University of Groningen

Renewable energy scenarios for AlbaniaXhitoni, Anisa

Published in:Default journal

IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.

Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Publication date:2013

Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database

Citation for published version (APA):Xhitoni, A. (2013). Renewable energy scenarios for Albania. Default journal.

CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.

Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.

Download date: 26-12-2019

CIO, Center for Isotope Research

IVEM, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies

Master Programme Energy and Environmental Sciences

Renewable energy scenarios

for Albania

Anisa Xhitoni

EES 2013-178 T

University of Groningen

Training report of Anisa Xhitoni

Supervised by: Dr. R.M.J. Benders (IVEM)

Dr. C. Visser (IVEM)

University of Groningen

CIO, Center for Isotope Research

IVEM, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies

Nijenborgh 4

9747 AG Groningen

The Netherlands

http://www.rug.nl/fmns-research/cio

http://www.rug.nl/fmns-research/ivem

Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 3

Përmbledhje .......................................................................................................................................... 5

List of abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. 7

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 9

1.1. Background ............................................................................................................................ 9

1.2. Current electricity situation in Albania ............................................................................... 9

1.3. Motivation and research design ......................................................................................... 10

1.4. Boundaries ........................................................................................................................... 11

1.5. Methodology of research..................................................................................................... 11

2. Electricity system in Albania ...................................................................................................... 13

2.1. Institutional and policy characteristics ............................................................................. 13

2.2. Past and present .................................................................................................................. 14

2.3. Future ................................................................................................................................... 15

2.4. Renewable energy potentials .............................................................................................. 16

2.4.1. Hydro power ............................................................................................................... 16

2.4.2. Solar power ................................................................................................................. 18

2.4.3. Wind Power ................................................................................................................. 19

2.4.4. Geothermal Power ...................................................................................................... 20

2.4.5. Biomass ........................................................................................................................ 21

2.5. Energy Efficiency ................................................................................................................. 22

3. Model ........................................................................................................................................... 25

3.1. SMD and SMD growth ....................................................................................................... 25

3.2. Load Duration Curve and chronological pattern ............................................................ 26

3.3. Wind pattern ........................................................................................................................ 27

3.4. Sun Pattern .......................................................................................................................... 28

3.5. Considering import ............................................................................................................. 28

4. Scenarios and results .................................................................................................................. 31

4.1. Business as Usual ................................................................................................................ 31

4.2. Efficient transmission and distribution system scenario ................................................. 34

4.3. Fully Renewable scenario ................................................................................................... 35

4.3.1. Fully Renewable scenario excluding pumped-hydro storage .................................. 35

4.3.2. Fully Renewable scenario including pumped-hydro storage ..................................... 37

4.4. Worst case scenario ............................................................................................................. 38

4.5. Costs ..................................................................................................................................... 40

5. Conclusions and discussion........................................................................................................ 43

5.1. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 43

5.2. Recommendation for future research ................................................................................ 45

6. References ................................................................................................................................... 47

7. Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 51

Appendix 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 51

Appendix 2 ...................................................................................................................................... 54

Appendix 3 ...................................................................................................................................... 55

3

Summary

The electricity production in Albania is highly based on hydro-power, accounting for 97% of the

total production. However, the amount of electricity produced by the hydropower plants (HPPs)

varies much every year due to climate factors such as the amount of rain and snow falls. For this

reason, the Albanian electricity sector is often not stable and in need of imported electricity.

Studies indicate also that the high dependency of the Albanian electricity sector on hydro-power,

makes it also very vulnerable in the long term, due to expected impacts of climate change,

including high temperatures and drought. Moreover, technical losses due to the low efficiency in

the transmission and distribution system, are higher than 30%.

This study attempts to research whether the Albania can make use of its other renewable

potentials along with the existing hydro-potentials, for creating a sustainable and self-reliable

electricity system by 2030. For this reason, the methodology used is a combination of literature

review and model building using the Power Plan modeling software. Firstly, the amount of

electricity was researched, which can be saved annually if the losses in transmission and

distribution network would be not higher than 8% in 2030. This target was based on the draft of

the Albanian National Energy Strategy. Furthermore, literature was revised in order to find the

relevant data on the renewable potentials Albania holds, which could be effectively used for

electricity production. Based on these potentials, several scenarios were built, including a

business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, a scenario where transmission and distribution (T&D) losses

are reduced to 8% by 2030, and a fully renewable scenario in which apart from hydro-power the

production is also based on wind, solar power and pumped-hydro storage.

The findings suggest that a gradual reduction of losses to 8% losses in 2030, can reduce the need

for electricity production substantially, up to more than 2000 GWh a year, with an average of

1503 GWh per year over a simulated period of 17 years. Moreover, the electricity needed to meet

the country’s demand, can be produced by hydro and solar power, for which Albania holds good

potentials. Onshore wind power can also play an important role in the renewable energy mix,

even though the potentials are not as high as hydro and solar power. The model built for this

research suggests that if no efficiency improvements in the T&D system will occur, the electricity

production needed to fulfil the domestic demand in 2030 will reach 11861 GWh, and if new

investments will happen only in the hydro-power sector, chances are that the demand will not

be fully met and a constant need for imported electricity will be present every year (BAU

scenario). Other scenarios suggest that the decrease in losses to 8% in 2030 will drop the needed

electricity production to 9086 GWh in 2030. However, the independency from imported

electricity can only be achieved if apart of existing and new HPPs, new solar and wind plants are

installed, along with enough capacities for pumped hydro storage. Indeed, one of the variants of

the fully renewable scenarios shows that without pumped-hydro storage, it is impossible to meet

the demand for electricity even if the installed capacities solar installations double.

This study is the first one to suggest that pumped hydro storage in Albania is of crucial

importance for the sustainable development of the electricity sector. It is advised to continue

with further studies in the same direction, to assess better the potentials of the country for

hydro-storage both in the national and international context.

4

5

Përmbledhje Prodhimi i energjisë elektrike në Shqipëri, bazohet kryesisht në potencialet hidrike, të cilat

arrijnë 97% të fuqisë së përgjithshme të instaluar në vend. Megjithatë, sasia e energjisë elektrike

të prodhuar nga hidrocentralet ka luhatje të mëdha në sasi, për shkak të rreshjeve të shiut dhe

dëborës të cilat nuk janë të njëjta çdo vit. Për këtë arsye, sistemi i deritanishëm i gjenerimit të

energjisë elektrike nuk është i qendrueshëm dhe vendi detyrohet të importojë energji elektrike

nga shtetet fqinjë në sasi të konsiderueshme. Gjithashtu, disa studime tregojnë se vartësia ndaj

burimeve hidrike, në planin afatgjatë e bën Shqiperinë shumë të brishtë ndaj pasojave të

ndryshimeve klimatike siç mund të jenë, për shembull, thatesirat. Për më tepër, sistemi elektrik

Shqiptar vuan nga humbjet e mëdha në rrjetin e shperndarjes dhe transmisionit të cilat arrijnë

vlera mbi 30%. Pra, në pergjithesi mund të thuhet se sistemi elektrik në vend nuk është i

qendrueshëm dhe në terma afatgjatë rrezikohet nga ngjarje madhore si ndryshimet klimatike.

Ky studim synon të hulumtojë mbi mundësitë që ka vendi për të prodhuar energji elektrike nga

burime të rinovueshme jo vetëm hidrike, deri në vitin 2030, në menyrë të tillë që të perballojë

kërkesat vetiake për energji elektrike. Metodologjia e përdorur për të arritur këtë, është një

kombinim mes kërkimit të të dhënave në literaturën ekzistuese, si dhe përdorimit të programit

kompjuterik Power Plan për të modeluar skenarë energjitikë. Fillimisht u kërkuan të dhenat mbi

sasinë e energjisë elektike që mund të kursehen nëse humbjet vjetore në rrjetin e shpërndarjes

dhe transmisionit do të ishin jo më shume së 8% deri në vitin 2030. Ky objektiv, bazohet në

draftin e Staregjisë Kombetare të Energjisë. Më tej, u kërkun të dhenat mbi potencialet

energjitike të rinovueshme në Shqipëri në literaturen shqiptare dhe nderkombëtare, për të

mesuar se cilat burime të rinovueshme mund të perdoren në menyren me efektive. Bazuar në

këto potenciale, u ndërtuan disa skenarë të zhvillimit të sistemit të energjise elektrike në vend

deri në vitin 2030. Ketu perfshihet një skenar pasiv, ku investimet e reja bazohen vetëm në

sektorin hidrik dhe nuk ka përmirësime të dukshme në eficencën e rrjetit të transmisionit dhe

shperndarjes; një skenar aktiv, ku humbjet në rrjet pakësohen deri në 8% në vitin 2030, por

centralet e reja vazhdojnë të mbeten hidrike; si dhe një skenar protësisht i rinovueshëm, ku

humbjet në rrjet zvogëlohen deri në 8% si dhe investimet e reja bëhen jo vetëm në impinatet

hidrike, por edhe ato diellore e të erës duke përfshire dhe sitemin e ruajtjes përmes pompimit

hidrik.

Rezultatet e keti kërkimi sugjerojnë se reduktimi i humbjeve në 8% deri në vitin 2030, mund të

arrijë të reduktojë kërkesën për energji elektrike në më shumë se 2000 GWh në një vit, ose

mesatarisht 1503 GWh në vit. Eneregjia elektrike e nevojëshme për të permbushur nevojat e

vendit, mund të gjenerohet nga burimet hidrike dhe diellore, të cilat gjenden në sasi të bollshme.

Energjia e erës në tokë (onshore) mund të luajë një rol të rëndësishëm në gjenerimin e energjisë

elektrike në vend, edhe pse potencialet nuk jane aq te larta sa ato diellore dhe hidrike. Skenaret

e ndërtuara nga modeli kompjuterik vënë në dukje se nevoja për energji në vitin 2030 do të

arrijë shifrën 11861 GWh, nese nuk bëhen përmiresime në eficencen e rrjetit. Me shume gjasa,

kjo nevoje nuk do mund të përmbushet vetëm nga burimet hidrike, ndaj nevoja për import do të

jetë e vazhdueshme dhe relativisht e madhe (Skenari pasiv). Por, nëse humbjet zvogelohen deri

në 8%, nevoja për energji elektrike në 2030-tën do te arrijë vetem në 9086 GWh (Skenari aktiv).

