CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19

Flexible nuclear power and fluctuating renewables? — An analysis for decarbonized multi-vector energy systems

Göke, Leonard, Wimmers, Alexander, von Hirschhausen, Christian·2025·Energy Strategy Reviews
DOI 10.1016/j.esr.2025.101782
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.esr.2025.101782

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The role of nuclear in a climate-neutral European energy system is contentious due to scalability challenges, exceptionally long construction times, and high uncertainty in final investment costs as evident in ongoing expansion projects in Europe and globally.

    “Notably, the role of nuclear in a climate-neutral European energy system is contentious due to scalability challenges, exceptionally long construction times, and high uncertainty in final investment costs as evident in ongoing expansion projects in Europe and globally102.”

    From Long-duration electricity storage needs for coping with Dunkelflaute events in Europe (2026) · cites this paper as [102]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 90

  1. F. Böse, A. Wimmers, B. Steigerwald, and C. von Hirschhausen. Questioning nuclear scale-up propositions: Availability and economic prospects of light water, small modular and advanced reactor technologies. Energy Research & Social Science, 110(April 2024):103448, 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103448. · DOI
  2. M. V. Ramana. Small Modular and Advanced Nuclear Reactors: A Reality Check. IEEE Access, 9:42090-42099, 2021. ISSN 2169-3536. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3064948. Conference Name: IEEE Access. · DOI
  3. J.D. Jenkins, Z. Zhou, R. Ponciroli, R.B. Vilim, F. Ganda, F. de Sisternes, and A. Botterud. The benefits of nuclear flexibility in power system operations with renewable energy. Applied Energy, 222:872-884, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.002. · DOI
  4. A. Lynch, Y. Perez, S. Gabriel, and G. Mathonniere. Nuclear fleet flexibility: Modeling and impacts on power systems with renewable energy. Applied Energy, 314:118903, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118903. · DOI
  5. G. Luderer, S. Madeddu, L. Merfort, F. Ueckerdt, M. Pehl, and R. Pietzcker et al. Impact of declining renewable energy costs on electrification in low-emission scenarios. Nature Energy, 7:32-42, 2022. doi: 10.1038/s41560-021-00937-z. · DOI
  6. D. Bogdanov, M. Ram, A. Aghahosseini, A. Gulagi, A. S. Oyewo, and M. Child et al. Low-cost renewable electricity as the key driver of the global energy transition towards sustainability. Energy, 227:120467, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.120467. · DOI
  7. A. B. Lovins. US nuclear power: Status, prospects, and climate implications. The Electricity Journal, 35(4):107122, May 2022. ISSN 10406190. doi: 10.1016/j.tej.2022.107122. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1040619022000483. · DOI
  8. G. Rothwell. Projected electricity costs in international nuclear power markets. Energy Policy, 164:112905, May 2022. ISSN 03014215. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112905. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301421522001306. · DOI
  9. M. Berthélemy and L. Escobar Rangel. Nuclear reactors' construction costs: The role of lead-time, standardization and technological progress. Energy Policy, 82:118-130, 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.03.015. · DOI
  10. A. Grubler. The costs of the french nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing. Energy Policy, 38(9):5174-5188, 2010. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.003. · DOI · Paper page
  11. R. McKenna, S. Hollnaicher, and W. Fichtner. Cost-potential curves for onshore wind energy: A high-resolution analysis for germany. Applied Energy, 115:103-115, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.10.030. · DOI
  12. M. Child, C. Kemfert, D. Bogdanov, and C. Breyer. Flexible electricity generation, grid exchange and storage for the transition to a 100 Renewable Energy, 139:80-101, 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.077. · DOI · Paper page
  13. W.-P. Schill. Electricity storage and the renewable energy transition. Joule, 4(10):2059-2064, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2020.07.022. · DOI · Paper page
  14. L. Deguenon, D. Yamegueu, S. Moussa kadri, and A. Gomna. Overcoming the challenges of integrating variable renewable energy to the grid: A comprehensive review of electrochemical battery storage systems. Journal of Power Sources, 580:233343, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2023.233343. · DOI
  15. P.D. Lund, J. Lindgren, J. Mikkola, and J. Salpakari. Review of energy system flexibility measures to enable high levels of variable renewable electricity. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 45:785-807, 2015.
