Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Expanded modelling scenarios to understand the role of offshore wind in decarbonizing the United States

Nature Energy volume 8, pages 1240–1249 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

An assessment of decarbonization pathways in energy models reveals fundamental limitations in representing factors that are relevant for practical decision-making. Although these modelling limitations are widely acknowledged, their impact on the deployment of individual power generation types is not well understood. As a result, the societal value from such generation types could be vastly misrepresented. Here we explore a wide spectrum of factors that impact offshore wind deployment in the United States using a detailed capacity expansion model. Many factors prescribe a large future role for offshore wind, yet this diverges from what models often show. We extend the typically narrow modelling context through high spatial resolution, several cost and transmission possibilities and various energy-sector policies. We estimate offshore wind to constitute 1–8% (31–256 gigawatts) of total US generation by 2050. This wide range suggests an uncertain but potentially important regional role. Our expansive scenarios demonstrate how to address many limitations of decarbonization modelling.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Offshore wind capacity in the policy and demand scenarios.
Fig. 2: Electricity generation and offshore wind capacity in our core scenario.
Fig. 3: Generation fraction in 2050 for the default-demand 95% CO2 reduction scenarios.
Fig. 4: Offshore wind capacity in 2050 across all scenarios.
Fig. 5: Wind deployment in 2050 by site.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The ReEDS model datasets analysed in this article are described in ‘Data’ in the Methods. Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

The source code for the ReEDS model is available at https://github.com/NREL/ReEDS-2.0. Further information related to the ReEDS code, data and assumptions is available from M.M. (Matthew.Mowers@nrel.gov).

References

  1. Moallemi, E. A. & Malekpour, S. A participatory exploratory modelling approach for long-term planning in energy transitions. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 35, 205–216 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Helistö, N., Kiviluoma, J., Holttinen, H., Lara, J. D. & Hodge, B.-M. Including operational aspects in the planning of power systems with large amounts of variable generation: a review of modeling approaches. WIREs Energy Environ. 8, e341 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Pfenninger, S., Hawkes, A. & Keirstead, J. Energy systems modeling for twenty-first century energy challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 33, 74–86 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ellenbeck, S. & Lilliestam, J. How modelers construct energy costs: discursive elements in energy system and integrated assessment models. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 47, 69–77 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li, J., Zhang, J., Ge, W. & Liu, X. Multi-scale methodology for complex systems. Chem. Eng. Sci. 59, 1687–1700 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sterman, J. All models are wrong: reflections on becoming a systems scientist. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 18, 501–531 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. DeCarolis, J. et al. Formalizing best practice for energy system optimization modelling. Appl. Energy 194, 184–198 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Keepin, B. & Wynne, B. Technical analysis of IIASA energy scenarios. Nature 312, 691–695 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gils, H. C. et al. Modeling flexibility in energy systems—comparison of power sector models based on simplified test cases. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 158, 111995 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bistline, J., Diamant, A. & Hytowitz, R. Incorporating Energy Storage Resources into Long-Term Capacity Planning Models Technical Report 3002021969 (Electric Power Research Institute, 2021); https://www.epri.com/research/products/000000003002021969

  11. McCollum, D. L., Gambhir, A., Rogelj, J. & Wilson, C. Energy modellers should explore extremes more systematically in scenarios. Nat. Energy 5, 104–107 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pye, S. et al. Modelling net-zero emissions energy systems requires a change in approach. Clim. Policy https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1824891 (2021).

