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.
Views of Finnish experts on the
rate, direction and key implications
of technology disruption
Tero Ahonen & Mikko Jalas
1
• Analysis on the rate, direction and impacts
of the technological disruption
• Mapping of the opportunities and
challenge...
SET research on Disruptive
Technologies
3
Delphi
workshop
on 6th of
June
Summing up
the pieces:
Technology
outlook for
203...
Results available in
SET website
• Discussion papers combining Delphi survey
and workshop results with information on the
...
• Development of Delphi survey with expert
interviews
• Two-round Delphi survey about changes in
the Finnish energy sector...
• Seven technology/theme-divided
tables with discussion on
• Main drivers for the use of
disruptive technology in Finland ...
0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
E: Energy efficiency of buildings
G: Digitalization and demand…
B: Solar heat, heat pumps an...
0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 %100 %
Wave energy
CCS&CCU
Fuel cells
Power to chemicals
Lithium batteries
...
0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100 %
CCS&CCU
Lithium batteries
Fuel cells
Wind power
Heat pumps
District...
10
Studied technologies in Delphi
workshop
Disruptive electricity
production methods:
Wind and solar PV
New usage possibil...
Wind power
• Disruptive source in the Nordic energy system
• LCOE in latest Nordic projects ~45 €/MWh
• Supported also in ...
Decreases
notably
0%
Decreases
24%
Remains
31%
Increases
38%
Increases
notably
7%
Acceptance of wind power
• Respondents e...
Solar PV
• Part of the global disruption in energy sector
• In Nordics the effect is more limited
• Currently installed ca...
0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
What portion of solar PV production is based
on building integrated&installed systems
What p...
”Wind power is disrupting current energy system due to
lowered electricity prices: time to shift from subsidies to
market-...
Biomass
• “Cornerstone” of Finnish energy system
through their use in CHP and as fuels
• 39 % emission decrease target for...
Under 5%
3%
5-15%
16%
15-25%
28%
25-35%
34%
Over 35%
19%
Share of biomass in energy production
• Future applications of bi...
Automated demand response
solutions
• Allows balancing of demand with fluctuating
production
• Export potential as service...
Not significant
3% Only small
significance
3%
Some
significance
26%A lot of
significance
50%
Very significant
18%
Signific...
3
0
0
0
31
17
13
13
28
41
32
6
24
24
16
35
14
17
39
45
0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %
Energy storages
Domestic reserve powe...
”Electricity prices should reflect more the present status
in electricity markets (=wider use of spot pricing)”
”Low elect...
Summing of the research
findings
• Electricity markets will be a market place for
demand availability with higher price vo...
23
Materialization of
smart energy
disruption
- Buildings
- City districts, villages
- Regions
- Nation
24
25
Region
• Regional RE-targets
• Peak-load as regional issue. Energy security.
Priority users
• Urban transition: in high...
• District heat storages and heat pumps for
demand response and seasonal storage
• Waste-water heat recovery
• Org. waste ...
27
Buildings
• Two-way electricity and heat networks. Heat
pumps, PV and solar heat.
• Demand response: Great interest, hi...
• Nordic electricity market
• Storage capacity – hydro / pump
• Wind turbines along the main road
network, turbines halted...
www.smartenergytransition.fiwww.smartenergytransition.fi
Thank You!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Tero Ahonen - Mikko Jalas - Views of Finnish experts on the rate direction and key implications of technology disruption - Smart Energy Transition - Annual Seminar - 15.02.2017 - Aalto University - Lappeenranta University of Technology - LUT

172 views

Published on

Tero Ahonen - Mikko Jalas - Views of Finnish experts on the rate direction and key implications of technology disruption - Smart Energy Transition - Annual Seminar - 15.02.2017 - Aalto University - Lappeenranta University of Technology - LUT - Strategic Research - Academy of Finland

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Tero Ahonen - Mikko Jalas - Views of Finnish experts on the rate direction and key implications of technology disruption - Smart Energy Transition - Annual Seminar - 15.02.2017 - Aalto University - Lappeenranta University of Technology - LUT

  1. 1. Views of Finnish experts on the rate, direction and key implications of technology disruption Tero Ahonen & Mikko Jalas 1
  2. 2. • Analysis on the rate, direction and impacts of the technological disruption • Mapping of the opportunities and challenges for Finland’s strengths • http://www.smartenergytransition.fi/ teknologiamurros 2 SET research on Disruptive Technologies
  3. 3. SET research on Disruptive Technologies 3 Delphi workshop on 6th of June Summing up the pieces: Technology outlook for 2030, reports and academic publ. Phase 1 1/2016-2/2016 Phase 5 Summary Phase 2 3/2016 Phase 3 5/2016 Phase 4 6/2016 Delphi round 2 (May) Delphi survey round 1 (March) Technology reports on solar PV, wind and BESS (January-April) SET expert interviews for Delphi develop. Review of global megatrends affecting the energy sector (January-June) Background briefs for Delphi workshop
  4. 4. Results available in SET website • Discussion papers combining Delphi survey and workshop results with information on the international technology development • Assessment of results • In respect to global megatrends • In respect to other relevant Finnish scenarios • Background materials for the Delphi survey • Reports of answers to survey questions 4
  5. 5. • Development of Delphi survey with expert interviews • Two-round Delphi survey about changes in the Finnish energy sector and the role of different technologies on this change • Delphi workshop about Finland in 2030, how different technologies are realized then, and what (policy) actions are needed for their uptake 5 Delphi research process
  6. 6. • Seven technology/theme-divided tables with discussion on • Main drivers for the use of disruptive technology in Finland in 2030 • How and where the discussed technology will be realized in Finland? • What is missing/needed for the uptake of the discussed technology? 6 Delphi workshop about Finland in 2030
  7. 7. 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % E: Energy efficiency of buildings G: Digitalization and demand… B: Solar heat, heat pumps and heat… C: Wind power D: Biomass-based energy systems F: Peak-load and reserve capacity A: PV Knowledge of thematic areas among the respondents: Limited Adequate Good Background of Delphi survey respondents: 7 Under 30… 31-40… 41-50… 51-60… Over 61… 0 9 16 13 1 Number and age of respondents Large company SME, < 200 employees Small company, < 10 employees Public sector NGO Academia Other Respondents' main area of activity
  8. 8. 0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 %100 % Wave energy CCS&CCU Fuel cells Power to chemicals Lithium batteries District heat storages Geothermal heat Forest biomass in new applications Solar heat Waste streams in energy production PV Automated demand response Windpower Heat pumps 35 24 14 7 11 7 3 3 5 3 0 0 1 1 9 15 13 22 17 14 19 17 10 9 6 8 2 1 3 4 9 11 16 15 19 16 24 26 29 16 18 15 Not significant Promising new alternative Has been taken into commercial use Has displaced significant parts of the existing energy system First survey results on the importance of different energy technologies in Finland in 2030:
  9. 9. 0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100 % CCS&CCU Lithium batteries Fuel cells Wind power Heat pumps District heat strogares Wave energy Solar heat PV Geothermal heat Power to chemicals Waste streams in… Forest biomass in new… Automated demand… 20 17 13 9 10 11 11 10 9 5 8 4 5 2 11 16 15 26 19 18 14 19 19 22 16 24 20 12 No significant poss. Some poss. Significant poss. First survey results on the export potential of different energy technologies in Finland in 2030:
  10. 10. 10 Studied technologies in Delphi workshop Disruptive electricity production methods: Wind and solar PV New usage possibilities of renewable resources: Biomass-based energy system as a part of overall solution Balancing of demand and production: Management of peak power demand Automated demand response Changes in the energy consumption: Energy demand in buildings Decentralized heating solutions
  11. 11. Wind power • Disruptive source in the Nordic energy system • LCOE in latest Nordic projects ~45 €/MWh • Supported also in Finland with feed-in tariff system • Finnish government objectives 6 TWh→9 TWh
  12. 12. Decreases notably 0% Decreases 24% Remains 31% Increases 38% Increases notably 7% Acceptance of wind power • Respondents expect over 10% for wind power in Finland in 2030 • Notable share of offshore farms are also expected Wind power Below 2% 14% Ca. 2-10% 32% Ca. 10-20% 34% Ca. 20-30% 17% Over 30% 3% Share of wind power in production 0 % 50 % 100 % Which portion investments is based on domestic financing? Which portion of wind power capacity is offshore? 10 % 30 % 50 % 70 %
  13. 13. Solar PV • Part of the global disruption in energy sector • In Nordics the effect is more limited • Currently installed capacity in Finland ~20-30 MW • TEM projects 0.2 TWh/a for 2020 and 0.7 TWh for 2030, corresponding ~250 and ~875 MW 13
  14. 14. 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % What portion of solar PV production is based on building integrated&installed systems What portion of solar PV production is based on private microgeneration What portion of produced electricity is sold to the grid 10 % 30 % 50 % 70 % 90 % Below 1% 15% Ca. 1-5% 20% Ca. 5-10% 40% Ca. 10-20% 20% Over 20% 5% Share of solar PV in production • Materialization is expected to happen in building level • Compensation of own energy consumption, possibly with battery energy storages in 2030s? Solar PV Not significant 15% Only small significance 12% Some significance 52% A lot of significance 18% Very significant 3% Significance of solar PV in 2030
