Bettina Burgholzer Energy Economics Group (EEG) Vienna University of Technology AAEE Student Chapter Vienna, 26 th March 2015 Cost/Benefit analysis of further expansion of the Austrian transmission grid to enable further Integration of renewable electricity generation (RES-E) The sole responsibility for the content of this presentation lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. Neither the EACI nor the European Commission are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
2 Overview About the GridTech Project Methodology of bottom-up model Austrian case study description Results of selected scenarios 2020: 380 kv transmission power line in Salzburg 2050: implementation of FACTS 1 & DLR 2, high PHS, less annual generation of Run-of-River, HVDC line AT-SK Conclusions 1 FACTS = Flexible AC Transmission Systems, considered to be phase shifters 2 DLR = Dynamic Line Rating
3 GridTech about the project Contract number: IEE/11/017 / SI2.616364 Full title: Impact Assessment of New Technologies to Foster RES- Electricity Integration into the European Transmission System Duration: May 2012 - April 2015 Budget: EUR 1,958,528 GridTech is a project co-funded by the European Commission under the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme. GridTech s main goal: Conduct a fully integrated assessment of new grid-impacting technologies and their implementation into the European electricity system. EC contribution: EUR 1,468,896
4 Project objectives & structure Assess the non-technical barriers for transmission expansion and market compatible renewable electricity integration in Europe Develop a robust cost-benefit analysis methodology on investments Apply and verify the cost-benefit analysis methodology for investments in the transmission grid Achieve a common understanding among key actors and target groups on best practise criteria Transmission expansion: non-technical barriers Innovative technologies screening Pan-European study (top-down approach) RES integration: market issues Cost-benefit methodology Regional case studies (bottom-up approach) Deliver tailor-made recommendations and action plans Results and recommendations
5 Pan-European study EU30+ zonal model Top-down approach: Used tool: MTSIM, developed and analyses done by Ricerca sul Sistema Energetico - RSE S.p.A. Milano Target countries (bottom-up modelling)
6 Bottom-up methodology: Input/Output and Optimisation EDisOn (Electricity Dispatch Optimization): Linear Optimisation Problem (LOP) formulated in MATLAB and solved by Gurobi-Solver! (cp. (Burger et al., 2007), (Shahidehpour et al., 2002)) Target function: Minimisation of the total system costs Constraints: Demand=Supply Capacity Ramping Limits Reservoirs balance Spillage of RoR and RES-E generation technologies DC power flow (PTDF-Matrix, cp. (Van den Bergh et al., 2014)) Input hourly based: Demand, Wind, PV, RoR and PHES inflow power plant data primary energy prices, CO 2 certificate prices and specific CO 2 emissions WP4: Exchanges and Prices Market Model Linear Optimisation Problem (LOP) minimisation of the total generation costs s.t. technical constraints Solving Model with Gurobi- Solver Output hourly based RoR, PHS and thermal production, Exchanges, Flows, Storage level, wholesale electricity prices, etc. CBA Calculation of benefits (welfare, CR, changes in fossil fuel needs and CO2 emissions)
% AAEE Student Chapter 2015, Vienna 7 Modelling of FACTS & DLR Parameter: Decision Variable: phase angle Constraints: Source: Präsentation an der RWTH Aachen (Puffer, 2010). DLR 140 120 100 80 Wind Auslastung < 0.5 100 % < 0.8 105 % < 1 115 % Source: dena-netzstudie II, 2010. Wind 60 50 40 20 with 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 hours Source: own illustration. Complex conductance Incidence
