Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Significance of international hydropower storage   Jens Hobohm
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Significance of international hydropower storage Jens Hobohm

  • 307 views
Published

German Norwegian Energy Forum …

German Norwegian Energy Forum
Conference 2012 in Berlin

Published in Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
307
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Significance of international hydropower storagefor the energy transitionJens Hobohm, Project manager: jens.hobohm@prognos.comFlorian Ess, Lea Haefke, Marco WünschBerlin, 23 October 2012
  • 2. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 2
  • 3. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 3
  • 4. The expansion of renewable energies is based largely onvolatile energy sources © 2012 Prognos AG 4
  • 5. Residual load curve 2012Residual load in Germany (load minus renewable feed-in)Assumption of must-run-capacity: 20 GW 60000 MW 40000 20000 0-20000-40000 Hours-60000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 © 2012 Prognos AG 5
  • 6. Residual load curve 2030Residual load in Germany (load minus renewable feed-in)Assumption of must-run-capacity: 10 GW 60000 MW 40000 20000 0-20000-40000 Hours-60000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 © 2012 Prognos AG 6
  • 7. Residual load curve 2050Residual load in Germany (load minus renewable feed-in)Assumption of must-run-capacity: 5 GW 60000 MW 40000 20000 0-20000-40000-60000 Hours-80000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 © 2012 Prognos AG 7
  • 8. The growing share of RES will lead to a potential capacitysurplus in a growing number of hours per yearSorted yearly annual load curve: RES minus load 60000 MW 2012 2020 40000 2030 Surplus due to fluctuating feed-in 2040 2050 20000 zero line: load equals feed in of renewables and must-run 0 Necessary controllable power generation -20000 -40000 hours -60000 1 1001 2001 3001 4001 5001 6001 7001 8001 © 2012 Prognos AG 8
  • 9. Challenges for the power system due to the „Energiewende“(energy transition) DescriptionCapacity More capacity available than can be used at the same timesurplusesLong-term Controllable power plants are not profitable under currentsecurity of market designsupplyGrid extension Grid extension proceeds too slowly and congestionand congestion management becomes more importantmanagementAncillary Regulating power, current and reactive power controll, shortservices circuit capacity, black start capacity  Short term security of supply, local! © 2012 Prognos AG 9
  • 10. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 10
  • 11. The mechanics of „indirect storage“ Electricity trade from a Filling level without interconnector(s) MW Scandinavian perspective Import m/ TWh 0 12 24 m³/ Inflow MW Outflow (power generation) Export Export 0 12 24 © 2012 Prognos AG 11
  • 12. With indirect storage, electricity use will be moved alongthe time line – at high efficiency Filling level with interconnector(s) m/ TWh m³/ Inflow MW Outflow (power generation) 0 12 24 © 2012 Prognos AG 12
  • 13. Comparison of options for the integration of electricityfrom fluctuating renewable energy sources Adiabatic Load Pumped Batteries Load Interconnectors Heat storage compressed Hydrogen/ managementTechnology storage (e.g. Electric management (indirect storage) systems air energy Methane (households, hydro plant vehicles) (industry) storage tertiary sector)Expected marketability today today 2010 to 2020 today 2020 to 2030 2015 to 2020 today 2020Implementation time approx. 8 years 2 to 3 years 3 to 5 years 10 years 3 to 5 years 1 year 1 to 10 years 1 year 2,2 to 3,6 GW el 2,7 GW el (positive)Application potential 1,4 GW per cable > 700 caverns (planned until unlimited 3 GW el1 2 GW el 3 GW el 4 to 18 GW el 2020) (negative)Range (in hours) weeks to months 4 to 24 8 to 16 4 to 8 seasonal 1 to 8 2 to 8 1 to 24 ca. 90%Efficiency 95% (from Germany to 60 to 70% 70 to 80% 30 to 40% 75 to 95% - -(power-to-power) (heat-to-heat) Germany) 640 (positive),Investment costs 1,000 1,000 1,500 1,000 depending on depending on 1,400 120 to 350(EUR/kWel) to 1,500 to 2,000 to 3,000 to 2,000 the process the process (negative)Lifetime 20 to 40 years 40 to 60 years 40 years >100 years 30 years 3,000 cycles - - medium toAcceptance medium good medium low to medium good medium medium good1 Considering 1 Mio. E-vehicles (each with a load of 3 kW) connected to the network at the same time. Depending on the degree of connectivity, 2 to 3 Mio. E-vehicles could be expected.2 This estimation by Prognos AG describes the situation for Germany. Different estimations concerning the acceptance of pumped storage do exist in the partner countries © 2012 Prognos AG 13
  • 14. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 14
  • 15. Structure of the installed capacity of electricity generationin 2010 in GW 180 163,8 GW 21,4 GW 49,1 GW 33,2 GW 18,1 GW 160 Conventional 140 PV Installed capacity [GW] 120 102 Wind 100 Other RES 80 Pumped-storage 60 17 Hydro 40 3 27 27 2 1 20 7 4 7 1 28 4 7 4 17 2 9 12 0 4 Germany Austria Sweden Norway Switzerland © 2012 Prognos AG 15
