1. Introduction
The clean energy transition supports a global shift from fossil fuel-based energy systems to renewable and sustainable sources such as solar, wind and biomass. This transformation is driven by the urgent need to mitigate climate change, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance energy security, and build a more resilient, sustainable energy infra-structure that supports long-term economic growth [
1].
In fact, the switch from energy systems based predominantly on the use of fossil fuels to new, more efficient and environmentally sustainable models based on the use of renewable energy sources is mandatory to mitigate climate change and increase energy security.
Promoting a clean energy transition represents a priority for the European Union (EU) strongly engaged in the fight against climate change with the ambitious goal set out in the European Green Deal to become climate-neutral by 2050, setting an intermediate – 55% target for CO
2 emissions at 2030 [
2]. Considering the enormous efforts required from all European countries to move to a climate-neutral economy by 2050, a complex set of laws has been defined to accelerate the energy transition. In particular, the Clean Energy for all Europeans Package [
3] sets out the European energy policy framework to facilitate a clean energy transition towards a more sustainable, decentralized and consumer-oriented system. The Clean Energy Package (CEP), based on four Directives [
4,
5,
6,
7] and four Regulations [
8,
9,
10,
11], focus on the energy performance of buildings, renewable energy, energy efficiency, governance and electricity market design, updating the EU targets for 2030 as follows:
a 40% reduction in Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to 1990 levels;
32% for renewable energy sources in the EU energy mix;
an energy efficiency target of 32.5%, compared to a baseline scenario set in 2007.
Another important initiative is the REPowerEU plan launched in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, that aims to reduce Europe's dependence on Russian gas (-18% of gas consumption), by promoting energy efficiency, diversify energy supplies and produce clean energy by accelerating the adoption of renewable sources [
12,
13,
14]. By 1 March 2026, EU Member States must submit national plans containing strategies for diversifying energy supplies, with detailed measures and milestones for phasing out direct and indirect imports of Russian gas and oil. These measures will accelerate the EU's energy transition and diversify energy supplies to eliminate risks to security of supply and market stability [
15]. The RePower plan also supports citizen-driven energy actions to contribute to the clean energy transition, advancing energy efficiency within local communities [
16].
As far as Italy is concerned, European regulatory frameworks have been transposed into national legislation, in line with the country's ambitious decarbonisation targets and providing financial incentives for community-based energy projects.
The Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan 2030 (PNIEC) [
17] defines Italy's policies and measures for achieving its energy and climate targets for 2030 and is the main instrument for implementing a new energy policy that guarantees the full environmental, social and economic sustainability of the Italian national territory and supports the energy transition. It addresses decarbonisation, energy efficiency and energy security in an integrated way through the development of the internal energy market, research, innovation and competitiveness [
17]. The updated version of the 2023 PNIEC sets a 43.7% reduction compared to 2005 in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and electricity production from renewable sources exceeding 65% [
18].
Although, unlike other European countries, Italy does not yet have a "framework law on climate", numerous provisions deriving from decrees and sectoral laws also contribute to implementing the EU guidelines. For example, budget laws and several ministerial decrees have introduced incentives to promote renewable energy sources, including the ”Conto Termico” [
19], tax benefits aimed at promoting the replacement of obsolete air conditioning systems [
20], the 110% “Super bonus”[
21] and other financial incentives to increase energy efficiency and reduce the energy demand of buildings [
22]. Furthermore, Decree No. 414 of 7 December 2023 of the Minister of the Environment and Energy Security (REC Decree), in force since 24 January 2024, introduces a new participatory model of energy management represented by Renewable Energy Communities (REC) [
23]. In particular, the REC Decree defined the new methods of granting incentives, aimed at promoting the local share of energy by installing plants powered by renewable sources included in configurations of energy communities, groups of self-consumers and remote self-consumers.
However, as Lv [
24] also points out, the energy transition is not a straightforward process, as there are several factors that could hinder and slow down its progress. In fact, the high cost of investing in infrastructure for renewable energy sources, the political influence of the fossil fuel industry in some countries, and local communities' concerns about noise pollution and the impact on the landscape are all factors that need to be considered in the governance of this process. In this context, the local dimension is becoming increasingly important due to its significant contribution to greenhouse gas emissions (cities are responsible for almost 70%), high energy consumption and the even greater impact of climate change on the population and infrastructure [
25]. Municipalities are therefore taking on a central role in the implementation of energy and climate policies, facing challenges such as high energy costs, public funding and investment payback times, the reliability of energy services provided, public acceptance, and technical and managerial skills.
Taking advantage of the composite legislative framework aimed at promoting a clean energy transition at local level within the achievement of the 2030 targets, several projects have been presented to implement energy production from renewable sources. Ronchetti et al. analysed the project proposals in the authorization phase for electricity production from renewable sources to assess the achievement of the intermediate decarbonisation targets set for 2030. They highlighted an imbalance in the location of projects in southern Italy, which could lead to future problems if not properly aligned with the infrastructure development planned by the national government [
26].