8 Austrian case study description 24 nodes: 17 correlate with the main substations within Austria and 7 neighbouring ones 35 transmission power lines (TPL): All parallel transmission power lines between the nodes are taken together to one representative transmission power line. Grid Technology Focus 2020 HVAC line Salzburg 2030 2050 HVAC line Carinthia DLR and FACTS HVDC line AT-SK DLR and FACTS Storage (PHS) 1030 CH 380 kv 220 kv 110 kv DE2 VBG 2600 4028 * Switzerland 1900 * TIR_w * interaction with WP4 Germany 3500 1866 DE1 TIR_e * Italy 2685 1700 2020 2573 IT 518 SBG_s OTIR 550 OOE_w SBG_n 1700 1296 104 492 KTN_w 1321 3092 3092 STMK_w 389 OOE_e 518 518 KTN_e 298 SI STMK Source: Austrian Power Grid, Masterplan 2030. * Czech Republic 518 2573 2148 518 STMK_s 5400 NOE * Slovenia 2518 W 2417 CZ NOE_n 777 540 Source: own illustration 428 5400 NOE_s 400 2300 HU * Hungary
EUR/MWh AAEE Student Chapter 2015, Vienna 9 Selected results: wo/w TPL expansion 2020 (2020A) without expansion (2020B) with expansion CO 2 certificte price: (2020A) (2020B) Salzburg TPL Load factor of TPLs > 70 % (cumulated number of hours) 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 6686 RES-E curtailment (GWh) - 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 10 EUR/ton CO 2 (2020A) 0.02 0.33 Total demand: 73.67 TWh/a (2020B) 0.01 0.30 Total installed capacity: 31 GW, of which are Wind: PV: RoR: PHS: 3.2 GW 1.2 GW 5.6 GW 10.2 GW wo/w Salzburg TPL expansion: Not Supplied Energy (NSE): 0 MWh 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Spill Wind Spill PV Spill Hydro Peak price duration curve mean (2020A): 34,97 / mean (2020B): 34,88 1 501 1001 time (hours) 1501 2001 (2020A) (2020B)
10 Selected results: wo/w TPL expansion 2020 (2020A) Load factor of TPL Salzburg vs. Export/Import AT-DE (2020B) (2020A) without expansion (2020B) with expansion CO 2 certificte price: 10 EUR/ton CO 2 Total demand: 73.67 TWh/a Export from AT Import to AT Export from AT Import to AT Load factor of TPL Salzburg vs. PHS Total installed capacity: 31 GW, of which are Wind: 3.2 GW PV: 1.2 GW RoR: 5.6 GW PHS: 10.2 GW wo/w Salzburg TPL expansion: Not Supplied Energy (NSE): 0 MWh pump consumption turb generation + 2 % PHS
With TPL expansion in Salzburg Without TPL expansion in Salzburg AAEE Student Chapter 2015, Vienna 11 Selected results: wo/w TPL expansion 2020 (2020 A) CBA = 0.023 1 (2020 B) CBA = 0.001 A nodal pricing approach within a control zone would not give enough incentives to invest in extending the TPL in Salzburg. Regulated grid tariffs are still necessary in the future 1 Assumption: i=5%, T=50 years, investment costs (Freileitung) rd. 190 M EUR, Source: Gutachten i.a. von E-Control, 2007.
GWh -79-58 -10,424-24 -32 GWh 13 8 2 33 1 44 37 36 55 137 164 AAEE Student Chapter 2015, Vienna 12 Selected results of the time horizon 2050 Scenario 2050 (2050 A) Reference scenario (2050 D) With FACTS & DLR (2050 F) High PHS, FACTS & DLR (2050 r) -33.3 % RoR (2050 SK) HVDC SK-AT CO 2 certificate price: 100 EUR/ton CO 2 150 100 50 - -50-100 Differences in generation structure compared to (2050 A) RES-E RoR turbine pump (2050D) (2050F) (2050r) (2050SK) (2050 D & F) due to flexible grid: RES-E (PV, wind, biomass, RoR) generation increases RES-E curtailment decreases PHS activities decreases slightly Full-load hours of thermal units diminishes -2% CO 2 emissions diminishes -3% (2050 r) due to lower generation of RoR: Lower spillages of RoR plants More PHS activities needed (2050 SK) due to additional imports from SK: RES-E curtailment decreases Less PHS activities needed Full-load hours of thermal units diminishes -12% CO 2 emissions can be reduced -11% Total demand: 90.7 TWh/a Total installed capacity: 53 GW, of which are Wind: PV: RoR: PHS: 7 GW 18 GW 6.7 GW 14 GW (P: 6 GW) High PHS:16.2 GW (P: 11.4 GW) 120 100 80 60 40 20-64 29 40 RES-E curtailment 43 38 28 45 10 45 35 RoR PV Wind 57 31 28 Fossil fuel savings
Implementation of FACTS & DLR and their impacts on the transmission grid max PV+Wind AAEE Student Chapter 2015, Vienna 13 For this selected week the implementation of FACTS & DLR allows 6.2 GWh (1.4 %) more PV generation (instead of curtailing) 9 GWh (2 %) more wind (instead of curtailing) 30 GWh (19 %) more pump consumption 46 GWh (24 %) less turbine generation 108 hours (14 %) less with a load factor > 70 % on 23 TPLs within AT (2050 A) reference scenario (2050 D) with FACTS & DLR turbine
