Diagnostic Toolkit for Reducing Regulatory Barriers to Solar, Wind and Pumped Hydro Storage in the European Union

Annex C. Methodology of quantitative component

This annex discusses the purpose, methodology, scope and resolution of the data collected for the quantitative component of the Diagnostic Tool.

A comprehensive database of technical, economic, and other parameters relevant to the Renewable Technologies was compiled to support the quantitative component of the Diagnostic Tool. This dataset can underpin the development of an interactive, exploratory tool that enables policymakers to analyse renewable energy trends over time, assess gaps between installed capacity and estimated potential or targets, track projects in the pipeline, and benchmark progress across countries or subnational regions (NUTS1/NUTS2).

By facilitating access to a wide range of comparable data, the tool allows policymakers to identify priority technologies and assess their country’s or region’s relative performance compared to peers with similar characteristics. This evidence base supports informed decision-making on renewable energy deployment.

In parallel, the exploratory tool complements the second component of the Diagnostic Tool: a qualitative assessment of regulatory barriers. This includes a legal analysis and a set of technology-specific self-assessment questions to help policymakers evaluate the alignment of regulatory frameworks with renewable energy market needs. These questions are presented at the end of each market-focused chapter, while the methodological foundation and its links to broader OECD screening instruments are detailed in Annex C.

Technology categories followed established definitions and data was collected across different technology types to the degree that data were available. This includes for instance ground-mounted PV, rooftop PV, and other types of distributed PV solar versus utility-scale solar; on-shore versus off-shore wind; and pumped hydro storage based on rated pump power capacity, stored generation potential, and reservoir discharge time).

Methodology

Quantitative data were collected from the authoritative sources cited in this summary. Where differences or discrepancies in reported metrics across sources were found, they were analysed and, where possible, discussed with the data providers. In many cases, these differences could be attributed to diverging data collection methodologies, definitions, resolution, or boundaries. However, in certain instances, it was only possible to speculate on the underlying reasons for the discrepancies in reported values. To develop an internally consistent dataset across related variables and at different resolutions, rules were created to privilege certain data sources over others, adjust estimates for coherency, and in some cases to adopt maximum values or other rule-based estimates based on multiple data sources.

Scope

Key parameters collected across each of the focus renewable energy sources were: (i) historical installed capacity and generation, (ii) installed capacity of projects in the pipeline, (iii) estimated future potential capacity and/or generation, and (iv) national targets. Additionally, (v) key measures of economic and financial performance (e.g. installed cost, weighted-average cost of capital) were collected for utility-scale PV and on- and off-shore wind.

Contextual and normalisation parameters were also collected, to enable comparisons across regions/countries, and to test hypotheses on correlations and drivers for trends and differences. These include (vi) socio-economic context and normalization variables (e.g. population and population density, GDP – also per capita, land area), parameters that (vii) contextualise and characterise the energy system (e.g. primary production and final energy consumption, by resource and sector, transmission grid length), and parameters that (viii) contextualise and characterise the electricity (“power”) sector (e.g. concentration ratios including Herfindahl-Hirschman Index and market shares of largest or largest three players as well as hourly electricity prices).

Most estimates of historical and installed capacity were based on multiple sources (see Table A C.1.) Since some composite estimates are in many cases higher than installed capacity reported at the national level by official sources such as Eurostat, estimates of total generation (TWh/year) were in some cases scaled to reflect greater installed capacity, preserving the implied capacity factor and maintaining consistency of time trends in capacity factors within each region/country.

For PV and on- and off-shore wind, estimates of resource potential draw primarily from the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre’s ENergy Systems Potential Renewable Energy Sources (ENSPRESO) evaluation of economically viable technical potential based on coherent GIS-based land-restriction scenarios (JRC ENSPRESO). PV solar estimates date to Nov 2023, onshore wind estimates were updated by JRC in March 2025 (ENSPRESO2, onshore wind) to reflect technological advancements in onshore wind technology as well as national and regional land restrictions and setback regulations. Offshore wind estimates were also updated in Quarter 1, 2025, and preliminary results reflecting technological advancements and different shore setback distances were shared and incorporated into the dataset (ENSPRESO2, offshore wind, forthcoming). Additional resource potential estimates from JRC for rooftop PV solar (Bódis, 2019), and for ground-mounted PV and onshore wind (JRC, 2024), complement the ENSPRESO estimates and provide indications on the uncertainty and variability of estimates of economically viable technical potential based on differences in assumptions, methodology, and scope.

Estimates of economically viable technology potential for pumped hydropower draw upon the Pumped Hydro Energy Storage (PHES) Atlas (Blakers et al., 2024). More details on how the potential was estimated are provided below in the PHS section in this annex.

Targets include installed capacity, total annual generation, and/or percentages (in total annual generation), for 2030 and, in some cases, for each future year to 2030. Targets for the year 2030 draw upon EMBER’s compilation of National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) (EMBER, 2024). Targets in intervening years and including 2030 come from EMBER’s compilation of transmission system operations, as well as from industry associations (WindEurope and Solar Power Europe) (see Table A C.2).

Table A C.1. Indicators in the OECD diagnostic tool database

Type	Market	Scope	Parameter	Unit	Coverage	Resolution	Technology resolution	Source(s)	Table 6 Ref
Renewable Energy Markets (focus markets)	PV solar	Historical/current	Installed and operating capacity	MW	2000-2024	Country	Distributed and Utility-scale	OECD estimate - based on Eurostat, EMBER, IRENA, GEM and TZ-SAM	A, B, C, D, E
		Historical/current	Installed and operating capacity	MW	2010-2024	Country / NUTS1-2	Utility scale (> 1 MW)	OECD estimate - based on GEM and TZ-SAM	D, E
		Historical/current	Generation, annual capacity factor	TWh/year	2000-2023	Country	All PV solar	OECD estimate - based on Eurostat, EMBER, IRENA, IEA, GEM and TZ-SAM	A, B, C, D, E
		Historical/current	Installation expenditures (CAPEX)	Billion 2023 USD	2010-2024	Country	Utility scale (> 1 MW)	OECD estimate - based on IRENA installed cost per MW and capacity	A-E, F
		Project pipeline	Announced/pre-construction/construction/shelved/cancelled	MW	2025-2030s	Country / NUTS1-2	Utility scale (> 1 MW)	GEM - Global Solar Power Tracker, updated Jan 2025	--
		Historical/current	WACC, cost of debt / equity, debt service cover ratio, loan tenor	% / value	2018-2019	Country	Utility scale PV solar	AURES II, 2021	--
		Project pipeline	Announced/pre-construction/construction/shelved/cancelled	MW	2025-2030s	Country / NUTS1-2	Utility scale (> 1 MW)	GEM - Global Solar Power Tracker, updated Jan 2025	--
		Potential	Available area / economic and technical potential	km2 / MW	Potential	Country	Rooftop PV solar	JRC, 2019 (Bódis et al.)	--
		Potential	Capacity and generation (low / medium / high potential scenarios)	MW / TWh/year	Potential	Country / NUTS1-2	Rooftop and ground-mounted PV	JRC, 2023 (ENSPRESO)	--
		Potential	Capacity and generation; untapped potential; available land	MW/TWh/year/km2	Potential	Country / NUTS1-2	Ground-mounted PV	JRC, 2024, RE Production and Potential in EU Rural Areas	--
		Targets	Targets in NECP / TSO grid plan / Solar Power Europe	MW / % generation	Targets	Country	Utility scale PV solar	EMBER, NECP targets and transmission grids data	G, H
		Historical/current	WACC, LCOE	% / 2023 USD/kW	2010-2023	Country	Utility scale PV solar	IRENA, 2024 and IRENA 2022	--
	Wind	Historical/current	Installed and operating capacity	MW	2000-2024	Country	Onshore and offshore wind	OECD estimate - based on IRENA, IEA, WindEurope and GEM	A, B, K, L
		Historical/current	Installed and operating capacity	MW	2010-2024	Country / NUTS1-2	Onshore wind	GEM - Global Wind Power Tracker, updated Dec 2024	--
		Historical/current	Generation, annual capacity factor	TWh/year	2000-2023	Country	Onshore and offshore wind	OECD estimate - based on IRENA, IEA, WindEurope and GEM	A, B, K, L
		Historical/current	LCOE	2023 USD/kW	2010-2023	Country	Onshore and offshore wind	IRENA, 2023	--
		Historical/current	Installation expenditures (CAPEX)	Billion 2023 USD	2010-2024	Country	Onshore and offshore wind	OECD estimate - based on IRENA installed cost per MW and capacity	A, B, F, K, L
		Historical/current	WACC, LCOE (LCOE is an annual weighted average for all countries)	% / 2023 USD/kW	2010-2023	Country	Onshore and offshore wind	IRENA, 2023	--
		Project pipeline	Announced/pre-construction/construction/shelved/cancelled	MW	2025-2030s	Country / NUTS1-2	Onshore and offshore wind	GEM - Global Wind Power Tracker, updated Feb 2024	--
		Potential	Technical potential under different setbacks and scenarios (E1 / E2)	MW and TWh/year	Potential	Country	Offshore floating & bottom-fixed	JRC, 2025 (ENSPRESO 2)	--
		Potential	Technical potential under different setbacks and scenarios	MW/TWh/year/km2	Potential	Country / NUTS1-2	Onshore wind	JRC, 2025 (ENSPRESO 2)	--
		Potential	Capacity and generation; untapped potential; available land	MW / TWh/year	Potential	Country / NUTS1-2	Onshore wind	JRC, 2024, RE Production and Potential in EU Rural Areas	--
		Targets	Targets in NECP / TSO grid plan / WindEurope	MW / % generation	Targets	Country	Onshore and offshore wind	EMBER, NECP & transmission grids data, WindEurope Market Outlook	G, H, J
	Pumped hydro	Historical/current	Installed and operating capacity	MW	2000-2024	Country / NUTS1-2	All pumped hydropower	OECD estimate - based on Eurostat, GEM, and IHA	A, B, L, M
		Historical/current	Generation, annual capacity factor	TWh/year	2000-2024	Country	All pumped hydropower	OECD estimate - based on Eurostat, GEM, and IHA	A, B, L, M
		Project pipeline	Capacity (announced/pre-construction/construction/abandoned)	MW	2025-2030s	Country / NUTS1-2	All pumped hydropower	OECD estimate - based on GEM, IHA, and US DOE GESDB	A, B, L, M, N
		Potential	Capacity / Annual Generation - by resource grade, type, storage time	MW/TWh/year	Potential	Country / NUTS1-2	By grade, category, duration	OECD estimate - based on the Global PHES Atlases	O
		NECP targets	Targets in National Energy and Climate Plan	MW / % generation	Targets	Country	By renewable energy market	EMBER, Global Renewable Power Targets 2030, accessed Sept 2024	--
Context	Population (+ density)	Historical/current	Population on January 1st (population density by NUTS3, 1990-2022)	# of residents	2013-2024	Country / NUTS1-2	--	Eurostat, accessed Jan 2025 ([tgs00096]; demo_r_d3dens)	--
	GDP (incl. per capita)	Historical/current	GDP, GDP per capita in real 2015 EUR and in PPS	million EUR, PPS	2014-2023	Country / NUTS1-2	--	Eurostat, accessed Aug 2024 ([tec00114]; [tgs00005]; [tgs00003])	--
	Area	Historical/current	Unadjusted land area at National and NUTS1 / NUTS2 level	km2	2024 NUTS	Country / NUTS1-2	--	GIS area using giscoR	--
Energy system	Total PE / FE energy	Historical/current	Supply (Primary Energy) and final consumption (by sector / TFC share)	TWh/year /% in TFC	2010-2023	Country	TFC / % Renewables + biofuels	Eurostat (OECD estimate - % in electricity, based on EMBER and Eurostat)	B, I
	Renewables & biofuels	NECP targets	Targets in National Energy and Climate Plan	MW / % generation	Targets	Country	RE capacity / % in TFC	EMBER, Global Renewable Power Targets 2030, accessed Sept 2024	--
	CO2 combustion	Historical/current	Total energy sector CO2 emissions from combustion	Mt CO2	2010-2023	Country	Annual, energy sector totals	Energy Institute Statistical Review of World Energy, updated Oct 2024	--
	Avoided fossil cons.	Historical/current	Total fossil energy (primary) avoided by renewable energy	Mtoe	2020-2022	Country	Total primary energy in fossil	EurObserv'ER, accessed Oct 2024	--
	Hydro	Historical/current	Installed and operating capacity	MW	2000-2023	Country	All hydropower	OECD estimate - based on Eurostat, EMBER and IRENA	A, C
		Historical/current	Generation, annual capacity factor	TWh/year	2000-2023	Country	All hydropower	OECD estimate - based on Eurostat, EMBER and IRENA	A, C
		Potential	Capacity and generation; untapped potential; available land	MW/TWh/year/km2	Potential	Country / NUTS1-2	All hydropower	JRC, 2024, RE Production and Potential in EU Rural Areas	--
		NECP targets	Targets in National Energy and Climate Plan	MW / % generation	Targets	Country	All hydropower	EMBER, Global Renewable Power Targets 2030, accessed Sept 2024	--
Electricity (power) market	Electricity generation	Historical/current	Generation by technology (nuclear, fossil, wind, solar, hydro/bio)	TWh	2020-2024	Country	5 types of generation technology	Ember - yearly electricity data, updated Sept 2024	--
	Transmission grid	Current/projections	Length (existing in 2020-22; refurbish/upgrades to 2032), investments	km; billion EUR	2020-22/2032	Country	Based on national data sources	Ember - transmission grids data (version 2024/03), updated March 2025	--
	Electricity prices	Historical/current	End-user prices (medium HHs, non-HH medium consumers)	EUR/kWh	2011-2024	Country	Data on two end-user types	Eurostat, Electricity prices by type of user [ten00117], updated Jan 2025	--
	Price structure	Historical/current	Electricity prices components for household consumers	EUR/kWh	2017-2023	Country	9 price component categories	Eurostat, [nrg_pc_204_c], updated Oct 2024	--
	Renewable PPAs	Historical/current	Corporate PPAs (Wind & Solar, Wind, Solar, Portfolio, Hybrid)	MW	2017-2024	Country	5 technology categories	WindEurope PPA Tool	--
	Market consolidation	Historical/current	Market share of the largest generator in the electricity market	Share (%)	2013-2022	Country	Largest company market share	Eurostat, [ten00119__c], updated June 2024	--
	Market consolidation	Current	Market share of three largest providers in HH / non-HH market	Share (%) / HHI	2023	Country	Herfindahl-Hirschman Index	ACER Chest Application, accessed August 2024	--
	Electricity prices	Current	HH / Industry end-user prices (Annual averages; share in price bins)	EUR cents/kWh	2023	Country	Price bins to enable comparisons	ACER Chest Application, accessed August 2024	--
	Switching rates	Historical/current	Number of times HH / non-HH end-users switch electricity providers	Switch rate (%)	2021-2023	Country	Data on HH / non-HH consumers	ACER Chest Application, accessed August 2024	--
	HH share smart meters	Current	Share of households with smart meters	Share (%)	2023	Country	HH consumers only	ACER Chest Application, accessed August 2024	--
	Wholesale prices	Historical/current	Wholesale electricity price in 15-minute intervals	Price bins, (%)	2015-2024	Country	Wholesale price distributions	ENTSO-e, EMBER European Wholesale Electricity Price Data	P, Q
	PMR Score	Historical/current	Power sector Product Market Regulation score (regulatory barriers)	Score (0-3)	1990-2023	Country	Score on regulatory barriers	OECD ECO - 2023-2024 PMR score, accessed	--