From a methodological point of view, taking into account that energy and climate issues are intertwined and should be integrated into a common planning framework that support energy transition, as also underlined by the sustainable energy and climate action plans (SECAPs) [
27], it is necessary to adopt scalable and comparable analytical approaches based on widely used models capable of representing technological progress and performing energy-environmental scenario analyses to devise the energy technology roadmaps. Among the most used models that support policy assessment and energy planning at local level [
28], The Integrated MARKAL-EFOM System (TIMES) model generator, developed as part of the International Energy Agency's Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (ETSAP-IEA), ensures compliance with all requirements as it allows performing energy and environmental analyses and devising robust policies [
29]. A study by Gupta and Ahlgren [
30] demonstrated that the TIMES platform is the most widely used for energy systems optimization over a long-time horizon to support energy planning at local scale. The TIMES-NE model was set up to analyze the energy system of the city of Gothenburg considering the end-use demands of the residential and transport sectors. In this study the City Energy Plan scenario was defined as an exploratory strategic scenario by incorporating the policy measures outlined in the city energy plan with the aim of describing the possible consequences of strategic decisions [
31]. The TIMES-Oslo model is another example of the TIMES application at the local scale to assess how the implementation of energy and climate policies can contribute to low-carbon cities. [
32] The TIMES_EVORA model was implemented to analyze the energy system of the Portuguese city in 2030 by introducing constraints for the reduction of CO
2 emissions, and considering the household incomes to verify for their investment capacity for the acquisition of more efficient technologies, from household appliances to private vehicles [
33]. Di Leo et al implemented the TIMES-Basilicata model to analyse the energy system of the Basilicata region in the Southern Italy. They focused their study on the construction of two low-carbon scenarios to identify development trajectories for the energy system in the Basilicata region: imposing an 85% reduction in CO
2 emissions by 2050 and introducing several combinations of energy efficiency measures. The modelling platform has proven to be effective and useful in supporting energy and climate strategic planning on a medium-long term on a regional/local scale [
34]. Another local application of the ETSAP-TIMES model generator involved the implementation of the TIMES Land-WEF model to investigate the interactions and interrelations between water, energy, food and land in the agricultural system of the Basilicata region. In this application, the scenario analysis carried out to support the achievement of some of the objectives set out in the European Farm to Fork Strategy, such as the reduction of pesticides or fertilisers from 2030 onwards, showed the evolution of the system under consideration in terms of land use, energy consumption and water use [
35]. Di Leo et al. used the ETSAP-TIMES model generator to analyse an automotive manufacturing industry and identify the most efficient and sustainable solutions for the production system. In this study, scenario analysis was applied to evaluate the system's responses to the introduction of energy and material recovery measures and the introduction of alternative energy production technologies [
36].
In this study the ETSAP-TIMES model’s generator is applied to model the energy system of the Municipality of Tito, in Southern Italy, in order to analyze its evolution over a 30-year time horizon (2020-2050) under a Business as Usual (BaU) scenario. The structure of the paper is organized as follows:
Section 2 outlines the methodology ad its application to local energy systems modeling;
Section 3 provides an in-depth description of the Municipality of Tito energy system with reference to the statistical data for characterising the demand profiles, the technologies in-use and available in the modeling time horizon and the projections of future energy requirements;
Section 4 and
Section 5 present the results of the optimisation of a BaU scenario and the possible implications in terms of energy policies.
4. Business as Usual Scenario
The Business as Usual scenario represents the status quo development of the energy system of the municipality of Tito taking into account the statistical data and the demand projections for the reference energy system (benchmark scenario). The exogenous assumptions concerned the costs of energy commodities, which were assumed to be constant over the time horizon, and the revenues from environmental compensation paid on on gas consumption, subject to the exploitation of oil fields, which were considered unchanged until 2050. The electricity produced by ground-mounted photovoltaic systems and those serving industrial buildings is not considered in this scenario. In fact, in the first case the electricity produced by is fed into the national electricity grid, while in the second case the electricity produced and self-consumed is related to a non-modeled sector. For the tertiary and residential sectors, the electricity produced and fed into the grid is considered an export. As concerns the technologies included in the file “database of new technologies”, photovoltaic systems for both the residential and tertiary sectors were duplicated to allow their activation in the examined time horizon and make explicit their contribution. In the tertiary sector, a minimum increase of 10% in the use of technologies with combined outputs (e.g. space heating and hot water) was assumed respect to the base year.
Furthermore, category-specific drivers were identified to estimate demand trends over the time horizon (2020-2050) through a statistical approach. For the residential sector, population and household projections at municipal level were used. The 20-year demographic trend provided by the National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) was used, which estimates a population decline from 7,147 in 2022 to 6,389 in 2042 [
62]. This assumption was also used to project the demographic trend to 2050 by identifying an appropriate mathematical function for extrapolation. The negative population trend shown in
Table 9 is typical of small municipalities in Southern Italy and in the internal areas of the Italian Apennines. On the contrary, the number of families residing in Tito in the last twenty years has recorded an increase from 2003 to 2023 (from 2323 to 2873) with a decrease in the average number of members per family (from 2.81 in 2003 to 2.45 in 2023) [
51]. Based on the statistical data of the period 2003-2023, the trend of the average number of members per family in the period 2024-2050 was estimated and, consequently, the trend of the number of families in the period 2020-2050 (obtained as the ratio between the population and the average number of members per family).
For Space Heating, the number of heated square meters per household was assumed to be constant over the entire 2020-2050 time horizon and, using the estimated number of households as the main driver, the number of heated square meters from 2024 to 2050 was calculated.
Water heating demand, on the contrary, is directly linked to population trends, assuming an increase in hot water per capita daily demand from the current 40 liters to 50 liters from 2030 to 2050.
Like Space Heating, the number of households is the main driver of space cooling, lighting and other electricity consumption demand over the time horizon. For space cooling, the share of households using air conditioning is assumed to increase from 50% in the base year to 60% in 2030-2040 and to 70% by 2040. Demand projections for lighting and other electrical uses were estimated, assuming an average household demand of 150 lumens for lighting and 290 MJ for other electrical obliged uses.
Table 10 summarizes the end-use demand projections for the period 2020-2050 in the residential sector.
In the tertiary sector, the trend of energy demand for different end uses is not directly related to demographic parameters. Based on the available statistical data, a trend line was identified for each subsector and, using this information, the demand projection over the 2020-2050 time horizon was obtained. For the public sector (Schools and Public Buildings), energy demand was considered constant over the time horizon, assuming that there is no increase in the volumes of Public Buildings and that the decrease in population does not affect consumption.
Table 11 summarizes the energy demand projections of the different tertiary sectors.