  13. Pedersen, T. T., Victoria, M., Rasmussen, M. G. & Andresen, G. B. Modeling all alternative solutions for highly renewable energy systems. Energy 234, 121294 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Musial, W. et al. Offshore Wind Market Report: 2021 Edition Technical Report DOE/GO-102021-5614 (US Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 2021); https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-08/Offshore%20Wind%20Market%20Report%202021%20Edition_Final.pdf

  15. Beiter, P. et al. Expert perspectives on the wind plant of the future. Wind Energy 25, 1363–1378 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mills, A. et al. Estimating the value of offshore wind along the United States’ eastern coast. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 094013 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang, Y.-H. et al. Spatial and temporal variation of offshore wind power and its value along the Central California Coast. Environ. Res. Commun. 1, 121001 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Douville, T., Bhatnagar, D., O’Neil, R. & Mongird, K. Exploring the Grid Value Potential of Offshore Wind Energy in Oregon OCS Study BOEM 2020-026, PNNL-29935 (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 2020); https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-29935.pdf

  19. Beiter, P. et al. A Spatial-Economic Cost-Reduction Pathway Analysis for U.S. Offshore Wind Energy Development from 2015–2030 Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-66579 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2016); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/66579.pdf

  20. Bistline, J. et al. Electric sector policy, technological change, and U.S. emissions reductions goals: results from the EMF 32 model intercomparison project. Energy Econ. 73, 307–325 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mai, T. et al. The role of input assumptions and model structures in projections of variable renewable energy: a multi-model perspective of the U.S. electricity system. Energy Econ. 76, 313–324 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Luderer, G. et al. Impact of declining renewable energy costs on electrification in low-emission scenarios. Nat. Energy 7, 32–42 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kanyako, F. & Baker, E. Uncertainty analysis of the future cost of wind energy on climate change mitigation. Clim. Change 166, 10 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cranmer, A. & Baker, E. The global climate value of offshore wind energy. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 054003 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Victoria, M., Zhu, K., Brown, T., Andresen, G. B. & Greiner, M. Early decarbonisation of the European energy system pays off. Nat. Commun. 11, 6223 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Soares-Ramos, E. P. P., de Oliveira-Assis, L., Sarrias-Mena, R. & Fernández-Ramírez, L. M. Current status and future trends of offshore wind power in Europe. Energy 202, 117787 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schlachtberger, D. P., Brown, T., Schäfer, M., Schramm, S. & Greiner, M. Cost optimal scenarios of a future highly renewable European electricity system: exploring the influence of weather data, cost parameters and policy constraints. Energy 163, 100–114 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Schlachtberger, D. P., Brown, T., Schramm, S. & Greiner, M. The benefits of cooperation in a highly renewable European electricity network. Energy 134, 469–481 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gils, H. C., Scholz, Y., Pregger, T., Luca de Tena, D. & Heide, D. Integrated modelling of variable renewable energy-based power supply in Europe. Energy 123, 173–188 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bistline, J. E. T. Roadmaps to net-zero emissions systems: emerging insights and modeling challenges. Joule 5, 2551–2563 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mai, T. et al. Electrification Futures Study: Scenarios of Electric Technology Adoption and Power Consumption for the United States Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-71500 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2018); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy18osti/71500.pdf

  32. Jorgenson, J., Awara, S., Stephen, G. & Mai, T. Comparing Capacity Credit Calculations for Wind: A Case Study in Texas Technical Report NREL/TP-5C00-80486 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2021); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/80486.pdf

  33. Barter, G. E., Robertson, A. & Musial, W. A systems engineering vision for floating offshore wind cost optimization. Renew. Energy Focus 34, 1–16 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Musial, W. & Butterfield, S. Future for Offshore Wind Energy in the United States Technical Report NREL/CP-500-36313 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2004); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36313.pdf

  35. Mai, T., Mowers, M., Beiter, P., Lopez, A. & Brown, P. The Determinants of Offshore Wind’s Role in a Future U.S. Energy System: A Preliminary Modeling Sensitivity Analysis [Slides] Presentation NREL/PR-6A40-82101 (Office of Scientific and Technical Information, 2022); https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1869691

  36. Lopez, A. et al. Land use and turbine technology influences on wind potential in the United States. Energy 223, 120044 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cole, W. et al. 2021 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook Technical Report NREL/TP-6A40-80641 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2021); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/80641.pdf

  38. Lopez, A. et al. Offshore Wind Energy Technical Potential for the Contiguous United States (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2022); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/83650.pdf