Table A C.2. Data sources

Ref	Data source and parameters	Accessed	Publication / Code(s)
A	Eurostat, PV solar, onshore and offshore wind, hydro (capacities)	22.01.2025	[nrg_inf_epcrw__custom_15080730] ; [nrg_inf_epcrw__custom_15081213]
B	EMBER, PV solar, wind (total of onshore and offshore), hydro	01.08.2024	Ember - yearly electricity data
C	IRENA, PV solar, onshore and offshore wind, hydro	10.08.2024	Stats_Extract_2024_H1_V1
D	GEM, utility-scale PV solar	20.01.2025	GEM (Global Energy Monitor) - Global Solar Power Tracker, updated Jan 2025
E	TZ-SAM, utility-scale PV solar	05.02.2025	Q4 2024 release
F	IRENA, Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2023 (v.1) / 2021 (v1.0)	22.10.2024	September 2024 data release
G	EMBER, NECP targets for renewable energy in 2030	29.10.2024	EMBER, Global Renewable Power Sector Targets 2030, accessed Oct 2024
H	EMBER, Transmission Grids Data	14.03.2025	Ember - transmission grids data (version 2024/03), updated March 2025
I	Eurostat, primary and final energy, electricity generation by technology	22.01.2025	Complete energy balances [nrg_bal_c__custom_13150330]
J	WindEurope, Online resources and Market Outlook	12.03.2025	Wind energy in Europe 2024 - Wind capacity figures 2025-2030
K	GEM, onshore and offshore wind	04.02.2025	GEM (Global Energy Monitor) - Global Wind Power Tracker, updated Feb 2024
L	GEM, pumped hydropower	26.02.2025	GEM (Global Energy Monitor) - Global Hydropower Tracker, updated Feb 2024
M	IHA (International Hydropower Association)	04.02.2025	IHA Hydropower Pumped Storage Tracking Tool, accessed Feb 2024
N	US DOE Global Energy Storage Database (GESDB)	14.01.2025	US DOE Global Energy Storage Database (GESDB), updated Dec 2024
O	Global PHES (Pumped Hydro Energy Storage) Atlases	15.01.2025	Global PHES (Pumped Hydro Energy Storage) Atlases, last accessed Jan 2025
P	ENTSO-e	20.10.2024	ENTSO-E Transparency Platform, accessed Oct 2024
Q	EMBER, European Wholesale Electricity Price Data	27.01.2025	EMBER, European Wholesale Electricity Price Data
R	European Commission, DG REGIO	24.06.2024	https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC135612
S	European Commission, JRC	24.06.2024	https://data.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dataset/6d546981-b488-4156-8ff4-4f6f5b49e4e3 and https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC139999

Resolution

Quantitative parameters were collected at the national level, and to the extent allowed by data availability, also at the NUTS1 and NUTS2 level. Project-level data on (a) existing installations and (b) planned projects in the pipeline, as well as (c) detailed spatial analysis of resource potential for PV solar, on-shore wind, and pumped-hydro made it possible to create a dataset of these three fundamental dimensions for tracking progress at the NUTS1/NUTS2 level. In cases where data sources were combined to create a composite estimate at the national level, discrepancies in aggregate rated capacity at the higher spatial resolution (i.e. NUTS1/NUTS2), as well as more recent or complete national estimates, made it necessary to adopt scaling factors to ensure that total capacity estimates reported at the NUTS1/NUTS2 level were consistent with national-level estimates.

PHS data

Data on future PHS potential in the EU are inferred from information available from the comprehensive Global Pumped Hydro Atlas developed by the Australia National University (ANU) 100% Renewable Energy Group. This dataset is being used by governments and private companies worldwide to locate prospective sites for PHS and includes closed‑loop browfield, bluefield, greenfield, ocean and turkey’s nest projects1, with the option to exclude reserved (urban) and protected areas.2

PHES Atlas data are available at the project level for a wide range of pairs of reservoirs (as two reservoirs are required for closed-loop PHS), and with global coverage. Data are also organised in clusters where each reservoir pair is rated through a “cost-efficiency” rating: AAA, AA, A, B, C, D and E.3 with AAA being the best (least cost) and E being the worst (highest cost).

The OECD-analysis did not select all possible PHS projects that may (even theoretically) exist, or all imaginable projects that may be technically feasible. Instead, the analysis has focused on projects that fulfil multiple policy goals at once, including excellent or very good economic viability, low environmental impact and higher likelihood of social acceptability.

On this basis, the following choices were made to include projects in the conservative and moderate scenarios for PHS potential:

• Exclude reserved (urban) and protected areas.4

• Exclude overlapping projects (i.e. where the same reservoir could be used for several pairs, in different cost clusters), also across different project types (i.e. brownfield, bluefield, greenfield, ocean and turkey’s nest), giving priority, for cases with overlaps, to projects with higher energy storage capacity per unit area.

• Exclude cases with reservoir pairs in the lower cost clusters (A, B, C, D or E).

• Only consider a selection of the remaining cases, starting from those with the best economic potential, likely lower environmental impacts and higher social acceptance, using the criteria summarized in the Table A.1.