5. Results
The subsequent sections present the results of the BaU scenario, focusing on electricity production, energy supply, total energy consumption, and air pollutant emissions.
5.1. Electricity Production and Energy Supply
Electricity production from PV (
Figure 9) increases by 99% in the considered time horizon going from 0.0034 PJ in 2020 to 0.0067 PJ by 2050, highlighting a strong commitment to the development of solar power, which is essential to meet energy needs and, at the same time, support the achievement of sustainability goals.
56% of photovoltaic electricity is produced by the tertiary sector and 44% by the residential sector, demonstrating the equal importance of both sectors in the development of photovoltaic energy.
Investing in photovoltaics is a measure that, on the one hand, provides electricity from renewable sources and, on the other, reduces CO
2 emissions, objectives contained in the PNIEC [
14]. In the year 2020, 42% of the electricity produced by photovoltaic is self-consumed (0.0014 PJ), while the remaining 58% (0.0019 PJ) is sent to the national distribution grid.
Figure 10 shows the energy mix from 2020 to 2050, highlighting the important role of natural gas and electricity, which, in the long term, substitute all fuels. In particular, natural gas reaches its maximum in 2035 (0.214 PJ) while biomass, diesel and LPG are gradually phased out by 2040, replaced by electricity, which increases to 0.064 PJ in 2050, representing 24% of the energy supply.
5.2. Energy Consumption
Total energy consumption from 2020 to 2050 (
Figure 11) decreases by 15% and shows a significant change in energy use patterns, driven by the decline of biomass and the increase in natural gas consumption (+ 44% in 2050 compared to 2020). Biomass is used only in the residential sector and, together with LPG, is gradually phased out in 2040.
Diesel follows a similar trend, being phased out by 2035. Electricity consumption, after an initial decrease from 0.063 PJ in 2020 to 0,052 PJ in 2025, increases 5% on the time horizon reaching 0.066 PJ in 2050.
Solar thermal energy is experiencing significant growth (+187% by 2050), demonstrating that technological progress is driving investment in renewable energy to meet climate goals [
63]. Electricity consumption overall is about 20% in 2020 and 24 % in 2050 with a minimum of 0,052 PJ (18%) in 2030, being mainly used in the tertiary sector (62% in 2020 and 73% in 2050 of the total electricity available). Natural gas consumption remains constant over the period considered in both the residential (71%) and tertiary (29%) sectors. The distribution of natural gas consumption between the residential sector (71%) and the tertiary sector (29%) remains constant over the time horizon. The distribuion of LPG consumption, which also remains constant until 2040, accounts for 73% in the residential sector and 27% in the tertiary sector, before being phased out by 2040.
Energy consumption in residential sector decreases 30% by 2050 mainly due to the phasing out of some fuels and the decrease of electricity (0.0179 PJ in 2050 - 24%). Biomass, the prevailing fuel in 2020 (44%) is phased out by 2040, being entirely substituted by natural gas (88%), while electricity consumption is almost constant (around 10% on the whole time horizon and solar thermal increasing from 0.0012 PJ in 2020 to 0.003 PJ by 2050) contributing to fulfil around 2% of the energy demand of Residential in 2050 (
Figure 12).
The demand for Space Heating, initially met by natural gas, biomass and LPG (52%, 45% and 3% respectively), will be entirely covered by natural gas from 2040 onwards, decreasing about 4% on the time horizon (
Figure 13).
Water heating demand increases 7% over the time horizon, being fulfilled in 2020 by natural gas (82%), Electricity (11%), LPG (5%) and solar thermal (2%), while in 2050 natural gas and solar thermal are the only fuels (95% and 5% respectively) (
Figure 14).
Cooking demand, initially fulfilled by natural gas (83%), LPG (11%) and electricity (6%), is fully met by natural gas since 2040 with a decrease of 51% total fuel consumption.
Figure 15.
Fuel consumption for Cooking – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 15.
Fuel consumption for Cooking – Residential sector (PJ).
Space cooling is entirely fulfilled by electricity accounting for 3% of electric uses including lighting, and other electric appliances, with a 25% increase for lighting in 2050 compared to the base year (
Figure 16).
Energy consumption in the tertiary sector increases by 30% over the period considered, i.e. +22% for electricity, +45% for natural gas and a significant increase in solar thermal energy (from 0.0002 to 0.0013 PJ), which replaces LPG and diesel, gradually phased out from 2030 onwards. In 2050, energy demand of tertiary is fulfilled by natural gas (55%), electricity 44% and solar thermal (1%) (
Figure 17).
Total energy consumption by subsector provides further insights, as shown in
Figure 18. Energy consumption in tertiary increases 30% along the time horizon. In 2020 Private Offices and shopping centers accounted for 47% and 34%, respectively, followed by Food, Public Buildings and Schools (around 5 % each). In 2050 a remarkable increase of Healthcare and Accommodation subsectors is expected (+190% and + 78% respectively), while Schools and Public Buildings will reduce consistently their consumption (-37% and -12% respectively), due to efficiency interventions on building structures. Food shows a 30% increase on the time horizon in line with the expected growth in the number of employees, accounting for about 5% on entire time horizon.
Figure 19 and
Figure 20 show natural gas and electricity consumption by subsector over the time horizon. For both fuels Private Offices and Shopping Centers have the highest consumption. In 2020 Private Offices account for 56% of natural gas consumption and 37% of electricity, while Shopping Centers account for 24% natural gas and 44% electricity respectively. In 2050 Private Offices see a 7% decrease in their share of total natural gas consumption (from 56% in 2020 to 49% in 2050), while their share of total electricity consumption increases by 4% (from 37% in 2020 to 41% in 2050). On the other hand, Shopping Buildings show a 6% increase in their share on natural gas consumption (from 24% in 2020 to 30% in 2050) and a 4% decrease in their share on electricity consumption (from 44% in 2020 to 40% in 2050). In the same period for this subsector electricity consumption increases from 0.018 PJ to 0.19 PJ. Analyzing the breakdown of natural gas consumption of all subsectors (
Figure 19), an increase is observed for Food and Healthcare (2% and 4% respectively), while share of School consumption decrease 4% (from 7% in 2020 to 3% in 2050).
