Approved by Resolution of the Council of Ministers No. 53/2020, of July 10th, the National Energy and Climate Plan (PNEC) recognized the potential of Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) to introduce a dispatchable renewable electricity component into the power generation system. Although the plan took a modest view regarding the weight of this technology in the installed capacity projected for 2030 – 300 MW, representing about 1% of the total system capacity – it sent a clear signal regarding the inclusion of this technological possibility in the energy policy implementation.

In the preliminary version of its first revision, submitted to the European Commission in June 2023, the contribution of CSP to the installed capacity in the power generation system has been revised upwards – 600 MW, corresponding to 1.3% of total capacity – in line with an increase in the overall system capacity, from 30 GW to 47 GW, based on a scenario of rising electricity consumption, largely driven by a significant increase in the contribution of Solar Photovoltaic, from 9 GW to 20 GW. Although modest in scale, this CSP target brought Portugal closer to Spain’s reality, where CSP capacity is already at 2.3 GW, with the latest PNEC 2030 revision aiming for 4.8 GW by 2030 (for a population five times larger, the Portuguese target would correspond to 3 GW).

In its final version, recently under public discussion, the importance of CSP continues to be mentioned but the concrete targets outlined in the preliminary document – “Pilot projects based on Concentrated Solar Power technologies will be promoted, as they enable energy storage” – have been replaced by a vaguer statement – “This technology is considered important as it is associated with energy storage, constituting a dispatchable source of electricity.” This change is reflected further on: from a perspective of 600 MW of installed capacity by 2030, we now see…0 MW. This “disappearance” of CSP, the only case among all the technologies planned for the power generation system, is accompanied by the inclusion of 1 GW of installed capacity in “Batteries.”

What is the rationale for this change – costs? It is undeniable that, at present, Solar Photovoltaic has the lowest electricity production costs, with a weighted average cost of around $49/MWh, compared to CSP’s $118/MWh – both figures in 2022 USD (IRENA, 2022. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2022). But what, then, justifies maintaining the goal of 200 MW for Wave Energy, whose projected cost for 2030 “could reach an LCOE below $100/MWh” (H2020 EU-SCORES project)?

Is it the potential for national integration in the value chain? In a revision that relies on almost half of the installed capacity by 2030 in Solar Photovoltaic, whose value chain is entirely (and inexorably?) dominated by China – more than 80% of manufacturing capacity in all stages of production, with the 10 largest global suppliers (IEA, 2022, Solar PV Global Supply Chains) – compared to the CSP value chain, based on foundations (concrete or metal), steel structures, reflective mirrors, and hydraulic circuits, with well-established European (and even national) capacities, presenting, perhaps, some vulnerability in the manufacturing of receiver tubes?

Is it the improvement in the power generation system’s management capacity? If in the diversification of sources – like wind or wave power, for example – we might find some argument, it is hard to understand the outright exclusion of 600 MW of installed capacity in storage associated with CSP installation (with an estimated additional system capacity between 4 and 6 GWh). This is even more puzzling when a new goal of 1 GW in “Batteries” is set.

Is it the security of supply? Beyond Europe’s vulnerability to the Solar Photovoltaic value chain, we must consider the likely meaning of “Batteries”: the use of lithium-ion batteries, the most established technology on the market but reliant on a raw material whose extraction and processing are entirely outside of Europe – China, Chile, Argentina – and which is listed as a critical raw material by the European Commission (EC, 2023. Study on the Critical Raw Materials for the EU). This compares with CSP storage systems, which use abundant materials – steel, sodium nitrate, and potassium salts. This does not seem like an obvious criterion – it is doubtful that the capacity to be installed by 2030 can benefit from potential national resources in this area.

Without delving into other aspects, such as circularity, macroeconomic impacts, or geopolitical strategy, all of which raise questions about this revision on CSP targets, it is crucial to remember that the PNEC 2030 is a political document that sets guidelines for the market.

Without underestimating the importance of setting goals that the market can respond to within the desired timeframe – and it is important to acknowledge that the photovoltaic-lithium tandem is ahead of other technologies in terms of product, service, and developer availability – it is in this document, and only in this document, that political ambitions and vision can be expressed to address not only the challenge of the Energy Transition but also its impact on the economy in the short term – price – and the long term – technological development, sustainability, national, and European integration.

Politics has its role – setting the conditions that allow the market to offer technological solutions that harness renewable endogenous resources, in this case, solar energy.

The market has its role – presenting solutions that ensure the best service in terms of cost but also the resilience of the energy system and the direct and indirect impacts on the national economy.

What I have long advocated for is the opening of technology-neutral solar auctions that require the combination of production and storage capacities, including criteria that evaluate the direct and indirect impacts of investments on the national economy and the exposure to critical value chains and raw materials. This would allow the market to present solutions that, always expressed in lower final costs, can best address the challenge of the Energy Transition.
The political self-exclusion of technological solutions represents a “gratuitous” narrowing of the country’s possibilities for this challenge. Let us leave it to the market – provided it is given the right conditions – to decide on the most competitive solutions.

Pedro Horta

Guest coordinating researcher at the University of Évora
Chairman of Renewable Energies Chair
Coordinator of INIESC – National Concentrating Solar Energy Research Infrastructure