Renewable Energy Industry Roadmap for Finland · Mario Ragwitz 1, Daniel Rosende 1, Gustav Resch 2,...
Transcript of Renewable Energy Industry Roadmap for Finland · Mario Ragwitz 1, Daniel Rosende 1, Gustav Resch 2,...
Mario Ragwitz1, Daniel Rosende1, Gustav Resch2, Christian Panzer2
1Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research (Fh-ISI)2Energy Economics Group, Technische Universität Wien (EEG)
Renewable Energy Industry Roadmap for Finland
Finland, 04.05.2010
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 2Slide 2
Content
1. Current renewable energy (RES) situation
2. Current RES support policies
3. Targets & trajectories
• European RES Directive: 2020 targets
• Background information: The Green-X model
• Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
4. Measures for achieving the target
5. Estimated costs & benefits of RES policy support measures
6. Concluding remarks
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 3Slide 3
Current RES situation in Finland
RES-E:
Development of RES-Electricity generation in Finland 1990 – 2007
Source: Eurostat
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,0001
99
0
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
Shar
e [%
]
Ele
ctri
city
ge
ne
rati
on
[G
Wh
]
Biogas
Biowaste
Geothermal power plants
Hydro large scale
Biomass solid
Hydro small scale
Photovoltaic systems
Solar thermal
Wave-Tide
Wind-turbines Onshore
Wind-turbines Offshore
Share of renewable electricity
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 4Slide 4
Current RES situation in Finland
Development of RES-Electricity generation in Finland 1990 – 2007
Source: Eurostat
RES-E:
1990
[G W h]
2000
[G W h]
2007
[G W h]
1990-2007
[%]
1990-2000
[%]
2000-2007
[%]
Biogas 5 22 29 10.9 16.0 4.0
Biomass solid 4,682 8,476 9,661 4.4 6.1 1.9
Biowaste 4 35 210 27.1 25.7 29.2
G eothermal power plants 0 0 0 : : :
Hydro large-scale 9,867 13,468 12,972 1.6 3.2 -0.5
Hydro small-scale 1,048 1,192 1,206 0.8 1.3 0.2
Photovoltaic systems 0 2 4 : : 10.4
Solar thermal 0 0 0 : : :
Tide & wave 0 0 0 : : :
W ind-turbines offshore 0 0 0 : : :
W ind-turbines onshore 0 78 188 : : 13.4
RES-E total 15,606 23,273 24,270 2.6 4.1 0.6
Technology
CAG RElectricity generation
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 5Slide 5
Current RES situation in Finland
Development of RES-Electricity capacities in Finland 1990 – 2007
Source: Eurostat
RES-E:
1990
[MW ]
2000
[MW ]
2007
[MW ]
1990-2007
[%]
1990-2000
[%]
2000-2007
[%]
Biogas 1 6 8 10.9 16.0 4.0
Biomass solid 983 1,500 1,757 3.5 4.3 2.3
Biowaste 1 5 0 -100.0 22.4 -100.0
G eothermal power plants 0 0 0 : : :
Hydro large-scale 2,322 2,574 2,786 1.1 1.0 1.1
Hydro small-scale 298 308 316 0.3 0.3 0.4
Photovoltaic systems 0 3 5 : : 7.6
Solar thermal 0 0 0 : : :
Tide & wave 0 0 0 : : :
W ind-turbines offshore 0 0 0 : : :
W ind-turbines onshore 0 38 110 : : 16.4
RES-E total 3,605 4,433 4,982 1.9 2.1 1.7
Technology
CAG RCapacity
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 6Slide 6
Current RES situation in Finland
Development of RES-Heat generation in Finland 1990 – 2007
Source: Eurostat
RES-H:
1990
[ktoe]
2000
[ktoe]
2007
[ktoe]
1990-2007
[%]
1990-2000
[%]
2000-2007
[%]
Biogas (grid) 0.0 11.0 17.0 : : 6.4
Solid biomass (grid) 0.0 394.0 1249.0 : : 17.9
Biowaste (grid) 0.0 13.0 28.0 : : 11.6
Geothermal heat (grid) : : : : : :
Solid biomass (non-grid) 3522.0 4903.0 4450.0 1.4 3.4 -1.4
Solar thermal heating and hot water 0.0 0.0 1.0 : : :
Heat pumps : 9.7 128.1 : : 44.5
RES-H total 3522.0 5330.7 5873.1 3.1 4.2 1.4
Generation
Technology
CAGR
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 7Slide 7
Current RES situation in Finland
RES-T:
• According to Eurostat, there was no consumption of biofuels in 2005.
• In 2006 and 2007, 1 ktoe of biofuels was consumed.