  • 16. The storage capacity of the Scandinavian reservoirs is2,300 times bigger than the German (0,05 TWh)Maximum hydro storage capacity in Norway, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland andGermany in 2011 TWh 120 SE 100 34 80 60 NO 40 82 CH 20 9 AT 0,05 0 3 Scandinavia Alps Germany © 2012 Prognos AG 16
  • 17. Filling levels of the reservoirs in Norway, weekly values GWh 80.000 70.000 60.000 50.000 40.000 30.000 20.000 10.000 0 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 Weeks 2010 2011 Average (1998 - 2011)Source: Own presentation according to Nord Pool Spot © 2012 Prognos AG 17
  • 18. The geographical distribution of the installed capacity ofhydroelectric plants in the provinces should be noted Legend filling of regions 0 – 999 MW 1,000 – 1,999 MW 2,000 – 2,999 MW 3,000 – 4,200 MW © 2012 Prognos AG 18
  • 19. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 19
  • 20. There are already a number of interconnectors betweenGermany and its neighbouring countries NO SE DKw DKe PL NL DE BE CZ FR AT CH 0 – 1.000 MW 1.000 – 2.000 MW 2.000 – 3.000 MW 3.000 – 3.895 MW © 2012 Prognos AG 20
  • 21. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 21
  • 22. In times of excess power in Germany, capacities will flowtowards Scandinavia in any caseSorted yearly annual load curve: RES and must-run minus load zero line: load equals feed in of renewables and must-run hours © 2012 Prognos AG 22
  • 23. Assumptions of the economic efficiency estimation forinterconnectors to Scandinavia Starting point: surpluses in Germany and Scandinavia: without storage the electricity has the value of zero Average electricity prices in 2050 (full costs) 90 EUR / MWh National long term storage offer for surplus electricity up to 30 EUR/MWh Value of the indirect or direct stored electricity in 2050: 90 -30 EUR = 60 Euro2011 pro MWh Investment costs (1.400 EUR / kW), credit for provision of power 250 EUR/kW Interest rate 8 % for 20 Jahre annuity of 10 %. An interconnector has to have a benefit per year of 115.000 EUR2011/MW. At a proceed of 60 EUR/MWh the interconnector has to transfer 1.900 hours per year surplus energy to earn the annuity for the investment costs (115.000 / 60 = rd.)  conform to 4 GW Surpluses from Scandinavia: Up to 20 TWh, thereof 10% to 25% exported by interconnectors will cause proceeds Additional proceeds for ancillary services have not been taken into account © 2012 Prognos AG 23
  • 24. The economic efficiency estimation based on theevaluation of surplusesSurplus in 2050 60 GW 50 40 30 20 5 TWh 10 0 1,900 h -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 Annual hours -60 1 1001 2001 3001 4001 5001 6001 7001 8001Quelle: Own presentation of Prognos AG © 2012 Prognos AG 24
  • 25. Result of the economic efficiency estimation forinterconnectors to Scandinavia 4 GW are economical on the basis of the German surpluses only If the Scandinavian surpluses are also taken into account, interconnectors with 10 to 15 GW could reach the required full load hours of 1,900 3 GW already exist remaining potential is 7 to12 GW © 2012 Prognos AG 25
  • 26. Agenda01 Challenges of the energy transition02 Comparison of possible solutions03 Hydro potential in Germany, Scandinavia and the Alps Transfer capacities between countries under survey –04 Status quo und prospects05 Economic potential of storage usage06 Open questions and conclusions © 2012 Prognos AG 26
  • 27. Open questions and need for research Future of the design of the EU electricity market Modeling of electricity prices with sensitivities, for example with a higher share of renewables How will market prices react on new interconnectors? Competition for Scandinavian hydropower resources Local provision of ancillary services Speed of network expansion – especially from north to south When is the expansion of Scandinavian hydro reservoirs necessary? Storage roadmap: Which storage facilities will be needed and when? © 2012 Prognos AG 27
  • 28. Conclusion: Hydropower storage can make an importantcontribution to the energy transition Surplus electricity (2050: 38 TWh), reserve power and ancillary services are the challenges of the energy transition (electricity) Hydropower storage is a efficient option to balance supply and demand – also for some days and weeks. Locally (200 km) it can also supply ancillary services Today s storage capacities in Scandinavia are 2,300 times bigger than the German capacities and those of the Alps with the factor of 10 7 to12 GW of new interconnectors between Germany and Scandinavia should be economic efficiency (estimation of Prognos AG) Approx. 10 to 20 TWh (26 to 52%) of the German surplus electricity could be used The storage capacities of the Alps could help until 2020 to store surplus electricity of PV from southern Germany Competition and security of supply as well as integration of renewables can be improved, electricity price peaks would be reduced International hydropower storages facilities are relevant for the energy transition, recommended is a step-by-step expansion © 2012 Prognos AG 28
  • 29. Thank you for your attention! We provide orientation. Prognos AG – European Center for Economic Research and Strategy Consulting Project manager: Jens Hobohm Tel: +49 30 520059-242 E-Mail: jens.hobohm@prognos.com www.prognos.com © 2012 Prognos AG 29