model to demonstrate the trade-offs
between technology and infrastructure options.
Results show firstly that the inclusion of resolved demand and
infrastructure topology in heat decarbonisation models can cer-
tainly influence the characteristics of the heat decarbonisation
pathways created. For example, for the scenarios considered, heat
electrification is more cost-effectively reached through installing
heat networks supplied by air-source heat pumps, rather than by
installing individual building heat pumps. This is due to the addi-
tional costs these individual technologies require related to the
reinforcement of the electricity grid.
Secondly, heat network penetration and the location of district
heat technologies are dependant not only on linear heat density,
but also on zone-to-zone connectivity and topology, in addition
to specific techno-economic assumptions. This further demon-
strates the importance of considering spatial aspects in the plan-
ning of energy transitions. For the cases modelled, it is observed
that linear heat density is a good indicator of district heating adop-
Fig. 14. Sensitivity analysis – Heat network penetration for low, medium, and high
tion where a high temperature heat network is available, with
carbon price scenarios.
adoption in the range of 50% to 60% for linear heat densities from
1500kWh/m to 2500kWh/m. Yet in the scenarios where a medium
temperature network is also available, linear heat density is less
implementing these measures. For example, for the three cases and indicative of optimal heat network adoption, with cases of high
scenarios detailed previously results show a cost-effective timeline adoption with low linear heat density, driven by favourable
for installing high and medium temperature networks in different demand and network topology.
zones, and the total cost-effective heat network penetration per Finally, also when the option of installing a medium tempera-
zone according to its linear heat density and demand topology. ture heat network was available, a mix between high temperature
For the particular case of Bristol, according to [63], the Bristol City heat networks and medium temperature networks was selected by
the model, with a higher penetration of the latter, and a higher Table A2
overall penetration. This means that the higher coefficient of per- Decision variables – Technology capacities.
formance for district level heat pumps when delivering lower tem- Variable Description Units
perature heat, and the lower network losses in medium NCHIbiind jy New installed capacity of individual heat supply kW
temperature networks, were able to offset the higher network technology iind for demand type b in zone j in year y
costs. Medium temperature heat network penetration was over VCHIbiind jyy0 Vintage capacity of individual heat supply technology iind kW
20%, 30%, and 40% for linear heat densities of over 1500, 2500, for demand type b in zone j installed in year y remaining in
year y0
and 3000 kWh/m, while high temperature heat network penetra-
DCHIbiind jyy0 Capacity of individual heat supply technology iind for kW
tion was over 20% and 30% for linear heat densities of under demand type b in zone j installed in year y
2000 and 1500 kWh/m respectively. All zones had both tempera- decommissioned in year y0
ture networks, but no clear threshold was identified outside of TCHIbiind jy Total capacity of individual heat supply technology iind for kW
these ranges. demand type b in zone j remaining in year y
OCHIbhiind jy Capacity of individual heat supply technology iind for kW
Based on the literature review, future work includes using the
demand type b in zone j which is operating in timeslice h in
new model to study more extensive heat decarbonisation options. year y
For example, by including a low temperature heat network NCHDidist jTy New installed capacity of district heat supply technology kW
together with booster heat pumps and efficiency improvements. idist of temperature level T in zone j in year y
Another example is the inclusion of a hydrogen network for indi- VCHDidist jTyy0 Vintage capacity of district heat supply technology idist of kW
temperature level T in zone j installed in year y remaining
vidual and district heat supply technologies, or enabling the possi- in year y0
bility of switching the current gas network to hydrogen. By DCHDidist jTyy0 Capacity of district heat supply technology idistrict of kW
including a cap on emissions from heat, this model can be used temperature level T in zone j installed in year y
to effectively study the trade-offs between energy supply options, decommissioned in year y0
TCHDidist jTy Total capacity of district heat supply technology idist of kW
infrastructure and equipment costs, and thereby provide new
temperature level T in zone j remaining in year y (it doesn’t
insight on possible heat decarbonisation pathways. matter when it was installed)
OCHDhidist jTy Capacity of district heat supply technology idist of kW
Acknowledgements temperature level T in zone j which is operating in
timeslice h in year y
NDidist jTy Number of district heat supply units of technology idist of –
This research was supported by Climate-KIC, Grantham Insti-
temperature level T purchased in zone j in year y
tute, Newton/NERC Sustainable Gas Pathways (NE/N018656/1), NDDidist jTy Number of district heat supply units of technology idist of –
and CONICYT. temperature level T decommissioned in zone j in year y
NCEejy New installed capacity of electricity supply technology e in kW
zone j in year y
Appendix A VCEejyy0 Vintage capacity of electricity supply technology e installed kW
in zone j in year y remaining in year y0
A.1. Nomenclature DCEejyy0 Capacity of electricity supply technology e in zone j kW
installed in year y decommissioned in year y0
TCEejy Total capacity of electricity supply technology e in zone j kW
This section describes the nomenclature used for the model for-
remaining in year y (it doesn’t matter when it was
mulation. The sets are described in Table A1, while Table A2 pre- installed)
sents the decision variables for technology capacities, Table A3 OCEhejy Capacity of electricity supply technology e in zone j which kW
shows the decision variables for network capacities,Table A4 is operating in timeslice h in year y
shows the decision variables for fuel and electricity consumption,
and Table A5 presents the cost decision variables.Table A6 shows
the scalars, and Tables A7–A11 show the parameters used in this Table A3
work. Decision variables - Network capacities.
Variable Description Units

