Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Techno-economic assessment of potential CCS deployment in the Southern African region. Bruno Merven , ERC in conjunction with VITO and the World Bank. The World Bank. Sandton , South Africa , 31st May 2011 World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Techno-economic assessment of potential CCS deployment in the Southern African region
Bruno Merven, ERCin conjunction with VITO and the World Bank
The World Bank
Sandton, South Africa, 31st May 2011World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Techno-economic assessment of potential CCS deployment in Southern African Region
• World Bank project conducted by consortium of VITO (Belgium), EIHP (Croatia) and ERC (South Africa)
• Overall objective:– Assess possible application and development of
CCS in power systems in Balkan and Southern Africa regions using a techno-economic model
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 2World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Project Activities
• Assessment of available underground storages and their economic characteristics
• Development of a regional techno-economic model (interconnected power system)
• Scenario based simulation and optimization• Workshop support and results presentation• Project report
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 3World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Study Area of Southern African Region
• 4 Countries: South Africa, Botswana, Mozambique and Namibia
• Population: 74.5 million• GDP (PPP): ~600 billion (2000US$)• Electricity demand – ~278 TWh growing by
~200 TWh by 2030• Total installed capacity (2009): ~47 GW
thermal: 90% (Mainly coal) remainder Hydro• Critical system reserve in several countries• South Africa accounts for ~91% of total
electricity demand• Regional transmission network is sparsely
connected with some new connection projects underway
• CO2 emission from power sector – ~246 Mton• UNFCC/Kyoto: ratified by all countries in study.
Only South Africa has a quantitative reduction target
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 4World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Generation expansion options
• Large coal resource available in all four countries• Natural gas: Namibia, Mozambique, South Africa
(LNG/pipeline imports)• CBM Potential in Botswana• Nuclear program under consideration in South Africa• Large scale hydro in Namibia and Mozambique• Solar (all four countries), wind (SA, Namibia),
biomass (SA, Mozambique)
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 5World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
General modeling Assumptions• Model used MESSAGE (IIASA/IAEA)• Planning horizon: 2010-2030• Demand Projection based on IRP (SA) and SAPP pool plan study• Real discount rate: 8%• All costs expressed in US$ (level 2010 – 7.4 Rands to the US$)• Gradual decrease of electricity import to 15% of domestic energy
needs by 2020• RE limited to 30% in each country• Technology and Fuel Costs based on SA IRP 2011 (dry cooling for
coal)• Technology learning applied to RE• CCS plant cost and efficiency calculated by scaling IRP costs and
efficiency by increment in generic costs and efficiencies researched by Vito.
• Coal plants with CCS cost about 50% more and are 7% less efficient• Retrofit costs given 40% premium above plant built with CCS first
time.Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 6World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
CCS transport and storage options
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 7World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
Oil/Gas FieldsCoal Fields
Saline Aquifers
• Transport Costs based on IPCC of $1/tonCO2/100km• Storage Costs around $10-$15 /tonCO2
The World Bank
Levelized Cost Curves for Electricity
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 8World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Leve
lized
Cos
t in
$/M
Wh
Capacity Factor
CCGTCCS
CCGTCoal CCS ECBM
Coal CCS EOR
Coal
Nuclear
Imported Hydro
CSP
SPV
Wind
Biomass
The World Bank
Levelized Cost Curves for Electricity
• EOR benefit estimated by Vito at $40/tonCO2 and ECBM at $4.8/tonCO2• Cross over for Coal-Nuclear: $25/ton• Cross over for Coal CCS Botswana and Coal: $40/ton• Nuclear always costs more than CCS with EOR and less than CCS with ECBM