As concerns electricity, Healthcare and Private Offices increase their share + 5% and 4% respectively, while other subsectors decrease their share from 5% to 1% (
Figure 20).
5.3. Sensitivity Analysis
A sensitivity analysis was carried out by gradually increasing the purchase cost of natural gas to assess the behavior of the energy system in terms of fuel uses and technology configuration. A progressive increase (+20%, 30%, 50% and 100%) in the cost of natural gas of the reference year along the time horizon was therefore considered to assess the response to both moderate changes and extreme conditions that could occur in the event of geopolitical instability.
The total cost of the energy system represents the total amount of energy production and consumption expenditure over a 30-year period. It includes fuel purchase costs, investment costs for new technologies, operating and maintenance costs for infrastructure and conversion and end-use technologies, minus any profits from energy sales or incentives.
Figure 21 shows the increase in the total energy system cost to the variations of natural gas prices. The cost increase goes from 2.5% to 5.2% compared to the BAU scenario.
Figure 22 shows the natural gas supply trends highlighting the decrease due to the increase in purchasing costs, which is more evident in the long term.
A 20% increase in the natural gas price is almost ineffective on consumption, which decrease in consumption ranges from 1% in 2030 to 8% in 2040. In the GASCOST+30% case, the reduction is significant, ranging from -71% to -95% in 2040. Doubling the natural gas costs (GASCOST+100% case) the reduction in the long term is -97%. Energy supply variations highlight the effects of the increase of natural gas prices on fuel mix (
Figure 23).
Natural gas is mainly substituted by electricity and biomass. In particular, in 2030 electricity increase ranges from 2% to 75%, while biomass decreases in the GASCOST+20% and GASCOST+30% cases, increasing up to 103% in the GASCOST+100% case, achieving 0.0625 PJ (
Figure 23 a). In 2050, electricity increases from 3% to 67%, while biomass and LPG contributions achieve 0.043 PJ and 0.0045 PJ respectively in the GASCOST+ 100% case. Fuel mix in Residential at increasing natural gas costs is reported in (
Figure 24).
In 2030 (
Figure 24 a), natural gas decreases to 92% (GASCOST+100% case) being substituted by electricity (+141%) and biomass (+103%). LPG and solar thermal contribution are constant, being respectively 0.01PJ and 0.002 PJ. In 2050, Electricity consumption increases +157% and biomass 138%. Solar thermal is constant (around 0.003 PJ) and LPG is zero in all cases except GASCOST+100%, which achieves 0.003PJ, contributing 3% to total residential energy consumption.
The increase in electricity consumption, which compensates for the decline in natural gas consumption, is linked in particular to the use of heat pumps for space and water heating as also demonstrated by the increase in space electricity consumption per square meter, which goes from 0.0023 PJ (BaU) to a maximum of 0.14 PJ (GASCOST+100% case, year 2040) ((
Figure 25).
Biomass also contributes to meeting Space Heating demand, showing a downward trend and gaining importance in 2040 and 2050, when the price of gas increases by at least 30% (
Figure 26).
In the tertiary sector, the increase in electricity consumption driven by the rise in natural gas prices is lower than in the residential sector, achieving + 29% in 2050 when natural gas price is doubled (GASCOST100% case) (
Figure 27).
Figure 28 shows the expected distribution among sub-sectors in 2050. Private Offices and Shopping Buildings still account for the largest share (84%), while Schools and Public Buildings account for about 4% each, Food and Healthcare about 3% each, and Accommodation 0.15%.
Considering the results of the sensitivity analysis, further investigation was conducted under the assumption of a 50% non-repayable grant for the purchase of heat pumps in both the residential and tertiary sectors, alongside a gradual increase in natural gas purchase costs (
Table 12).
Figure 29 shows the trend in total system costs considering a 50% reduction in investment costs of heat pumps and a gradual increase in the purchase cost of natural gas. In all the four cases the total system’s cost is lower than the cost of the BaU scenario. The lowest total system cost (29.19 MEuro) is obtained in the GASCOST+20%_50_HP case corresponding to 50% reduction in heat pumps investment cost and a 20% increase in the purchase cost of natural gas. the total cost of the system reaches 29.70 MEuro in the GASCOST+100%_50_HP case corresponding to a 100% increase in the purchase cost of natural gas and a 50% reduction in heat pumps investment cost.
The following figures show the results of the GASCOST+20%_50_HP and GASCOST+30%_50_HP cases in which the cost of natural gas increased by 20% and 30%. The results obtained with a further increase in the cost of gas are comparable to those obtained in the GASCOST+50% and GASCOST+100% cases with no reduction in the purchase cost of heat pumps. When the investment cost of heat pumps is halved, biomass boilers, formerly selected as the most economical technology without any reduction in the price of heat pumps, from a 30% increase of the cost of natural gas increases 30%, are discarded. Biomass is therefore no longer used for space heating in the residential sector, as illustrated in (
Figure 30).
The reduction in heat pump investment costs leads also to a more rapid reduction in natural gas consumption, as shown in
Figure 31, which shows the trend in gas consumption considering a 20% and 30% increase in natural gas purchase costs with and without the reduction in heat pump investment costs (GASCOST+20%, GASCOST+20%_50_HP, GASCOST+30%, GASCOST+30%_50_HP cases). In the GASCOST+20%_50_HP case, natural gas consumption is reduced by 80% in 2030 and by 94% in 2040 and 2050 compared to the GASCOST+20% case. In the GASCOST+30%_HP case, the reduction is 91% in 2030, 65% in 2040 and 37% in 2050 compared to the GASCOST+30% case. In the GASCOST+30% case, natural gas consumption is lower than in the BaU scenario as early as 2040.