Appendix B. Model formulation
ICN jj0 ny Capacity of network type n that connects zones j and j0 kW
installed in year y
B.1. Constraints CCNjj0nyy0 Capacity of network type n that connects zones j and j0 kW
installed in year y remaining in year y0
The following section describes the constraints used in the DCNjj0nyy0 Capacity of network type n that connects zones j and j0 kW
installed in year y and decommissioned in year y0
model.
TCNjj0ny Total capacity of network type n that connects zones j and j0 in kW
year y
B.1.1. Installed and decommissioned heat and electricity supply NLNjny New network length of network type n installed within zone j km
capacities in year y
VLN jnyy0 Vintage network length of network type n installed within km
Eqs. (B.1) to (B.3) show the relationship between vintage capac-
zone j in year y remaining in year y0
ity, new capacity, and decommissioned capacity for individual heat DLNjnyy0 Network length of network type n installed within zone j in km
supply, district heat supply, and electricity supply technologies. year y decommissioned in year y0
TLNjny Total network length of network type n within zone j in year y km
F hjj0ny Flow in network n from zone j to zone j0 in timeslice h in year kW
Table A1 y
Sets. F IN
hjny
Flow in network n from outside the boundaries of the city into kW
zone j in time slice h in year y
Index Description Index Description kW
F OUT
hjny
Flow in network n from zone j to outside the boundaries of the
iind Individual heat supply technologies y Time period [Years] city in timeslice h in year y
idist District heat supply technologies h Time slice [Hours] F CONS
hjny
Flow in network n consumed in zone j in timeslice h in year y kW
e Electricity supply technologies a Fuel type F GEN Flow in network n generated in zone j in timeslice h in year y kW
hjny
j Zones b Demand type
m_ hjj0Ty Water mass flow from zone j to zone j0 in timeslice h and year kg/s
T Temperature levels [K] n Network type
y at temperature level T
Table A4 Table A7
Decision variables and derived quantities – fuel and electricity consumption. Technology parameters.
Variable Description Units Parameter Description Units
ELEC TOT
by
Total electricity consumed from the grid by demand type b kWh g ThI
iind
Thermal efficiency of technology iind –
in year y
g ThD
idist T
Thermal efficiency of technology idist of temperature level –
ELECDTOT Total electricity consumed from the grid by district kWh T
y
technologies in year y
gEI
CHP
Electric efficiency of individual CHP –
FUELabhjy Fuel a consumed by demand type b in zone j in tumeslice h kWh
gED
CHPT
Electric efficiency of district CHP of temperature level T –
in year y
FUELDahjy Fuel a consumed by district technologies in zone j in kWh CapD
idist T
Maximum thermal capacity of technology idist at kW
temperature level T
tumeslice h in year y
kWh LtIiind Lifetime of heat supply technology iind Years
FUELTOT
aby
Total fuel a consumed by demand type b in year y
Total fuel a consumed by district technologies in year y kWh LtD Lifetime of heat supply technology idist at temperature Years
FUELDTOT
ay
idist T
level T
CO2 Total CO2 equivalent emissions Ton
LtEe Lifetime of electricity supply technology e Years
CO2e
CostCI After diversity capital cost for demand type b of individual £/kW
biind jy
heat supply technology iind in zone j and year y
CostCD Capital cost for district heat supply technology idist in zone £/kW
idist jTy
Table A5 j for temperature level T in year y
Costs elements of objective function. CostCE
ejy
Capital cost of electricity supply technology e in zone j and £/kW
year y
Variable Description Units Variable operation cost for individual heat supply £/kWh
CostOI
iind y
OP NPV of total variable system’s operation costs £ technology iind in year y
MNT NPV of total annual system’s maintenance costs £ CostOD
idist Ty
Variable operation cost for district heat supply technology £/kWh
FE NPV of total system’s fuel and electricity costs £ idist for temperature level T in year y
CRB NPV of total system’s carbon costs £ CostOE Variable operation cost for electricity supply technology e £/kWh
ey
CPT NPV of total system’s capital costs £ in year y
EQ NPV of total equipment’s capital costs £ CostMI
biind jy
Annual maintenance cost after diversity in zone j for £/kW
NTW NPV of total networks’ capital costs £ demand type b of individual heat supply technology iind in
DEC NPV of total system’s decommission costs £ year y
SLV NPV of total system’s salvage value at the end of the modelling £ CostMD
idist y
Annual maintenance cost of district heat supply £/kW
period technology idist in year y
ES NPV of total system’s incomes from selling electricity to the £ CostME
ey
Annual maintenance cost of electricity supply technology £/kW
grid e in year y
COSTS NPV of total system’s costs £ CostDI
iind y
Decommission cost of individual heat supply technology £/kW
iind in year y
CostDD
idist Ty
Decommission cost of district l heat supply technology £/kW
idist of temperature level T in year y
Table A6 CostDE
ey
Decommission cost of electricity supply technology e in £/kW
Scalars. year y
Scalar Description Value

