Re-assessment of CO₂ and SO₂ emissions in energy sector by using LEAP-model: experiences from Estonian energy sector planning

A re-assessment of the LEAP model used for Estonia's Energy Plan 2020 revealed that actual CO2 and SO2 emissions (2000–2006) were 1.5% and 2.0% higher, respectively, than 2009 projections. These deviations were caused by revised statistical methodologies and unexpected increases in electricity exports. The study concludes that while LEAP is appropriate for scenario calculations, periodic updates are essential to account for unpredictable political and economic shifts, such as the decision to maintain oil-shale production units.

• A 2012 re-assessment of the LEAP (Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning) model results for the Estonian National Energy Sector Development Plan until 2020 (Energy Plan 2020) found that actual emissions between 2000 and 2006 were higher than the 2009 model projections: CO2 emissions were 1.5% higher and SO2 emissions were 2.0% higher.
• The deviations between the 2009 LEAP model projections and actual emissions were primarily driven by two factors: the amendment of national statistical database data for CO2 and SO2 due to revised methodology, and an increase in electricity exports to meet regional demand, which increased emissions because oil shale is the primary electricity source in Estonia.
• The re-assessment indicates that emissions by 2030 will be higher than the 2009 projections. This is attributed to a higher annual growth in electricity consumption (2.2% compared to the 1.5% assumed in 2009) and significantly larger annual electricity exports (4,354 GWh compared to the 1,000 GWh assumed in 2009).
• The LEAP model is found to be more effective for supply predictions than demand forecasts. This is because production capacities are generally more stable, whereas consumption patterns are more susceptible to unpredictable political and economic decisions.
• Several real-world changes occurred after 2009 that were not captured in the original model, including the postponement of the shutdown dates for old oil-shale units, the decision to install sulphur-capturing filters instead of closing units in 2016, and the 2011 decision to build a new oil-shale based power unit.
• While periodic re-assessment of ex ante model predictions is not currently a regular procedure in Estonia's policy process, the study argues it is necessary to account for recent changes in baseline data, measures, and policies to improve decision-making and reduce uncertainty.

APA

Kuldna, P., Kuhi-Thalfeldt, R., & Peterson, K. (2013). Re-assessment of CO₂ and SO₂ emissions in energy sector by using LEAP-model: experiences from Estonian energy sector planning. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4543.pdf

Chicago

Kuldna, Piret, Reeli Kuhi-Thalfeldt, and Kaja Peterson. Re-assessment of CO₂ and SO₂ emissions in energy sector by using LEAP-model: experiences from Estonian energy sector planning. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2013. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4543.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Kuldna |first1=Piret |last2=Kuhi-Thalfeldt |first2=Reeli |last3=Peterson |first3=Kaja |title=Re-assessment of CO₂ and SO₂ emissions in energy sector by using LEAP-model: experiences from Estonian energy sector planning |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=October 2013 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4543.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{kuldna2013reassessment, author = {Kuldna, Piret and Kuhi-Thalfeldt, Reeli and Peterson, Kaja}, title = {{Re-assessment of CO₂ and SO₂ emissions in energy sector by using LEAP-model: experiences from Estonian energy sector planning}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2013}, month = oct, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4543.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }