Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Energy Research at the IER

948 views

Published on

Pathways of the energy transition in Germany – an energy system

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Energy Research at the IER

  1. 1. Pathways of the energy transition in Germany – an energy system PD Dr.-Ing. Markus Blesl 74RD SEMI-Annual ETSAP Meeting
  2. 2. Agenda 1. Current situation 2. Setting of frameworks 3. Modelling approach 4. Scenario analysis 5. Conclusion 17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 2
  3. 3. Agenda 1. Current situation 2. Setting of frameworks 3. Modelling approach 4. Scenario analysis 5. Conclusion 17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 3
  4. 4. Year 2020 2030 2040 2050 Red. comp. 1990 40% 55% (61%*) 70% 80% bis 95% German targets *Conversion-Sector (Electricity; district heat, refineries etc.) 0 100 200 300 400 1990 20102011201220132014201520162017 Kohlen Erdgas Sonstige 2030 target Current situation: Climate targets & structure commission • Measurements to achieve the 2030 targets of the energy sector including • a plan to reduce the electricity generation by coal with a time schedule and additional institutional options Structure commission (since 7/2018) CO2 Emission electricity generation [Mt] coal gas others
  5. 5. Pledge to build no new plants from 2020 on by producers in all member states except Poland & Greece (Eurelectric) Coal phase-out plans in EU member states Own illustration based on information from Politico & Eurostat *share of coal in electricity production
  6. 6. Agenda 1. Current situation 2. Setting of frameworks 3. Modelling approach 4. Scenario analysis 5. Conclusion 17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 6
  7. 7. Setting the framework What are the discussion levels? Alternative burden sharing options Additional institutional options Assumed as fixed: climate targets GER Coalition of the Willing (CoW) United Europe (Utd-EU) Influence of European ambition Climate action GER Sectoral targets (CAP) Slow coal phase out (CS) Cross-sector targets (CST) Fast coal phase out (CP) Status Quo Europe (limited European ambitions) Level of EU cooperation influences mitigation cost and achievable climate targets considerably Scenario framework + further studies, e.g. German projection report according to EUR-Lex - 32013R0525 Projections e.g. on population, industrial structure, transport activity etc. Certificate elimiation Support EE
  8. 8. Scenarios: Germany in EU context Scenario #1: Germany all alone Scenario #2: Coalition of the willing Scenario #3: Europe united • Implementation of a national measure (e.g. regulated phase-out like for nuclear) • Other EU member states according to national plans • EU level stagnating(?) • Club of progressive member states takes joint measures around EU ETS • Other EU member states according to national plans • EU level stagnating(?) • EU member states give up national plans • Targets on EU level backed by strong and credible policy (EU ETS fixed) • Waterbed effect: Under a joint cap, emission reduction in one state(s) leads to increase in other state(s) • Important to consider counter measures like active managed MSR, minimum price or cancellation of EUAs • Scenario discussion based on work for the
  9. 9. Agenda 1. Current situation 2. Setting of frameworks 3. Modelling approach 4. Scenario analysis 5. Conclusion 17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 9
  10. 10. 10 The Times PanEU Model Characterization TIMES PanEU  European energy system model EU28, Norway, Switzerland, Baden-Württemberg  Technology-oriented, bottom-up optimization model with perfect foresight  Country-specific detailing of the energy generation and the demand sector, as well as detailed mapping of the boundary coupling line capacities according to ETSO  Intertemporal optimization in the period 2010 – 2050  12 (up to 280) sub-annual time segments (four seasonal and three daily segments; five typical weeks)  Emissions: Greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O)  Sector-based: public and industrial energy supply, industry, households, Commercial and tertiary sector, transport, agriculture and refineries  Objective function: minimization of the total costs (optimization model)
  11. 11. Agenda 1. Current situation 2. Setting of frameworks 3. Modelling approach 4. Scenario analysis 5. Conclusion 17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 11
  12. 12. 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 2030 2050 MtCO2 EU-28 GHG emissions D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU Options for transformation paths GHG emissions • CoW allows to reduce emissions according to the 40% target in the short term (2030) • In the long run (2050) a stronger engagement or an EU-wide measure is necessary, otherwise the 80% target cannot be achieved! National actions in form of a „Coalition of the Willing“ (CoW) as a possibility to bridge the gaps for fulfilling the EU climate targets D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU D-CAPD-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU In case waterbed effect can completely eliminated, GHG emissions could be lower in some scenarios
  13. 13. Options for transformation paths Effects on the German electricity sector • Electricity prices increase with stronger climate ambitions • The reduced electricity generation in Germany in most scenarios is partially replaced by imports basing mainly on non-renewables 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU Average electricity price 2015 – 2050 in %-difference to D-CAP 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2030 2050 Electricity imports in TWh D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU
  14. 14. Options for transformation paths Mitigation costs for Germany • In the short run (2030) Germany profits from higher overall EU ambitions and joined activity (Utd-EU) • In the long run (2050), for achieving the European 80% target, Germany (and the EU) has to expect a considerable increase in CO2 abatement cost Compensation costs not covered Compensation costs not covered 0 100 200 300 400 500 D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU CO2 prices in €/t in 2050 ETS Sectoral target CoW markup EU target 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU CO2 prices in €/t in 2030 ETS Sectoral target CoW markup EU target Marginal CO2 abatement cost/CO2 prices in EUR/tCO2 in 2030 Marginal CO2 abatement cost/CO2 prices in EUR/tCO2 in 2050
  15. 15. Scenario comparison of the GHG emissions of Germany between sectoral and cross targets in 2030 • Abatement costs in the other sectors are higher as in the conversion sector • A fast phase out of coal in the power sector will be cost efficiency measure; can reduce the burden in the other sector and might be therefore reasonable • The sectoral targets of the conversion sector should be higher 0 40 80 120 160 200 Energiewirtschaft / Sonstige Verkehr Industrie Haushalte / Gewerbe / Landwirtschaft GHGemissions2030 Sektorziele 2030 Kostenoptimale ZieleCost optimal target IndustryConversion Transport Residential / Commercial / Agriculture Sector targets 2030
  16. 16. Analyzed (regulatory instruments) - Pathway of a coal phase out 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2017 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Installedelectricalplantcapacityofcoal plants[GW] Decommissioning Slow phase out of coal (D-CAP 2030) Fast phase out of coal
  17. 17. Scenario results – coal replacement options electricity generation capacity 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 2010 2015 D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST D-CAP D2E5W1-KAL D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST 2020 2030 2040 2050 Netelectricitycapacity[GW] Electricity storage (excl. pump storage) Others / non-renew. waste Other renew. energies Biomass / renew. waste Solar Photovoltaik Wind Hydro (incl. pump storage) Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Lignite
  18. 18. Scenario results – coal replacement options electricity generation -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 2010 2015 D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST D-CAP D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CP-CF CST 2020 2030 2040 2050 Netelectricity[TWh] Electricity storage (excl. pump storage) Net Imports Others / Waste non- ren. Other Renewables Biomass / Waste ren. Solar Wind offshore Wind onshore Hydro incl. pump storage Nuclear Gas CCS Gas w/o CCS Oil Lignite CCS Lignite w/o CCS Coal CCS Coal w/o CCS
  19. 19. 0 50 100 150 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Electricitygeneration coalpowerplant [TWh/a] CO2-Preis Ordnungsrecht (langsam) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 CO2emissions [MtCO2] Rebound of coal and Gas residual amount in the case of a institutional phase out of coal in comparison with a price driven pathway Residual amount of emission from gas Rebound CO2 price institutional slow phase out
  20. 20. • A fast phase out of coal will increase the electricity generation cost round about 3% • The undiscounted cumulative additional cost of the fast phase out of coal for the energy system of Germany are 41 – 106 Bio. € (without possible compensation costs) • This corresponds to an extra payment of 34 – 90 € per household in Germany 0 2 4 6 8 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Electricitygeneration cost[ct/kWh] ohne Kohleausstieg ordnungsrechtlicher Kohleausstieg (schnell) KSP90 mittels CO2-Preis Without coal phase out Electricity generation costs change only a little bit in case of a phase out of coal Institutional fast coal phase out Sectoral target with CO2 price
  21. 21. • Replacement options: Beside the installation of gas power plants an increase of electricity imports can substitute coal power plants • Reinforced installation of renewable electricity generation options in Germany (open competitive bidding for generation quantities or capacities) can restrict the electricity import Additional institutional options: Additional Renewable electricity generation • Beside this effects the independency with the electricity generation by gas combined heat and power (CHP) and the district heating generation in Germany 300 400 500 600 700 800 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Districtheatinggeneration[PJ/a] D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CS+CF -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Netelectricityexpoortin[TWh] D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP-CF
  22. 22. Agenda 1. Current situation 2. Setting of frameworks 3. Modelling approach 4. Scenario analysis 5. Conclusion 17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 22
  23. 23. Conclusions 1. United action on European Union level (Utd EU) is • preferable for Germany and the EU in the short term AND • necessary in the long term 2. A Coalition of the Willing (CoW) implementing a minimum price for CO2 OR a accelerated coal phase out in Germany • can achieve similar GHG mitigation targets as a united EU approach only in the short run BUT • only at higher costs AND • increases most probably acceptance problems in German coal regions Different policies and ambitions can achieve the same short term targets, but cost and acceptance differ significantly! In the long term stronger ambition is needed! • Further analysis will be done in the
  24. 24. E-Mail Telefon +49 (0) 711 685- Universität Stuttgart Energiewirtschaft und Systemtechnische Analyse (SAM) PD Dr.-Ing. Markus Blesl 87 865 Institut für Energiewirtschaft und Rationelle Energieanwendung (IER) Markus.Blesl@ier.uni-stuttgart.de Thank you for your attention !

×