r Discount rate 7%
c Specific heat capacity of water 4.1813 kJ/kg K
Table A8
y0 Initial modelling year 2013
Network parameters.
yfinal Final modelling year 2051
M; M1 Big numbers Parameter Description Unit
CostNT
ny
Diameter dependent capital cost of network n in year y £/kW
km
These equations establish that vintage capacity in a given year is all CostND
ny
Average capital cost of distribution network n in year y £/km
capacity of a given technology that has been installed previously LtN
n
Lifetime of network n Years
and hasn’t been decommissioned until that year. LossT Average loss (% of heat generated) of heat distribution –
network of supply temperature T
y0
X T RT Return temperature of heat network of supply K
VCHIbiind jyy0 ¼ NCHIbiind jy DCHIbiind jyy0 8biind j; y 6 y0 ðB:1Þ temperature level T
y0 ¼0
y0
X
VCHDidist jTyy0 ¼ NCHDidist jTy DCHDidist jTyy0 8idist jT; y 6 y0 ðB:2Þ Table A9
Spatial parameters.
y0 ¼0
Parameter Description Unit
y0
X Rlj Road length within zone j km
VCEejyy0 ¼ NCEejy DCEejyy0 8ej; y 6 y0 ðB:3Þ djj0 Linear distance between zone j and zone j0 km
y0 ¼0
Nbjj0 1 if zones j and j0 are neighbours, 0 if not. –
The total installed capacity of individual heat supply, district Cbj 1 if zone j is a city boundary, 0 if not. –
heat supply, and electricity supply technologies in a given year
are defined by Eqs. (B.4),(B.5) and (B.6), respectively. These equa-
y0
X
tions show that the total installed capacity of technologies equals TCHDidist jTy0 ¼ VCHDidist jTyy0 8idist jTy0 ðB:5Þ
the sum of all remaining vintage capacity in a given year, indepen- y¼0
dent of when technologies were installed.
y0 y0
X
X
TCHIbiind jy0 ¼ VCHIbiind jyy0 8biind jy0 ðB:4Þ TCEejy0 ¼ VCEejyy0 8ejy0 ðB:6Þ
y¼0 y¼0
Table A10 B.1.2. Installed and working heat and electricity supply capacities
Resource parameters. Eqs. (B.16) to (B.18) state that capacity of a given technology
Parameter Description Unit that is supplying heat and electricity operating on a given time
slice can be at most the total installed capacity of that technology.
Cost Faby Fuel price of fuel a for demand type b in year y £/kWh
Cost FD
ay
Fuel price of fuel a for district technologies in year y £/kWh OCHIbhiind jy 6 TCHIbiind jy 8bhiind jy ðB:16Þ
Cost Eby Electricity price for demand type b in year y £/kWh
Cost ED
y
Electricity price for district technologies in year y £/kWh OCHDhidist jTy 6 TCHDidist jTy 8hidist jTy ðB:17Þ
E Electricity price for selling electricity to the grid in year £/kWh
Selly
y OCEhejy 6 TCEejy 8ejy ðB:18Þ
EmFaby Emission factor of fuel a for demand type b in year y tonCO2e/
kWh Variables for new capacity are expressed in [kW] of a new pur-
EmFD
ay
Emission factor of fuel a for district technologies in tonCO2e/ chased heat or electricity supply technology. Eqs. (B.19) to (B.21)
year y kWh
enforce that only whole units of district heat supply technologies
EmEby Consumption based emission factor of electricity grid tonCO2e/
for demand type b in year y kWh can be installed or decommissioned.
EmED Consumption based emission factor of electricity grid tonCO2e/
y
for district technologies in year y kWh NDidist jTy CapDidist T ¼ NCHDidist jTy 8idist jTy ðB:19Þ
Cost CO2
y
Carbon price for year y £/tonCO2e
X
NDDidist jTy CapDidist T ¼ DCHDidist jTy0 y 8idist jTy ðB:20Þ
y0 <y
Table A11
Demand parameters. NDidist jTy ; NDDidist jTy 2 Zþ ðB:21Þ
Parameter Description Unit
Eq. (B.22) shows constrains all capacity variables to be continu-
Numbjy Number of customers of demand type b in zone j in year y – ous and not negative.
DemH
bhjy
After diversity individual heat demand of customer type b kW
in timeslice h in zone j and year y NCHIbiind jy; VCHIbiind jyy0 ; DCHIbiind jyy0 ; TCHIbiind jy ; OCHIbhiind jy ; NCHDidist jTy ;
DemEbhjy After diversity individual electricity demand of customer kW
type b in timeslice h in zone j and year y
VCHDidist jTyy0 ; DCHDidist jTyy0 ; TCHDidist jTy ; OCHDhidist jTy ; NCEejy ; VCEejyy0 ;
Dur h Duration of time slice h hours DCEejy ; TCEejy ; OCEhejy P 0 8behidist idist jTyy0 ðB:22Þ
B.1.3. Networks
The model considers two variables for network capacities: net-
Eqs. (B.7) to (B.9), define decommissioned heat supply capacity. works within zones, and networks between zones. Networks
The installed capacity needs to be decommissioned at the latest between zones are built along the linear distance between two
when it has met its lifetime, or though the option remains to zones, and the decision variable is expressed in power units
decommission it earlier. [kW], reflecting that the decision is the pipe/cable diameter con-
yþLt Ii
necting two zones. Networks within zones are assumed to be built
Xind following the roads within each zone. The decision variable is
NCHIbiind jy ¼ DCHIbiind jyy0 8biind jy ðB:7Þ expressed in length units [km], and the built network length
y0 ¼0
within each zone is proportional to the percentage of peak heat
demand served by a given network. Section 3.1 explains how the
yþLtD
Xi
dist T costs associated to both formulations were calculated.
NCHDidist jTy ¼ DCHDidist jTyy0 8idist jTy ðB:8Þ
y0 ¼0
B.1.3.1. Infrastructure between zones
Eq. (B.23) states that a network between zones is connected
yþLtEe
X when it has been installed and not decommissioned.
NCEejy ¼ DCEejyy0 8ejy ðB:9Þ
y0 ¼0 y0
X
CCNjj0 nyy0 ¼ ICN jj0 ny DCN jj0 nyy0 8jj0 n; 8y 6 y0 ðB:23Þ
Eqs. (B.10) to (B.15) show border conditions for vintage capacity y0 ¼0
and decommissioned capacity. These equations establish that
there cannot be any remaining capacity if it has not been previ- Initial networks for electricity and gas are assumed as described
ously installed, and technologies cannot be decommissioned in Section 3.1. These initial networks are decommissioned linearly
before being installed. throughout the modelling time horizon as described by Eq. (B.24),
when the time periods are 8.
VCHIbiind jyy0 ¼ 0 8biind j; y > y0 ðB:10Þ
ICN jj0 ny0
0
DCNjj0 ny0 y ¼ 8jj0 ; y0 < y; n–heatn ðB:24Þ
VCHDidist jTyy ¼ 0 8idist jT; y > y
0 ðB:11Þ 8
Eq. (B.25) imposes installed networks to be decommissioned at
VCEejyy0 ¼ 0 8ej; y > y0 ðB:12Þ most when they have met their lifetimes:
N
DCHIbiind jyy0 ¼ 0 8biind j; y P y0 ðB:13Þ Xn
yþLt
ICNjj ny ¼
0 DCN jj0 nyy0 8jj0 ny ðB:25Þ
y0 ¼0
0
DCHDidist jTyy0 ¼ 0 8idist jT; y P y ðB:14Þ
Eq. (B.26) defines the total connected network capacity
DCEejyy0 ¼ 0 8ej; y P y0 ðB:15Þ between zones in a given year, independent of when it was
installed.
X
TCN jj0 ny ¼ CCNjj0 ny0 y 8jj0 ny ðB:26Þ installed in each zone. Because of the way new capacity and capital
y0 6y costs are modelled (explained in Section 3.1.) the installed capacity
of individual heat supply technologies is the capacity that serves
Eq. (B.27) constrains all network variables to be non-negative.
after diversity peak heat demand. This means that the ratio of
0
ICN jj0 ny ; CCNjj0 nyy0 ; DCN jj0 nyy0 P 0 8jj nyy0 ðB:27Þ installed heat supply technologies consuming gas, electricity, or
heat, to the total peak heat demand is the percentage of demand
Eqs. (B.28) to (B.30) establish that connections between zones served by each network. Multiplying this by the total road length
must be symmetric (which leads to dividing the cost by two in per zone gives the necessary length of each network. Eqs. (B.40)
Eq. (B.72)). to (B.42) show these constraints for heat, electricity, and gas net-
ICN jj0 ny ¼ ICN j0 jny 8jj0 ny ðB:28Þ works respectively. Note that Eq. (B.40) should be for each temper-
ature level of heat networks modelled.
CCN jj0 nyy0 ¼ CCNj0 jnyy0 8jj0 nyy0 ðB:29Þ X
b;iind ¼HXT
TCHIbiind jy
X H
Rlj 6 TLNjheatnðT Þy 8jT y ðB:40Þ
DCN jj nyy0 ¼ DCN j jnyy
0 0 0
0
8jj nyy 0
ðB:30Þ b
Dem bpeakjy Numbjy
Border conditions for networks between zones are shown in

