. 2022 Dec 7;26(1):105729. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.105729

Table 2.

Variable O&M cost suggestions

Technology	variable cost [€/MWh]	Source
onshore wind	1.4	DEA²⁶
offshore wind	2.7	DEA²⁶
PV	$0 \to 1^{*}$	Clauser & Ewert³⁰
CSP ^a	2.9	Clauser & Ewert³⁰
CSP + Storage	4	Clauser & Ewert³⁰
Biomass	6.7^a	Clauser & Ewert³⁰
Tidal	3.1^d	-.
Wave	3.0^d	-.
Geothermal	5.6	Clauser & Ewert³⁰
run of river	3.6^a^,^b	EIA³¹
hydroelectric dams	3.6^a^,^b	EIA³¹
pump-hydro storage	3.6^a^,^b	EIA³¹
battery inverter	6.8^a^,^c	EIA³¹
battery storage	13.5^a^,^c	EIA³¹
hydrogen electrolyzer	3^e	Glenk & Reichelstein³²
hydrogen storage tank^f	$0^{f} \to 1^{*}$	DEA²⁶
hydrogen fuel cell^f	$0^{f} \to 1^{*}$	DEA²⁶

The variable O&M cost are for a set of renewable generators and storage technologies in energy models based on 2030 data. The O&M costs exclude fuel cost, e.g. for biomass.

^∗ Reported below 1€/MWh, but set to 1€/MWh to avoid USC.

Interpolated between 2020 and 2035.

Aggregated as hydroelectric devices by EIA.

Assumption of cost split: 2/3 store and 1/3 inverter.

Assumed similar to offshore wind. Lack of alternative data.³³

Required conversion with hydrogen energy density of $33.3 k g / M W h$

DEA reports zero variable costs for the whole hydrogen storage system.