Energy Communities (ECs) are aggregations of users that cooperate to achieve economic benefits by sharing energy instead of operating individually in the so-called “disagreement” case. As there is no unique notion of fairness for the cost/profit allocation of ECs, this paper aims to identify an allocation method that allows for an appropriate weighting of both the interests of an EC as a whole and those of all its members. The novelty is in comparing different optimization approaches and cooperative allocation criteria, satisfying different notions of fairness, to assess which one may be best suited for an EC. Thus, a cooperative model is used to optimize the operation of an EC that includes two consumers and two solar PV prosumers. The model is solved by the “Social Welfare” approach to maximizing the total “incremental” economic benefit (i.e., cost saving and/or profit increase) and by the “Nash Bargaining” approach to simultaneously maximize the total and individual incremental economic benefits, with respect to the “disagreement” case. Since the “Social Welfare” approach could lead to an unbalanced benefit distribution, the Shapley value and Nucleolus criteria are applied to re-distribute the total incremental economic benefit, leading to higher annual cost savings for consumers with lower electricity demand. Compared to “Social Welfare” without re-distribution, the Nash Bargaining distributes 39–49% and 9–17% higher annual cost savings to consumers with lower demand and to prosumers promoting the energy sharing within the EC, respectively. However, total annual cost savings drop by a maximum of 5.5%, which is the “Price of Fairness”.

Preheating is often required to prevent hydrate formation during the pressure reduction process in a natural gas distribution network’s pressure reduction station. This paper examines an energy recovery method to avoid the cost and energy consumption of this preheating. The primary aim is to assess the techno-economic feasibility of an energy recovery system based on the Ranque–Hilsch vortex tube coupled to a heat exchanger for large-scale application to the gas grid. To this end, a techno-economic model of the entire energy recovery system was included in an optimisation procedure. The resulting design minimises the payback period (PP) when the system is applied to the pressure reduction stations belonging to a particular gas grid. The pressure reduction stations always operate at an outlet pressure above atmospheric pressure. However, available performance models for the Ranque–Hilsch vortex tube do not permit prediction at backpressure operation. Therefore, a novel empirical model of the device is proposed, and a cost function derived from several manufacturer quotations is introduced for the first time, to evaluate the price of the Ranque–Hilsch vortex tubes. Finally, a nearly complete set of pressure reduction stations belonging to the Italian natural gas grid was chosen as a case study using actual operating parameters collected by each station’s grid manager. The results indicate that the environmental temperature strongly affects the technical and economic feasibility of the proposed energy recovery system. In general, pressure reduction stations operating at an ambient temperature above 0 °C are economically desirable candidates. In addition, the higher the energy recovery system convenience, the higher the flow rate and pressure drop managed by the station. In the Italian case study, 95% of preheating costs could be eliminated with a PP of fewer than 20 years. A 40% preheating cost saving is still possible if the maximum PP is limited to 10 years, and a small but non-negligible 3% of preheating costs could be eliminated with a PP of fewer than 4.5 years.

Planning the best path for the energy system decarbonization is currently one of the issues of high global interest. At the European level, the recent policies dealing with the transportation sector have decided to ban the registration of light-duty vehicles powered by internal combustion engines fed by fossil fuels, from 2035. Regardless of the official positions, the major players (industries, politicians, economic and statistical institutions, etc.) manifest several opinions on this decision. In this paper, a mathematical model of a nation’s energy system is used to evaluate the economic impact of this decision. The model considers a superstructure that incorporates all energy conversion and storage units, including the entire transportation sector. A series of succeeding simulations was run and each of them was constrained to the achievement of the decarbonization level fixed, year by year, by the European community road-map. For each simulation, an optimization algorithm searches for a less costly global energy system, by including/excluding from the energy system the energy conversion units, storage devices, using a Mixed Integer Linear approach. Three optimization scenarios were considered: (1) a “free” scenario in which the only constraint applied to the model is the achievement of the scheduled decarbonization targets; (2) an “e-fuels” scenario, in which all new non-battery-electric light-duty vehicles allowed after 2035 must be fed with e-fuels; (3) a “pure electric” scenario, in which all new light-duty vehicles allowed after 2035 are battery-electric vehicles. The comparison of the optimum solutions for the three scenarios demonstrates that the less costly transition to a fully renewable energy system decarbonizes the transportation sector only when the share of renewable energy sources exceeds 90%. E-fueled light-duty vehicles always turn out to be a less expensive alternative than the electric vehicles, mainly because of the very high cost of the energy supply infrastructure needed to charge the batteries. Most of all, the costs imposed to society by the “e-fuels” and “pure electric” light-duty-vehicle decarbonizing scenarios exceed by 20% and 60%, respectively, the “free” transition scenario.