Electricity networks need to be able to at least supply electricity
Eqs. (B.31) and (B.32). These equations say that there can only be
consuming heat supply technologies plus electricity demand. Note
remaining networks and decommissioned networks if they have
that for electricity networks Eq. (B.41) assumes all electricity
been previously installed.
demand is still supplied by the electricity grid, plus the additional
0
CCN jj0 nyy0 ¼ 0 8jj n; y > y0 ðB:31Þ demand generated by the installation of new electricity consuming
heat supply technologies.
DCN jj0 nyy0 ¼ 0 8jj n; y P y0
0
ðB:32Þ 0X 1
biind jyTCHI
@ b;iind ¼ASHP;GSHP;eradiators
X þ 1A Rlj 6 TLNjelecny 8jy
H
b
Dembpeakjy Numbjy
B.1.3.2. Infrastructure within zones
As for networks between zones, Eq. (B.33) defines a network ðB:41Þ
when it has been installed and not decommissioned.
Gas network needs to be able to supply at least all gas consum-
y0
X
0
ing heat supply technologies:
VLNjnyy0 ¼ NLNjny DLNjnyy0 8jn; 8y 6 y ðB:33Þ
y0 ¼0
X
b;iind ¼boilers;CHPs
TCHIbiind jy
As described in Section 3.3, initial networks for gas and electric- X H
Rlj 6 TLNjgasny 8jy ðB:42Þ
b
Dembpeakjy Numbjy
ity are in place at the beginning of the modelled time horizon. Eq.
(B.34) imposes initial networks to be decommissioned linearly
throughout the 8 modelled time periods.
B.1.3.4. Energy balance in each zone. Eq. (B.43) constrains the energy
NLNjj0 ny0 balances in each zone for different networks. In power units, this
DLNjny0 y ¼ 8j; y0 < y; n–heatn ðB:34Þ equation states that the energy in heat, gas or electricity that is
8
entering a zone minus the energy leaving the zone, needs to equate
Eq. (B.35) imposes installed networks to be decommissioned at
the energy being consumed in the zone minus the energy being
most when they have met their lifetimes:
generated in it.
N
Xn
yþLt
X X
NLNjny ¼ DLNjnyy0 8jny ðB:35Þ F IN OUT
F hjj0 ny F CONS GEN
8hjny
hjny F hjny þ F hj0 jny hjny þ F hjny ¼ 0
y0 ¼0
j0 j0
And Eq. (B.36) defines the total installed network capacity ðB:43Þ
within a zone at a given time period.
X Consumption from heat networks equates heat delivered to
TLNjny ¼ VLN jny0 y 8jny ðB:36Þ buildings by heat exchangers, as shown by Eq. (B.44). Note that
y0 6y
one equation would be needed for each heat network of different
All network capacities must be non-negative, as shown in Eq. temperature levels. Flow generated into heat networks in each
(B.37). zone is the heat generated by district heat supply technologies,
as shown in Eq. (B.45).
0
NLNjny ; VLNjnyy0 ; DLNjnyy0 P 0 8jnyy ðB:37Þ
X OCHIbhiind jy
F CONS
hjheatnðT Þy ¼ 8hjT y ðB:44Þ
As in Eqs. (B.31) and (B.32), Eqs. (B.38) and (B.39) state that
bi ¼HXT
gThI
iind
there can only be remaining networks and decommissioned net- ind
works if they have been previously installed. X