Edhe pse do të ketë sërish nevojë për import të energjise kjo sasi do të jetë në masë më të vogel.

Në menyrë që të arrihet një pavarësi energjitike duhet që, jo vetëm të diversifikohen burimet e

energjisë së rinovueshme përmes instalimeve diellore dhe ato të erës, por duhet të aplikohen

6

edhe sistemet e ruajtjes së energjisë përmes pompimit hidrik. Kjo rezulton prej një nga

varjanteve të skenarit plotesisht të rinovueshëm. Nëse sistemet e ruajtjes përmes pompimit

hidrik, nuk aplikohen në skenarin plotësisht të rinovueshëm, ateherë edhe përmes dyfishimit të

kapaciteteve të instaluara diellore, nuk do të mund të përmbushen nevojat për energji elektrike

në vend. Megjithatë, modeli i ndertuar nuk merr parasysh shkëmbimet e energjisë me vendet

fqinje, të cilat në kushte të caktuara, mund të sherbejnë për ruajtjen e energjisë.

Ky studim është ndër të parët që sugjeron se sistemet e ruajtjes përmes pompimit hidrik mund

të kenë një rol kyç në zhvillimin e qendrueshëm të sitemit elektrik në Shqipëri. Për këtë arsye,

autorja sugjeron të vazhdohen e zgjerohen kërkimet në kete drejtim, për të vlerësuar në mënyrë

më të plotë potencialet e vendit mbi sistemet e ruajtjes përmes pompimit hidrik dhe përdorimit

strategtjik të tyre në kontekstin kombëtar dhe ndërkombëtar.

7

List of abbreviations

AKBN – National Agency of Natural Sources

BAU – Business as Usual

ERE – Energy Regulatory Entity

EUE – Expected Unserved Electricity

PHS – Pumped-Hydro Storage

METE – Ministry of Economy, Trade and energy

MoE – Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Waster Administration

NES – National Energy Strategy

LDC – Load Duration Curve

LOLP – Loss of Load Probability

PP – Power Plan

SMD – Peak Demand

T&D – Transmission and Distribution

8

9

1. Introduction

1.1. Background Albania is a small country in the Mediterranean region with a rough economic and political past,

on a transitory path from a communist dictatorship ending in 1992, toward a democratic, open-

market economy. It has a population of 3.216 million (2011) living in an area of 28,750 km2,

with the higher density located in the central and western part of the country. The last two

decades, Albania has undergone a non-linear economic growth. Since 1993-1996 the GDP

growth had an average of 10%. However, in 1997, due to the collapse of the Pyramidal Schemes

(Jarvis, 2000), the Albanian economy fell behind while slowly recovering in the following years

and reaching a more or less stable growth of around 3% in the last three years (World databank,

2012). The GDP per capita in Purchasing Power Standards (PPS) is among the lowest in Europe,

and only 28% (in 2010) of the average GDP per capita of the EU27 countries (Eurostat, 2011).

The electricity system is characterised by relatively high consumption by the household sector

with an average of 4637 kWh/year: 2100 kWh/yr in rural areas and 6000 kWh/yr in urban

areas (GEF, PNUD, MoE, 2012). This high value of consumption is mainly due to the fact that

electricity is largely used for heating, apart from other typical usages in the households. In the

rural areas the consumption is lower because of the usage of forest wood for heating.

1.2. Current electricity situation in Albania Albanian electricity production is largely based on hydro-power which accounts for 97% of the

total installed capacity. The domestic production of electricity is 100% hydro based, because the

only oil-gas combined-cycle TPP existing currently, Vlora TPP built in 2009, cannot operate due

to relatively high costs of gas and oil along with some technical problems. The amount of

electricity produced by the hydropower plants (HPPs) varies much every year due to climate

factors such as the amount of rain and snow falls. For instance, in the year 2002, the domestic

production of electricity could cover only 49% of the demand, while in 2004, 92.4% of the total

demand was supplied with the domestic hydro-power potential. (Cela and Hizmo, 2009). Thus,

the Albanian electricity sector is often not stable and there is a need for imported electricity

from neighbouring countries, which usually do not have an energy mix based on renewable

sources.

A recent study from the World Bank indicates that the high dependency of the Albanian

electricity sector on hydro-power makes it very vulnerable in the long term, due to expected

impacts of climate change, including high temperatures and drought (World Bank, 2009).

According to the same study, Albania is characterized by relatively high exposure and

sensitivity to climate change, along with relatively low adaptive capacity to offset these

vulnerabilities. Albania is the second most vulnerable country in this context in Europe and

Central Asia, after Tajikistan.

Albania has relatively low values of CO2 emissions of only 1.3 metric ton per capita in 2008

(World databank, 2012), compared to the European and Central Asian countries which have

average emissions of 7.9 metric tons per capita in 2008. One of the reasons of the low levels of

CO2 emissions is of course the hydro-based electricity production. However, when considering

the fact that every year different shares of electricity demand are supplied by imported power,

10

the amount of CO2 emissions increase due to the indirect contribution of emissions from the

other countries with a less “green” energy mix. One of the proposed ways to overcome the

shortcomings of hydropower-based electricity generation system in Albania, is through the

connection with the lignite-based electricity of the Kosovarian grid (Republic of Kosovo’s

Ministry of Energy and Mining, 2009). In this case, even though the electricity produced in

Albania remains clean, the demand of the country for electricity will indirectly support the CO2-

intensive lignite-fired power plants in Kosovo. Thus, this strategy would enhance the climate

change effects.

Another problem, adding up to the general unsustainable electricity situation in Albania, is the

high amount of technical electricity losses due to the low efficiency of transmission and

distribution systems and non-technical losses due to theft, are higher than 30% in Albania

(Smith, 2004). For these reasons, there is a need to improve the Albanian production and

transmission system toward an efficient and sustainable one.

1.3. Motivation and research design Gradual increase of the electricity demand, low reliability of hydro power production and high

transmission and distribution losses provide for a very unstable electricity system in Albania.

The Government of Albania is prioritizing the construction of new hydro power plants as the

main strategy for the improvement of the electricity situation, while sporadically shifting

attention to wind and nuclear power. Up to now, there have not been any attempts to give a

future outlook for the Albanian energy situation with diversified renewable energy generations

sources and up to now, renewable sources other than hydro, have had a secondary consideration

in the energy strategies developed.

Thus, the aim of this research is to study whether a future electricity system based only on

diversified renewable energy generation is possible. The research takes into consideration a

decrease in technical and non-technical losses as well as a general efficiency improvement. Since

Albania, according to the World Bank 2012 data, is ranked among the lower-middle-income

countries, the financial aspect is also important. Thus, apart from the natural potentials, the

study will also attempt to roughly estimate the financial feasibility of the development of the

above mentioned renewable technologies in the country.

The main research question to be asked is:

� Is it possible for Albania to have a diverse, yet sustainable and self-

reliable, electricity generation sector by 2030, based on its domestic

renewable potentials?

To answer this main question, several sub-questions need to be researched.

Before thinking of any new way of energy generation, there should be a better management of

the existing one. That is why, in order to develop a sustainable electricity system in Albania,

there is a need to decrease the technical and non-technical losses. By doing so, we need to

understand how much electricity can be saved, because the saved electricity will not need to be

produced by any kind of renewable or non-renewable way whatsoever. Thus, the first sub-

question is:

11

• What is the expected demand for electricity in Albania by 2030 and by how much would

it change with the increase of efficiency in transmission and distribution systems?

A further question to be asked, is related to the theoretical capacity of existing renewable natural

resources in Albania for electricity production. For this, the second sub-question has been

formulated:

• What are the renewable energy potentials in Albania?

After evaluating the potentials for renewable sources for electricity generation, the challenge will

be to find the optimal way to exploit these potentials. Therefore, the third sub-question is:

• How can Albania manage its renewable energy resources in order to meet its demand for

electricity by 2030?

1.4. Boundaries Due to time restrictions, some boundaries were set. The research focuses only on the domestic

renewable potentials of Albania. This does not mean that, in my view, Albania should not

exchange electricity with the neighbouring countries. However, my aim is to research whether

the domestic renewable potentials for Albania are enough to fulfil the national growing demand

for electricity until 2030. The following renewable energy sources will be taken into account:

Solar, hydro, wind, geothermal and biomass.

1.5. Methodology of research First, different sources were checked for finding out the current electricity system in Albania as

well as plans for its development in the future. Since only few academic articles have been

produced on this matter, the main source of data for the research has been the governmental

publications and independent reports. The publications were consulted and an overview of the

Albanian renewable potentials was made, which can be found in Chapter 2. Moreover, in order

to build the scenarios of the electricity system in Albania for 2030, the software Power Plan was

used, which is an interactive simulation model used to plan the electricity supply in a county.

For making the simulation running, a set of data related to the electricity system in Albania was

needed. These data were used to reproduce the base year of the simulation. Albania does not

have a stable electricity generation system and is characterised by huge discrepancies of

electricity production throughout the years. For this reason, year 2009 which was an average

year, was chosen to be reproduced and serve as a base for building the scenarios. Apart from the

electricity related data, atmospheric patterns such as wind speed or solar intensity were needed

in order to biuld a reliable base for the simulation of the renewable energy production. Since not

all the data were completely available, several assumptions have been made, which will be

described in details in chapter 3.

Furthermore, three basic scenarios for the electricity sector’s development in Albania were built:

• Business as usual (BAU)

• Efficient transmission and distribution grid

12

• Fully Renewable

o Without pumped-hydro storage

o With pumped-hydro storage

An additional “Worst case scenario” was built to check the sensitivity of the scenarios, where

production of electricity from HPPs is assumed to be the lowest noted. All the scenarios are

discussed in detail in Chapter 4. The report concludes with a Conclusion and Discussion section,

as well as some recommendations for further research in Chapter 5.

13

2. Electricity system in Albania

For many years the electricity system in Albania has been entirely state-owned. In the last years

there have been attempts to privatize both the HPPs and the transmission and distribution

system. This chapter will describe the past and present political and technical electricity

situation, as well as the potentials that the country holds for future renewable electricity

generation.