  16. H.C. Gils. Assessment of the theoretical demand response potential in europe. Energy, 67:1-18, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2014.02.019. · DOI
  17. T. Brown, D. Schlachtberger, A. Kies, S. Schramm, and M. Greiner. Synergies of sector coupling and transmission extension in a cost-optimised, highly renewable european energy system. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 160:720-739, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.222. · DOI · Paper page
  18. A. Schuller, C. M. Flath, and S. Gottwalt. Quantifying load flexibility of electric vehicles for renewable energy integration. Applied Energy, 151:335-344, 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.04.004. · DOI
  19. R. Verzijlbergh, C.B. Martínez-Anido, Z. Lukszo, and L. de Vries. Does controlled electric vehicle charging substitute cross-border transmission capacity? Applied Energy, 120:169-180, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.08.020. · DOI
  20. P.A. Gunkel, C. Bergaentzlé, I. G. Jensen, and F. Scheller. From passive to active: Flexibility from electric vehicles in the context of transmission system development. Applied Energy, 277:115526, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115526. · DOI
  21. N.O. Nagel, E.O. Jåstad, and T. Martinsen. The grid benefits of vehicle-to-grid in norway and denmark: An analysis of home-and public parking potentials. Energy, 293:130729, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.130729. · DOI
  22. A. Bloess. Impacts of heat sector transformation on germany's power system through increased use of power-to-heat. Applied Energy, 239: 560-580, 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.101. · DOI
  23. W.-P. Schill and A. Zerrahn. Flexible electricity use for heating in markets with renewable energy. Applied Energy, 266:114571, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114571. · DOI
  24. A. Bloess, W.-P. Schill, and A. Zerrahn. Power-to-heat for renewable energy integration: A review of technologies, modeling approaches, and flexibility potentials. Applied Energy, 212:1611-1626, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.073. · DOI
  25. D.P. Schlachtberger, T. Brown, S. Schramm, and M. Greiner. The benefits of cooperation in a highly renewable european electricity network. Energy, 134:469-481, 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.06.004. · DOI
  26. A. Roth and W.-P. Schill. Geographical balancing of wind power decreases storage needs in a 100 iScience, 26(7):107074, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107074. · DOI · Paper page
  27. F. Neumann, E. Zeyen, M. Victoria, and T. Brown. The potential role of a hydrogen network in europe. Joule, 7(8):1793-1817, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2023.06.016. · DOI
  28. D. Wang, M. Muratori, J. Eichman, M. Wei, S. Saxena, and C. Zhang. Quantifying the flexibility of hydrogen production systems to support large-scale renewable energy integration. Journal of Power Sources, 399:383-391, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.07.101. · DOI
  29. H. C. Gils, H. Gardian, and J. Schmugge. Interaction of hydrogen infrastructures with other sector coupling options towards a zero-emission energy system in germany. Renewable Energy, 180:140-156, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.08.016. · DOI
  30. K. Guerra, R. Gutiérrez-Alvarez, O. J. Guerra, and P. Haro. Opportunities for low-carbon generation and storage technologies to decarbonise the future power system. Applied Energy, 336:120828, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.120828. · DOI
  31. B. Wealer, S. Bauer, C. von Hirschhausen, C. Kemfert, and L. Göke. Investing into third generation nuclear power plants -Review of recent trends and analysis of future investments using Monte Carlo Simulation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 143:110836, June 2021. ISSN 13640321. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110836. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364032121001301. · DOI · Paper page
  32. L. Göke. Anymod.jl: A julia package for creating energy system models. SoftwareX, 16:100871, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2021.100871. · DOI
  33. J. Bistline, S. Bragg-Sitton, W. Cole, B. Dixon, E. Eschmann, and J. Ho et al. Modeling nuclear energy's future role in decarbonized energy systems. iScience, 26(2):105952, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.105952. · DOI
  34. B. Shirizadeh and P. Quirion. Low-carbon options for the french power sector: What role for renewables, nuclear energy and carbon capture and storage? Energy Economics, 95:105004, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2020.105004. · DOI
  35. J. Price, I. Keppo, and P. E. Dodds. The role of new nuclear power in the uk's net-zero emissions energy system. Energy, 262:125450, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125450. · DOI
  36. L. Duan, R. Petroski, L. Wood, and K. Caldeira. Stylized least-cost analysis of flexible nuclear power in deeply decarbonized electricity systems considering wind and solar resources worldwide. Nature Energy, February 2022. doi: 10.1038/s41560-022-00979-x. · DOI