F GEN
hjheatnðT Þy ¼ ð1 LossT Þ OCHDhidist jT y 8hjT y ðB:45Þ
VLNjnyy0 ¼ 0 8jn; 8y > y 0 ðB:38Þ idist
DLNjnyy0 ¼ 0 8jn; 8y P y0 ðB:39Þ For electricity, Eq. (B.46) shows that electricity consumption in
each zone is the initial electricity demand for appliances, plus con-
sumption of electricity-powered heat supply technologies. On the
B.1.3.3. Network capacity other hand, electricity generated in each zone is the generation
The following three equations impose that heat, electricity, and from electricity supply technologies plus electricity generated by
gas networks need to be able to supply at least technologies CHP units, as shown in Eq. (B.47).
X X OCHIbhi jy X OCHDhi jTy Eq. (B.59) defines all energy and mass flow variables as non-
F CONS
hjelecny ¼ DemEbhjy Numbjy þ ind
þ dist
8hjy
b
ThI ThD
b;
giind T;
gidist T negative.
iind ¼ idist ¼
0
ASHP;
GSHP;
ASHP;
GSHP F IN OUT CONS GEN
_ 0
hjny ; F hjny ; F hjj ny ; F hjny ; F hjny ; mhjj Ty P 0
0 8hjj nTy ðB:59Þ
eradiator
ðB:46Þ
B.1.4. Fuel and electricity consumption and CO2 emissions
X X gED
CHP T
Eqs. (B.60) and (B.61) show hourly fuel consumption by
F GEN ¼ OCEhejy þ OCHDhCHPdist jTy ThD dist demand type in each zone, for individual heat supply and district
hjelecny
e T
gCHPdist T
heat supply technologies respectively. In these equations the sums
X gEICHP are over individual heat supply and district heat supply technolo-
þ OCHIbhCHPind jy ThI ind 8hjy ðB:47Þ
b
gCHPind gies that consume fuel a. Eq. (B.62) and (B.63) show the total
annual fuel consumption for individual heat supply and district
Gas consumption in each zone is given by the energy that gas heat supply technologies.
consuming heat supply technologies are using to transform into
heat, as shown in Eq. (B.48). On the other hand there is no gas gen- X OCHIbhi jy
eration in the different zones, as shown in Eq. (B.49). FUELabhjy ¼ ind
Dur h 8abhjy ðB:60Þ
iind ðaÞ
gThI
iind
X OCHIbhi jy X OCHDhi jTy
F CONS
hjgasny ¼
ind
þ dist
8hjy X OCHDhi jTy
g ThI
gThD FUELDahjy ¼ dist
Durh 8ahjy
b; iind T; idist T
ðB:48Þ
iind ¼ idist ¼
T;
gThD
idist T
ðB:61Þ
boilers; boilers; idist ðaÞ
CHPs CHPs
X
F GEN 8hjy FUELTOT
aby ¼ FUELabhjy 8aby ðB:62Þ
hjgasny ¼ 0 ðB:49Þ
hj
Eq. (B.43) for electricity ensures electricity demand is met. Eq. X

(B.50) ensures individual heat demand is supplied by individual FUELDTOT
ay ¼ FUELDahjy 8ay ðB:63Þ
hj
heat supply technologies:
X Eq. (B.64) shows the yearly consumption of electricity from the
OCHIbhiind jy P DemHbhjy Numbjy 8bhjy ðB:50Þ
electricity grid by demand type, while Eq. (B.65) shows total yearly
iind
electricity consumption.
Additionally, the flow between zones for heat networks is given X X OCHIbhi jy
by Eq. (B.51). This equation should be repeated for each heat net- ELEC TOT
by ¼ DemEbhjy Numbjy Dur h þ ind
Dur h 8by
work temperature level. hj
ThI
hj
giind
iind ¼
_ hjj0 T y ðT T RT Þ c ¼ F hjj0 8hjj0 T y

ASHP;
m heatnðT Þy ðB:51Þ GSHP;
eradiator
Eq. (B.52) ensures that there can only be flow between zones if a ðB:64Þ
network is in place:
X OCHDhi jTy
0 ELECDTOT ¼ dist
Durh 8y
F hjj0 ny 6 TCN jj0 ny 8hjj ny ðB:52Þ y
hjT
gThD
idist T ðB:65Þ
idist ¼
ASHP;
Eqs. (B.53) and (B.54) ensure that a network can only be GSHP
installed between two neighbour zones:

