Upload
chessa
View
31
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The challenge of running 100% renewable energy scenarios M ethodological issues. 2nd Ghent Summer School August 28, 2014. D. Devogelaer, FPB. 100% what?. Mission from 4 energy ministers in 2011: 1 federal, 3 regional ministers of Energy Concerns on climate, economy and SoS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
plan.be
The challenge of running 100% renewable energy scenarios
Methodological issues
2nd Ghent Summer SchoolAugust 28, 2014
D. Devogelaer, FPB
plan.be
100% what?
• Mission from 4 energy ministers in 2011:
• 1 federal, 3 regional ministers of Energy
• Concerns on climate, economy and SoS• Time frame, target and consortium fixed:
2050 - 100% - FPB (fed), VITO (Fl), ICEDD (Wl)
manoeuver within that framework
plan.be
“You say you want a [renewable] revolution…
We'd all love to see the plan” The Beatles, White Album,
1968
Relatively easy to calculate number of windmills, solar panels, ... required, less straightforward to have them all available when needed
(V)LT model Scenario analysis
How can we answer a question like this?
Which model?
Which scenarios
?
Which output?
Which input?
plan.be
The model
plan.be
« En économie, un modèle est une représentation simplifiée de la réalité économique ou d'une partie de celle-ci. Comme dans les autres disciplines scientifiques, les modèles économiques utilisent le formalisme mathématique qui permet de représenter le modèle sous forme d'équations. Outre ces équations, les modèles empiriques sont constitués d’une banque de données propre et généralement d’un jeu de paramètres. «
Source: FPB.
• a description of a system using mathematical concepts and language
• used not only in natural sciences (e.g. physics) and engineering disciplines (e.g. computer science, artificial intelligence), but also in social sciences (e.g. economics)
• may help to explain a system and to study the effects of different components, but also to make projections about future behaviour
• basically, a set of interrelated equations that can assign results either to a variable or to a dimension value
Model: What(’s in a name)?
plan.be
• What is your research question? • Which models are apt to answer the question?
100% study: Model TIMES
1. National energy system2. VITO partner in project3. Quick feedback loops4. Experience with time horizon 2050
How do you define the choice of the model?
plan.be
• Partial equilibrium (energy) model• Bottom-up optimisation model of the national
energy system • Detailed representation of energy-material flows
and technologies (broad sense) • Various alternative technological choices • Up to 2050• Driving factor: fulfilment of energy service
demand (≠ energy demand)
Basic principles of TIMES model
plan.be
Challenge: Dealing with variable renewable sources daily and seasonal fluctuations
Click icon to add chart
Source: Elia.
plan.be
1. Cope with uncertainty of power supply
• Extending the temporal resolution to 78 periods in one year = 26 periods of two weeks x 3 periods a day
• Reserve capacity requirement (sum of nominal power of biomass plants, geothermal and storage facilities)
• Constraint to assure that BE can be self sustained for 14 consecutive days without counting on wind and solar
2. Day-night and seasonal electricity storage options
3. Alternative solutions to increase system’s flexibility• Overproduction - grid disconnection curtailment• Endogenous steel production timing (not ‘just in time’)
4. Endogenous transmission and distribution network
Major model improvements for dealing with variable character of renewable energy
plan.be
How do you go about? • Literature review: problem of finding exactly what you
need
• Geographical scope
• Time frame
• “Old” data
• Coherence
• …
• Stakeholders: want to have their say, can deliver valuable input, but
• Often not familiar with model specificities
• Often not aware of time lags of model
• One model cannot solve all
• Expert judgment: more difficult for references/objectivity
Define assumptions
plan.be
You will get attacked on your assumptions… always!
• Because it is no exact science e.g. oil price projections
• Because by the time your study gets published, assumptions can be out-dated -> the curse of the modeller
• By pressure groups, lobbyists, but also peers
Solution: Perform sensitivity analyses to test robustness of results
Often the definition of assumptions is an exercise on its own and can give rise to new studies!
Define assumptions (II)
plan.be
Background information
Surface: 30.000 km2
Population: 11 million (330p/km2)GDP: 350 billion €Final energy consumption: 1800 PJ Per capita final energy consumption:
150% EU27 average or 75% USHydro: limited to 120 MW Domestic fossil energy supply = 0
plan.be
• Belgian GDP: increases at an AAGR of 1.8% in 2010-2050 • Fuel prices: Energy roadmap 2050, CPI, crude oil to some 127
$’08/bbl in 2050
• Carbon price: Energy roadmap 2050, CPI, 15 €/tCO2 in 2020, 51 €/tCO2 in 2050
• CCS technologies: not allowed• Coal: no investments in new coal fired PP’s• Nuclear: current legislation on the phasing out of nuclear PP’s• Electricity imports: limited to 5.8 TWh (average Belgian net
imports 2003-2010)
Assumptions
plan.be
Assumptions on renewable costs
plan.be
Assumptions on electricity storage costs
plan.be
The scenarios
plan.be
Definition of scenarios REF Fossil Benchmark scenario
plan.be
The output
plan.be
Results for REF
plan.be
While presenting the results to the stakeholder committee, they noticed that costs for REF were relatively low -> in the search for an answer, it came about that investments in coal fired power plants were still allowed
• Relatively low prices in 2050 due to lack of oil indexation
• No GHG target so not penalised
Changed that, so no new coal investments in power generation
Analysis of results
plan.be
Results for REN scenarios
plan.be
• Model has tendency to postpone investments: bulk of investments during the final decade
• Makes economical sense, but from a societal point of view non-sense
• Imposition of targets:35% of primary energy in 2030, 65% in 2040, 100% in 2050
Analysis of results
plan.be
Energy mix: Primary energy, 2050
Source: TIMES.
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Solar Bioenergy (domestic and import)Total ambient heat (air + ground) HydroWind onshore Wind offshoreWind offshore, non-Belgian territory Electricity - import
PJ
plan.be
Energy mix: Final energy, 2050
Click icon to add chart
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Electricity Biomass Hydrogen Heat (air & ground & direct) Coal Gas Oil
PJ
Source: TIMES.
plan.be
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Biomass (incl. CHP)GeothermalHydroPVWind offshoreWind onshoreGasWind offshore - non Belgian territoryImported electricity (other)Of which excess electricity
TW
h
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND0
50
100
150
200
250
Biomass (incl. CHP)GeothermalHydroPVWind offshoreWind onshoreGasWind offshore - non Belgian territory
GW
e
Source: TIMES.
Energy mix: Power generation, 2050
plan.be
Energy mix: Power generation capacities (MW), 2020-2050
DEM GRID PVBIO WIND
plan.be
Storage capacities: Electricity (GWh), 2020-2050
DEM GRID PVBIO WIND
plan.be
Energy mix: Energy flows in PV scenario (PJ), 2050
Source: http://www.emis.vito.be/artikel/naar-100-hernieuwbare-energie-belgi%C3%AB-tegen-2050-video
plan.be
Costs: Energy system costs (M€2005), 2050
Source: TIMES.
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
Variable costsInvestment and fixed costsDemand reductions
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
-20000
-10000
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
Variable costsInvestment and fixed costsDemand reductions
plan.be
Costs: Additional cost wrt REF (% of GDP), 2050
DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
5.0%
Additional total cost Additional energy system cost
Source: TIMES.
plan.be
Costs: Additional cost incl. avoided GHG damage cost (M€2005), 2050
• Total annual add. cost wrt REF, when (global) benefit of avoided GHG in 2050 is included
• Lord Stern@Davos: ‘I got it wrong on climate change – it's far, far worse’ The Observer, Jan 26, 2013 DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
-15000
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
Low case CO2 damage (130 €/ton)
High case CO2 damage (300 €/ton)
No longer a cost...
... but a benefit
plan.be
Costs: Additional investments wrt REF (M€2005)
DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
-50000
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
Agriculture CHP Commercial Conversion
Electricity Industry Other sectors Residential
Transport
DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
-2000
3000
8000
13000
18000
23000
28000
Agriculture CHP Commercial Conversion
Electricity Industry Other sectors Residential
Transport
Cumulative for 2013-2050
Investments in 2050
plan.be
Costs: Cumulative additional investment expenditures in the electricity sector (M€2005)
DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
Conventional Geothermal Grid expansion Others Solar Storage Wind
Source: TIMES.
Cumulative for 2013-2050
plan.be
Some things ‘outside’ the model
plan.be
• Part of the assignment was to look at the socio-economical impact of the transformation
• Problem: not within modelling environment• So you start again with
• a literature overview
• looking for an adequate model or instrument
• defining your data
• analysing your results
• …
Some things outside the model
plan.be
• Article of Wei et al. (2010)• Look at ways to adapt to Belgian situation
• Capacity factors
• Lifetime
• Domestic production
• …
• Gather data: define the input that you need and find sourcesSources have to be as coherent as possible with each other and with the previous exercise
• Make spreadsheet model• Run the model
Employment
plan.be
Employment: Some estimations
• The RES trajectories all create more job-years or FTE’s than REF
• REF already integrates a lot of renewables
• PV creates the most FTE’s in any given year
• BIO and DEM are the second highest job generating scenarios
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
DEM GRID BIO PV WIND
Source: Wei et al. (2010), Federal Planning Bureau (2013).
Annual job-years generated over REF due to the RES trajectories, 2020-2030 Total FTE’s
plan.be
• Going from average to min-max ranges • Going from all jobs to types of jobs• Results in ranges of CIM and O&M and fuel processing
jobs for the years 2020 and 2030
Employment: Some estimations (II)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
90000
100000
CIM min O&M min Indirect min2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
90000
100000
CIM max O&M max Indirect max
Source: Federal Planning Bureau (2013).
plan.be
Employment: Some estimations (III)
• National macrosectoral model: HERMES<FPB
• WIND scenario• Results in % wrt
REF
Source: Federal Planning Bureau (2014).
Click icon to add chart
Confidential
plan.be
Other things ‘outside’ the model
plan.be
• 6 critical areas of government action/intervention1. Defining a clear institutional framework
2. Improving energy efficiency
3. Supporting renewable energy production
4. Improving energy infrastructure
5. Supporting research and development
6. Facilitating the electrification of the society• Principles for designing policies Cost effectiveness Fairness Competitiveness
PAMs
plan.be
Technically, a 100% renewable energy system is feasible without having to change the economic paradigm.
However, such a radical society transformation implies that:
o A highly ambitious renewable target goes hand in hand with a trend towards electrification: a doubling/tripling of power production is noted, curtailment is necessary
o Energy imports strongly diminish but remain important: imports tumble from 83% (REF) to [42%-15%] depending on the scenario
o Society shifts from a fuel intensive to a capital intensive society
o It seems cost efficient to maintain overcapacities, both in industry and power generation new paradigm in energy perception
Conclusions (1/2)
plan.be
Conclusions (2/2)
o This comes at a significant cost: in 2050, energy system costs increase by 20% wrt REF, BUT…
o When including disutility costs, the total add. cost is even higher (30%)
o With disutility + GHG damage net positive effect of some scenarios +/- 10 B€/year (highly dependent on GHG damage cost assumptions)
o 300 to 400 billion € of additional investments are needed o Sensitivity to fuel prices and PV costs
o PV costs from 371 – 1000 €05/kWp => variation of 0.5% of GDP2050
o Variant of REF scenario with higher oil prices (250 $08/boe in 2050) additional costs decrease
o Creation of additional employmento 20 000 to 60 000 additional full-time jobs in 2030
o Cost efficiency of adapting to energy flow variability
o Further research is certainly needed
plan.be
• Presentations National International
• TED conference• Summer school (1&2)• Other studies
Central Economic Council: Construction of a model capable of analysing the socio-economical impacts of ‘quelconque’ energy policy
Climact, VITO: Scenarios for a low carbon Belgium by 2050
ICEDD: Le coût d’une transition énergétique postposée en Wallonie
…
• Political First Common Commission on Energy in 2013 Flemish Government’s demand to study 2030
implications
Follow up
plan.be
Thank you!
•Contact:•Danielle Devogelaer, [email protected] •Dominique Gusbin, [email protected] •Jan Duerinck, [email protected] •Wouter Nijs, [email protected] •Yves Marenne, [email protected] •Marco Orsini, [email protected]
plan.be
Space requirements: Surface (km2), 2050
Results
REF DEM GRID BIO PV WIND0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
Solar Wind offshore (BE) Wind onshore Biomass (domestic and imported)
Belgian land surface Belgian Continental Plate
km
2
plan.be
External fuel bill
Click icon to add chart
2020 2030 2040 2050
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
Bioenergy Electricity from trade Gas Nuclear Oil products Solid fuels
Total energy import costs, Reference scenario (M€2005)
Source: TIMES.
+53%