Estonian energy scenarios 2030 2050 Reference and single track scenarios in Balmorel.
-
Upload
samuel-anthony -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Estonian energy scenarios 2030 2050 Reference and single track scenarios in Balmorel.
Estonian energy scenarios 2030 2050
Reference and single track scenarios in Balmorel
INTRODUCTION
Process• 4 December 2012: Kick-off meeting• 7+8 January 2013: Scenarios defined• 26 February: Test results for two scenarios• 8 April: Test results for all scenarios• 9 April: Defining combination scenario• 23 April: Skype• 7 May: Draft final report• 14 May: Meeting• 31 May: Final report
4
Purpose of this presentation
• It is draft model runs – not final results– 30 time steps per year • Will be increased to 72
• Can be used to discuss assumptions• Input to discussion of combination scenario
Scenarios– Reference and single track scenarios has been simulated.
Focus on electricity and district heating.
Liberal market
CO2 concern(100€)
Renewable energy focus
CO2 market collapse (0€)
110%
Carbon leakage (0€ in Russia)
Reference
EE
Medium CO2 price
Input driven scenarios
1. Define input– Demand, fuel costs, CO2 price, technology costs,
existing plants and transmissions lines
2. Use “fundamental model”– Optimal dispatch– Optimal investments (simplifyed)
3. Study results– Prices, costs– Emissions
Scenario table of key assumptions
Estonian Demand
Estonian Capacity constraint
Estonian Inland generation
CO2 price (2030 and 2050) EUR/ton
Reference BAU 110 % - 30 47
CO2 market collapse BAU 110 % - 0 0
Carbon leakage BAU 110 % - 30/0 * 47/0 *
CO2 concern EE 110 % - 73 100
Renewable energy EE - 100 % 30 47
Liberal market BAU - - 30 47
* Zero in Russia
Status
• Model runs are successful– Socio-economic evaluation will be included before meeting!
• Renewable energy focus-scenario needs to be reformulated!– Now:
• Only investment in new capacity in Estonia in the form of RE• 100% national generation of electricity
– Should be:• Only investment in new capacity in Estonia in the form of RE• Increasing requirement for RE generation in Estonia
• Work with Stream model is in progress– Result send to demand group for comments
BALMOREL
10
Introduction: Balmorel• Optimal dispatch (a given year, with given technology)
– Input:• Electricity and heat demand• Fuel prices• Capacities (generators, transmission) and efficiencies
– Output:• Generation per unit, flow between areas• Costs, emissions
• Optimal investments– Input:
• Cost of technologies• Interest rate, time horizon
– Output:• New MW generation and transmission
– Interpretation: • New capacity is build based on expected development (if profitable in year X)• Construction time = Horizon for expectation• No strategic behaviour
11
“Optimal dispatch and marginal price”
Area 2Generation: 0-100 MW
Marginal price: 150 X/MWh
Area 1:Generation: 0-100 MW
Marginal price: 100 X/MWh50 MW
Demand Generation Price Transmission
Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 2
10 10 20 0 100 100 +10
10 40 50 0 100 100 +40
40 60 90 10 100 150 +50
50 60 100 10 100 150 +50
75 75 100 50 150 150 +25
40 140 90 90 100 150 +50
MW MW MW MW X/MWh X/MWh MW
12
Model set-up
• Model area– Baltic states, Nordic countries, Poland, Germany,
NW Russia and Belarus• Belarus modelled as transit country (No demand, no
power plants)
– 23 price areas
LVLT
FI
EE
DK_EDK_W
DE_NW DE_NE
DE_CS BLR
SE_S
SE_NSE_M
NO_S
NO_O
NO_NNO_M
RU
RU_KAL
PL
2011
ASSUMPTIONS
Updated assumptions• Base year set to 2012 and investments in new generation capacity from
2020• Possibility for rebuilding selected oil shale plants to coal or biomass (Narva
8, 11 and Auvere )• Updated Estonian electricity demand forecast and grid loss• Oil shale price: set to mining costs in 2012 and short term opportunity