With regard to electricity, the GASCOST+20%_HP case, in which the cost of natural gas increases 20% and the investment cost for heat pumps is halved, shows a significant increase in electricity consumption (64% in 2030, 65% in 2040 and 55% in 2050) compared to the GASCOST+20% case whose consumption is very similar (almost identical) to that of the BAU scenario (
Figure 32). In 2030, the increase in electricity consumption in the GASCOST+30%_HP case is 42% compared to the GASCOST+30% case. This difference is not evident in 2040 and 2050, where the trends for the GASCOST+30% and GASCOST+30%_HP cases are very similar. In the GASCOST+30%_HP case, there is a slight reduction in consumption of 1.6% in 2040 and 2.8% in 2050 compared to the GASCOST+30% case, due to the use of more efficient heat pumps than in the GASCOST+30% case, promoted by lower investment costs.
5.4. Greenhouse Gases Emissions
The Kyoto Protocol identified seven greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming: carbon dioxide (CO
2), methane (CH
4), nitrous oxide (N
2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF
6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF
3), among which carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are the main contributors. Carbon dioxide is by far the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas, as it currently accounts for the largest share of warming associated with human activities. In fact, globally, total CO₂ emissions linked to energy use increased by 0.8% in 2024, contributing to an atmospheric CO₂ concentration of 422.5 ppm, 50% higher than pre-industrial levels. This increase was driven by the rise in natural gas emissions in 2024 (180 Mt CO₂, +2.5%), which was the main contributor to the growth in global carbon emissions. [
64,
65].
As concerns the Tito energy system, the analysis focused on CO₂ emissions, which are mainly determined by natural gas consumption in residential and tertiary sectors. As shown in
Figure 33, CO
2 emissions increase till 2035 (+ 42%) and start declining from 2045 with an overall increase around 34% respect to 2020. Residential accounts for 71% highlighting its main contribution, while Tertiary emits the remaining 29%, these percentages remain constant over the time horizon. The slight decrease in the last time-period is mainly due to due to a decrease in natural gas consumption.
The decrease in natural gas consumption due to the increasing gas prices drives a decrease in CO
2 emissions (
Figure 34).
In 2030, the decline will be significant when the price of natural gas is at least 50% higher than the current selling price (-71% compared to emissions in the BaU scenario). By 2040, a 30% increase will already be effective (-85%), while in 2050 the reduction in CO2 emissions will vary from 92% (GASCOST30% case) to 95% (GASCOST50% and GASCOST100% cases). This confirms the effectiveness of a 30% increase in the price of natural gas in the long term in bringing about a steady decrease in CO2 emissions.
Analyzing the cases with the reduction in heat pump investment costs (
Figure 35), it is possible to see a reduction in CO
2 emissions of 80% by 2030, 94% by 2040 and 2050 in the GASCOST+20%_HP case compared to the GASCOST+20% case. In the GASCOST+30%_HP case, CO
2 emissions are reduced by 90% compared to the GASCOST+30% case in 2030, while in subsequent periods the values are very similar, with a difference of -1.2 kton in 2040 and -0.4 kton in 2050.
6. Conclusions
The implementation of the municipal energy system model based on ETSAP-TIMES framework articulated a potential evolution pathway under the BAU scenario, which reflects current national policies and energy consumption trends paving the way to further investigation of future contrasting scenarios.
Current energy landscape highlights the heavy reliance of Tito's energy system on fossil fuels in 2020, particularly on natural gas, despite the municipality's leading position in the Basilicata region for installed PV capacity. Biomass is the most used source for residential heating, followed closely by natural gas.
In the BaU scenario total energy consumption decreases by 15% by 2050. It is observed that there is a noticeable overall decline in biomass, LPG, and diesel use which are are gradually phased out by 2040 and 2035, respectively, driven by regulatory pressures and the phasing out of more carbon-intensive sources. A substantial growth of renewables is also observed. In particular, electricity production from PV systems increases by 99% over the time horizon, going from 0.0034 PJ in 2020 to 0.0067 PJ by 2050 demonstrating a meaningful shift toward renewable energy and alignment with national climate goals. Also, solar thermal exhibits encouraging growth, increasing by 187% by 2050, although its overall contribution remains relatively modest in absolute terms. Despite the PV growth, natural gas remains the dominant energy carrier throughout the time horizon. Its consumption increases 44% by 2050 compared to 2020 and is particularly dominant for Space Heating and Cooking demands in the residential sector, indicating a slower transition away from fossil fuels in these critical end-uses. The residential sector trends toward reduced overall energy use by 30% by 2050, reflecting improved efficiency or behavioral shifts. In this sector, biomass, the prevailing fuel in 2020 (44%), is entirely substituted by natural gas (88% contribution) by 2040. Energy consumption in the tertiary sector increases by 30% over the time horizon, particularly in the Healthcare and Accommodation subsectors (expected increases of +190% and +78% respectively by 2050). The continued reliance on natural gas leads to a 34% increase in CO2 emissions by 2050 compared to 2020, peaking in 2035. The residential sector is the primary contributor, accounting for 71% of these emissions. The slight emissions downturn by mid-century suggests some progress toward decarbonization, potentially aided by improved energy efficiency.
The sensitivity analysis investigates the impact of gas prices and the effectiveness of subsidies to promote technology innovation. Increasing the price of natural gas is highly effective at reducing consumption and the associated CO2 emissions. A 30% price increase reduces long-term consumption significantly, leading to a 92% drop in CO2 emissions by 2050 compared to the BaU scenario. Electricity (powering heat pumps) and biomass emerge as the primary substitutes. Combining a moderate natural gas price increase (+20%) with a 50% non-repayable grant for heat pumps proves to be the most effective policy lever. This approach drastically reduces natural gas consumption and CO2 emissions (an 80% reduction by 2030) while simultaneously lowering the total energy system cost below that of the BaU scenario.