  39. Flint, S., deMesa, R., Doughman, P. & Huber, E. Offshore Wind Energy Development off the California Coast Technical Report CEC-800-2022-001-REV (California Energy Commission, 2022); https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/4361

  40. Shields, M. et al. A Supply Chain Road Map for Offshore Wind Energy in the United States Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-84710 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2023); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy23osti/84710.pdf

  41. Neumann, F. & Brown, T. The near-optimal feasible space of a renewable power system model. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 190, 106690 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Komiyama, R. & Fujii, Y. Large-scale integration of offshore wind into the Japanese power grid. Sustain. Sci. 16, 429–448 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Gao, A., Huang, C., Lin, J. & Su, W. Review of recent offshore wind power strategy in Taiwan: onshore wind power comparison. Energy Strategy Rev. 38, 100747 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mai, T., Lopez, A., Mowers, M. & Lantz, E. Interactions of wind energy project siting, wind resource potential, and the evolution of the US power system. Energy 223, 119998 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Buchholz, S., Gamst, M. & Pisinger, D. Finding a portfolio of near-optimal aggregated solutions to capacity expansion energy system models. SN Oper. Res. Forum 1, 7 (2020).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Ho, J. et al. Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) Model Documentation: Version 2020 Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-78195 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2021); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/78195.pdf

  47. Gates, N., Cole, W., Frazier, W. & Gagnon, P. Evaluating the Interactions Between Variable Renewable Energy and Diurnal Storage Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-78042 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2021); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/78042.pdf

  48. Annual Technology Baseline. National Renewable Energy Laboratory https://atb.nrel.gov (2021).

  49. Denholm, P. et al. Examining Supply-Side Options to Achieve 100% Clean Electricity by 2035 Technical Report NREL/TP-6A40-81644 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2022); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81644.pdf

  50. Annual Energy Outlook 2021 (US Energy Information Administration, 2021); https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/AEO_Narrative_2021.pdf

  51. Murphy, C. et al. Electrification Futures Study: Scenarios of Power System Evolution and Infrastructure Development for the United States Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-72330 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2021); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/72330.pdf

  52. Maclaurin, G. et al. The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) Model: A Geospatial Platform for Technical Potential and Supply Curve Modeling Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-73067 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2019); https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/73067.pdf

  53. Barbose, G. U.S. Renewables Portfolio Standards. 2021 Status Update: Early Release (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2021); https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/rps_status_update-2021_early_release.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was authored in part by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the US Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding is provided by the US DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Wind Energy Technologies Office. The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the US Government. The US Government retains, and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US Government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes. The views expressed are purely those of the authors only.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, USA

    Philipp Beiter & Trieu Mai

  2. New York City, NY, USA

    Matthew Mowers

  3. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA

    John Bistline

Authors
  1. Philipp Beiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Trieu Mai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthew Mowers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Bistline
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

P.B., T.M. and J.B. conceived and conceptualized the study. M.M., T.M. and P.B. performed the analysis. P.B., T.M. and J.B. wrote the manuscript. M.M. edited the manuscript and provided guidance on the analysis and technical assumptions.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philipp Beiter.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Energy thanks Jose Lara, Hans Christian Gils and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Tables 1–4, Figs. 1–12 and Note 1.

Supplementary Data 1

Source data for Supplementary Figs. 1–6 and 8–12.

Source data

Source Data Fig. 1

Source data for Fig. 1 (policy and demand scenarios).

Source Data Fig. 2

Source data for Fig. 2 (generation and capacity in the core scenario).

Source Data Fig. 3

Source data for Fig. 3 (offshore wind generation fraction in 2050).

Source Data Fig. 4

Source data for Fig. 4 (offshore wind capacity in 2050).

Source Data Fig. 5

Source data for Fig. 5 (wind deployment by site in 2050).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Beiter, P., Mai, T., Mowers, M. et al. Expanded modelling scenarios to understand the role of offshore wind in decarbonizing the United States. Nat Energy 8, 1240–1249 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-023-01364-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-023-01364-y

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing