## 4 Results
### Assessing the Technology Portfolio EMP  
Following the 3 BL assessment, the most competitive technologies were identified as stated in Section 4.1. From the RE technology scores for each of the scenarios that were analysed in this paper, the optimal percentage shares of the technologies for FB residential precinct were determined. Table 10 shows the shares of RE technologies with the goal  
Figure 3: The scenario spider diagrams showing the aggregated scores. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Technology** & **Neutral** & **Pro-Economic** & **Pro-Environmental** & **Pro-Social** \\ \hline Rooftop PV & 7.88 & 8.17 & 8.18 & 7.27 \\ Wind Turbine & 3.22 & 3.28 & 3.64 & 2.72 \\ Heat Pump & 6.61 & 6.67 & 7.43 & 5.73 \\ Energy Efficiency & 6.67 & 5.63 & 6.88 & 7.50 \\ BAU & 3.49 & 4.77 & 3.07 & 2.61 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: The technology aggregated scores. of meeting electricity demand for the FB residential precincts, thereby transitioning to renewable energy and energy efficiency and achieving net-zero GHG emissions in the energy sector by 2050. The pro-social scenario best satisfied the goal of the FB framework. Initially, the technologies were modelled to meet FB's residential electricity demand and net-zero GHG emissions by 2050 in order to ensure that Melbourne's emission target would be met. Thus, this paper also attempted to assess three time horizons (i.e., 2030, 2040 and 2050) for implementation to aid in policy and decision-making. Varying the target completion year for installing and implementing RE technologies is a common practice in energy planning [57; 58]. Figure 4 shows that the suggested technology mix for Option 4 could be optimised further by implementing the technologies earlier than 2050. When the implementation of Option 4 was set to timeframe A (2030) and timeframe B (2040), the goals could be met as early as 2028 and 2032, respectively. The results show that Option 4 was the optimal technology share. As the electricity demand from the grid is replaced by RE technologies over the years, net-zero GHG emissions would also be achieved. The targets of Victoria and the City of Melbourne for the RE share of electricity generation would also be met and even surpassed. Victoria is only aiming for a 50% RE share by 2030, while the City of Melbourne is targeting a 100% RE share by 2040. Option 4 could provide 100% RE as early as 2028, depending on the implementation pace and the enabling policies that are in place. Option 4 recommended prioritising energy efficiency implementation, since it had the biggest share in EMP. Energy efficiency measures, such as the installation of wall insulation, could cut 32% of total electricity use compared to not having energy efficiency measures. Rooftop PVs ranked a very close second behind energy efficiency, with a percentage value of 31%. Ground source heat pumps ranked third, while wind energy technology came last with a very small share in the technology mix. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Scenarios**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Technologies (\% Share)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Electricity**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Net-Zero GHG** \\ **Emissions** \\ **Achieved by 2050?** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{4-7}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **Rooftop** \\ **PV** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Wind** \\ **Turbine** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Heat** \\ **Pump** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Energy** \\ **Efficiency** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Energy** \\ **by 2050?** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Demand Satisfied** \\ **Achieved by 2050?** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Neutral (Option 1) & 32\% & 13\% & 27\% & 27\% & No & No \\ \hline Pro-economic (Option 2) & 34\% & 14\% & 28\% & 24\% & No & No \\ \hline Pro-environmental (Option 3) & 31\% & 14\% & 28\% & 26\% & No & No \\ \hline Pro-social (Option 4) & 31\% & 12\% & 25\% & 32\% & Yes & Yes \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}