31 July 2026
The Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Authority (EECA) has used an updated
model of the whole energy system to understand
what the country’s energy use might look like in
2050.
The SMC asked NZ experts to
comment.
Emeritus Professor Ralph Sims, Sustainable
Energy and Climate Mitigation, Massey University,
comments:
“EECA make it clear that their scenarios
are not forecasts or predictions but give a “what if?”
view of the future. Their outputs depend on the many
assumptions used by the modellers regarding rate of uptake
of new technologies and behavioural changes that are
particularly hard to assess.
“The two EECA Scenarios
look forward 25 years to 2050. If an energy scenario had
been done 25 years ago in 2001, it would not have accurately
predicted the major changes in energy technologies and
systems achieved since then.
“Nevertheless, the EECA
Scenarios provide an indication on where energy investments
should be made in the near-future, with the “SHIFT”
scenario giving lower costs, greater efficiencies leading to
lower energy demand, and higher emission reduction benefits
than the more “business-as-usual” STEADY scenario with
LNG added.
“The main conclusions from the SHIFT
scenario are to increase flexible energy demand and energy
storage in batteries to reduce daily peak electricity demand
and thus save costs. This has been verified in the past few
days when the very cold weather caused a record electricity
demand. Implementing more flexible energy systems and
batteries can be achieved well before 2050 and should be
ramped up now as the shares of renewable energy used to meet
electricity generation, heat and transport demands continue
to increase.
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
“Who knows, but by 2050 NZ could well
be investing in hydrogen-fueled vehicles and small, safe and
efficient nuclear power plants currently being developed
around the world. However, these weren’t included in the
scenarios!”
Conflict of interest statement: “I
was on the EECA Board 2002 till
2007.”
Associate Professor Michael Jack,
Director of the Sustainable Energy Programme and Co-Director
of the Otago Energy Research Centre, University of Otago,
comments:
“In my opinion the most interesting
result from this analysis is the demand flexibility and
battery results. These show that demand flexibility provides
significant system-wide benefits, beyond simply reducing
peak demand. Demand flexibility can enable greater
electrification providing significant economic benefits. In
contrast, if demand flexibility is not present, high levels
electrification cannot be achieved economically. This is a
very important result as it show the critical importance of
demand flexibility for electrification in New
Zealand.
“Furthermore, from my reading of the
report, the assumptions around how much demand flexibility
will be available in the future are rather conservative.
Based on previous research I believe that there is technical
potential for quite a bit more demand flexibility than has
been assumed in this work. The challenge for the sector is
how to create the systems, regulations and markets to
realise this potential.”
Conflict of interest
statement: “I was not directly involved in EECA’s TIMES
3.0 work, but I have been involved in some of the early
consultation work (more than 1 year ago) they did with
stakeholders on this project. I am also currently applying
for funding to EECA for an unrelated
project.”
Dr Basil Sharp, Emeritus Professor of
Economics and former Director of the Energy Centre,
University of Auckland, comments:
“The Energy
Centre in collaboration with business groups created the
first NZ version of the TIMES model some years ago so it is
pleasing to see TIMES continue to be used. I recall that the
last experiment we undertook with TIMES was to examine the
prospect of industrial use of green hydrogen in NZ’s
energy future. Results showed future
potential.
“Results from TIMES-NZ 3.0 are based on
two scenarios Steady and Shift. Unless the structure of the
model has changed, the model sets out to minimise the cost
of meeting the scenario target. Scenario setting is crucial.
Among other things, Steady assumes NZ has an LNG plant and
Shift assumes speedy electrification. Gas is important for
process heat. The model finds electricity and biogas useful
substitutes. Was hydrogen not considered as an energy source
for industrial use and heavy transport? Green hydrogen is
underway in NZ. The cost savings – and emissions reduction
– associated with electrification are a
highlight.
“We need to bear in mind that these
results obtain from predetermined targets – unless the
model has changed, demand is determined by the targets.
Presumably assumptions in the model transition the economy
over time. Assumptions regarding the relative ease and rate
at which these transitions occur is crucial. A second
cautionary comment relates to the cost of investing in the
alternative technologies and the broader implications this
has for economic growth.
“Pleasing to see EECA using
TIMES. For me, the headline message is
electrification.”
Conflict of interest statement:
“We developed TIMES NZ at the Energy
Centre.”
Dr Isabelle Chambefort, General
Manager of Energy, Earth Sciences New Zealand,
comments:
“The report is a timely update of
modelling New Zealand’s long-term energy transition. The
Steady and Shift scenarios will be a helpful way for us to
outline the potential pathways we can take to realistically
achieve a more sustainable and equitable energy
transition.
“The strong dependency on the biomass
and biogas in the Shift model is a concern as no pipeline of
production is already in place but this could be decreased
by a higher use of direct heat from the already announced
push for low temperature geothermal energy.
“The
model also makes some assumptions around population change,
it makes no assessment of where that change will happen, nor
the age-structure of that population. The locations of our
future population change is important; for example, a large
increase in colder South Island conditions (e.g., Queenstown
Lakes, Selwyn and Waimakariri districts) will contribute to
a very different seasonal energy demand than population
changes in the warmer upper-North Island. South Island
presently has no meaningful peaking capacity in its
generation mix (generation there is near-100%
weather-dependant). All peaking in the south is currently
dependent upon North Island assets.”
Conflict of
interest statement: The expert has declared they have no
conflict of interest.
