The main objective of this study is to

The possibility for additional technological change and radical cost reductions for some technologies could change the landscape laid out here [55]. However, since the results show that even with the conservative cost assumptions used, achieving renewables shares above 80% is feasible from a cost perspective and from a technical perspective to the degree that hourly data can demonstrate this, an increased build of renewables should not be dismissed outright on either of these grounds. In any case, the weighting of different objectives – cost, BAY 60-6583 security, emissions – will determine what mix of technologies appears more favorable. That weighting is not the subject of the analysis presented here. In addition, these trade-offs are fraught with issues that are ill captured by aggregate indicators such as system-wide costs or energy security indices. For example, despite the fact that electricity cannot easily be stored for longer periods, Lilliestam and Ellenbeck [56] have argued that Europe is not significantly vulnerable to a deliberate interruption of electricity exports. Yet the public may be particularly concerned with import dependence [57]. Other important issues, like electricity prices, or household energy poverty, are not addressed by the modeling approach used here. In order to make choices from the range of scenarios presented here, therefore, additional data on decision preferences, as well as other analyses connecting these high-level results to bottom-up effects, would be necessary.