  37. E. Baik, K. P. Chawla, J. D. Jenkins, C. Kolster, N. S. Patankar, and A. Olson et al. What is different about different net-zero carbon electricity systems? Energy and Climate Change, 2:100046, 2021. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2021.100046. · DOI
  38. Amirhossein Fattahi, Jos Sijm, Machteld Van Den Broek, Rafael Martínez Gordón, Manuel Sanchez Dieguez, and André Faaij. Analyzing the techno-economic role of nuclear power in the Dutch net-zero energy system transition. Advances in Applied Energy, 7:100103, September 2022. ISSN 26667924. doi: 10.1016/j.adapen.2022.100103. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S266679242200021X. · DOI
  39. S. Wheatley, B. K. Sovacool, and D. Sornette. Reassessing the safety of nuclear power. Energy Research & Social Science, 15:96- 100, May 2016. ISSN 22146296. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.026. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S2214629615301067. · DOI
  40. L. M. Krall, A. M. Macfarlane, and R. C. Ewing. Nuclear waste from small modular reactors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(23):e2111833119, June 2022. ISSN 0027-8424, 1091-6490. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2111833119. URL https://pnas.org/ doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2111833119. · DOI
  41. R. Lordan-Perret, R. Bärenbold, H. Weigt, and R. Rosner. An ex-ante method to verify commercial U.S. nuclear power plant decommissioning cost estimates. Energy Economics, 127:107023, November 2023. ISSN 01409883. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2023.107023. URL https: //linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140988323005212. · DOI
  42. M. Lehtveer and F. Hedenus. Nuclear power as a climate mitigation strategy -technology and proliferation risk. Journal of Risk Research, 18(3):273-290, March 2015. ISSN 1366-9877, 1466-4461. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2014.889194. URL http://www.tandfonline.com/ doi/abs/10.1080/13669877.2014.889194. · DOI
  43. A. Stirling. Limits to the value of external costs. Energy Policy, 25(5):517-540, April 1997. ISSN 03014215. doi: 10.1016/S0301-4215(97) 00041-4. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301421597000414. · DOI
  44. L. Göke, J. Weibezahn, and M. Kendziorski. How flexible electrification can integrate fluctuating renewables. Energy, 278:127832, September 2023. ISSN 03605442. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.127832. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S0360544223012264. · DOI
  45. R. Haas, S. Thomas, and A. Ajanovic. The Historical Development of the Costs of Nuclear Power. In R. Haas, L. Mez, and A. Ajanovic, editors, The Technological and Economic Future of Nuclear Power, pages 97-116. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 2019. ISBN 978-3-658-18004-1 978-3-658-18005-8. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-25987-7_12. URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-658-25987-7_12. · DOI
  46. G. MacKerron. Nuclear costs: Why do they keep rising? Energy Policy, 20(7):641-652, July 1992. ISSN 03014215. doi: 10.1016/ 0301-4215(92)90006-N. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/030142159290006N. · DOI
  47. K. Shirvan. Overnight Capital Cost of the Next AP1000. Technical Report MIT-ANP-TR-193, Massachusetts Institue of Technology, Cambridge, MA, March 2022.
  48. N. Barkatullah and A. Ahmad. Current status and emerging trends in financing nuclear power projects. Energy Strategy Reviews, 18: 127-140, December 2017. ISSN 2211467X. doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2017.09.015. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/ pii/S2211467X17300561. · DOI
  49. G. Rothwell. Economics of Nuclear Power. Routledge, London, UK, 2016. ISBN 978-1-138-85840-4.
  50. L. M. Boldon and P. Sabharwall. Small modular reactor: First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) and Nth-of-a-Kind (NOAK) Economic Analysis. Technical Report INL/EXT-14-32616, 1167545, August 2014. URL http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1167545/. Last accessed on 14.07.2022.
  51. W. R. Stewart and K. Shirvan. Capital Cost Estimation for Advanced Nuclear Power Plants. preprint, Open Science Framework, January 2021. URL https://osf.io/erm3g. Last accessed on 14.07.2022.
  52. IEA, NEA, and OECD. Projected Costs of Generating Electricity -2020 Edition. Technical report, International Energy Agency (IEA), Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), Paris, December 2020. URL https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_51110/projected-costs-of-generating-electricity-2020-edition. Last accessed on 15.07.2022.
  53. B. W. Dixon, F. Ganda, K. A. Williams, E. Hoffman, and J. K. Hanson. Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis -2017 Edition. Technical Report INL/EXT-17-43826, 1423891, September 2017. URL http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1423891/. Last accessed on 05.08.2022.
  54. B. Mignacca and G. Locatelli. Economics and finance of Small Modular Reactors: A systematic review and research agenda. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 118:109519, February 2020. ISSN 1364-0321. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.109519. URL http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032119307270. · DOI
  55. L. W. Davis. Prospects for Nuclear Power. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(1):49-66, 2012. doi: 10.1257/jep.26.1.49. URL http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.26.1.49. · DOI
  56. J. Koomey and N. E. Hultman. A reactor-level analysis of busbar costs for US nuclear plants, 1970-2005. Energy Policy, 35(11):5630- 5642, 2007. ISSN 0301-4215. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.06.005. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0301421507002558. · DOI
  57. L. Escobar Rangel and F. Leveque. Revisiting the Cost Escalation Curse of Nuclear Power: New Lessons from the French Experience. Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, 4(2), April 2015. ISSN 21605882. doi: 10.5547/2160-5890.4.2.lran. URL http: //www.iaee.org/en/publications/eeeparticle.aspx?id=95. · DOI
  58. J. Harding. Economics of Nuclear Power and Proliferation Risks in a Carbon-Constrained World. The Electricity Journal, 20(10):65- 76, December 2007. ISSN 10406190. doi: 10.1016/j.tej.2007.10.012. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S1040619007001285. · DOI
  59. B. Steigerwald, J. Weibezahn, M. Slowik, and C. Von Hirschhausen. Uncertainties in estimating production costs of future nuclear technologies: A model-based analysis of small modular reactors. Energy, 281:128204, October 2023. ISSN 03605442. doi: 10.1016/j. energy.2023.128204. URL https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360544223015980. · DOI
  60. D. G. Caglayan, N. Weber, H. U. Heinrichs, J. Linßen, M. Robinius, P. A. Kukla, and D. Stolten. Technical potential of salt caverns for hydrogen storage in europe. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 45(11):6793-6805, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.12.161. · DOI · Paper page
  61. K. Poncelet, E. Delarue, D. Six, J. Duerinck, and W. D'haeseleer. Impact of the level of temporal and operational detail in energy-system planning models. Applied Energy, 162:631-643, 2016. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.10.100. · DOI
  62. K. Poncelet, E. Delarue, and W. D'haeseleer. Unit commitment constraints in long-term planning models: Relevance, pitfalls and the role of assumptions on flexibility. Applied Energy, 258:113843, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113843. · DOI
  63. H. C. Bloomfield, D. J. Brayshaw, L. C. Shaffrey, P. J. Coker, and H. E. Thornton. Quantifying the increasing sensitivity of power systems to climate variability. Environmental Research Letters, 11(12):124025, 2016. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124025. · DOI
  64. O. Ruhnau and S. Qvist. Storage requirements in a 100% renewable electricity system: extreme events and inter-annual variability. Environmental Research Letters, 17(4):044018, 2022. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ac4dc8. · DOI
  65. J. Ullmark, L. Göransson, and F. Johnsson. Representing net load variability in electricity system capacity expansion models -accounting for challenging net-load events. SSRN, 2024. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4681508. · DOI
  66. L. Göke, F. Schmidt, and M. Kendziorski. Storage requirements in a 100% renewable electricity system: extreme events and inter-annual variability. European Journal of Operational Research, 316(1):183-199, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2024.01.016. · DOI
  67. F. Neumann, V. Hagenmeyer, and T. Brown. Approximating power flow and transmission losses in coordinated capacity expansion problems. Applied Energy, 314(3):118859, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118859. · DOI
  68. Institute for Energy and Transport (Joint Research Center). The jrc-eu-times model. bioenergy potentials for eu and neighbouring countries. eUR -Scientific and Technical Research Reports, 2015. doi: 10.2790/39014. · DOI
  69. L. Göke. A graph-based formulation for modeling macro-energy systems. Applied Energy, 301:117377, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021. 117377. · DOI
  70. S. Heinen, W. Turner, L. Cradden, F. McDermott, and M. O'Malley. Electrification of residential space heating considering coincidental weather events and building thermal inertia: A system-wide planning analysis. Energy, 127:136-154, 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.03. 102. · DOI
  71. M. S. Triebs and G. Tsatsaronis. From heat demand to heat supply: How to obtain more accurate feed-in time series for district heating systems. Applied Energy, 311:118571, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118571. · DOI
  72. V. Heinisch, L. Göransson, Erlandsson R., H. Hodel, F. Johnsson, and M. Odenberger. Smart electric vehicle charging strategies for sectoral coupling in a city energy system. Applied Energy, 288:116640, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116640. · DOI
  73. A. Mangipinto, F. Lombardi, F. D. Sanvito, M. Pavičević, S. Quoilin, and E. Colombo. Impact of mass-scale deployment of electric vehicles and benefits of smart charging across all european countries. Applied Energy, 312:118676, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118676. · DOI