Eq. (B.66) shows the total CO2e emissions of the system
ICN jj0 ny 6 Nbjj0 M 8hjj0 ny ðB:53Þ throughout the modelling period.
X X
CCNjj0 nyy0 6 Nbjj0 M 8hjj0 nyy0 ðB:54Þ CO2 ¼ FUELTOT F
aby Emaby þ FUELDTOT FD
ay Emay
aby ay
And Eq. (B.55) states that there cannot be energy flow between X X
a zone and itself: þ ELEC TOT E
by Emby þ ELECDTOT
y EmED
y ðB:66Þ
by y
0
F hjj0 ny ¼ 0 8hny; j ¼ j ðB:55Þ
For heat networks, Eq. (B.56) imposes no mass flow between a B.1.5. Costs
zone and itself: Finally, all the systems costs are added and minimised. Eq.
_ hjj0 Ty ¼ 0 8hTy; j ¼ j0
m ðB:56Þ (B.67) defines the total fixed annual operation and maintenance
costs, while Eq. (B.68) shows the total variable annual operation
Eq. (B.57) establishes that there can only be flow from outside and maintenance costs. Eq. (B.69) quantifies total fuel and electric-
the city boundary into a zone which is a city boundary, while Eq. ity costs, and Eq. (B.70) defines total carbon costs.
(B.58) establishes that there can only be flow to outside the city
X 1 X
boundary from a zone which is a city boundary MNT ¼ TCHIbiind jy Cost MI
biind jy þ TCHDidist jTy
ð1 þ rÞ y i jTy
0 6 F IN
hjny 6 Cbj M 8hjny ðB:57Þ biind jy dist
1 X 1
Cost MD
idist y þ TCEejy Cost ME
ey ðB:67Þ
0 6 F OUT 8hjny ð1 þ rÞ y ð1 þ rÞ y
hjny 6 Cbj M ðB:58Þ ejy
X 1 X LtIiind ðyfinal yÞ
OP ¼ OCHIbhiind jy Durh CostOI 1
iind y SLV ¼ VCHIbiind jyyfinal Cost CI
ð1 þ rÞ y biind jy
bhiind jy
biind jy LtIiind ð1 þ rÞyfinal
X 1
þ OCHDhidist jTy Durh Cost OI X LtDidist T ðyfinal yÞ 1
iind y
ð1 þ rÞ y þ VCHDidist jTyyfinal Cost CD
idist jTy
hidist jTy
idist jTy LtDidist T ð1 þ rÞyfinal
X 1
þ OCEhejy Dur h CostOE
ey ðB:68Þ X LtEe ðyfinal yÞ 1
ð1 þ rÞ y þ VCEejyyfinal Cost CE
ejy
hejy
ejy
E
Lte ð1 þ rÞyfinal
X 1 X 1 X CCN jj0 nyyfinal LtNn ðyfinal yÞ 1
FE ¼ FUELTOT F
aby Cost aby y þ FUELDTOT FD
ay Cost ay þ djj0 CostNT
ny
aby
ð1 þ rÞ ay ð1 þ rÞ y 0
jj ny
2 LtNn ð1 þ rÞyfinal
X 1 X 1 X
þ ELEC TOT Cost Eby þ ELECDTOT CostED LtNn ðyfinal yÞ 1
y þ VLN jnyyfinal Cost ND
ð1 þ rÞ y rÞ y ny ðB:76Þ
by y
by y ð1 þ Lt N
ð1 þ rÞyfinal
jny n
ðB:69Þ
X CO2 1 B.2. Objective function

