Master Thesis

Israel’s practical transition plan to 100% all-sector clean

renewable energy by 2050

Source: http://thesolutionsproject.org/

Liat M. Chobadi
Technische Universität Berlin, MSc in Environmental Planning
TU Berlin Matr.-Nr.: 354761
March, 2017

Supervisors:
Prof. Dr. Volkmar Hartje
Institut für Landschaftsarchitektur und Umweltplanung
Fachgebiet Landschaftsökonomie
Technische Universität Berlin

Prof. Dr. Mark Jacobson

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Stanford University
Eidesstattliche Erklärung

Hiermit erkläre ich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbstständig und eigenhändig sowie ohne
unerlaubte fremde Hilfe und ausschließlich unter Verwendung der aufgeführten Quellen und
Hilfsmittel angefertigt habe.

Tel Aviv, Israel, den March 12, 2017

…………………………………………………………………
Liat M. Chobadi

2
Abstract
Israel is a country rich with renewable energy resources such as solar and wind. Yet, Israel currently
lags behind other OECD countries with a mere 2% of its energy produced by renewable energy
resources. Future plans to increase the share of renewable energy are at the very best modest or non-
concrete. At the same time, Israel has a high-risk profile with regards to climate change. Given its
long coastline and vulnerability to rising sea levels and its dry climate, Israel is prone to heatwaves
and droughts. Other than climate change effects, the continued use of fossil fuels as an energy
resource has additional negative effects such as air pollution causing health issues and premature
deaths.
This thesis proposes a clear, actionable, and validated plan to convert Israel’s all-purpose energy
infrastructure into 100% renewable energy of Wind-Water-Sunlight (WWS) technologies by 2050.
The proposed plan is based on Prof. Jacobson’s “world plan”,‘100% Clean and Renewable Wind,
Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World.’ While
Jacobson et al. (2016) presents a cogent plan for Israel (as well as the other 138 countries) the World
Plan does not account for Israel’s specific topographic, environmental, and statutory limitations.
Accounting for such limitations is critical in order to validate Israel has enough suitable area to
develop the aforementioned WWS technologies. Thus, meeting the expected all-purpose end use
power by 2050 by relying entirely on WWS is questionable, hereby placing another hurdle for
Jacobson’s et al. (2016) plan. Closing this gap is important as decision makers in general are more
likely to adopt Jacobson’s et al. (2016) plan the more detailed and targeted it is towards their country.
This thesis, based on Jacobson’s et al. (2016) World Plan, presents for the first time a full
comprehensive validated plan to convert Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to one derived
entirely from WWS by 2050, which includes spatial analysis.
In the analysis, residential rooftop photovoltaics (PV), utility-scale PV, and Concentrating Solar
Power (CSP) technologies practical potential were found to be sufficiently greater than the nameplate
capacity needed according to Jacobson’s et al. (2016) proposed energy mix. Onshore wind practical
potential was validated to be very close to the nameplate capacity needed by the World Plan. Since
the analysis accounts only for limited topographic, environmental, and statutory limitations and many
other factors exist that influence the success of wind development in Israel (such as economic and
social factors), Jacobson’s et al. (2016) energy mix was not found to be “safely” validated. As such, a
second ‘alternative’ proposal was introduced, offering an energy mix based on Jacobson’s et al.
(2016) plan but slightly modified so that all energy sources were safely validated to meet projected
demand.

3
Abstrakt

Israel ist ein Land, dass viele erneuerbare Energiequellen besitzt, wie Solar- und Windenergie. Das
Land bezieht jedoch nur 2% seiner Energie von erneuerbaren Energiequellen. Dies ist verglichen mit
anderen OECD sehr wenig. Ist gibt für die Zukunft derzeit keine konkreten Pläne, die einen größeren
Bezug von erneuerbaren Energie vorsehen. Zudem stellt der Klimawandel derzeit ein Risiko für Israel
dar. Da das Land einen langen Küstenstreifen besitzt, ist es sehr schadenanfällig bei steigendem
Meeresspiegel und besitzt zudem ein trockenes Klima mit Hitzewellen und Dürren. Neben den
Effekten des Klimawandels, gehen mit der andauernden Benutzung fossiler Brennstoffe als
Energiequelle viele negative Effekte einher, wie Luftverschmutzung, welche Gesundheitliche
Probleme und frühzeitige Tode als Folge haben können
In dieser Arbeit wird ein verständlicher, verfolgbarer und stichhaltiger Plan aufgeführt, der Israel 100
% Umwandlung auf erneuerbare Energien bis zum Jahr 2050, basierend auf Prof Jacobsons „World
Plan“, 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps
for 139 Countries of the World` erörtert. Obwohl Jacobson et. Al (2016) einen überzeugenden Plan
für Israel (sowie die anderen 138 Länder) vorlegt, geht der World Plan nicht auf Israels spezifische
Topografie, Umwelt und gesetzliche Bestimmungen ein. Diese sind jedoch kritisch für die
Beurteilung, ob Israel genug geeignete Flächen hat, um die genannten WWS Technologien zu
entwickeln. Daher ist das alleinige Verlassen auf WWS fraglich, wenn es darum geht bis 2050 den
Energiebezug komplett auf Erneuerbare Energien zu umzustellen. Die schafft eine weitere Hürde für
Jacobson’s et al . (2016) Plan. Dies ist insofern wichtig, da wichtige Entscheidungsträger generell mit
größerer Wahrscheinlichkeit Jacobson’s et al. (2016) annehmen, je detaillierter und länderspezifisch
er ist.

Diese Arbeit bezieht sich auf Jacobson et al . (2016) World Plan und präsentiert zum ersten Mal einen
kompletten, umfassenden validierten Plan der Israels komplette Energieinfrastruktur bis 2050 auf
erneuerbare Energien beschreibt. Hierfür wird auch eine räumliche Analyse durchgeführt.

In der durchgeführten räumlichen Analyse wurde ermittelt, dass das praktische Potential von
Photovoltaikanlagen in Wohngebieten (PV); Versorgungsunternehmen (PV), und konzentrierte
Solarkraft (CSP) als hinreichend größer ermessen wurde, als die Nennkapazität durch Jacobson’s et
al. (2016) vorgeschlagenen Energiemix. Das praktische Potential von Seewind ist der ermittelten
Nennkapazität aufgeführt im Worldplan sehr ähnlich. Da die Analyse nur auf limitierte topografische,
umwelt und gesetzliche Bestimmungen eingeht und viele andere Faktoren existieren, die den Erfolg
der Windentwicklung in Israel beeinflussen (die ökonomische und soziale), wurde Jacobson’s et al.
(2016) Energie Mix als unzureichend empfunden. Es wurde aus diesem Grund eine zweiter
‘alternativer’ Vorschlag aufgeführt, der einen Energie Mix erläutert, der auf Jacobson’s et al. (2016)
Plan basiert, aber ein wenig modifiziert wurde, damit alle Energiequellen sicher validiert werden
konnten, um der prognostizierten Nachfrage gerecht zu werden.

4
Acknowledgements
This Master’s Thesis has been written in order to fulfill an MSc in Environmental Planning at
Technische Universität Berlin under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Volkmar Hartje and as a Visiting
Student Researcher with Prof. Dr. Mark Jacobson’s research group at Stanford University. I would
like to thank both of my supervisors for their guidance and support throughout the thesis process.

Furthermore I would like to thank all of the kind individuals and organizations that helped me with
data collection: Dr. Gil Proacktor (Israel’s Ministry of Environmental Protection), Omri Cameron
(Israel’s Ministry of Environmental Protection), Yuval Laster (Israel’s Ministry of Environmental
Protection), Yari Ginott (Israel’s Ministry of Environmental Protection), Honi Kabalo )Israel’s Public
Utilities Authority), Eitan Parnas (Green Energy Association of Israel), Dror Zurel (Israel’s Ministry
of Environmental Protection), Ran Dressler (Israel’s Planning Administration), Harel Dan
(Hamaarag), Dr. Amit Savir (Israel Meteorological Service), Amir Shmulik (Israel’s Nature and Parks
Authority) , Ohad Hatzofe (Israel’s Nature and Parks Authority), Sari Paz (Central baruao of
statistics), Gershon Kun (Central baruao of statistics) Ora Meir (Central Baruao of statistics) and Gal
Shofrony.

5
Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 3
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 5
Table of figures ....................................................................................................................................... 8
List of tables.......................................................................................................................................... 10
List of abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. 12
Terms .................................................................................................................................................... 13
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 14
1.1 Predicted climate change effects on Israel ............................................................................ 14
1.2 Other negative effects to Israel from current BAU energy policy ........................................ 16
1.3 Renewable energy as a solution ............................................................................................ 18
2. Motivation ..................................................................................................................................... 20
2.1 Israel’s current energy consumption by sources ................................................................... 20
2.1 Israel’s renewable resource availability ................................................................................ 23
2.2 Value of converting to renewable energy ............................................................................. 24
2.2.1 Prevention of premature deaths..................................................................................... 25
2.2.2 Jobs ............................................................................................................................... 25
2.2.3 Energy security ............................................................................................................. 26
2.2.4 Cost reduction ............................................................................................................... 27
3. Problem statement ......................................................................................................................... 30
3.1 Purpose statement ................................................................................................................. 30
3.1.1 Main research question ................................................................................................. 30
3.1.2 Sub-research question ................................................................................................... 30
4. State of art ..................................................................................................................................... 30
4.1 Israel’s previous renewable energy plans ............................................................................. 30
4.2 Jacobson’s work, which provides framework but does not “validate” ................................. 31
4.3 The gap this project fills........................................................................................................ 34
5. Literature review ........................................................................................................................... 36
5.1 Spatial analysis criteria ......................................................................................................... 36
5.1.1 Technical criteria .............................................................................................................. 36
5.1.2. Practical criteria ............................................................................................................... 39
5.2 Rooftop PV- technical background and previous work related to rooftop evaluation .......... 41
5.3 Review of other sources ........................................................................................................ 41
5.3.1 Geothermal .................................................................................................................... 41
5.3.2 Hydropower .................................................................................................................. 42
5.3.3 Wave ............................................................................................................................. 42
6. Methods......................................................................................................................................... 44
6.1 GIS analysis method ............................................................................................................. 45
6.1.1 Validation method ......................................................................................................... 47

6
 6.1.2 Wind turbine spatial analysis ........................................................................................ 48
6.1.3 Utility-scale solar power: PV and CSP ......................................................................... 52
6.2 Rooftop analysis.................................................................................................................... 57
7. World Plan Results ....................................................................................................................... 58
7.1 Demand projection ................................................................................................................ 58
7.2 Suggested 2050 WWS energy mix ....................................................................................... 59
8. Analysis Results ............................................................................................................................ 61
8.1 GIS spatial analysis ............................................................................................................... 61
8.1.1 Onshore wind ................................................................................................................ 61
8.1.2 Solar .............................................................................................................................. 67
8.1.3 Military grounds................................................................................................................... 74
8.2 Rooftop PV ........................................................................................................................... 74
9. Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 75
9.1 Discussion of the results wind and solar ............................................................................... 78
9.1.1 Onshore wind ................................................................................................................ 78
9.1.2 Utility scale PV ............................................................................................................. 80
9.1.3 CSP ............................................................................................................................... 81
9.1.4 Offshore wind ............................................................................................................... 81
9.1.5 Residential rooftop PV .................................................................................................. 82
9.1.6 Commercial rooftop PV ................................................................................................ 82
9.1.7 Summary of solar and wind analysis .......................................................................... 83
9.2 Alternative renewable energy resources ............................................................................... 83
9.3 Suggested transformation plan .............................................................................................. 84
9.3.1 Footprint of implementing plan .................................................................................... 88
9.4 Benefits from transforming to WWS .................................................................................... 89
9.4.1 Financial benefits .......................................................................................................... 89
9.4.2 Health and health cost saving benefits .......................................................................... 90
9.4.3 Labor benefits ............................................................................................................... 90
9.4.4. Energy security benefits ................................................................................................ 90
9.5 Further work.......................................................................................................................... 91
9.6 Bottom line............................................................................................................................ 91
10. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 92
Bibliography ......................................................................................................................................... 95
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................. 100
Appendix 1 ...................................................................................................................................... 100
Appendix 2 ...................................................................................................................................... 102
Appendix 3 ...................................................................................................................................... 103

7
Table of figures
Figure 1. Observed CO2 mixing ratios (ppmv) between 1751-2014 and model projections from 2015-
2100 for five Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios and three WWS cases
Source: Jacobson et al. 2016 ................................................................................................................. 14

Figure 2. Patterns of changing mean summer maximum (JJA) and mean winter minimum (DJF)
temperatures, TX and TN for 2040-2069 and for 2070-2099 relative to the 1961-1990 control period
Source: Lelieveld et al. 2012 ................................................................................................................ 15

Figure 3. Patterns of changing number of days per year with heavy precipitation (RR>10mm, left
panel) and number of dry days (RR<1 m, right panel)… showing the mean changes for 2040-2069
relative to the control period 1961-1990. Source: Lelieveld et al. 2012. .............................................. 15

Figure 4. Electricity generation system of Israel Electric Corporation (True for 2010) Source: Israel
Electric Corporation Strategic Aspects Overview 2012 ....................................................................... 16

Figure 5. Israel’s Annual peak demand vs. nominal installed capacity through the years 1948-2011.
Source: The Israel Electric Corporation 2010....................................................................................... 17

Figure 6. “Growth in GDP. vs. growth in total electricity consumption. 2001=100”. Source: The Israel
Electric Corporation 2010 ..................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 7. Israel’s EEZ provide a variety of social, economic, and environmental services. Source:
Technion 2014 ...................................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 8. Israel's annual electricity production by fuel type for the years 2001, 2005, 2010. Source:
The Israel Electric Corporation 2010. ................................................................................................... 20

Figure 9. Comparison between 139 countries in 2014 for their ability to reach 2050 WWS all-
purposes energy demand. Source: Jacobson et al. 2016 ....................................................................... 22

Figure 10. Worldwide annually averaged global solar irradiance (direct plus diffuse) at the ground
(kWh/m2/day) generated by GATOR-GCMOM model. Source: Jacobson et al. 2016 ........................ 23

Figure 11. Israel’s annual average direct normal (DNI), at 40 km resolution. The data was developed
by NREL's Climatological Solar Radiation (CSR) Model. Data source for creating this map: OpenEI
.............................................................................................................................................................. 23

Figure 12. World’s annual wind speed (m/s) and annual capacity factor (--). Source: Jacobson et al.
2016 ...................................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 13. Map of annual mean wind speed (m/s) at 100 meter height above the topographical surface
in Israel and the West Bank. Data source: Israel Meteorology Center ................................................ 25

Figure 14. Migration routes of soaring birds in the Middle East at spring (left) and autum (right).
Source: Yom-Tov 1988......................................................................................................................... 40

Figure 15. Average temperature at 6 km and 8 km depth. Source: Shalev et al. (2008)...................... 42

Figure 16. Ten years wave energy potential (kW/m) for the Eastern Mediterranean. a) Mean, b)
Standard deviation, c) Skewness, d) Kurtosis values. Source (Zodiatis et al. 2014) ........................... 43

Figure 17. Flowchart for modeling suitability of wind farm ............................................................... 50

8
Figure 18. Flowchart for modeling suitability of CSP ......................................................................... 55

Figure 19. Flowchart for modeling suitability of utility scale PV ........................................................ 56

Figure 20. Areas suitable for wind farm installation differentiated by their limitations ....................... 65

Figure 21. Areas practically suitable for wind farm installation ........................................................... 66

Figure 22. Areas technically suitable for CSP installation differentiated by their limitations .............. 68

Figure 23. Areas practically suitable for CSP installation with differentiated limitations applied. ...... 69

Figure 24. Areas suitable for utility scale PV differentiated by their limitations ................................. 71

Figure 25. Areas technically suitable for utility scale PV after eliminating areas suitable for CSP .... 72

Figure 26. Areas practically suitable for utility scale PV after eliminating areas suitable for CSP ...... 73

Figure 27: Israel’s proposed 2050 energy mix by Jacobson et al. (2016) ............................................. 77

Figure 28. Proposal B for 2050 energy mix .......................................................................................... 78

Figure 29: Proposed timeline for necessary actions needed to transform Israel’s all-purpose energy to
100% WWS by 2050.. .......................................................................................................................... 84

Figure 30. Israel’s mean change of all-purpose end-use power demand and its supply of conventional
fuels (fossil fuels, Bio-fuels, and nuclear) and WWS technologies over time. Also presented the
percent of end-use power provided by each WWS in 2050. Souece: Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) .. 85

Figure 31. Map of area practically suitable in Israel for onshore wind development. .......................... 86

Figure 32. Map of area practically suitable in Israel for CSP development. ........................................ 87

Figure 33. Map of area practically suitable in Israel for utility scale-PV wind development............... 88

Figure 34. 2050 average estimates of fully annualized levelized business costs of electricity (LCOE)
to end users in 100% BAU scenario. .................................................................................................... 89

Figure 35. Israel’s mean change of all-purpose end-use power demand and its supply of conventional
fuels (fossil fuels, Bio-fuels, and nuclear) and WWS technologies over time...................................... 93

9
List of tables
Table 1. New jobs created and earnings from construction and operations due to conversion to WWS
system from 2015 to 2050, jobs lost in the conventional fuels and nuclear energy industries and net
jobs and earning change due to conversion to WWS system from 2015 to 2050. ...................................... 26

Table 2. Estimated fully annualized, unsubsidized 2013 and 2050 U.S.-averaged costs of electricity to
end-users ($2013/MWh). The costs include generation, short- and long-distance transmission,
distribution, and storage, but do not include external costs. ....................................................................... 27

Table 3. Levelized costs of energy (LCOE) for conventional fuels in business as usual (BAU)
scenario in 2013 and 2050 and for WWS energy sources in 2050. Also shown are average electricity
cost savings due to conversion to WWS system in 2050 ............................................................................ 28

Table 4. Israel’s air pollution (PM2.5 plus O3) premature mortalities per year in 2050, avoided air
pollution costs and climate change costs due to conversion to WWS in 2050. Also, Israel’s total cost
benefit due to conversion to a WWS system and the payback period are presented. ................................. 29

Table 5. Israel’s rooftop area estimations for residential and non-residential structures from previous
researches (Vardimon 2011, Shofrony 2014). ............................................................................................ 41

Table 6. Israel’s end-use power demand for all-purposes by sector in 2012 and estimated demand in
2050 in case of (1) "Business As Usual" (BAU) where fossil-fuel, nuclear, and biofuel will continue
to be consumed or in case of (2) converting Israel’s all-purpose energy resources to 100% WWS by
2050. Also presented is the reduction of end-use demand in 2050 due to convertiion to WWS. ............... 58

Table 7. WWS technologies rated power and average capacity factors in 2050, number and capacities
of WWS power plants or devices needed to provide Israel's total annually-averaged end-use power
demand for all-purposes in 2050, accounting for transmission, distribution, forced and unforced
maintenance, and array losses. Also shown are currently installed nameplate capacity and the footprint
areas and spacing areas in Kilometer Squared and percentage of Israel’s land area. ................................. 59

Table 8. Suitable rooftop areas and technical potential for PV installation for residential, commercial,
government and industrial buildings in 2050. Also shown are proposed installed capacities and
fractions out of technical potential in 2050 ................................................................................................. 61

Table 9. Spatial analysis results for areas suitable for wind farm installation ........................................... 63

Table 10. Comparison between areas with suitable wind speed at the West Bank territory and within
Israel border (km2) ...................................................................................................................................... 64

Table 11. Spatial analysis results for areas suitable for utility scale PV and CSP ..................................... 67

Table 12. Summary table of the results of the spatial analysis for technical and practical potential of
utility scale solar installation. ..................................................................................................................... 74

Table 13. Summary of results of calculation with regards to the required military grounds repurposing .. 74

Table 14.Suitable rooftop area for PV installation and technical potential of residential buildings in
2015 and 2050 ............................................................................................................................................. 74

Table 15. Discussion table. Presented are the percent of 2050 demand met by each WWS technology
as suggested by Jacobson et al. (2016), the end-use power delivered and capacity needed to meet
Israel's total annually-averaged end-use power demand for all-purposes in 2050. Also shown are the

10
amount of areas found technically and practically suitable for each of the WWS technologies and their
technical and practical nameplate capacity. ................................................................................................ 76

Table 16. Discussion table. Presented are the percent of 2050 demand met by each WWS technology
for alternative proposal (“proposal B”), the end-use power delivered and capacity needed to meet
Israel's total annually-averaged end-use power demand for all-purposes in 2050. Also shown are the
amount of areas found technically and practically suitable for each of the WWS technologies and their
technical and practical nameplate capacity ................................................................................................ 77

Table 17. Discussion table. Suitable rooftop areas for PV installation and technical potential of
residential buildings in 2050 as found by analysis and Jacobson et al. (2016). Also shown are
proposed installed capacities of residential buildings of rooftop PV and its fraction out of technical
potential in 2050 ......................................................................................................................................... 82

11
List of abbreviations
BAU Business as Usual
AC Alternating Current
AWPR Advanced pressurized-water reactor
BEV Battery Electric Vehicles
CBS Central Bureau of Statistics
CC Carbon Capture
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CSP Concentrated Solar Power
DNI Direct Normal Irradiance
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EGS Enhanced Geothermal Systems
EIA Energy Information Agency
FTE Full Time Equivalents
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GHI Global Horizontal Irradiance (the sum of direct and diffuse Irradiance)
GIS Geographic Information System
GW Gigawatt
HCLB High Cost Low Benefits
HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
HVDC High Voltage Direct Current
IGCC Integrated gasification combined cycle
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
JEDI Jobs and Economic Development Impact
JNF Jewish National Fund (Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael )
km Kilometer
km2 Square Kilometer
kWh Kilowatt hour
LCHB Low Cost High Benefits
LCOE Levelized Costs Of Energy
m/s Meter per second
MNI Ministry of National Infrastructures
MoEP Ministry of Environmental Protection
MW Megawatt
n.a Not available
NIS Israeli New Shekel
NOP National Outline Plan
NOP 10/D/10 National Outline Plan for photovoltaic installations
NOP 22 National Outline Plan for Forests and Afforestation
Integrated National Outline Plan for Building, Development and
NOP 35
Conservation
O3 Ozone
PM2.5 Particulate Matter
PSH Pumped-storage hydroelectricity
PV Photovoltaic

12
 R&D Research and Development
SMR Small Modular Reactor
TWh Terawatt-hours
VSL Value of Statistical Life
WWS Wind-Water-Sunlight

Terms
This section briefly describes some of the words and terms used in this project in order to make the
thesis approachable to readers from a variety of technical backgrounds. The terms are presented in
alphabetical order.

Capacity factor: The proportion of the electrical energy produced by a generating unit for a period
of time to the maximum electrical energy that could have been produced by the (same) generating unit
at perfect conditions during the same period of time (U.S. Energy Information Administration)

Diffuse Horizontal Irradiation (DHI): The solar energy received by a unit area of surface from all
directions when radiation is scattered off the atmosphere or surrounding area. (International Finance
Corporation (IFC) 2012)

Direct Normal Irradiation (DNI): The solar energy received by a unit area of surface directly facing
the sun. (International Finance Corporation 2012)

Electrification: Transformation of services such as heating, cooling, lighting, and transportation to be

powered directly by electricity instead of other fuels. For example, shifting to use battery electric
vehicles (BEVs) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs) instead of fueled vehicles (Jacobson et al.
2016)

End-use load: The power in delivered electricity or fuel that is actually used to provide services to a
firm or individual. It disregards losses during electricity generation or fuel production and
transmission but includes industry self-energy-use such as mining, transporting, and refining fossil
fuels (Jacobson et al. 2016)

Footprint area: The physical area on the top surface of the ground or water needed for each
generating unit (Jacobson et al. 2016)

Global Horizontal Irradiation (GHI): The total solar energy, direct beam and diffuse irradiation,
which a unit area of surface receives (International Finance Corporation 2012)

Installed nameplate capacity: The maximum rated output of a generating unit (device or plant)
under specific conditions designated by the manufacturer (U.S. Energy Information Administration)

Rated power (of a device or plant): The rated or maximum capacity at which rate an electric power
production equipment will produce power (U.S. Energy Information Administration)

Spacing area: The area between generating units (Jacobson et al. 2016)

13
Introduction

1. Introduction
The earth’s ecosystem has been changing as a result of human activity since the beginning of the
industrial revolution. Most scientists attribute the cause of climate change to the combustion of fossil
fuels, which releases greenhouse gases into the earth’s atmosphere (Moomaw et al. 2011).

Without any active change in the current energy resource consumption, fossil fuel consumption is
expected to increase, leading to rising levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) and other pollutants that cause
climate change like carbon dioxide (the leading climate change pollutant), black carbon, methane,
tropospheric ozone precursors, carbon monoxide, and nitrous oxide. Jacobson et al. (2016) developed
a roadmap to convert the energy recourses of 139 countries of the world to 100% WWS recourses by
2050 with a mid-goal of 80% by 2030. Implementation of the roadmap will avoid increases in CO2
levels and in other climate change pollutants with the aim to delay, and ultimately prevent, reaching
the climate change tipping point. Figure 1 demonstrates the impact of implementation of the roadmap
on global carbon dioxide levels, as well as the impact of less intensive conversion of 80% WWS by
2050 and 100% by 2100. In both cases CO2 levels will be reduced below today’s level. Furthermore,
Figure 1 presents Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimations of CO2 levels in
five case of Business as Usual (BAU) illustrating that without any active change, CO2 levels are
expected to be much higher than in WWS scenarios (Jacobson et al. 2016).

Figure 1. Observed CO2 mixing ratios (ppmv) between 1751-2014 and model projections from 2015-2100 for five
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios and three WWS cases: an unattainable 100% WWS by 2015
case; a 80% WWS by 2030 and 100% by 2050 case and a less-aggressive 80% by 2050 and 100% by 2100 case. Source:
Jacobson et al. 2016

1.1 Predicted climate change effects on Israel

Israel is a small, developed country, with 8.3 million citizens, which contributes about 0.2% of global
emissions (Israel 2015; Central Bureau of Statistics 2015b). Although Israel’s contribution to the
world’s emission is relatively small, climate change places Israel at a high risk due to the country’s
long coastline which makes it vulnerable to rising sea levels and its already dry climate increasing
vulnerability to heat waves and droughts (Lelieveld et al. 2012).

Israel is located in western Asia in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. The Eastern
Mediterranean is expected to warm up faster than the global mean rate of 2.8°C by the end of the
century. A regional climate assessment predicts that in case of intermediate IPCC SRES scenario
A1B, the mean temperatures at the Eastern Mediterranean are expected to rise by 3-5°C by 2050 and
3.5-7°C by the end of the century (see Figure 2). Such rises could lead to consequences for human

14
Introduction

health and energy usage. Warmer temperatures are predicted to result in an increase in energy
consumption for cooling purposes. Furthermore, a decrease of 10-50% of rainfall during this century
is predicted which leads to about 5-10 extra dry days per year by 2050 and 10–20 extra dry days per
year by the end-of-century (See Figure 3). Water scarcity is predicted to increase energy demand due
to the need to desalinate sea water (Lelieveld et al. 2012).

Figure 2. “Patterns of changing mean summer maximum (JJA) and mean winter minimum (DJF) temperatures, TX (top) and
TN (bottom), respectively... The left panels shoe the mean changes for 2040-2069 and the right panels for 2070-2099
relative to the 1961-1990 control period “ Lelieveld et al. 2012

Figure 3. “Patterns of changing number of days per year with heavy precipitation (RR>10mm, left panel) and number of dry
days (RR<1 m, right panel)… showing the mean changes for 2040-2069 relative to the control period 1961-1990” Lelieveld
et al. 2012. RR = Rain Rate

The Mediterranean Sea level on Israel’s shore is predicted to increase by about 1-1.4 meters by 2100
due to climate change. Rising sea levels will lead to several problems, including pushing the coastal
strip east causing cliff collapses that will endanger a stripe of about 50 m east of the current cliff line.
The cliff collapse and rising sea level will cause Israel’s land area to decrease by 1.1-2.25 km2 (1,125-
2,250 dunam) in the next 50 years, which will harm existing assets, infrastructures, and coastal
antiquities sites. The costs due to cliff collapse for the next 50 years are estimated to be about 65-208
million dollars (250-800 million NIS), depending on the growth rate of the risked stripe, which is
estimated to be of 0.5-1 meters per year. Furthermore, rising sea levels will cause higher waves and
stronger storms (Bein et al. 2010).

Climate change is also expected to influence the Levant basin’s unique marine ecosystem. The eastern
Mediterranean land-locked basin structure causes a rapid increase of the sea surface temperature. In
the past two decades, higher temperatures were detected at the sea surface and this trend is expected
to continue to in the future, including in deep waters (Lelieveld et al. 2012).

