## 3 Techno-Economic Analysis at 2060
### Results and Discussion  
The results of this assessment are reported in Tables 5-8. Every table contains the input parameters discussed in the previous section, mentioned by classes (geophysical and environmental parameters, wind farm specifications, costs, financial aspects and losses). Note that only some of these parameters plays a role in LCoE calculation. Mean wind speed (whereby gross production and capacity factor are derived), CAPEX, OPEX, and WACC are the main drivers of LCoE, which was variated. LCoE and LCoE percentage variation compared to the baseline for each case study are reported in the last lines of the tables. The benchmark scenario at 2030 indicates, as in the previous section, a mean LCoE near to 100 \(\upvarepsilon\)/MWh, a value compatible with the estimates reported in [11] for floating wind turbines at commercial stage. The baseline highlights differences in wind resource between case study sites, which recur along successive scenarios. As noticeable in ATLAEOLICO wind speed maps, all selected sites present attracting wind conditions. In the Apulia site, the resource (7.79 m/s) is slightly lower than the other sites, but is still assessed as profitable in terms of electricity production. Marine surroundings of Sicily present more suitable wind velocities while Sardinia's west coast exhibit even better wind conditions. Sicily and Sardinia sites currently present, respectively, wind speeds of 8.05 m/s and 8.92 m/s. Some projects of wind farms for these zones have already been submitted, but are still waiting for authorization [32]. For clarity's sake, the results are summarized in the following bar plot (Figure 3), which shows the differences between case studies along the different scenarios. Specific scenario related comments are:  
* In CC 2060, following the approach used by [25], the first scenario at 2060 was assembled by focusing only on the resource change. Costs and technological parameters were not then modified in order to isolate climate change effects on capacity factors and consequently on LCoE. Results show an increase smaller than 10% in the LCoE at 2060 for case study 2 (Sicily) under a \(-\)0.50 m/s speed decrease hypothesis, and an increase smaller than 5% in the LCoE at 2060 for case studies 2 (Sicily) and 3 (Sardinia) under a \(-\)0.25 m/s speed decrease hypothesis. For case study 1 (Apulia) no resource variation was applied; therefore, LCoE did not experience any variation. Given these results, obtained without considering any technological improvement or costs decrease, it is inferable that climate change could play an antagonistic role in reducing LCoE of floating wind technology, although its impacts does not appear to be dramatic. Figure 3: Graphical comparison between developed scenarios. CC + TEC(I) 2060 shows that, even when a conservative hypothesis of costs and WACC reduction is applied, the LCoE positive trend of the previous scenario is largely balanced. Decrease in LCoE, which involves both resource change and a low technological development contributes, is placed between \(-10.9\%\) (case study 2 under \(-0.50\) m/s hypothesis) and \(-18.4\%\) (case study 1). * In the CC + TEC(II) 2060 scenario, a more optimistic pattern of economic and technological inputs is applied, including higher turbines, which access greater wind speeds. LCoE reductions is more evident: Apulia's site, which does not suffer climate change effects, experiences a reduction of \(-28.4\%\) in LCoE. Sicily shows reductions of \(-25.4\%\) (optimistic hypothesis) and \(-22.1\%\) (pessimistic hypothesis), while Sardinia LCoE drops by \(25.6\%\). Absolute values of LCoE decrease to about \(70\)-\(80\) \(\upxi\)/MWh range. * In the TEC(II) 2060, the deviation between LCoE decreases if resource variations are taken or not into account is negligible and obviously maximal in the \(-0.50\) m/s hypothesis for case study 2 (\(-6.2\%\)). This, fortunately, confirms again the weak effects of climate change on wind energy production in the analyzed sites.