Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision South Africa

Transcription

1 Utility Scale RE Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision South Africa Paul Gauché, Justine Rudman & Cebo Silinga. Stellenbosch Univ 21 April, 2015 WWF Dialogue on Utility and Local Scale Renewable Energy in South Africa

2 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Starting with a brain stretch If I offered a 2030 * electric system with following in advance Average cost **: R 0.61 per kwh Standard deviation: less than R 0.02 per kwh Demand availability: 99.99% Resilient to demand: Best-Best *** Would you take it? **** * In 2015 Rand ** Cost probability distribution mean on LCOE definition *** Greater average availability for demand changes Quicker new capacity **** Sure, this is a simulated question on a concept merely to ensure you are awake 11 May

3 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Outline 1. Intro & about us 2. Objective 3. Spatial-temporal modelling primer 4. The system 5. The model 6. The scenarios 7. Our findings and call to action 11 May

4 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 1 Intro & about us 11 May

5 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Introduction & about us National (DST) & Eskom university hub for RE Co-author: Cebo Silinga DST/Eskom/Sasol funded CSP and ST group Co-authors: Paul Gauché & Justine Rudman More about us: 11 May

6 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Introduction & about us energy systems analysis Pfenninger, S., Gauché, P., Lilliestam, J., Damerau, K., Wagner, F. & Patt, A., Potential for Concentrating Solar Power to Provide Baseload and Dispatchable Power. Nature Climate Change, June May

7 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Introduction & about us technology development 11 May

8 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 2 Objective 11 May

9 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Objective Initial test & refinement of the WWF scenario* for the feasibility and merits of targeting 20% annual electricity generation by 2030 By spatial-temporal analysis on the whole electricity system of South Africa Comparing scenarios using a single metric: System cost of electricity (R/kWh) * WWF Renewable 11 May

10 Installed capacity (MW) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Starting point Other Pumped storage Open cycle gas Wind Solar Combined cycle gas Hydro Nuclear New coal Existing coal 0 IRP 2010 IRP Update WWF High WWF Low 11 May

11 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Starting constraint Transmission infrastructure expenditure will be extremely limited all the way to 2030 [Note: Modelling of transmission system limited to basic assumptions] 11 May

12 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Scope limitations [post technical review] Analysis of generation side is good Transmission analysis is very basic GCCA substation and regional evac only considered no other modelling of transmission done. Focus rather on proposing nodes near existing transmission system assuming this is a lower cost than to locate renewable projects only by location of resource. Recommendation to follow up with Eskom to refine the model 12 May

13 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 3Spatial-temporal modelling primer 11 May

14 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Spatial Find Upington for this particular hour in deep winter Gauché, P., Pfenninger, S., Meyer, A.J., Von Backström, T.W and Brent, A.C., Modeling Dispatchability Potential of CSP in South Africa. SASEC 2012, May, Stellenbosch, South Africa. 11 May

15 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Temporal 7 days of wind power in 10 distributed regions Day of the year Wind power over a few days and how that fits into the month of January for the whole system Month of January for the whole electricity system May

16 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 4 The system 11 May

17 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Coal power life expectancy ESKOM generation Capacity 2013 Capacity Capacity by Capacity by 2030 (ESKOM) (IRP Update) 2030* with LifEx** Arnot Camden Duvha Grootvlei I think this is asking a lot Hendrina Kendal Komati Kusile Kriel Lethabo Majuba Matimba Matla Medupi Tutuka TOTAL *Assuming decommission schedule as presented in the IRP Update **Adding life extension to all plants, except RTS and those older than 50 years in May

18 Demand (MW) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable When we consume electricity whole year Minimum Average Peak 0 11 May

19 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Transmission today and tomorrow 11 May

20 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Grid basics big nuclear 11 May

21 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Grid basics big renewable 11 May

22 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 5 The model 11 May

23 Demand (MW) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Demand scaling the entire yearly shape Annual demand (TWh) Scenario Multiples n/a 358 WWF Low WWF High IRP Update IRP May

24 every technology or plant at nodes Supply Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Combined: Coal, Nuclear, Hydro, Pumped storage, CCGT, OCGT System hub CSP node CSP node PV & CSP node City PV node Actual node Wind node Virtual node 11 May

25 zero Probability avg Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Cost account for wide range of futures probabilistically Certain* Simple LCOE (R/kWh) 11 May

26 Technology PV Fixed tilt Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Cost & performance data table CSP 6h TES CSP 9h TES Wind OCGT CCGT Nuclear Coal (PF with FGD) Pumped storage Imported Hydro Domestic hydro Range CAPEX (R/kW) Fixed OPEX (R/kW/a) Variable OPEX (R/MWh) Fuel Costs (R/GJ) Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Availability Turndown limit Ramp (%/min)* rate Maximum life (years)** 90% NA 25 90% 0 6% 30 Oops we seem to have this wrong: too low by R / kw * (To be corrected with good referenceable data but not now) 90% 0 6% 30 90% NA 20 90% % 30 90% 0 5% 30 90% % 60 80% - 85% % 60 90% 0 50% % 0 2% % 0 2% 60 * We were initially uncertain about the correct range and kept it wider in this study. Most recent data (IEA, B&V, UK Hinkley power plant) seems to be suggesting that when factoring in the construction time, the correct range centres around $9,000/kW implying that we have significantly underestimated nuclear cost. This is noted as an item to revisit. 11 May Span

27 sun Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Solar resource CSP solar irradiation = cost PV solar irradiation Spain USA SA Germany SA 11 May

28 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Wind resource 11 May

29 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Nodes the big decisions going where the grid is! City PV City PV NW/SW wind Maximum use of Cape line SE wind 11 May

30 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Model system logic Start year Configure all plants (capacity, availability merit, etc) Load 8760 demand hours Load 8760 hours solar, wind & weather Start next hour Load merit item & compute supply fraction No Demand met? Yes Stop hour Storage charging logic (add to demand next hour) No No Out of capacity? Year complete? Yes Yes Stop year 11 May

31 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Model system result example (WWF High) OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear City PV Utility PV Days of the year Wind WWF High 11 May

32 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Cost models plant level LCOE = (CapEx + finance + fixed OpEx + variable OpEx + Fuel) / (Power generated) Age (start of generation) CapEx (R/kW) Financing OpExF (R/MW/y) OpExV (R/MWh/y) Fuel (R/MWe) (e.g. Medupi) (2022 cost in 2015 R) (15-30 y + construction) Cost is apples to apples & reasonably applicable 11 May

33 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Cost models system level System LCOE = Σ (LCOE) + COUE COUE = Cost Of Unserved Energy COUE range: R 10/kWh R150/kWh * Notes: Low end linked to simple GDP per annual power gen High end includes systematic impacts such as investment decisions Diesel power is cheaper than the whole range (not ideal, but it is so) * Source: DOE IRP2010 input parameter sheet Now we can compare all scenarios 1 number 11 May

34 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable CSP (Concentrating Solar Power) Very detailed Validated Many modes Each plant unique Storage, Heliostats & Turbine all variable Role: CSP is used as mid-merit partners with CCGT plants in this role Benefit: Good for system Drawback: Sacrificial at times 11 May

35 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable PV (Photovoltaic) Detailed Validated Many modes Each plant unique Role: Intermittent renewable with guaranteed offtake Benefit: Cheap fuel-saver & more predictable than wind Reflected Irradiation Direct Irradiation Diffuse Irradiation PV Panel Drawback: No storage 11 May

36 Power (MW) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable PV System-wide predictable Year hours Lephalale De Aar Kimberly Prieska De Aar North Pofadder Fort Beufort Grobleshoop Kuruman Welkom Laingsberg De Aar South 11 May

37 Capacity or output fraction Feasibility of the WWF Renewable PV Key measures Capacity factor duration Annual cumulative power fraction Hours 11 May

38 Power output (kw) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Wind Detailed Validated Each plant unique Role: Intermittent renewable with guaranteed offtake Benefit: Cheapest fuel-saver Drawback: No storage & less predictable intra-week Model Hub height wind speed (m/s) 11 May

39 Hourly power produced (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Wind Yes, it can be like a yoyo 350 Node-01 Node-02 Node-03 Node-04 Node Node-06 Node-07 Node-08 Node-09 Node Year hour 11 May

40 Capacity or output fraction Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Wind Key measures Capacity factor duration Annual cumulative Hours 11 May

41 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 6 The scenarios 11 May

42 Capacity (MW) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable End Point Other Pumped storage OCGT CCGT CSP City PV PV Wind Hydro Nuclear Coal 0 IRP Capacity IRP Update Capacity WWH High Capacity WWF High Initial WWF Low Capacity WWF Low Initial 11 May

43 Annual shortfall (TWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Macro finding IRP struggles with capacity limits Unserved energy: IRP hit by 1) lower coal availability 2) S-T method (shows poor blend of tech) 3) Worst demand IRP IRP Update WWF High WWF Low 11 May

44 Power generation fractions (%) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable System behaviour by month IRP 100% 90% 80% 70% Unserved OCGT Pumped storage CCGT 60% Coal 50% Nuclear 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Hydro CSP City PV Utility PV Wind January February March April May June July August September October November December 11 May

45 Power generation fractions (%) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable System behaviour by month WWF High 100% 90% 80% 70% Unserved OCGT Pumped storage CCGT 60% Coal 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Nuclear Hydro CSP City PV Utility PV Wind January February March April May June July August September October November December 11 May

46 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable IRP struggling Load-shedding OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear City PV Days of the year Utility PV Wind Demand 11 May

47 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF High performing well OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear Days of the year City PV Utility PV Wind Demand 11 May

48 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF High summer with poor sun event OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear City PV Utility PV Wind Demand Days of the year 11 May

49 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF High summer with wind drop OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear City PV Utility PV Wind Demand Days of the year 11 May

50 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF High transition to winter OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear Days of the year City PV Utility PV Wind Demand 11 May

51 Power production and demand (MWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF High deep winter OCGT Pumped storage CCGT CSP Coal Hydro Nuclear Days of the year City PV Utility PV Wind Demand 11 May

52 Pumped storage charge level Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF High pumped storage as system health indicator Year hour 11 May

53 Pumped storage charge level Feasibility of the WWF Renewable IRP pumped storage as system health indicator Year hour 11 May

54 Capacity contribution (%) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Capacity renewables, mid merit & peaking 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Pumped storage OCGT CCGT CSP Pumped storage OCGT CCGT Pumped storage OCGT CCGT CSP Pumped storage OCGT CCGT CSP 50% CSP 40% PV PV PV 30% PV 20% 10% 0% Wind Wind Wind Wind IRP IRP Update WWF High WWF Low 11 May

55 Annual production contribution (%) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Annual generation renewables, mid merit & peaking 100% 90% 80% Pumped storage OCGT Pumped storage OCGT OCGT CCGT OCGT CCGT 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% CSP CSP CCGT CCGT CSP CSP PV PV PV PV Wind Wind Wind Wind IRP IRP Update WWF High WWF Low 11 May

56 Probability Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Cost each scenario probability costing 1 WWF scenario assures low cost 0.5 WWF Low WWF High IRP Update IRP Cost of electricity (R/kWh) 11 May

57 Typical cost of electricity (R/kWh) Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Cost resilience the final test R R 1.00 Did not IRP expect 2010 system this. Hindsight WWF explanation High system is possible. IRP update system WWF Low system R 0.10 Regardless of growth path: WWF High / IRP Update demand WWF vision is lowest cost IRP 2010 demand WWF Low demand 11 May

58 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Energy Vision 2030 South Africa 7Our findings and call to action 11 May

59 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Key findings Eskom coal plant availability is big issue Preserve & maintain the fleet for lowest cost Low availability hits the system significantly (all other things equal) WWF scenario is on the right track! Going up to 25% renewable gives a best system Grid does need improvement beyond 25%* Right balance leads to unexpected benefits Hi RE + peaking + storage = double reserve availability Using RE saves fuel cost (less stiff system) Big OCGT & CCGT but low diesel and gas consumption! Handling sudden increase in demand is unexpected bonus * Beyond the upper level of transmission in the GCCA & noting grid backbone constraints not considered. 11 May

60 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Conclusion Our study shows a conceptual system that seems superior in every way Renewable focussed Quick to add capacity (no long lead times) Higher local involvement (jobs, local content another study) Lowest fuel price fluctuation / availability vulnerability Very low diesel / gas needs New capacity after 2022* gets even cheaper Resilience and energy security is very high * Any time really 11 May

61 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Conclusion $$ Major potential role in preventing load shedding $$ Very high local economic participation 11 May

62 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Call to action Immediate Eskom s fleet is important protect it at all costs Place PV on every rooftop now quick fix (see CSIR) [In hindsight] Place PV & wind at pumped storage & other plants Planned Improve IRP process systematically & with S-T method Be bold go big on RE to allow critical mass industrialization Get organised: Don t allocate and provide grid to random located project. Plan well, facilitate, and let the projects come to the grid. Incentive for system: IPPs will respond correctly with time of day tariffs. 11 May

63 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable Thank you Paul Gauché, Justine Rudman & Cebo Silinga Stellenbosch University 21 April, 2015 concentrating.sun.ac.za , WWF. All WWF photographs used in this presentation are copyright protected and courtesy of the WWF-Canon Global Photo Network and the respective photographers.

64 Feasibility of the WWF Renewable WWF IN SHORT +100 WWF is in over 100 countries, on 5 continents WWF has over 5,000 staff worldwide 1961 WWF was founded In M WWF has over 5 million supporters Photo: Michel Roggo / WWF-Canon

65