15
Introduction

1.2 Other negative effects to Israel from current BAU energy policy

Continued use of fossil fuels as an energy resource has several negative effects on Israel other than
climate change effects. First, combustion of fossil fuels such as oil, coal or natural gas releases air
pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, into the atmosphere causing health issues_
(Meindertsma et al. 2012). Furthermore, fossil fuel emissions of particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone
(O3) were found to have a relative risk in causing premature deaths due to cardiovascular disease,
respiratory disease, and complications from asthma (Jacobson et al. 2016)

Second, Israel’s energy security is actually a matter of national security. Israel is politically an island
state and cannot rely on its neighbor countries for energy. A disruption to Israel’s energy supply can
impact its ability to provide water for domestic, agricultural, and industrial uses due to Israel’s
dependency on desalination plants for clean water that operate on electricity from the grid. Currently,
Israel's power plants are located on several limited locations along the Mediterranean coast for
technical reasons such as supply of cooling water and due to better access for ships transporting fossil
fuels. Israel Electric Corporation (IEC), a governmental company that generates most of Israel’s
electricity, has 63-generation units and 17 power stations (See Figure 4 ; Israel Electric Corporation
Strategic Aspects Overview 2012). The geographical concentration of energy resources increases
Israel’s vulnerability to threats, such as potential terrorist attacks or weather hazards. Deployment of
energy resources with renewable energy technologies over many locations will strengthen Israel’s
energy immunity from such threats (Willner 2014).

Figure 4. Electricity generation system of Israel Electric Corporation (True for 2010) Source: Israel Electric Corporation
Strategic Aspects Overview 2012

16
Introduction

Lastly, since fossil fuel availability is limited and the power demand is projected to rise by 49% in the
next 25 years, fossil fuel costs are expected to increase. Thus, Israel is expected to pay higher prices
for its energy resources if no active changes are made to Israel’s energy grid (Uyan 2013).

To review Israel’s energy demand growth to date, over the past 6 decades since Israel’s establishment
in 1948, Israel’s installed capacity and energy demand grew greatly from 69 MW of installed capacity
to 13,750 MW in 2012 (Israel Electric Corporation Strategic Aspects Overview 2012). While both
(installed capacity and energy demand) grew throughout the years, Israel’s ability to supply peak
demand has declined. The gap between the two is illustrated in Figure 5. Figure 6 demonstrates that
Israel’s electricity consumption grew linearly with the country’s Gross Domestic Product (G.D.P).

Figure 5. Israel’s Annual peak demand vs. nominal installed capacity through the years 1948-2011. Source: The Israel
Electric Corporation 2010

Figure 6. “Growth in GDP. vs. growth in total electricity consumption. 2001=100”. Source: The Israel Electric Corporation
2010

17
Introduction

1.3 Renewable energy as a solution

As a clean energy resource that is becoming more cost-effective, renewable energy has been
increasingly utilized to fulfill the growing global energy demand and is expected to take on an
increasingly significant role in meeting rising energy demands as the global community works
together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to stop climate change (Renewable Energy
Policy Network for 21st Century (REN21) 2016). Wind, solar photovoltaics (PV), and concentrating
solar power (CSP) with storage are clean, commercially proven, scalable technologies that in
combination can ensure reliable renewable energy supply during the day and night (Wright, Hearps
2011).

Wind turbines generate electricity from the energy of the wind. It converts mechanical energy of the
rotating blades to electrical energy. Over the years wind turbines have increased their sizes and
capacities and today they are the cheapest renewable energy technology to deploy (Wright, Hearps
2011). Wind turbines can be developed on land or offshore. Increased world-wide offshore wind
energy development is expected over the next decades in the hopes of becoming an important source
of energy in the near future (Bilgili et al. 2011).

Solar photovoltaics (PVs) is clean renewable energy that coverts solar radiation (Global Horizontal
Irradiation) to electricity. The modules are made up of PV cells which are typically made from
silicon. The modules must be mounted on a structure that can be either fixed or tracking. Even though
tracking systems are more expensive they are usually cost-effective in locations with a high direct
irradiation. PV modules costs have dropped significantly over the last decade, which has made solar a
cost competitive resource and the world’s fastest growing energy source. Solar PVs are constructed in
arrays in variety of sizes based on the application used, ranging from residential rooftops, to
commercial rooftop, to utility scale plants (Wright, Hearps 2011)

CSP plants generate electricity by exploiting solar power. First, DNI (component of solar irradiance
that travels directly from the sun) is focused by mirrors and then it is either converted to heat energy
in concentrating solar thermal systems or directly to electricity in concentrating photovoltaic (CPV)
systems. If converted to heat, a turbine and generator are then used to produce electricity in
concentrating solar thermal systems. Molten salts are usually used as a heat transfer fluid and heat
storage medium that can be used in times with no sun or at high pick demand. CSP technologies use
sun-tracking technology since they have to face the sun at all times. CSP is still relatively expensive
when compared to other renewable resources and its scalability depends on extensive cost reductions,
combined with government-driven economic support (Wright, Hearps 2011).

Hydropower is another clean commercially proven technology but its development is limited due to
environmental considerations (Wright, Hearps 2011). Hydropower classifies into three categories:
run-of-river, reservoir or storage, and pumped storage plants. Hydroelectric plants generate electricity
through the use of gravitational force of falling or flowing water. The most common types are the
reservoir or storage dams that produce power from water falling from dams. Run-of-river plants
produce electricity from water flowing down a river (Willner 2014).

Most pumped-storage hydroelectricity (PSH) methods combine pump station with hydroelectric
plants. This combination exploits the potential energy between different elevation levels. PSH is
storage in the form of reservoir pair, where the water is pumped to a higher elevation reservoir at
times of low cost and low peak demand and used to generate electricity at times of high peak demand.
It is not a “source” of electric power since it uses slightly more energy than it produces but it allows
the peak power demand to be met reliably and cost-effectively (Jacobson et al. 2014). PSH is
essentially another form of energy storage. PSH helps manage the grid at times when other energy
sources such as solar and wind are less effective like when there is no sun or wind or in times of other
problems with the grid. Another benefit of PSH is helping to control the grid frequency since the
response time of turning on the system and generating electricity is relatively short. PSH response
time stands at 70 seconds while gas turbine response time is half an hour.

18
Introduction

Currently, ocean energy technologies are under development and range from Research and
Development (R&D) to prototype and demonstration stages. Only tidal range technology is
considered mature (Moomaw et al. 2011). Wave, tidal and enhanced geothermal power are
technologies with large potentials but need to overcome technical obstacles to be used in the future on
a large scale (Wright, Hearps 2011).

Geothermal energy is generated by extracting heat from natural hot resources such as volcanoes,
geysers, hot springs, thermal conduction from Earth’s internal heat, and ground heat produced by
solar radiation. This heat can then be used to generate electricity or for direct heating. Geothermal
systems are expected to be extensively developed in the near future because of their affordable power
prices and reliable production of base-load power (International Energy Agency (IEA) 2011).
Geothermal energy could be generated in most areas with Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS)
technology. EGS allows generation of geothermal energy at high depths at areas with dry rock by
fracturing impermeable rock with cold high-pressure water. The water flows through the fracks of the
hot rock capturing its heat and returns to surface through production to spin turbines and creates
electricity (U.S. Department of Energy 2012). EGS is still a relatively new technology. The first
private commercial EGS plant for large-scale electricity production started in Australia in 2013 and
only few commercial developments have been done at depths between 2-5 km (Olasolo et al. 2016).

While Israel can use resource available on land (land size of 21,640 km2), it can also use resources
available in its offshore area. Israel’s enjoys Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of about 26,000 km2
with a coastline of about 273 km (Jacobson & Delucchi 2016), Technion 2014). Within the EEZ,
Israel does not have full sovereignty but enjoys exclusive economic rights such as the right to use
waves, currents, and wind for renewable energy production.

Figure 7. Israel’s EEZ provide a variety of social, economic, and environmental services. Source: Technion 2014

With the aid of new technological developments, converting Israel’s energy sources from fossil
fuels to clean renewable energy can mitigate climate change and other negative effects, such as
environmental consequences and health related issues (Meindertsma et al. 2012). While further

19
Introduction

research and development keeps improving cost-effectiveness of renewable energy technologies,

some are already cost-competitive when compared with conventional energy generation, especially
when taking into account climate change effects and other health externalities (Jacobson et al.
2016; Proaktor et al. 2015).

The question remains – If a technical and economic solution already exists today that can mitigate and
possibly even prevent the dire threats of rising sea levels, extreme storms, and heat waves that
scientists warn us about as the consequences of climate change, why is the global community so slow
to convert to renewable energy?

A large gulf exists between the scientific world and decision makers. Climate change could be halted
if decisions makers were informed, or willing to listen, to reliable, scientific and unbiased information
that consists of specific solutions to climate change that outline feasible long-term actions with clear
economic and social benefits.

2. Motivation
The motivation behind the topic of this thesis relies on the following three observations: Firstly, Israel
currently is doing very poorly from a renewable energy perspective. Secondly, it has all the necessary
environmental factors to have the potential have a robust renewable energy sector. Lastly, Israel can
greatly benefit from making the transition to relying on renewable energy.

Let’s elaborate on these three points:

2.1 Israel’s current energy consumption by sources

Although Israel takes an active role in the international effort of stopping climate change, it still lags
behind considering that its electricity is almost entirely generated from fossil fuels. In 2010, based on
Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, Israel’s main fuels for electricity generation were 61% coal,
36.6% natural gas, 1.5% fuel oil, and 0.9% gas oil (Central Bureau of Statistics 2015a). In 2015, only
2% of Israel’s total energy was generated by renewable energy, a very small percentage compared to
its technical potential with solar and wind resource availability (Gutman 08/20/16, Willner 2014).
The change in energy production by different sources is illustrated in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Israel's annual electricity production by fuel type for the years 2001, 2005, 2010. Source: The Israel Electric
Corporation 2010.

20
Problem Statment

Currently there are several renewable energy plants under development. A Concentrated Solar Plant
(CSP) facility of 121 MW that combines parabolic trough and tower technologies is under
construction in Ashalim. Ashalim is expected to connect to the grid in 2017 and an additional 110
MW is expected to be added in 2018 (Renewable Energy Policy Network for 21st Century (REN21)
2016). Yet still, these additions are a “drop in a bucket” (less than 0.5%) when compared to Israel’s
total energy production of ~21,200 MW.
One cannot discuss Israel’s energy supply mix without mentioning the recent discovery of natural gas
at the coast of Israel, which has had a significant impact on the future of Israel’s energy production.
Over 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, an amount that is expected to be sufficient to fulfill Israel’s
energy demand for the next decades, has been discovered in recent years within Israel’s EEZ. Israel
plans to export some of this resource and use it to generate about 65% of its energy (Technion 2014).
The natural gas discovery allows Israel to stop relying on imported fossil fuels from foreign countries
and become an energy independent country. This kind of energy independency could also be achieved
using renewable energy. The latter will also benefit Israel through better air quality that will lead to
reductions in mortality and environmental benefits, such as protecting its marine ecosystem while
extracting the gas and, of course, reducing GHG emissions. From an energy security perspective,
Israel would be safer since renewable energy will be based at many individual sites, as opposed to a
single high-vulnerability site.

In 2014, only 1% of Israel’s nameplate capacity required for a 100% WWS system by 2050 was
installed. Compared to other world countries Israel ranked 97th in 2014 for its ability to reach 100%
WWS power for all-purposes energy demand by 2050 (see figure 2) (Jacobson et al. 2016).

21
Problem Statment

Figure 9. Comparison between 139 countries in 2014 for their ability to reach 2050 WWS all-purposes energy demand.
Source: Jacobson et al. 2016

22
Problem Statment

2.1 Israel’s renewable resource availability

Relative to other parts of the world, Israel has high annual Global Horizontal Irradiation (GHI) of
about 6 kWh/m2/day as can be seen in Figure 10. Israel’s richness of solar resource, the maturity of
solar technologies over the last decade, as well as the massive reductions in price of solar panels that
have made them cost comparative to fossil fuels makes solar energy a great resource for Israel to rely
on (Wright, Hearps 2011; Jacobson et al. 2016). Utility-scale PV can operate in any country because it
can use global solar irradiance (direct plus diffuse) (Jacobson et al. 2016). CSP is feasible only in
countries with strong DNI of at least an annual average of 5 KWh/m2/day. Some areas in Israel do
have significant DNI where CSP can be developed (see Figure 11) (Schmalensee et al. 2015).

Figure 10. Worldwide annually averaged global solar irradiance (direct plus diffuse) at the ground (kWh/m2/day) generated
by GATOR-GCMOM model, which simulates clouds, aerosols gases, weather, radiation fields, and variations in surface
albedo over time. Horizontal resolution of 2.5o W-E x 2.0o S-N. Source: Jacobson et al. 2016

Figure 11. Israel’s annual average direct normal (DNI), at 40 km resolution. The data was developed by
NREL's Climatological Solar Radiation (CSR) Model. Data source for creating this map: OpenEI

23
Problem Statment

Interestingly, while Israel is behind on its renewable energy production, with less than 2% of its
energy produced by renewable (solar and wind) energy, Israel is actually ranked third in the world in
solar water heating collector capacity per capita, after Austria and Cyprus. This further illustrates
Israel’s renewable energy resources availability and potential.

Wind is another resource available for Israel to generate clean energy. Figure 12 and figure 13
indicates that the annual wind speed at 100 meter above ground level (AGL) in Israel’s area is about 6
m/s and the annual 1capacity factor at that height, assuming 5 MW turbines with 126-meter rotor
diameter, is about 0.3. When compared to other countries, Israel’s annual wind speeds and capacities
are average. Although Israel does not enjoy the highest annual wind speeds and capacities when
compared to other locations, the region might have in some locations high enough wind speeds to
generate electricity using wind turbines.

Figure 12. On the left, the world’s annual wind speed (m/s) and on the right, annual capacity factor (--)generated by
GATOR-GCMOM 4-year-average modeled at 100 meter above ground level (AGL) at 2.5o W-E x 2.0o S-N resolution
(Israel’s location is on the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. It is marked by the error). Source: Jacobson et al. 2016

A detailed evaluation of areas with sufficient solar irradiance and wind speed for development of solar
and wind technologies will be made as part of this project.

2.2 Value of converting to renewable energy

Converting Israel’s energy resource to renewable energy has the potential to mitigate many of the
negative effects caused by fossil fuel emissions of particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone (O3) such
as environmental consequences, premature deaths, and health related issues (e.g cardiovascular
disease, respiratory disease, and complications from asthma) (Jacobson et al. 2016; Meindertsma et
al. 2012).

Prof. Jacobson “world plan”,’100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-
Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World’ (Jacobson et al. 2016)), present a
transition plan to 139 countries of the world to rely entirely on WWS. Israel energy resource mix
in 2050 is suggested to rely almost mainly (99.97%) on wind and solar technologies. This
section presents Israel’s benefits from implementing transitioning to WWS taken from Prof.
Jacobson “world plan” such as, reduction in future energy costs (due to transforming to WWS
system), avoided global-warming costs, mortality and morbidity due to air-pollution, and
estimations of cost reductions associated with conversion to 100% renewable energy of wind-
water-solar (WWS) technologies. Additionally, this part presents Jacobson et al. (2016)
estimations for job creation potentials versus loss.

1 Defined in Terms

24
Problem Statment

Figure 13. Map of annual mean wind speed (m/s) at 100 meter height above the topographical surface in Israel and the West
Bank. The data was provided by Israel Meteorology Center as raster file of 100 meter resolution created by using regional
model (COSMO) and micro model (WAsP). Data source: Israel Meteorology Center

2.2.1 Prevention of premature deaths

Converting Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to WWS by 2050 will prevent on average
2674 premature deaths per year due to the reduction of air pollution. Israel’s premature deaths
were calculated by Jacobson et al. (2016) by using modeled concentrations of PM 2.5 and O3 that
were combined with the relative risk of mortality as a function of concentration and with
population in a health effects equation. Mortalities due to emissions in 2050 were then extrapolated
while accounting for expected future efficiencies under the BAU scenario (Jacobson et al. 2016).

2.2.2 Jobs

Converting Israel to 100% WWS system will create 62,408 new jobs from 2015 to 2050. Those
include both short term construction jobs and long-term operation and maintenance jobs. Jobs lost
due to lack of further development of fossil-fuel infrastructures are also taken into account.
Moreover, additional job creation due to conversion to WWS system for research and development
of WWS technologies and storage can also be accounted for but is not included in Jacobson’s
calculations (Jacobson et al. 2016).

25
Problem Statment

For each WWS technology an estimate of job creation and change in earnings in 2050 was
calculated by Jacobson et al. (2016) for both construction and operation jobs in scenario of
transition of Israel to 100% WWS system. The average estimate for construction and operation
(Jobs/MW) for each year for each technology were calculated by averaging yearly high and low
estimates for construction and operation. These estimates used Jobs and Economic Development
Impact (JEDI) models for each technology assuming steady construction from 2015-2050 (1/35th
of the WWS infrastructure is built each year). JEDI are economic input-output models with several
assumptions and uncertainties. JEDI models integrate three levels of impacts: project development
and onsite labor impacts, local revenue and supply chain impacts, and induced impacts. JEDI
models report job creation as full-time equivalents (FTE) which equal to 2,080 hours of work per
year per FTE. Jacobson et al. (2016) makes the following assumptions for the calculation of jobs
associated with new transmission lines: 80% of new lines will be 500 kV high-voltage direct
current (HVDC) lines and 20% 230 kV alternating current (AC) lines; total line length simply
equals five times the circular radius of Israel (Jacobson et al. 2016). The total construction and
operation jobs were calculated by summing up the construction and operation job creation needed
for new WWS generator capacity for each technology plus new jobs for transmission and storage.

Table 1. New jobs created and earnings from construction and operations due to conversion to WWS system from 2015 to
2050, jobs lost in the conventional fuels and nuclear energy industries and net jobs and earning change due to conversion to
WWS system from 2015 to 2050.

Note: The jobs are FTE equivalent. One FTE is equivalent to 2,080 hours a year. Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi
(2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy
Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World.

Estimates for construction and operation jobs and earnings are based on the number of new generators
required for each type of annual average power and peaking or storage. Earnings take into account
wages, services, and supply-chain impacts. Jobs lost account for current jobs plus future jobs lost
from a decreased developing fossil-fuel infrastructure in the oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and bioenergy
industries because WWS plants will replace them.

2.2.3 Energy security

Currently, Israel's power plants are geographically concentrated on several limited locations along
the Mediterranean coast for technical reasons, which makes Israel vulnerable to threats, such as
potential terrorist attacks or weather hazards. The Deployment of energy resources with renewable
energy technologies over many locations will contribute to Israel’s energy immunity from such
threats. Furthermore, renewable energy contributing to energy resource diversification is an acute
factor in increasing energy security which leads to stronger economic security and national security
(Willner 2014). Israel is politically an island state and cannot rely on its neighbor countries for
energy. Considering Israel’s delicate political situation, energy security should also be taken into
consideration when evaluating the benefits from converting to renewable energy.

26
Problem Statment

2.2.4 Cost reduction

Another benefit from converting to renewable energy is independency from rising and fluctuating
world fossil fuels costs. Israel could avoid paying higher prices for fossil fuels as its power demand is
projected to rise by 49% in the next 25 years since their availability is limited (Uyan 2013). LCOE for
conventional fuels are expected to increase by 2050 due to higher labor and transport costs and
constant processing of the fuels. While the costs of all WWS technologies by 2050 are expected to
drop due to technology improvements, cheaper manufacturing costs, and improved efficiency of
project deployment caused by scaling .Jacobson et al. (2016) estimates the cost of converting to all-
purpose energy infrastructure with WWS by 2050 and in case of further usage of fossil fuel (BAU).
Current and future full social costs of WWS electricity generators and conventional energy generators
were estimated. Table 2 presents weighted average estimates of fully annualized levelized business
costs of electricity generation (LCOE) for fossil fuels such as coal and gas, for nuclear and biomass
and for each of the WWS technologies in 2013 and 2050. WWS LCOE in 2050 were calculated by
averaging low cost, high benefits (LCHB) case and high cost, low benefits case (HCLB). The costs
include generation, short and long distance transmission, distribution and storage, but they do not
include externality costs.

Table 2 shows that in 2013 the LCOE for generating electricity by hydropower, onshore wind, utility-
scale solar PV, and solar thermal for heat are lower than traditional fuels.

Table 2. Estimated fully annualized, unsubsidized 2013 and 2050 U.S.-averaged costs of electricity to end-users
($2013/MWh). The costs include generation, short- and long-distance transmission, distribution, and storage, but do not
include external costs.

Explanation for the calculation can be found in Jacobson et al. (2016). For the year 2050 BAU scenario, costs of WWS are
slightly different. CC = carbon capture; IGCC = integrated gasification combined cycle; AWPR = advanced pressurized-
water reactor; SMR = small modular reactor; PV = photovoltaics. n.a = not available. Data derived from Jacobson and
Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector
Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. The source of the footnotes of the table is Jacobson et al. 2016.

27
Problem Statment

Table 3 displays Jacobson et al. (2016) estimates for LCOE per unit energy (converted to kWh)
produced in all sectors for conventional fuels in (BAU) scenario in 2013 and 2050 and for WWS
energy sources in 2050. Also shown are end-use power delivered in BAU and WWS scenarios
together with average electricity cost savings due to conversion to WWS in 2050. As presented in
Table 3, in 2050 Israel’s weighted LCOEs among all generators in WWS scenario is estimated to be
9.91 ¢/kWh and 10.5 ¢/kWh for BAU. Since the estimate for LCOE for 2050 BAU scenario does not
account for transportation, heating and cooling, or industry energy costs, it is not directly comparable
with the LCOE in 2050 WWS that takes these factors into account. Due to switching from BAU
electricity to WWS electricity average electricity cost saving in 2050 is expected to be 2.46 billion
dollar (2013 USD) per year and 227 dollar per person a year (2013 USD).

Table 3. Levelized costs of energy (LCOE) for conventional fuels in business as usual (BAU) scenario in 2013 and 2050 and
for WWS energy sources in 2050. Also shown are average electricity cost savings due to conversion to WWS system in
2050

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

2013 2050
Average Average energy
Average LCOE Average LCOE of Average LCOE Electricity Cost cost savings with
of BAU (¢/kWh) BAU (¢/kWh) of WWS (¢/kWh) Savings with WWS
WWS (B $2013/yr) ($2013/person/yr)
9.90 10.50 9.91 2.46 227.08

Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water,
and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. The source of the footnotes of the table
is Jacobson et al. 2016
a. The 2013 LCOE for conventional fuels combines the distribution of conventional and WWS generators in 2013
with 2013 averaged LCOEs for WWS technologies. Costs include generation, short- and long-distance
transmission, distribution, and storage, but they exclude externalities for conventional fuels and WWS power
(2013 USD/MWh-delivered electricity)
b. Same as (a), but for a 2050 BAU scenario. LCOE for 2050 BAU includes existing WWS together with future
increases in WWS and energy efficiency
c. The 2050 LCOE of WWS scenario includes the 2050 distribution of WWS technologies of all energy sectors with
2050 averaged LCOEs for each WWS technology (The LCOE accounts for transmission and distribution)
d. The 2050 averaged electricity cost savings per year due to switching to WWS system. It is calculated as the
product of BAU electricity use and the 2050 BAU LCOE less the annualized cost of the expected efficiency
improvements in the WWS case less the total cost of BAU electricity converted to WWS (product of WWS
electricity use replacing BAU electricity and the 2050 WWS LCOE)
e. The 2050 averaged electricity cost savings per capita a year due to switching to WWS system, calculated by
dividing (d) by Israel’s 2050 population

When accounting for externality costs such as air pollution health costs and climate change damage
cost (e.g. loss of coastline, fishery and agricultural, heat stress mortality and morbidity, food scarcity,
drought, wildfires, and severe weather), the total cost of electricity generation for each of the WWS
technologies is even further less than conventional fuels in 2050.

Israel’s total air pollution damage cost in 2050 in BAU scenario is estimated to be on average 27
billion dollars (2013 USD) per year and account for mortality costs, morbidity costs, and non-health
costs such as loss caused by a decrease in agricultural output. The mortality cost was calculated by
multiplying the number of mortalities by the value of statistical life (VSL). The morbidity and non-
health costs were calculated by multiplying the mortality cost by the ratio of the value of total air-
pollution damages (mortality plus morbidity plus other damages) (Jacobson et al. 2016).

Climate change damage costs for Israel in 2050 caused by greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions created
by burning fossil fuels in BAU scenario is 36 billion dollars (2013 USD) per year and 3300 dollars
(2013 USD) per person a year (Table 4). GHG emissions are defined by Jacobson et al. (2016) as
carbon dioxide (CO2), air pollution particles that cause global warming and other GHGs. Climate
change costs was calculated by the sum of coastal flood and real estate damage costs, agricultural loss
costs, energy-sector costs, water costs, health costs due to heat stress and heat stroke, influenza and

28
Problem Statment

malaria costs, famine costs, ocean acidification costs, increased drought and wildfire costs, severe
weather costs, and increased air pollution health costs (Jacobson et al. 2016).

Total cost savings due to damage prevention of air pollution and climate change together with energy
saving due to better efficiency is on average 65 billion dollars (2013 USD) per year and 6029 dollars
(2013 USD) per person a year. Thus, converting to a WWS system will produce electricity, health and
climate change cost-savings in 2050 with a total average of 6029 dollars per person a year. Thus the
upfront investment due to conversion to a WWS system is expected to be returned on average after 2
years when accounting for the sum of the aforementioned cost-savings (Jacobson et al. 2016;
Jacobson & Delucchi 2016).

Table 4. Israel’s air pollution (PM2.5 plus O3) premature mortalities per year in 2050, avoided air pollution costs and climate
change costs due to conversion to WWS in 2050. Also, Israel’s total cost benefit due to conversion to a WWS system and
the payback period are presented.

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)

Avoided Energy+Air-
Premature Avoided air- Avoided Energy+Air-
Avoided air- Climate pollution+CC
Mortality pollution Climate pollution+CC Energy + Air-
pollution Change benefits of
caused by damage costs Change benefits of pollution + CC
damage costs damage costs converting to
Air Pollution in 2050 damage costs converting to Payback period
in 2050 (B in 2050 WWS in 2050
in 2050 ($2013/person in 2050 (B WWS in 2050 (Years)
2013-$/yr) ($2013/person ($2013/person/y
(Deaths/yr) /yr) 2013-$/yr) (B 2013-$/yr)
/yr) r)
Average 2,674 27 2,502 36 3,300 65 6,029 2.1
HCLB 653 4 377 20 1,860 27 2,465 5.0
LCHB 5,897 88 8,148 76 7,023 167 15,398 0.8
Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water,
and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. The source of the footnotes of the table
is Jacobson et al. 2016
a. Israel’s 2050 premature mortalities due to air pollution of particulate matter (PM 2.5) and Ozone (O3) per year
in BAU scenario. Israel’s premature deaths were calculated by using modeled concentrations of PM2.5and O3
in 2015 that were combined with low, medium, and high relative risks of mortality and with Israel’s
population. The results for 2015 were than extrapolated for 2050. The threshold concentration of zero was
used for PM2.5while concentrations below 8 µg/m3 were down-weighted and for ozone a concentration
threshold of 35 ppbv was assumed.
b. Israel’s 2050 total avoided costs per year from mortalities, morbidities and non-health costs such as lost
visibility and agricultural output that were prevented due to conversion to WWS system. Calculated by
multiplying Israel’s value of statistical life (VSL) (can be found in Jacobson & Delucchi 2016) by the low,
medium, and high values of premature mortalities due to PM2.5 and ozone). Values are projected to 2050
based on GDP per capita projections for the U.S. then scaled for Israel as a nonlinear function of GDP per
capita relative to the U.S. The result is then used to calculate morbidity and non-health cost caused by air
pollution.
c. Israel’s total climate cost saving per year due reduction in emissions in 2050 with WWS scenario.
d. The sum of averaged electricity cost saving from Table 3, and columns (b) and (d).
e. The cost savings due to converting to WWS when accounting air pollution (health) and climate change is
equal the upfront installation cost of WWS generators on average after 2 years.

Thus, converting Israel to rely only on WWS resources will be more economical than continuing
to burn fossil fuels in BAU scenario. This is due 1) cost savings from prevention of mortality,
morbidity and non-health costs caused by air pollution, 2) cost saving due to climate change damages
3) energy cost savings due to better efficiency from switching from BAU electricity to WWS
electricity (Jacobson et al. 2016; Jacobson & Delucchi 2016).

Furthermore, converting Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to WWS by 2050 will not only
contribute to the prevention of climate change but also benefit Israel directly by preventing health
issues caused by air pollution, creating new jobs from 2015 to 2050, and contributing to energy
resource diversification and energy independency, which are acute factors in strengthening Israel’s
energy security leading to stronger economic and national security. Also, Israel’s energy

29
Problem Statement

independency will help ensure that expected rising and fluctuating fossil fuels fluctuation prices will
not affect Israel.

3. Problem statement
While the negative effects on Israel due to consumption of fossil fuels such as climate change effects,
health issues and energy security are discussed in the scientific literature, Israel is relying and
expected to keep relying on fossil fuels for its energy resource as a long-term plan. As discussed,
Israel’s current energy plan versus it’s potential is the genesis of this paper - creating an actionable
alternative energy plan for Israel that is based on renewable energy sources. Although previous work
with assessments on Israel resource availability for different renewable resources exists, it is still
unclear whether Israel has enough available land to construct renewable energy technologies that will
allow conversion to 100% renewable energy in an economic manner, and if so what constitutes the
right transition plan for Israel.

