| Scenarios used | EDF recommends the priority use of two reference scenarios in climate studies for the Group’s facilities: SSP2-4.5 (the median scenario) and SSP5-8.5 (the scenario with the highest impact). The choice of scenario/model combination is crucial. EDF is currently using CMIP-5 models and is planning to migrate to the new database for CMIP-6 models in the very near future. |
|---|---|
| Scope | Global climate projections with adapted downscaling used in each study with respect to the installation under consideration. |
| Main variables taken into consideration |
Air temperature (performance of nuclear and thermal power plants, distribution network transport capacity, risk of fire). River flow rates and tempe ratures (producible hydro and nuclear power, risk of flooding). Sea levels (submersion of infrastructures). Wind and cloud cover (producible wind and solar power). Storms (damage to production and distribution resources). Some of these variables are not generated directly by climate forecasting and call for specific calculations. |
| Timeframe considered | Long-term (2040-2100) due to the long technical lifespan of EDF’s electricity production and distribution infrastructures. It should be noted that the emissions scenarios only result in significantly differing impact evaluations from 2050 onwards, due to the inertia of the climate system and the foreseeable impact of historic emissions. |
EDF R&D’s climate department has carried out an initial study on future climate scenarios for Chooz and Civaux for ADAPT. The scenario/model combinations were chosen for their ability to cover the broadest possible extent of risks, including extremes. A first study was conducted for the Chooz and Civaux nuclear power plants (1).
EDF group nuclear power plants under construction (Flamanville 3, Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C) have all been designed taking into account the findings of climate impact studies, in particular the prospect of rising sea levels and exceptionally large waves. For instance, for Hinkley Point C power plant in Somerset, UK, a 13.5m sea wall has been built to address an estimated increase in wave heights to 4.6 metres within the next 100 years. This time horizon covers both the operation and decommissioning of the facility. For Sizewell C in Suffolk, UK, the sea wall height has been set at 10.2 metres due to the lower tidal range in the North Sea compared to the Bristol Channel.
Climate impact studies for EDF group facilities have also quantified the risk of reductions in producible nuclear and hydro power due to the increased frequency and intensity of heatwaves and drought during the summer. However, these periods do not coincide with problematic periods in terms of electricity supply and demand, and in the long term the development of solar power should mitigate the risks to the electrical system in this respect.
With respect to exposure to extreme events such as storms, cyclones, flooding and fires, EDF group activities identified at being most at risk are firstly, power distribution networks (Enedis) and secondly EDF’s island activities (IES and PEI), especially in the most pessimistic scenarios such as SSP5-8.5. Nuclear power plants already have very high levels of safety and their adaptation to the most extreme physical events is reviewed every ten years.
The impact of climate change on electricity demand has been modelled, in particular at national level with the Futurs énergétiques 2050 (“Energy Futures 2050”) study carried out by French grid operator RTE. The study confirms the relevance of nuclear and renewable energy, seen as complementary, and reveals an increase in electricity demand in summer (with the increasing use of AC) and a decrease in winter (less heating), tending to suggest that demand for electricity will fluctuate less on a seasonal basis.
To evaluate legal, technological, market, and reputational transition risks, the EDF group has adopted scenarios developed by the IEA for its 2022 World Energy Outlook (WEO). The scenarios in question have been selected due to their extensive use, particularly in the energy sector, and their level of detail at regional and national scales. In line with the recommendations of the WBCSD and the TCFD, the EDF group uses three scenarios: one based on 1.5°C, one based on “Well below 2°C” and one assuming “Business as usual”. In 2021, the EDF group and WBCSD were involved in the setting up of an analysis platform allowing these scenarios to be compared with each other and with other scenarios including NGFS, UN PRI, BNEF and lRENA and put them in the context of the scenarios used by the IPCC.
| Scenarios used |
“Aligned 1.5°C”: IEA’s “Net Zero” (NZE) scenario aiming for carbon neutrality in 2050 and resulting in a temperature increase of +1.5°C in 2100. “Well below 2°C” scenario: IEA’s “Announced Pledges” (APS) scenario, resulting in a temperature increase of +1.7°C in 2100. “Business as usual” scenario: IEA’s “Stated Policies” scenario (STEPS), resulting in a temperature increase of +2.5°C in 2100. |
|---|---|
| Scope | World energy-climate scenarios detailed at regional (EU) or national level. |
| Variable Principles considered |
Final energy use, share of electricity and gas demand. Development of electric mobility and hydrogen power. Discounted cost of various means of electricity production (renewables, nuclear, gas, CCUS). Global CO2 emissions, CO2 sinks and the price of CO2. |
| Time horizon considered | Medium term (2030–2050): Europe and most of the countries in which the EDF group operates have committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. |
(1) For ADAPT, the study looked at all the CMIP5 models available in the climate department and selected 4 climate variable model/scenario pairs to 2050 to test the fleet’s resilience: an upper scenario (GFDL-CM3/RCP8.5), a lower scenario (MRI-CGCM3/RCP2.6), and two intermediate scenarios (NorESM1-M/RCP4.5) and (BNU-ESM/RCP4.5). In 2023, the study will be updated with CMIP 6 data.