Dr John Kennedy, Chief
Scientist of Energy Use, Storage and Materials, Earth
Sciences New Zealand, comments:
“The report is a
welcomed update of New Zealand’s long-term energy
transition using the TIMES-NZ 3.0 model. The comparison
between the Steady and Shift scenarios effectively
illustrates the economic and environmental benefits of
faster technology adoption, with the Shift scenario
achieving significantly lower emissions and lower total
system costs.
“One of the report’s key strengths
is its whole of energy system perspective, highlighting the
interactions between electricity generation, transport,
industry, and gas supply. The recognition of demand
flexibility and battery storage as critical enablers of a
highly renewable energy system is particularly valuable. The
discussion on the continued role of dispatchable generation
for system reliability is also realistic and acknowledges
the technical challenges of achieving 100% renewable
electricity. However, the treatment of LNG also warrants a
broader discussion of long-term energy security, emissions
implications, and potential stranded asset
risks.
“Finally, additional sensitivity analyses
around emerging technologies, hydrogen, long-duration energy
storage, and industrial innovation would strengthen the
report and provide greater confidence in the robustness of
the conclusions for policy and investment
decision-making.”
Conflict of interest statement:
The expert has declared they have no conflict of
interest.
Professor Alan Brent, Chair in
Sustainable Energy Systems, Te Herenga Waka – Victoria
University of Wellington, comments:
“The release of
the revised TIMES-NZ model is particularly timely. Aotearoa
New Zealand is at a critical juncture, with decisions made
today shaping the trajectory of the energy transition and
influencing the future energy system for generations to
come. The insights provided by the model will play an
important role in informing these strategic
decisions.
“Importantly, the high-level results from
the scenarios analysed demonstrate that a more rapid
transition can reduce overall investment requirements. This
includes avoiding the need to import liquefied natural gas
(LNG), alongside a range of contributing factors such as
declining costs of clean energy technologies, increased
availability of technological solutions, and improvements in
energy efficiency.
“The modelling approach is also
notable for its high level of transparency. The EECA team
has made the core modelling files and components publicly
available through a dedicated repository, enabling
stakeholders to examine the underlying assumptions, test
uncertainties, and develop alternative scenarios. From both
an education and research perspective, this level of
openness is invaluable, supporting greater understanding,
collaboration, and informed decision-making across the
energy sector, and society.”
Conflict of interest
statement: “I don’t have any conflict of
interest.”
Professor (Ahorangi) Nirmal Nair,
Department of Electrical, Computer, and Software
Engineering, Waipapa Taumata Rau – University of Auckland,
comments:
“I am underwhelmed with the release of
the report commissioned by EECA (New Zealand Crown Entity)
along with Advocacy Group (BEC) and its reportage around
future energy scenario planning using IEA TIMES framework
which is dated. This modelling from BEC first appeared
around 2018 before the eve of the passing of NZ 2019
Zero-Carbon Act and had recommended 2060 as the year the
business members felt comfortable for their analysis. It
appears now that this latest 3.0 version has the blessings
of EECA, a crown entity, which I found a bit
uncomfortable.
“EECA as an entity was first
established in 1992 encouraging energy efficiency across our
energy consumption sectors (transport, industrial and
electricity). Its scope of activities then was relevant
towards promoting clean-car, industrial energy efficiency
and efficient use of electricity. Its mandate changed in
2000 by it becoming a crown entity, and in 2017 started
operating through levies gathered from our electricity,
transport and gas sector. Since then its focus has been
dispersed around activities that appear not directly falling
in their remit like renewable energy education, solar
grants, energy hardship, innovation etc. There were other
crown entities like MBIE, Electricity Authority and
innovation entities like Callaghan and Ara Ake active in
similar activities. As part of the restructuring of our
Science System and Crown entities supporting it, both
Callaghan and Ara Ake have been retired.
“This
latest EECA-BEC report is being released just one month
after Transpower (State owned Enterprise) released Te
Kanapu – Our energy scenarios which
outlines detailed consultation and showcasing infographics
around 5 possible future scenarios.
“The New Zealand
public at this time needs more authentic, federated and
clear information regarding matters of energy and causing
confusion by circulating various strategies and scenarios by
public entities is a bit jarring.
“An honest
conversation about the scope of activities of governance
entities around electricity/energy like Electricity
Authority, Commerce Commission and EECA needs to be had to
ensure that the social sanction and consensus around energy
security, resilience and affordability is maintained,
particularly during the months before our November
elections. We need to be better prepared with being
socialized with NZ based credible energy futures, so that
all of us can row-together towards a more abundant and
prosperous energy future.”
Conflict of interest
statement: “No direct conflicts of interest. Current
research funding regarding electricity innovation and
resilience of energy infrastructure comes from Future
Architecture Network, MBIE SSIF and
QuakeCore (Te
Hiranga Ru – NZ Centre of Earthquake
Resilience– TEC Funded CoRE)
respectively. Have made independent submissions on electricity
infrastructure and markets in the past.
Disclosure: Recently supporting as Technical Advisor a Power
system AI start-up GRID
GPT.”
Our aim is to promote accurate, evidence-based reporting on science and technology by helping the media work more closely with the scientific community.
The Science Media Centre is New Zealand’s only trusted, independent source of information for the media on all issues related to science. Thousands of news stories providing context from and quoting New Zealand researchers have been published as a direct result of our work.