Climate change threatens the very energy sources meant to slow it, by making wind and solar power less predictable.
A new German study reveals a hard truth: climate change can make renewable systems less reliable, especially by weakening biomass and wind in certain years. But the study also shows exactly how countries — particularly ones with cold, variable climates like Canada, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Scotland, and Finland — can protect themselves.
The study’s key message
A fully renewable system is still achievable, but only if we plan for two realities:
✅ Renewables are vulnerable to weather extremes
✅ Energy systems must stay resilient even when wind or biomass drops
Ignoring this leads to higher emissions, rising system costs, and even a return to fossil backup power — the opposite of the transition we’re working toward.
The weak spot: bioenergy under extreme climate conditions
The study used a high-resolution modelling framework that connects detailed climate models, land-use data, bioenergy yields, and Germany’s future wind fleet. The result: biomass declines sharply under high-impact climate scenarios.
Under strong climate change (RCP6.0):
- Bioenergy feedstock availability drops
- Costs increase 15–17% compared to the best scenario
- Flexible biomass power plants struggle to provide backup electricity
- Fossil gas is used more often to fill gaps
That’s a direct threat to net-zero planning, because biomass — especially BECCS (Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage) — is one of the few renewable sources that can both generate electricity and remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. If biomass weakens, carbon removal weakens too.
Wind is vulnerable too — but smart planning works
The study simulated wind production across 403 real turbine sites using hourly weather data. Reality check:
- In “Bad Wind Years,” production falls noticeably
- Northeastern and coastal regions perform best in 2050
- Southern regions lag behind and may face shortages
But here’s the good news:
- Even in low-wind years, a well-distributed wind fleet keeps system costs only 1% higher than average.
- The real risk isn’t the wind — it’s relying too heavily on biomass to cover the bad days.
Why this matters for Canada and Northern Europe
These regions have a similar energy profile to Germany;
- Large wind build-out planned
- High winter heating demand
- Big role for bioenergy (forestry, agricultural residues, BECCS)
- Vulnerability to climate-driven droughts and storms
- Long-distance transmission between windy north and energy-hungry south
The study’s lesson is clear: climate change can disrupt renewable supply before we reach 2050.
If we don’t plan for this, countries risk:
- Higher emissions when biomass fails
- Electricity shortages during cold snaps
- Higher cost of energy for households and businesses
- Reliance on imported fossil power
Five solutions this research proves
1. Invest in climate-resilient biomass
- Germany found that certain energy crops — especially paludiculture (crops grown on restored wetlands) — stay productive even under harsh climate conditions.
- Canada and Scandinavia have massive peatland and wetland ecosystems that could be restored for the same purpose:
✅ carbon storage
✅ soil restoration
✅ stable biomass for winter energy
2. Don’t put all the pressure on biomass
Bioenergy must be a backup — not the backbone. The system becomes more resilient when:
- Wind and solar are geographically spread
- Hydrogen, pumped storage, and batteries handle short-term gaps
- Biomass is saved for the worst-case situations
3. Build stronger north–south transmission
Germany’s model showed that southern states could require 110–470 TWh of electricity imports per year — far more than current plans.
This is exactly what Canada, Norway, Sweden, and the UK already face: the strongest renewables are often in the north, while the biggest demand sits in the south.
Transmission matters as much as turbines.
4. Plan for extreme years, not average years
The system that looks fine on paper can fail in a cold, windless winter.
The German model ran bad-wind scenarios using real weather data and found:
- Energy shortages appear quickly without backup
- Costs rise fastest under high-heat, low-biomass futures
- Fossil gas becomes the default fallback
5. Build circular carbon systems
- The study found powerful synergies:
- Wetland crops → BECCS → electricity + carbon removal
- BECCS → bioethanol → green chemicals
- Forest residue → negative-emissions electricity
- In good years, BECCS absorbs CO₂
- In bad years, it stabilises the grid
- This is exactly the kind of resilience northern countries need
The most important warning
- Under worst-case climate scenarios, even with renewables built to plan, Germany still has positive emissions in 2045 — meaning carbon neutrality slips unless new removal methods or carbon imports are used
The message for northern nations is clear:
- Climate change isn’t just something to solve — it’s something that can break the solutions we’re building.
- But resilience is achievable with the right planning.
The key takeaway
This study doesn’t say “renewables won’t work.”
It says they will — if we treat climate risk as part of the design, not an afterthought.
For Canada and Northern Europe, the blueprint is:
- resilient biomass (especially wetland crops)
- strong transmission between windy/coastal regions and population centres
- diverse renewable mix
- carbon-removal technologies like BECCS
- planning for extreme weather years, not averages
Renewable energy can beat climate change — but only if the system itself is climate-proof.
Source
Climate change may impair the transition to a fully renewable energy system: A German case study, Energy, 2025-10-06
Boˆreal 