  15. 15. ”Wind power is disrupting current energy system due to lowered electricity prices: time to shift from subsidies to market-based schemes, such as carbon tax?” ”Offshore wind farms will be installed in Finland, as their prices will decrease to competitive level” ”With increased wind and solar, flexible consumption will become more and more important part of energy system. Also new transmission connections and biomass-based plants will play role in this change” 15 Workshop comments on wind and solar
  16. 16. Biomass • “Cornerstone” of Finnish energy system through their use in CHP and as fuels • 39 % emission decrease target for sectors outside ETS is to be solved e.g. with the use of biofuels Use of forest resources 2008-2012 Sustainable yield of forest resources 2030-2039
  17. 17. Under 5% 3% 5-15% 16% 15-25% 28% 25-35% 34% Over 35% 19% Share of biomass in energy production • Future applications of biomass should target to carbon-neutral products with added value • Fuels preferably from side streams, pulp vs. fuel market prices? Biomass How much of the energy demand in transportation will be covered with biofuels? How much of the energy demand in heat production will be covered with biofuels? How much of the energy demand in power production will be covered with biofuels? 10 % 30 % 50 % 70 % 90 %
  18. 18. Automated demand response solutions • Allows balancing of demand with fluctuating production • Export potential as services utilizing digitalization and modern electricity meters • Especially feasible with systems having storage capacity (households, industry applications)
  19. 19. Not significant 3% Only small significance 3% Some significance 26%A lot of significance 50% Very significant 18% Significance of automated DR • DR is expected to be central part of Finnish energy system in 2030 • Open data access and real-time interaction were seen as key factors for this development Automated DR 7 0 3 7 0 25 37 23 11 20 29 20 29 19 3 29 30 32 33 47 11 13 13 30 30 0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100 % Loads in households Automatization and with novel control algorithms Reorganization of industrial processes Realtime interaction with customers Communication between systems Significance of different factors in automated DR Not significant - - - Very significant
  20. 20. 3 0 0 0 31 17 13 13 28 41 32 6 24 24 16 35 14 17 39 45 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % Energy storages Domestic reserve power Strong transmission lines Demand mgmt./response Significance of different factors in manag. peak power demand Not significant - - - Very significant Management of peak power demand • Automated DR cannot solely fulfill peak power demand • Topical in Finland, as peak demand (15100 MW) required importing of ~4000 MW • Who will invest in (peak) power plants, if it is more lucrative to have heat plants instead? Below 1000 MW 28% 1000-2000 MW 22% 2000-3000 MW 19% 3000-4000 MW 25% Over 5000 MW 6% Importing during peak demand
  21. 21. ”Electricity prices should reflect more the present status in electricity markets (=wider use of spot pricing)” ”Low electricity prices do not support building of traditional power plants. This lack needs to be compensated with wide implementation of demand response systems” ”Standardization&legislation should support the uptake of DR and electric vehicles in new buildings” 21 Workshop comments on DR and peak power
  22. 22. Summing of the research findings • Electricity markets will be a market place for demand availability with higher price volatility • Digitalization and related services vs. bulk-based materials as export solution then? • The uptake of renewables is also related to the uptake of storage solutions • Pumped hydro also in Finland, solar PV with battery in households or as electric vehicles?
  23. 23. 23 Materialization of smart energy disruption - Buildings - City districts, villages - Regions - Nation
  24. 24. 24
  25. 25. 25 Region • Regional RE-targets • Peak-load as regional issue. Energy security. Priority users • Urban transition: in high-price housing stock. Urban EV. • Energy poverty. Low service in rural areas. Price caps. Low quality electricity. • Forest biomass logistics for CHP • Coal-power plants and landfills as sites for wind / PV • Wind power technology ≠ massive three-blade turbines
  26. 26. • District heat storages and heat pumps for demand response and seasonal storage • Waste-water heat recovery • Org. waste and sewage into biogas and micro CHP • Overlapping commercial and community networks • PV is used to attract cars. EV charging in commercial and work environments • Co-operatives in wind power production and demand response markets • City plans for energy solutions & power limits for properties 26 Block, district or village
  27. 27. 27 Buildings • Two-way electricity and heat networks. Heat pumps, PV and solar heat. • Demand response: Great interest, high tech & automation, service and personal profiles in DR systems. Real-time DR. SMS DR. DR as virtual battery. • Home based living & biofuel heating • EV and biogas/methane powered vehicles • Certification of skilled low-energy house builders. Demolition & prefabrication & rapid construction. Ongoing maintenance work. • Overheat and hot in summer, no snow in winter?
  28. 28. • Nordic electricity market • Storage capacity – hydro / pump • Wind turbines along the main road network, turbines halted for summertime in recr. areas. • Taxing of PV capacity or PV production • Consolidation of industries, large efficient units • Service availability across country (EV, biogas?) • Standardization of equipment and data formats. Data availability vs privacy 28 Country / State
  29. 29. www.smartenergytransition.fiwww.smartenergytransition.fi Thank You!

×