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 50 100
LCO
E ($/
MW
h)
CO2 Price ($/ton)
Coal no CCS
SA Oil/Saline Aq no EOR
Botswana no ECBM
Botswana ECBM
Nuclear
SA Oil EOR
Mozambique-Oil EOR
LCOE CCS options vs Coal and Nuclear
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 9World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
-40.0
-20.0
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Coal Coal CCS Moz Coal CCS Moz EOR
Coal CCS Bot Coal CCS Bot ECBM
LCO
E ($/
MW
h)
Capital O&M Fuel Transport Storage Total
Breakdown of Coal CCS options
The World Bank
Cost Curve for CCS (SA)
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 10World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
50 500 5000 50000
LCO
E ($/
MW
h)
Cumulative Capacity Logarithmic scale (TWh or Mton-CO2)
MozOil
/Gas2030
100 Mt
SAOil
/Gas202077 Mt
BotswanaCoal Fields
20203,780 Mt
SASaline Aquifers
202542,000 Mt
• Oil/gas fields in Mozambique/SA most cost effective CCS option but storage capacity limited (450 MW, 350 MW running 85% for 30 years)
• Botswana coal fields capacity large but more expensive than nuclear (~17 GW)• Saline aquifer storage potential even larger but injectivity, capacity and costs
uncertain
Nuclear
The World Bank
Development scenarios• Reference scenario: least cost optimization• Baseline scenario: South Africa IRP “revised
balanced” – with CO2 Limit on South Africa– Without EOR/ECBM benefits– With EOR/ECBM benefits
• CO2 tax scenarios (with EOR/ECBM benefits and CO2 limit for South Africa)– $25/ton CO2 – $50/ton CO2 – $100/ton CO2
(All scenarios have IRP committed build plan)Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 11World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Reference (least cost) scenario• Generation dominated by
coal, with some hydro• Diesel and Natural gas used
for peaking• CO2 emission
– Cumulative: 6,418 Mton– 2030: 380 Mton
• Average generation cost hovers around 47$/MWh before increasing from 2022 onwards, reaching around 53 $/MWh in 2030.
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 12World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Elec
trici
ty S
uppl
y (T
Wh)
Coal Existing Coal New CCGT Nuclear Hydro Wind
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
-50
100 150 200 250 300 350 400
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Aver
age
Gene
ratio
n Co
sts
($/M
Wh)
CO2
Emiss
ions
(M
t)
CO2 Emissions Avg Gen Costs
Power Generation
Emissions and Costs
The World Bank
Baseline Scenario (IRP SA)• Less coal and more RE and
Nuclear to meet SA emissions target
• Avg. costs rise to $67/MWh• Some Gas CCS plants near the
depleted oil/gas fields, with cumulative stored reaching 25Mton CO2
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 13World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Elec
trici
ty S
uppl
y (T
Wh)
Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS CCGT CCGT CCS
Nuclear Hydro Biomass Solar Wind
-
5
10
15
20
25
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Cum
ulati
ve S
tore
d CO
2 (M
ton)
South Africa depleted oil field
South Africa export to Mozambique Depleted Oil fields
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
-50
100 150 200 250 300 350
2010
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
Aver
age
Gene
ratio
n Co
sts
($/M
Wh)
CO2
Emiss
ions
(M
t)
CO2 Emissions Avg Gen Costs
Power Generation
Emissions and Costs Stored CO2
The World Bank
$25/ton CO2 Tax scenario•CCS coal option becomes
competitive for South Africa•Share of CCS based
generation reaches 10% in 2030
•Avg costs rise to $77/MWh•Depleted SA oil fields reach
maximum potential by 2028.•CO2 redirected to
Mozambique
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 14World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
050
100150200250300350400450500
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Elec
trici
ty S
uppl
y (T
Wh)
Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS CCGT CCGT CCS
Nuclear Hydro Biomass Solar Wind
-
50
100
150
200
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Cum
ulati
ve S
tore
d CO
2 (M
ton)
South Africa depleted oil field
South Africa export to Mozambique Depleted Oil fields
404550556065707580
-50
100 150 200 250 300 350
2010
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
Aver
age
Gene
ratio
n Co
sts
($/M
Wh)
CO2
Emiss
ions
(M
t)
CO2 Emissions Avg Gen Costs
The World Bank
$100/ton CO2 Tax scenario•CCS now is also competitive in
Botswana and Namibia•Share of CCS based
generation reaches 16% in 2030•Avg costs rise to $120/MWh•Depleted SA oil fields reach
maximum potential by 2026.•SA CO2 redirected to
Mozambique and Botswana
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 15World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Elec
trici
ty S
uppl
y (T
Wh)
Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS CCGT CCGT CCS
Nuclear Hydro Biomass Solar Wind
406080100120140
-
100
200
300
400
2010
2013
2016
2019
2022
2025
2028
Aver
age
Gene
ratio
n Co
sts
($/M
Wh)
CO2
Emiss
ions
(M
t)
CO2 Emissions Avg Gen Costs
-
200
400
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Cum
ulati
ve S
tore
d CO
2 (M
ton)
South Africa depleted oil fieldSouth Africa Saline Aquifer (East)South Africa export to Botswana coal fieldsSouth Africa export to Mozambique Depleted Oil fieldsBotswana coal fieldsNamibia Depleted Oil fields
The World Bank
Results Summary: Emissions and Costs
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 16World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
350.00
400.0020
10
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
CO2
Emiss
ions
(M
ton)
Reference
Baseline
Baseline EOR
$25/tonEOR
$50/tonEOR
$100/ton EOR
• SA CO2 target in Baseline (IRP) drops regional emissions by 28% in 2030 (11% cumul.) relative to reference (least cost).
• Further significant reductions only seen at $100/ton CO2 price.
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Aver
age
Gene
ratio
n Co
sts
($/M
Wh)
Reference
Baseline
Baseline EOR
$25/tonEOR
$50/tonEOR
$100/ton EOR
The World Bank
Results summary: Structure of Generation and Stored CO2
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 17World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
• Coal share does not change much between Base-line, $25 CO2 tax and $50 CO2 tax but drops when tax increased to $100/ton
• In baseline contribution of CCS marginal mainly in terms of CCGT CCS• With a CO2 tax Coal CCS starts coming in
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2010
2030
Ref
eren
ce
2030
Bas
elin
e
2030
Bas
elin
e EO
R
2030
$25
/ton
EOR
2030
$50
/ton
EOR
2030
$10
0/to
n EO
R
Cum
ulati
ve S
tore
d CO
2 (M
ton)
Shar
e of
Tot
al E
lect
ricity
Gen
erati
on
Gas CCS
Coal CCS
Other RE
Hydro/PS
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Stored CO2 (Mton)
The World Bank
ConclusionsProject activities realised• An analysis focusing on the use of CCS (Carbon Capture and
Storage) technologies and their competitiveness with other options was carried out
• Underground storage volume and associated transport and storage costs were researched and estimated
• CCS options in electricity generation and their costs were estimated
• Techno-economic model for optimisation was developed• Several development scenarios were simulated
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 18World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
ConclusionsRole of CCS in the region
• Oil/gas fields in SA/Mozambique most cost effective CCS options but storage capacity limited
• Botswana coal fields capacity large but more expensive than nuclear• Saline aquifer storage potential even larger but needs more research• In the baseline (SA IRP) scenario with the CO2 constraint, CCS
contributes marginally to help SA meet its target.• At $25 and $50 CO2 taxes, Coal CCS with the depleted oil/gas fields
in South Africa and Mozambique for storage become cost effective and play a slightly bigger role.
• CCS using coal fields for storage only come into play at $100/ton tax.
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 19World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Possible next steps• Further research of availability and costs of
underground storages needed in all the countries in the region to reduce uncertainty
• Modeling of Transport and Storage options could be improved
• Look further than 2030.• Other constraints on CCS (e.g. water)• Expanding the analysis to the rest of the
region• Other sectors e.g. CTL, industrialTechno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 20World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Thank you for your attention!
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 21World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
0
100
200
300
400
500
600TW
h Namibia
Mozambique
Botswana
South Africa
Electricity demand projection
~ 200 TWh
SA demand based on IRP 2011, others based on SAPP pool plan study of 2008
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 22World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Techno-economic model• MESSAGE (Model for Energy Supply Strategy Alternatives and
their General Environmental Impact)– Developed by IIASA (International Institute for Applied System
Analysis) and IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)– Available free of charge for IAEA member countries– Training available through IAEA TC projects
• Physical flow model– Demand driven– Used for medium to long-term energy system planning, energy
policy analysis, and scenario development– Linear and mixed integer programming– Built-in multi-regional modeling option
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 23World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Installed power (2009)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Botswana Mozambique Namibia South Africa
Shar
e of
Inst
alle
d Ca
pacit
y
Pump Stor
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 24World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
Botswana: Coal Mozambique: Mainly coal with some oilNamibia: Hydro and Coal South Africa: Mainly coal with some
nuclear, and peaking (Pump Storage + OCGTs)
The World Bank
Generation (2009)
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
Botswana Mozambique Namibia South Africa
Gene
ratio
n (T
Wh) Net Imports
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 25World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
Around 87% of power generated from coal thermal, mainly in South Africa
The World Bank
Fuel prices
Fuel USD/GJ Price
Diesel – imported 27.0 Natural gas – domestic 8.8 Natural gas – imported 10.8
Coal – domestic 2.0 Nuclear fuel 0.8
Fuel Prices based on SA IRP 2011
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 26World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
Generic Technology Options and Costs
Technology Costs based on SA IRP 2011 (dry cooling for coal)Technology learning applied to RE
Plant description Fuel typeCapital
cost USD/kW
Fixed O&M
USD/kW
VariableO&M
USD/MWhEfficiency
Available/capacity
factorCapacity
credit
OCGT liquid fuels Diesel 547 9.5 0.0 30% 89% 1
Combined cycle gas Gas/LNG 842 20.0 0.0 48% 90% 1
Supercritical coal Coal 1 314 25.4 6.0 37% 85% 1
PWR nuclear Nuclear fuel 6 412 0 12.9 33% 85% 1
Biomass Renewable 4 496 131.4 4.2 25% 85% 1
Bulk Wind Renewable 2 000 35.9 0.0 NA 29% 0.23
Solar thermal central receiver Renewable 5 207 81.5 0.0 NA 41% 1
Solar PV (bulk) Renewable 3 896 67.8 0.0 NA 20% 0
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 27World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
CCS Capture Options
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 28World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
Plant description Fuel TypeCapital
cost USD/kW
Fixed O&M
USD/kW
VariableO&M
USD/MWhEfficiency
Availablecapacity
factor
CCGT with CCS Gas 1 314 25.4 0.0 39% 89%
Coal Supercritical with CCS Coal 4 046 71.8 6.6 30% 85%
The World Bank
Storage Options Identified and modelled
• Storage data from SA CCS Atlas, and limited available geological survey data• EOR benefit estimated by Vito at $40/tonCO2 and ECBM at $4.8/tonCO2• Some options not modelled because of high uncertainty and costs.• Start year for Namibia and Mozambique oil fields brought forward within model horizon.
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 29World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
Country # in Mat-
rix
Site Name Location Capacity (Gton) Uncertainty
Risk premium
Storage Cost (USD/ton)
No EOR/ECBM
Storage Cost (USD/ton)
with EOR/ECBM
Start Year
Modelled?
South Africa 1 Karoo Basin Inland 12 very high NA - - NA NoSAF 2 Zululand Mesozoic Basin On-Shore East Coast 0.46 high 100% 15.00 15.00 2025 Yes 3 Mezosoic Algoa and
Gamtoos BasinOn-Shore South Coast 0.4 high 50% 11.25 11.25 2025 Yes
4 Onshore coal fields On-Shore inland 1.2 very high NA - - NA No 5 Mesozoic Outeniqua Basin Off-shore South coast 48 high 50% 11.25 11.25 2025 Yes 6 Mesozoic Orange Basin Off-shore West coast 56 high 50% - - 2025 No 7 Mesezoic Durban Basin Off-shore East coast 42 high 50% 11.25 11.25 2025 Yes 8 Depleted oil/gas fields Off-shore South coast 0.077 medium 25% 9.38 -30.63 2020 YesBotswana 9 Coal fields South 3.78 high 50% 6.45 6.45 2020 YesBOT 10 Saline aquifers South unknown very high NA - - NA NoMozambique 11 Coal fields Inland North 6 very high 100% 10.20 10.20 2025 YesMOZ 12 Depleted gas fields South 0.1 very high 50% 11.25 -28.75 2029 Yes 13 Saline aquifer (Ibo) Off-shore North unknown very high NA - - NA NoNamibia 14 Saline aquifer Inland East unknown very high NA - - NA NoNAM 15 Depleted oil/gas fields Off-shore South 0.129 high 75% 13.13 -26.88 2029 Yes
The World Bank
SA IRP committed build plan
Committed build
RTS
Cap
acitr
y
Med
upi (
Coa
l)
Kus
ile (C
oal)
Ingu
la (P
S)
DO
E O
CG
T IP
P
Cog
ener
atio
n
Win
d
CSP
Land
fill,
hydr
o
Sere
(Win
d)
Dec
omm
.
MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW 2010 380 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 0 2011 679 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 2012 303 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 100 100 0 2013 101 722 0 333 1020 0 400 0 25 0 0 2014 0 722 0 999 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 2015 0 1444 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 -180 2016 0 722 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -90 2017 0 722 1446 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2018 0 0 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019 0 0 1446 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2020 0 0 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2021 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -75 2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1870 2023 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2280 2024 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -909 2025 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1520 2026 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2027 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2028 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2850 2029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1128 2030 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1463 4332 4338 1332 1020 390 700 200 125 100 -10902
Committed build plan is “forced in” all scenarios.
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 30World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
The World Bank
SA “Revised Balanced” IRP
Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Southern Africa | Sandton | May 2011 | 31World Bank CCS Capacity Building Trust Fund
Committed build New build options
RTS Capac
itryMedu
pi Kusile Ingula
DOE OCGT
IPP
Cogeneration, own build Wind CSP
Landfill,
hydro Sere
Decommissioni
ng
Coal (PF, FBC,
Imports)
Gas CCGT OCGT
Import
Hydro WindSolar
PVSolar CSP
Nuclear
Fleet MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW
2010 380 0 0 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02011 679 0 0 0 0 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02012 303 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 02013 101 722 0 333 1020 0 400 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 02014 0 722 0 999 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 400 300 0 02015 0 1444 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 -180 500 0 0 0 400 300 0 02016 0 722 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -90 0 0 0 0 400 300 100 02017 0 722 1446 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 300 100 02018 0 0 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 300 100 02019 0 0 1446 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 400 300 100 02020 0 0 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 237 0 0 400 300 100 02021 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -75 250 237 0 0 400 300 100 02022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1870 250 237 805 1143 400 300 100 02023 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2280 250 0 805 1183 400 300 100 16002024 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -909 250 0 0 283 800 300 100 16002025 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1520 250 0 805 0 1600 1000 100 16002026 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000 0 0 0 400 500 0 16002027 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 1600 500 0 02028 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2850 1000 474 690 0 0 500 0 16002029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1128 250 237 805 0 0 1000 0 16002030 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000 948 0 0 0 1000 0 0
1463 4332 4338 1332 1020 390 700 200 125 100 -10902 6250 2370 3910 2609 8400 8400 1000 9600