Table A C.3. Economic classes and their application in the criteria used for the selection of the potentials in the OECD dataset

	Bluefield and brownfield	Greenfield, ocean and turkey’s nest
	Countries with favourable orography	Countries with orographic limitations	Countries with favourable orography	Countries with orographic limitations
Conservative potential	AAA	AAA	AAA	AAA
Moderate potential	AAA, AA	AAA, AA	AAA	AAA, AA

Source: OECD analysis

More conservative cost clusters were retained for greenfield, ocean and turkey’s nest projects, as these are generally expected to be subject to greater environmental impacts when compared with bluefield and brownfield projects. More conservative cost clusters were also considered for countries with a favorable orography,5 taking into consideration aspects that influence social acceptance, as these are cases that have less pressure, in comparative terms, to consider domestic pumped hydro capacity (due to larger potential density, overall, vs. countries without mountains). The same countries are also more likely to be those where bluefield potential is larger (as these are the countries that already built more greenfield projects, in the past).

The selection approach outlined above was also tested looking at aggregated results, for different cost clusters and in each project group. This test, performed at the country level and for different reservoir storage capacity categories, confirmed the hypotheses. It showed that land requirements per unit energy storage are lowest for brownfield, bluefield and ocean projects, with values that are roughly double with respect to greenfield and turkey’s nest projects. Amongst projects other than brownfield and bluefield, land intensity is lowest for ocean, suggesting a better capacity to offset higher environmental and social acceptability challenges, for these projects, with respect to greenfield and turkey’s nest ones, based on freshwater.

References

[4] Berestycki, C. and A. Dechezleprêtre (2020), “Assessing the efficiency of environmental policy design and evaluation: Results from a 2018 cross-country survey”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1611, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/482f8fbe-en.

[3] Koźluk, T. (2014), “The Indicators of the Economic Burdens of Environmental Policy Design: Results from the OECD Questionnaire”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1178, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jxrjnbnbm8v-en.

[1] OECD (2021), 3 operational manual COMPETITION ASSESSMENT TOOLKIT.

[2] OECD (2020), The 2018 edition of the OECD PMR indicators and database: Methodological improvements and policy insights | en | OECD | OCDE, https://www.oecd.org/fr/publications/the-2018-edition-of-the-oecd-pmr-indicators-and-database-methodological-improvements-and-policy-insights-2cfb622f-en.htm (accessed on 25 November 2020).

Notes

← 1.  Bluefield sites are those where an existing water reservoir that can be used. Brownfield refers to cases resulting from the repurposing of existing mining pits, pit lakes, tailings ponds, or underground mining tunnels. Greenfield sites are located far from the existing transmission, access roads, and water pumping infrastructure and must obtain a social licence for the entire development area. Ocean projects use the sea as the lower reservoir. Turkey’s nest project rely on artificial ring dams, needed for locations in flat areas.

← 2.  Protected areas generally include national parks and equivalent reserves in recognition that they ‘are valuable for economic and scientific reasons and also as areas for the future preservation of fauna and flora and geologic structures in their natural state.

← 3.  Key inputs for the cost model include physical and technical data that are dependent on the characteristics of the sites considered, default technical data and key cost parameters. Site-specific physical and technical data include power rating, head (height difference between reservoirs), separation between reservoirs, stored energy, water-rock volume ratio (ratio of the volume of water that can be stored to the volume of required rock). Default technical data include useable fraction of the water volume, pumping efficiency and generation efficiency. Key cost parameters include dam construction, land acquisition, initial fill acquisition and interest rates (PHES cost calculator).

← 4.  This exclusion is based on the classification of protected areas used in the PHES Atlas, reliant on the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA).

← 5.  The list of countries with favourable orography includes the five EU countries with large pumped hydro exploitation already in place (Austria, France, Italy, Spain and Sweden) and ten other EU countries with significant mountain ranges, despite lower exploitation for pumped hydro, to date, and lower mountain height (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia). The analysis was also carried out for EU neighbouring countries, based on the same logic. Countries with favourable orography in that case include Albania, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Türkiye (best profiles), as well as Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia (significant mountain ranges, despite lower exploitation currently and lower mountain height).