3.1 Purpose statement

This work aims to eventually decrease Israel’s GHG emissions and other pollutants that contribute to
climate change and other negative effects to zero by presenting a clear roadmap for Israel, which
could be easily adopted by Israel’s decision makers. The thesis suggests a roadmap to convert Israel’s
all-purpose energy infrastructure to one derived entirely from WWS by 2050 while focusing on the
siting aspect of WWS development.

3.1.1 Main research question

What practical transition plan can convert Israel to 100% all-sector renewable energy by 2050?

3.1.2 Sub-research question

When accounting for technical, environmental, and regulatory limitations, does Israel have sufficient
area for development of wind and solar installations that will allow Israel to fulfill its all-purpose
energy demands by 2050?

4. State of art
The state of art review will cover: (a) previous renewable energy plans for Israel and (b) Jacobson’s
work globally, and will further show (c) there is a gap. Namely, that previous Israel-specific plans are
far from detailed or comprehensive enough, and Jacobson’s work, while promising, isn’t validated,
and further isn’t specific and actionable yet in terms of specific siting of different WWS technologies
for Israel.

4.1 Israel’s previous renewable energy plans

In prior decades several governmental decisions targeted a specific percentage of electricity

generation from renewable energy sources. Many of the targets, however, were not met. In this
following section previous documents discussing Israel’s GHG reduction targets or renewable energy
development are presented such as governmental decisions and national plans that hoped to achieve a

30
State of art

specific percentage of energy generation from renewables or reducing GHG emission by a specific
year.

In 2002, Israel’s government passed Resolution 4450, setting a target of 2% of electricity generation
from renewable energy resources by 2007, and 5% by 2016. In 2009, Israel set a new target of
reaching 5% of electricity generation from renewable energy resources by 2014, and 10% by 2020
which is already on its track to fail (Ronen 2013).

In 2010, the Ministry of National Infrastructures published a policy document on the integration of
renewable energy sources into the Israeli electricity sector for the years 2010-2020 with the aim of
implementing Government Resolution No. 4450 (SE/176) concerning the generation of 10% of
Israel’s electricity from renewable energy sources by 2020 (Ministry of National Infrastructures
2010). While both the ministry’s plan as well as the one brought forth by this thesis offer predictions
for electricity demand, offer estimated costs of generating electricity using renewable energy
technologies, and provide a forecast of installed capacity from renewable energy sources, the ministry
plan aims for low renewable energy target (10% versus end goal of 100%) and is short termed. The
ministry’s plan forecasts through only 2020 while this plan looks through 2050. The ministry
suggested limited sites for development of renewable energy technologies and preliminary mapping
of land in the Negev (a desert area in the south of Israel) has been conducted. While both, the ministry
plan and this roadmap, identifying potential siting for deployment of renewable energy, this thesis
presents a through spatial analysis for all of Israel while the ministry was only specific sites. In 2012,
Rebecca A. Yasner from Carnegie Mellon University, criticized the Ministry of National
Infrastructures (2010) in her thesis, concluding that the short term goal that was set by the Ministry of
National Infrastructures plan was too low and that the plan falls short of setting Israel on track for
large-scale, integrated deployment of renewable electricity technologies (Yasner 2012).

In 2015, on behalf of the Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection, an assessment of Greenhouse

Gas Emission Reduction Potential was conducted in order to recommend to the Israeli government a
national GHG emissions reduction target for 2030 (Proaktor et al. 2015). The report included
projection of GHG emissions and electricity consumption under a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario
through 2030,. It identified the key technological abatement measures most relevant to Israel and their
economic impacts. It studied two scenarios- one with a conservative target which could be achieved
only through the implementation of cost-effective abatement measures without a price of carbon, and
a second one with a more ambitious target scenario, which includes the maximum reasonable level of
implementation of all the abatement measures that were found to be feasible, including a number of
measures that are not cost effective without accounting for the price of carbon. This report focuses on
different measures of GHG reduction and the evaluation of the maximum reasonable level of
deployment for the renewable energy technologies a “a reflection of the team's best assessment “
which is based on review of published literature and data but fails to include spatial analysis as seen in
this thesis (Proaktor et al. 2015).

4.2 Jacobson’s work, which provides framework but does not “validate”

Recently a roadmap to convert 139 countries of the world (including Israel) to entirely Wind Water
and Sunlight (WWS) technologies was published by Jacobson et al. (2016). The goal of the roadmap
is to minimize air pollutants, greenhouse gases, and particle emissions. The roadmap presents a
scenario that energy in all sectors including electricity, transportation, heating/cooling, industry,
agriculture, forestry, and fishing will be completely converted to WWS technologies by 2050, with a
mid-goal of 80% by 2030. The roadmap presents an energy mix for each of the 139 countries that will
allow them to rely entirely on WWS technologies and accounts for their energy demand and resource
availability. Jacobson et al. (2016) roadmap does not attempt to present the least-cost future energy
mix or satisfy grid reliability constraints but does estimate the number of additional generators needed
to ensure reliable electric power grid.

31
State of art

Jacobson (2009) found that in terms of addressing pollution, public health, global warming, and
energy security, the following WWS technologies - wind, concentrated solar power (CSP), solar PV,
geothermal, tidal, wave, and hydroelectric power, were found to be the most suitable to generate
electricity when compared to all overall energy options. Due to increased air pollution, emissions
contributing to climate change and other issues, Jacobson’s roadmap excludes the use of nuclear
power, coal with carbon capture, liquid or solid biofuels, or natural gas (Jacobson et al. 2014;
Jacobson et al. 2016).

Jacobson et al. (2016) suggest a WWS scenario where all end-uses will be electrified and will use
WWS power directly (with exception to some transportation that suggested to be run on hydrogen
produced from WWS electricity). For short distance ground transportation, Jacobson (2009) found the
best option to be battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs), where the
hydrogen is produced by electrolysis from WWS electricity. The best option for long distance ground
transportation was found to be BEVs with fast charging or battery swapping. For heavy-duty ground
transportation BEV-HFCV hybrids will be used. Although electrolytic hydrogen for transportation is
less efficient and more costly than electricity for BEVs, hydrogen-energy storage might be preferred
over battery energy storage in cases of ships, aircraft, and long-distance freight, for example.
Furthermore, in the WWS scenario the heating or cooling would be powered primarily by electric heat
pumps and high-temperature industrial applications would be powered by electric arc furnaces,
induction furnaces, dielectric heaters and resistance heaters (Jacobson et al. 2014; Jacobson et al.
2016).

Electrification of end-uses in the WWS scenario will allow lower end-use power demand due to “(a)
the high energy-to-work conversion efficiency of electricity used for heating and electric motors and
(b) because WWS eliminates the energy needed to mine, transport, and refine coal, oil, gas, biofuels,
bioenergy, and uranium. Also, (c) the use of WWS electricity to produce hydrogen for fuel cell
vehicles, while less efficient than the use of WWS electricity to run BEVs, is more efficient and
cleaner than burning liquid fuels for vehicles…. On the other hand, burning electrolytic hydrogen is
slightly less efficient but cleaner than burning fossil fuels for direct heating” (Jacobson et al. (2016)).

Jacobson et al. (2016) projects Israel’s and the other 138 countries of the world expected end-use
energy demand in 2050 in Business As Usual (BAU) and in a scenario of converting its all-purpose
energy infrastructures to one powered by Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS). End-use power is the
power in electricity or fuel that people actually use (e.g. heating and transportation) and it does not
account for power losses during production and transmission. The projections consider increasing
energy demands, shifts from coal to gas, and improvements in end-use energy efficiency. The end-use
energy demand also account for international transportation and shipping. The estimates for 2050 are
based on extrapolation of data from the IEA starting in 2012. The BAU projections were extrapolated
using the EIA’s 2050/2012 ratio for energy consumption by sector and fuel (Jacobson & Delucchi
2016). EIA’s projections in the International Energy Outlook (Energy Information Agency 2015) are
until 2040 while Jacobson et al. extended their projections to 2075 using a ten-year moving linear
extrapolation. The WWS projections in 2050 were estimated from 2050 BAU values.

Based on the estimated 2050 end-use power demand and technical potential capacity, the total
nameplate capacity, and total nameplate capacity per each of the WWS technologies, as well as the
number of needed units for each of the WWS technologies needed in 2050 in order to meet the
demand was calculated (considering that all sectors have been electrified). by Jacobson et al. (2016).
For onshore and offshore wind the nameplate capacity needed was calculated by accounting for each
country’s power demand and technical potential available for onshore and offshore wind. For
hydropower, the nameplate capacity is assumed to be the same as in 2015 and for geothermal, tidal,
and wave power the nameplate capacity is limited by each country’s technical potentials. For
rooftops, utility scale PV and CSP the total nameplate capacity needed to be installed in 2050 is
calculated by dividing the end-use power delivered in 2050 by the product of 2050 capacity factors
and overall transmission and distribution efficiency in 2050.. Power losses during energy transmission

32
State of art

and distribution, generator maintenance, and competition among wind turbines for limited kinetic
energy were accounted for.

Grid reliability and energy exchanges among countries were not considered. While grid reliability
was not part of the calculations, the number of additional generators needed to ensure reliable electric
power grid was estimated using the results of a grid reliability study for the U.S (Jacobson et al.
2015c). Jacobson et al. (2015) concluded that maintaining grid reliability in a 100% WWS system in
the U.S. can be solved by integrating multiple low-cost solutions. CSP with molten storage will
provide Israel power demand in peaking times by storing electricity or heat. Furthermore, solar
thermal and geothermal are used for direct heat or heat storage in soil. Also presented are the needed
capacities for additional peaking power and storage. The calculations account for power losses due to
storage (Jacobson et al. 2016).

Jacobson et al. (2016) assumes that Israel will generate all of its’ annually averaged power
independently. This is an ideal scenario considering Israel’s political conflicts with neighboring
countries. However, import and export of electricity with other countries might be profitable for Israel
considering energy generation costs that might be cheaper due to better resource availability in
neighboring countries.

For wind turbine calculations characteristics Senvion’s RePower 5M wind turbine at the 100-m hub is
used. For solar PV calculations Sun Power E20 panels characteristic were used, where the estimated
panel rated power output is 200.53 W/m2, the sample solar panel rated power = 327 W and the area of
panel itself = 1.63 m2. Utility-scale PV power plants are assumed to be sized relatively small (50
MW) to allow for placement in most available sites. For CSP, characteristics mimic the device used at
Ivanpah Solar Power Facility in California Mojave Desert with assumed storage of maximum charge
to discharge rate of 2.62:1. Their technical potentials limit their use in geothermal, tidal, and wave
energy technologies (Jacobson et al. 2016; Jacobson & Delucchi 2016).

Footprint area is defined by Jacobson et al. (2016) as: “the physical area on the top surface of the
ground or water needed for each energy device.”, while ‘spacing area’ is defined as: “the area
between some devices, such as wind, tidal, and wave turbines, needed to minimize interference of the
wake of one turbine with downwind turbines.” While Rooftop PV and offshore technologies do not
take up new land, onshore wind, hydropower, geothermal, solar PV plants, and CSP plants require
new land footprints. Jacobson et al. (2016) chose not to account for additional footprints or spacing
areas for added transmission lines since: “Transmission systems have virtually no footprint on the
ground because transmission towers are four metal supports connected to small foundations, allowing
grass to grow under the towers. Further, the rights-of-way under transmission lines can typically
accommodate many uses; more than can the rights-of-way under gas and oil pipelines and other
conventional infrastructure that new transmission lines will replace” (Jacobson et al. 2016).

The technical potential capacity for onshore wind was calculated by multiplying areal power density
of onshore wind systems by the total onshore land area with a wind resource that can provide what
was defined as the minimum acceptable capacity factor, where the capacity factor and the areal power
density are a function of the hub height of the turbines. The technical potential for offshore wind was
estimated as the product of the areal power density for offshore wind systems and Israel’s coastal
length. Wave technical potential capacity was estimated as a function of the wave power available per
unit of coastline, the fraction of the coastline that can be exploited for wave power, the efficiency of
the wave-energy converter (WEC), and the capacity factor without consideration of the availability of
the WEC. Tidal technical potential is estimated based on a nonlinear function of the length of Israel
coastline. Utility-scale PV plants technical potential is based on land area with at least the minimum
acceptable solar insolation, which is a function of the total PV-system areal power density (areal
power density of utility scale PV is estimated as a function of the module density (which increases
over time) and a spacing factor (which is estimated based on a function of population density)). CSP
technical potential is estimated by the land area with minimum exposure of 5 kWh/m2/day.

33
State of art

Residential rooftop technical potential (also accounting for rooftop area of residential parking) is
calculated by multiplying the product of the PV areal power density by rooftop area that is technically
suitable for PVs. Rooftop area technically suitable is taken into account: average building height,
average rooftop area, the percentage of rooftop area that is flat, and the average slope of pitched roofs.
The potential also considers rooftop area of residential parking.

Calculation method for residential rooftop area suitable for PV is taken from Jacobson et al. (2016):
The total residential rooftop area suitable for PV in each country in 2050 is calculated by
extrapolating the fraction of 2050 population living in urban versus rural areas linearly but
with upper limits from 2005-2014 urban fraction data (World Bank, 2015c). Projected 2050
population in each country is then divided between rural and urban population. Population in
each case is then multiplied by floor area per capita by country (assumed the same for rural
and urban homes) from Entranze Data Tool (2015) for European countries, IEA (2005) for a
few additional countries, and IEA (2014a) for remaining regions of the world. The result is
finally multiplied by the utilization factor (UF), which is the ratio of the usable rooftop area to
ground floor area. For rural areas in each country, UF=0.2. Eiffert (2003) estimates UF=0.4
for rooftops and 0.15 for facades, but for single-family rural residential homes, shading is
assumed here to reduce the UF to 0.2. For urban areas, UF=0.4 is assumed, but the urban area
population is divided by the number of floors in each urban complex to account for the fact
that urban buildings house more people per unit ground floor area. The number of floors is
estimated by country in Europe from Entranze Data Tool (2015) as the number of dwellings
per multi-family building divided by an estimated four dwellings on the bottom floor of a
building. This gives the average number of floors in an urban area ranging from 2 to 5 for
these countries. We assume 3 floors per urban dwelling in most other countries. Potential
solar PV installed capacity is then calculated as the installed capacity of a Sunpower E20 435
W panel multiplied by the suitable rooftop area and divided by panel area. The total
commercial rooftop area suitable for PV for European countries in 2050 is calculated as the
product of the estimated 2050 country population, the average commercial ground floor area
per capita (Entranze Data Tool, 2015), and a UF=0.4 (Eiffert, 2003). Scaling the European
value to the GDP/capita of countries to that of European countries gives the average
commercial ground floor area per capita in other countries. Potential solar PV installed
capacity is then the installed capacity of a Sunpower E20 435 W panel multiplied by suitable
rooftop area and divided by panel area. The potential rooftop or canopy area over parking
spaces in each country is computed by multiplying the number of passenger cars per person
(World Bank, 2014) by the average parking space per car (30 m2, Dulac, 2013) in the country.
Given that 1) some of these parking spaces will be in residential garages that have already
been included in the residential rooftop PV calculation, and 2) some parking spaces will not
necessarily have a roof (e.g. basement parking spaces), a utilization factor of 0.5 is applied to
the estimate for parking area suitable for PV. With these assumptions, the PV capacity on
parking-space rooftops is ~15% of the maximum capacity on residential rooftops and ~9% of
the maximum capacity on residential-plus-commercial rooftops.

Jacobson’s roadmap is unique since it is suggesting a long-term sustainable energy infrastructure that
has the supplies 100% of Israel’s energy in all sectors (electricity, transportation, heating/cooling, and
industry) from Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) power without fossil fuels, biofuels, or nuclear
power. Thus this plan provides the largest possible reductions in air pollution and global-warming
impacts. In this work, I have adopted Jacobson et al. (2016) proposal for a target WWS supply mix to
address Israel’s future energy demand projections in a 100% renewable energy manner.

4.3 The gap this project fills

As Israel is on one hand rich with renewable energy potential, and on the other currently have no
single Israel-specific concrete actionable plan to transition into 100% renewable energy or close to it
any time into the futures, relying on Jacobson’s world plan for 139, and specifically the high-level

34
State of art

plan for Israel is a very good starting point. Thus, this work starts with Israel’s results from the World
Plan aiming to build and present a long-term transition plan for Israel based on Jacobson’s proposal.
While the Jacobson’s roadmap presents a cogent plan, the question remains about whether or not
Israel has enough suitable area to develop the aforementioned WWS technologies in order to allow
the country to generate the expected all-purpose end use power by 2050. Closing this gap is critical to
implementing Jacobson’s plan since if there is not enough suitable area available the plan’s chance to
succeed falls short. Beyond that, decisions makers would likely be very slow to adopt Jacobson’s plan
before it is validated for Israel, proved Israel has sufficient renewable energy potential, and suggested
specific sites selection and specific implementation plan. Evaluation of areas suitable for renewable
energy development has not been conducted yet for Israel and is conducted here for the first time.

The physical characteristics of the locations of renewable installations directly affect efficiency and
cost-effectiveness of the installations (International Finance Corporation (IFC) 2012). To ensure a
successful development, the environmental qualities in the planned area of the renewable installation
should be carefully examined. For example, a successful wind farm should be in an area with
sufficient wind speed for spinning the turbine and it will be more economical to generate wind power
as the wind speed is greater (up to a certain limit, which above it may jeopardize the wind turbine).
For the example of solar farms, a good location will include high radiation and long daylight hours.
Israel has great potential for the generation of clean energy from solar and wind resources.

When evaluating suitable locations for various renewable-energy technologies, technical, economic,
environmental, social and regulatory factors should be taken into account (Lopez et al. 2012; Brewer
et al. 2015). Economic factors, for example, include distance to transmission lines and roads since the
closer the wind turbines are to existing transmission lines and roads, the lower the construction and
maintenance costs (Uyan 2013). Social factor include public attitudes, distance from structures,
especially residential buildings due to physiological health effects that were found to be associated
with the attitude to the noise emitted by wind turbines and their visual appearances. The scientific
literature concludes that the health impacts on populations that live near wind turbines are primarily
due to annoyance from the wind turbines and not from direct effects from the turbines. Annoyances
from wind turbines could lead to sleep disturbances and psychological distress to the nearby
population. Thus, in order to avoid such disturbances, a minimum setback distance has been
established in different countries between residential buildings and wind turbines ( Brewer et al.
2015;Knopper and Ollson 2011, Bakker et al. 2012).

This work focuses on assessing Israel’s renewable energy technical and practical potential for wind
and solar sources while considering environmental and regulatory factors. The technical potential
represents Israel’s renewable energy upper limit potential by taking into account topographic and
land-use limitations for current renewable technologies system performances. The technical potential
is based on feasibility from an engineering perspective, but does not take into account whether the
potential is actually attainable as other constraints (i.e. social, environmental, and regulatory) must be
considered. Hence, this work will also discuss practical potential, which, while based on technical
potential, also takes into account these other considerations, including environmental and statutory
regulations. The practical potential is a much more realistic indicator of Israel’s “real” or “practical”
renewable energy upper limit potential.

This work will rely on Jacobson’s plan for Israel in the World Plan proposal- Jacobson et al. (2016),
and will prove the plan is doable, and will further present specific site selection for implementing it.

35
Literature review

5. Literature review
Jacobson et al. (2016) suggests Israel’s 2050 energy mix to be comprised of 80.5% solar and 19.4%
wind energy (with less than 0.1% for tidal and hydro). As wind and solar technologies comprise more
than 99.97% of the WWS energy source mixture, and this thesis is based on Jacobson’s et al (2016)
proposed roadmap, this thesis will focus on exploring the technical and practical potential of wind and
solar technologies (and not of geothermal, tidal and hydropower). This chapter first presents a
literature review of criteria that will be used in the spatial analysis for onshore, offshore wind, CSP
and utility PV. Following is a description of technical factors for rooftop development and previous
work related to Israel’s rooftop evaluation. Lastly, a review of other renewable energy sources is
presented.

5.1 Spatial analysis criteria

Many different technical factors influence the feasibility of developing wind and solar technologies.
Following is a short review of different factors used by different researchers for the primary
technologies covered in this thesis.

In the literature different factors were used in order to find areas suitable for wind energy
development. Miller & Li (2014) outlined modeling approaches and modeling factors used in studies
to determine suitable areas for wind farm installation (Miller & Li 2014). Miller & Li (2014)
demonstrate that there are no unified criteria used by researchers to determine suitable areas for wind
farm installation but that each analysis relies on different criteria. For example, Aydin et al. (2010)
used the following factors: distance to natural reserves, distance to large cities, distance from towns,
distance from airports, noise, distance from lakes and wetlands, and wind power. Meanwhile, Baban,
Parry (2001) used: slope, distance to water bodies, historical sites, urban areas, roads and railways,
land use and the presence of important ecological area. van Hoesen and Letendre (2010) used wind
potential, slopes and elevation.

For utility scale PV the following factors were used by Uyan (2013): distance from residential, land
use, distance from roads, slope, distance from transmission lines, while Brewer et al. (2015) used
slope, road and water proximity, land ownership and use, and grid connectivity. In International
Finance Corporation (IFC) (2012) the following factors were mentioned: Solar resource (GHI), Local
climate, Available area, Land use, Topography, Geotechnical (for example consideration of
groundwater and seismic risk), Geopolitical (e.g. military zones), Accessibility (proximity to existing
roads), Grid connection, Module soiling (e.g. local weather, environmental, human and wildlife
factors), Water availability (required for module cleaning), and Financial incentives.

For CSP, Clifton, Boruff (2010) outlined modeling factors used in studies to determine suitable areas
for wind farm installation. Their research shows that there while there exists a specific set of factors to
determine suitable areas for CSP installation, each analysis used different criteria. For example,
Anders et al. (2005) used: Solar radiation, slope, Minimum land area, protected and sensitive areas,
and water bodies, while Gastli et al. (2010) used slope and minimum land area only, and Domínguez
Bravo et al. (2007) used Solar radiation, slope, Minimum land area, protected and sensitive,
Agricultural land use protected and sensitive area.

5.1.1 Technical criteria

As demonstrated by the brief literature review above, there are many criteria that can be taken into
account for ensuring successful WWS project development and prior analyses have not adhered to a
defined set of criteria to be used. The following section elaborates on the specific factors found most
relevant for this thesis.

36
Literature review

1.1.1.1 Criteria for wind development

5.1.1.1.1 Onshore wind

Final set of criteria selected for finding areas suitable for onshore wind installations:

Wind speed
Wind speed is the most important factor in the development of wind turbine. Wind
speeds of 6 m/s at 100m elevation is the minimum speed necessary to make wind
energy production possible (Miller & Li 2014).

Slope
At slope terrain percentages greater than 30%, wind turbine development is not
feasible. Slopes greater than 10% limit the accessibility of the cranes needed to carry
the heavy parts of the turbine (van Haaren & Fthenakis 2011, Miller & Li 2014). This
technical limitation can be overcome at the expense of higher installation costs. The
U.S. Department of Energy estimated the costs associated with installation as 25% of
the capital cost. Furthermore, they assessed that the cost penalty for an increase of
2.5% of terrain slop leads to increases of one-fourth of the of the wind turbine capital
installation costs (U.S. Department of Energy 2008, van Haaren & Fthenakis 2011).
In many studies, areas with slope percentages greater than 20 percent were defined as
unsuitable for wind farm installation. However, successful installations at 30% slope
terrain in the Greek island of Crete and in Baoding Mountain in China have been
documented (Tegou et al. 2010, Miller & Li 2014, Buist 2015). As successful
installation at 30% were already made, and assuming technological advancement will
make such inclined installations easier and cheaper, slope of 30% was chosen as
threshold.

Land use
The land use of the area is important since wind farms cannot be developed on urban
areas, archeological sites, airport or built structures like roads and parking lots, or if
the area is water land. Meanwhile, wind turbines can be developed on areas with open
space (Miller, Li 2014)

5.1.1.1.2 Offshore wind

Final set of criteria selected for finding areas suitable for offshore wind installations :

Wind speeds
Minimum wind speed is needed in order to make the development cost effective.
Current development are locate in areas with at least average annual wind speeds of
7m/s at 90 m elevation but average annual wind speeds above of 6.4 m/s at 90 m
height above surface is already considered suitable by NREL (Lopez et al. 2012;
European Wind Energy Association 2013; Westgate, DeJong 2005)

Depths lower than 50 m

Currently, commercial installation is economical only up to 50 m depth. Installation
at higher depths (over 50 m deep) could be done by floating turbines not yet
commercialized or economical (European Wind Energy Association 2013).

37
Literature review

Distance from shore

Distance to shore is usually another limitation that should be taken into consideration
when planning offshore wind farms since as the distance from shore increases, costs
also rise. World-wide offshore installation have reached distances from shore of over
100 km. The minimum distance from shore is meant to keep the turbines far enough
from shore in order to avoid visual pollution and public annoyance (Jacobson et al.
2016; European Wind Energy Association 2013).

Other uses
The offshore area should not include archeological sites or previously assigned shipping lanes.

1.1.1.2 Criteria for Solar development

5.1.1.2.1 Utility-scale PV

Final set of criteria selected for finding areas suitable for utility-scale PV installations:

Irradiance
The most basic factor for developing a solar PV project is high average annual Global
Horizontal Irradiation (GHI). The higher the solar insolation, the greater the energy
yield per installed development (while there is no min GHI that is required, locations
exceeding 5 kWh/m2/day are considered with sufficient insolation) (Jacobson et al.
2016)

Land use
As with onshore wind turbine, PV cannot be constructed on urban areas, water land,
archeological sites, or airports. PV also cannot be constructed on forests and
agriculture land in order to prevent harm to the forest ecosystem due to the large land
area needed as well as due to the competition between food and energy resources
caused by agricultural development (Uyan 2013).

Topography
The solar farm should be on flat or south facing slopes to ensure greater solar
radiation and power production due to the location of the sun installations
(International Finance Corporation (IFC) 2012; McKinney 2014). Although PV farms
can be constructed on steep slopes, construction on flat areas simplifies installation
and reduces costs (International Finance Corporation (IFC) 2012)

5.1.1.2.2 CSP

Final set of criteria selected for finding areas suitable for CSP installations:

Land use
Same as for utility-scale PV

Irradiance
For CSP the most important factor is minimum annual average direct normal
irradiance (DNI) of 5 KWh/m2/day. This criterion is required in order to make the
costs of generating electricity cost-effective. CSP electricity generation is linear to the

38
Literature review

amount of DNI. (Clifton and Boruff 2010, Lopez et al. 2012, Doris et al. 2013,
Schmalensee et al. 2015).

Slope
CSP has to be constructed on relatively flat areas. The literature highlights different
minimum slope percentages as criteria for CSP development. NREL and Uyan (2013)
used a maximum of 3% slope while Clifton and Boruff (2010) used a maximum slope
ranging from 1% to 7%.

Minimum contiguous area

Minimum contiguous area is needed to ensure an area size large enough to be
considered a utility-scale project. Lopez et al. (2012) used a 0.18 km2 minimum
requirement while Clifton and Boruff (2010) used a range of 2 to 8 km2.

5.1.2 Practical criteria

As development of wind turbine would not be feasible in areas with restricted regulatory limitation for
development or in areas of environmental consequence, the following section presents information
regarding regulations that affect renewable energy development in Israel.

Israel has created a statutory protection on open areas by declaring them nature reserves, national
parks, or forest areas in order to prevent their development and preserve their ecosystem. The level of
protection of open spaces depends on the statutory protection (Planning laws) granted to them by the
law. For example, the National Outline Plan for Forests and Afforestation - NOP 22 - grants statutory
protection to forest and afforestation formations. It presents guidelines for their preservation,
cultivation, and integration into the overall planning of Israeli land. It was integrated with national and
district outline plans as well as into the Integrated National Outline Plan for Building, Development
and Conservation - NOP 35 (Kaplan and Abel 2011). NOP 35 defines 6 kinds of planning areas:
Urban Texture, City Texture, Rural Texture, National Protected Texture, Combined Protected
Texture, and Shore Texture. The textures differ from one another by the quantitative and spatial ratios
designated to different land-uses. For example, urban texture contains more areas designated to urban
developments while considering areas of environmental consequence such as ecological corridors.
Whereas, most of the land-use for areas of Combined Protected Texture will be designated to preserve
natural areas (State of Israel 2015).

Israel’s National Outline Plan for Wind Turbines - NOP 10/D/12 - bans the installation of wind
turbines on greenhouses, preservations, and heritage, historic, or national sites. It also explicitly states
that installation of wind turbines on shoreline areas requires the approval of a representative from the
Ministry of Defense at the concerned regional committee.

The National Outline Plan for Photovoltaic Installations- NOP 10/D/10 bans small and moderate sized
photovoltaic installations in shore texture (as defined in NOP35) and in areas with scenic, heritage,
archeological, and ecological importance including Ecological Corridors. It also states that installation
of photovoltaic on military ground requires the approval of the Ministry of Defense. Small and
moderate sized photovoltaic installations are defined in the NOP as areas smaller than 750 Dunam
(750,000 square meters). For large photovoltaic installations, each PV farm or CSP has to be assessed
separately due to their individual large impacts on the environment (State of Israel 2015).