• The following table gives an overview of the biofuel situation in Finland:
Technology Unit 2005 2006 2007
Biodiesel [ktoe] : : :
Bioethanol [ktoe] 0 1 1
Biofuels, total [ktoe] 0 1 1
Share Biofuels [%] 0.0 0.02 0.02
Source: Eurostat
Biofuel consumption and share of biofuels in Finland 2005 -2007
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 8Slide 8
RES-E:
• The main support instruments for RES-E are investment subsidies and a tax measure.
• The so called “energy aid” is a state grant for investments in RES. Grants are available for
investment and research projects.
• “Tax aid“ is a guaranteed payment similar to a feed-in tariff and is paid per kilowatt hour of
electricity fed into the grid.
• These support instruments for RES-E are applicable at national level. There are no other
important additional instruments contributing substantially to the growth of RES-E.
• The introduction of feed-in tariffs for electricity from wind power and biogas is currently
being discussed.
• Support in the form of green certificates, investment subsidies for consumers, higher taxes
on fossil fuels and additional tax exempts are under consideration.
Current RES support policies in Finland
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 9Slide 9
RES-H&C:
• The generation of RES-H is supported by investment subsidies and tax reliefs.
• State grants are available for RES-H investment and research projects.
• The maximum available investment subsidy is 30%.
• Finnish households can benefit from Energy Grants for Residential Buildings.
• There is a cap on the annually available budget: 14 million EUR in 2008 and 22 million
EUR in 2009.
• The maximum amount of this subsidy is 25% of eligible costs. Such eligible costs might
include material and equipment costs but not the cost of work.
• Taxes on heat are based on the net carbon emissions from input fuels and are zero for
RES.
Current RES support policies in Finland
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 10Slide 10
RES-T:
• A quota obligation (a minimum percentage of biofuels to be supplied for consumption) for
the distributors of transport fuels has been set for the years 2008-2010.
• This minimum percentage will increase annually: 2% in 2008, 4% in 2009 and 5.75% in
2010.
• If the distributors failed to fulfill this obligation, the customs authorities will impose a penalty
fee.
• There are a few financial measures for RES-T production available:
• vehicle tax exemption according to the Law on Vehicle Tax,
• grants for R&D and pilot projects under the technology programme “BioRefine - New
Biomass products”.
• There is no specific support for electric vehicles that use RES-E.
Current RES support policies in Finland
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 11Slide 11
European RES Directive – 2020 targets
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%A
T
BE
BG
CY
CZ
DK
EE FI
FR
DE
GR
HU IE IT LA
LT
LU
MT
NL
PL
PT
RO
SK SI
ES
SE
UK
EU
27R
ES
in
te
rms o
f fi
na
l e
ne
rgy
[%
of
de
ma
nd
] RES potential 2020 - share on current (2005) demand
Proposed RES target for 2020
RES share 2005
Note: Additional potentials do not include biofuel imports
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 12Slide 12
Key elements of the new RES directive
• National support schemes remain as key driver for the future RES
deployment in Europe
• Target definition: RES share in gross final energy consumption
• Binding national targets for RES (in total*) by 2020 (*no sectoral targets
except the minimum target (10%) for RES in transport)
• Flexibility with respect to national target achievement (national
compliance but with increased cooperation between Member States)
• Measures for an accelerated removal of non-economic RES barriers
(grid access, accompanying market stimulation measures, etc.)
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 13Slide 13
Background information: the Green-X model
Simulation model for energy policy instruments in the European energy market
RES-E, RES-H, RES-T and CHP, conventional power
Based on the concept of dynamic cost-resource curves
Allowing forecasts up to 2020/2030 on national / EU-27 level
Reference clients: European Commission (DG RESEARCH, DG TREN, DG ENV), Sustainable Energy Ireland, German Ministry for Environment, European Environmental Agency,
Consultation to Ministries in Serbia, Luxembourg, Morocco, etc.
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 14Slide 14
The Green-X approach: cost-resource curves
•Potentials
•by RES-E technology (by band)
•by country
•Costs of electricity
•by RES-E technology (by band)
•by country
•COST-RESOURCE CURVES
•by RES-E technology
•by country
•costs
•potential
•Dynamic aspects
•Costs: Dynamic cost assessment
•Potentials: Dynamic restrictions
•DYNAMIC
•by year
The Green-X approach: Dynamic cost-resource curves
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 15Slide 15
Developed scenarios
Proactive RES support beyond the
(boundaries of) 2020 RES targets
Countries aim for pure
national target fulfillment
Based on calculations done with the Green-X model:
Flexibility measures give more attention in
order to fulfill the 2020 RES target from the EU
perspective more efficiently (resource
allocation)
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 16Slide 16
General remarks
• The assessed cases follow the concept of strengthened national support.
• The fulfillment of the target of 20% RES by 2020 is preconditioned both at the EU level as
well as at the national level for all cases.
• The ACT scenario goes beyond that level of ambition and illustrates the impact of an EU-
wide proactive RES support.
• The policy framework for biofuels in the transport sector is set equal under all assessed
policy variants.
• For all cases a removal of non-economic barriers (i.e. administrative deficiencies, grid
access, etc.) is presumed for the future.
• An adequate removal of these deployment constraints is conditioned on the assumption
that this process will be launched in 2010-2011.
• Results of the scenario calculations include details on RES deployment as well as on the
associated costs and benefits.
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 17Slide 17
Scenarios assumptions
Key assumptions:To ensure maximum consistency with existing EU scenarios and projections the key input
parameters of the Green-X scenarios are based on PRIMES modelling and the (updates of the)
FORRES 2020 study.
Corresponding PRIMES scenarios:
- The European Energy and Transport Trends by 2030 / 2007 / Baseline
- The PRIMES scenario on meeting both EU targets by 2020
(20% GHG reduction and 20% RES by 2020) / 2008
- The European Energy and Transport Trends by 2030 / 2007 / Efficiency case
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 18Slide 18
Scenarios assumptions
Key assumptions: on future energy and CO2 prices
• Fossil energy
prices
• CO2 prices
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 19Slide 19
Reference prices for electricity, heat and transport fuels
(referring to the default case of strengthened national policies)
Scenarios assumptions
Key assumptions: on future sectoral energy prices
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 20Slide 20
Scenarios assumptions
Key assumptions: RES Costs
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Biogas
(Solid) Biomass co-firing
(Solid) Biomass
Biowaste
Geothermal electricity
Hydro large-scale
Hydro small-scale
Photovoltaics
Solar thermal electricity
Tide & Wave
Wind onshore
Wind offshore
Cost of electricity (LRMC - payback time: 15 years) [€/MWh]
cost range (LRMC)
Cu
rre
nt
ma
rke
t p
rice
PV: 430 to 1640 €/MWh
*Ranges of long-term marginal generation cost (for 2006) for various RES
technologies in the electricity sector (above)
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 21Slide 21
Scenarios assumptions
Key assumptions: RES Costs
RES Costs Assumptions on expected future technological progress (technological learning).
Resulting (investment) cost reduction.
RES-Electricity technologies
35%40%45%50%55%60%65%70%75%80%85%90%95%
100%105%110%115%120%
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
20
14
20
16
20
18
20
20
20
22
20
24
20
26
20
28
20
30
Co
st
red
uc
tio
n -
sh
are
of
init
ial
inv
es
tme
nt
co
sts
(a
s i
n t
he
ye
ar
20
06
) [%
]
Hydropower
Geothermal electricity
Solid biomass - cofiring &large-scale plant
Solid biomass - small-scale CHP
Gaseous biomass
Gaseous biomass CHP
Wind energy
Tidal & wave
Solar thermal electricity
Photovoltaics
*High energy prices changed the overall situation. Prior learning expectations will not be met
with a continuation of high energy prices (i.e. an increase of investment cost could be observed for
almost all energy technologies in 2006 to 2008 caused by increasing energy and raw material prices)
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 22Slide 22
Key assumptions: on the future energy demand
Development over time (gross final energy demand)
Scenarios assumptions for the case of Finland
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 23Slide 23
Key assumptions: on the future energy demand
Demand by sector in 2020
Scenarios assumptions for the case of Finland
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 24Slide 24
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
Development over time in relative terms (RES share in gross final
energy demand) referring to “low energy demand growth”
National RES deployment [% - share of gross final energy demand]
low energy demand growth (PRIMES high energy efficiency
case)
moderate energy demand
(growth) (PRIMES 20% case)
NAT - National perspective 43,7% 39,6%
EU - European perspective 44,3% 41,3%
ACT - Proactive RES support 51,0% 46,5%
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 25Slide 25
RES share in corresponding (gross) demand in 2020 by sector
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
Sectoral RES deployment by 2020 [%
- share of corresponding (gross)
demand]
low energy demand growth
(PRIMES high energy
efficiency case)
moderate energy demand
growth (PRIMES 20% case)
RES-Electricity
RES-Heat BiofuelsRES-
ElectricityRES-Heat Biofuels
NAT - National perspective 30,7% 66,0% 10,0% 27,2% 60,3% 10,0%
EU - European perspective 30,9% 66,9% 10,0% 29,4% 62,5% 10,0%
ACT - Proactive RES support 45,3% 71,0% 10,0% 41,2% 65,0% 10,0%
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 26Slide 26
RES deployment in 2020 by sector
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
Sectoral RES deployment by 2020
[ktoe]
low energy demand growth
(PRIMES high energy
efficiency case)
moderate energy demand
growth (PRIMES 20% case)
RES-
ElectricityRES-Heat Biofuels
RES-
ElectricityRES-Heat Biofuels
NAT - National perspective 2.423 7.738 381 2.462 7.765 425
EU - European perspective 2.442 7.852 381 2.660 8.043 425
ACT - Proactive RES support 3.577 8.335 381 3.734 8.370 425
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 27Slide 27
Development over time - NAT case: low energy demand (growth)
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 28Slide 28
RES deployment in 2020 by sector“low energy demand growth” (left) versus “moderate energy demand growth” (right)
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
0
1.000
2.000
3.000
4.000
5.000
6.000
7.000
8.000
9.000
NAT - National perspective
EU - European perspective
ACT - Proactive RES support
RES deployment by 2020 [ktoe]
RES-Electricity RES-Heat Biofuels
0
1.000
2.000
3.000
4.000
5.000
6.000
7.000
8.000
9.000
NAT - National perspective
EU - European perspective
ACT - Proactive RES support
RES deployment by 2020 [ktoe]
RES-Electricity RES-Heat Biofuels
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 29Slide 29
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
RES-E capacity in 2020: low energy demand (growth)
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 30Slide 30
Electricity generation from RES:
Referring to the
NAT-case at “low
energy demand
(growth)”
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 31Slide 31
Heat generation from RES:
Referring to the
NAT-case at “low
energy demand
(growth)”
Scenarios on meeting Finland’s 2020 RES commitment
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 32Slide 32
Measures for achieving the target
Measures on administrative procedures, regulations and codes:
• Should authorization procedure take into account the specificities of different renewable energy
technologies?
• Should the renewable energy potential be taken into account in spatial planning?
• Should timetables for processing applications be communicated in advance?
• How many steps should be needed to obtain the final authorization? Should there be a one-stop
shop for coordinating all the steps?
Measures concerning buildings:
• What measures should be introduced into the building codes to ensure the share of renewable
energy used in the building sector will increase?
• How should an obligation for minimum levels of renewable energy in new and newly refurbished
buildings be drafted to best ensure renewable energy integration in buildings? At what levels
should it be set?
• What is the projected increase of renewable energy use in the building sector until 2020?
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 33Slide 33
Measures for achieving the target
Measures on information:
• How should specific information be targeted at different groups, as end consumers, builders, property
managers, property agents, installers, architects, farmers, suppliers of equipment using renewable energy
sources, public administration?
• How should guidance for planners and architects be provided to help them consider the optimal combination of
renewable energy sources, high efficiency technologies and district heating and cooling when planning,
designing, building and renovating industrial or residential areas?
Measures on electricity infrastructure development:
• Should there be priority connection rights or reserved connection capacities provided for new installations
producing electricity from renewable energy sources?
Priority/guaranteed access to the grid:• Should priority or guaranteed access be ensured? Explain.
• How should it be ensured that transmission system operators, when dispatching electricity generating
installations give priority to those using renewable energy sources?
• How should the transmission and distribution of electricity from renewable energy sources be guaranteed by the
transmission and distribution system operators?
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 34Slide 34
Financial support
Weighted average (2011 to 2020) total remuneration for yearly new RES
installation in Finland – NAT and ACT scenario
NAT (National target
fulf illment)
ACT (proactive support -
realisable deployment)
Biogas 61.3 106.3
(Solid) Biomass 63.7 130.5
Biowaste 57.1 95.7
Geothermal electricity 0.0 0.0
Hydro large-scale 61.5 106.1
Hydro small-scale 0.0 108.2
Photovoltaics 0.0 350.3
Solar thermal electricity 0.0 0.0
Tide & Wave 0.0 0.0
Wind onshore 62.1 87.5
Wind offshore 0.0 106.5
RES-E (average) 63.3 137.8
RES heat (district heat) 49.2 78.8
RES heat (decentral) 86.8 129.0
Biofuel (average) 101.7 101.7
RES policy indicator
(i.e. required total
remuneration)
Weighted average (2011 to 2020) total
remuneration for yearly new RES installations
[€/MWhRES]
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 35Slide 35
Increasing biomass availability
Availability of biomass in Finland
NAT scenario ACT scenario
• The total primary energy use of biomass in 2020 is with 10,444 ktoe in the NAT and
11,862 ktoe in the ACT scenarios similar in both scenarios.
• In both scenarios, forestry products and forestry residues are strongly dominating the
market, while only small amounts of biomass get imported.
Finland ACT (proactive support - realisable deployment)
Feedstock category UnitTotal
2015
Imports
2015
Total
2020
Imports
2020
Agricultural products [ktoe] 217 35 267 129
Agricultural residues [ktoe] 334 : 448 :
Forestry products [ktoe] 5.573 : 6.046 :
Forestry residues [ktoe] 3.872 313 4.020 675
Biowaste [ktoe] 234 : 276 :
Total biomass availibility [ktoe] 10.577 11.862
Finland NAT (National target fulfillment)
Feedstock category UnitTotal
2015
Imports
2015
Total
2020
Imports
2020
Agricultural products [ktoe] 168 35 220 129
Agricultural residues [ktoe] 329 : 407 :
Forestry products [ktoe] 4.976 : 5.259 :
Forestry residues [ktoe] 3.872 153 3.970 183
Biowaste [ktoe] 233 : 275 :
Total biomass availibility [ktoe] 9.765 10.444
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 36Slide 36
Flexibility/Joint projects/European perspective
Excess and deficit production of renewables compared to the indicative trajectory in Finland
FinlandNAT (National target fulfillment)
Sector UnitAverage
2011 - 2012
Average
2013 - 2014
Average
2015 - 2016
Average
2017 - 20182020
Excess [ktoe] 1.377 1.238 1.058 761 424
Deficit [ktoe] : : : : :
FinlandEU (European perspercitve)
Sector UnitAverage
2011 - 2012
Average
2013 - 2014
Average
2015 - 2016
Average
2017 - 20182020
Excess [ktoe] 1.433 1.362 1.332 1.170 900
Deficit [ktoe] : : : : :
FinlandACT (proactive support - realisable deployment)
Sector UnitAverage
2011 - 2012
Average
2013 - 2014
Average
2015 - 2016
Average
2017 - 20182020
Excess [ktoe] 1.689 1.903 2.065 2.183 2.301
Deficit [ktoe] : : : : :
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 37Slide 37
Costs & benefits* of the future RES deployment (new installations 2006 to 2020)*monetary expression – limited to direct avoidance of fossil fuels and the corresponding contribution to combat climate change
Referring to “low
energy demand
(growth)”
Estimated costs & benefits of RES policy support measures
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 38Slide 38
Costs & benefits* of the future RES deployment (new installations 2006 to 2020)*monetary expression – limited to direct avoidance of fossil fuels and the corresponding contribution to combat climate change
Referring to
“moderate
energy demand
(growth)”
Estimated costs & benefits of RES policy support measures
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 39Slide 39
Policy evaluation: RES deployment versus policy cost (consumer expenditures)
Estimated costs & benefits of RES policy support measures
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 40Slide 40
Concluding remarks for Finland
• In the NAT and ACT scenarios Finland achieve its 38% 2020 RES target.
• An important growth will have particularly the RES-E sector up to 2020.
• In the RES-E sector a key role will play biomass (solid) and hydro (large & small
scale).
• Biomass (decentral & grid connected) will generate the mayor contribution in the
RES-H sector.
• The 10% target of RES in transport will be mainly fulfilled through biofuels imports.
• Increased RES deployment brings large benefits to Finland’s supply security.
• Increased penetration of RES does have a price but actual costs and benefits are strongly influenced by the future energy price & demand development.
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 41Slide 41
General remarks (EU level)
Necessary steps to let the target of 20% RES by 2020 become reality:
• Removal of non-economic barriers of an accelerated RES deployment is a
precondition for reaching the 2020 RES commitment (at moderate cost)
• A stable effective & efficient RES policy based on technology-specific support
is a key success criterion – “Stop-and-Go(GO)” policies increase the cost of meeting
Europe’s RES commitment
• Ambitious RES support needs to be accomplished by a strong energy efficiency policy
• The new policy framework requires strong central coordination to assure the
required flexibility (for RES target achievement)
o continuous monitoring of member states progress
o transparency (e.g. trading platform)
o clear enforcement mechanism (in case of non-compliance)
Thanks for your attention!Thanks for your attention!
In case of questions / remarks:
• Email: [email protected]
• or http://www.repap2020.eu
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 43Slide 43
Background information: the Green-X model
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 44Slide 44
Overview on economic & technical specifications for new RES-E plant
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 45Slide 45
Overview on economic & technical specifications for new RES-H plant (grid & non-grid)
Finland Finland –– 44thth May May –– Slide 46Slide 46
Overview on economic & technical specifications for new RES-T plant