2.1. Institutional and policy characteristics On the governmental level, the ministry responsible for the energy and electricity-related issues

in Albania, is the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Energy (METE). The National Agency of

Natural Resources (AKBN) is an institution organizationally-dependent on the METE which is

responsible for the usage of the natural resources such as hydrocarbons, mining and energy and

develops and implements the energy policies (AKBN, 2010). The Energy Regulatory Entity

(ERE) is an independent body created in 19951. The ERE’s role is to maintain a balance between

the different energy actors in Albania while ensuring the protection of interest of the electricity

consumers. The state-owned Albanian Energy Corporation (KESH) went through a structural

change in 2001 and formed the production division, the transmission division (OST) and the

distribution division (OSSH). In March 2009 the distribution sector OSSH was privatized by the

Czech company CEZ in 76% of the shares (Fletorja zyrtare e Republikës së Shqipërisë, 2009).

The privatization was considered as a strategically decision by METE, in order to improve the

quality of the energy supply for the Albanian consumers while attracting capital investments in

the electricity sector (USAID, 2009). However, today in 2013, it cannot be said that the

privatization was successful as the transmission system did not improve much. The lack of

improvements in the transmission system along with several contradictions that CEZ had with

the ERE and the METE (Reuters, 2012), prompted the Albanian government to break the

contract with CEZ in January 2012 (ERE, 2013).

The AKBN is also responsible for the development of the energy strategies in the country. The

last approved National Energy Strategy (NES) dates in July 2003 (AKE, 2003). Later on, in

2007, the strategy was updated and aims to frame and integrate the decision in the energy

sector until 2020 (AKBN, 2007). NES foresees two basic scenarios for the electricity

development of the country until 2020: The passive scenario and the active scenario. In the

passive scenario, no major investments are foreseen for the improvement of the efficiency in

T&D. In contrast, the active scenario anticipates gradual improvement of the efficiency in T&D,

until these losses are only 8% in 2020. However, this version of the strategy is today still a draft.

In this research I will be referring to the draft strategy, because it is far more updated than the

one from 2003.

A number of Action Plans have also been developed in order to address requirements from both

the national strategies and the international agreements that the Albanian government has been

committed to. Worth mentioning in this respect are the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan

1 ERE functions on the bases of the law no. 9072, date 22.05.2003 “On the electrical energy

sector changed” and the law No. 9946, date 30.06.2008 "On the natural gas sector". The aim of

this body is to ensure the constant and quality electricity supply

14

(NEEAP) and the Draft National Plan for Renewable Energy (NPRE). Even though both the

Strategies and Action Plans involve the whole energy sector of the country and not solely

electricity, they are still relevant for this study, since they do not exclude the electricity sector.

On the international level, Albania is a signer of the Energy Community Treaty since October

2005. This treaty requires Albania, as well as other countries of Southern and Eastern Europe,

to create a market in line with the EU Internal Energy Market (Official Journal of the European

Union, 2005). Albania has also signed the Climate Change Convention in 1994 and the Kyoto

Protocol in 2004 as a Non-Annex 1 country (UNFCCC, 2012).

2.2. Past and present Energy in the form of electricity was used in Albania for the first time in 1923, in very small scale

diesel instalments, which served to supply only a few wealthy families. It was not until 1957,

when the first HPP, Ulza, in the river Mat was constructed with an installed capacity of 25.2

MW. The construction of Ulza HPP opened the way to setting up the national electro-energetic

system. At that time, the total installed capacity in the country was about 60 MW, and the first

transmission lines of 110 kV and 35 kV were constructed. However, it was only after 1960 that

the country had enough human and technical capacity for expanding the constructions and

fulfilling the country’s needs for electricity. During the years 1960-1966 the HPPs of Shkopet,

Bistrica 1 and Bistrica 2 with a total installed capacity of 51.5 MW were constructed, along with

the TPP in Fier of 99 MW. Later on, from 1971-1988, the three most powerful HPPs, Vau i Dejës,

Fierza and Koman, were constructed in the river Drin, which are still today the most important

electricity generating facilities in the country. At the same time, several new TPPs were

constructed, while the Fieri TPP was enlarged with a new unit of 60 MW. After 1971, the

transmission and distribution system was also expanded, not only inside the country, but also

linking Albania with the international grid through the neighbouring countries such as Greece

and (at that time) Yugoslavia (KESH, 2011).

It is obvious that a major focus has been given to the exploration of the hydro power potential in

Albania, since the beginning of the development of the electricity system. After 1990 and

especially after 2000 Albania lacked any significant alternative energy generation facility, apart

from HPPs. Due to unstable climate factors, the HPPs were not always able to produce enough

electricity for fulfilling the domestic demand. For this reason, part of the demand was covered

by imported electricity from neighbouring countries (table 1).

Table 1 Domestic electricity production and imports from 2002-2010

Years 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Production

(GWh)

3204 4974 5467 5409 5516 2933 3770 5201 7702

Import

(GWh)

2072 937 567 365 633 2826 2417 1884 1911

Total

(GWh)

5276 5911 6034 5774 6149 5759 6187 7085 9613

15

The following graph shows the amount of electricity supply and electricity needed to fulfil the

national demand, along with the number of average of hours of shortages every year since 2002.

Despite imports, the total demand for electricity could not be met for several years, thus

systematic electricity shortages of several hours every day were common.

Figure 1 Electricity supply and load shortages in Albania from year 2002-2010 (ERE, 2010)

2.3. Future The development of the electricity sector in Albania does not seem to have changed much in the

last years compared to the developments in the past, when considering the types of investments

made in this sector. The main investments are still focused in the hydro sector while other types

of electricity generation installments, both fossil and other types of renewables, are

underdeveloped (Since 1990 only one TPP of 97 MW was installed while hundreds of

concessions were given for the construction of new HPPs). According to the passive scenario of

the draft NES, when no major changes are expected to happen in the economic and industrial

field, an increase in the energy demand will require new installed capacity of 1089 MW until

2020. 642 MW of this total is foreseen to be in forms of combined-cycle turbines TPPs and 437

MW, in forms of new HPPs. However, this scenario foresees an increase in electricity demand

up to more than 13000 GWh in 2020, and more than 9000 GWh in 2012. Today, we know that

this estimation is much higher than the current demand.

According to the active scenario of the same strategy where substantial investments in energy

efficiency are foreseen, the need for additional capacities will be 896 MW. From this, 297 MW is

foreseen to be generated by the Vlora combined-cycle oil and gas TPP of 97 MW (currently

16

constructed) and the rehabilitation of Fieri TPP with two units of 72 MW and 128 MW; three

HPPs Devolli 75 MW, Vjosa 80 MW, Drini 84 MW and the rest is unspecified. The active

scenario foresees transmission losses decreased to 2% and losses in distribution to be reduced to

6% in 2020 (8% losses in total).

There is no clear explanation why the passive scenario foresees such a big share of installed

capacities for TPPs, compared to the active scenario. Perhaps, it is because the strategy is still in

its draft phase. However, despite the existence of this strategy, the current trends of investments

in the energy sector are generally based on short-term decisions and until 2012 there does not

seem to be a serious commitment toward decreasing losses in transmission and distribution of

electricity.

2.4. Renewable energy potentials Because of its highly diverse terrain and geographical position, Albania has high potentials to

develop various types of renewable energy generation facilities. The country has a

Mediterranean climate, characterized by hot and dry summers and soft and wet winters. Even

though the country is relatively small, its terrain is very diverse. Four zones of different altitudes

and different climate regimes (from West to East) can be distinguished: Field Mediterranean

Area (0 - 200 m), Hilly Mediterranean Area (200 – 500 m), Pre-mountainous Mediterranean

Area (1000 – 1500 m) and Mountainous Mediterranean Area (above 1500 m).

2.4.1. Hydro power

The territory of Albania is very rich in water resources. There is an average rainfall value of 1400

mm rain per year for the whole territory. However, 65 – 75 % of the falls happen during the

winter time. Beside this, also different territories within the country have different amount of

Figure 2 Main rivers in Albania

17

rain and snowfall in one year. The amount of rainfall annually varies from 650 mm in the

South-East to 2800 mm in the North (Co-Plan, 2007). Above 1000 m of height there is usually

snow, which ensures water for the rivers during the period of spring and summer when the days

with rain are not that frequent (Zavalani, et al, 2010). Albania has eight main rivers (from

North to South): Drini, Buna, Mati, Ishmi, Erzeni, Shkumbini, Semani and Vjosa (Table 2).

Table 2 Main rivers in Albania and their characteristics (AEA, 2012)

River Length

(km)

Catchments

area (km2)

Avarage

flow

m3/s

Module

of flow

(l/s/km2)

Ration

Max/Min

flow

Buna 41 5.187 320 - 5.3

Drini 285 14.173 352 24.8 5.1

Mati 115 2.441 103 42.6 9.3

Ishmi 74 673 20.9 31 5.9

Erzeni 109 760 18.1 24 11.2

Shkumbini 181 2.441 61.5 25.2 13.2

Semani 281 5.649 95.7 16.9 13.7

Vjosa 272 6.706 195 29.1 7.2

The biggest HPP-s in the country are located in the river Drin (Table 3). Those are the HPP of

Vau i Dejës, Koman and Fierza with a combined capacity of 1350 MW. In the rivers Mat and

Bistricë four smaller HPPs are located: Ulza and Shkopet HPP in river Mati and Bistrica 1 and

Bistrica 2 in river Bistrica in the very south of the country. Together they have a total installed

capacity of 78 MW. In 2012, another HPP in river Drin, the Ashta HPP, finished constructing

and adds to the total installed capacity of the country 53 MW (Energji Ashta, 2012). The rest of

the HPPs in Albania are small and account for 37.5 MW, for a total of 1518 MW installed

capacity of hydro-power (AKBN, 2013). There is a total or 83 small HPP in the country, mostly

constructed in the years 1960-1980, but not all of them are functioning or properly functioning.

A list of all small HPP can be found in Appendix 1.

Table 3 List of existing and functioning HPPs (AKBN, 2009)

HPP River Installed

Capacity (MW)

Fierza Drini 500

Koman Drini 600

Vau i Dejës Drini 250

Ashta Drini 53

Ulza and Shkopet Mati 49

Bistrica I and II Bistrica 29

32 small HPP that operate on concessionary contracts Various 24.4

16 small HPP which has been privatized Various 2.047

22 small HPP owned by the state Various 11

18

Even though the HPPs are the main producers of electricity, still only about 35 % of the total

hydro power potentials has been exploited until now (METE, 2007). The Government of Albania

is trying to exploit more of the hydro-potential through giving concession to the private sector

for building more than 300 HPPs. Several of them are currently under construction and an

additional installed capacity of 400 MW is expected to be present in the upcoming years (AIDA,

2012).