While development of renewable energy is beneficial for environmental conservation, it is important

to ensure that wind turbine developments will not be located in areas with specific environmental
importance such as those that harbor endangered species, bats caves and their lodging and breeding
sites, or bird migration routes.

39
Literature review

Ecological corridors should be taken into consideration when choosing a site to construct renewable
energy technology. Ecological networks became a major tool world-wide in preserving biodiversity
and natural habitats in order to mitigate fragmentation caused by humans (fragmentation of building
roads, fences, rail tracks and buildings). Ecological corridor allows migration between two fragments
that otherwise would have been separated, thus decreasing the risk of species extinction. Connecting
between isolated natural reserves by a corridor such as natural land, woodland agriculture land and
streams, is vital for species survival since it allows them to migrate and to colonize new areas when
environmental conditions change. Thus, renewable energy development on ecological corridors
should be avoided (Jongman et al. 2004, Ministry of Environmental Protection 2010).

Israel is a bottleneck for migratory birds due to its unique location between 3 continents (Figure 14).
Israel’s bird density and biodiversity is considered one of the richest in the world. Over 500 million
birds migrate through Israel’s sky from Europe and Asia to Africa during the migration season and
over 530 different bird species permanently reside in Israel. The main harm from wind farms affects
bats and birds if the wind farm is located on main migration routes. In 2008, The Society for
Protection of Nature in Israel released a report on endangered birds which found that 46 birds species
were in danger of extinction and 18 of them under severe danger of extinction (The Society for
Protection of Nature in Israel 2008, Ben David and Avni 2013). Several Important Birds and
Biodiversity Areas (IBA) have been recognized in Israel. IBA are sites of international significance
for the conservation of birds and other biodiversity. These sites are part of a worldwide network
considered essential to ensure bird survival. The sites are found by locally collected, ground-truthed
data that are analyzed nationally. IBA are identified using criteria agreed upon internationally, such as
the bird numbers and species' complements that they hold, and are selected in a way that they form a
network throughout the species' biogeographic distributions. Thus, the consequences of preserving
and protecting IBA sites are critical to preventing bird extinctions (BirdLife International 2014).

Figure 14. Migration routes of soaring birds in the Middle East at spring (left) and autum (right). Source: Yom-Tov 1988

For offshore wind development environmental factors such as protected marine environment or
offshore birds migration route should be taken into consideration.

A more detailed explanation of which of the factors above were taken under consideration in this
thesis and in what manner can be found later on in the Method chapter

40
Literature review

5.2 Rooftop PV- technical background and previous work related to Israel’s rooftop
evaluation

The development of rooftop PV is limited to the fraction of roof area technically suitable. Factors
considered when evaluating rooftop suitability are the roof portions directed to the south in the
northern hemisphere countries, shading and occupying objects such as solar water heaters, AC units,
antennas and satellite dishes that limit the area available for PV construction on the roof (Shofrony
2014; Jacobson et al. 2016). Melius et al. (2013) found that 10% to 60% of building rooftop area is
suitable for PV development, with the higher end pertaining to commercial or large buildings, or
buildings with flat roofs. Since commercial buildings usually have large flat roofs they usually have a
larger portion of suitable area for PV than residential buildings (Melius et al. 2013; Jacobson et al.
2016).

Two studies were conducted in order to evaluate Israel’s rooftops potential. Shofrony (2014)
evaluated that in 2012, Israel residential rooftop was 170.4 km2 and non-residential was 77.7 km2
while Vardimon (2011) found that in 2007 Israel’s residential rooftop was 188.7 km2and non-
residential was 62.7.7 km2.
Table 5. Israel’s rooftop area estimations for residential and non-residential structures from previous researches (Vardimon
2011, Shofrony 2014)

Residential Commercial and

Year of data Total rooftop area
rooftop area governmental
source (km^2)
(km^2) rooftop area (km^2)

Shofrony (2014) 2012 170.40 77.70 248.10

. Vardimon (2011) 2007 188.70 62.70 251.40

5.3 Review of other sources

5.3.1 Geothermal

Sites suitable for conventional geothermal plants in Israel are very limited, at least with current
technologies. Shalev et al. (2008) found that although Israel’s average geothermal heat flux of 42
mW/m2 is lower than the world average of 60 mW/m2, the heat flux at the south end of the Golan
Heights and in southern Israel is relatively high (larger than 10 bar) and accrue at relatively shallow
depths (lower than 3000m). These measures would allow for the development of geothermal energy at
these sites. Geothermal energy could be generated in most areas in Israel with Enhanced Geothermal
Systems (EGS) technology. Shalev et al. (2008) also found that the ground temperatures in Israel are
sufficient to produce geothermal energy with EGS, with temperatures higher than 150 Celsius at
depths greater than 6 km and around 200 Celsius at depths of 8 km in most of Israel (Shalev et al.
2008). The technological immaturity, together with the lack of experience of developing the system at
depths of 6 - 8 km, puts the feasibility of this technology in Israel in question.

41
Literature review

Figure 15. Average temperature at 6 km (on the left) and 8 km (on the right) underground. Source: Shalev et al. 2008

5.3.2 Hydropower

Hydropower is another renewable energy resource widely used to generate clean energy. As
mentioned before, hydropower is classified into three categories: run-of-river, reservoir or storage,
and pumped storage plants. Considering Israel’s dry riverbeds, Israel does not have hydropower
potential from run-of-river and reservoir or storage. However, Israel is developing pumped storage
plants that can be used as storage (Willner 2014). Currently, Israel has a national plan for a total of
800 MW of pumped hydroelectric storage capacity by 2020. In 2014, Israel constructed its first PSH
plant with a capacity of 300 MW on Mount Gilboa, and another PSH plant with a capacity of 340
MW is in the advanced planning stages at the Kochav ha-Yarden site (Public Utilities Authority
Electricity 6/13/2012; Jacobson et al. 2014; Willner 2014).

5.3.3 Wave

Zodiatis et al. (2014) made an assessment of wave energy potential over the Eastern Mediterranean
Levantine Basin conducted. In their research, a ten-year database (2001-2010) of wave energy
potentials was produced using high resolution (1 arc minute), state-of-the-art wind-wave numerical
models. Observational data by satellites and meteorological stations, such as measurements of buoy
located in the shore of the Israeli city Hadera, have been integrated into the models, creating a
hindcast platform. Zodiatis et al. found that Israel and other countries in the Levantine Basin enjoy
relatively low stable wave energy potential (Zodiatis et al. 2014). The possibility of using this
resource will be further touched on in the Discussion chapter.

42
Literature review

Figure 16. Ten years wave energy potential (kW/m) for the Eastern Mediterranean. a) Mean, b) Standard deviation, c)
Skewness, d) Kurtosis values. Source: Zodiatis et al. 2014

43
Methods

6. Methods
This chapter presents the methods used to answer the main and sub research questions.
First, a literature review was conducted, surveying the latest state of the art knowledge with respect to the
research questions. The literature review focuses on two main categories: data that will help construct the
transition plan that will transform Israel energy resources to 100% WWS, and criteria for finding areas
suitable for development of WWS technologies.
Jacobson et al. (2016) has created a World Plan to convert 139 countries which contains the most up to
date data, including projections for Israel. Prof. Jacobson’s proposal for a target WWS supply mix to
address Israel’s future energy demand projections in a 100% renewable energy manner was adopted in
this thesis. The results and projections relevant to Israel’s transition to renewable energy were derived
from the World Plan roadmap (Jacobson et al. 2016) and spreadsheet (Jacobson & Delucchi 2016).
The following results and projections are presented in the ‘Israel’s results from the World Plan’ chapter:
Israel's projected future end-use power demand and a suggested energy mix to generate Israel’s all-
purpose energy demand in 2050 with only WWS technologies (onshore wind, offshore wind, utility-scale
PV, residential PV, commercial/governmental PV, concentrated solar power (CSP), geothermal, wave,
tidal, and hydropower). This thesis also presents Israel’s expected energy demand in 2050 in Business As
Usual (BAU) and in a scenario of converting its all-purpose energy infrastructures to one powered by
wind, water, and sunlight (WWS)(Jacobson & Delucchi 2016). Furthermore, this work derives the
number of WWS generators and corresponding footprint and spacing areas needed to meet demand in the
WWS case and an energy mix that will allow Israel to convert its all-purpose energy infrastructure to
WWS by 2050.
For the sake of consistency with prior roadmaps developed with the same methods as the World Plan used
to study Israel, results are presented in the same format (similar tables) as previous roadmaps developed
by Jacobson and Delucchi for individual U.S. state energy roadmaps for New York, California,
Washington State, and the remaining United States (Jacobson et al. 2013; Jacobson et al. 2014; Jacobson
et al. 2015a; Jacobson et al. 2015b respectively).
As Jacobson’s et al. (2016) suggested energy mix is based on top-down modeling, and not on the actual
bottom-up feasibility in Israel, considering its terrain, unique geography and WWS potential, etc., a site
suitability map has been developed using the Geographic Information System (GIS). GIS is a
geographical analysis tool used for solving complex geographic planning and management problems. GIS
has become popular in recent years in the decision making process and specifically in assessing the most
optimal sites for renewable energy installations (Brewer et al. 2015; Tegou et al. 2010; Uyan 2013). The
GIS multi-criteria spatial analysis data layers of physical, regulatory and environmental variables were
overlaid to create a map of locations most optimal for WWS installations.
Based on the criteria that were determined most relevant to help answer the main and sub questions of this
thesis, GIS data sets required for analysis based on such criteria (e.g. land use data, slope and protected
areas, etc) were collected for the study area from multiple sources, such as Israel Meteorology Center,
Ministry of Interior, NASA, etc (full list of sources can be found in Annex 4).
Israel’s GIS spatial analysis results reveal areas technically suitable for development of onshore wind,
utility scale PV, and CSP technologies. It might be that the same areas prove to be suitable for several
technologies. The results of the analysis were used to calculate the technical and practical potential (MW)
for utility-scale photovoltaic (PV), concentrating solar power (CSP), and onshore wind power. These
results help validate whether Israel has enough suitable area to develop the aforementioned WWS
technologies in order to allow the country to generate the expected all-purpose end use power by 2050.

44
Methods

Additionally, this section analyzes Israel’s rooftop PV technical potential that is based on previously
published research. Estimates of Israel’s technical potential for offshore wind, wave, geothermal, tidal,
hydropower, and commercial rooftop PV system have not been calculated in this thesis but are taken from
Jacobson et al. (2015) and integrated into the suggested WWS plan.
The outcome of both Jacobson’s World Plan and the GIS analysis are compared and analyzed in the
Discussion with the aim of providing technical and practical feasibility for Prof. Jacobson’s World Plan
model while taking into account Israel’s unique geography, climate, environmental and regulation
settings.

6.1 GIS analysis method

This section presents the methods used to estimate Israel’s technical and practical potential. This chapter
will first detail the multi-criteria spatial analysis, which was used to determine Israel’s technical and
practical potential for wind and solar technologies (onshore wind, utility scale PV and CSP). Secondly,
this section outlines the methods used to estimate Israel’s technical potential for residential rooftop PV.
This thesis does not conduct spatial analysis of suitable areas for offshore wind as the data regarding
Israel’s offshore wind speed which is a critical factor for finding Israel’s technical and practical potential
for offshore wind turbines was unobtainable. Thus, the technical potential is taken from the World Plan
estimation (Jacobson et al. 2016) and practical potential of offshore wind turbines is left unknown.
Further, commercial rooftop PV system technical (and practical) potential was not estimated due to
insufficient data with regards to the amount of floors in commercial buildings, a critical piece of data for a
potential estimate. As the contribution of geothermal, tidal, and hydropower to WWS energy source mix
is less than 0.03% (and there is little concern that this low energy supply can be achieved in Israel),
geothermal, tidal, and hydropower technical potential have not been validated in this thesis but were taken
from Jacobson et al. (2016) and later integrated into the suggested WWS plan.

In this work, a site suitability map has been developed using GIS multi-criteria analysis for onshore wind,
utility scale PV and CSP technologies. With GIS multi-criteria analysis, data layers of raster or gridded
values that represent different criteria are overlaid to create a suitability map that helps determine whether
a given area is suitable for particular use (Tegou et al. 2010, Brewer et al. 2015). Spatial analysis aims to
determine whether sufficient suitable area is available for the development of WWS technologies that will
provide the needed capacity to meet Israel’s energy demand in 2050 as proposed by Jacobson’s et al.
(2015).

A thorough literature review (presented in literature review chapter) led to the evaluation criteria for site
suitability for each of the mentioned technologies. The ideal site for WWS development is a site with
high-energy resources, low biological resources, and limited site regulations. The site-suitability analysis
was conducted with these specifications in mind. First, areas found unsuitable for WWS installation due
to topographic and land-use limitations were eliminated. Areas technically suitable for WWS installation
remained. Next, out of the areas technically suitable for WWS installation, areas practically suitable for
WWS installation were found by eliminating areas with burdensome environmental and statutory
regulations. The spatial analysis has been conducted with a guideline that areas that are most suitable for
WWS installations are the ones that have the lowest disruption to the existing land use and interfere the
least with other limitations (environmental and regulation).

Here is a summary of the GIS analysis criteria:

45
Methods

Criteria for finding sites technically suitable for onshore wind farm development

 Annual wind speed greater than 6 m/s at a height of 100 m

 Slope less than than 30 percent
 Available Open Space areas that are not:
▪ Archeological sites
▪ Airports
▪ Roads
▪ Water bodies
▪ Built structures

Criteria for finding sites practically suitable for onshore wind farm development
 Technically suitable
 Not part of shore texture
 Not ecologically sensitive
▪ Nature reserves
▪ National parks
▪ Bird important areas

Criteria for finding sites technically suitable for PV farm development

 Available open space areas that are not:
▪ Archeological sites
▪ Airports
▪ Roads
▪ Forests
▪ Water bodies
▪ Built structures

Criteria for finding sites that are practically suitable for PV farm development
 Technically suitable
 Not part of shore texture
 Non-agricultural
 Not ecologically sensitive
▪ Nature reserves
▪ National parks
▪ Bird important areas

Criteria for finding sites technically suitable for CSP development

 Available open space areas that are not:
▪ Archeological sites
▪ Airports
▪ Roads
▪ Forests
▪ Water bodies
▪ Built structures
 Slope less than or equal to 5 percent
 Continuous areas over 180,000 square meters
 Annual average DNI greater than than 5 kWh/m2/day

46
Methods

Criteria for finding sites practically suitable for CSP development

 Technically suitable
 Not part of shore texture
 Non-agricultural
 Not ecologically sensitive
▪ Nature reserves
▪ National parks
▪ Bird important areas

There may be an overlap between sites found technically and practically suitable for different WWS
installations e.g. overlap between areas suitable for utility scale installations and onshore wind. However,
per each WWS source (e.g. wind, solar, …), best-fit technology was found per site, without overlapping.
E.g. sites suitable for CSP and utility scale PV do not overlap since areas suitable for CSP were
eliminated from areas suitable for solar PV.

The spatial analysis does not account for social factors such as public attitudes towards WWS
development on the suggested sites. In previous studies, public opinion was found to have a large role in
the success of site development since it can slow or even completely halt a project deemed permissible by
law and regulation. The spatial analysis also does not account for economic factors such as proximity to
existing roads or grid transmission lines that affect the direct cost of WWS construction and development
(Brewer et al. 2015). Those two aspects should be integrated in the final process of deciding site
development.

6.1.1 Validation method

To validate Jacobson’s et al. 2016 proposal, an analysis shall be conducted per each energy source to
determine its technical and then practical potential and the results compared to Jacobson’s proposed
energy output for said source. The plan shall be considered invalid if Israel has insufficient energy output
per one or more of the energy sources. In such a case, an alternative proposal shall be made.

Moreover, as there are many factors not taken into consideration by this evaluation (i.e. societal, political
& cultural aspects), not to mention inaccurate data input and models for those factors - it may be that a
certain calculated practical potentials are actually lower than estimated. Likewise, it may be that demand
in 2050 is higher than projected (and therefore the proposed energy requirement per source should be
higher, assuming same energy mix across sources per Jacobson’s et al 2016 plan). Therefore the plan is
not only evaluated as valid and invalid, but also as “safe” or “unsafe”/“uncertain”. A “safe” plan shall be
defined as a plan, where the found practical potential of each energy source is greater by at least 25% than
the required energy capacity for that source. A “safe” plan has large enough error margins (at least 25%)
implying high likelihood to implement the proposed plan. An “uncertain” plan, is one where at least one
energy source doesn’t have sufficient 25%+ margins. If a plan shall be found “uncertain,” a safe
alternative proposal shall be made.

6.1.1.1 Military Grounds

Out of Israel’s total land of 21,640 km2, 7,895 km 2 (or 36.5%) is currently defined as “military grounds”.
Military grounds are areas designated for army usage and include military sites, training areas, or other
closed areas. While analyzing site suitability for renewable installations, some of the sites found suitable
for site installation would inevitably overlap with military grounds. Israel does not need all of the
currently allocated 36.5% of its area for military use, and this thesis assumes that Israel can repurpose up
47
Methods

to 10% of its total area currently defined as military ground (789 km 2) as sites for allocated renewable
energy installation. As such, in addition to meeting a 25% error margin per energy source, for the plan to
be considered valid and safe, total area required to repurpose from military grounds should not exceed
10%.

The 10% military ground threshold will be calculated as follows: per each energy technology source the
total (maximum) practical energy potential will be calculated P. Further the area required to achieve
maximum potential production through installation will be calculated, A(P) - this is based on the GIS
analysis conducted, summarizing all area of sites practically suitable per technology. Of that area, the sub-
area that overlaps with military grounds will also be calculated, A(MP), again based on GIS analysis,
intersecting the military grounds layer with the practical potential layer for each technology. Further, the
area required to meet projected demand per that technology shall be calculated A(D). This can be
calculated as follows: A(D)=D/P*A(P), relying on a nominal energy production to area ratio, which is a
close enough approximation, considering the relatively uniform sun and wind distribution across Israel,
and considering this calculation is done pre-specific site selection. It is further assumed that if there is
enough available land that is not on military ground, then the renewable installation will be done on such
land without requiring repurposing. Therefore, when accounting for military ground required for WWS
installation, we want to consider per technology what is the minimal area that is absolutely required to be
repurposed from military ground. This area is A(Repurpose)=Max(A(D)-(A(P)-A(MP)),0). Then, the
requirement is Sum(A(Repurpose)i)/A(M)<10% where the A(Repurpose) is summed across all
technologies (wind, PV, CSP) and then divided by entire military ground A(M) and should be less than
10% as defined.

Beyond the overall 10% repurposing threshold as described in detail above, per each specific
technology, areas that were found practically suitable based on other considerations, and at the
same time were overlapping with military grounds, were not excluded.
6.1.2 Wind turbine spatial analysis

Note: as explained previously, there is insufficient data to perform a meaningful analysis on offshore
wind turbine energy potential, and therefore the focus here is solely on onshore wind turbine energy
potential.

To find areas technically suitable for onshore wind farm development, the following criteria were
considered in the spatial analysis: wind speed, land use, and slope. Regulatory and environmental criteria
were also considered to estimate Israel’s practical potential, and such regulatory and environmental
datasets were overlaid using ESRI ArcGIS. Layers with coordinate systems different from the Israel TM
Grid were projected onto it, raster datasets were converted into vector datasets and all data layers with
world data were clipped to fit into Israel’s border area. Figure 17 illustrates this spatial analysis.

Areas that were found unsuitable for installation due to technical constraints - an annual average wind
speed lower than 6 m/s, slope greater than 30% or areas with unfit land-use – were excluded (explanation
of the criteria can be found in the literature review chapter). Areas with unfit land-use are considered:
urban areas, water land, archeological sites, and airports. Israel’s onshore wind farm technical potential
has been calculated by multiplying the technically suitable area (found by spatial analysis) by the wind
turbine rated power of 5000 kW and dividing by the area for one turbine accounting for spacing of 0.78
km2 as estimated by Jacobson and Delucchi (2016). Annex 3 provides a detailed explanation of the
calculation.

The multi-layered analysis areas that were left were differentiated by their qualities - higher wind speeds,
lower slope percentages, and the applicable restrictions (statutory or environmental). Areas practically
48
Methods

suitable for wind farm installation were defined as areas that, in addition to being technically suitable for
wind farm installation, also meet the following criteria: not on shore texture, and not located on nature
reserves, national parks, or birds important areas (BIA). Israel’s practical potential was calculated by
multiplying the areas that were found in the spatial analysis as practically suitable by turbine rated power
of 5000 kW and dividing by the area for one turbine accounting for spacing of 0.78 km2 as estimated by
Jacobson and Delucchi (2016).

Data of Israel’s wind speed was provided by: Israel Meteorology Center. An annual average wind speed
above 6 m/s was chosen as technical criteria for choosing a suitable site for wind turbines. Thus, areas
with annual average wind speeds less than than 6 m/s at heights of 100 meters were excluded. As higher
wind speeds generate more energy, three levels of wind speeds were defined, 6+m/s, 6.5+m/s and 7+m/s.
Table 9, presented in the Results, summarizes the various areas with such energy speeds.

Slope percentage layer was derived from ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model Version 2 using
ArcGIS slope tool. This thesis uses a slope threshold of 30% to eliminate areas from the technical analysis
since a) this thesis presents a long-term plan where better future solutions to overcome slope limitations
can be assumed, and b) installation at 30% slope terrain has already been constructed on the Greek island
of Crete and in Baoding mountain in China (Tegou et al. 2010, Miller & Li 2014, Buist 2015).

49
Methods

Figure 17. Flowchart for modeling suitability of wind farm

50
Methods

Data used to define locations of open space were derived from ‘open space composition’ polygon data
retrieved from Israel’s National Ecosystem Assessment Program called Hamarag . This data contains
information on areas of shrub-steppe, Garrigue, forest and woodland, desert, field crops, plantations,
water land and built structure (roads and parking lots were already excluded from the original data). All
areas other than ‘water land’ and ‘built structure’ were extracted from this data layer in the process of
creating a layer that contains only open space. Furthermore, ‘airport’ and ‘archeological sites’ were
extracted from a ‘land use’ data layer that was provided by Central Bureau of Statistics. Those areas
(‘airport’ or ‘archeological sites’) were further subtracted from the open space data layer and a data layer
that contains only open space was received. Note, that the actual building of airports and archeological
sites were already eliminated in the first phase of eliminating ‘built structure‘ areas from the ‘open space
composition’ layer. In the second phase, eliminating airports and archeological sites, the area surrounding
the structures was also eliminated (as is appropriate for such installation due to proximity).

As explained, in order to eliminate protected areas, Hamaarag data source was used. Hamaarag defined
three degrees of statutory protections in the State of Nature report 2015: 1. High protection for areas
declared as Nature Reserves, National Parks or forests (including planted forests that were recognized by
National Outline Plan for Forests and Afforestation-NOP 22). Those areas were found by the Nature and
Parks Authority to be vital to preserving biodiversity; 2. Moderate protection for areas considered by the
planning committees to become protected as Nature Reserves, National Parks or forest area that was not
recognized by NOP22 to be protected. 3. No protection for areas that were not proposed to the planning
committees but were offered to be recognized as protected by the Nature and Parks Authority and the
Jewish National Fund (JNF) (Berg et al. 2015, Shkedi and Sadot 2000). When choosing areas practically
suitable for wind turbine installation, areas with high protection and moderate protection were eliminated.
Forests that are not part of the high or medium protection levels were not eliminated as wind turbines can
be integrated into a forest’s surroundings.

Israel’s National Outline Plan for Wind Turbines - NOP 10/D/12 - bans installation of wind turbines on
greenhouses, preservations, and heritage, historic, or national sites. Due to limited data on greenhouses,
preservations, and heritage, historic, or national sites, these limitations were not part of the analysis but it
can be assumed that most of these areas were eliminated as part of the elimination of built structures and
archeological sites. In order to eliminate restricted locations of protected areas (national parks and
forests), shore texture, and areas of high ecological sensitivity for birds (Birds Important Areas), a
restriction layer was created by uniting data layers of those restrictions.

Since NOP 35 is dividing all of Israel into textures (Urban Texture, City Texture, Rural Texture, National
Protected Texture, Combined Protected Texture, and Shore Texture) where the planning authority is
required to approve any development, it was found unnecessary to add the textures as a regulation
limitation. Nevertheless, this work considers shore texture as a practically unsuitable area for wind farm
development since Israel’s National Outline Plan for Wind Turbines- NOP 10/D/12 explicitly states that
installation of wind turbines on shoreline areas requires the explicit approval of a representative from the
Ministry of Defense at the concerned regional committee. Considering that these two areas were singled
out, and considering the requirement for a committee representative to approach, it was deduced that such
approvals would not come easy, and that it would be best to make a plan that works without relying on
such approvals a-priori. The installation of 2miniature wind turbines is allowed only in shoreline areas
approved for construction while submission of a plan is required for installation of small3, medium4 and
big5 wind turbines in those areas.
2
Horizontal or vertical wind turbine at maximum height of 4 m
3
Horizontal or vertical wind turbine at maximum height of 18 m
4
Horizontal or vertical wind turbine at maximum height of 40 m
5
Horizontal or vertical wind turbine at height of at least 40 m.

51
Methods

Israel’s onshore wind farm practical potential was evaluated by only accounting for areas with no
limitations at all as such limitations were defined for wind installation (other than possibly overlapping
with military designated grounds as explained above). Furthermore, agriculture areas were considered as
practically suitable for wind farm installation since crop can still be grown on the same areas that wind
farms are constructed
.
BIA were considered not practically suitable and were filtered out due to Israel’s importance to bird
migration population. Preserving and protecting BIA sites are critical to preventing bird extinctions
(BirdLife International 2014).

Many other restrictions were not included in this estimate due to lack of data. These restrictions include
areas such as those of endangered species, bird migration routes, bat caves and their lodging and breeding
sites, buffer zones from the airport, and distance to populated areas and inhabited structures.

Ecological corridors should be taken into consideration when choosing a site to construct wind turbines.
Nature and Parks Authority has identified areas of ecological corridor importance (Rotem et al. 2015).
The ecological corridor data layer that was provided by the Nature and Parks Authority’s presents almost
all the areas that were not already used as an urban area or protected area (nature reserve/national
park/forests) and designated these areas as ecological corridors. Ecological corridors are important for the
mentioned reasons but they are also important to the understanding of the consequences of continued
pollution on the ecosystem. Further research into understanding the benefits of preserving areas for
ecological health versus the damage of continued fossil fuel usage need to be conducted and areas with a
greater potential to be used as ecological corridors should be defined. A further understanding of which
areas are really necessary and which could be used for wind turbines should be conducted.

6.1.3 Utility-scale solar power: PV and CSP

To find areas suitable for utility-scale photovoltaic (PV) and concentrated solar power (CSP), similar
methods of GIS spatial analysis as were conducted for onshore wind turbine were used with a small
adaptation (layers with coordinate system different than Israel TM Grid were projected onto it, raster
datasets were converted into vector dataset, and all data layers with world data were clipped to fit into
Israel’s border area). Israel’s solar technical potential was evaluated by taking into account topographic
and land-use constraints. Areas unsuitable for installation due to land-use constraints such as urban areas,
water land, archeological sites, airports and forests were excluded. Forest land was excluded since
constructing CSP or PV solar farm will harm the forest ecosystem due to the large land area that both
need.

Figure 18 presents a flow chart explaining the steps of the spatial analysis for finding areas suitable for
CSP installation. In order to find CSP technical potential, areas with slopes larger than 5% were
eliminated from the remaining areas. CSP has to be constructed on flat areas with low steepness slopes.
While different maximum slope percentages were used in the literature, a maximum of 5% was chosen
for this analysis. In order to ensure a large enough installation area, areas of minimum contiguous area of
180,000 m2 were integrated into the analysis. Furthermore, a criterion of areas with minimum annual
average direct normal irradiance (DNI) of 5 KWh/m2/day was integrated. (Schmalensee et al. 2015).
Israel’s DNI was derived from solar maps of 40 km resolution for Africa provided by the NREL online
data repository. The data were developed from NREL's Climatological Solar Radiation (CSR) Model that
uses the following parameters: cloud cover, atmospheric water vapor and trace gases, amount of aerosols
in the atmosphere (OpenEI). The data reveals that Israel’s annual average DNI is between 4.6

52
Methods

kWh/m2/day to 6.5 KWh/m2/day. Thus, areas with annual DNI smaller than 5 KWh/m2/day were
eliminated (Clifton and Boruff 2010, Lopez et al. 2012, Doris et al. 2013, Richter et al. 2009).

Lastly, CSP technical potential was calculated by multiplying the area found suitable for CSP storage
by the weighted areal power density of 34.07 MW/km2 (explanation of the calculation that led to this
value can be found in the spreadsheet of Jacobson and Delucchi 2016). The storage is assumed to be with
a maximum charge to discharge rate (storage size to generator size ratio) of 2.62:1 as assumed in
Jacobson et al. (2015). For footprint calculation, a land area for one plant of typical size is assumed to be
about 2.93 km2 with CSP mirror sizes similar to those at Ivanpah.

Figure 19 presents a flow chart explaining the steps of the spatial analysis for finding areas suitable for
utility scale PV. Israel’s utility-scale PV technical potential has been calculated out of the sum of areas
that were found in the spatial analysis to have a slope smaller or equal to 5% and that are not suitable for
CSP installation (areas that were suitable for CSP were subtracted), together with half of the areas that
were found to have slope percentages greater than 5%. Only half of the areas with slope percentages
greater than 5 were used in the calculation since areas with slopes greater than 5% that are facing south
have higher solar radiation due to the location of the sun (McKinney 2014). The limitation of minimum
continuous area of 180,000 square meters was not applied on PV since small PV farms could be
constructed in smaller areas and still serve as great sources of solar energy.

Israel has rich solar resource availability. Based on NREL’s data of 40 km resolution for Africa
(developed from NREL's Climatological Solar Radiation (CSR) Model), Israel’s GHI is between 5.2
KWh/m2/day and 5.9 KWh/m2/day. This estimation was validated by comparing it to measurements
conducted by Israel Meteorological Center6 at four different stations (Beit Dagan, Haifa, Jerusalem, Bear
Sheva) between the years 1994-2005. Solar irradiance was not integrated into the analysis as a criterion,
since its annual average global horizontal irradiance (GHI) is sufficient and does not change much
throughout Israel (although, generally speaking, the south GHI is higher than in the north of Israel)
(Richter et al. 2009, Lopez et al. 2012).

Utility-scale PV technical potential was calculated by multiplying the suitable area found in the analysis
by panel rated power output of 239 W/m2 and dividing by spacing factor (total system area/panel area) of
1.8 m2 that includes nominal “spacing” between panels in the plant footprint area. Detailed explanation of
the calculations can be found in Annex 3.

From the results of the areas that were found technically suitable for PV and CSP installation, further GIS
analysis was conducted by identifying areas with environmental statutory protection, areas important for
bird conservation (BIA), and military ground. Explanations regarding the data sources, the reasoning
behind the chosen criteria and the spatial analysis process are the same as the details outlined in the
onshore wind part of this chapter. The National Outline Plan for Photovoltaic Installations- NOP 10/D/10
bans from installing small and moderate photovoltaic installations in shore texture (as defined in NOP35)
and in areas with scenic, heritage, archeological, and ecological importance including Ecological
Corridors. Due to limited data on heritage sites, this limitation was not part of the analysis but it can be
assumed that most of those areas were eliminated as part of the elimination of built structures and
archeological sites. It also states that installation of photovoltaic on military ground requires the approval
of the Ministry of Defense. Small and moderate photovoltaic installations are defined in the NOP as areas
smaller than 750 Donam (750,000 square meters). For large photovoltaic installations, each PV farm or
CSP has to be assed separately due to their individual large impacts on the environment (State of Israel
2015). Constructing photovoltaic installations in protected areas will be more limited due to statutory

6 Data source: https://ims.data.gov.il/he/ims/6 (In Hebrew)

53
Methods

limitations as described in the analysis of onshore wind farm. Further, agriculture areas were excluded in
order to prevent competition between food resources and energy resources.

To evaluate CSP practical potential only areas with no limitations as described were considered as
practically suitable areas. CSP practical potential was calculated by multiplying the area found suitable
by CSP storage weighted areal power density of 34.07 MW/km2.

From the results of this spatial analysis only areas with no limitations at all (possibly overlapping partially
with areas designated to the military) on non-agricultural land were used to calculate the utility-scale PV
practical potential. Although PV farm can be constructed on a steep slope, doing so would increase
installation costs. To make sure no overlap exists between the CSP practical potential and utility-scale PV
practical potential, areas suitable for CSP were subtracted since areas for CSP development are more
restricted than to utility scale PV. The remaining area was multiplied by panel rated power output of 239
W/m2 and divided by a spacing factor of 1.8 m2.

For further steps towards implementation, economic limitations associated with solar construction and
maintenance such as distance to transmission lines and roads, should also be taken into consideration as
described in the onshore wind analysis.

54
Methods

Figure 18. Flowchart for modeling suitability of CSP

55
Methods

Figure 19. Flowchart for modeling suitability of utility scale PV

56
Methods

6.2 Rooftop analysis

To determine Israel’s available residential rooftop space an analysis was conducted on data provided
by Israel’s Ministry of Environmental Protection from 2015. However, it was not possible to calculate
the equivalent available commercial and governmental rooftop space since the necessary average
number of stories in commercial and governmental building is nonexistent in Israel. The available
area for PV in commercial rooftop in 2050 has been estimated by Jacobson at el. (2015) and its results
are used as is without validation in the Discussion.

Israel’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP) has provided results of an analysis the MoEP
conducted on the uses of the structures in Israel. MoEP stated that the results for residential rooftop
area and non-residential rooftop area such as leisure, services and commerce, religion, education,
municipality and government and transportation, is inaccurate due to an inability of their analysis to
correctly categorize the structures to the right usage.

In order to reveal the ratio between all of Israel’s residential and non-residential structures an analysis
was conducted using data of the amount of residential and non-residential structures that were built
between the years 1995-2015 as previous data does not exist online by Israel Central Bureau of
Statistics. From the ratio between the years 1995-2015 an extrapolation was made to estimate the
ratio between all of Israel’s residential and non-residential structures (also for the structures built
previous to 1995). For verification purposes, the estimated ratio was compared to previous research
of Vardimon (2011) and Shofrony (2014). Using the ratio Israel’s rooftop area for residential and
non-residential structures for 2015 was calculated.

Further verification has been conducted by comparing the results to the average floor area per capita
of European countries based on data from 7ENTRANZE from 2008. Israel’s rooftop area was
calculated based on number of residents that live in Israel, the number of averaged stories in
residential buildings and the average floor area per capita for residential buildings. The average
number of stories in residential building was calculated from data provided by Israel Central Bureau
of Statistics (CBS) for the years for years 1995-2014 and later on was estimated for building that was
built also before 1995.

The residential useable area of the rooftop was estimated by using Jacobson et al (2016) usability ratio
for urban area and for non-urban area. Estimation of the percentage of urban population in 2050 are
taken also from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016). The technical potential was calculated by multiplying
the estimated usable area of residential rooftop by the solar panel rated power of solar PV panel
SunPower E20.

The amount of area available for PV construction on residential rooftops in 2050 was calculated based
on the fraction of rooftop areas suitable for PV installations in urban area and in non-urban areas in
2050, estimated residential floor area per capita in 2050, amount of population in 2050.
The technical potential was calculated by multiplying the estimated available residential rooftop by
the estimated solar panel rated power in 2050. This rated power was calculated by Jacobson et al.
(2015) by extrapolating from 2015 rated power assuming solar PV panel characteristics of SunPower
E20.

Explanations to the calculation of available residential rooftops for PV construction can be found in
Annex 3.

7
Data source: http://www.entranze.enerdata.eu/

57
World Plan Results

7. World plan results

This chapter presents Israel’s results from Prof. Jacobson “World Plan” in the paper ‘100% Clean and
Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All- Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the
World’ (Jacobson et al. 2016). This chapter will highlight Israel’s expected energy demand in 2050 in
Business As Usual (BAU) and in a scenario of converting its all-purpose energy infrastructures to one
powered by wind, water, and sunlight (WWS). Furthermore, this chapter outlines the number of
WWS generators and corresponding footprint and spacing areas needed to meet demand in the WWS
case, and an energy mix that will allow Israel to convert its all-purpose energy infrastructure to WWS
by 2050. Finally, this chapter presents a timeline to transform 139 countries that can also be suitable
for Israel to rely only on WWS technologies by 2050.

As mentioned before, in this work I have adopted Prof. Jacobson’s proposal for a target WWS supply
mix to address Israel’s future energy demand projections in a 100% renewable energy manner. The
results presented here will be discussed in context of the results of the GIS analysis.

7.1 Demand projection

Jacobson et al. (2016) estimate that Israel’s total end-use power demand in 2050 will be 27.2 GW
(104.5 TWh/year) in a "business as usual" (BAU) fossil-fuel based scenario, and 15.8 GW (139.1
TWh/year) in a 100% WWS scenario. Replacing fossil fuels with WWS technologies is expected to
generate total reduction of end-use demand by 42% relative to a BAU scenario. These projections are
based on expected Israel’s population growth by 36.5% between 2015-2050.
Jacobson et al. projects that Israel’s population will grow from 8.4 million in 2015 to 9.4 million in
2030 and 10.8 million in 2050.

Israel’s reduction of end-use demand in 2050 is projected to be 24.4% due to electrification of end
uses, 8.4% due to changes in upstream energy use, and 8.9% due to additional efficiency measures
(Jacobson et al. 2016, Jacobson & Delucchi 2016). Israel’s efficiency gain due to electrification of
end-uses in the WWS scenario is projected to be influenced mainly by efficiency in the transportation
and industrial sectors (69% and 50%, respectively).

Table 6. Israel’s end-use power demand for all-purposes by sector in 2012 and estimated demand in 2050 in case of (1)
"business as usual" (BAU) where fossil-fuel, nuclear, and biofuel will continue to be consumed or in case of (2) converting
Israel’s all-purpose energy resources to 100% WWS by 2050. Also presented is the reduction of end-use demand in 2050
due to conversion to WWS.

Energy end-use
demand
WWS- Replacing fossil fuels,
BAU- Conventional fossil fuels, reduction due
nuclear and biofuel with WWS
nuclear and biofuel (GW) to conversion
(GW)
to WWS in
Energy Sector 2050 (%)
2012 2050 2012 2050
Residential 4.30 6.02 3.15 4.45 26%
Commercial 2.07 4.00 1.61 3.10 22%
Industrial 4.19 5.90 2.13 2.96 50%
Transportation 7.35 7.81 2.24 2.38 69%
Agriculture/forestry/fishing 0.22 0.24 0.22 0.24 0%
Other 3.10 3.28 2.58 2.74 17%
Total 21.22 27.26 11.93 15.88 42%
Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight
(WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. The calculations use the method of Jacobson and
Delucchi (2011) with IEA (2015) end-use demand data.

58
World Plan Results

7.2 Suggested 2050 WWS energy mix

Table 7 presents Prof. Jacobson’s proposed energy mix and the amount of new plants or devices that
are needed for providing Israel’s total projected end-use energy demand from Table 6. According to
Prof. Jacobson’s proposal, 80.5% of Israel’s energy will be generated by solar and 19.4% by wind
turbines. Intuitively, this energy mix makes sense considering Israel’s high solar resource accessibility
while wind has lower availability since sufficient wind speed for generating electricity is limited to
specific areas. Solar and wind are the only two resources capable to power Israel on their own, and a
mix of both is required to ensure grid reliability. Furthermore, in 2050 with WWS world, the grid will
be more flexible than today due to integration of technologies such as BEV charging and hydrogen
production that will allow better matching load with peak WWS availability (Jacobson et al. 2014).

According to estimates of Table 7, replacing Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure with WWS by
2050 will require 2.3% of Israel land area (of which 13% of land is already in-use (primarily roof-
tops), and 87% (or 2% of Israel’s total land area) is the additional land required footprint for new
devices/plants). “This does not account for the decrease in footprint from eliminating the current
energy infrastructure, which includes the footprint for mining, transporting, and refining fossil fuels
and uranium and for growing, transporting, and refining biofuels and bioenergy” Jacobson et al.
(2016). Spacing area on new land is 1.6% of Israel’s land area and is needed only for wind turbines.
Spacing on Israel’s offshore area is 3.2% of Israel’s offshore area and is needed only for wind
turbines. Furthermore, Table 7 demonstrates that in 2015 only 1.6% of the total nameplate capacity
necessary for converting Israel to 100% of its all-purpose energy infrastructure to one derived entirely
from renewable energy by 2050 was already installed (Jacobson et al. 2016).
Table 7. Presented are the rated power and average capacity factors in 2050 for WWS technologies, as well as the number
and capacities of WWS power plants or devices needed to provide Israel's total annually-averaged end-use power demand
for all-purposes in 2050, accounting for transmission, distribution, forced and unforced maintenance, and array losses. Also
shown are currently installed nameplate capacity and the footprint areas and spacing areas in Kilometer Squared and
percentage of Israel’s land area.

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n)
Spacing
Percent of Percent of Spacing
Total Installed Footprint area for
Rated Average 2050 Technical End use nameplate Footprint area for
nameplate nameplate Number of Spacing for area for new units
power of capacity power potential power capacity area for new units
Energy Technology capacity capacity new units new units new units (% of
one unit factor in demand capacity delivered already new units (% of
needed for 2015 needed (km^2) (% of Israel's
(MW) 2050 met by (MW) (MW) installed (km^2) Israel's
(MW) (MW) Israel) offshore
technology 2015 land)
area)
Onshore wind 5 40.51% 6.84% 2,682 1,087 2,682 31 1.16% 530 0.01 353.55 0.00% 1.63% -
Offshore wind 5 32.49% 12.60% 6,155 2,000 6,155 0 0% 1,231 0.02 820.86 0.00% - 3.16%
Wave device 0.75 9.49% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 100% 0 - - - - -
Geothermal electric plant 100 85.44% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 100% 0 - - - - -
Hydroelectric plant 1300 47.45% 0.02% 7 3 7 7 100% 0 - - - - -
Tidal turbine 1 23.36% 0.01% 9 2 9 0 0% 9 0.00 0.03 0.00% - 0.00%
Res. roof PV 0.005 23.44% 17.48% 19,162 2,775 11,838 239 2.02% 2,319,806 50.95 - 0.24% - -
Com/gov roof PV 0.1 22.22% 9.03% 8,827 1,434 6,452 298 4.62% 61,540 27.03 - 0.12% - -
Solar PV plant 50 23.70% 41.29% 1,905,180 6,555 27,656 344 1.25% 546 333.82 - 1.54% - -
CSP plant 100 61.24% 12.73% 488,561 2,021 3,301 6 0.18% 33 96.69 - 0.45% - -
Total 100.0% 2,430,583 15,877 58,099 925 1.59% 2,383,695 508.50 1174.44 2.35% 1.63% 3.16%
Total new land 1.99% 1.63% 3.16%

For peaking power / storage

CSP plant 100 7.6% 1,213 1,980.40 0 0.00% 20 58.12 - 0.27% - -
Solar thermal for heat 50 7,227.29 3,501 48.44% 75 5.32 - 0.02% - -
Geothermal heat plant 50 82.40 82 100% 0 0 - 0.00% - -
Total for storage 9,290 3,583 38.57% 94 63 0 0.29% - -
Total new land 0.29% - -

Annual power + storage 2.64% 1.63% 3.16%

*New land 2.28% 1.63% 3.16%
Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water,
and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. The source of the footnotes of the table
is Jacobson et al. (2016). *New land= New land for annual power + storage

a. Rated powers8 are based on existing reliable technologies.

b. The capacity factors9 for 2050 for residential PV, commercial/government rooftop PV, utility scale PV, and CSP are
calculated for Israel from the 3-D global model. The onshore and offshore wind capacity factors in 2050 are calculated

8
Defined in Terms
9
Defined in Terms

59
World Plan Results

for Israel at 100-m hub height out of global model simulations of wind power that account for competition between wind
turbines for available kinetic energy based on the estimated number of wind turbines needed for Israel and after
subtracting transmission, distribution, maintenance, and array losses (Jacobson et al. 2016).
c. Percent of annually all-purpose end-use power demand in a WWS scenario (from Table 6) to be met by each of the WWS
technologies, according to Prof. Jacobson proposal. The percent of power demand met by technology in 2050 assumes
that wind and solar are the only two resources that Israel can rely on.
d. Israel’s technical potential for onshore wind is based on onshore wind areal power density and total onshore land area
minimum acceptable capacity factor. The technical potential for offshore wind was estimated as the product of the areal
power density for offshore wind systems and Israel’s coastal length. Wave technical potential capacity was estimated as a
function of the wave power available per unit of coastline, the fraction of the coastline that can be exploited for wave
power, the efficiency of the wave-energy converter (WEC), and the capacity factor without consideration of the
availability of the WEC. Tidal technical potential is estimated based on a nonlinear function of the length of Israel
coastline. Utility-scale PV plants technical potential is based on land area with at least the minimum acceptable solar
insolation which is a function of the total PV-system areal power density (areal power density of utility scale PV is
estimated as a function of the module density (which increases over time) and a spacing factor (which is estimated based
on a function of population density)). CSP technical potential is estimated by the land area with minimum DNI exposure
of 5 kWh/m2/day.
e. Israel’s end-use power delivered in 2050 for each of the technologies was calculated by multiplying the fraction of load
fulfilled by each WWS technology (as proposed) by the total end-use power delivered in 2050.
f. Total nameplate capacity10 needed to be installed in 2050 for onshore wind, offshore wind, geothermal, tidal, and wave
power is limited to Israel technical potentials. For hydropower, the nameplate capacity is assumed to be the same as in
2015. For rooftops, utility scale PV, and CSP, the total nameplate capacity needed to be installed in 2050 is calculated by
dividing the end-use power delivered in 2050 by the product of 2050 capacity factors and the overall transmission and
distribution efficiency in 2050.
g. Nameplate capacity already installed in 2015
h. Percent of nameplate capacity already installed in 2015 out of the total nameplate capacity needed in 2050 to provide
100% of Israel’s all-purpose energy demand.
i. The number of new devices needed in 2050 is calculated by dividing the total of the nameplate capacity needed in 2050
minus the already installed capacity in 2015 by the rated power of device or plant.
j. For utility PV plants, nominal “spacing” area between panels is counted in the plant footprint area. For CSP plant the
mirror sizes characteristics are the same as the mirror used at Ivanpah Solar Power Facility in California Mojave Desert.
k. Spacing area for onshore and offshore wind is calculated as 42D2, where D is rotor diameter of the wind turbine of 126 m
(same as Senvion’s RePower 5M wind turbine).
l. Israel’s land area is 21,640 km2.

The following values were used for Israel as for the rest of the countries in the world plan: “Short- and moderate distance
transmission, distribution, and maintenance losses for all energy sources treated here, except rooftop PV, are assumed to be 5-
10%. Rooftop PV losses are assumed to be 1-2%. The plans assume 38 (30-45)% of onshore wind and solar power and 20 (15-
25)% of offshore wind power is subject to long-distance transmission loss with line lengths of 1400 (1200-1600) km and 120
(80-160) km, respectively. Line losses are 4 (3-5)% per 1000 km plus 1.5 (1.3- 1.8)% of power in the station equipment “
(Jacobson et al. 2016).

Offshore energy sources or rooftops PV do not require new land for spacing. Thus, the new land area required is smaller than
the total footprint area and equals the sum of the footprint areas for new onshore wind, geothermal, hydropower, and utility
solar PV. Offshore wind, wave and tidal generators are in water and thus do not require new land; likewise for rooftop PV that
can be installed on existing rooftops, parking lots or other structures. Note that only onshore wind requires new land for
spacing. The additional needed CSP power or storage in addition to the necessary annual power generation for insuring the
grid reliability is presented.

Table 8 presents suitable rooftop areas and technical potentials for PV installation for residential,
commercial, government and industrial buildings in 2050 as estimated by Prof. Jacobson.
Furthermore, the proposed installed capacities and fractions out of technical potential in 2050 are
presented. The calculations account for rooftops of residential, commercial, and governmental
buildings. Garages, parking lots and structures associated with these buildings were accounted for.
Commercial and governmental buildings include any non-residential buildings (including schools)
excluding manufacturing, industrial, and military buildings (Jacobson et al. 2016).

10
Defined in Terms

60
World Plan Results

Table 8. Suitable rooftop areas and technical potential for PV installation for residential, commercial, government and
industrial buildings in 2050. Also shown are proposed installed capacities and fractions out of technical potential in 2050

Installed Percent of
generation installed
Suitable Technical capacity to capacity
rooftop area potential 2050 meet relative to
2050 (km2) (MW) electricity technical
demand in potential in
2050 (MW) 2050
Residential buildings,
80 19,162 11,838 62%
including residential parking
Commercial government and
37 8,827 6,452 73%
industrial buildings
Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water,
and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World.

Jacobson et al. (2016) estimates that Israel’s technical potential for residential rooftops in 2050 to be
19,162 MW and suggests using 62% of Israel’s technical potential for PV installed on residential
rooftops. For commercial/government rooftop areas, Israel’s technical potential is estimated to be
8,827 MW and Jacobson et al. (2016) suggests using 73% of the potential.

Jacobson et al. (2016) propose the following timeline to transform 139 countries of the world to rely only on
WWS technologies by 2050:
- As soon as possible- Development of super grids and smart grids that will allow better manage energy
demand and supply.
- by 2020, all new power plants will be WWS. Existing conventional power plants will be phased out
gradually by 2050. Also, heating/cooling, drying, and cooking devices in the residential and
commercial sectors will be powered by electricity.
- by 2025, all new ships should be electrified and/or use electrolytic hydrogen. All new port operations,
new rail and bus transport should be electrified and powered by WWS electricity.
- by 2030 all new off-road transport, small-scale marine, light-duty on-road transport, heavy-duty truck
transport, and industrial processes should be electrified.
- by 2035, all new short-haul aircraft should be powered by battery or electrolytic hydrogen.
- by 2040, all new long-haul aircraft should be powered by electrolytic cryogenic hydrogen.

Jacobson et al. (2016) roadmap presents the projected end-use power demand and suggests energy mix that will
fulfill this demand without accounting for environmental and site regulations. In the next chapter an analysis for
site suitability will be presented.

8. Results

8.1 GIS spatial analysis

8.1.1 Onshore wind

Table 9 presents areas found by spatial analysis to be technically suitable for onshore wind farms.
Israel has an area of 2153 km2 with onshore annual average wind speeds at 100 m height greater than
6 m/s. With wind turbine same as Senvion’s RePower 5M at 100 m height, Israel has a total potential
of 13.8 GW of installed capacity. Multi-layered analysis found 1211 km2 of Israel’s onshore area to be
technically suitable for onshore wind farm installation (Those areas stand in the criteria of being in
open space (areas that are not urban areas, water land archeological sites and airports), slope
percentage less than or equal to 30, wind speed equal to or greater than 6 m/s. Israel’s total technical

61
Results

potential for wind farms is 7.8 GW of installed capacity. Out of the areas found technically suitable,
further criteria, as detailed in the Methods, were used in order to find areas practically suitable for
wind farm installation. After accounting for such criteria, spatial analysis found 448 km2 of Israel’s
onshore area practically suitable for wind farm installation. Spatial analysis also found that 137 km2 of
the area practically suitable area for onshore wind development has annual average wind speeds
greater or equal to 6.5 m/s at heights of 100 meters and 23 km2 have annual average wind speeds
greater or equal to 7 m/s at 100 meters. Israel has 633.45 km2 of area technically suitable for wind
farm development with slope percentages less than or equal to 15 and 386.19 km2 of area with slope
percentages less than or equal to 10. It’s noteworthy to mention that out of the 448 km2 of area
practically suitable, 249 km2 overlaps with military grounds, which is roughly 3% of Israel’s total
military ground (7,895 km2). An analysis of energy sources overlap with military grounds can be
found at the end of the Results chapter, and further a discussion of such finding can be found at the
Discussion chapter.

Figure 20 presents Israel’s technical suitability map for wind energy development. The map uses color
coding to distinguish between different areas that are technically suitable, based on the practical
limitations applied to them. Gradations of red indicate the more severe limitations, while the less
severe limitations are highlighted by green gradations. About 6% of Israel’s land area is technically
suitable for wind energy development. As can be seen in the map, these areas are primarily located in
the northern and southern parts of Israel - the Galilee and Negev areas. As the map illustrates (Figure
20), a large area in the southern part of Israel close to the city of Eilat was found technically suitable
for wind farm installation but subject to environmental protection regulations and high ecological
sensitivity for birds (Birds Important Areas). Figure 21 presents Israel’s practical suitability map for
the wind energy development where only areas with no limitations at all or military land areas are
marked. Areas practically suitable for wind farm installation are also located mainly at the northern
and southern parts of Israel- Galilee and Negev areas.

62
Results

Table 9. Spatial analysis results for areas suitable for wind farm installation (km2)

All the areas are within Israeli territory. If not mentioned otherwise all areas are on open space. Open space is the area left
after eliminating areas unsuitable for installation due to land-use constraints such as urban areas, water land, roads
archeological sites and airports. When a limitation is mentioned the other limitations are excluded. For example- if military

63
Results

ground limitation is mentioned it means the area excludes BIA, Shore Texture & Low/Mid/High Environmental Protection.
Values that are marked in light purple are the values used to calculate Israel’s technical potential while the light green values
were used to calculate the practical potential

Although the plan area of the roadmap is only within Israeli territory, the possibility to collaborate
with West Bank on wind energy will be briefly discussed in the Discussion chapter. As such, Table 10
presents areas with onshore wind speeds greater than 6, 6.5 and 7 m/s side by side for Israel and the
West Bank.
Table 10. Comparison between areas with suitable wind speed at the West Bank territory and within Israel border (km2)

Wind speed
West Bank Israel area
greater than
area (km^2) (km^2)
(m/s)
6 892.61 2153.57
6.5 441.62 952.51
7 166.45 292.49

Note: the values are before elimination of areas not suitable for wind farm installation due to land use, environmental and
statutory limitations.

64
Results

Figure 20. Areas suitable for wind farm installation differentiated by their limitations

Note: The areas marked in the map are technically suitable for onshore wind farm installation. Those areas follow the
criteria of being in open space (areas that are not urban areas, water land archeological sites and airports), slope
percentage less than or equal to 30, wind speed equal or greater than 6 m/s. The areas marked in green are areas
considered most suitable since they are with the least limitations, medium suitability is marked in yellow and the least
suitable areas marked in red. Those areas could overlap with areas suitable for CSP and utility scale PV installation.

65
Results

Figure 21. Areas practically suitable for wind farm installation

Note: The areas marked in the map are practically suitable for onshore wind farm installation. Those areas follow the
criteria of being in open space (areas that are not urban areas, water land archeological sites and airports), slope
percentage less than or equal to 30, wind speed equal or larger than 6 m/s, have no limitation at all or are military ground
with no other limitation. Those areas could overlap with areas suitable for CSP and utility scale PV installation.

66
Results

8.1.2 Solar

8.1.2.1 CSP plant

Table 11 presents areas suitable for utility scale PV and CSP (km2) as found by spatial analysis.
About 1139 km2 of land are technically suitable for CSP installation. These areas fall into the criteria
of being in open space (areas that are not urban areas, water land, archeological sites, airports and
forests), having a slope percentage less than or equal to 5, continuous area larger or equal to 18,000
m2, and DNI greater than or equal to 5 kwh/m2/day. The technical potential for electricity generation
from CSP installation is about 39 GW. It was found that about 266 km2 are practically suitable for
CSP installation. Those areas include areas found in the spatial analysis with no limitations (civilian
or military grounds). The practical potential for electricity generation from CSP installation was found
to be about 9 GW.

Figure 22 presents Israel’s technical suitability map for CSP. The areas found technically suitable
were differentiated by the limitations applied to them. Similarly to onshore wind, the map is color
coded - areas with less limitations or limitations that were found less destructive to the environment
were marked in green while areas with a greater amount of limitations or areas more destructive to the
environment were marked in red. Areas technically suitable for CSP were found in limited locations
spread all over Israel whereas areas with more environmental protection regulations and high
ecological sensitivity for birds (BIA) are located mainly in south Israel (Negev). Figure 23 presents
Israel’s practical suitability map for the CSP development where only areas with no limitations at all
or military ground areas are marked. The practical suitability map illustrates that areas practically
suitable for CSP development are spread all over Israel with high concentrations in the southeastern
parts of Israel.

2
Table 11. Spatial analysis results for areas suitable for utility scale PV and CSP (km )

Note: Open area is the area left after eliminating areas unsuitable for installation due to land-use constraints such as urban
areas, water land, archeological sites, airports and forests.

67
Results

Figure 22. Areas technically suitable for CSP installation differentiated by their limitations

Limitations applied on areas suitable for CSP Installation where open area, slope smaller or equal to 5 percent, continues
areas over 180,000 square meters and annual average DNI larger than 5 kWh/m2/day.

68
Results

Figure 23. Areas practically suitable for CSP installation with differentiated limitations applied.

Areas that are practically suitable for CSP installation are areas that are defined as open areas with slopes less than or
equal to 5 percent, continues size of over 180,000 m2 and annual average DNI larger than 5 kWh/m2/day, on non-
agriculture land, and are not on ecologically sensitive land such as Nature Reserves, National parks and BIA. Those areas
were extracted out of areas technically suitable for CSP installation.

69
Results

8.1.2.2 Utility-scale PV plant

The spatial analysis found 9622 km2 of area technically suitable for utility scale PV (table 3). Those
areas are the sum of areas that were found in the spatial analysis to have slopes less than or equal to
5% and that are not suitable for CSP installation (areas found suitable for CSP were subtracted in
order to make sure there will be no overlap), together with half of the areas found to have slope
percentages greater than 5. The utility scale PV technical potential was found to be about 1,277,778
MW. Areas practically suitable for utility scale PV installation were found to be about 519 km2. As
mentioned in the Methods, in addition to the mentioned criteria for areas found technically suitable,
the following criteria were applied in the spatial analysis to find the practical potential: slope less
than or equal to 5%, areas with no limitations at all or military ground with no other environmental or
statutory limitation and on non-agricultural land. The practical potential for electricity generation
from Utility scale PV is about 9 GW. The final results of this analysis are summarized in Table 12.

