Proceedings of ESCAPE 36ISSN: 2818-4734
Volume: 5 (2026)
Table of Contents
LAPSE:2026.0255
Published Article
LAPSE:2026.0255
Energy planning towards absolute environmental sustainability: identifying key demand-side sufficiency levers to stay within planetary boundaries using sensitivity analysis tool
Nicolas Ghuys, Diederik Coppitters, Anne van den oever, Mahdi Kchaou, Hervé Jeanmart, Francesco Contino
June 12, 2026
Abstract
Human activities have already transgressed several planetary boundaries, yet energy system models remain largely focused on greenhouse gas mitigation, reflecting their original purpose of addressing climate change. Recent integrations of Planetary boundary-based Life Cycle Assessment into Energy System Optimisation Models show that even cost-optimal low-carbon pathways systematically violate multiple planetary boundaries, indicating that supply-side decarbonisation alone is insufficient for absolute environmental sustainability. At a 2050 horizon, where energy supply is largely decarbonised and technologies are assumed mature, further impact reductions through techno-economic optimisation become limited, positioning final energy demand as a key remaining lever for restoring feasibility under planetary constraints. To address this gap, we ex-tend an Energy System Optimisation framework coupled with a Planetary Boundary framework by explicitly treating final energy demand as a decision variable and exploring energy sufficiency configurations within a multi-objective formulation minimising system cost and environmental pressures. The national-scale EnergyScopeTD model is coupled with the RHEIA uncertainty analysis framework to propagate uncertainty in final energy demands and to identify demand-side drivers through global sensitivity analysis. Applied to Belgium, the results show that individual mobility demand is the dominant driver of environmental pressures across multiple planetary boundaries, with consistently higher influence than other end-use demands. While large-scale vehicle fleet electrification substantially reduces climate impacts, it simultaneously shifts pressures toward other environmental dimensions, indicating that technological substitution alone, even combined with moderate sufficiency, is insufficient to achieve absolute sustainability. Overall, the results confirm that energy sufficiency, particularly in mobility, is necessary for operating energy systems within planetary limits, and that anchoring system design in absolute sustainability thresholds provides a robust basis for prioritising demand-side mitigation strategies.
Keywords
Energy system model, Optimisation, Planetary boundary, Sensitivity analysis, Sufficiency
Suggested Citation
Ghuys N, Coppitters D, oever AVD, Kchaou M, Jeanmart H, Contino F. Energy planning towards absolute environmental sustainability: identifying key demand-side sufficiency levers to stay within planetary boundaries using sensitivity analysis tool. Systems and Control Transactions 5:424-431 (2026) https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.175018
Author Affiliations
Ghuys N: UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Coppitters D: UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
oever AVD: Vrij Universiteit Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
Kchaou M: UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Jeanmart H: UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Contino F: UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Journal Name
Systems and Control Transactions
Volume
5
First Page
424
Last Page
431
Year
2026
Publication Date
2026-06-12
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: 0424-0431-394-SCT-5-2026, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2026.0255
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.175018
Publisher Version
Download
Files
Jun 12, 2026
Main Article
License
CC BY-SA 4.0
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
150
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Jun 12, 2026
 
Verified by curator on
Jun 12, 2026
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
https://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2026.0255
 
Record Owner
PSE Press
Links to Related Works
Directly Related to This Work
Publisher Version
References Cited
  1. Steffen W. et al. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347, 1259855 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855
  2. IPCC. Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/ (2021). Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
  3. Algunaibet IM, Guillén-Gosálbez G. Life cycle burden-shifting in energy systems designed to minimize greenhouse gas emissions: novel analytical method and application to the united states. Journal of Cleaner Production 229:886-901 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.276
  4. Laurent A, Olsen SI, Hauschild MZ. Limitations of carbon footprint as indicator of environmental sustainability. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46:4100-4108 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1021/es204163f
  5. Algunaibet IM, Pozo C, Galán-Martín Á, Huijbregts MAJ, Mac Dowell N, Guillén-Gosálbez G. Powering sustainable development within planetary boundaries. Energy Environ. Sci. 12:1890-1900 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1039/c8ee03423k
  6. Theilig K, Takser I, Reitberger R, Vollmer M, Lang W. Toward zero-emission buildings: a case study on a non-residential building in germany using life cycle assessment and carbon sequestration of green infrastructure. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1196:012046 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1196/1/012046
  7. Creutzig F., et al. Planetary impact shifts from fossil fuels to material extraction. arXiv (2024) https://doi.org/10.22541/au.171901018.84864468/v1
  8. Blanco H. et al. Life cycle assessment integration into energy system models: An application for power-to-methane in the eu. Appl. Energy 259 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114121
  9. Ghuys N., Coppitters D., Van den Oever A., Kchaou M., Contino F., Jeanmart H. Integrating planetary boundaries into energy system optimisation models for absolute environmental sustainability assessment: a methodological framework. Preprint (2025) https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8251250/v1
  10. Schnidrig J, Souttre M, Chuat A, Maréchal F, Margni M. Between green hills and green bills: unveiling the green shades of sustainability and burden shifting through multi-objective optimization in swiss energy system planning. Journal of Environmental Management 370:122537 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.122537
  11. Pfenninger S, Hawkes A, Keirstead J. Energy systems modeling for twenty-first century energy challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 33:74-86 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.003
  12. Limpens G, Moret S, Jeanmart H, Maréchal F. Energyscope TD: a novel open-source model for regional energy systems. Applied Energy 255:113729 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113729
  13. Volkart K, Mutel CL, Panos E. Integrating life cycle assessment and energy system modelling: methodology and application to the world energy scenarios. Sustainable Production and Consumption 16:121-133 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2018.07.001
  14. Ryberg M. W. et al. Development of a life-cycle impact assessment methodology linked to the planetary boundaries framework. Ecol. Indic. 88, 250-262 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.051
  15. Sala S, Crenna E, Secchi M, Sanyé-Mengual E. Environmental sustainability of european production and consumption assessed against planetary boundaries. Journal of Environmental Management 269:110686 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110686
  16. Coppitters D, Tsirikoglou P, Paepe W, Kyprianidis K, Kalfas A, Contino F. RHEIA: robust design optimization of renewable hydrogen and derived energy carrier systems. JOSS 7:4370 (2022) https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04370
  17. van den Oever Anne (2025). Environmental life cycle assessment for decision-support in the development of advanced biofuels.
(0.1 seconds)

[0.1 s]