  74. L. Strobel, J. Schlund, and M. Pruckner. Joint analysis of regional and national power system impacts of electric vehicles-a case study for germany on the county level in 2030. Applied Energy, 315:118945, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118945. · DOI
  75. M.A. Hannan, M.S. Mollik, A. Q. Al-Shetwi, S.A. Rahman, M. Mansor, and R.A. Begum et al. Vehicle to grid connected technologies and charging strategies: Operation, control, issues and recommendations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 339:130587, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130587. · DOI
  76. S. Wang and R. Bo. Joint planning of electricity transmission and hydrogen transportation networks. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, 58(2):2887-2897, 2022. doi: 10.1109/TIA.2021.3119556. · DOI
  77. G. He, D. S. Mallapragada, A. Bose, C. F. Heuberger-Austin, and E. Gençer. Sector coupling via hydrogen to lower the cost of energy system decarbonization. Energy Environ. Sci., 14:4635-4646, 2021. doi: 10.1039/D1EE00627D. · DOI
  78. F. Parolin, P. Colbertaldo, and S. Campanari. Development of a multi-modality hydrogen delivery infrastructure: An optimization model for design and operation. Energy Conversion and Management, 266:115650, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115650. · DOI
  79. F. Arpino, C. Canale, G. Cortellessa, M. Dell'Isola, G. Ficco, G. Grossi, and L. Moretti. Green hydrogen for energy storage and natural gas system decarbonization: An italian case study. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 49:586-600, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023. 09.299. · DOI
  80. H. Auer, P. Crespo del Granado, P.-Y. Oei, K. Hainsch, K. Löffler, and T. Burandt et al. Development and modelling of different decarboniza- tion scenarios of the european energy system until 2050 as a contribution to achieving the ambitious 1.5 • c climate target-establishment of open source/data modelling in the european h2020 project openentrance. Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik, 137(7):346-358, 2020. doi: 10.1007/s00502-020-00832-7. · DOI
  81. S. Risch, R. Maier, J. Du, N. Pflugradt, P. Stenzel, L. Kotzur, and D. Stolten. Potentials of renewable energy sources in germany and the influence of land use datasets. Energies, 15(15), 2022. doi: 10.3390/en15155536. · DOI
  82. M.-A. Dupré la Tour. Photovoltaic and wind energy potential in europe -a systematic review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 179:113189, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113189. · DOI
  83. M.M. Frysztacki, J. Hörsch, V. Hagenmeyer, and T. Brown. The strong effect of network resolution on electricity system models with high shares of wind and solar. Applied Energy, 291:116726, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116726. · DOI
  84. M. Kendziorski, L. Göke, C. von Hirschhausen, C. Kemfert, and E. Zozmann. Centralized and decentral approaches to succeed the 100% energiewende in germany in the european context -a model-based analysis of generation, network, and storage investments. Energy Policy, 167:113039, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113039. · DOI
  85. Committee on Laying the Foundation for New and Advanced Nuclear Reactors in the United States, Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Academy of Engineering, and National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Laying the Foundation for New and Advanced Nuclear Reactors in the United States. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2023. ISBN 978-0-309-69077-5. doi: 10.17226/26630. URL https://www.nap.edu/catalog/26630. Pages: 26630. · DOI
  86. J. Kupitz. Small and medium reactors: Development status and application aspects. pages 497-534, Trieste, Italy, December 2001. ICTP Lecture Notes. URL https://www.osti.gov/etdeweb/biblio/20854884.
  87. R. Budi, A. Rijanti, S. Lumbanraja, M. Birmano, E. Amitayani, and E. Liun. Fuel and O&M Costs Estimation of High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactors and Its Possibility to be Implemented in Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 536(1):012144, June 2019. ISSN 1757-8981, 1757-899X. doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/536/1/012144. URL https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10. 1088/1757-899X/536/1/012144. · DOI
  88. C. P. Pannier and R. Skoda. Comparison of Small Modular Reactor and Large Nuclear Reactor Fuel Cost. Energy and Power Engineering, 06(05):82-94, 2014. ISSN 1949-243X, 1947-3818. doi: 10.4236/epe.2014.65009. URL http://www.scirp.org/journal/doi.aspx? DOI=10.4236/epe.2014.65009. · DOI
  89. P. Linares and A. Conchado. The economics of new nuclear power plants in liberalized electricity markets. Energy Economics, 40:S119- S125, December 2013. ISSN 01409883. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.007. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S0140988313002028. · DOI
  90. S. Öberg, M. Odenberger, and F. Johnsson. Exploring the competitiveness of hydrogen-fueled gas turbines in future energy systems. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 47(1):624-644, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.10.035. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Göke, L., Wimmers, A., & von Hirschhausen, C.
Venue
Energy Strategy Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-07
Volume
60
Pages
101782
ISSN
2211-467X
DOI
10.1016/j.esr.2025.101782
Cited by
19
References
0
Language
en
Licence
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (423336886)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review