Figure 24 presents Israel’s technical suitability map for utility scale PV. Areas found technically
suitable were differentiated by the limitations applied on them. The same criteria used for the
suitability map for onshore wind turbine and CSP were used here. Areas technically suitable for utility
scale PV were found all over Israel whereas areas with many environmental protection regulations
and high ecological sensitivity for birds (BIA) are located mainly in southern Israel (Negev) and some
in the north (Golan Heights). Areas with all three limitations- environmental protection regulations,
high ecological sensitivity for birds (BIA), and military ground - were found in several limited
locations in southern Israel. Figure 25 displays Figure 24 without areas found technically suitable for
CSP. Figure 26 presents Israel’s practical suitability map for the utility scale PV development after
eliminating areas found practically suitable for CSP. Only areas with no limitations at all or military
ground areas are marked. The practical suitability map illustrates that areas practically suitable for
utility scale PV development are spread all over Israel with higher concentrations in the southeastern
parts of Israel.

70
Results

Figure 24. Areas suitable for utility scale PV differentiated by their limitations

Note: The areas marked in green are the most technically suitable for utility scale PV installation (green), medium
suitability (yellow), and least suitable (red). These areas overlap with areas suitable for CSP installation. The areas marked
in the map are available open space areas that are defined as areas without built structures, water bodies, archeological
sites, airports, roads, or forests.

71
Results

Figure 25. Areas technically suitable for utility scale PV after eliminating areas suitable for CSP

Note: The areas marked on the map are areas most technically suitable (green) for utility scale PV installation,
medium suitability (yellow), and least suitable (red). These areas are not built structures, water bodies,
archeological sites, airports, roads, or forests. Those areas are not overlapping with areas suitable for
CSP installation.

72
Results

Figure 26. Areas practically suitable for utility scale PV after eliminating areas suitable for CSP

Note: The areas marked on the map are areas that were found practically suitable for utility scale PV
installation by the following criteria: they are open areas with slopes less than or equal to 5 percent, on non-
agriculture land, and are not on ecologically sensitive land such as Nature Reserves, National parks and BIA.
Those areas were extracted out of areas technically suitable for utility scale PV installation and are not
overlapping with areas suitable for CSP installation.

73
Results

Table 12. Summary table of the results of the spatial analysis for technical and practical potential of utility scale solar
installation.

8.1.3 Military grounds

Table 13. Summary of results of calculation with regards to the required military grounds repurposing

8.2 Rooftop PV

It was found that in 2015 the maximum residential rooftop area suitable for PV installation is 85 km2,
with a technical potential of 17 GW. In 2050 the amount of useable area is estimated to be 91 km2
with a technical potential of 21.6 GW. Summary of the results can be found in Table 14.
Table 14.Suitable rooftop area for PV installation and technical potential of residential buildings in 2015 and 2050

Suitable
Technical
residential
Year potential
rooftop area
(MW)
(km^2)
2015 85 17,035
2050 91 21,661

74
Discussion

9. Discussion
This chapter discusses, in combination, Prof Jacobson’s results for Israel from the World Plan and the
results of this thesis’ analyses in an attempt to answer the primary and secondary research question.

Primary research question:

What practical transition plan can convert Israel to 100% all-sector renewable energy by 2050?

Secondary research question:

When accounting for technical, environmental, and regulatory limitations, does Israel have
sufficient area for development of wind and solar installations that will allow Israel to fulfill its all-
purpose energy demands by 2050?

As Prof. Jacobson’s proposal for Israel (Jacobson et al (2016)) was adopted as base plan, to answer
the research questions the discussion would focus on the validation of Jacobson’s proposal across the
different WWS energy sources, and overall, per the proposal. Such validation directly answers the
secondary research question. Then, following such validation, a clear practical transition plan to
convert Israel to 100% all-sector renewable energy by 2050 will be presented.

To elaborate further on the validation of Jacobson’s proposal, the results of the GIS analysis will be
discussed in order to conclude whether Israel has sufficient area for development of onshore wind,
utility scale PV and CSP plants when accounting for site technical, environmental and regulatory
limitations that will allow Israel to meet all-purpose energy demand by 2050. Likewise, the results of
the analysis for residential rooftop will be discussed, to see if Israel has sufficient available rooftop
area, whether residential or commercial, to meet Jacobson’s plan.

Table 15 displays the combined results from Jacobson et al. (2016) and the results of the analyses
conducted in this thesis. Table 15 presents the percent of power demand met by each of WWS
technologies in 2050 with WWS system per Jacobson’s proposal, the end use power delivered by each
technology, the total nameplated capacity needed by each technology, and the percentage of currently
installed nameplated capacity relative to need in 2050 as estimated by Jacobson et al. (2016). It also
presents Israel’s technical and practical potential as was found in this thesis for onshore wind, utility
scale PV and CSP (marked in blue) and the rest of the WWS technologies estimations as was found
by Jacobson et al. And lastly, Table 15 presents the ratio between nameplated capacity needed by
each technology and the practical potential in 2050.

75
Discussion

Table 15. Presented is the percent of 2050 demand met by each WWS technology as suggested by Jacobson et al. (2016), the
end-use power delivered, and capacity needed to meet Israel's total annually-averaged end-use power demand for all-
purposes in 2050 (marked in black). Also shown are the amount of areas found technically and practically suitable for each
of the WWS technologies and their technical and practical nameplate capacity (marked in blue).

Percent of Percent of Areas Technical Practical Ratio: practical

End use Total Areas found
2050 power nameplate found potential potential potential
power nameplate technically
Energy Technology demand met capacity practically nameplate nameplate capacity relative
delivered capacity suitable
by already suitable capacity capacity to nameplate
(MWe) needed (MW) (km^2)
technology installed 2015 (km^2) (MW) (MW) capacity needed

Onshore wind 6.8% 1,087 2,682 1% 1211.01 448.00 7,784 2,879 1.07
Offshore wind 12.6% 2,000 6,155 0% --------- --------- 6,155 --------- ---------
Wave device 0% 0 0 100% --------- --------- 782 --------- ---------
Geothermal plant 0% 0 0 100% --------- --------- 0 --------- ---------
Hydroelectric plant 0.02% 0 7 100% --------- --------- 7 --------- ---------
Tidal turbine 0.01% 2 9 0% --------- --------- 9 --------- ---------
Res. roof PV system 17.5% 2,775 11,838 2% --------- 90.62 21,661 21,661 1.83
Com/gov roof PV system 9.0% 1,434 6,452 5% --------- --------- 8,827 8,827 1.37
Solar PV plant 41.3% 6,555 27,656 1% 9622.28 2468.79 1,277,779 327,840 11.85
CSP plant 12.7% 2,021 3,301 0% 1138.63 266.05 38,798 9,066 2.75
Total 100% 15,874 58,099 1.6% --------- --------- 1,361,801 370,273 6.37

Based on the estimated 2050 power demand, the total nameplate capacity and the number of units of
each of the WWS technologies was calculated after all sectors have been electrified but before
considering grid reliability. Values in blue are the results of the analysis conducted in this thesis.
Values in black are derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for
100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139
Countries of the World.

Israel’s 2050 energy mix as suggested by Jacobson et al (2016)) is: 80.5% solar, 19.4% wind, and less
than 0.03% hydro and geothermal. When broken down into specific technologies the energy mix is as
follows: residential rooftop PV system 17.5%, commercial and governmental rooftop PV 9%, utility
scale PV 41.3%, CSP plant 12.7%, onshore wind 6.8%, and offshore wind 12.6% (Figure 27). As
Table 15 demonstrates, Israel has validated sufficiently higher technical potential for each of the wind
and solar technologies than the nameplate capacity needed in order to provide the energy demand
projected for 2050 as estimated by Jacobson et al. (2016), per Jacboson’s energy mix proposal. Thus,
technically, Jacobson et al (2016) suggested energy mix can be applied. However, the practical
potential found for onshore wind has a margin of only 7% more than the planned energy supply for
onshore wind according to Jacobson. As 7% is lower than the defined threshold of 25% for “safe”
validation, then onshore wind is validated with “uncertainty”. All other technologies are “safely”
validated with margins greater than 25% (+37% for commercial rooftop, +83% for residential roof top
and +175% for CSP, and +1085% solar PV).

As onshore wind wasn’t “safely” validated, it is therefore recommended to consider an alternative

proposal, in case site area for onshore wind is physically found to be insufficient. The alternative
proposal (“proposal B”) shall be based on the minimal changed required on top of Jacobson’s
proposal, where suggested power from each source is safely validated. Moreover, between the fact
that offshore wind farms practical potential wasn’t validated (due to lack of offshore wind speed data)
and Israel’s offshore attributes, namely that it reaches depth of 50m+ very rapidly (in some areas
reaching 50m depth already at 4 km from shore), proposal B shall also be more conservative with its
reliance on offshore wind.

To summarize: proposal B will be based on minimum alternation to Jacobson’s proposal while

meeting the following criteria:
(1) 25% margin per each energy source (that can be validated)
(2) Offshore wind end use power delivery plan that does not exceed its onshore equivalent
(3) Minimum footprint

76
Discussion

Percent of 2050 power demand met by technology

Onshore wind
7%
Wave device
CSP plant 0%
13%
Geothermal plant
Offshore wind
0%
13%
Hydroelectric plant
0%
Res. roof PV system
17% Tidal turbine
Solar PV plant 0%
41%

Com/gov roof PV
system
9%
Figure 27: Israel’s proposed 2050 energy mix by Jacobson et al. (2016)

Based on the above criteria, proposal B to meet Israel’s energy requirement in 2050 is therefore:

Table 16. Presented is the percent of 2050 demand met by each WWS technology for the alternative proposal (“proposal
B”), the end-use power delivered and capacity needed to meet Israel's total annually-averaged end-use power demand for all-
purposes in 2050. Also shown are the amount of areas found technically and practically suitable for each of the WWS
technologies and their technical and practical nameplate capacities

Ratio:
Percent of practical
Percent of Total Technical Practical
End use nameplate Areas found Areas found potential
2050 power nameplate potential potential
power capacity technically practically capacity
Energy Technology demand met capacity nameplate nameplate
delivered already suitable suitable relative to
by needed capacity capacity
(MWe) installed (km^2) (km^2) nameplate
technology (MW) (MW) (MW)
2015 capacity
needed
Onshore wind 5.9% 933 2,304 1% 1,211.01 448.00 7,784 2,879 1.25
Offshore wind 5.9% 933 2,872 0% --------- --------- 6,155 --------- ---------
Wave device 0% 0 0 100% --------- --------- 782 --------- ---------
Geothermal plant 0% 0 0 100% --------- --------- 0 --------- ---------
Hydroelectric plant 0% 0 7 100% --------- --------- 7 --------- ---------
Tidal turbine 0% 2 9 0% --------- --------- 9 --------- ---------
Res. roof PV system 25.2% 3,995 17,043 2% --------- 90.62 21,661 21,661 1.27
Com/gov roof PV system 9.0% 1,434 6,452 5% --------- --------- 8,827 8,827 1.37
Solar PV plant 41.3% 6,555 27,656 1% 9,622.28 2,468.79 1,277,779 327,840 11.85
CSP plant 12.7% 2,021 3,301 0% 1,138.63 266.05 38,798 9,066 2.75
Total 100.00% 15,874 59,642 1.6% --------- --------- 1,361,801 370,273 6.21

77
Discussion

Percent of 2050 power demand met by technology

Offshore wind Geothermal plant
Onshore wind 6% 0%
6%
Hydroelectric plant
0%
CSP plant Wave device
13% 0%
Tidal turbine
0%
Res. roof PV
system
Solar PV plant 25%
41%

Com/gov roof PV
system
9%

Figure 28. Proposal B for 2050 energy mix

Note that in proposal B both onshore wind and offshore wind end use power delivered were reduced
to 933 MWe (or 5.9% of total energy required, each), which leaves onshore wind with a desired 25%
error margin. Residential rooftop PV absorbed the additional energy requirement and now provides
nearly 4 GWe, instead of 2.77 GWe per Jacobson’s original proposal. Even with this heavier reliance
on residential rooftop PV, there is still more than 25% margin for residential rooftop PV, so this new
plan meets all desired criteria. As residential rooftop PV absorbed 100% of the additional energy
required, we have successfully met the “minimum footprint” criteria for the alternative proposal, with
zero footprint (as additional PVs are to be installed on then existing structures).

Overlap with military ground

As can be seen in table 15, all sources other than onshore wind has sufficient area practically suitable
not on military ground, and therefore can be constructed entirely on non-military grounds. Onshore
wind has less area practically suitable, and therefore out of its 417 km 2 required, only 198.6 km2 can
be built non-military ground, meaning 218.7 km2 must be built on military ground. As this is the only
source that must be built on military ground, and as 218.7 km2 is less than 3% of total military
ground, far less than set threshold of 10%, then such land repurposing is reasonable and from this
perspective the plan is validated. As proposal B requires even less onshore wind land, proposal B is
similarly also validated from the military grounds aspect.

9.1 Discussion of the results wind and solar

Following the high-level discussion presented in the section above, in this section, the GIS multi-
criteria spatial analysis and its results are discussed in greater detail.

9.1.1 Onshore wind

Although Israel has an area of 2153 km2 with onshore annual wind speeds greater than 6 m/s at 100 m
height, the spatial analysis reveals that only 1211 km2 of Israel’s onshore area are technically suitable
for onshore wind farm installation and 448 km2 are practically suitable for wind farm installation. I.e.,

78
Discussion

only 20.8% of the total onshore area with high wind speed is practically suitable for wind farm
installation. This surprisingly poor 1:5 ratio between total area with sufficient annual onshore wind
speed and the actual practically available area may explain the narrow 7.4% margins between Israel’s
validated practical potential and proposed energy generated from onshore wind in Jacobson’s plan.

According to the plan proposed by Prof. Jacobson, 6.8% of Israel’s WWS 2050 all-purpose energy
demand is generated with onshore wind. To achieve that, 93.1% of the area found practically suitable
for onshore wind needs to be developed with wind turbines. Such tight implementation plan with
margins smaller than the target 25% threshold is considered validated with uncertainty. To name a
few factors that may contribute to insufficient suitable area with such tight margins: social or political
objection to certain sites, overlap with bird migration paths not taken into account, slower
technological progress than expected (resulting in lower MW/km2 ratio, requiring more land-use),
overlap with specific military area that cannot be repurposed (e.g. military facility that cannot be
relocated) and overall errors in data or modeling that can accumulate. For this reason an alternative
proposal B was made, where onshore wind is expected to produce only 5.9% of Israel’s WWS 2050
all-purpose energy demand. In such a case practical potential was safely validated (margins great than
25%).

The 448 km2 found practically suitable for onshore wind farm installation meet all the criteria
specified in methods: slopes less than or equal to 30%, wind speeds equal to or greater than 6 m/s,
compliance with Israel’s regulations (not located on shore texture nor on Nature Reserves and
National Parks), and not located on areas of importance for birds conservation.

Geographically, areas technically and practically suitable for wind farm installation are located mainly
at the northern and southern parts of Israel in the Galilee and Negev areas. With wind turbines similar
to Senvion’s RePower 5M at 100 m, Israel has a technical potential of 7.8 GW and practical potential
of 2.8 GW of installed capacity.

About 50% of the area found practically suitable for onshore wind is overlapping with military
ground. From total military grounds perspective this means areas found practically suitable for wind
farm installations overlaps with only 3% of the total area designated to military use. Still, it may be
that certain specific locations must remain in military use for strategic reasons. Considering that about
50% of the area found practically suitable for onshore wind is overlapping with military ground, this
leaves room for high volatility, and is actually a reason for concern, especially considering onshore
wind has a very slim margin of 7.4% to begin with.

Implementation notes

137 km2 of the area practically suitable area for onshore wind development has annual average wind
speeds greater or equal to 6.5 m/s and 23 km2 of the area has annual average wind speeds greater or
equal to 7 m/s. Since areas with higher wind speeds should be preferred for development over those
with lesser wind speeds due to better efficacy and cost-effectiveness, these 137 km2 should be
prioritized for wind development. To decrease wind turbine capital installation costs, areas practically
suitable with smaller slope percentages should be preferred. Areas that were found in the spatial
analysis practically suitable with slope percentages less than or equal to 10 should be preferred to
those with slope percentages of 15, also for reasons of increased cost effectiveness. The same can be
said for areas with slopes of 15% versus 30%.

Although this roadmap does not include the West Bank territory it may be beneficial to consider
obtaining a share of onshore wind from the West Bank. Cooperation between Israel and the West
Bank could multiply the amount of available area suitable for wind turbine installations by a factor of
up to 3X, as the West Bank territory has 900 km2 of area with wind speeds greater than 6 m/s (Table
10 in Results chapter). Assuming a similar 4:1 ratio of 6 m/s areas to areas practically suitable for
onshore wind installation, 225 km2 would increase area available for onshore wind turbine by nearly
50%. This may be a possibility worth exploring.

79
Discussion

9.1.2 Utility scale PV

The GIS multi-criteria spatial analysis found that about 9,622 km2 are technically suitable for utility
scale PV installation and 2,469 km2 are practically suitable for utility scale PV. Since area suitable for
utility scale PV is also suitable for CSP but not the other way around, areas that are suitable for both
were subtracted and the mentioned results do not overlap with areas suitable for CSP. The suitability
map illustrates that areas technically and practically suitable for utility scale PV installation are
located all over Israel. It was found that assuming PV installation of Sunpower E20 435 W panel
Israel has a technical potential of 1,277.8 GW and practical potential of 327.8 GW of installed
capacity. Both capacities, technical and practical, greatly (nearly 12X) exceed the 27.6 GW of total
nameplate capacity needed to provide 41.3% of Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy demand by utility
scale PV in a WWS case as proposed by Jacobson et al. (2016). Since the practical potential that was
found in the analysis is about 10 times greater it can be concluded that even after taking into account
further environmental factors such as endangered species or ecological corridors or social and
economic factors (distance to transmission lines and roads) enough area will be left that will allow for
the development of utility scale PV that will meet 41.3% of Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy demand.
Further research of the mentioned factors is needed.

Thus, Israel has enough area that complies with technical limitations for utility scale PV, which
include area with sufficient GHI (5.2-5.9 KWh/m2/day), slopes less than or equal to 5% or areas with
slope percentages greater than 5 that are facing south to ensure greater solar radiation due to the
location of the sun, has no other land use (including no archeological sites, airports and forests),
practically suitable when considering Israel’s regulations (not located on shore texture, Nature
Reserves, National Parks as stated in the National Outline Plan for Photovoltaic Installations-
NOP35), and are not located on areas of importance for birds conservation nor on agriculture land in
order to prevent competition between food resources and energy resources.

8.4% of the area found practically suitable for utility scale PV needs to be developed in order to
generate 41.3% of Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy demand by utility scale PV in a WWS case as
proposed by Jacobson et al. (2016). Since about a half of the area found practically suitable for utility
scale PV development is designated for military usage, that means that even if using military grounds
for PV installation is entirely avoided, the land area required to reach 41.3% of all energy would take
just about 15%-20% of the non-military area practically suitable for PV installation. Undoubtedly,
enough area is practically suitable for PV installation.

Implementation notes

Although PV farms can be constructed on steep slopes, doing so would increase installation costs.
Thus, construction on areas with slopes equal to or less than 5% will increase the cost-effectiveness of
the project. It was found that Israel has 519 km2 of practical area that also has slope percentage less
than or equal to 5% while the necessary area for utility scale PV that will comply with WWS 2050
utility scale PVs needed energy demand is only 338 km2 - about two thirds. Thus, development of
utility scale PV can be made only on areas that are more cost-effective (sufficient margin error of
+50%). Moreover, of the 519 km2 practical area that also has slope percentage less than or equal to
5%, 287 km2 is on military ground, meaning even if constraining PV installations to slopes less than
5%, only 51 km2 would overlap with military ground, which is less than 0.65% of total military
ground, so unless there is a specific strategic importance of this particular area, it is very likely that it
can be allocated for PV installation, thus allowing 100% of installation to take place on cost-effective
sites with less than 5% slope. And in any case, even if PV were to be installed entirely on military
grounds, the PV sites will take less than 4.3% of total military area).

80
Discussion

9.1.3 CSP

The spatial analysis found that Israel has an area of 1139 km2 technically suitable for CSP and 266
km2 practically suitable for CSP. Areas practically suitable for CSP development are spread all over
Israel with higher concentrations in the southeastern parts of Israel. Israel has a technical potential of
about 39 GW and practical potential of 9 GW of installed capacity. Both capacities, technical and
practical, exceed the 3.3 GW of total nameplate capacity needed to provide 12.6 % of Israel’s 2050
all-purpose energy demand by CSP in a WWS case as found by Jacobson et al. (2016). Since the
practical potential that was found in the analysis is more than twice greater than the total nameplate
capacity needed it can be concluded that even after taking into account further environmental, social
and economic factors, enough area will be left that will allow for the development of CSP that will
meet 12.6 % of Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy demand. Further research of the mentioned factors is
needed.

Thus, Israel has enough area that complies with CSP technical limitations of areas with no other land-
use (including no archeological sites, airports and forests), slope less than or equal to 5% since CSP
has to be constructed on flat areas, continuously greater or equal to 18,000 m2 to ensure large enough
installation area, and with DNI greater than or equal to 5 kwh/m2/day to make the costs of generating
electricity cost-effective and also comply with Israel’s regulations (not located on Nature Reserves,
National Parks) and not located on areas of importance for birds conservation nor on agriculture land.

As 36.4% of the area found practically suitable for CSP installation is needed to generate 12.7% of
Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy demand by CSP in a WWS case and less than a half of the area that
was found practically suitable for CSP development is designated for military usage, it means that
there is enough area for CSP development that is not on military ground, thus saving further
coordination with the Ministry of Defense. Regardless, the total onshore ground that was found
practically suitable for CSP development and overlaps with military grounds is only 2% of the total
onshore army ground to begin with. So also from military perspective, CSP is safely validated.

9.1.4 Offshore wind

As explained, data on Israel’s offshore wind speed critical for determining Israel’s offshore wind
technical and practical potential isn’t available. Therefore this thesis doesn’t provide validation for
Israel’s offshore wind practical potential. The technical potential is taken as is from the World Plan
estimation. Jacobson et al. 2016 estimated the technical potential based on Israel’s costal water length
and areal power density for offshore wind systems.
When applying all the different factors needed for the development of offshore wind turbine
(minimum average annual wind speeds of 5.7 m/s at 100 m heights above surface, depths lower than
50 m, do not carry any environmental importance etc), limited amount of areas are left for offshore
wind development.

Considering that above constraints and concerns, along with Israel’s offshore attributes, reaching
depth of 50m+ very rapidly, proposal B is also conservative with its reliance on offsore wind, aiming
for 5.9% instead of 12.6% per Jacobson’s original proposal.

As a side note, as it has been demonstrated that Israel has +1085% more area suitable for PV
installation than required by Prof. Jacobson’s proposed plan for PV, the excess area can be used for
further PV installation to account for some missing offshore wind suitable area, if such were found in
deeper inspection.

81
Discussion

9.1.5 Residential rooftop PV

Table 16 indicates that for residential rooftop PV the proposed installed generation capacity to meet
electricity demand in 2050 (as was estimated by Jacobson and Delucchi (2016)) is a bit more than half
(55%) of Israel’s technical and practical potential.

Both Jacobson and this project’s rooftop PV estimations took into consideration ‘usability fraction’
that stands for different practical reasons such as shading on the rooftop or reasonable orientation to
the south. In addition, since installation of PV on existing residential rooftops does not interfere with
any environmental or regulation limitations, the technical potential in this case is actually also the
practical potential. Thus, Israel has almost twice more residential rooftop area than is needed in order
to generate 17.5% of Israel’s energy demand in 2050. In cases of greater energy demand than
estimated by Jacobson et al. (2016) or in case other WWS resources will not be available as expected,
development of further residential rooftop PV is available.

Table 17 compares the results of the residential rooftop analysis conducted in this thesis and the
results from Jacobson et al (2016). The analyses conducted in this thesis estimates suitable rooftop
area in 2050 of 91 km2 which is close to the estimate of 80 km2 by Jacobson et al. (2016). The
difference between the two estimates (+13.7%) is reasonable and could be the result from multiple
variance in models or parameters used, such as an inaccuracy in the number of stories or the estimated
rooftop area per capita. Both residential rooftop technical potential estimations (calculated here as
21.6 GW and Prof. Jacobson’s as 19.1 GW) in 2050 are significantly (almost twice) greater than 11.8
GW which is the total nameplate capacity needed in 2050 to provide 17.5% of Israel’s all-purpose
energy demand by residential rooftop PV in a WWS case as found by Jacobson et al. (2016). PV is
safely validated.

Table 17. Suitable rooftop areas for PV installation and technical potential of residential buildings in 2050 as found by
analysis and Jacobson et al. (2016). Also shown are proposed installed capacities of residential buildings of rooftop PV and
its fraction out of technical potential in 2050

Installed Percent of
generation installed
Suitable Technical capacity to capacity
rooftop area potential 2050 meet relative to
2050 (km2) (MW) electricity technical
demand in potential in
2050 (MW) 2050
Residential buildings,
80 19,162 11,838 62%
including residential parking
Commercial government and
37 8,827 6,452 73%
industrial buildings

Accordingly to proposal B, residential rooftop are planned to produce nearly 4GW instead of
2.775GW per Jacobson’s original plan, replacing some of the energy originally planned for onshore
and offshore wind that could not be safely validated. Even with this increase reliance on residential
rooftop, their practical potential is safely validated (27% margin).

9.1.6 Commercial rooftop PV

Jacobson et al. (2016) estimate that the maximum installed PV capacity in 2050 for
commercial/government rooftops, including carports, garages, parking structures, and parking lots, is
about 8.8 GW. This capacity is greater by a “safe margin” of 37.5% than the total nameplate capacity
of 6.4 GW which is sufficient to provide 9% of Israel’s all-purpose energy demand by
commercial/government rooftops PV in a WWS case as was found by Jacobson et al. (2016). As only

82
Discussion

73.1% of Israel’s technical potential for commercial and governmental rooftop PV is suggested to be
used to generate 9% of Israel energy demand in 2050, this resource could be seen as a resource that
could be further developed in case of need.

9.1.7 Summary of solar and Wind Analysis

Table 16 indicates that Israel’s technical potential for each of the wind and solar technologies is
greater or similar to the total nameplate capacity needed to provide Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy
demand. The practical potential for onshore wind, utility-scale PV and CSP, and residential and
commercial rooftop PV was validated to be greater than or similar to the total nameplate capacity
needed to provide Israel’s 2050 all-purpose energy demand according to Jacobson's proposal, while
the practical potential for offshore wind remains unknown. A slightly modified proposal B was
introduced which “safely” validates the practical potential of onshore wind, utility scale PV and CSP,
and residential and commercial rooftop PV as at least 25% higher than total nameplate capacity
needed per resource, with significantly lower reliance on onshore and offshore wind. This
demonstrates that Israel has enough available wind and solar resources to supply its energy demand in
2050 when taking technical limitations into account and also when accounting for environmental and
regulatory limitations

9.2 Alternative renewable energy resources

Tidal energy is required to supply total nameplate capacity of 9 MW in order to fulfill 0.01% of
Israel’s expected total energy demand in 2050 in a WWS scenario. Wave energy in the proposed
roadmap is not required. The literature review highlighted that Israel enjoys relatively low stable wave
energy potential since the costs of wave energy in 2050 are expected to stay relatively high versus
other WWS technologies. Additionally, due to wave energy’s technological immaturity, it is not
integrated into this energy mix. Nevertheless, wave energy should be remembered as an option since
its development doesn’t require new land area, which is especially beneficial in a country like Israel
where land is a scarce resource. In the potential case of technological improvement and cost-
competiveness with other WWS technologies this resource might be beneficial to use.
Although geothermal energy could be generated in most areas in Israel at depths of 6 - 8 km with
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) technology, geothermal is not suggested as part of Israel’s
2050 WWS energy mix due to technological immaturity as well as due to a lack of experience in
developing the system at the mentioned depths. Nevertheless, the potential of developing
conventional geothermal system at the south end of the Golan Heights and in southern Israel, sites that
were found suitable by Shalev et al. (2008), should be further assessed. In case the development of
conventional geothermal system in Israel is found possible, it should be considered to be integrated in
the final energy mix due to the system’s relatively low cost and reliable production of base-load
power.

Hydropower capacity in the end use energy mix is kept the same as the capacity already existing in
2015 (with installed capacity of 7 MW) as Israel does not have resource availability for additional
hydropower implementation. Nevertheless, pumped-storage hydroelectricity (PSH) method can help
manage and stabilize Israel’s grid at times when other main energy resources of solar and wind do not
work. It is also a cheaper storage method than CSP. This it is an option that should be preferred over
CSP. It is interesting to note that Israel aims to build 800 MW capacity of PSH by 2020 (of which
about 600 MW are already in the construction process).