The overall conclusion is that the BaU pathway only partially aligns with decarbonization targets. The current trajectory emphasizes the need for more aggressive policy actions and technological innovation to significantly reduce fossil fuel dependency and accelerate the transition to a low-carbon energy system.
The next step in this research involves scenario analysis where different external constraints will be applied to assess the effectiveness of specific measures and policies. This future analysis is particularly relevant for understanding the implications of implementing RECs in accordance with European and Italian directives.
Figure 1.
Diagram of the methodological steps.
Figure 1.
Diagram of the methodological steps.
Figure 2.
RES of the supply sector.
Figure 2.
RES of the supply sector.
Figure 3.
RES of electricity production from photovoltaic systems (RES-E).
Figure 3.
RES of electricity production from photovoltaic systems (RES-E).
Figure 4.
RES for Space Heating, Water Heating and Space Cooling of the residential sector.
Figure 4.
RES for Space Heating, Water Heating and Space Cooling of the residential sector.
Figure 5.
RES for cooking, lighting and other electrical uses of the residential sector.
Figure 5.
RES for cooking, lighting and other electrical uses of the residential sector.
Figure 6.
RES of the Food subsector in the tertiary sector.
Figure 6.
RES of the Food subsector in the tertiary sector.
Figure 7.
TIMES-TITO energy model structure.
Figure 7.
TIMES-TITO energy model structure.
Figure 8.
Calculation procedure for residential data.
Figure 8.
Calculation procedure for residential data.
Figure 9.
Electricity production from PV (PJ).
Figure 9.
Electricity production from PV (PJ).
Figure 10.
Energy supply (PJ).
Figure 10.
Energy supply (PJ).
Figure 11.
Total energy consumption (PJ).
Figure 11.
Total energy consumption (PJ).
Figure 12.
Total fuel consumption – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 12.
Total fuel consumption – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 13.
Space Heating demand – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 13.
Space Heating demand – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 14.
Water heating demand – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 14.
Water heating demand – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 16.
Electricity consumption for space cooling, lighting and other electric uses – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 16.
Electricity consumption for space cooling, lighting and other electric uses – Residential sector (PJ).
Figure 17.
Total fuel consumption – Tertiary sector (PJ).
Figure 17.
Total fuel consumption – Tertiary sector (PJ).
Figure 18.
Total fuel consumption per subsector– Tertiary sector (PJ).
Figure 18.
Total fuel consumption per subsector– Tertiary sector (PJ).
Figure 19.
Natural gas consumption per subsector (PJ).
Figure 19.
Natural gas consumption per subsector (PJ).
Figure 20.
Electricity consumption per subsector (PJ).
Figure 20.
Electricity consumption per subsector (PJ).
Figure 21.
Total energy system cost (MEuro).
Figure 21.
Total energy system cost (MEuro).
Figure 22.
Natural gas supply (PJ).
Figure 22.
Natural gas supply (PJ).
Figure 23.
Fuel Supply variations at increasing of natural gas costs – a) year 2030 and b) year 2050.
Figure 23.
Fuel Supply variations at increasing of natural gas costs – a) year 2030 and b) year 2050.
Figure 24.
Residential fuel mix a) year 2030 and b) year 2050.
Figure 24.
Residential fuel mix a) year 2030 and b) year 2050.
Figure 25.
Electricity consumption for space heating (PJ/Mm2).
Figure 25.
Electricity consumption for space heating (PJ/Mm2).
Figure 26.
Biomass consumption for space heating (PJ/Mm2).
Figure 26.
Biomass consumption for space heating (PJ/Mm2).
Figure 27.
Electricity consumption in the tertiary sector.
Figure 27.
Electricity consumption in the tertiary sector.
Figure 28.
Electricity consumption by subsectors- Year 2050.
Figure 28.
Electricity consumption by subsectors- Year 2050.
Figure 29.
Total energy system cost (MEuro).
Figure 29.
Total energy system cost (MEuro).
Figure 30.
Supply of biomass (PJ).
Figure 30.
Supply of biomass (PJ).
Figure 31.
Supply of natural gas (PJ).
Figure 31.
Supply of natural gas (PJ).
Figure 32.
Supply of electricity (PJ).
Figure 32.
Supply of electricity (PJ).
Figure 33.
CO2 emissions - BaU scenario (kton).
Figure 33.
CO2 emissions - BaU scenario (kton).
Figure 34.
Total CO2 emissions (kton).
Figure 34.
Total CO2 emissions (kton).
Figure 35.
Total CO2 emissions (PJ).
Figure 35.
Total CO2 emissions (PJ).
Table 1.
End use demands by sector
Table 1.
