Project Image Pool

There are 431 results.

Terms of use: The pictures on this site originate from the projects in the frame of the programmes City of Tomorrow, Building of Tomorrow and the IEA Research Cooperation. They may be used credited for non-commercial purposes under the Creative Commons License Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC).

Stakeholders contributing and benefiting from the innovations in the ISGAN Casebook

The chart compares the stakeholders who contributed to the case studies in the ISGAN Casebook on planning smart distribution grids with those who benefited from them.

Benefits, revenues, and cost analysis

Benefit, revenue, and cost analysis to evaluate the economic performance

Economic evaluation tool

Economic assessment tool for determining acceptable storage costs

National Task 41 team

Kick-off meeting for Task 41 at the Energieinstitut an der JKU Linz

National workshop on the economic feasibility of energy storage

Stakeholder workshop on the economic feasibility of energy storage. Presentations and discussion on thermal, electrical, and chemical storage technologies and their potential applications.

Value creation and business model framework

Development of business cases based on a 12-step approach

Kick Off Meeting des IEA ES Task 48 am KTH in Stockholm Oct. 13th 2025

We successfully kicked off Task 48 at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm - together with our colleagues from Task 47: Components for Thermal Energy Storage. We are inspired by the energy and expertise everyone brought to the table. Our discussions set a strong foundation for collaboration on advancing thermal energy storage (TES) materials — including phase change materials (PCM), thermochemical materials (TCM), and high-temperature sensible storage. Over the coming months, we’ll work together to develop measurement guidelines for TES materials, compile an overview of innovative TES materials and build a shared, high-quality TES materials database. A big thank you to Saman Nimali Gunasekara and colleagues for hosting and to all participants for their inspiring contributions!

Main pillars to form a successful capacity mechanism

The figure illustrates the key design principles of an effective Capacity Mechanism (CM), structured around four main dimensions: Incentives, Efficiency, Neutrality, and Missing Money. The Incentives pillar highlights the importance of creating appropriate signals for both producers and consumers, including investment security, stable revenue mechanisms, demand-side flexibility, and ensuring availability during scarcity situations. The Efficiency dimension emphasizes the need to control overall system costs while avoiding market distortions through well-designed market mechanisms and competitive structures. Under Neutrality, the figure stresses the importance of a technology- and climate-neutral approach that maintains a level playing field while enabling the participation of low-emission technologies. Finally, the Missing Money pillar addresses the issue of insufficient market revenues by introducing additional income streams and risk-mitigation mechanisms to ensure the financial viability of energy producers and long-term security of supply.

Classification of Flexibility Mechanisms

The table provides an overview and classification of different flexibility mechanisms used in electricity systems, based on key distinguishing characteristics such as pricing structure, activation triggers, participation mode, quantity determination, and spatial scope. It illustrates how diverse approaches—ranging from local flexibility markets and demand response programs to peer-to-peer trading, energy communities, flexible connection agreements, and variable grid tariffs—can be systematically compared. Each mechanism is categorized according to whether participants can actively set prices (price input option) or are subject to predefined tariffs (price given), and whether flexibility is activated explicitly through defined products or implicitly via incentive-based signals. Furthermore, the table differentiates between voluntary and involuntary participation, as well as whether the amount of flexibility can be freely chosen or is predetermined by the system design. Finally, it distinguishes between local and national implementations, reflecting the extent to which mechanisms address geographically specific grid constraints or broader system-level needs. Overall, the table highlights the wide spectrum of flexibility provision concepts and underscores the increasing importance of both market-based and regulatory instruments in enabling grid stability, integrating distributed energy resources, and supporting the transition toward more adaptive and decentralized energy systems.

Key drivers for Grid Investment

The graphic illustrates the four key drivers for grid flexibility and reinforcement: technological developments, particularly injection peaks from PV generation and electric vehicles; policy targets for renewable energy and EV adoption, which strongly influence investment decisions; regional challenges, as grid violations occur differently depending on location, grid design, and the distribution of generation and demand; and grid utilization, which allows for higher median loading of cables and transformers. Together, these factors determine where, when, and to what extent flexibility and grid reinforcement are needed.

Measures to avoid voltage problems

One of the key challenges in managing decentralized energy systems is preventing network violations. Network violations arise not only from exceeding the thermal limits of cables and transformers, a challenge typically managed through conventional congestion management, but also significantly from overvoltage or undervoltage, particularly in low-voltage (LV) networks. Possible measures to avoid these violations are shown in this figure.

Overview IETS Task 21 Phase 3

The IETS Task 21 at a glance: A clear presentation of its development from its initiation in 2020 to Phase 3, including the activities of Subtasks 1 to 5.

New CCU/CCS value chains

Project-based analysis of new CCU and CCS value chains using a canvas.

Simultaneity of PV electricity generation and heat pump electricity demand for different control strategies in the PEB use case EXCESS

Comparison of the electricity demand of heat pumps under different control strategies, simulated for the Austrian EXCESS demonstration building, in relation to the available PV generation on the façade for an average winter week in February. The building under investigation represents a use case in the IEA EBC Annex 83 project.

Duration curves of heating power for the coldest week of the year – comparison of standard control vs. MPC

One use case considered in the IEA EBC Annex 83 is a thermally activated building that was designed within the national research project HybridLSC. The thermally activated building mass allows for temporal load shifting by means of model predictive control (MPC) of the building. A comparison of the duration curves of heating power for the coldest week of the year between a standard control strategy and an MPC-based control strategy shows a significant reduction in peak loads, which is achieved without any loss of comfort for the occupants. This is essential for the optimal sizing of heat sources and forms the basis for reducing peak loads in energy networks.

Innsbruck Campagne

PV Potential of the Facade - Project Innsbruck Campagne

Innsbruck Campagne

Photo of the district Innsbruck Campagne

PV Potential Innsbruck Campagne

Colormap of the PV Potential of the district Innsbruck Campagne

HP Inegration

Integration options of heat pumps in districts

BI-Generation

Hydraulic integration of the heat pump for BI-Generation