83
Discussion

9.3 Suggested transformation plan

Transforming Israel to 100% WWS system as suggested by Jacobson et al (2016) will reduce the end-
use demand in 2050 to 15.8 GW versus 27.2 GW in BAU case. This difference can be attributed to
conversion of fossil fuel combustions to a more efficient electrified system. All sectors will be
electrified as suggested by Jacobson et al. (2016): Short distance ground transportation will electrified
with battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs) (hydrogen will be
produced by electrolysis from WWS electricity), long distance ground transportation will use BEVs
with fast charging or battery swapping, heavy-duty ground transportation will use BEV-HFCV
hybrids and ships, aircraft, and long-distance freights will use hydrogen-energy storage. Furthermore,
in 2050, WWS case heating or cooling will be powered primarily by electric heat pumps and high-
temperature industrial applications will be powered by electric arc furnaces, induction furnaces,
dielectric heaters, and resistance heaters.

Jacobson's et al. (2016) suggested timeline offers a conversion of 20% of Israel’s all-purpose energy
by 2020, 50% by 2025, 80% by 2030, 95% by 2040, and 100% by 2050 (Figure 29). In order to
achieve the goal of 100% WWS by 2050 and its mid goal of 80% by 2030, better policies to
incentivize the market are needed (Jacobson et al. 2016).

Figure 29: Proposed timeline for necessary actions needed to transform Israel’s all-purpose energy to 100% WWS by 2050.
Timeline is similar to the one proposed to 139 countries of the world (Jacobson et al. (2016)). The percentage next to the
years in the time axis indicates the percent energy supplied by WWS sources by that year.

In the first years of the transition to WWS system, WWS devices will be produced by conventional
fuels but as the proportion of WWS power increases, a larger portion of clean energy will be used to
power WWS devices until all new WWS devices will be produced with WWS electricity and the
usage of conventional fuels will be stopped. Figure 30 presents the transition plan from an end-use
power demand perspective. The figure displays the projected end-use power demand and its supply by
conventional fuels and WWS technologies from 2015 to 2050 with BAU scenario and WWS scenario.
It illustrates the reduction in end-use demand with WWS (21.2 GW) scenario versus BAU (27.2 GW)
due to conversion from fossil fuel combustions to an electrified system that has better efficiency
(Jacobson et al. 2016).

84
Discussion

Figure 30. Israel’s mean change of all-purpose end-use power demand and its supply of conventional fuels (fossil fuels, Bio-
fuels, and nuclear) and WWS technologies over time. Next to each WWS technology is the percent of end-use power
provided by WWS in 2050. The percentage next to the years in the time axis indicates the percent energy supplied by WWS
sources by that year. Data derived from Jacobson and Delucchi (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and
Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. The table
format is similar to previous state roadmaps and the 139 countries of the world roadmap (Jacobson et al. 2014; Jacobson et
al. 2015a; Jacobson et al. 2016)

Specific sites were selected for installation per technology, and specific energy goals were set per
every 5 years. Decision makers still need to choose per each 5 years which specific sub-set of sites to
develop over those 5 years to achieve the 5-year goal, across each WWS energy source.

As wind farm is most limited in space, areas found suitable for wind farms should get first priority for
wind farms and not developed with any other WWS technology. Figure 31 bellow presents final
locations chosen for onshore wind farm installation. Both military and non-military grounds are
needed (light and dark shades of green on map), and overall 93.1% of the land marked practically
suitable for onshore wind should be developed by 2050.

85
Discussion

Figure 31. Map of area practically suitable in Israel for onshore wind development.

86
Discussion

CSP should be developed according to Figure 32, focused only on non-military ground (areas colored
in dark green on map). 36.4% of the total green area should be developed with CSP by 2050.

Figure 32. Map of area practically suitable in Israel for CSP development.

87
Discussion

PV plants should be developed according to Figure 33 bellow, solely on non-military ground areas
(darker shades of green). Construction should focus on areas with slopes equal to or less than 5% to
keep costs to minimum. About 15%-20% of the non-military area should be developed by 2050.

Figure 33. Map of area practically suitable in Israel for utility scale-PV wind development

And rooftop area, residential and commercial, should be developed to hit 2050 goals of 55% of all
practically suitable residential rooftop area and 73.1% all practically suitable commercial rooftop
area.

Last, offshore wind should also be developed until hitting set goals of 6,155 MW total nameplate
capacity in 2050. Specific sites are not selected for offshore wind as such could not be determined
without offshore wind data as explained.

9.3.1 Footprint of implementing the plan

Replacing Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure with the WWS mix suggested by Jacobson et al.
(2016) will require 2.3% of Israel’s land area, while the footprint of new land area will be 2%. These
values do not account for the decrease in footprint from eliminating the current energy infrastructure.
Spacing area on new land is 1.6% of Israel’s land area and is needed only for wind turbines. Spacing
on Israel’s footprint of offshore area was found to be 3.2% and is needed almost entirely for the
development of offshore wind turbines. This evaluation does not take into account eliminating the
current energy infrastructure. Thus, the footprint from converting to WWS could practically be

88
Discussion

smaller. Considering the small footprint percentage this aspect should not serve as a roadblock for the
implementation of this roadmap (Jacobson et al. 2016).

Replacing Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure with the ‘alternative’ WWS mix suggested in this
thesis will require a slightly greater footprint area (2.5%) than Jacobson’s original proposal (2.3%) but
development on new land will require same 2% percent as all additional installations are done on
rooftops of then existing residential buildings. Spacing area for onshore wind is decreased to 1.4% of
Israel’s land area and the pacing footprint for offshore wind turbines is decreased to 1.5% of Israel’s
offshore area in the alternative proposal B.

Furthermore, as can be seen in Table 16 that in 2015 only 1.6% of the total nameplate capacity
necessary to convert Israel to 100% of its all-purpose energy infrastructure to one derived entirely
from renewable energy by 2050 was already installed. Thus, in order to reach the 100% WWS system
by 2050 significant development is needed.

9.4 Benefits from transforming to WWS

9.4.1 Financial benefits

Figure 34 presents 2050 LCOE of WWS and coal in cases of further fossil fuel usage (BAU) as was
estimated by Jacobson et al. (2016) (presented in Table 2) The figure illustrates whether WWS
technology is more or less expensive compared to coal, which represents the least expensive fossil
fuel. While usually the decision of energy project development is based on a least-cost analysis it
reveals that only solar thermal, hydropower, utility PV, and CSP with storage are competitive energy
resources in 2050 when compared to coal. The cost estimates take into account generation, short and
long distance transmission, distribution and storage, but they do not include external costs. Thus,
WWS technologies become more competitive compared with conventional sources of energy if the
comparison is not limited exclusively to strict financial/cash criteria, but also accounts for external
costs. When accounting for external costs such as air pollution health costs and climate change
damage costs, such as loss of coastline, fishery and agricultural, heat stress mortality and morbidity,
food scarcity, drought, wildfires, and severe weather, the total cost of electricity generation for each of
the WWS technologies is less than conventional fuels in 2050. Jacobson et al. (2016) estimates that in
2050 Israel’s averaged LCOEs for WWS technologies WWS scenario will be lower than in a BAU
scenario, with weighted LCOEs among all generators of 9.91 ¢/kWh for WWS and 10.5 ¢/kWh for
BAU (The LCOE accounts for transmission and distribution, but not externalities).

Figure 34. 2050 average estimates of fully annualized levelized business costs of electricity (LCOE) to end users in 100%
BAU scenario. The costs include generation, short and long distance transmission, distribution and storage, but they do not

89
Discussion

include external costs. The figure presents the predicted WWS power prices vs the cheapest fossil fuel option- coal in 2050.
Dark green represent technologies that there energy generation is cheaper than coal already today and in 2050, light green
represent technologies that in 2050 there energy generation will be cheaper than coal, yellow for technologies with has
similar price to coal and red for technologies more expensive than coal. Values are extracted from Table 2.

9.4.2 Health and health cost saving benefits

Converting Israel to a WWS system by 2050 will not only contribute to the prevention of climate
change but also benefit Israel directly by preventing health issues caused by air pollution. The fossil
fuel emissions of particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone (O3) were found by to have a relative risk in
causing premature deaths due to cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and complications from
asthma. Converting Israel’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to WWS by 2050 will prevent 2,674
premature deaths per year on average due to the reduction of air pollution as estimated by Jacobson et
al. (2016).

Converting to WWS will create on average a total cost savings of 65 billion dollars (2013 USD) per
year and 6,029 dollars (2013 USD) per person a year due to damage prevention of air pollution,
climate change and energy saving due to better efficiency. The damage prevention costs for air
pollution are estimated to be on average 27 billion dollars (2013 USD) per year and account for
mortality, morbidity, and non-health costs. The damage prevention costs for air greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions created by burning fossil fuels in BAU scenario is 36 billion dollars (2013 USD)
per year and 3,300 dollars (2013 USD) per person a year. Thus, the upfront investment due to
conversion to a WWS system is expected to be returned on average after 2 years when accounting for
the sum of the aforementioned cost-savings. Furthermore, due to switching from BAU electricity to
WWS electricity the average electricity cost saving in 2050 is expected to be 2.46 billion dollars
(2013 USD) per year and 227 dollars per person a year (2013 USD). Thus, converting Israel to rely
only on WWS resources will be more economical than continuing to burn fossil fuels in a BAU
scenario. (Jacobson et al. 2016; Jacobson & Delucchi 2016).

9.4.3 Labor benefits

Furthermore, converting Israel to 100% WWS system will create 62,408 new jobs from 2015 to 2050.
Those new jobs account for both short term construction jobs and long-term operation and
maintenance jobs and discounts for jobs lost due to lack of further development of fossil-fuel
infrastructures. Moreover, additional job creation due to conversion to WWS system for research and
development of WWS technologies and storage can also be accounted for but is not included in
Jacobson’s calculations (Jacobson et al. 2016).

9.4.4. Energy security benefits

Deployment of energy resources with WWS technologies over many locations instead of the current
situation of several specific locations of conventional power plants, will contribute to Israel’s energy
immunity to potential terrorist attacks or weather hazards, an aspect that should also be taken under
consideration when evaluating the benefits from implementing this roadmap.

In this roadmap, Israel is assumed to generate all of its annually averaged power independently to
meet energy demand by 2050. This is the ideal scenario considering Israel’s political conflicts with its
neighboring countries. Converting to WWS system will contribute to energy resource diversification
and energy independency, which are acute factors in increasing Israel’s energy security leading to
stronger economic and national security. Also, Israel’s energy independency will help ensure that
expected rising and fluctuating fossil fuels fluctuation prices would not affect Israel.

90
Discussion

9.5 Further work

As this plan only focuses on the technical and practical limitations, before wind turbine development
it is essential to conduct further analysis that will also account for areas with endangered species,
ecological corridors, bats caves and their lodging and breeding sites, bird migration routes, buffer
zones from the airport, distance to transmission lines and roads, and distance to populated areas and
inhabited structures. Further research into understanding the benefits of preserving areas for
ecological health versus the damage of continued fossil fuel usage need to be conducted and areas
more likely to be used as ecological corridors should be defined.

As mentioned before, the spatial analysis does not account for social factors such as public attitudes,
which can play a large role in the success of site development since they can slow or stop a project
that should be permissible by law and regulation. Also, the spatial analysis does not account for
economic factors such as proximity to existing roads or grid transmission lines that affect the direct
cost of WWS construction and development. Since those factors are important in the success of
development of WWS and the transition of Israel to renewable energy further research with those
factors should be done.

Moreover, as offshore wind turbine practical potential wasn’t validated due to lack of offshore winds
peed data, such data should be gathered, and based on offshore wind practical potential should be
validated.

As grid reliability and energy exchanges among countries were not considered but are critical factors
for the success of converting Israel to rely only on renewable energy, further research on those issues
is needed. While grid reliability was not part of the calculations, the number of additional generators
needed to ensure reliable electric power grid was estimated by Jacobson et al. (2016)).

In order to achieve the goal of 100% WWS by 2050 and its mid goals, policies to incentivize the
market are needed. The government has the ability to ensure the implementation of this roadmap by
improving its renewable energy policies. Financial incentives can make WWS technologies that are
more expensive in generating electricity relative to conventional fossil fuels economically feasible on
the short term, and ensure long-term economic and social benefits for Israel. Thus further research on
policies and incentives with regard to development of renewable energy is needed.

9.6 Bottom line

This thesis highlights the significant practical potential of onshore wind, utility scale PV, and CSP as
well as rooftop PV technologies to be used in the future to generate clean energy. Although this study
does not cover all possible limitations regarding WWS development and there are various aspects that
still need to be assessed, this thesis allows developers and decision makers to estimate Israel’s WWS
energy potential and help determine the best locations for onshore wind, utility scale PV, and CSP
when taking into account Israel’s technical, environmental, and regulatory limitations.

While the economic factors were not taken into account, the thesis does demonstrate that the
transition path to 100% renewable energy laid out in this work is indeed cheaper in the long-term than
the continued burning of fossil fuels. Meaning, the plan presented here is not only ecological and
feasible, but also more economical compared to business as usual alternatives. Although this roadmap
does not attempt to present the least-cost future energy mix or satisfy grid reliability constraints, the
number of additional generators needed to ensure reliable electric power grid was estimated. Further
research would be needed to ensure grid reliability.

The negative externalities of the use of fossil fuels, such as air pollution and the contribution to
climate change, together with the mentioned additional benefits of energy security, more independent

91
Discussion

and stable energy, and job creation, provide strong reasons for Israel to convert its all-purpose energy
infrastructure to 100% WWS system by 2050.

10. Conclusion
In order to answer the main research question of ‘What practical transition plan can convert Israel to
100% all-sector renewable energy by 2050?’ this thesis adopted Jacobson’s et al. (2016) “world
plan”,‘100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps
for 139 Countries of the World’. The World Plan offers a long-term transition plan to supply 100% of
Israel’s energy in all sectors (electricity, transportation, heating/cooling, industry, etc.) from Wind,
Water, and Sunlight (WWS) power. Jacobson’s et al. (2016) roadmap was validated by evaluating
Israel’s WWS technical and practical potential per technology, while taking into account Israel’s
unique geography, climate, environmental, and regulation settings. This roadmap answers the sub
research question of ‘When accounting for technical, environmental, and regulatory limitations, does
Israel has sufficient area for development of wind and solar installations that will allow Israel to fulfill
its all-purpose energy demands by 2050?’

In order to validate Jacobson’s et al. (2016) plan the following steps were taken:

I. Literature review, to learn about the different factors to be considered for each technology in
Jacobson’s proposed energy sources mix
II. Deciding on clear criteria for the technical potential and practical potential per technology
III. Obtaining data from multiple sources to use in analysis against criteria
IV. Perform analysis using data, compared against criteria. The primary tool here was the multi-
factor GIS analysis
V. Analyze results, answer the research questions, and present a clear transition plan

Validation of Jacobson’s et al. (2016) proposed plan is based on evaluating the availability of sites
suitable for WWS development per each energy resource, and comparing the total energy each
resource can produce (practical potential) with the total nameplate capacity needed by that resource
according to Jacobson’s et al. (2016) proposed energy mix. Under the assumption that both data and
its analysis in this thesis are not 100% comprehensive nor 100% accurate, a “safe” validation was
defined as one that included an “acceptable error margin” of 25% between found practical potential
per technology and the required nameplate capacity per Jacobson’s plan.

Based on the results of the GIS multi-criteria spatial analysis, when taking into account Israel’s
technical, environmental and regulatory limitations, utility scale PV, CSP, and rooftop PV
commercial and residential were safely validated with margins greater than 25% (+37% for
commercial rooftop, +83% for residential roof top, +175% for CSP, and +1085% solar PV).

Offshore wind could not be validated because offshore wind speed data, one of the most critical data
required for offshore wind siting and potential evaluation could not be obtained. Another marker that
was obtained and analyzed for offshore wind - offshore depth as distance from the shoreline - was
analyzed and found to be steeper than expected, implying less offshore potential probably exists than
previously estimated.

Moreover, the practical potential found for onshore wind was validated but with a slim margin of only
7% more than the required nameplate capacity for onshore wind per Jacobson’s et al. (2016) plan. As
onshore wind was not “safely” validated, it was recommended to consider an alternative proposal
(“proposal B”), in case site area for onshore wind is physically found to be insufficient. Proposal B is
based on the minimal changes required as a supplement to Jacobson’s proposal, where suggested
power from each source is safely validated, offshore wind end use power delivery plan does not
exceed its onshore equivalent, while keeping footprint to minimum.

92
Conclusion

Jacobson’s et al. (2016) roadmap suggests the following energy mix for 2050: 80.5% solar (residential
rooftop PV system 17.5%, commercial and governmental rooftop PV 9%, utility scale PV 41.3%,
CSP plant 12.7%) and 19.4% wind (6.8% onshore wind & offshore wind 12.6%).

Proposal B suggests the following energy mix: 88.2% solar (residential rooftop PV system 25.2%,
commercial and governmental rooftop PV 9%, utility scale PV 41.3%, CSP plant 12.7%) and 11.8%
wind (5.9% onshore wind & offshore wind 5.9%).

As the above proposals validate the practical potential of converting Israel into 100% renewable by
2050, a clear actionable plan was presented.

First, in terms of timeline, and with 5-year goals increments, as can be seen in following graph:

Figure 35. Israel’s mean change of all-purpose end-use power demand and its supply of conventional fuels (fossil fuels, Bio-
fuels, and nuclear) and WWS technologies over time. Next to each WWS technology is the percent of end-use power
provided by WWS in 2050. The percentage next to the years in the time axis indicates the percent energy supplied by WWS
sources by that year.

Second, in terms of siting, as specified through siting maps and suggested implementation details per
each technology, this thesis presented sites that were found suitable for WWS installation per
technology and detailed the guidelines necessary to follow during implementation.

Further, footprint impact of implementing the plan was calculated. Replacing Israel’s all-purpose
energy infrastructure with the WWS mix suggested by Jacobson et al. (2016) will require 2.3% of
Israel’s land area, while the footprint of new land area will be 2%. These values do not account for the
decrease in footprint from eliminating the current energy infrastructure. Spacing area on new land is
1.6% of Israel’s land area and is needed only for wind turbines. Spacing on Israel’s footprint of
offshore area was found to be 3.2%.

Last, benefits from adopting Jacobson et al. (2016) and transitioning Israel’s all-purpose energy
infrastructure to one derived entirely from WWS by 2050 were presented, and includes: direct savings
of 2.46 billion dollar (2013 USD) per year on energy costs, and additional 63 billion dollar (2013
USD) annual savings when accounting for avoided health and air pollution costs. Beyond economics
benefits, 2,674 premature deaths per year would be saved and 62,408 new jobs will be created
between 2015 to 2050. Moreover, Israel will achieve greater energy security through decentralization
of its energy production.

93
Conclusion

The following follow up work on this thesis is recommended:

 Gather offshore wind speed data and validate offshore wind practical potential
 Evaluate social factors such as public attitudes and include them in practical potential
evaluations
 Evaluate and include economic factors such as proximity to existing roads or grid
transmission lines
 Conduct further analysis on areas with high ecological sensitivity such as areas endangered
species, ecological corridors, bats caves and their lodging and breeding sites, bird migration
routes, so such ecological factors can take into account when validating wind or solar farm
practical potential
 Take into account issues beyond energy supply that are essential for reliance on alternative
energy sources, namely: grid reliability, storage, and handling peak-hours
 Research on policies and governmental incentives that encourage the development of
renewables as well as facilitate transition to fully electrified consumption, especially at earlier
stages of implementing the plan, where economics are less clearly in favor of the renewable
alternative

94
Bibliography

Bibliography
Akstein, G. & Toyli, G. (2015) What is the most appropriate policy to encourage the generation of
electricity from renewable energy?: ‫?מהי המדיניות הראויה לקידום יצור חשמל מאנרגיות מתחדשות‬
Anders, S., Bialek, T. & Geier, D. et al. (2005) Potential for Renewable Energy in the San Diego
Region.
Aydin, N. Y., Kentel, E. & Duzgun, S. (2010) GIS-based environmental assessment of wind energy
systems for spatial planning: A case study from Western Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 14 (1), 364–373.
Baban, S. M. & Parry, T. (2001) Developing and applying a GIS-assisted approach to locating wind
farms in the UK. Renewable Energy 24 (1), 59–71.
Bakker, R. H., Pedersen, E., van den Berg, G. P., Stewart, R. E., Lok, W. & Bouma, J. (2012) Impact
of wind turbine sound on annoyance, self-reported sleep disturbance and psychological distress.
Science of The Total Environment 425, 42–51.
Becker, N., Ben-Shlomo, V., Wenger, A. & Tabchnik, D. (2011) Report Adam Teva V'Din,
Environmental effects of gas drilling,Tamar reservoir as test case: ‫דוח אדם טבע ודין השפעות סביבתיות‬
‫ מאגר תמר כמקרה מבחן‬,‫של קידוחי הגז‬.
Bein, A., Edelman, A. & Cohen, G. (eds.) (2010) Cliff collapse in Israel's coast. Ways of coping, and
the economic, environmental and public implications: ,‫ דרכים להתמודדות‬.‫התמוטטות המצוק בחופי ישראל‬
‫ משרד‬,‫ מעקב ובקרה‬,‫ מוגש לאגף תיאום‬.‫ טיוטא לדיון‬.‫ מסמך מדיניות‬.‫ הציבוריות והסביבתיות‬,‫והמשמעויות הכלכליות‬
‫ראש הממשלה‬.
Ben David, I. & Avni, N. (2013) Threats in planning and maintenance of open spaces in Israel: ‫איומים‬
‫בתחום התכנון והבנייה בשמירה על השטחים הפתוחים בישראל‬.
Berg, N., Drori, R., Dan, H., Perlberg, A. & Shorek, M. (2015) The state of nature report 2015. ‫דוח‬
2015 ‫מצב הטבע‬, Jerusalem, Israel.
Bet-Hazavadi, E. & Drori, A. (2010) National Energy Efficiency Program: Reducing Electricity
Consumption 2010-2020.
Bilgili, M., Yasar, A. & Simsek, E. (2011) Offshore wind power development in Europe and its
comparison with onshore counterpart. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15 (2), 905–
915.
BirdLife International (2014) Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas: A global network for conserving
nature and benefiting people. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.
Brewer, J., Ames, D. P., Solan, D., Lee, R. & Carlisle, J. (2015) Using GIS analytics and social
preference data to evaluate utility-scale solar power site suitability. Renewable Energy 81, 825–
836.
Buist, J. (2015) Gallery: Blade delivery to the top of Baoding Mountain in China. Wind Power
Monthly.
Central Bureau of Statistics (2014) Israel in figures.
Central Bureau of Statistics (2015) Energy Balance: 2013, Jerusalem, Israel.
Central Bureau of Statistics (2015) Energy usage and conservation: Selected Data from the 2014
Social Survey about Using and Saving Energy, Jerusalem, Israel.
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) (2013) Society in Israel. Report No. 6: Past, Present and Future
Perspectives.
Clifton, J. & Boruff, B. J. (2010) Assessing the potential for concentrated solar power development in
rural Australia. Energy Policy 38 (9), 5272–5280.
Cory, K., Couture, T. & Kreycik, C. (2009) Feed-in Tariff Policy: Design, Implementation, and RPS
Policy Interactions: Technical Report, NREL/TP-6A2-45549, Prepared under Task No.
PVB9.4210.
Couture, T. D., Cory, K., Kreycik, C. & Williams, E. (2010) A Policymaker's Guide to Feed-in Tariff
Policy Design.
Domínguez Bravo, J., García Casals, X. & Pinedo Pascua, I. (2007) GIS approach to the definition of
capacity and generation ceilings of renewable energy technologies. Energy Policy 35 (10), 4879–
4892.

95
Bibliography

Doris, E., Lopez, A. & Beckley, D. (2013) Geospatial Analysis of Renewable Energy Technical
Potential on Tribal Lands, DOE/IE-0013. U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, VA.
Eisentraut, A. & Brown, A. (2014) Heating without Global Warming: Market Developments and
Policy Considerations for Renewable Heat, France.
EMD International A/S EMD ConWx Mesoscale Data.
Energy Information Agency (EIA) (2015) International Energy Outlook 2014.
European Wind Energy Association (2013) Deep Water: The next step for offshore wind energy.
Franze, M. & Weiss, W. (2014) Solar Heat Worldwide: Markets and Contribution to the Energy
Supply 2012, 2014th edn.
Gastli, A., Charabi, Y. & Zekri, S. (2010) GIS-based assessment of combined CSP electric power and
seawater desalination plant for Duqum—Oman. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14
(2), 821–827.
Goffredo, S. & Dubinsky, Z. (eds.) (2014) The Mediterranean Sea: Its history and present challenges
/ Stefano Goffredo, Zvy Dubinsky, editors. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht.
Gutman, L. (08/20/16) Private power plants already produce 29% of the electricity in Israel. ‫תחנות כוח‬
‫ מהחשמל בישראל‬29% ‫פרטיות כבר מייצרות‬. Calcalist.
Gutman, L. (2015) Mekorot reveals the benefits of water: will use hydroelectric energy: ‫מקורות מגלה את‬
‫ תשתמש באנרגיה הידרואלקטרית‬:‫יתרונות המים‬. Calcalist.
International Energy Agency (IEA) (2011) Technology Roadmap: Geothermal Heat and Power,
France.
International Finance Corporation (IFC) (2012) Utility Scale Solar Power Plants: A Guide For
Developers and Investors.
Israel (2015) ISRAEL'S INTENDED NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION (INDC):
Submission to the ADP.
Israel Electric Corporation Strategic Aspects Overview (2012).
Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection (2015) Historic Decision: Half a Billion NIS Investment
to Reduce Greenhouse Gases.
http://www.sviva.gov.il/English/ResourcesandServices/NewsAndEvents/NewsAndMessageDover
/Pages/2015/09-Sept/Half-a-Billion-NIS-Investment-to-Reduce-Greenhouse-Gases.aspx.
Accessed 11/22/2015.
Jacobson, M. Z. & Delucchi, M. A. (2016) Spreadsheets of calculations for 100% Clean and
Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of
the World. http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/WWS-50-USState-
plans.html. Accessed 6/12/2016.
Jacobson, M. Z., Delucchi, M. A. & Bauer, Z. A. et al. (2016) 100% Clean and Renewable Wind,
Water, and Sunlight (WWS) All- Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World.
Version 3.
Jacobson, M. Z., Delucchi, M. A., Bazouin, G. & Dvorak, M. J. (2015) A 100% wind, water, sunlight
(WWS) all-sector energy plan for Washington State. Renewable Energy.
Jacobson, M. Z. (2009) Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security.
Energy Environ. Sci. 2 (2), 148–173.
Jacobson, M. Z. & Delucchi, M. A. (2011) Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar
power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and
materials. Energy Policy 39 (3), 1154–1169.
Jacobson, M. Z., Delucchi, M. A. & Bazouin, G. et al. (2015) 100% clean and renewable wind, water,
and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States. Energy Environ. Sci. 8
(7), 2093–2117.
Jacobson, M. Z., Delucchi, M. A., Cameron, M. A. & Frew, B. A. (2015) Low-cost solution to the
grid reliability problem with 100% penetration of intermittent wind, water, and solar for all-
purposes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112
(49), 15060–15065.
Jacobson, M. Z., Delucchi, M. A. & Ingraffea, A. R. et al. (2014) A roadmap for repowering
California for all-purposes with wind, water, and sunlight. Energy 73, 875–889.