costs from 2020 and onwards (function of oil and CO2 price)• Estonian biogas price and resource• Investment option for oil shale power plants• Estonian wood chips price reduced by 1.75 EUR/GJ per year• Nuclear in Poland postponed to 2025• CO2 leakage to Russia
– Same CO2 price in Russia as within the EU (in most scenarios): Assuming no leakage
– New Carbon leakage scenario• Data feedback from Lithuanian TSO
Levelised cost of energy
• 2030 and 2050
Text will be added
RESULTS: GENERATION
18
201220202022202420262028203020352040204520502012202020222024202620282030203520402045205020122020202220242026202820302035204020452050
Reference CO2 concern CO2 market collapse
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
Biomass (CCS)WindBiomassBiogasSolarCoal CCSCoal and ligniteNatural gasPeat Oil shaleOilGeoNuclear HydroWaste
TWh/
year
Electricity generation – model area
Natural gas
Hydro
Wind
Nuclear
Coal CCS
Coal & lignite
Note: Different step of X-axis, corresponding to simulated years
Electriricy generaton by country
Map will be added
20
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Reference Liberal market
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
WindNatural gasCoalWood chipsBiogasOilOil shaleWasteHydro
TWh/
year
Electricity generation – EstoniaReference and Liberal market
Note: higher coal and natural gas generation in reference scenario due to 110 % capacity requirement
21
Electricity generation – EstoniaCO2 concern and CO2 market collapse
Note: CO2 market collapse leads to heavy coal generation
2012 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2012 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050CO2 concern CO2 market collapse
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
WindNatural gasCoalWood chipsBiogasOilOil shaleWasteHydro
TWh/
year
22
Electricity generation – EstoniaRE focus and No CO2 price in Russia
Note: RE scenario method leads to increased oil shale generation. Consider RE % methods instead of investment constraint.
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
RE focus No CO2 price in Russia
-
2.0000
4.0000
6.0000
8.0000
10.0000
12.0000
14.0000
16.0000
WindNatural gasCoalWood chipsBiogasOilOil shaleWasteHydro
TWh/
year
Rebuilding of oil shale plants
• Detailed results about rebuilding of plants
Text will be added
RESULTS: CO2 EMISSIONS
25
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2012
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Reference CO2 concern CO2 market collapse-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Biomass (CCS)Natural gasCoal and lignitePeatOilOil shaleWaste
CO2
emis
sion
(Mt/
year
)
CO2 emission – model area
Endogenous investments from 2020
26
CO2 emission – Estonia20
20
2030
2040
2050
2020
2030
2040
2050
2020
2030
2040
2050
2020
2030
2040
2050
2020
2030
2040
2050
2020
2030
2040
2050
Reference CO2 market col-lapse
CO2 concern No CO2 price Russia
RE focus Liberal market
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Oil shaleCoalNatural gasOilWaste
CO2
emis
sion
(Mt/
year
)
RESULTS: DISTRICT HEATING
28
District heating generation – Estonia20
12
2020
2030
2050
2012
2020
2030
2050
2012
2020
2030
2050
2012
2020
2030
2050
2012
2020
2030
2050
2012
2020
2030
2050
Reference CO2 market col-lapse
CO2 concern No Russion CO2 price
RE focus Liberal market
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
ElWood chipsBiogasNatural gasOil shaleCoalOilWaste
PJ/y
ear
RESULTS: INVESTMENTS
30
Investment in elec. generation – model area
Note 2: Remember 5 years time step in the last part: More investments per time step
Note 1: Large investments in first year with endogenousinvestments indicate an unbalance in earlier years
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Reference CO2 market collapse CO2 concern
-
20000.000
40000.000
60000.000
80000.000
100000.000
120000.000
Biomass (CCS)WindCoal CCSCoalSolarNatural gasBiomassBiogasNuclear GeoWaste
MW
/yea
r
Note 3: Wind and solar investments in 2040 and beyond are primarily reinvestments in Germany due to NREAP
31
Investment in elec. generation - Estonia
Note:
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2020
2022
2026
2028
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Reference CO2 market col-lapse
CO2 concern No Russian CO2 price
RE focus Liberal market
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
WasteCoalNatural gasWindBiomassBiogas
MW
/yea
r
RESULTS: PRICES
33
Electricity prices - Estonia
Note: • Investments from 2020 results in changes electricity price• Fuel prices are the same in all scenarios
2012 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2035 2040 2045 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
ReferenceCO2 market collapseCO2 concernNo Russian CO2 priceRE focusLiberal market
EUR/
MW
h
34
Electricity prices – regionReference
2012 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2035 2040 2045 20500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EstoniaFinlandLithuaniaLatviaNW RussiaEU
R/M
Wh
35
Import balanceReference
CO2 market collapse
(TWh/year) 2012 2020 2030 2050Estonia 4.3 1.6 1.4 -6.9Latvia 0.4 6.6 6.0 3.4Lithuania -4.9 -5.1 -8.2 -5.9Finland -0.1 -5.0 -7.7 -17.7NW Russia -1.9 4.2 5.4 2.7Belarus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Poland 12.6 -3.8 -13.0 -28.7Sweden -6.8 -5.1 4.4 22.2Denmark 10.5 23.7 13.2 -13.5Norway 1.8 10.3 31.0 55.7
Germany -15.7 -27.5 -32.5 -11.1
(TWh/year) 2012 2020 2030 2050Estonia 4.3 1.5 3.7 -1.6Latvia 0.4 5.6 4.8 -2.1Lithuania -4.9 -6.5 -10.1 -8.6Finland -0.1 -4.8 -2.5 -16.5NW Russia -1.9 5.0 4.9 3.4Belarus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Poland 12.6 -1.4 -9.3 -10.7Sweden -6.8 -5.6 4.7 17.4Denmark 10.5 9.5 -4.5 -35.8Norway 1.8 7.7 25.4 55.4
Germany -15.7 -11.0 -17.2 -0.9
(TWh/year) 2012 2020 2030 2050Estonia 4.3 1.1 -2.4 -5.4Latvia 0.4 5.8 2.7 -1.3Lithuania -4.9 -1.7 5.6 4.2Finland -0.1 -8.9 -15.9 -18.4NW Russia -1.9 4.5 1.4 0.4Belarus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Poland 12.6 -9.0 -18.6 -45.5Sweden -6.8 -3.9 14.0 13.0Denmark 10.5 26.0 10.1 0.4Norway 1.8 17.4 43.8 55.6
Germany -15.7 -31.3 -40.7 -3.1
CO2 concern
(TWh/year) 2012 2020 2030 2050Estonia 4.3 0.5 0.5 -6.8Latvia 0.4 5.0 4.4 -1.6Lithuania -4.9 -6.5 -9.2 -8.2Finland -0.1 -7.2 -7.8 -17.8NW Russia -1.9 17.7 15.2 11.9Belarus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Poland 12.6 -6.5 -16.2 -28.4Sweden -6.8 -5.2 4.4 21.2Denmark 10.5 22.5 13.3 -13.8Norway 1.8 10.1 26.7 55.7
Germany -15.7 -30.5 -31.2 -12.2
No CO2 price in Russia
Note: Postive values are export – negative import.
36
Transmission 2011(MW) BLR_BLR DE_CS DE_NE DE_NW DK_E DK_W EE_R FI_R LT_R LV_R NO_M NO_N NO_O NO_S PL_Central PL_NW PL_S PL_SE PL_W RU_ARK RU_KAL RU_KAR RU_KOL RU_KOM
BLR_BLR 500
DE_CS 3060 3330 700 171 821
DE_NE 3060 1200 600
DE_NW 3330 1200 1500
DK_E 600 600
DK_W 950 600 1000
EE_R 350 1300
FI_R 350 100
LT_R 500 2000 700
LV_R 1300 2000
NO_M 900 600
NO_N 100 900 50
NO_O 5200
NO_S 700 1000 600 2500
PL_Central INF INF INF INF
PL_NW 598 INF INF INF INF
PL_S INF INF INF INF
PL_SE INF INF INF INF
PL_W 1280 INF INF INF INF
RU_ARK 1E+100
RU_KAL 700
RU_KAR INF
RU_KOL INF
RU_KOM INF
RU_NOV
RU_PSK 500 500 500
RU_STP 500 350 INF
SE_M 740 550 2300
SE_N 1200 750 700
SE_S 600 1700 600
37
Investments in transmission - MW
Text will be added
RESULTS: ECONOMY
Socio-economics
Text will be added
DISCUSSION
Observations - Estonia
Text will be added
Observations – surrounding system
Text will be added
NEXT STEPS
Next steps
• Reformulate RE scenario• Increasing requirement for RE generation in Estonia: x%
by 2030, X% by 2050
• Forecast for district heating demand and check of district heating areas
• Update Latvian data (if we receive feedback)• Increase time resolution
Revised time schedule?Phase Date Tasks Scenario calculations
8+9 April 2013
Meeting with expert groups:• Discussion of results;• Revision of “single track” scenarios;• Agreement on relevant "combination scenario”.
23 Apr 2013 Project status via Skype
Conclusions
7 May 2013 Draft final report
14 May 2013
Meeting with expert groups:• Discussion of main conclusions;• Identification of recommendations for important actions in
the short-term in order to achieve long-term goals and identification of important barriers.
31 May 2012 Final report
EXTRA SLIDES
Reference scenario
Reference scenario – Business as usual i.e. with a requirement of having inland production capacity equal to 110 % of the hourly peak demand, current trend in energy efficiency, an oil shale price is a function of the international oil price, and WEO 2012 forecast of CO2 prices in their new policy scenario i.e. 23-31-34 €/ton CO2 in 2020-2030-2035, respectively. The price in 2050 set to 45 €/ton CO2.
The 110 % requirement is calculated as follows:110 % of peak demand – 150 MW
Liberal market scenario
Liberal market scenario – A scenario with reduced requirements for inland Estonian electricity capacity. In this scenario the impact of setting a lower capacity requirement is analysed. This scenario have no specific requirement for Estonian capacity.
Oil shale opportunity costsMethod
The opportunity costs of oil shale seen from the existing power plants at Narva from 2011 to 2050. The model will then consider the efficiencies at existing Narva power plants and electricity prices etc.This substitution price could be estimated as either the short or long term marginal costs:- Short term costs:
- fuel oil price x refinery efficiency - oil shale refinery OPEX – refinery CO2-costs- Long term costs:
- fuel oil price x refinery efficiency - oil shale refinery CAPEX - oil shale refinery OPEX – refinery CO2-costs.
We assume the refineries are already in operation and base our cost estimate on short term marginal costs.
Oil shale opportunity costsAssumptions
1. Reference oil price set to fuel oil based on price forecast from IEA World Energy Outlook 2012.2. Mining fee (royalty) 2011-2014: 1,1 euro/tonnes. 2014-2050: 2,4 euro/tonnes3. Mining costs (ex transport and royalty): 2011: 10,5 euro/tonnes, 2030: (10,5+16)/2= 13,25
euro/tonnes. 2050: 16 euro/tonnes. For the years between these points I have made a linear projection.
4. Transport costs to Narva: 3 euro/tonnes in all years5. OPEX of refinery: 21 euro/tonnes in all years.6. CAPEX of refinery: Average of Enefit and Petroter: 10 euro/tonnes per year with an interest
rate of 10 % and 20 years pay back time.7. 1 tonnes of oil shale rock set to contain 2,33 MWh or 8,33 GJ energy - based on the report of
the resource group.8. Refinery efficiency set to 70 % based on the report of the resource group. This is in line with
the efficiency of the existing Petroter refinery.9. CO2 price forecast based on IEA World Energy Outlook New Policies scenario with an
adjustment to the historic 2011 and 2012 CO2 price level.10. CO2 emission based on Enefit 280 data: 0,36 tonnes CO2/bbl shale oil. I have estimated
the calorific value of 1 bbl oil shale to 5,52 GJ and used an refinery efficiency of 70 %.
Oil shale short term opportunity costs
20122014
20162018
20202022
20242026
20282030
20322034
20362038
20402042
20442046
20482050
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
Oil shale mining costsOil shale long term opp costOil shale short term opp costCoal priceEu
ro/G
J
Note: We have used the short term opportunity costs of oil shale in the following scenarios