14 Selected results of the time horizon 2050 Scenario 2050 (2050 A) Reference scenario (2050 D) With FACTS & DLR (2050 F) High PHS, FACTS & DLR (2050 r) -33.3 % RoR (2050 SK) HVDC SK-AT CO 2 certificate price: 100 EUR/ton CO 2 Total demand: 90.7 TWh/a Total installed capacity: 53 GW, of which are Wind: PV: RoR: PHS: 7 GW 18 GW 6.7 GW 14 GW (P: 6 GW) High PHS:16.2 GW (P: 11.4 GW) Selected week, where maximum of CR occurs
Social Welfare increase Reliability increase Resilience improvement CO 2 emissions reduction RES-E spillage reduction Controllability & Flexibility increase Socio-environmental impact AAEE Student Chapter 2015, Vienna 15 Summary of selected scenarios Benefit/Aspect Scenario 2020 & 2050 (2020 A) Reference scenario (2020 B) With TPL expansion (2050 A) Reference scenario (2050 D) With FACTS & DLR (2050 F) High PHS, FACTS & DLR (2050 r) -33.3 % RoR (2050 SK) HVDC SK-AT Case (2020A) Base 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (2020B) Expansion + + + 0 + + - (2050A) Base 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (2050D) FACTS & DLR ++ + + ++ ++ ++ 0 (2050F) High PHS, FACTS & DLR ++ + + ++ ++ ++ - (2050 r) -33.3 % RoR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (2050 SK) HVDC SK-AT 0 0 0 ++ + + - Social Welfare increase: Ability of a power system to reduce congestion as a basis for an efficient market Reliability increase: Adequate and secure supply of electricity Resilience improvement: Ability of the system to withstand increasingly extreme system conditions CO 2 emissions reduction: Reduce CO 2 emissions in the power system RES-E spillage reduction: Reduce the RES-E curtailed energy Controllability & Flexibility increase: Possibility to control power flows and different possible future development paths or scenarios Socio-environmental impact: Public acceptance and environmental impact
16 Conclusio for the time horizon 2020 & 2030 TPL expansions (from 220kV to 380kV) in Salzburg and in Carinthia are very important for closing the Austrian 380 kv ring Significant for national and European RES-E integration (connection of wind in the east and PHS in the west) for the time horizon 2050 FACTS and DLR can reduce RES-E curtailment significantly for Cost/Benefit Analysis Congestion Rent (CR) as a revenue for CBA approach only makes sense if it is an expansion of a cross-border connection of uncoupled markets regulated grid tariffs are still necessary in the future, especially within a control zone
17 For more information about the project, please visit: www.gridtech.eu Thank you! Photo credits: ABB, Siemens, Verbund, TenneT, OE, WIP
18 Referenzen M. Burger, B. Graeber, and G. Schindlmayr, Managing energy risk: An integrated view on power and other energy markets. Chichester, England, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007. M. Shahidehpour, H. Yamin, and Z. Li, Market operations in electric power systems: Forecasting, scheduling, and risk management. [New York]: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Wiley-Interscience, 2002. K. Van den Bergh, E. Delarue, and W. D'haeseleer, DC power flow in unit commitment models. TME Working Paper - Energy and Environment, 2014. R. Puffer, www.forum-netzintegration.de/uploads/media/duh_puffer_ws1_06052010.pdf, 2010. dena-netzstudie II, Integration erneuerbarer Energien in die deutsche Stromversorgung im Zeitraum 2015 2020 mit Ausblick 2025, www.dena.de/publikationen/energiesysteme/dena-netzstudie-ii.html, 2010. Gutachten im Auftrag von Energie-Control GmbH Wien, Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. B. R. Oswald, Institut für Energieversorgung und Hochspannungstechnik, Universität Hannover, www.econtrol.at/portal/page/portal/medienbibliothek/presse/dokumente/pdfs/pk%20salzburgleitung_endfassun g_4ks_20080118_0_0.pdf, 2007.