Environmental and Socio economic impact assessment of RES cooperation

Transcription

1 BRINGING EUROPE AND THIRD COUNTRIES CLOSER TOGETHER THROUGH RENEWABLE ENERGIES Environmental and Socio economic impact assessment of RES cooperation Zoran Kordic, Natalia Caldés UNDP / CIEMAT July 5th, Belgrade

2 The regulatory and policy action loop Conceptual framework Multi-Level Structure

3 Considerations 3 future RES support scenarios for each WB country Future local content scenarios (moderate/high) Various socio-economic (jobs) and environmental impacts (PM) Methodologies (LCA, E.F, etc), literature, stakeholder consultation Various sources of uncertainty data, methodologies, future scenarios, etc a good indication of the sign and magnitude of possible environmental and socio-economic co-effects for exporter countries.

4 DOMESTIC SHARE SCENARIOS Scenarios Moderate High Share of domestic component in production and installing of renewables [%] Share of domestic component in maintenance of renewables [%]

5 What does it mean for job creation in West Balkan countries?

6 EMPLOYMENT Country total (each year) - JOBS BAU Cooperation Albania Croatia Bosnia Macedonia Montenegro Kosovo Serbia

7 How many jobs can be created per renewable energy technology?

8 EMPLOYMENT [SERBIA] Wind onshore Photovoltaics Hydro small-scale Hydro large-scale Solid biomass BAU Cooperation NREAP Cooperative scenario can create more than 5000 jobs yearly.

9 What is the economic stimulation associated to renewables?

10 ECONOMIC STIMULATION Country total (each year) M BAU Cooperation Albania Croatia Bosnia Macedonia Montenegro Kosovo Serbia

11 M CAPITAL EXPENDITURES [SERBIA] Wind onshore Photovoltaics Hydro small-scale Hydro large-scale Solid biomass Biogas BAU Cooperation Under the cooperative scenario, the overall economic stimulation in Serbia is M

12 CO2 avoidnace [tco2] 2 EMPLOYMENT AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1,5 1 0,5 Hydro Small BAU Hydro Small Cooperation Wind BAU Wind Cooperation ,5 Capital expenditures [M ] Country: Serbia

13 What are the environmental effects associated to renewables?

14 LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

15 Environmental impact changes in relation to lignite (Kwh) Climate change Ozone depletion Human toxicity, cancer effects Human toxicity, non-cancer Particulate matter Photochemical ozone Acidification Terrestrial eutrophication Freshwater eutrophication Marine eutrophication Freshwater ecotoxicity Land use Water resource depletion Mineral, fossil & ren Lignite BAU 2020 SNP strong 2020

16 Environmental impact changes in relation to BAU - Scenario Climate change Ozone depletion Human toxicity, cancer effects Human toxicity, non-cancer Particulate matter Photochemical ozone Acidification Terrestrial eutrophication Freshwater eutrophication Marine eutrophication Freshwater ecotoxicity Land use Water resource depletion Mineral, fossil & ren resource > 2020% BAU C SNP ave C SNP strong C

17 MAIN MESSAGES The cooperation scenario generates at least twice as many jobs than BAU. High domestic content shares (high vs. Moderate) almost doubles the employment effects. In average, lignite generates at least twice as much environmental impacts than Renewable technologies. Additional policy measures should be in place to capture the largest share of socio-economic benefits (job creation, economic stimulation, technology transfer, etc). Social and environmental safeguards must be in place to ensure that local communities benefit from RES deployment.

18 THANK YOU

19 Environmental impacts of different electricity generation technologies compared to coal electricity

20 Environmental impact changes in relation to BAU - Scenario Climate change Ozone depletion Human toxicity, cancer effects Human toxicity, non-cancer effects Particulate matter Photochemical ozone formation Acidification Terrestrial eutrophication Freshwater eutrophication Marine eutrophication Freshwater ecotoxicity Land use <-200 Water resource depletion Mineral, fossil & ren resource depletion BAU C SNP ave C SNP strong C

21 1 kwh of electricity produced from Environmental Impact Categories SNP strong Lignite Mix BAU Climate change kg CO2 eq 1,29 0,70 0,64 Ozone depletion kg CFC-11 eq 1,51E-09 5,53E-09 5,23E-09 Human toxicity, cancer effects CTUh 3,00E-07 6,98E-08 6,42E-08 Human toxicity, non-cancer effects CTUh 1,22E-07 2,09E-08 2,09E-08 Particulate matter kg PM2.5 eq 7,02E-04 1,01E-04 9,49E-05 Photochemical ozone formation kg NMVOC eq 1,93E-03 1,22E-03 1,13E-03 Acidification molc H+ eq 8,96E-03 2,31E-03 2,13E-03 Terrestrial eutrophication molc N eq 6,06E-03 4,75E-03 4,41E-03 Freshwater eutrophication kg P eq 4,62E-03 1,10E-03 1,00E-03 Marine eutrophication kg N eq 1,50E-03 6,54E-04 6,02E-04 Freshwater ecotoxicity CTUe 4,70 1,01 0,93 Land use kg C deficit -0,06-0,01-0,01 Water resource depletion m3 water eq 1,42E-03 4,95E-04 4,55E-04 Mineral, fossil & ren resource depletion kg Sb eq 2,45E-07 1,12E-07 2,26E-06

22 kg CO 2 eq./kwh GHG emissions per kwh in Serbia 8,0E-01 7,0E-01 6,0E-01 5,0E-01 4,0E-01 3,0E-01 2,0E-01 1,0E-01 0,0E BAU SNP ave SNP strong

23 SWOT ANALYSIS FOR SERBIA (Assessment of the host country situation as conducive to deploy RES projects under Art. 9) Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats Energy system strategy and energy outlook RES Industry development Energy security Market structure of energy system Grid and Interconnections RE Regulatory & Policy Framework (current) (future) Institutional Framework for RES deployment Financial risks and uncertainty Investment facilitation RES capacity/potential/ Available Technology Options Public awareness/acceptance Environmental effects Social effects

24 Extra slides

25

26 Phase Impact category Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROEI) Climate change Human toxicity Phase Impact category Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROEI) Climate change Human toxicity Particulate matter Acidification Eutrophication Land use Particulate matter Acidification Eutrophication Land use Water resource depletion Resource depletion Water resource depletion Resource depletion Indicator MJ/KWh Indicator kg CO2 eq. MJ/KWh CTU h kg CO2 eq. CTU h kg PM2.5 eq. kg PM2.5 eq. molc H+ eq. molc H+ eq. kg P eq. kg P eq. kg C deficit m3 water eq. kg Sb eq. kg C deficit m3 water eq. kg Sb eq. CSP/WIND/HYDRO/BIOMASS M O&M D CSP/WIND/HYDRO/BIOMASS M O&M D

27 INDICATOR MJ/KWh INTENDED USE and RELEVANCE FOR THE COOPERATION MECHANISMS Captures the relation between the energy requirement for construction, operation and decommissioning, and the energy output of the plant over its life time. Kg CO 2 equivalent CTU h Kg PM 2.5 equivalent Molc H+ equivalent Kg P equivalent Kg C deficit Captures the potential effects on climate change. Relevant for third countries to assess the impact on CO2 reduction commitments Captures the potential effects on Human toxicity - Relevant for third countries to measure other potential local environmental impacts Captures the potential effects in Particulate matter - Relevant for third countries local environmental impacts Captures the potential effects on Acidification - Relevant for third countries local environmental impacts Captures the potential effects on Eutrophication - Relevant for third countries to measure other potential local environmental impacts Captures the potential effects on Land use - third countries might be interested in ensuring that new renewable project will not affect the soil quality. m 3 water equivalent Kg SB eq. Captures the potential effects on Water resource depletion - Whenever there is a regional/national problem related to water scarcity, third countries might need to assess this impact Captures the potential effects on Resource depletion - third countries want to avoid overexploitation of national resources

28 EMPLOYMENT [BOSNIA] Wind onshore Photovoltaics Hydro small-scale Hydro large-scale Solid biomass BAU Cooperation

29 EMPLOYMENT [MACEDONIA] Wind onshore Photovoltaics Hydro small-scale Hydro large-scale Solid biomass Biogas BAU Cooperation

30 EMPLOYMENT [CROATIA] Wind onshore Photovoltaics Hydro small-scale Hydro large-scale Solid biomass Biogas BAU Cooperation NREAP