96
Bibliography

Jacobson, M. Z., Howarth, R. W. & Delucchi, M. A. et al. (2013) Examining the feasibility of
converting New York State’s all-purpose energy infrastructure to one using wind, water, and
sunlight. Energy Policy 57, 585–601.
Jongman, R. H., Külvik, M. & Kristiansen, I. (2004) European ecological networks and greenways.
Landscape and Urban Planning 68 (2-3), 305–319.
Kaplan, M. & Abel, E. (2011) National outline plan for forests and afforestation: NOP 22 policy
document. Maor Wallach Ltd, Jerusalem.
Kit, E. & Kroszynski, U. (2014) Marine Policy Plan for Israel: Physical Oceanography, Deep Sea and
Coastal zone Overview. http://msp-israel.net.technion.ac.il/files/2014/12/ATOS-report-final.pdf.
Accessed 6/6/2016.
Knopper, L. D. & Ollson, C. A. (2011) Health effects and wind turbines: A review of the literature.
Environmental Health 10 (1), 78.
Lelieveld, J., Hadjinicolaou, P. & Kostopoulou, E. et al. (2012) Climate change and impacts in the
Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Climatic change 114 (3-4), 667–687.
Lopez, A., Roberts, B., Heimiller, D., Blair, N. & Porro, G. (2012) U.S. Renewable Energy Technical
Potentials: A GIS-Based Analysis: Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-51946, Springfield, VA.
McKinney, M. (2014) Site Suitability Analysis for a Solar Farmin Watauga County, NC. Journal of
Student Research in Environmental Science at Appalachian 4.
Meindertsma, W., van Sark, W. & Lipchin, C. (2012) Renewable energy fueled desalination in Israel.
Desalination and Water Treatment 13 (1-3), 450–463.
Melius, J., Margolis, R. & Ong, S. (2013) Estimating Rooftop Suitability for PV: A Review of
Methods, Patents, and Validation Techniques.
Miller, A. & Li, R. (2014) A Geospatial Approach for Prioritizing Wind Farm Development in
Northeast Nebraska, USA. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 3 (3), 968–979.
Ministry of Environmental Protection (2010) Israel's National Biodiversity Plan.
Ministry of interior (2013) National council approval for national outline plane for wind turbins.
Ministry of National Infrastructures Decision makers proposal for implemention of goverment goals
for renewable energy generation.
Ministry of National Infrastructures (2010) Policy on the integration of renewable energy sources into
the israeli electricity sector.
Mitchell, C., Sawin, J. L. & Pokharel, G. R. et al. (eds.) (2011) Chapter 11: Policy, Financing and
Implementation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York.
Moomaw, W., Yamba, F. & Kamimoto, M. et al. (eds.) (2011) Chapter 1: Renewable energy sources
and climate change mitigation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and
New York, NY, USA.
Nicholls, J., Mawhood, R., Gross, R. & Castillo-Castillo, A. (2014) Evaluating Renewable Energy
Policy: A Review of Criteria and Indicators for Assessment.
Olasolo, P., Juárez, M. C., Morales, M. P., D´Amico, S. & Liarte, I. A. (2016) Enhanced geothermal
systems (EGS): A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 56, 133–144.
OpenEI.
Paltiel, A., Sepulchre, M., Kornilenko, I. & Maldonado, M. (2012) Long‐Range Population
Projections for Israel: 2009‐2059, Jerusalem, Israel.
Portman, M. E. (2014) Developing Resource Management and Marine Policy for the Eastern
Mediterranean Sea. In: Goffredo, S. & Dubinsky, Z. (eds.) The Mediterranean Sea: Its history and
present challenges / Stefano Goffredo, Zvy Dubinsky, editors. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,
pp. 641–654.
Prime Minister Office (2014) National outline plane for wind turbines.
Prime Minister's Office (2013) The committee to examine the economic benefits of renewable energy:
Recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial committee. ‫הוועדה לבחינת התועלת הכלכלית של אנרגיות‬
‫מתחדשות המלצות הצוות הבין משרדי‬.
Proaktor, G. & Shmoeli, L. (2014) Monitoring report for the implementation of government decisions
to reduce power consumption and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. ‫דו"ח ניטור ומעקב אחר יישום‬
‫החלטות הממשלה לצמצום צריכת החשמל ולהפחתת פליטות גזי חממה‬.
Proaktor, G., Tamir, O. & Kamara,, Ron et al. (2015) Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emission
Reduction Potential and Recommended National Target for Israel: Final Report.

97
Bibliography

Public Utilities Authority Electricity APPENDIX B. Jerusalem District Electricity Co. Ltd ("JDECO")
- Description of Corporate Business.
Public Utilities Authority Electricity Israel Public Utility Authority's - Electricity biennial activity
report 2011-2012.
Public Utilities Authority Electricity (2012) The Electricity Authority has given an additional
conditional license to establish pumped storage power: Awarded to investment company for
development in the Gilboa. ‫רשות החשמל נתנה רישיון מותנה נוסף להקמת מתקן ייצור חשמל באגירה שאובה‬,
Jerusalem, Israel.
Public Utilities Authority Electricity (2013) The Israeli renewable energy market and regulation:
current status report.
Public Utilities Authority Electricity (2014) The Israeli Net Metering Scheme – lessons learned.
Renewable Energy Policy Network for 21st Century (REN21) (2015) Renewables 2015, global status
report: Key findings 2015.
Renewable Energy Policy Network for 21st Century (REN21) (2016) Renewables 2016: Global status
report.
Richter, C., Teske, S. & Short, R. (eds.) (2009) Concentrating Solar Power Global Outlook 09: Why
Renewable Energy is Hot. Greenpeace International; SolarPACES; ESTELA, Amsterdam,
Netherlands.
Ronen, Y. (2013) Electricity generation from renewable energy sources in Israel- monitoring the
implementation of Government Resolutions 4450: Submitted to Internal Affairs and Environment
Committee. 4450 ‫ מעקב אחר יישום החלטת הממשלה‬-‫ייצור חשמל באמצעות אנרגיות מתחדשות בישראל‬.
Rotem, D., Angrat, N., Azri, A., Goldstein, H. & Ben-non, G. (2015) Ecological corridors from
theory to practice: Principles and guidelines for the design and interface of ecological corridors
in Israel. ‫ עקרונות והנחיות לתכנון וממשק מסדרונות אקולוגיים בישראל‬.‫מסדרונות אקולוגיים מהלכה למעשה‬.
ִ
Schmalensee, R., Bulovic, V. & Armstrong, R. et al. (2015) The Future of Solar Energy: An
Interdisciplinary MIT Study.
Shalev, E., Levitte,, Dov, Gabay,, Ran & Zemach, E. (2008) Assessment of Geothermal Resources in
Israel.
Shany-Abochazira, Y. (2015) Localities and Population in Israel 2014, Jerusalem, Israel.
Shkedi, Y. & Sadot, E. (2000) Ecological corridors in open areas: tool to preserve nature: ‫מסדרונות‬
‫ כלי לשמירת טבע‬:‫אקולוגיים בשטחים פתוחים‬.
Shofrony, G. (2014) Towards a Solar Rooftop Reform: How Israel's Residential Photovoltaic
Potential can Upscale the Economy. Master of Business Administration. Hebrew University of
Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Sovacool, B. K. (2009) Contextualizing avian mortality: A preliminary appraisal of bird and bat
fatalities from wind, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity. Energy Policy 37 (6), 2241–2248.
State of Israel (2015) Integrated National Outline Plan for Building, Development and Conservation.
Consolidated Version: NOP 35.
SunShot (2012) SunShot Vision Study.
T. Stoffel, D. Renné & D. Myers et al. (2010) Concentrating Solar Power: Best Practices Handbook
for the Collection and Use of Solar Resource Data (CSP), NREL (National Renewable Energy
Laboratory). Technical Report.
Technion (2014) Summary of Report – Stage A. http://msp-
israel.net.technion.ac.il/files/2014/12/Summary-of-stage-A-Report.pdf. Accessed 6/6/2016.
Tegou, L. I., Polatidis, H. & Haralambopoulos, D. A. (2010) Environmental management framework
for wind farm siting: methodology and case study. Journal of environmental management 91 (11),
2134–2147.
The European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) (2012) National Road Map for
Israel: Task 1: Harmonised Legislative and Regulatory. Activity 1.1.2: Road Maps to Achieve
Regulatory Regulatory Convergence with EU.
The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) (2012) Evaluating policies in support of the
deployment of renewable power.
The Israel Electric Corporation (2010) Statistical Report 2009.

98
Bibliography

The Society for Protection of Nature in Israel (2008) Endangered birds report's findings 2008: ‫ממצאי‬
2008 ‫דו"ח ציפורים בסכנת הכחדה‬. http://www.teva.org.il/?CategoryID=806&ArticleID=2721.
Accessed 3/2/2016.
Troen, I. & Petersen, E. L. (1989) European Wind Atlas, First edition.
U.S. Department of Energy (2008) 20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy’s
Contribution toU.S. Electricity Supply.
U.S. Department of Energy (2012) What is an Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS)?
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Glossary.
https://www.eia.gov/tools/glossary/index.cfm. Accessed 2/20/2017.
Uyan, M. (2013) GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in
Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 28, 11–17.
van Haaren, R. & Fthenakis, V. (2011) GIS-based wind farm site selection using spatial multi-criteria
analysis (SMCA): Evaluating the case for New York State. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 15 (7), 3332–3340.
van Hoesen, J. & Letendre, S. (2010) Evaluating potential renewable energy resources in Poultney,
Vermont: A GIS-based approach to supporting rural community energy planning. Renewable
Energy 35 (9), 2114–2122.
Vardimon, R. (2011) Assessment of the potential for distributed photovoltaic electricity production in
Israel. Renewable Energy 36 (2), 591–594.
Westgate, Z. J. & DeJong, J. T. (2005) Geotechnical Considerations for Offshore Wind Turbines.
Willner, S. E. (2014) Hydropower and pumped-storage in Israel – The energy security aspect of
theHydropower and pumped-storage in Israel – The energy security aspect of the Med-Dead
Project 6 (4), 1–9.
Wizelius, T. (2007) Developing Wind Power Projects, First edition. Earthscan, London.
Wright, M. & Hearps, P. (2011) Australian sustainable energy: Zero carbon Australia stationary
energy plan, Second edition. Energy Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Vic.,
©2010.
Yahel, R. & Angrat, N. Index of geographic information- Coastal and marine environment in the
Mediterranean Sea: ‫ הסביבה החופית והימית בים התיכון‬-‫אינדקס מידע גיאוגרפי‬.
Yahel, R. & Angrat, N. (2012) Nature conservation policy in the Mediterranean Sea.: Marine
reserves as a tool for preserving the environment and diversity in the Mediterranean Sea. ‫מדיניות‬
‫ שמורות טבע ימיות ככלי לשימור הסביבה והמגוון בים התיכון‬.‫שמירת הטבע בים התיכון‬.
Yasner, R. A. (2012) Maximizing Renewable Electricity in Israel: Energy Security, Environmental
Impact, and Economic Development. Carnegie Mellon University.
Yom-Tov, Y. (1988) Bird migration over Israel. Junk, Dordrecht.
Zodiatis, G., Galanis, G. & Nikolaidis, A. et al. (2014) Wave energy potential in the Eastern
Mediterranean Levantine Basin. An integrated 10-year study. Renewable Energy 69, 311–323.

99
Appendix
Appendix 1

The following values are relevant characteristics of wind and solar technologies used by Jacobson et
al. (2016) and in the calculations of this thesis. Data source is: Jacobson, M.Z & Delucchi, M.A.,
2016.
Wind turbine characteristics Low case High case AVERAGE
D1(S8) Mean annual wind speed (m/s) 8.50E+00 7.00E+00
D2 (S9) Turbine rated power (kW) 5.00E+03 5.00E+03 5.00E+03
D3 (S9) Turbine rotor diameter (m) 1.26E+02 1.26E+02
D4=(0.087*D1-D2/D3^2) (S10) Turbine capacity factor 4.25E-01 2.94E-01
D5 Hours per year (hrs) 8.76E+03 8.76E+03 8.76E+03
D6=D2*D4*D5 Turbine energy output without losses (kWh/yr) 1.86E+07 1.29E+07
D7 Turbine effic. (transmission,conversion, array losses) 9.00E-01 8.50E-01
D8=D6*D7 Turbine energy output with losses (kWh/yr) 1.67E+07 1.09E+07
D9=(4*D3)*(14*D3)/10^6 (S10) Area for one turbine accounting for spacing (km2) 6.67E-01 8.89E-01 7.78E-01
D10 Diameter of turbine tubular tower (m) 4.00E+00 5.00E+00
D11=PI*(D10/2)^2/10^6 Area of turbine tower touching ground (km^2) 1.26E-05 1.96E-05
D12 Lifetime of wind turbine (yr) 3.00E+01 3.00E+01
D13 (S11) Energy to manufacture one turbine (kWh/MW) 1.37E+06 1.37E+06
D14=D13*D2/(D12*1000) Energy to manufacture one turbine (kWh/yr) 2.28E+05 2.28E+05
D15=0.5*(D6a+D6b) Avg turbine energy output before transmission (kWh/yr) 1.86E+07 1.29E+07
D16=D13*D2/D15 Energy payback time (yr) for given turbine and winds 3.68E-01 5.31E-01
D17=D14*C4 Single-turbine CO2 emissions (g-CO2e/yr) 1.39E+08 1.39E+08
D18=D17/D15 Single-turbine CO2 emissions (g-CO2e/kWh) 7.47E+00 1.08E+01
D19 Time lag (yr) between planning and operation 2.00E+00 5.00E+00
D20 Time (yr) to refurbish after first lifetime 1.00E+00 2.00E+00
D21=C4*(D19+D20*(100yr/D12))/100yr CO2 emissions due to time lag (g-CO2e/kWh) 3.25E+01 7.10E+01
D22=D21-D21 Wind minus wind time lag CO2 (g-CO2e/kWh) 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
D23 (Ni, 2002) Grassland soil organic carbon (kg-C/m^2) 1.32E+01 1.32E+01
D25 (Ni, 2002) Grassland above-ground carbon (kg-C/m^2) 1.15E+00 1.15E+00
D26=D22*0.66 (34% loss Table 6 of Pouyat et al.,2006)Impervious surface soil organic carbon (kg-C/m^2) 8.71E+00 8.71E+00
D27=(D23+D24-D25)*44.01/12.01 CO2 loss due to impervious surface (kg-CO2/m^2) 5.26E+01 5.26E+01
D28=D27*D47*1e9(m2-g/km2-kg)/(D8*100yr) CO2 emissions due to loss of soil+surface carbon g-CO2e/kWh) 3.95E-04 9.43E-04

Solar PV panel characteristics SunPower E20 Low-cost case High-cost case AVERAGE
G21 Panel rated power in base year (W) 3.27E+02 3.27E+02 3.27E+02
G19 Area of panel itself (m2) 1.63E+00 1.63E+00 1.63E+00
Panel efficiency in base year 2.04E-01 2.04E-01 2.04E-01
G22 Annual rate of change in efficiency 4.00E-03 6.00E-03 5.00E-03
Base year of panel data 2.02E+03 2.02E+03 2.02E+03
G1 (S16)= G21*EXP(G22*(Target_year-E156)) Panel rated power in 2050, at constant area 3.76E+02 4.03E+02 3.90E+02
Panel efficiency in 2050 2.35E-01 2.52E-01 2.43E-01
G2 (S16) Mean capacity factor accounting for sunlight, PVs, inverter 2.40E-01 2.00E-01 2.20E-01
G4 Transmission efficiency 9.50E-01 9.00E-01 9.25E-01
G18=G1/G19 Panel rated power output (W/m2) in 2050 2.31E+02 2.48E+02 2.39E+02
Total footprint/panel area, utility PV 2.34E+00 2.57E+00 2.45E+00
Total footprint/panel area, rooftop systems 1.00E+00 1.10E+00 1.05E+00
G3=G1*G2*D5/1000 Single-panel energy output before transmis. loss (kWh/yr) 7.91E+02 7.07E+02 7.51E+02
G5=G3*G4 Single-panel output w/ transmis. loss (kWh/yr) 7.51E+02 6.36E+02 6.94E+02
G6 (S16) Solar panel area (m2) plus walking and other non-panel space 3.81E+00 4.18E+00 4.00E+00
G7 (S17) Lifetime of solar panel (yr) 3.00E+01 3.00E+01 3.00E+01
G8 (S17) Single-panel CO2 emissions (g-CO2e/kWh) 1.90E+01 5.90E+01 3.90E+01
G9=G8*G3 Single-panel CO2 emissions (g-CO2e/yr) 1.50E+04 4.17E+04 2.93E+04
G10 Time lag (yr) between planning and operation 2.00E+00 5.00E+00 3.50E+00
G11 Time (yr) to refurbish after first lifetime 1.00E+00 2.00E+00 1.50E+00
G12=C4*(G10+G11*100yr/G7)/100yr CO2 emissions due to time lag (g-CO2e/kWh) 3.25E+01 7.10E+01 0.00E+00
G13=G12-D21 Solar PV minus wind time lag CO2 (g-CO2e/kWh) 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
Ratio of carbon lost from desert to that from grassland
G14 (include only the 70% of PV on land) 7.00E-02 7.00E-02 7.00E-02
G15=G14*D27*G6*1e3(g/kg)/(G5*100yr) CO2 emissions due to loss of soil+surface carbon g-CO2e/kWh) 1.87E-01 2.42E-01 0.00E+00
G16=G8*G3/G5+G13+G15 Total g-CO2e/kWh 2.02E+01 6.58E+01 4.22E+01
G17=G8*G3+(G13+G15)*G5 Total CO2 emissions per panel (g-CO2e/yr) 1.52E+04 4.19E+04 2.93E+04
G20 Spacing factor (m2) (total system area/panel area) 1.80E+00
G23 Panel rated power output (W/m2) in 2015 2.01E+02 2.01E+02 2.01E+02
G24= G6/G21 Footprint utility PV (km^2/MW) 1.17E-02 1.28E-02 1.22E-02

100
 WEIGHTED
Concentrated solar power with no storage characteristics Low-cost case High-cost case AVERAGE
M1 Typical plant size (MW) 1.00E+02 1.00E+02 1.00E+02
M2 (S39) Capacity factor (no storage) 2.50E-01 1.80E-01
M3=M1*M2*1000*D5 Energy per plant before transmission (kWh/yr) 2.19E+08 1.58E+08
M4=G4 Transmission efficiency 9.50E-01 9.00E-01
M5=M3*M4 Energy per plant after transmission (kWh/yr) 2.08E+08 1.42E+08
M6=E2/M5 Number of 100 MW CSP plants to run U.S. CSP-BEV 5.87E+03 1.11E+04 8.49E+03
M7 (S40) Lifetime of CSP plant (yr) 3.00E+01 3.00E+01
M8 (S40, S41) Energy payback time (yr) 4.17E-01 5.58E-01
M9=0.5*(M3a+M3b) Avg energy per plant before transmission (kWh/yr) 1.88E+08 1.88E+08
M10=M9*M8/M7 Energy to manufacture one CSP plant (kWh/yr) 2.62E+06 3.51E+06
M11=M10*C4 Single-CSP plant CO2 emissions (g-CO2e/yr) 1.59E+09 2.13E+09
M12=M11/M9 Single-CSP plant CO2 emissions (g-CO2e/kWh) 8.45E+00 1.13E+01
M13 (S42) H2O consumption wet-cool parabolic trough (gal/kWh) 7.77E-01 7.77E-01
M14=M13*M3*M6 Gal-H2O/yr required to run U.S. CSP-BEV 9.99E+11 1.36E+12
M15=M14/I32 Fraction of U.S. water demand for wet-cool CSP BEV 6.71E-03 9.13E-03
M16=M14*F15/E2 Fraction of U.S. water demand for wet-cool CSP HFCV 2.11E-02 2.72E-02
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE
CSP (no storage) installation areal density (MW/km2-land
M34 occupied) 5.26E+01 4.12E+01
CSP (with storage) installation areal density (MW/km2-land
M35 occupied) 3.09E+01 3.13E+01
CSP storage weighted areal power density (MW/km2-land
M36=1/(M37/M35+(1-M37)/M34) occupied) 3.47E+01 3.34E+01 3.41E+01
M37 CSP storage share, the ratio of capacity with storage to total capacity 7.33E-01

M18=M17*M1 Land area required (km^2) for one plant of typical size 2.88E+00 2.99E+00 2.93E+00
M19=M18*M6 Land area (km^2) required to run U.S. CSP-BEV 1.69E+04 3.32E+04 2.49E+04
M20=M19/E7 Fraction of U.S. land for CSP-BEV 1.85E-03 3.62E-03
M21=M19/E10 Fraction of California land for CSP-BEV 4.19E-02 8.22E-02
M22=M19/E12 Ratio of CSP to wind footprint area for BEV 1.84E+04 1.17E+04
M23=M19/E4 Ratio of CSP to wind spacing area for BEV 3.47E-01 2.59E-01
M24 (see text) Time lag (yr) between planning and operation 2.00E+00 5.00E+00
M25 Time (yr) to refurbish after first lifetime 1.00E+00 2.00E+00
M26=C4*(M24+M25*100yr/M7)/100yr CO2 emissions due to time lag (g-CO2e/kWh) 3.25E+01 7.10E+01
M27=M26-D20 CSP minus wind time lag CO2 (g-CO2e/kWh) 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
M28 Ratio of carbon lost from desert to that from grassland 1.00E-01 1.00E-01
M29=M28*D27*M18*1e9(m2-g/km2-kg)/(M5*100yr) CO2 emissions due to loss of soil+surface carbon g-CO2e/kWh) 7.28E-01 1.11E+00
M30=M12+M27+M29 Total g-CO2e/kWh 9.18E+00 1.24E+01
M31=M30*E2/10^12 CSP-BEV CO2 emissions (MT-CO2e/yr) 1.12E+01 1.96E+01

101
 Appendix 2

Presented are the values used in the calculation of the thesis in order to make it easier for the reader to
follow the calculation method.

Israel's population and energy demand

Z1 Population in 2015 (Not including residents in the west bank) 8.09E+06
Z2 Population in 2050 (Not including residents in the west bank) 1.08E+07
Z3 Percentage of urban population in 2050 9.33E-01
Z4 Percentage of Non-urban population in 2050 6.65E-02
Z5 Israel energy demand in 2050 (TWh/yr) 1.39E+02
FACSHT=factor to multiply total solar PV by to get size of heat collectors
Z6 for grid integration
SHEATFAC study
= factor to reduce FACSHT by in grid 1.90E-01
integration model to ensure collector size no larger than max
Z7 power collected. 8.28E-01
Z8=Z6*Z7 FACSHT*SHEATFAC 1.57E-01
Z9 Installed nameplate capacity for storadge in 2013 for utility scale PV (MW) 0.00E+00
Z10 Israel land area (km2) 2.16E+04
Z11 Israel water area= EEZ+costal (km2) 2.60E+04
Z12 Costal length (km) 2.73E+02
Israel's EEZ 2.20E+04
Total on shore militaty ground km^2 7.89E+03
Military area practically suitable for wind turbine installation 2.49E+02
Military area practically suitable for CSP 1.21E+02
Military area practically suitable for PV 1.47E+03

Values used for rooftop calculation

Estimated number of stories of urban area residences assuming higher
residential buildins will be constructed in 2050 (based on analysis on data
W1 from Central Bureau of Statistics) 2.30E+00
Estimated residential m^2/capita in 2015 and 2050 (Assuming it will stay the
W2 same as 2015) 5.00E+01
W3 Fraction of rooftop area suitable for PVs in urban area and commertial use 4.25E-01
W4 Fraction of rooftop area suitable for PVs in Non-urban area in 2050 2.00E-01
W5 Estimated number of stories of Commercial buildings in 2050 3.00E+00
W6 Avarage number of stories of residential buildigs constructed by 2015 1.80E+00
Estimation of percentage of urban population 2015 (based on data of urban
W7 precentage in 2014) 9.12E-01
Estimation of percentage of non-urban population 2015 (based on data of
W8 urban precentage in 2014) 8.75E-02
Estimation of percentage of urban population in 2050. Assumed to be higher
W9 than 2015 9.30E-01
W10 Percentage of Non-urban population in 2050. Assumed to be lower than 2015 7.00E-02
W11 (Y1) Onshore wind rated power of one unit (MW) 5
W12 (Y2) Offshore wind rated power of one unit (MW) 5
W13 (Y3) Wave device rated power of one unit (MW) 0.75
W14 Geothermal plant rated power of one unit (MW) 100
W15 Hydroelectric plant rated power of one unit (MW) 1300
W16 Tidal turbine rated power of one unit (MW) 1
W17 Res. roof PV system rated power of one unit (MW) 0.005
W18 Com/gov roof PV system rated power of one unit (MW) 0.1
W19 Solar PV plant rated power of one unit (MW) 50
W20 CSP plant rated power of one unit (MW) 100

102
 Appendix 3

Explanations of calculations
Calulation of available residential rooftops for PV installation in 2050
Estimated number of stories of urban area residences assuming higher residential buildins will be constructed in 2050 (see
W1 number stories in residential building built 2010-2014 (Red Building story tab )) 2.30E+00
W2 Estimated residential Floor area m^2/capita in 2015 and 2050 (assuming that will stay the same as 2050) 4.50E+01
W6 Avarage number of stories of residential buildigs constructed by 2015 1.80E+00
W7 Estimation of percentage of urban population 2015 (based on data of urban precentage in 2014) 9.12E-01
W8 Estimation of percentage of non-urban population 2015 (based on data of urban precentage in 2014) 8.75E-02
W9 Estimation of percentage of urban population in 2050. Source: Jacobson et al (2015) 9.33E-01
W10 Percentage of Non-urban population in 2050. Source: Jacobson et al (2015) 6.65E-02

X1=W2*W3/W1 Suitable PV m^2 roof/capita in Urban area in 2050 8.32E+00

X2=W2*W4 Suitable PV m^2 roof/capita in Non-Urban area in 2015 and 2050 9.00E+00
X3=Z2*W9*X1 Suitable PV area in Urban area in 2050 (m^2) 8.41E+07
X4=Z2*W10*X2 Suitable PV area in Non-Urban area in 2050 (m^2) 6.48E+06
X5=(X3+X4)/10^6 Suitable Area in 2050 (km^2) 9.06E+01
X6=X5*G18 Technical potential in 2050 (MW) 2.17E+04

X7=W2*W3/W6 Suitable PV m^2 roof/capita in Urban area in 2015 1.06E+01

X8=Z1*W7*X7 m^2 suitable PV area in Urban area in 2015 7.85E+07
X9=Z1*W8*X2 m^2 suitable PV area in Non-Urban area in 2015 6.37E+06
X10=(X8+X9)/10^6 km^2 Useable Area in 2015 8.49E+01
X11=X10*G23 Technical potential in 2015 (MW) 1.70E+04

Onshore wind
Israel's onshore wind capcity from areas where wind speed is greater than 6 m/s at 100m hight (MW) 1.38E+04
Area available at Wind speed bigger than 6 m/s Slope 30 and in open space (Urban areas, water land archeological sites and
X12 airports were exluded ) 1.21E+03
X13=X12*D2*10^-3/ D9 Onshore technical potential (MW) 7.78E+03

Area practiclly suitable: available in open space (Urban areas, water land archeological sites and airports were exluded ) at
X14 wind speed bigger than 6 m/s slope equal or smaller than 30% and with no environmental or on military ground 4.48E+02
X15= X14*D2*10^-3/ D9 Onshore wind practical Potential (MW) 2.88E+03

Calculating technical potential capcity for Solar PV

X16 (Z6) Areas technically suitable for utility scale PV (Open areas that are not suitable for CSP installation) 9.62E+09
X17=10^-6*G18*X16/G20 Technical Potential for PV farm (MW) 1.28E+06

Calculating Practical potential capcity for Solar PV

Area with Slope=<5 with no limitation at all or areas defined as military ground, on non agricultural land that is not suitable
for CSP due to continious size<18,000 m2 DNI<5 kwh/m2/day (since this area is flat it the solar farm doesn't need to face
X18 (Z9) only on south mountain edge and not need to split the area to half) 2.47E+09
X19=10^-6*G18*X18/G20 Practical Potential for PV farm (MW) 3.28E+05

Calculating technical MW for CSP

X20 (Z1) Available area for CSP (km2) with Slope=<5 continious size=>18,000 m2 DNI=>5 kwh/m2/day 1.14E+03
X21=X20*M36 Technical Potential for CSP (MW) 3.88E+04

Calculating Practical MW for CSP

Available area for CSP (km2) Slope=<5 continious size=>18,000 m2 DNI=>5 kwh/m2/day with no limitation or only fire, on
X22 (Z7) non agricultural land: 2.66E+02
X23=X22*M36 Practical Potential for CSP (MW) 9.07E+03

103
 Appendix 4. . The following table presents the data sources that were used to create the criteria layers for finding areas suitable for WWS development.

Layer Original Data source Original Resolution / Data Description Criteria the data was used for Used as part of the
dataset type Data type from special analysis is of

Annual wind Raster Israel 100 m 2015 Annual wind speeds at a height of 100 m created by using Wind layer Onshore wind
speed at a height Meteorology regional model (COSMO) and micro model (WAsP) Areas with wind speeds less than 6/6.5/7 PV farm
of 100 m Center (m/s) were excluded. Areas in the West CSP
Bank were excluded.

ASTER Global Raster NASA 30 m 2011 slope Onshore wind

Digital Elevation CSP
Model Version 2

Textures Vector Ministry of Polygon 2015 Within Israel border AND Shore texture Onshore wind
Interior. NOP 35

Land use Raster Central Bureau 100 m 2013 Open space Onshore wind
of Statistics Areas defined in the Landuse layer as PV farm
‘airport’ or ‘archiological sites’ were CSP
erased from the open area layer

Open space Vector Hamaarag, The Polygon 2015 The layer divides Israel’s area into eight categories: Shrub-steppe, Open space Onshore wind
composition State of Nature Garrigue, Forest and woodland, Desert open space, ‘other’ open PV farm
2015 report space, Field crops, Plantations, waterland, built areas. Waterland and built areas were excluded CSP
(This layer already doesn’t contain areas of roads). from the open areas composition data
The data is based on Survey of Israel landuse data, Kaplan’s built since theywere found as unsuitable for
areas data together with remote sensing analysis. wind installation.

Open space Vector Hamaarag. The Polygon 2015 The layer aggregates plans of the Jewish National Fund Nature Open space Onshore wind
statutory State of Nature and Parks Authority and National Outline Plan 22 PV farm
protection level 2015 report CSP
The layer describes the Environmental statutory protection level
of open space areas (High, median and low)

Bird Important Vector Nature and Parks Polygon 2016 Environmental importance: Birds Onshore wind
Areas Authority Important Areas PV farm
CSP

Military areas Vector Ministry of Polygon 2015 Military areas Onshore wind
Interior. National PV farm
Outline Plan 35 CSP

Solar radiation Vector NREL Polygon 2014 Monthly and annual average direct normal (DNI), global DNI larger than 5 KWh/m2/day annually. CSP
of Africa horizontal (GHI), latitude tilt, and diffuse data and GIS data at 40
km resolution for Africa developed from NREL's Climatological
Solar Radiation (CSR) Model.