Review on State-of-the-art Energy Systems in the Arctic

1. Introduction

• Across five Arctic nations, 1,500 off-grid settlements house 1.6 million people, where diesel supplies heat, electricity, and transport and heating fuel use can approach five times electricity use,.The Arctic has no single geographic definition; boundaries may be based on the Arctic Circle, tree line, or summer temperature.Source: §1 · p. 1
• The Arctic is warming almost twice as fast as the global average, while fossil-energy black carbon accelerates sea-ice melt and shrinking ice reduces reflection, amplifying warming,.Source: §1 · p. 1
• Rapid environmental degradation and high energy costs challenge indigenous communities, whose reliance on imported diesel exposes them to fuel-price fluctuations.Source: §1 · p. 1

2026 NORSK FORSKNINGSSENTER FOR SOLKRAFT – FME SOLAR

• Locally generated renewable energy can reduce fossil-fuel transportation emissions and air pollution while supporting energy independence, reliability, and long-term cost savings.Potential autonomous sources include wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, and biomass.Source: 2026 NORSK FORSKNINGSSENTER FOR… · p. 2
• Remote Arctic communities face high costs integrating variable renewables; delivery logistics and site installation account for 35% of capital costs in most cases.Many communities lack road access and use islanded microgrids because connection to national grids is difficult or economically impractical.Source: 2026 NORSK FORSKNINGSSENTER FOR… · p. 2
• Arctic energy infrastructure must address extreme cold, icing, frozen-ground construction, and thawing permafrost through adapted policies, planning, and equipment.Below -40 °C, material properties can change; in Svalbard, the active layer is typically 1–2 m and may exceed 5 m under continued warming.Source: 2026 NORSK FORSKNINGSSENTER FOR… · p. 2
• The review assesses environmental, technical, and social constraints and strategies to improve the reliability, sustainability, and resilience of Arctic energy systems.Its scope emphasizes remote and off-grid settlements.Source: 2026 NORSK FORSKNINGSSENTER FOR… · p. 2
• The review covers renewable generation, diesel and geothermal supply, storage, thermal systems, building-side demand, enabling technologies, policies, and hybrid-system modelling tools.It compares EnergyPLAN, MARKAL/TIMES, TRNSYS, HOMER, and MATLAB-based approaches.Source: 2026 NORSK FORSKNINGSSENTER FOR… · p. 2

2. Methodology

• Adapted from Li et al., the review used identification, screening, and eligibility stages, summarized in Figure 1.Source: §2 · p. 2, Figure 1 · p. 3

2.1. Identification of Articles

• The Scopus search on 22 October 2025 queried titles, abstracts, and keywords for clean/renewable energy, energy systems, and Arctic/cold-climate terms, restricted to post-2015 articles; it returned 157 records.Source: §2.1 · p. 3

2.2. Screening, Eligibility, and Final Inclusion

• Title screening removed 34 of 157 records (123 remained), abstract screening removed 45, and 78 articles underwent full-text review; 10 additions brought inclusion to 88.Source: §2.2 · p. 3

2.3. Profile of the Reviewed Literature

• Included-study publications generally increased from 2015 onward, except in 2023, when the Scopus search string yielded only three articles.Source: §2.3 · p. 3, Figure 2 · p. 4
• The included literature spans many regions, with most articles addressing cold-climate and Arctic regions.Source: §2.3 · p. 4, Figure 3 · p. 4

3. Overview of the Regions Covered

• Norway’s mainland relies primarily on hydropower, while unconnected Arctic islands depend mainly on diesel as renewable alternatives develop.Hydropower provides 99% of Norway’s electricity. In Svalbard, Longyearbyen’s coal-fired plant was upgraded to diesel; existing installations include solar PV, battery storage, and a liquid biogas plant,,.Source: §3 · pp. 4–5
• Approximately 75% of Canada’s Indigenous remote communities rely heavily on diesel, despite its high operating costs and environmental footprint,,,.Canada has nearly 300 remote communities with more than 225,000 people; 73% of its 148 microgrids lack year-round road access and 61% are fly-in communities,.Source: §3 · p. 5

United States of America (Alaska)

• Alaska’s islanded communities rely heavily on imported diesel, with fuel costs and delivery difficulties contributing to energy costs above the US national average, –.Alaska’s electricity mix is 47% natural gas, 39% hydroelectricity, 10% petroleum-fired, and 4% non-hydroelectric renewables; it also has more than 60 MW of wind capacity and promotes diverse energy solutions,.Source: United States of America (Alaska) · p. 5
• Russia’s vast Arctic zone has about 900 diesel power plants producing approximately 3 billion kWh annually, while renewable deployment remains limited,.The region covers about 9 million km2 and has long distances between sparsely populated areas; it is economically significant, accounting for up to 15% of Russia’s GDP and a quarter of its exports.Source: United States of America (Alaska) · p. 5

4. Conceptual Energy Systems for Arctic Regions

• Arctic system proposals combine solar and wind with battery, hydrogen, and borehole thermal storage, while diesel provides emergency backup during prolonged shortages.Electricity and heating are treated separately: batteries provide short-term electrical storage and fast response, hydrogen supports longer-term storage, and borehole thermal storage supplies heating demand.Source: §4 · p. 6

4.1. Renewable Energy Sources in the Arctic Energy Supply

• Solar and wind are among the most widely adapted electricity sources for remote, off-grid Arctic communities, within a broader transition that also considers microgrids, demand management, nuclear energy, and enabling policy.The reviewed scope also covers diesel and geothermal generation, battery and hydrogen storage, thermal systems and building heat demand, subsidies, and legal frameworks.Source: §4.1 · p. 6

4.2. Solar Energy

• Solar supplies less than 1% of Arctic electricity, and PV systems may need three to four times as many panels as comparable southern systems.Solar irradiation ranges from 2 to 5 kWh/m2/day, with little or no polar-night sunlight; snow-reflecting bifacial panels can achieve 25–45% bifacial gain. Walls, multidirectional arrays, and tracking can also improve harvesting in low-angle sunlight,,.Source: §4.2 · p. 7

4.2.1. Degradation of Photovoltaic Panels in Cold Climates

• 27–34% annual bifacial gains and 41% higher annual yield with double-axis tracking were reported for an evaluated cold-climate system.Three Alaska tracking systems increased energy production by 48–86%; trackers are typically disabled October through March, and arrays averaged about 0.4% annual degradation over 16 years. Snow, ice, moisture ingress, and very low temperatures can damage panels, although cold and polar climates had the lowest reported degradation rates.Source: §4.2.1 · pp. 7–8

4.3. Wind Energy

• 5% higher winter and 10% lower summer wind turbine performance have been reported, while Arctic wind projects are expected to cost two to three times more than temperate-region projects.Wind is available year-round, particularly along Arctic coasts, but storage is needed to cover generation deficits; denser cold air can increase energy extraction,.Source: §4.3 · p. 8

4.3.1. Limitations on Wind Energy Scalability

• Remote communities’ lower energy needs can make commercially available cold-region turbines rated at 20–100 kW or higher a scale mismatch.Paulin-Besset et al. recommended 20–30 kW Eocycle EOX S-16 turbines with tilt-up, crane-less hydraulic towers, 2.75 m/s cut-in speed, and a 30-year lifespan.Source: §4.3.1 · p. 8

4.3.2. Blade Icing on Wind Turbine in Cold Climates

• 17–30% turbine performance reductions from blade icing have been reported.Glaze and rime ice alter blade shape and aerodynamics; active protection uses powered systems, while passive approaches use ice-adhesion-reducing coatings or black paint to absorb solar radiation.Source: §4.3.2 · p. 8

4.4. Complementarity of Solar and Wind Resources

• Wind is strongest from September to April, while solar is unavailable during the October-to-March polar night, making the resources seasonally complementary,.The reviewed studies describe variable generation patterns for both resources, with the seasonal effect amplified at high latitudes.Source: §4.4 · p. 8

4.5. Challenges to Renewable Energy Deployment

• Remote Arctic renewable installations cost 3 to 4 times as much as comparable temperate-area installations, and variability requires added capacity and storage that raises supply costs,.Successful deployment also depends on geographical location and technical feasibility alongside economic viability,,.Source: §4.5 · pp. 9–10

4.6. Diesel Based Power Generation

• Diesel supplies almost 80% of remote Arctic communities and provides reliable electricity, while isolated renewable systems typically retain backup capacity averaging 50% of installed capacity,,,.Only about 30% of diesel energy becomes usable electricity; the remainder becomes heat, creating cogeneration potential. Fuel transport also risks spills and leaks,,.Source: §4.6 · p. 10

4.7. Geothermal Energy

• Geothermal plants can provide stable electricity and heat, and Spitsbergen geothermal gradients range from 24 °C/km in the west to 55 °C/km in the southeast, averaging 33 °C/km,.Preliminary drilling around Longyearbyen found promising ground temperatures, and direct geothermal heating has been proposed as an alternative to heating oil,.Source: §4.7 · p. 10

4.8. Energy Storage Systems in Cold-Climate Regions

• Islanded microgrids need storage to stabilize voltage and frequency; batteries are widely included in hybrid systems and provide fast response, but degrade faster than other storage technologies,,,.The review describes flywheels or generator spinning reserve for the shortest timescale, and batteries for daily, weekly, and seasonal demands.Source: §4.8 · p. 10, §4.8.1 · p. 11

4.8.2. Hydrogen for Long-Term Storage in Cold Climates; 4.8.3. Hydrogen Production: Technologies, Trends, and Challenges

• Hydrogen is a potential long-term storage medium produced from water using electricity; green hydrogen uses renewable-powered electrolysis, while hydrogen fuel cells convert hydrogen to electricity and water,,.Hydrogen production efficiencies range from 20 to 80%, and fuel-cell technology remains costly despite reported cost reductions and output increases. Green and turquoise hydrogen are noted for lower or zero CO2 emissions.Source: §4.8.2 · p. 11, §4.8.3 · pp. 11–12

4.8.4. Hydrogen Storage and Transport

• Hydrogen can be stored physically as compressed gas or liquid, or chemically in compounds; these options involve pressure, extreme cooling, low energy density, or added cost,.Seasonal storage is relevant where Arctic wind and solar vary through the year. Transport options include blending 20% hydrogen with natural gas or carrying hydrogen as ammonia. Table 1 is identified as summarizing reviewed storage and hydrogen findings.Source: §4.8.4 · p. 12, Table 1 · p. 13

4.8.5. Hydrogen in Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems

• 26.7% hydrogen-system round-trip efficiency versus 81% for Li-ion, while hydrogen offers storage for a week or more and has slower response and degradation concerns,.Mousa et al. proposed hydrogen for daily loads of 6–8 hours and Li-ion batteries for peak shaving and sudden fluctuations.Source: §4.8.5 · p. 12

4.9.1. Thermal Energy Storage

• Thermal storage can shift surplus wind or solar generation into heat for low-generation periods and may cost less than electrochemical batteries.Large-scale options include boreholes, rockpiles, and aquifers; storage methods include thermochemical, sensible, and latent heat,. Polar Night Energy’s soapstone-powder system has operated since 2022 and stores material at up to 1000 °C.Source: §4.9.1 · p. 14

4.9.2. Borehole Thermal Energy Storage

• Medium-depth borehole thermal energy storage (BTES) has reported efficiencies exceeding 80%, while offering affordable, expandable, long-term heat storage.BTES uses borehole heat exchangers and the subsurface as a storage medium; distributed point-of-use storage is described as cost-effective, and some Alaska communities have installed dispatchable residential thermal loads,,.Source: §4.9.2 · p. 14

4.9.3. Heat Pumps

• Ground-source heat pumps are less affected by outdoor temperatures than air-source units, making them more favourable for cold regions.Air-source heat-pump performance depends heavily on outdoor air temperature; solar PV can also be integrated with heat pumps, and heat pumps are expected to supply a substantial share of industrial heat demand by 2050,,.Source: §4.9.3 · p. 15
• Real-world heat-pump COP is 3 to 5, compared with an ideal 8.8 to 10.1, and accurate COP modelling improves planning.COP is the ratio of heat generated to electricity consumed and varies with source and sink temperatures; modelling with a constant COP produced large result variations. Heat pumps can reduce heating electricity consumption by more than 3 times.Source: §4.9.3 · pp. 14–15

4.10.1. District Heating

• Moving from 3GDH to 4GDH reduces primary energy consumption by around 4.5% and system costs by 2.7% (Sorknæs et al.).4GDH operates at a 55–65 °C forward temperature, compared with above 80 °C for 3GDH, whose grid losses usually exceed 20%; the newer systems can use low-grade renewables and waste heat, with higher heat-pump performance expected,.Source: §4.10.1 · pp. 15–16
• Solar district heating achieves a 65–90% renewable fraction in Rehman et al., and solar surplus can support heat pumps and be stored short-term or seasonally,,.Solar energy can provide electricity to operate the heat pump and raise thermal-storage temperature; seasonal storage helps manage summer surpluses when heating demand is low.Source: §4.10.1 · pp. 15–16
• Converting electric to non-electric heating can reduce a medium-sized municipality’s annual electricity consumption by 10% and peak demand by 20%.Electric heating accounts for approximately 72% in Norway, 32% in Finland, and 26% in Sweden; district heating serves 45% of building space in Finland and 70% of hotels in Norway and Sweden,.Source: §4.10.1 · p. 16

4.10.3. Net-Zero-Emission Buildings NZEB

• An air-source heat pump was the most cost-effective solution in cold regions (Astudillo et al.), but including heating, cooling, and plug loads makes positive-energy-building levels difficult (Rehman et al.).Building energy needs include electricity and thermal energy for heating and domestic hot water, and sometimes cooling; technologies to meet heating and hot-water demands include solar collectors, heat pumps, and combined cooling, heating, and power systems.Source: §4.10.3 · p. 17
• Improved airtightness cuts energy use by more than 30%, while Arctic envelope retrofits lower annual and peak heating demand, allowing smaller systems and reducing diesel dependence,,.Insulation, high-insulation windows, reduced thermal bridging, and heat-recovery ventilation further reduce heat loss; advanced metering and demand-side management can shift flexible loads to periods of higher renewable generation.Source: §4.10.3 · p. 17

4.11.1. Islanded Microgrids for Remote Arctic Regions

• Islanded microgrids coordinate generation, storage, and demand around variable wind and solar, but renewable penetration above 70% can sharply increase curtailment and system costs,,.Variable-speed generators and grid-forming inverters are among the approaches studied to improve microgrid stability in cold-climate regions,.Source: §4.11.1 · p. 18
• Proposed Arctic energy options include isothermal deep-ocean compressed-air storage and ocean thermal energy conversion devices designed to be more effective in cold regions,.The compressed-air concept stores energy in underground or underwater cavities.Source: §4.11.1 · p. 18

4.11.2. Demand Side Management DSM

• For an Arctic container farm, 17 kW of solar PV cut annual costs by up to 18%; 1.5 kW PV with optimized water reuse cut lifetime costs over 13% and diesel bills up to 37%,.Demand-side management shifts use to off-peak hours to balance supply and demand; an intelligent automatic control system reduced fuel consumption by 22%.Source: §4.11.2 · pp. 18–19

4.11.3. Nuclear Energy Technologies for Remote Arctic Regions

• A strontium-based radioisotope thermoelectric generator’s heat over its half-life is equivalent to burning approximately 4 tons of diesel, and is reported not to pose a nuclear hazard.These generators have powered remote installations including lighthouses, navigation beacons, and meteorological stations.Source: §4.11.3 · p. 19
• Small modular reactor electricity LCOE is 40–90% below diesel generation and comparable to low-cost large hydropower, but passive safety remains unverified and deployment unapproved.Challenges include unsupervised nuclear-material risks, greenhouse-gas emissions during manufacturing, and public scepticism toward nuclear power.Source: §4.11.3 · p. 19

4.12. Governmental Subsidies and Legal Frameworks for Remote Arctic Communities

• Public subsidies help keep remote electricity affordable, while fair legal frameworks support energy-market fairness; however, subsidies may weaken renewables and reinforce fossil dependence.High costs reflect diesel transport to remote locations, with goods and fuel often arriving by sea in summer or by air.Source: §4.12 · p. 20
• Recommendations include shifting fossil-fuel subsidies toward renewables, while Russian investment needs tax incentives and favorable legal conditions; absence of large subsidies enabled community projects.Boute et al. argue that structural subsidy changes are needed to make renewable investment financially viable in Russia’s remote areas.Source: §4.12 · p. 20
• Alaska’s microgrid-enabling technologies account for approximately 12% of the world’s installed capacity, with subsidies helping expand renewables for affordable, reliable energy.Renewable-powered microgrids address remote communities where extending traditional grid infrastructure is neither economical nor technically feasible.Source: §4.12 · pp. 20–21
• Energy projects should consider post-colonial relations, as Arctic development can leave local populations unrepresented amid tensions between resource exploitation and environmental protection.Rodon et al. argue that transition pathways are social as well as technical and economic; Gritsenko et al. describe resource colonialism in Russia’s Arctic.Source: §4.12 · p. 21

5.1. EnergyPLAN

• EnergyPLAN offers hourly, sector-integrated annual simulations, but its deterministic, aggregated operation focus can miss uncertainty and microgrid-level variability critical to Arctic supply.It represents similar units in aggregated form and optimizes operation of predefined systems rather than directly optimizing investment decisions.Source: §5.1 · p. 22

5.2. MARKAL/TIMES

• Deterministic TIMES with limited temporal resolution can understate costs and flexibility needs while overstating variable renewables; 60 scenarios improve stochastic representation but add computation.Increasing temporal resolution can improve accuracy but substantially increases computation time; transparency and validation matter because outcomes depend on assumptions and implementation.Source: §5.2 · p. 23

5.3. TRNSYS

• TRNSYS supports detailed electricity-and-heat simulation across 10 reviewed studies, but output reliability depends on representative local data and component assumptions.One study used weather data from about 160 km away, omitted some ground-freezing effects, and recommended on-site validation of simulated savings.Source: §5.3 · p. 23

5.4. HOMER

• HOMER enables techno-economic microgrid optimization, but Arctic technologies and unplanned events may need approximations and measured-data validation.In the Kotzebue study, bifacial PV and unplanned turbine downtime required approximations; simulated PV generation differed from measured output by 1.4%.Source: §5.4 · p. 23

5.5. MATLAB

• MATLAB/Simulink enables customized hybrid-system models and optimization, but flexibility makes results dependent on modeler choices and requires transparency and validation.A stand-alone diesel, battery, PV, and wind model showed close agreement with HOMER results.Source: §5.5 · p. 24

5.6. Summary of Reviewed Papers

• Wind–solar–diesel hybrids cut emissions by over 55% and remain far more cost-effective than fully renewable systems.Combining battery and sensible thermal storage also reduces costs across all renewable energy fractions.Source: §5.6 · p. 25
• Reviewed studies also report gains from coordinated planning and optimized renewable hybrid systems, alongside constraints at high renewable penetration.Replacing coal heating cuts CO₂ emissions by 51–90%, with biomass pellet boilers achieving the lowest emissions and PV-integrated heat pumps balancing cost and environmental impact. Coordinated renewables, EVs, batteries, heat storage, and demand response improve voltage balance and hosting capacity, with hydrogen proposed for seasonal mismatches; beyond 70% renewable penetration, curtailment and costs rise as battery capacity limits systems, while optimized wave-wind-hydrogen systems reduce costs with hydrokinetic turbines.Source: §5.6 · p. 25

• Renewable penetration is expected to increase, but reaching 100% is challenging without curtailment; wind may have a larger share than solar because it is available year-round while winter solar irradiance is low.Source: §6 · p. 25
• Storage is central to remote cold-region systems: Li-ion batteries regulate frequency and voltage, thermal storage meets heating demand, and hydrogen can provide seasonal storage and serve as an energy carrier.Source: §6 · p. 25
• Heat pumps and borehole thermal storage are identified as key heating components, while intelligent controls can optimize islanded grids and reduce required battery capacity.Source: §6 · p. 25
• The review recommends specialized Arctic energy-modelling tools and building retrofits to improve efficiency lost in older construction built without building codes.Source: §6 · p. 25
• Diesel-generation subsidies should be redirected to renewables, while diesel can remain emergency backup until renewable, self-sufficient systems are developed.Source: §6 · p. 25

Appendix

• The abbreviation list defines terminology used across the review, from energy technologies and storage to optimization methods and performance metrics.Examples include ASHP, BTES, COP, LCOE, MILP, and TES.Source: Appendix · p. 26
• Tables 7 and 8 are identified as references for Figures 1 and 2, respectively.Source: Table 7 · p. 27, Table 8 · p. 27
• Table 9 presents nZEB evaluation criteria adapted from [99], including grid interaction, renewable-energy share, heat-pump COP, and solar-system measures.The listed indicators also cover energy transmitted from the grid, transmission and power losses, exergy efficiency, and solar thermal fraction.Source: Table 9 · p. 28, Appendix · p. 28
• Table 10 provides an overview of models used in the studies and the specific optimizations performed.Source: Table 10 · p. 28