CRB ¼ FUELTOT F
aby Emaby Cost y
ð1 þ rÞ y
aby Finally, Eq. (B.77) shows the objective function to be minimised
X CO2 1 which corresponds to the total system’s costs throughout the
þ FUELDTOT FD
ay Emay Cost y modelling time horizon.
ay ð1 þ rÞ y
X minCOSTS ¼ MNT þ OP þ FE þ CRB þ CPT þ DEC SLV ES
1
þ ELEC TOT E CO2
by Emby Cost y ðB:77Þ
by
ð1 þ rÞ y
X 1
þ ELECDTOT EmED CO2
y Cost y ðB:70Þ References
y
y
ð1 þ rÞ y
[1] Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, et al.
Capital costs are subdivided into the cost of equipment Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global
(Eq. (B.71)) and the cost of networks (Eq. (B.72)), giving the total and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for
system’s capital cost (Eq. (B.73)). Policymakers. Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA:
X 1
Intergovernmental pane on climate change (IPCC); 2014.
EQ ¼ NCHIbiind jy Cost CI
biind jy
[2] Chaudry M, Abeysekera M, Hosseini SHR, Jenkins N, Wu J. Uncertainties in
biind jy
ð1 þ rÞ y decarbonising heat in the UK. Energy Policy 2015;87:623–40.
[3] Hanna R, Gross R, Parrish B, Speirs J. Best practice in heat decarbonisation
X 1 policy: A review of the international experience of policies to promote the
þ NCHDidist jTy Cost CD
idist jTy
uptake of low-carbon heat supply UKERC Technology and Policy Assessment;
idist jTy
ð1 þ rÞ y 2016.
[4] Østergaard PA, Andersen AN. Booster heat pumps and central heat pumps in
X 1 district heating. Applied Energy 2016;184:1374–88.
þ NCEejy Cost CE
ejy ðB:71Þ [5] Bianco V, Scarpa F, Tagliafico LA. Estimation of primary energy savings by using
ejy
ð1 þ rÞ y heat pumps for heating purposes in the residential sector. Appl Therm Eng.
2017;114:938–47.
[6] Dodds PE. Integrating housing stock and energy system models as a strategy to
X ICN jj0 ny 1 improve heat decarbonisation assessments. Appl Energy 2014;132:358–69.
NTW ¼ djj0 Cost NT
ny [7] Kannan R, Strachan N. Modelling the UK residential energy sector under long-
0 2 ð1 þ rÞ y
jj ny term decarbonisation scenarios: comparison between energy systems and
sectoral modelling approaches. Appl Energy 2009;86(4):416–28.
X 1 [8] Ommen T, Markussen WB, Elmegaard B. Lowering district heating
þ NLNjny CostND
ny ðB:72Þ
jny
ð1 þ rÞ y temperatures – Impact to system performance in current and future Danish
energy scenarios. Energy 2016;94:273–91.
[9] Soltero VM, Chacartegui R, Ortiz C, Velázquez R. Evaluation of the potential of
natural gas district heating cogeneration in Spain as a tool for decarbonisation
CPT ¼ EQ þ NTW ðB:73Þ
of the economy. Energy. 2016; 115, Part 3: p. 1513–32.
[10] McGlade C, Pye S, Watson J, Bradshaw M, Ekins P. The future role of natural gas
Technology decommission costs are shown in Eq. (B.74).
in the UK. UK Energy Research Centre: UKERC; 2016.
X 1 [11] Lund H, Möller B, Mathiesen BV, Dyrelund A. The role of district heating in
DEC ¼ DCHIbiind jyy0 CostDI
iind y0 0
future renewable energy systems. Energy 2010;35(3):1381–90.
biind jyy 0 ð1 þ rÞy [12] Connolly D, Lund H, Mathiesen BV, Werner S, Möller B, Persson U, et al. Heat
Roadmap Europe: Combining district heating with heat savings to decarbonise
X 1 the EU energy system. Energy Policy 2014;65:475–89.
þ DCHDidist jTyy0 CostDD
idist Ty0 0 [13] Lund H, Werner S, Wiltshire R, Svendsen S, Thorsen JE, Hvelplund F, et al. 4th
idist jTyy 0 ð1 þ rÞy Generation District Heating (4GDH): Integrating smart thermal grids into
X 1
future sustainable energy systems. Energy 2014;68:1–11.
þ DCEejyy0 CostDE
ey0 0 ðB:74Þ [14] Troup H. Electricity is on track for decarbonisation, but what about
ejyy 0 ð1 þ rÞy decarbonising heat? Renew Energy Focus 2016;17(5):178–9.
[15] Dominković DF, Bačeković I, Sveinbjörnsson D, Pedersen AS, Krajačić G. On the
way towards smart energy supply in cities: The impact of interconnecting
Eq. (B.75) shows the income from electricity sold to the grid. geographically distributed district heating grids on the energy system. Energy;
X GEN E 1 2017.
ES ¼ F hjelecny Dur h Selly ðB:75Þ [16] Fischer D, Madani H. On heat pumps in smart grids: a review. Renew Sustain
hjy
ð1 þ rÞ y Energy Rev 2017;70:342–57.
[17] European Environment Agency. Renewable energy in Europe
Eq. (B.76) shows the salvage value by the end of the modelling 2016. Luxembourg: Recent growth and knock-on effects; 2016.
[18] Dodds PE, Staffell I, Hawkes AD, Li F, Grünewald P, McDowall W, et al.
period assuming a linear depreciation of equipment and networks Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies for heating: A review. Int J Hydrogen
throughout their lifetimes. Energy 2015;40(5):2065–83.
[19] Sadler D, Cargill A, Crowther M, Rennie A, Watt J, Burton S, et al. H21 Leeds City http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/sub-national-gas-consumption-
Gate Northern Gas. Networks 2016. data>.
[20] Committee on Climate Change. Next steps for UK heat policy; 2016. [40] Department of Energy & Climate Change. Sub-national electricity consumption
[21] MacLean K, Sansom R, Watson T, Gross T. Managing Heat System data 2013 [updated 26 March 2015; cited 2015 12 April]. Available from:
Decarbonisation. Comparing the impacts and costs of transitions in heat <https://http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/sub-national-electricity-
infrastructure Imperial College London, Centre for Energy Policy and consumption-data>.
Technology; 2016. [41] Department of Energy & Climate Change. Updated energy and emissions
[22] Hall LMH, Buckley AR. A review of energy systems models in the UK: Prevalent projections 2015:2016.
usage and categorisation. Appl Energy 2016;169:607–28. [42] Bolton P. Components of an energy bill. Library House of Commons; 2014.
[23] Fishbone LG, Abilock H. Markal, a linear-programming model for energy [43] Department for Business EIS. Green Book supplementary guidance: valuation
systems analysis: Technical description of the BNL version. Int J Energy Res of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for appraisal. Data tables 1-20:
1981;5(4):353–75. supporting the toolkit and the guidance. <https://www.gov.uk/government/
[24] Pye S, Sabio N, Strachan N. An integrated systematic analysis of uncertainties publications/valuation-of-energy-use-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions-for-
in UK energy transition pathways. Energy Policy 2015;87:673–84. appraisal2015>.
[25] Haikarainen C, Pettersson F, Saxén H. A model for structural and operational [44] OFGEM. DPCR4 – FBPQ Analysis and CAPEX projections; 2004 61877/PBP/
optimization of distributed energy systems. Appl Therm Eng 2014;70 000492.
(1):211–8. [45] Eurelectric. Power Distribution in Europe Facts & Figures; 2011.
[26] Girardin L, Marechal F, Dubuis M, Calame-Darbellay N, Favrat D. EnerGis: A [46] KEC International Limited RC cited 2017 15 Jan 2017 Available from: <http://
geographical information based system for the evaluation of integrated energy www.rpgcables.com/> 2015
conversion systems in urban areas. Energy 2010;35(2):830–40. [47] OFGEM. Gas Distribution Price Control Review Final Proposals Document;
[27] Keirstead J, Calderon C. Capturing spatial effects, technology interactions, and 2007 285a/07.
uncertainty in urban energy and carbon models: retrofitting newcastle as a [48] Dodds PE, Demoullin S. Conversion of the UK gas system to transport
case-study. Energy Policy 2012;46:253–67. hydrogen. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2013;38(18):7189–200.
[28] Keirstead J, Samsatli N, Shah N, Weber C. The impact of CHP (combined heat [49] DUKES: calorific values. In: Department for Business EIS, editor; 2016.
and power) planning restrictions on the efficiency of urban energy systems. [50] Nasr GG, Connor NE. Natural Gas Engineering and Safety Challenges:
Energy 2012;41(1):93–103. Downstream Process, Analysis, Utilization and Safety. Switzerland: Springer
[29] Pfenninger S, Hawkes A, Keirstead J. Energy systems modeling for twenty-first International Publishing; 2014.
century energy challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:74–86. [51] Element Energy. Research on district heating and local approaches to heat
[30] Sustainable Energy Planning Research Group Aalborg University. EnergyPLAN decarbonisation – a study for the Committee on Climate Change; 2015.
Advanced energy systems analysis computer model [cited 2017 15 February]; [52] Nussbaumer T, Thalmann S. Sensitivity of System Design on Heat Distribution
2017. Available from: <http://www.energyplan.eu/>. Cost in District Heating. Switzerland: IEA Bioenergy Task 32, Swiss Federal
[31] Di Somma M, Yan B, Bianco N, Graditi G, Luh PB, Mongibello L, et al. Multi- Office of Energy, and Verenum; 2014.
objective design optimization of distributed energy systems through cost and [53] Frontier Economics. Total cost benchmarking at RIIO-ED1 – Phase 2 report –
exergy assessments. Appl Energy; 2017. Volume 2; 2013.
[32] Wu R, Mavromatidis G, Orehounig K, Carmeliet J. Multiobjective optimisation [54] Hurtig J. Report-evaluation of a small scale district heating system in Ullared,
of energy systems and building envelope retrofit in a residential community. Sweden. Sweden: University of Halmstad; 2010.
Appl Energy 2017;190:634–49. [55] AECOM Limited. Assessment of the costs, performance, and characteristics of
[33] Sveinbjörnsson D, Ben Amer-Allam S, Hansen AB, Algren L, Pedersen AS. UK heat networks; 2015.
Energy supply modelling of a low-CO2 emitting energy system: case study of a [56] Western Power Distribution. Brechfa Forest Connection Project; 2014.
Danish municipality. Appl Energy 2017;195:922–41. [57] Dodds PE, McDowall W. The future of the UK gas network. Energy Policy.
[34] Loulou R, Labriet M. ETSAP-TIAM: the TIMES integrated assessment model Part 2013;60:305–16.
I: Model structure. Comput Manage Sci. 2008;5(1):7–40. [58] Alternatives EEC. Heat Pumps in District Heating; 2016 15D/537.
[35] Office for National Statistics. Super Output Area (SOA) [cited 2015 25 May]. [59] AEA. RHI Phase II – Technology Assumptions. Key Technical Assumptions for
Available from: <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/ Selected Technologies. 2012 AEA/R/ED57097.
beginner-s-guide/census/super-output-areas–soas-/index.html>. [60] Sweett Group. Research on the costs and performance of heating and cooling
[36] UCL. Development of the UK TIMES energy systems model 2015 [26/01/2016]. technologies; 2013.
Available from: <https://http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/energy/research/ [61] AEA. Review of technical information on renewable heat technologies; 2011
themes/energy-systems/uk-times>. 11D/0020.
[37] ELEXON. Elexon-Profiling 2015 [08/09/2015]. Available from: <https://http:// [62] Eunomia Research and & Consulting Ltd. RHI Evidence Report: Bioliquids for
www.elexon.co.uk/reference/technical-operations/profiling/>. Heat. Assessment of the Market, Renewable Heat Potential, Cost, Performance,
[38] Department of Energy and Climate Change. The Future of Heating: A strategic and Characteristics of Bioliquids for Non-Domestic Heat; 2014 URN 14D/392.
framework for low carbon heat in the UK. London, UK; 2012. [63] Minshull A, Luke A, Shiels S, Phillips J, Leach M. Our resilient future: a
[39] Department of Energy & Climate Change. Sub-national gas consumption data framework for climate and energy security. Bristol City Council; 2015.
2013 [updated 26 March 2015; cited 2015 12 April]. Available from: <https://

