Do the maths yourself
You see it differently? Do the maths.
Choose a scenario and change the assumptions. The link below shares exactly your settings, for example in a discussion.
Expansion as set out in the Energy Act: 45 TWh of new renewables. All nuclear plants are shut down, consumption as in the Energy Perspectives 2050+.
Imports in winter
5.5 TWh
above the 5 TWh guideline
Solar power unused
49 %
18.7 TWh per year
Cost per kWh consumed
7.2 ct.
4.9 bn CHF per year, generation only
- Run-of-river plants
- Waste, wood, biogas
- Wind
- Solar, used
- Storage lakes
- Imports
- Solar, unused
- Consumption
68.7 TWh per year, 38.5 TWh of it in winter
Extra reservoirs 1.1 TWh, seasonal battery 0.00 TWh
Rate 3.0 %, new nuclear 5.0 %, imported power 12 ct./kWh
Limits of the model
- Months, not hours. The model works with monthly totals. It assumes that day and night are balanced, for example by pumped storage and daily batteries. Cold, windless weeks of fog are not captured. The winter gap is therefore more likely underestimated.
- An average weather year. Dry years and winters with little snow are not captured.
- Grid costs are missing. Much more solar power needs stronger distribution grids. These costs are not included and would make the solar scenarios more expensive.
- Today’s prices. Solar and batteries are expected to get cheaper; nuclear projects have recently become more expensive.
- Imports are always possible. The model does not check whether neighbouring countries have power to spare in winter.
- Flexible demand is missing. Plants that run only when there is a surplus, for example to make hydrogen, would use the summer power and improve the case for solar.
Found a mistake or a better source? The model is open on GitHub. All assumptions are on the page Assumptions and sources.