Guarantees of Origin (GOs) were introduced in order to enhance transparency about the origin of green electricity produced in Europe, and to deliberately empower end-consumers to participate in the sustainable energy transition. The separation of electricity and the GO trade has resulted in a prosperous GO market that, however, has been characterized by non-transparency and opportunistic behavior. Historic price development has been opaque and can therefore not be used to forecast future GO prices. This paper, firstly, provides a thorough overview of the European GO market and an analysis of the historic price development; secondly, it proposes a model, the first of its kind, for determining future price developments of European GOs for different renewable energy technologies in different countries up to 2040. For household consumers, GO price determination is based on willingness-to-pay estimates from the literature, whereas for non-household consumers, the model introduces a novel approach to determine the willingness to pay for green electricity. Four different scenarios are considered (Status Quo, Sustainable Development, Full Harmonization, and Ideal Development) and annual GO data are used. The findings indicate that GO prices can be expected to increase on average in the next years, with prices ranging from 1.77 to 3.36 EUR/MWh in 2040. Sensitivity analysis shows that ‘WTP percentages’ have the highest influence on GO prices. It can be concluded that future GO prices will remain challenging to predict, even with the support of sophisticated models, due to the expected supply and demand-driven market growth affecting the market equilibrium prices for different GOs in different countries.

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations, established in 2015, aim to achieve global sustainability by 2030 through the improvement of environmental, social, and economic parameters. However, unlike earlier concepts such as the Agenda 21 of 1992, the SDGs overlook radioactive waste management and related challenges of radiation itself. First, we investigate the historic consideration and unexplained disappearance of radioactive waste in earlier sustainability concepts. Then, we propose amending seven SDGs to address this gap. For SDGs 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), 14 (Life Below Water), and 15 (Life on Land), new or revised indicators should monitor the release of hazardous materials. SDGs 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) require additional targets and indicators to integrate international cooperation and social implications of nuclear facilities' operation. Redefining “hazardous waste” in SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and “environmentally sound technologies” in SDG 17 is necessary to encompass radioactive waste. Implementing these changes demands statistical efforts, but the existing monitoring infrastructure, particularly in Europe and North America, can facilitate this. As 2030 approaches, it is crucial to reintroduce radioactive waste management into sustainability agendas, whether within the SDGs themselves or in a subsequent framework.