2.4.2. Solar power

Since Albania belongs to the sub-tropical zone, it has relatively high levels of solar radiation

during the year. In a year Albania receives insolation in average of 1500 kWh/m2/yr varying

from 1185 to 1690 kWh/m2/yr (World Energy Council, 2010). Values for the Global Horizontal

Figure 3 Global Horizontal Irradiation (GIR) in Albania

19

Irradiation (GHI) are 5.4 kWh/m2/day (EBRD, 2010). As also shown in Figure 3, the part of the

country receiving the highest insolation is the western and South-Western part. The lowlands in

the western part of the country have the highest values or irradiation and can produce 139

kWh/m2 electricity monthly. High values of solar irradiation are also observed in the highlands

of the South-Eastern region, close to the city of Korça where the monthly values of electricity

potentials are measured to be 110kWh/m2 (Prifti, 2012). The importance of the utilization of the

solar energy potential in the regions of Fier, Vlora, Durrës and Saranda are also recognized by

the draft NES. However, there have been no serious investments in solar energy apart from

some small scale pilot projects or individual investments in heating panels. PV cells have not

officially been considered as a source of electricity, mostly because they are perceived as very

costly in capital investments. However, due to the gradual increase of the fossil fuel prices (thus

of the increased prices for the imported electricity) and the decrease of the solar PV systems

prices, the situation might change.

2.4.3. Wind Power

Several sources consulted for the purpose of this study show that wind in Albania could be a

potential source of energy. However, it seems that not the whole country is suitable for the

construction of wind farms. The draft NES identifies several zones where the wind potential is

higher. These are located in Shkodra (Velipojë, Cas), Lezhë (Ishull shengjin, Tale, Balldre),

Durrës (Ishëm, Porto Romano), Fier (Karavasta, Hoxhara 1, Hoxhara 2), Vlorë (Akerni),

Tepelenë and Sarandë. The maximum average wind speed at 10 m height is 4 - 4.5 m/s while the

Figure 4 Annual average wind speed in 10 m height (m/s) (left) and Annual quantity of wind hours (right)

20

maximum duration of wind is 4500 - 5250 hours in places like Saranda and Bilishti (Co-Pan,

2007). More recent studies highlight the lack of measurements of the speed and duration of

wind (Schoenherr, 2010). Despite that, the government of Albania had granted in 2008 seven

licenses to companies (mostly Italian) for the construction of eolic parks as follows:

Bilisht‐Kapshticë Wind Farm (150 MW); Shengjin‐Kodrat e Rencit in Lezha Wind Farms (108 +

114 MW), Wind‐farm in Karaburun, Vlora with an installed capacity of 500 MW; Wind Farm in

Butrinti‐Markat (72 MW), Wind Farm in Berat, Tërpan (145 + 80 MW); Wind farm of 40 MW

and one of 150 MW in Kavaja (US Department of State, 2009). However, until now, none of the

projects has been materialized, neither brought further.

As for the offshore wind potentials of the country, the data are even less available. There is only

one study which suggests that Albania has a potential of 1344 MW installed capacity of offshore

wind power (Gaudiosi, G. and Borri, C., 2010). However, this number is not supported by any

other study or document to the best of the author’s knowledge.

2.4.4. Geothermal Power

Albanian territory is characterized by many geothermal resources with low enthalpy. Three

thermal springs has been identified and they are located in the area of Krujë, Ardenicë and

Peshkopi. The biggest potential is located in the geothermal area of Kruja, from North of Kruja

Figure 5 Geothermal thematic map of Albania (Frashëri, A., 2007)

21

to North of Elbasan. In this geothermic zone (180 km in length and 4.5 km in width) the specific

reserves values range from 38.5 - 39.6 GJ/m2. The Ardenica area has a reservoir with 0.82 x 1018

J with resources density of 0.25 – 0.39 GJ/m2. The Peshkopia area is estimated to have similar

potentials to the Kruja region due to the similar water temperature, yield and stability. In the

central part of the western lowlands there are many old oil wells where the temperature reaches

up to 68 °C in 3000 m depth, while the temperature can reach 105.8 °C at 6000 m depth

(Frashëri, 2007). In Albania, up to now, only the direct use of the geothermal potentials have

been considered, such as heating buildings, SPA clinics etc., while no thorough research has

been performed into electricity generation of geothermal power plants. However, when

compared to other countries with geothermal resources of low enthalpy such as Hungary or

Slovakia, which have developed small scale geothermal Power Plants on 5 MW (Bertani, 2012),

we may assume the same potential for Albania. The only technology with which the potential of

low enthalpy geothermal sources can be exploited, are the binary plants, which are used widely

around the world.

2.4.5. Biomass

Albania has different kinds of biomass resources, from firewood, agricultural waste to urban

waste. Albanians has used fire wood for heating and cooking for ages. This trend now has

changed especially in the big cities, but, firewood is still used in villages for the same purposes.

Despite the historical use of firewood, there are no official plans for producing electricity from

biomass. However, unofficial sources suggest that incineration plants for burning urban waste

may be constructed in the future (Top-Channel.tv, 2013). In the case that these plans do

materialize, they will add to the share of renewable energy production in the country. In

average, Albania produces 266 kg/person/year waste, or 852360 tons/year in total (MMPAU,

AMP 2010) which if totally converted to electricity would be roughly 571081 MWh per year (1

ton waste = approx. 0.67 MWh) (Ramboll, 2006). This study, however, will not consider

biomass in the form of urban waste, as an option when developing the renewable energy

scenario. This is because burning the waste is a very controversial topic and may decrease the

incentive for reusing and recycling materials in the country.

22

2.5. Energy Efficiency For several years maintaining the efficiency in the Albanian electricity transmission and

distribution grid was a challenge which was never truly overcome. Despite the constant

consideration in the official documents and strategies along with concrete measures such as the

privatization of the distribution system or construction of new transmission lines, the

percentage of losses still remains very high, of 37.58 % in 2011 (ERE, 2011). Moreover, the major

focus is shifted toward the construction of new power generation systems, mostly, HPPs. But

more HPPs means a continuous dependency on atmospheric conditions, especially rainfalls,

which by now we know that they can differ significantly every year. This makes the country very

dependent on imports. It also reveals to be very difficult to plan well ahead the need for

electricity import and amount of money which would be spent every year for this purpose.

Increasing the efficiency of the transmission and distribution system is one of the most

immediate steps that should be taken toward a reliable electricity system in Albania. Moreover,

the more electricity is saved, the less capacity needs to be installed, which results in less

expenditures and less environmental impacts.

For this research, a decrease in losses to 8% in both T&D is calculated. This number comes from

the draft NES (AKBN, 2007), according to the active scenario of which losses are expected to be

decreased to 8% in 2020. However, the measures for improving gradually the efficiency would

have started since 2007 according to the strategy. Since today we know that the efficiency has

not increased, this target is postponed to 2030 in the scenarios built for this study. In order to

achieve this target, constant reductions are calculated for every year starting from 2012. For the

year 2030, about 2800 GWh are to be saved (Figure 6). This number is calculated from the

difference between the estimation of increase of demand if no reductions take place (BAU) with

the demand as reductions take place gradually. For the calculation of the BAU curve, an

extrapolation of the electricity demand from the years 2009-2011 has been executed. The years

2009-2011 were chosen as the most stable, since no regular shedding have occurred since 2009.

Figure 6 Differences in electricity supply when T&D losses are reduced until 8%

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Differences in electricity supplyProductionBAU(GWh)

Productionwithsavings(GWh)T&D losses

23

The NES of 2003 estimates a total investment in T&D of 600 million US dollars, or 470 million

EUR in order to reach the losses in range of 8%. This number is quite outdated, but it is used

here to show a rough estimation of the range of investments needed in the sector. This number,

divided by the number of years until 2030, leads to about 25 Million of EUR per year.

Table 4 Energy saved by improvements in T&D and related costs

Year Production

without

savings

(GWh)

Production

with

savings

(GWh)

T&D

losses

2012 7605 7441 33.3%

2013 7795 7528 32.0%

2014 7990 7608 30.6%

2015 8189 7674 29.0%

2016 8394 7787 28.0%

2017 8604 7862 26.5%

2018 8819 7937 25.0%

2019 9040 8054 24.0%

2020 9266 8132 22.5%

2021 9497 8219 21.1%

2022 9735 8331 20.0%

2023 9978 8369 18.0%

2024 10228 8492 17.0%

2025 10483 8618 16.0%

2026 10745 8692 14.4%

2027 11014 8784 13.0%

2028 11289 8824 11.0%

2029 11572 8954 9.8%

2030 11861 9086 8.0%

24

25

3. Model

For building different scenarios for the evolution of electricity system in Albania, the modelling

software Power Plan (PP) was used. Power plan is an interactive model that is used to plan the

electricity supply for a country, according to the estimated demand. PP bases its future

simulation on the data given for a year. The results are determined both by the decisions of the

user for new power production facilities, as well as different external factors. These factors are

for instance: the electricity demand, population growth, GDP growth, oil prices. Several other

characteristic elements of PP are described in this chapter.

The base modelling year for Albania in this research is 2009. This year was chosen because it

showed to have an average production of electricity compared to the previous or following years.

Moreover, 2009 is the first year since 2002 when the electricity production and imports fulfil

the demand for electricity of the country and no shortages occur (Table 5). The table also shows

yearly expenditures for import which are also used in this study for rough estimations of import

values in the future.

Table 5 Electricity production and imports through the years (ERE, 2012)

Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Production (GWh) 3204 4974 5467 5409 5516 2933 3770 5201 7702 4158

Import (GWh) 2072 937 567 365 633 2828 2417 1884 1911 3262

Cost of import

(EUR/MWh)

30.18 30.15 35.57 40.04 47.81 69 79 48.69 45.5 60.49

Total value of import

(106 EUR)

62.53 28.26 20.17 14.63 30.25 195 190.9 91.74 86.95 197.3

Shortage (GWh) 960 662 556 664 412 891 200 0 0 0

Shortage

(hours/day)

4.3 2.9 2.3 2.7 1.6 3.4 0.3 0 0 0

The variables which were needed to model the scenarios for 2030 are described below in details:

3.1. SMD and SMD growth SMD is the peak demand for electricity in a given year. With the increased economic

development and population of the country, the peak demand for electricity also increases every

year. PP uses the percentage of this peak demand for calculating the total electricity demand for

the country. In year 2009 for instance, Albania had an SMD of 1370. Depending on the

scenarios, with or without increase in the efficiency of T&D, the percentage of change in the

SMD is calculated for every year until 2030.

26

3.2. Load Duration Curve and chronological pattern Since the electricity demand is not linear throughout the year, it is impossible to calculate the

electricity demand only by knowing the value of the SMD. In this case, the Load Duration Curve

in needed. This curve is composed of hourly values of the demand throughout the year (8760

hours in a year), organized from the highest to the lowest value. The integral of the curve is

equal to the total demand of electricity in one year. The highest load in a year is the peak load,

the lowest is the base load and the area in between is the middle load (when planning the new

generation facilities in power plan, it is important to also indicate the type of load they will be

generating electricity for). PP constructs this curve according to a set of several values, which

represent the spread of demand through the year. In the case of Albania, the values from the

days with maximum and minimum demand were found from year 2009 (ERE, 2010) and a set

of points was formed based on these values. Then the curve was slightly changed in order to be

calibrated according to the production of electricity in Albania in 2009 (Figure 7).

Despite the information regarding the total yearly demand of electricity and peak load, the LDC

does not say anything about the distribution of the demand. The LDC does not give any

information regarding the daily pattern of electricity demand, neither of periods with the

highest or lowest demand through the year. However, this information is needed particularly

when wind or solar energy is a source of electricity for the country, since sunshine and wind are

not available at any time of the day. For this reason an hourly-chronological pattern is needed.

In the case of Albania, the data for the hourly demand of electricity were not available. However,

the daily pattern of demand for the days with the highest (31st December) and lowest (23rd June)

values of electricity consumption were found in the ERE report. Using these two days and the

LDC, the rest of the year was constructed by calculating a gradual change in demand including a

decrease for the weekend days. The pattern was then normalized to 1 (one) before being used by

PP. Figure 8 shows the calculated daily patterns for each month in 2009.

Figure 7 Load duration curve built for Albania in 2009

27

3.3. Wind pattern The wind speed in this study is measured in 2010 at the Airport of Tirana (NOAA, 2012), where

the average wind speed at 10 m is 2.2 m/s, which corresponds to the value found in the

literature. For constructing a whole pattern adapted for PP, hourly data of wind speed are

needed. The wind speed is then converted to electricity production and then normalized. In

order to arrive at the electricity production value from the wind speed, first the wind speed at

the height of the wind turbine is calculated because wind speed increases with height. For

calculating the wind speed at the height of the turbine (v1) the following equation has been used

(Nelson, 2009):

Where:

- wind speed measured at the station

- wind speed at the height of turbines

H0 - height of the station

H1 - height of the turbine

z - roughness parameter

In our case Ho = 5 m, H1 = 80 m and z = 0.3 because the area has many trees, hedges and few

buildings (Annex 2). Further on, the electricity generation from the wind speed is calculated

according to the power curve of a specific type of wind turbine and normalised. For this reason,

a Vestas wind turbine model no. V 100, 2.6 MW is considered, which is constructed to maximise

the yield of low to medium wind speed sites (Vestas, 2011). Figure 9 shows the power curve of

the chosen wind turbine.

Figure 8 Constructed daily patterns of electricity demand in different months in 2009

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

January

February

March

April

June

May

July

August

September

October

28

Figure 9 Power curve for Vestas model no.V100 -2.6MW

3.4. Sun Pattern Similarly to the wind pattern, the solar pattern is also built of hourly data of normalised

electricity production data. The hourly irradiation has been found for the year 2005 (HelioClim-

3 Database of Solar Irradiance, 2005) for the city of Vlora in south-west Albania. The hourly

irradiation values (W/m2) have then been multiplied with the efficiency of the solar panel which

is estimated to be 15% and then normalised. The yearly radiation in the measured area is 1681

kWh/m2, which corresponds to the area with relatively high irradiation values that the literature

suggests (Figure 3).

3.5. Considering import Previously it was explained that the model was based on the year 2009, as this year is an average

one in production of electricity and because of lack of shortages. However, the imported

electricity has a high share in the supply for that year. As table 5 showed, import is not always

enough for fulfilling the domestic demand. This is dependent on the availability of the excessive

electricity in neighbouring countries, as well as the ability of Albania to pay the high costs of

import. For this reason, a simulation of the year 2009 without import was made, mainly to show

the vulnerability of the electricity system if import is not available. Table 6 shows the results of

this simulation. Two values are especially important here, the Loss of Load Probability (LOLP)

and the Expected Unserved Electricity (EUE). The LOLP shows how many days in 10 years will

be probably out of electricity if the system is not changed. In this case 1838 days in 10 years will

be short of electricity. The EUE shows the amount of electricity needed which cannot be

supplied. In 2009, if no electricity would have been imported, 2702 GWh would still be needed

to meet the country’s demand.

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Po

we

r (M

W)

Windspeed [m/s]

Power curve for Vestas model

no. V 100, 2.6 MW

Power [MW]

29

Table 6 Simulation of electricity system for 2009 including and excluding import

Year 2009 With

import

Without

import

Hydro (TWh): 5.3 5.3

Import (TWh): 1.8 0.0

Total (TWh): 7.1 5.3

Loss Of Load Probability

(days/10 years)

0 1838

Expected Unserved

Electricity (GWh)

0 2702

30

31

4. Scenarios and results

Based on the set up and assumptions described previously, three basic scenarios for the

electricity development of Albania were built:

• Business as usual (BAU)

• Efficient transmission and distribution grid

• Fully Renewable

o Without pumped-hydro storage

o With pumped-hydro storage

These scenarios, however, do not take into account the chance of drought and low hydro

production through the years, as they were built based on an average production year (2009). In

order to compensate for this limitation, an additional scenario “The worst case scenario” was

built based on the lowest production year, 2007 (see table 5). All the scenarios are constructed

assuming that there will be a stable growth in GDP of 3% per year. Also no major changes in

usage of electricity are foreseen, such as major energy-intensive industrial investments or shift

from electricity use for heating in households to gas or other energy carriers.

As described in the boundaries of the research design session 1.3, the renewable scenarios are

not meant to include import. However, in the first two scenarios, imports are included for an

easier comparison between the two. In case of exclusion of import, the same amount of

electricity would be marked as “Unserved electricity” which is actually presented in the tables

accompanying the scenarios. The final “Fully Renewable” scenarios do not take into account any

import, because the aim is to find out whether the renewable domestic sources can suffice to

meet the Albanian demand for electricity.

4.1. Business as Usual According to this scenario, the SMD growth increases with 2.5% every year. No substantial

improvements in the transmission and distribution grid are envisioned and the newly

constructed power plants are always HPPs. These new HPPs are Kalivaçi (80 MW) and Skavica

(350MW). The lifetime of the two large HPPs, Fierza and Vau i Dejes which have been

constructed before 1980, ends before 2030. The same also holds for the Ulza and Shkopeti HPP.

The scenario foresees that the life of these HPPs are extended with 30 more years due to

rehabilitation. It is also supposed that the Vlora TPP starts operating in 2013 at full capacity.

Moreover, the small HPPs are grouped together according to the way they are usually presented

by the AKBN:

• 32 HPP-s operate on concessionary contracts, with a total installed capacity of 24.4 MW

• 16 HPP-s are privatized and have an installed capacity of 2 MW

• 22 HPP-s are state-owned with an installed capacity of 11 MW

32

The grouping was done since the single HPPs have a very small capacity, but similar

characteristics with each other.

The BAU scenario is quite different from the NES’s passive scenario, as it does not plan for any

new TPPs to be constructed. It was chosen to be so, following the actual trend of the new energy

generation plants in the country, which from 1990-2012 have mainly been hydro based.

Table 7 shows the list of power plants used in the scenario, their construction and faze-out date,

capacity and type of load. The table also shows the assigned energy for every HPP, which is the

average amount of electricity which can be produced maximally in one year by each HPP. These

values have been based on the actual production for year 2009, and estimated accordingly for

the new foreseen HPPs.

Table 7 List of Power Plants in BAU scenario

Type of

PP

Name Year in

operation

Year out

operation

Capacity

(MW)

Efficiency Assigned

energy

(GWh)

Oil and

Gas

Combined

Cycle TPP

Vlora 2013 2059 98 0.55 N/A

Hydro Fierza 1978 2028 500 1664

Hydro Fierza

Rehabilitation

2028 2058 500 1664

Hydro Koman 1988 2038 600 1997

Hydro Vau i Dejes 1971 2021 250 876

Hydro Vau i Dejes

rehabilitation

2021 2051 250 876

Hydro Ulza and

Shkopet

1958 2043 49 424

Hydro Bistrica I and

II

1963 2048 29 251

Hydro 32 small HPP

on

concessionary

contracts

1980 2031 24.4 211

Hydro 16 privatized

small HPP

1988 2038 2.047 17

Hydro 22 public

small HPPs

1988 2038 11 95

Hydro Ashta I and II 2012 2062 53 240

Hydro Kalivaçi 2016 2066 80 362

Hydro Skavica 2020 2070 350 1584

33

Figure 10 and Table 8 show the production of electricity from 2009-2030 for the BAU scenario.

This scenarios foresees a total need for electricity of 11861 GWh in 2030, where 7993 GWh can

be domestically produced and 3868 GWh need to be imported. The peak demand in the final

year is 2283 MW. It is clear that the imported electricity has an important share every year and

it is the only source of electricity which can keep up with the fast and substantial increase in

demand, assuming that the neighbouring countries will have enough electricity to sell (or

exchange) with an affordable price for Albania.

Figure 10 Electricity supply according to the BAU scenario

However, if import is excluded from the energy supply mix, the domestic electricity system fails

to supply the need for electricity in the country. Table 8 shows the installed capacities in year

2009 compared to 2030 and the LOLP. In 2030 this number is very high at 2977 days/10 years.

The number is so high because the electricity from the HPPs is not necessarily produced at the

times when it is needed. This shows that it is not only important for a closed system like ours, to

produce the absolute amount of electricity needed in a year, but this electricity should also be

available when the demand is higher. HPPs, which are very much dependent on the atmospheric

conditions, cannot be a reliable source of electricity without being combined with other variants

of electricity supply (new power plants, storage systems or import and exchange of electricity).

Table 8 Characteristics of BAU scenario as if import was not possible

Year 2009 2030

Hydro (MW) 1465 1948

Combined cycle

(MW)

0 98

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

19

20

20

20

21

20

22

20

23

20

24

20

25

20

26

20

27

20

28

20

29

20

30

El.

pro

du

ctio

n (

TW

h)

Year

Import

Combined cycle

Hydro

34

Peak demand (MW) 1370 2283

Total demand

(GWh)

7118 11861

Total Production

(GWh)

5313 7993

Unserved

Electricity (GWh)

1805 3868

Loss of load

probability (days/10

years)

2586 2977

4.2. Efficient transmission and distribution system scenario In this scenario, substantial improvements in the T&D grid are planned which would reduce the

losses to 8% in 2030. The SMD growth for this scenario has been adjusted according to the

gradual reduction of T&D losses while the new electricity generation plants remain the same as

the BAU scenario. With the reduction of losses, the supply needed to fulfil the demand for

electricity decreases significantly. Figure 11 shows the reduced dependence of imported

electricity, especially after 2020. In 2030 the total supply is 9086 GWh, from which 1378 GWh

have to be imported. When compared to the BAU scenario, 2775 GWh are saved only in 2030

and 25552 GWh are saved in total from 2009-2030.

Figure 11 Electricity supply according to the Efficient T&D scenario

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

19

20

20

20

21

20

22

20

23

20

24

20

25

20

26

20

27

20

28

20

29

20

30

Pro

du

ctio

n o

f e

lect

rici

ty (

TW

h)

Year

Import

Combined cycle

Hydro

35

However, even in this scenario if import is excluded, the system loses stability. In this case, in

2030 the LOLP is still very high at 1907 days/10 years. This number, however, is much smaller

than the LOLP of the BAU scenario.

Table 9 Characteristics of Efficient T&D scenario as if import was not possible

Year 2009 2030

Hydro (MW) 1465 1948

Combined cycle

(MW)

0 98

Total (MW) 1465 2046

Peak demand

(MW)

1370 1749

Total demand

(GWh)

7118 9086

Total Production

(GWh)

5313 7708

Unserved

Electrictiy

1805 1378

Loss of Load

probability

(days/10 years)

2702 1907

In conclusion, this scenario shows that T&D improvements can significantly increase the

reliability of the system and reduce the need for imported electricity. However, an efficient T&D

system is not enough for a reliable and self-sustainable electricity system, if not accompanied by

additional constructions of power plants.

4.3. Fully Renewable scenario The following scenarios take into account only renewable energy sources for electricity

production. Thus, the production of electricity from the already existing gas and oil combined-

cycled Vlora TPP is excluded. Moreover, the reduction of T&D losses presented above is

assumed, meaning 8% losses in 2030 and the possibility for importing electricity is totally

excluded. The SMD growth is also the same as the efficient T&D scenario. There are two fully-

renewable scenarios. The first one explores the possibility of new wind and solar installations

along with the conventional HPPs, excluding the possibility for storage. The second one takes

storage into account. The comparison between both scenarios highlights the importance of

pumped-hydro storage in the Albanian electricity system.

4.3.1. Fully Renewable scenario excluding pumped-hydro storage

The developments in this scenario foresee major investments in wind parks and solar PV,

additionally to the existing and new HPPs planned in the first two scenarios. Table 10 shows the

total installed capacities for each type of resource, while Appendix 3 presents the whole list of

36

power plants. The new wind and solar installations together exceed the total hydro installed

capacity.

According to this scenario, the final production of electricity in 2030 will be 9466 GWh, thus

1758 GWh more than the efficient T&D scenario. Moreover, there is still an amount of 82.6 GWh

of unserved electricity and a LOLP of 223.3 days/10 years. This happens because large amounts

of electricity are produced by wind and solar installations which are independent on the demand

pattern of the country. In this case there is a considerable amount of exceeding electricity

produced 380 GWh, compared to the efficient T&D scenario, in order to fulfil the demand in

2030. In the case where the excessive electricity produced cannot be stored, neither exported or

exchanged, it goes wasted.

Table 10 Characteristics of the fully renewable scenario excluding storage

Year 2009 2030

Hydro (MW) 1465 1948

Wind (MW) 0 600

Solar (MW) 0 1640

Pumped-hydro

storage (MW)

0 0

Total (MW) 1465 4188

Peak demand

(MW)

1370 1749

Total Demand

(GWh)

7118 9549

Total production

(GWh)

5313 9466

Unserved

electricity (GWh)

1805 83

Loss of load

probability

(days/ 10 years)

2702 223.3

Figure 12 shows that the production of electricity from the HPPs decreases slightly after 2019,

even though the installed capacity is the same as in the other scenarios. This is due to the type of

load the new solar and wind installations are assumed to be. Both wind farms and Solar PV are

assumed to serve the base-load demand. This means that the total electricity needed to fulfil the

base-load demand is partially supplied by wind and solar, which reduces the need for electricity

production by the HPPs. Despite the overlapping of production, due to the uncertainty of

electricity generation by these sources, there are still chances for losses of load.

37

Figure 12 Electricity supply according to the Fully renewable scenario excluding storage

4.3.2. Fully Renewable scenario including pumped-hydro storage

Due to the high differences in geographical altitude, Albania can profit also by the construction

of pumped-hydro storages (PHS) which can be used to store the electricity produced by the

renewable sources when the electricity is not needed. This scenario considers the construction

of two PHS in the new HPPs Kalivaçi, and Skavica. These PHSs are assumed to have an

efficiency of 80% (Schainker, 2004) and a maximum installed capacity equal to the HPP they

are in (see Appendix 3 for details).

Figure 13 Electricity supply according to the fully renewable scenario including storage

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029

Ele

ctri

city

pro

du

ctio

n (

TW

h)

Year

Unserved electricity

Solar

Wind

Hydro

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029

Ele

ctri

city

pro

du

ctio

n (

TW

h)

Year

Unserved electricity

Pumped-hydro storage

Solar

Wind

Hydro

38

In this scenario the total production of electricity is 9116 GWh in 2030. Figure 13 shows the total

production of electricity from various resources. It is visible that from 2009-2027 there is still a

significant amount of unserved electricity. However, after 2027 the system is self-sufficient,

because the excessive electricity produced by the renewable sources can be pumped upstream

with very small losses, and used as hydro-power when the demand is higher. The amount of

electricity stored by the pumped-hydro storage system in 2030 is equal to 157 GWh. Table 11

shows the installed capacities for this scenario in 2009 and 2030. The total installed capacity in

this scenario is 3368 MW, from which 430MW can serve both as HPP and PHS.

The introduction of the PHS in the renewable scenario, makes it possible for the system to fulfil

the demand even with half the capacities for solar of the previous renewable scenario (see Table

11 and Appendix 3). This outcome is very important, since it provides effectiveness in use of

renewable resources while making use of existing or new HPPs built in the country. Moreover, it

can save costs by saving on new installations of solar and wind power.

Table 11 Characteristics of the fully renewable scenario including storage

Year 2009 2030

Hydro (MW) 1465 1948

Wind (MW) 0 600

Solar (MW) 0 820

Pumped-hydro

storage (MW)

0 430

Total (MW) 1465 3368

Peak Demand

(MW)

1370 1749

Total Demand

(GWh)

7118 9116

Total Production

(GWh)

5313 9116

Unserved

electricity (GWh)

1805 0.1

Loss of load

probability

(days/ 10 years)

2702 3.3

4.4. Worst case scenario Up to now, the scenarios have been built based on an average assigned energy for the HPPs,

which in all scenarios have the biggest share of installed capacity and electricity production. The

assigned energy was based on an average year of electricity production in Albania, 2009.

However, as noted in Table 3, the production of electricity from the HPPs has high variations

39

and in some years the production is very low due to the atmospheric conditions. The scenarios

do not assume these variations in hydro power production. In order to check the sensitivity of

the fully renewable scenarios, an additional scenario was built based on the lowest production of

the last 10 years, which happened in 2007.

Figure 14 Electricity supply according to the worst case scenario

In this case, the production of electricity from the HPPs is significantly lower every year (Figure

14). This simulation shows that the necessary electricity for fulfilling the domestic demand, can

be generated by the same amount and types of power plants discussed in the renewable scenario

including storage. However, in order to make use of this electricity, new storage capacities are

needed. This scenario estimates an installed capacity of 1780 MW of PHS (Table 12) installed in

the Vau i Dejes, Fierza and Koman HPPs in addition to Skavica and Kalivaçi PHS. In this case,

the pumped-hydro storage system can be even more efficient and can store 2191 GWh in 2030.

Judging from the history of electricity generation by the HPPs of the last 10 years, it is highly

unlikely that such a low production would continue for 18 years. However, single years with low

rainfalls are likely to occur. Thus, a combination of the worst case scenario and the renewable

scenario including storage, could provide for a more realistic prediction.

Table 12 Characteristics of the worst case scenario

Year 2009 2030

Hydro (MW) 1465 1948

Wind (MW) 0 600

Solar (MW) 0 820

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

19

20

20

20

21

20

22

20

23

20

24

20

25

20

26

20

27

20

28

20

29

20

30

Ele

ctri

city

pro

du

ctio

n (

TW

h)

Year

Unserved electricity

Pumped-hydro storage

Solar

Wind

Hydro

40

Pumped-hydro

storage (MW)

0 1780

Total (MW) 1465 5148

Total Demand

(GWh)

7118 9116

Total Production

(GWh)

5313 9116

Unserved

electricity (GWh)

1805 0

Loss of load

(days/ 10 years)

2701 0

4.5. Costs This research did not intend to make a profound analysis of costs for the developed scenarios.

However, as Albania is a developing country with serious economic limitations, a superficial

calculation of costs was made, comparing the additional expenses in the BAU scenario with the

renewable scenarios including PHS. As both scenarios foresee the same number of HPPs built

until 2030, the costs for constructing the HPPs of Kalivaçi and Skavica are not taken into

account in any of the calculations. Neither are the rehabilitation of Vau I Dejës and Fierza HPP.

The costs taken into account in these calculations are the additional installations. Thus, for the

renewable scenario are those for the wind and solar plants, the two PHS, the costs for T&D

improvements and finally the costs for importing electricity until the year of self-sufficiency,

2027. For the BAU scenario, the additional costs are only due to import.

The costs of imported electricity are assumed to be 60 EUR/MWh which is the average price of

the imported electricity from 2007-2011. In the BAU scenarios, the costs until 2030 are

estimated to be 3015 mln EUR, or around 177 mln EUR per year. In the Renewable Scenario, the

total costs of import are lower, because the losses are decreasing and new investment are made

in the electricity generation sector. However, the new investments in electricity generation are

quite significant (see Table 13). The costs for the eolic plants are estimated to be 850 mln EUR

in total, based on the costs stated in the draft Albanian Action Plan for Renewable Energy (MoE

et al., 2012). The costs for the solar PV panels are estimated to be 492 mln in total (Federal

ministry for the Environment, 2012) while the costs for the PHS are assumed to be 387 mln

EUR, (Steffen, 2011). In addition, 470 mln EUR in investments are estimated for reducing the

T&D losses to 8% (METE, 2003).

41

Table 2 Differences in costs between the Renewable Scenario and the BAU scenario (in EUR)

The costs for the renewable scenario are significantly higher than for the BAU scenario, but it

should also be noted, that in the BAU scenario nothing is invested which could generate income

later. In the Renewable scenario, however, the investment made will last at least 30 years and

generate electricity, which will not only provide electricity independence for the country, but it

can also generate profits if considering export of electricity to the neighbouring countries.

However, keep in mind that these cost estimations are very rough. They do not take into account

specific technologies, neither managing costs or changes in prices the incoming years.

Renewable

scenario incl.

storage

BAU scenario

Import: 1765 mln

Wind: 850 mln

HPS: 387 mln

Solar: 492 mln

T&D: 470 mln

Import: 3015 mln

Total: 3964 mln Total: 3015 mln

Per year: 233 mln Per year: 177 mln

42

43

5. Conclusions and discussion

Based on the data modelled and assumptions made, it can be concluded that it is possible for

Albania to have a diverse, yet sustainable and self-reliable, electricity generation sector by 2030,

based only on its domestic renewable potentials. Several scenarios were developed, which

showed that, in order to achieve the self-reliability of renewable electricity generation in

Albania, several measures need to be taken. These measures include improvements in efficiency

of T&D, construction of new power plants based on renewable sources and finally a storage

system is of essential importance. Putting this study in perspective of the other ones of its genre

in Albania proves to be difficult, as most of the energy-related studies, plans or strategies foresee

only up to 2020. However, some of the data and targets in this research have been based on the

national plans and energy strategies.

It was seen that improvements in T&D efficiency can save an average of 1503 GWh every year.

The electricity demand in the BAU scenario for 2030 is 11861 GWh. But if losses in T&D are

reduced to 8%, the demand in 2030 would be equal to 9086 GWh. This reduction of losses also

goes in line with the governmental plans. However, the draft NES estimates this reduction to

happen by 2020. Judging from the current history of investment in the T&D system in Albania,

up to now the yearly targets for achieving the 8% losses in 2020 have been missed. Moreover, in

order to ease the targets for increasing the T&D efficiency every year, the 8% target was

postponed to 2030.

The literature showed that Albania holds several potentials for renewable electricity generation.

Even though some of these potentials, such as biomass and geothermal, are not thoroughly

explored, the potential for hydro, solar and wind power (to some extend) are known and valued

to be plentiful. This report also shows that storage is very important to achieve a fully renewable

scenario. In the case of Albania the storage can be achieved through the usage of the existing or

new HPPs as pumped hydro storages. The results show that the PHSs can help in managing the

renewable energy resources even when the electricity production from hydro-power, which has

the largest share in the Albanian electricity mix, is close to the lowest levels recorded.

5.1. Discussion However, these results were achieved based on some assumptions. First, scenarios are built

based on an average production of electricity, while due to differences in rainfalls, it is difficult

to predict the fluctuations in productions during the years. In order to make up for this, a worst

case scenario was built, based on the lowest electricity production recorded, to check whether

the fully renewable system can make up for the minimal hydro-production. However, it should

be noted, that based on the previous years, chances are that the reality will neither be average or

worst, but a combination of both production, with probably some sporadic cases of

overproduction. These fluctuations are not only relevant for the fully renewable scenarios, but

also for the BAU and T&D-efficient scenario.

Second, the model in PowerPlan was built based on several patterns for the electricity demand,

solar irradiance and wind speed. These were hourly patters which were either constructed based

on fewer values (the demand pattern), or measured by the meteorological stations in a single

year. The yearly patterns in solar irradiance and wind speed, do match the values reported in the

44

literature. However, these values may change in the upcoming years, due to a change in

meteorological conditions or climate change effects. Along with the patterns, the yield of

electricity production will also change. Moreover, the wind speed used in the wind patterns was

not measured in the location with the highest wind speed, because no data were found for these

locations. If these hot-spot locations could be monitored, the wind potential is estimated to be

higher.

Third, the fully renewable scenarios do not consider biomass as a source of renewable energy to

be included in the estimations for 2030. This is due to the controversy associated with the topic

(both burning of waste and using crops), but also due to lack of related data for Albania. Perhaps

a study on the matter could result in interesting conclusions for using biomass for electricity

generation in Albania

Fourth, this study does not take into account the alternative ways of harvesting the renewable

sources, which cannot generate electricity, but if applied could lower the electricity demand. For

instance, in Albania heating solar panels are introduced and used sporadically by individuals.

The heating panels do not produce electricity of course, but if used, the electricity demand for

heating the water will be substituted by the heating panels. Similarly, the geothermal sources of

low enthalpy can be adapted for heating purposes, which would again decrease the electricity

consumption for heating purposes. The development of these ways of harvesting the renewable

energies in the country, may decrease the dependency for electricity, but due to the time

constrains the study does not address this issue.

Fifth, the import or exchange of electricity has been excluded from the fully renewable

scenarios. This was done for the sake of simplifying the assumptions and making the scenarios

easier for the PowerPlan software to digest. However, until the year 2027, where the self-

sufficiency state is achieved, the amount of unserved electricity can be imported for fulfilling the

domestic demand. Moreover, part of the overproduction of electricity could be exported or

exchanged with the neighbouring countries, according to particular needs. The exchange of

electricity, with neighbouring countries, could simplify the transition to a fully renewable

electricity system, but also bring additional value to the PHS systems by giving them strategic

importance to the country.

Sixth, the study does not analyse the cost for implementing the different scenarios. A rough

calculation was only made to build a general idea on the differences in costs between the BAU

scenario and the fully renewable scenario including storage. However, these calculations do not

include all the expenses for building the scenarios, but only considers the differences. The

expenses take into account only the costs for the construction of the energy facilities and not the

managing costs, neither the payback time or the likeliness of the changes in prices in the

following years.

Seventh, rain and snowfall hourly data are not used to simulate HPP production capacity.

Instead, an average assigned energy was estimated for the HPPs, according to the average year

2009.

Finally, all the above scenarios cannot be implemented without political will and strategic

planning. The renewable scenarios can only be achieved if they are incorporated in the future

NES and implemented seriously, sustained also by solid funding sources and strategy.

45

5.2. Recommendation for future research This research is maybe the first one to include the PHS systems in the electricity generation

scheme in Albania. The model showed that PHSs have high potential for balancing the

renewable electricity generation. For this reason, future research should be made in assessing

the optimal use of PHS, both for domestic and international usage.

Further studies should also include assessing the energy potential of geothermal sources,

biomass and solar heating panels and their contribution to decreasing the electricity demand.

Moreover, the potentials for offshore wind parks should be explored and possibly added to the

scenarios.

Finally, as the investments in the electricity system are costly and as Albania is not a high

income country, the costs for implementing either of the scenarios are relevant. A deep analysis

of costs is recommended including also profits and expenses from exchanging electricity with

neighbouring countries.

46

47

6. References

AEA, 2012, Albanian hydroenergetic potential, http://aea-al.org/?p=1195 (retrieved on 16

January 2013)

AIDA, 2012, Renewable Energy Albania, http://aida.gov.al/wp-

content/uploads/2012/12/Renewable-energy-Albania-1.pdf

AKBN, Hydro-energetic potential,

http://www.akbn.gov.al/images/pdf/publikime/Broshura_Hidroenergjetika.pdf (retrieved on

16 January 2013)

AKBN, 2009, Hydroenergy in Albania

AKBN, 2010, Mission of the institution, http://www.akbn.gov.al/index.php/en/about-

akbn/mission (retrieved on December 3rd, 2012)

AKBN, 2007, Strategjia sektoriale e energjisë 2006-2020

AKE, 2003, Strategjia Kombetare e Energjisë

Bertani, R., 2012, Geothermal power generation in the world 2005–2010 update report,

Geothermics, 41: 1– 29

Cela, R. and Hizmo, A. 2009, Analysys of the renewable energy and its impact on rural

development in Albania, November 2009, Agripolicy, Enlargement Network for Agripolicy

Analysis.

Co-Plan, 2007, Assessment of RES potentials in Albania, Tirana, Albania

EBRD, 2010, Albania Country Profile, Renewable Energy Initiative, http://ws2-

23.myloadspring.com/sites/renew/countries/Albania/profile.aspx#solar (retrieved on 17

January 2013)

Energji Ashta, 2012, VERBUND and EVN Open Ashta Hydropower Plant in Albania,

http://www.energji-ashta.al/eashta/verbund-and-evn-open-ashta-hydropower-plant-in-

albania/ (retrieved on 16 January 2013)

ERE, (2011), Raport vjetor, Gjendja e Sektorit të Energjisë dhe Veprimtaria e ERE-s gjatë Vitit

2011, Tirana, Albania

ERE, 2013, Vendim Nr. 4 Datë 21.01.2013 për heqjen e liçencave të shoqërise CEZ Shpërndarje

Sh.A. për aktivitetin e shpërndarjes së energjisë elektrike, miratuar me vendim nr. 08, datë

25.01.2008, të ndryshuar, dhe për aktivitetin e furnizimit publik me pakicë të energjisë

elektrike” të miratuar me vendim të bordit të komisionerëve nr. 09, datë 25.01.2008, të

ndryshuar

48

Eurostat, 2011, “GDP per capita in the Member States ranged from 44% to 271% of the EU27

average in 2010” http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/2-13122011-BP/EN/2-

13122011-BP-EN.PDF

Federal ministry for the Environment, 2012, Renewable Energy Sources in Figures, Berlin,

Germany

Fletorja zyrtare e Republikës së Shqipërisë, 2009, Ligj nr. 10 116, datë 23.4.2009 “Për miratimin

e kontratës së shitjes së 76 për qind të aksioneve të Operatorit të Sistemit të Shpërndarjes

(OSSH) sh.a. ndërmjet Ministrisë së Ekonomisë, Tregtisë dhe Energjitikës së Republikës së

Shqipërisë dhe CEZ a.s.”: 2745 - 2780.

Frashëri, A., 2007, Scenarios for integrated and cascade ose of geothermal energy of low

enthalpy in Albania Proceedings European Geothermal Congress 2007, 30 May – 1 June 2007,

Unterhaching, Germany

Gaudiosi, G. and Borri, C., 2010, Offshore wind energy in the mediterranean countries, Revue

des Energies Renouvelables SMEE’10 Bou Ismail Tipaza (2010) 173 – 188

HelioClim-3 Database of Solar Irradiance, 2005, http://www.helioclim.org/

Jarvis, Ch., 2000, The Rise and Fall of Albania's Pyramid Schemes, Finance and Development A

quarterly magazine of the IMF, 37: 1

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/03/jarvis.htm ( retrieved on February 22nd,

2012)

KESH, (2011), Fillimet e Energjise, http://www.kesh.com.al/content.aspx?id=2&idd=12

(retrieved on 27 February, 2013)

METE, 2007, Draft National Energy Strategy 2006-2020, Tirana, Albania

METE, 2003, The National Energy Strategy and Action plan, (Updated on April 2005)

MMPAU and AMP, 2010, Raporti për gjendjen e mjedisit 2009,

MoE, GEF, PNUD, 2012, Draft i Planit të Veprimit të Shqipërisë për Energjitë e Rinovueshme si

Palë Kontraktore në Komunitetin e Energjisë

Nelson, V., 2009, Wind Energy: Renewable Energy and the Environment, Wind Characteristics,

CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, US: 39

NOAA, 2012. Global hourly wind data. http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov, 2012.

Official Journal of the European Union, 2005, L 198/31

Prifti, A., 2012, Electric energy rating acquired by solar energy in Albanian territory,

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research: 3 (2012), 8

49

Reuters, 2012, “World Bank says CEZ could quit Albania in months”

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/01/albania-worldbank-cez-idUKL5E8M1GLJ20121101

(retrieved on December 3rd, 2012)

Ramboll, 2006, The most efficient waste energy system in Europe, Waste to energy in Denmark

Schainker, R., 2004, Executive overview: energy storage options for a sustainable energy future,

Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2004. IEEE

Smith, T., 2004, Electricity theft: a comparative analysis, Energy Policy 32 (2004): 2067–2076

Steffen, B., 2011, Prospects for pump-hydro storage in Germany, EWL Working Paper No.

07/2011

UNFCCC, Albania, http://maindb.unfccc.int/public/country.pl?country=AL (retrieved on

December 4th, 2012)

USAID, 2009, “USAID Applauds Privatization of KESH Distribution System” March 20, 2009

http://albania.usaid.gov/?fq=brenda&m=shfaqart&aid=297&kid=26&tit=USAID_Applauds_Pr

ivatization_of_KESH_Distribution_System&gj=gj2&gj=gj2 (retrieved on November 29th, 2012)

Qendra e Publikimeve Zyrtare, 2011, Për miratimin e planit kombëtar të veprimit për efiçencën e

energjisë, 2011-2018, Fletorja zyrtare e republikës së Shqipërisë no.619, p 6181

Schoenherr, 2010, Schoenherr energy a basic legal primer to wind power generation, Wien,

Austria

Top-Channel.tv, 2013, Incinerator that divided Fier, http://www.top-

channel.tv/english/artikull.php?id=8018, (retrieved on 23 January 2013)

US Department of State, 2009, 2009 Investment Climate Statement – Albania

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2009/116574.htm (retrieved on 18 January 2013)

Vestas, 2011, Brochure, V100- 2.6MW Reliability, performance and safety.

Zavalani, O., Kaçani, J. and Marango, P., 2010, Renewable Energy Potentials of Albania,

International Conf. on RE (ICRE2010), Damascus, paper nr. 009-089, April 2010.

World Bank, 2009, Climate vulnerability assessments, an assessment of climate change

vulnerability, risk and adaptation in Albania’s energy sector.

World databank, 2012 http://databank.worldbank.org (retrieved 22 Octorber 2012)

World Energy Council, 2010, 2010 Survey of Energy Resources

50

51

7. Appendices

Appendix 1

List of Small HPPs in Albania (Co-Plan, 2007)

52

53

54

Appendix 2

Values of the Roughness Parameter, z (Nelson, V., 2009).

Terrain Description

z

Snow, flat ground

Calm open sea

Blown sea

Snow, cultivated farmland

Grass

Crops

Farmland and grassy plains

Few trees

Many trees, hedges, few buildings

Forest and woodlands

Cities and large towns

Centers of cities with tall buildings

0.0001

0.0001

0.001

0.002

0.02–0.05

0.05

0.002–0.3

0.06

0.3

0.4–1.2

1.2

3.0

55

Appendix 3 Installed capacities in different scenarios

Table 3 Fully Renewable Scenario excluding storage

Type of

PP

Name Year in

operation

Year out

operation

Capacity

(MW)

Efficiency Assigned

energy

(GWh)

Max

Capacity

which

can be

stored

(GWh)

Hydro Fierza 1978 2028 500 1664

Hydro Fierza

Rehabilitation

2028 2058 500 1664

Hydro Koman 1988 2038 600 1997

Hydro Vau i Dejes 1971 2021 250 876

Hydro Vau i Dejes

rehabilitation

2021 2051 250 876

Hydro Ulza and

Shkopet

1958 2043 49 424

Hydro Bistrica I and

II

1963 2048 29 251

Hydro 32 small HPP

on

concessionary

contracts

1980 2031 24.4 211

Hydro 16 privatized

small HPP

1988 2038 2.047 17

Hydro 22 public

small HPPs

1988 2038 11 95

Hydro Ashta I and II 2012 2062 53 240

Hydro Kalivaçi 2016 2066 80 362

Hydro Skavica 2020 2070 350 1584

Wind N/A 2019 2044 100

Wind N/A 2021 2046 100

Wind N/A 2023 2048 100

Wind N/A 2025 2050 100

Wind N/A 2027 2052 100

Wind N/A 2028 2053 100

Solar N/A 2013 2038 40

Solar N/A 2015 2040 100

56

Solar N/A 2017 2042 100

Solar N/A 2020 2045 200

Solar N/A 2021 2046 200

Solar N/A 2022 2047 200

Solar N/A 2023 2048 200

Solar N/A 2024 2049 200

Solar N/A 2025 2050 200

Solar N/A 2026 2051 200

Table 4 Fully Renewable Scenario including storage

Type of

PP

Name Year in

operation

Year out

operation

Capacity

(MW)

Efficiency Assigned

energy

(GWh)

Max

Capacity

which

can be

stored

(GWh)

Hydro Fierza 1978 2028 500 1664

Hydro Fierza

Rehabilitation

2028 2058 500 1664

Hydro Koman 1988 2038 600 1997

Hydro Vau i Dejes 1971 2021 250 876

Hydro Vau i Dejes

rehabilitation

2021 2051 250 876

Hydro Ulza and

Shkopet

1958 2043 49 424

Hydro Bistrica I and

II

1963 2048 29 251

Hydro 32 small HPP

on

concessionary

contracts

1980 2031 24.4 211

Hydro 16 privatized

small HPP

1988 2038 2.047 17

Hydro 22 public

small HPPs

1988 2038 11 95

Hydro Ashta I and II 2012 2062 53 240

Hydro Kalivaçi 2016 2066 80 362

Hydro p Kalivaçi 2023 2073 80 0.8 0 271.7

Hydro Skavica 2020 2070 350 1584

Hydro p Skavica 2027 2077 350 0.8 0 1188.7

Wind N/A 2019 2044 100

57

Wind N/A 2021 2046 100

Wind N/A 2023 2048 100

Wind N/A 2025 2050 100

Wind N/A 2027 2052 100

Wind N/A 2028 2053 100

Solar N/A 2013 2038 20

Solar N/A 2015 2040 50

Solar N/A 2017 2042 50

Solar N/A 2020 2045 100

Solar N/A 2021 2046 100

Solar N/A 2022 2047 100

Solar N/A 2023 2048 100

Solar N/A 2024 2049 100

Solar N/A 2025 2050 100

Solar N/A 2026 2051 100

Table 5 Worst case scenario

Type of

PP

Name Year in

operation

Year out

operation

Capacity

(MW)

Efficiency Assigned

energy

(GWh)

Max

Capacity

which

can be

stored

(GWh)

Hydro Fierza 1978 2028 500 700.8

Hydro Fierza

Rehabilitation

2028 2058 500 700.8

Hydro p Fierza 2028 2058 500 0 560.64

Hydro Koman 1988 2038 600 788.4

Hydro p Koman 2013 2043 600 0.8 0 630.7

Hydro Vau i Dejes 1971 2021 250 438

Hydro Vau i Dejes 2021 2051 250 438

Hydro p Vau i Dejes 2021 2051 250 0.8 0 525.6

Hydro Ulza and

Shkopet

1958 2043 49 424

Hydro Bistrica I and

II

1963 2048 29 251

Hydro 32 small HPP

on

concessionary

1980 2031 24.4 211

58

contracts

Hydro 16 privatized

small HPP

1988 2038 2.047 17

Hydro 22 public

small HPPs

1988 2038 11 95

Hydro Ashta I and II 2012 2062 53 240

Hydro Kalivaçi 2016 2066 80 362

Hydro p Kalivaçi 2023 2073 80 0.8 0 271.7

Hydro Skavica 2020 2070 350 1584

Hydro p Skavica 2027 2077 350 0.8 0 1188.7

Wind N/A 2019 2044 100

Wind N/A 2021 2046 100

Wind N/A 2023 2048 100

Wind N/A 2025 2050 100

Wind N/A 2027 2052 100

Wind N/A 2028 2053 100

Solar N/A 2013 2038 20

Solar N/A 2015 2040 50

Solar N/A 2017 2042 50

Solar N/A 2020 2045 100

Solar N/A 2021 2046 100

Solar N/A 2022 2047 100

Solar N/A 2023 2048 100

Solar N/A 2024 2049 100

Solar N/A 2025 2050 100

Solar N/A 2026 2051 100