Spatially Resolved Model For Studying Decarbonisation Pathways For Heat Supply and Infrastructure Trade Offs

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

Spatially Resolved Model For Studying Decarbonisation Pathways For Heat Supply and Infrastructure Trade Offs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Spatially resolved model for studying decarbonisation pathways for heat

A new optimisation model to study heat decarbonisation approaches is presented.

F. Jalil-Vega, A.D. Hawkes / Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

(continued on next page)

F. Jalil-Vega, A.D. Hawkes / Applied Energy xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Formulate and apply a spatially-resolved model of energy sup-

ture, explicit infrastructure trade-offs, and different demand

types of insights that it can generate.

The presented research addresses the gap in existing energy

it covers topics such as grid infrastructure trade-offs, energy sys-

tems modelling, and distributed versus centralised heat supply

develop more sustainable and optimised energy systems.

It is emphasised that improving heat decarbonisation modelling

As discussed below, the framework is intended to capture seasonal

second or minute-to-minute variations. It is noted that the relative

flexibility of the supply-demand balance in heat provision may

and time steps, electricity

3.1. General description of the model

The model formulated in this research, named HIT (Heat Infras-

tricity to a spatially-disaggregated region through to 2050. The

for different consumer types are modelled.

are the optimal investments in heat supply technologies in each

zone and time period; the investments in infrastructure for heat,

networks can be added in the framework developed, as has been

done in this article for a second lower temperature heat network.

infrastructure and equipment are considered to inform commis-

sioning and decommissioning decisions. Table 2 describes the

input data used.

to account for different pipe or cable sizes connecting two zones

and the length of these connections. The general methodology

Input Description Comments

of individual heat supply technologies is the capacity that serves

Fig. 1. Spatial disaggregation for modelled zones in the City of Bristol.

The commercial software GAMS v28.8.3 was used for imple-

4. Results and discussion

Fig. 5. Percentage of total individual heat supply installed capacity, Scenario 2.

(m) Scenario 2, 2015 (n) Scenario 2, 2030 (o) Scenario 2, 2050

(m) Scenario 2, 2015 (n) Scenario 2, 2030 (o) Scenario 2, 2050

This paper has presented a spatially resolved model for the

Variable Description Units

Variable Description Units Parameter Description Units

Scalar Description Value

Border conditions for networks between zones are shown in

works if they have been previously installed. X

Eq. (B.43) for electricity ensures electricity demand is met. Eq. X

_ hjj0 T y ðT  T RT Þ c ¼ F hjj0 8hjj0 T y

installed between two neighbour zones:

X CO2 1 B.2. Objective function

You might also like

_ hjj0 T y ðT T RT Þ c ¼ F hjj0 8hjj0 T y