Islands typically have sensitive energy systems depending on natural surroundings, but innovative technologies and the exploitation of renewable energy (RE) sources present opportunities like self-sufficiency, but also challenges, such as grid instability. Samsø, Orkney, and Madeira are in the transition to increase the RE share towards 100%—however, this is addressed in different ways depending on the local conditions and current development phases in the transition. Scenarios focusing on the short-term introduction of new technologies in the energy systems are presented, where the electricity sector is coupled with the other energy sectors. Here, both smart grid and sector-integrating solutions form an important part in the next 5–15 years. The scenarios are analyzed using the modeling tool EnergyPLAN, enabling a comparison of today’s reference scenarios with 2030 scenarios of higher RE share. By including three islands across Europe, different locations, development stages, and interconnection levels are analyzed. The analyses suggest that the various smart grid solutions play an important part in the transition; however, local conditions, sector integration, and balancing technologies even more so. Overall, the suggestions complement each other and pave the way to reach 100% RE integration for both islands and, potentially, other similar regions.

The integration of renewable energy (RE) in energy systems can be approached in many ways depending on local possibilities. Evaluating this in the limited context of islands, this paper presents a multi-energy system transition to a 100% RE share in a two-folded technical analysis. The case study of Madeira Island using the EnergyPLAN modeling tool is used to show strengths and weaknesses of, on the one hand, electrifying all transport and heating demands on an island, while remaining demands are supplied with biomass, and, on the other hand, additional smart charging, vehicle-to-grid, thermal collectors and storages, as well as electrofuel production and storages. Technical results indicate the potentials and advantages of the second approach with 50% less biomass and no curtailment at 1–3% higher costs, compared to the first one with 7% of production curtailed. The technical analysis is supported by the institutional analysis that highlights the balancing needs through additional flexibility and interaction in the energy system. For maximum flexibility, of both demand and grid, and successful implementation of 100% RE, investment incentives and dynamic tariffs are recommended entailing more dynamic consumer involvement and strategic energy planning.