Key determinants in auction schemes for wind energy

Transcription

1 .0.0 Key determinants in auction schemes for wind energy Daniel Fürstenwerth BERLIN, Agora Energiewende an Overview Think Tank based in Berlin Mission: How to make the Energiewende a success story? Financed by Mercator Foundation and European Climate Foundation, 0-07 Independent and non-partisan

2 .0.0 The German Case: From Feed-in Tariffs to Auctions Power Generation in Germany Share of Renewables Transition: 0-08 Feed-in-Tariff + low risk / low cost* + community investment - highly regulated - No cap on investment % % 0-% -60% Auctions + market-based system + cap on investment (, - GW for wind onshore) * for wind onshore Auctions for Renewable Energies - Questions requiring further clarification Forthcoming in english (october):

3 .0.0 Key Discussion Points in Designing Auction Systems differentation Are auctions preferable over other e.g. a Feed-in Tariff scheme? How to make sure the winning projects get build? What is the product that is auctioned? How does the bidding take place and how is the winning offer rewarded? How are different ressource endowmends considered? How to ensure local communities benefit from wind park development? Capacity additions wind onshore in Germany (net) GW Does the amount of projects offered exceed demand for new projects? What are permitting requirements and bottlenecks?

4 .0.0 Challenge French Experience wind onshore: 00 MW auction in 00 0 MW built in 008 (0% realization rate) Solutions Brazil: High requirements on project development Germany (PV, prelim.) Increase quantity auctioned over target France, Brazil, China: Penalties

5 .0.0 Choice (examples) Increase quantity auctioned High requirements on project development Financial deposit/penalty Trade-off (example): High market barriers Easy access for community projects Choice: Payment based on power produced vs. capacity installed Payment over fixed time vs. fixed quantity of power Including/excluding grid connection cost Location specified vs. not-specified

6 .0.0 Denmark (Wind offshore) Predefined site Germany (PV, prelim.) Free selection of site Feed-in-premium for power produced (0y) Austria (Small PV) Investment grant for installed capacity is key to influence system-friendly design of technology Power ion (share of total output) 0,6 0, 0, 0, 0, Feed-in characteristic depending on wind turbine design Starkwind (0) Schwachwind (0) Standard System Friendly 0, Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su 6

7 .0.0 Choice: Criteria and process for selection of winners Dynamic vs. static auctioning Pay-as-bid vs. uniform pricing Focus: Reduce cost while avoiding winners curse California Sealed-bid-auction Pay-as-bid Netherlands Sequential auctions for different price levels Limited by annual budget France, PV Multiple criteria for selection: incl. CO-balance of product, R&D-requirements 7

8 .0.0 Current Situation in Germany: Differentiated level of Feed-in-Premium Distributed expansion of Wind power Wind Quality in Germany m/s Open Question: How to enable distributed expansion at least cost? Ownership of Installed Renewable Energy Capacities in Germany in 00 (total GW) 9% % 7% % 7% % 0% Private Individuals Farmers Project Developers Investment Fonds/Banks Others Businesses Other Utilities Big Utilities Source: 8

9 .0.0 Choice (example) Easy access to auction system ( -page-application ) Separate auctions for small projects Feed-in-Premium for small projects Mandatory local investment opportunity Local aceptance will be key to the future of wind power Auctions for Renewable Energies - Questions requiring further Clarification Forthcoming in english (october): Contact: daniel.fuerstenwerth@agora-energiewende.de 8 9