End use demands by sector
| Description |
TIMES Code |
Unit of measure |
Description |
TIMES Code |
Unit of measure |
| Residential |
Tertiary – Accommodation |
| Space Heating |
DRSH |
Mm2
|
Space Heating |
DTASH |
Mpresences |
| Water Heating |
DRWH |
Mliters |
Water Heating |
DTAWH |
Mpresences |
| Space Cooling |
DRSC |
Mm2
|
Space Cooling |
DTASC |
Mpresences |
| Cooking |
DRCO |
MUnit |
Other Electric Uses |
DTAOEU |
Mpresences |
| Lighting |
DRLG |
Glumen |
|
|
|
| Other Electric Uses |
DROEU |
PJ |
|
|
|
| Tertiary – Food |
Tertiary – Public Buildings |
| Space Heating |
DTCSH |
MEmployees |
Space Heating |
DTPSH |
Mm3
|
| Water Heating |
DTCWH |
MEmployees |
Water Heating |
DTPWH |
Mm3
|
| Space Cooling |
DTCSC |
MEmployees |
Space Cooling |
DTPSC |
Mm3
|
| Other Electric Uses |
DTCOEU |
MEmployees |
Other Electric Uses |
DTPOEU |
Mm3
|
| Tertiary – Private Offices |
Tertiary – Shopping Buildings |
| Space Heating |
DTPOSH |
MEmployees |
Space Heating |
DTPSH |
Mm2
|
| Water Heating |
DTPOWH |
MEmployees |
Water Heating |
DTPWH |
Mm2
|
| Space Cooling |
DTPOSC |
MEmployees |
Space Cooling |
DTPSC |
Mm2
|
| Other Electric Uses |
DTPOOEU |
MEmployees |
Other Electric Uses |
DTPOEU |
Mm2
|
| Tertiary – Healthcare |
Tertiary – Schools |
| Space Heating |
DTHSH |
MEmployees |
Space Heating |
DTPSH |
Mm3
|
| Water Heating |
DTHWH |
MEmployees |
Water Heating |
DTPWH |
Mm3
|
| Space Cooling |
DTHSC |
MEmployees |
Other Electric Uses |
DTPOEU |
Mm3
|
| Other Electric Uses |
DTHOEU |
MEmployees |
|
|
|
Table 2.
Energy consumption of the residential sector by end-uses - year 2020 (TJ).
Table 2.
Energy consumption of the residential sector by end-uses - year 2020 (TJ).
| |
Natural gas |
LPG |
Solar Thermal |
Biomass |
Electricity |
Total |
| Space Heating |
61 |
3.5 |
|
104 |
0.5 |
169 |
| Water Heating |
26 |
1.8 |
1.2 |
|
3.3 |
32.3 |
| Space Cooling |
|
|
|
|
0.7 |
0.7 |
| Lighting |
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
3.2 |
| Cooking |
13 |
1.8 |
|
|
0.9 |
15.7 |
| Other Electric Uses |
|
|
|
|
15 |
15 |
| Total |
100 |
7.1 |
1.2 |
104 |
23.6 |
235.9 |
Table 3.
Sectoral end-use demands in Residential – year 2020.
Table 3.
Sectoral end-use demands in Residential – year 2020.
| End-use demands |
Unit of measure |
Values |
| Space Heating |
Mm2
|
0.423 |
| Water Heating |
Mliters |
104.6 |
| Space Cooling |
Mm2
|
0.212 |
| Cooking |
Munit |
0.0072 |
| Lighting |
Glumen |
0.064 |
| Other Electric Uses |
PJ |
0.00083 |
Table 4.
Number of employees and energy consumption of the tertiary subsectors – year 2020.
Table 4.
Number of employees and energy consumption of the tertiary subsectors – year 2020.
| |
N. of Employees |
Energy consumption (TJ) |
| Accommodation |
18 |
0.82 |
| Food |
107 |
4.8 |
| Schools |
115 |
5.2 |
| Public Buildings |
142 |
6.4 |
| Private Offices |
1042 |
47 |
| Shopping Buildings |
704 |
32 |
| Healthcare |
76 |
3.4 |
| Total |
2,204 |
99 |
Table 5.
Energy consumption of different sub-sectors for type of end-use – year 2020 (TJ).
Table 5.
Energy consumption of different sub-sectors for type of end-use – year 2020 (TJ).
| |
Space Heating |
Water Heating |
Space Cooling |
Other Electric Uses |
Total |
| Accommodation |
0.16 |
0.23 |
0.1 |
0.33 |
0.82 |
| Food |
0.94 |
1.3 |
0.6 |
2 |
4.8 |
| Schools |
4.6 |
0.04 |
0 |
0.57 |
5.2 |
| Public Buildings |
4.6 |
0.04 |
0.73 |
0.99 |
6.4 |
| Private Offices |
37 |
0.33 |
5.8 |
3.6 |
47 |
| Shopping Buildings |
14 |
2.3 |
7.9 |
7.7 |
32 |
| Healthcare |
1.3 |
0.25 |
0.23 |
1.6 |
3.4 |
| Total |
63 |
4.5 |
15 |
17 |
99 |
Table 6.
Energy consumption of tertiary sub-sectors, by end-use and energy source – year 2020 (TJ).
Table 6.
Energy consumption of tertiary sub-sectors, by end-use and energy source – year 2020 (TJ).
| |
Natural gas |
Electricity |
LPG |
Diesel |
Solar Thermal |
Total |
| Accommodation |
0.23 |
0.48 |
0.01 |
0.003 |
0.01 |
0.82 |
| Space Heating |
0.095 |
0.017 |
0.006 |
0.001 |
|
0.16 |
| Water Heating |
0.13 |
0.024 |
0.009 |
0.002 |
0.01 |
0.22 |
| Space Cooling |
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
| Other Uses |
|
0.335 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
| Food |
1.33 |
2.84 |
0.09 |
0.02 |
0.06 |
4.8 |
| Space Heating |
0.55 |
0.1 |
0.04 |
0.01 |
|
0.93 |
| Water Heating |
0.78 |
0.14 |
0.05 |
0.01 |
0.06 |
1.3 |
| Space Cooling |
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
| Other Uses |
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
| Schools |
2.7 |
1.1 |
0.2 |
0.032 |
0.002 |
5.2 |
| Space Heating |
2.7 |
0.49 |
0.18 |
0.03 |
|
4.5 |
| Water Heating |
0.025 |
0.005 |
0.002 |
0.0003 |
0.002 |
0.04 |
| Other Uses |
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
| Public Building |
2.8 |
2.2 |
0.2 |
0.033 |
0.002 |
6.4 |
| Space Heating |
2.7 |
0.5 |
0.18 |
0.0325 |
|
4.5 |
| Water Heating |
0.026 |
0.0048 |
0.0017 |
0.0003 |
0.002 |
0.043 |
| Space Cooling |
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
| Other Uses |
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
| Private Offices |
22 |
14 |
1 |
0.3 |
0.02 |
47 |
| Space Heating |
22 |
4 |
1 |
0.3 |
|
36 |
| Water Heating |
0.2 |
0.035 |
0.013 |
0.0023 |
0.02 |
0.32 |
| Space Cooling |
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
| Other Uses |
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
| Shopping Buildings |
9.6 |
18 |
0.62 |
0.11 |
0.11 |
32 |
| Space Heating |
8.2 |
1.5 |
0.53 |
0.097 |
|
14 |
| Water Heating |
1.3 |
0.24 |
0.088 |
0.016 |
0.11 |
2.2 |
| Space Cooling |
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
| Other Uses |
|
7.8 |
|
|
|
7.8 |
| Healthcare |
0.94 |
2 |
0.06 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
3.4 |
| Space Heating |
0.8 |
0.14 |
0.052 |
0.009 |
|
1.3 |
| Water Heating |
0.15 |
0.026 |
0.009 |
0.002 |
0.01 |
0.24 |
| Space Cooling |
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
| Other Uses |
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
| Total |
41 |
40 |
2.7 |
0.48 |
0.21 |
99 |
Table 7.
Local electricity production from photovoltaic systems.
Table 7.
Local electricity production from photovoltaic systems.
| Localization |
Capacity (kW) |
Electricity Production (TJ) |
Self-consumption (TJ) |
Transferred to the national grid (TJ) |
| Residential |
367 |
1.5 |
0.4 |
1 |
| Tertiary |
466 |
1.9 |
1 |
0.9 |
| Industrial-Ground |
17’942 |
72.4 |
|
72.5 |
| Total |
18’775 |
75.8 |
1.4 |
74.4 |
Table 8.
Energy balance (TJ) – Year 2020.
Table 8.
Energy balance (TJ) – Year 2020.
| Flow/ Product |
Natural gas |
LPG |
Diesel |
Electricity |
Biomass |
Solar Thermal |
Total |
| Import |
141 |
9.73 |
0.48 |
62 |
104 |
|
317.2 |
| Local production |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
1.4 |
4.8 |
| Export |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2 |
| Residential Consumption |
100 |
7.07 |
|
23.6 |
104 |
1.2 |
235.9 |
| Tertiary Consumption |
41 |
2.66 |
0.48 |
40 |
|
0.2 |
84.4 |
Table 9.
Demographic drivers of end-use demand.
Table 9.
Demographic drivers of end-use demand.
| Year |
2020 |
2021 |
2025 |
2030 |
2035 |
2040 |
2045 |
2050 |
| Population |
7162 |
7147 |
7083 |
6941 |
6740 |
6497 |
6333 |
6142 |
| Average number of member per family |
2.52 |
2.49 |
2.44 |
2.36 |
2.28 |
2.20 |
2.12 |
2.03 |
| Families |
2847 |
2868 |
2901 |
2941 |
2958 |
2957 |
2993 |
3020 |
Table 10.
Demand projections by end-use in the residential sector (2020-2050).
Table 10.
Demand projections by end-use in the residential sector (2020-2050).
| |
Unit |
2020 |
2025 |
2030 |
2035 |
2040 |
2045 |
2050 |
| Space Heating |
Mm2
|
0.423 |
0.431 |
0.437 |
0.440 |
0.440 |
0.445 |
0.449 |
| Water Heating |
MLiters |
105 |
116 |
127 |
123 |
119 |
116 |
112 |
| Space Cooling |
Mm2
|
0.212 |
0.215 |
0.218 |
0.220 |
0.220 |
0.222 |
0.224 |
| Cooking |
MUnit |
0.0072 |
0.0071 |
0.0069 |
0.0067 |
0.0065 |
0.0063 |
0.0061 |
| Lighting |
Glumen |
0.063 |
0.065 |
0.066 |
0.066 |
0.066 |
0.067 |
0.067 |
| Other electric uses |
PJ |
0.00083 |
0.00084 |
0.00085 |
0.00086 |
0.00086 |
0.00087 |
0.00088 |
Table 11.
Energy demand projections of the tertiary subsectors.
Table 11.
Energy demand projections of the tertiary subsectors.
| |
Unit |
2020 |
2025 |
2030 |
2035 |
2040 |
2045 |
2050 |
| Accommodation |
MPresence |
0.017 |
0.022 |
0.023 |
0.024 |
0.025 |
0.026 |
0.027 |
| Food |
MEmployees |
0.000107 |
0.000103 |
0.000105 |
0.000107 |
0.000109 |
0.000111 |
0.000113 |
| Schools |
Mm3
|
0.0262 |
0.0262 |
0.0262 |
0.0262 |
0.0262 |
0.0262 |
0.0262 |
| Public Buildings |
Mm3
|
0.0088 |
0.0088 |
0.0088 |
0.0088 |
0.0088 |
0.0088 |
0.0088 |
| Private Offices |
MEmployees |
0.0010 |
0.0012 |
0.0013 |
0.0014 |
0.0016 |
0.0017 |
0.0018 |
| Shopping Buildings |
Mm2
|
0.045 |
0.047 |
0.050 |
0.052 |
0.055 |
0.057 |
0.060 |
| Healthcare |
MEmployees |
0.00008 |
0.00010 |
0.00013 |
0.00016 |
0.00018 |
0.00021 |
0.00024 |
Table 12.
Sensitivity analysis with increase in natural gas costs and 50% reduction in heat pump investment costs.
Table 12.
Sensitivity analysis with increase in natural gas costs and 50% reduction in heat pump investment costs.
| Cases |
Increase in the purchase cost of natural gas |
Investment costs for heating pumps |
| GASCOST+20%_50_HP |
+20% |
-50% |
| GASCOST+30%_50_HP |
+30% |
-50% |
| GASCOST+50%_50_HP |
+50% |
-50% |
| GASCOST+100%_50_HP |
+100% |
-50% |