Norsk vannkraft i det europeiske kraftmarkedet Magnus Korpås Professor, elkraft NTNU
CEDREN-Hydrobalance (2013-2017) WP 1 WP 2 WP 3 WP 4 WP 5 Roadmaps for balancing from Norwegian hydropower Demand for balancing in Europe Business models Environmental impact Social acceptance and regulatory framework
Europa skal avkarboniseres og elektrifiseres El-andel av total energimix Kilde: EU Energy Roadmap 2050
ved storskala omlegging til fornybar energi Fornybar-andel av elmix Kilde: EU Energy Roadmap 2050
Vind-og solvariasjoner er en økende utfordring for systemet
Betydelig samvariasjon av vind i Nordsjøområdet Figure shows correlation for hourly wind velocity in the North Sea. Source: Kjeller Vindteknikk 1 Correlation coefficient 0 6 6
Et velutbygd kraftnett hjelper på å glatte ut lokale variasjoner Power (% of installed capacity) 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0 % December 2000 wind speeds, 2030 MW amounts Netherlands 7000 MW BeNeLux+Fra+Ger 111 500 MW UCTE 226 000 MW UCTE+GB+Nordel 268 300 MW 1 169 337 505 673 Pan-European balancing can reduce storage needs of wind+pv by a factor of 11 compared with regional storage Source: Fraunhofer IWES 7
Nordisk vannkraft har unike kvaliteter.. Hurtig reguleringskapasitet for levering av effekt Store vannmagasiner for lagring av energi Store effekt- og pumpeutvidelser mulig i eksisterende vannkraftsystem Det er et sterkt økende behov for fleksibel kraft i Europa. Hva slags rolle kan nordisk vannkraft spille? 8
Energilagring Sikre samsvar mellom forbruk og produksjon av el Tradisjonelt har vi sett behov innen to hovedområder Balansering av el-produksjon i varmekraftverk over døgnet Sesonglagring av vannkraft fra vår og sommer til vinter Nå økende fokus på integrasjon av sol og vind Behov for energilagring på mange tidsskalaer Nødvendig for å sikre framtidig fornybar-satsing Ikke alltid lett å se behovet i dag hvorfor?
Balansering over døgnet i et termisk system (variasjon i forbruk) Termiske kraftverk er mest effektive når de kjøres med jevn last. Endringer i forbruk i løpet av døgnet kan med fordel håndteres av andre typer kraftverk, for eksempel pumpekraftverk eller gasskraftverk Tradisjonelt er pumpekraft brukt for å supplere kraftproduksjon i høylastperioder om dagen, mens pumping har skjedd om natta. Dette har endret seg for eksempel i Tyskland på grunn av mye PV-produksjon om dagen
Sesongvariasjon i tilsig og forbruk i Norge (2007)
Dagens utvekslingsmønster (timer-uke) GWh/h 25 20 15 Produksjon NO Forbruk NO GWh/h /kwh 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 5 2.5 0-2.5-5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 50 40 30 20 Eksport NO->utlandet Eksport NO->DK Pris NO Pris DK 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 time 12
Nettutvikling rundt Nordsjøen Source: ENTSO-E 13
Egenskaper til et kraftmarked som er tilrettelagt for fleksibilitet Felles markeder for spot, balanse og systemtjenester over landegrensene Produksjonsplaner oppdateres hyppigere Markedsklarering tettere på driftstimen Forbrukssiden deltar aktivt Tillate ekstrempriser på spot eller innføre kapasitetsmarkeder «Merit order effect» 14
Price Coupling of Regions (PCR) FINLAND Markets covered by PCR (2860 TWh) NORWAY SWEDEN ESTONIA LATVIA RUSSIA Markets which have shown interest to join IRELAND DENMARK LITHUANIA BELARUS Markets which could join as a part of a larger European plan UK NETHERLANDS BELGIUM GERMANY LUXEMBOURG CZECH REPUBLIC POLAND SLOVAKIA MOLDOVA UKRAINE FRANCE SWITZERLAND ITALY AUSTRIA SLOVENIA CROATIA HUNGARY BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA SERBIA ROMANIA BULGARIA MONTENEGRO PORTUGAL SPAIN ALBANIA MACEDONIA GREECE TURKEY /
Sammenhengen mellom vind/sol og pris Eksempel fra Tyskland / 16 Source: J. Mayer, Fraunhofer ISE
North-European Power market model 75 climatic years (wind, solar, inflow, temperature) 2 hours resolution 52 areas about 1500 power plants 80 transmission corridors Stochastic optimisation Unit commitment and dispatch Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
Scenarios for generation capacity Phase-out of nuclear in Germany Much more wind power in Europe (and solar in Germany) +11 GW hydro generation capacity in Norway (+5 GW pumpinig) Consumption increases with 5-15 %, depending on country 2010 2030 Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
Simulated electricity prices in 2010 Daily prices in Germany reflects the costs of thermal power Seasonal prices in Norway depends on the available water Norway Germany Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
Simulated electricity prices in 2030 Higher short-term price variability in Germany Lower short-term price variability in Norway Norway Germany Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
Norwegian hydro production Increased production variability due to balancing of WPP 35 30 2010 2030 35 30 25 25 Hydro Production [GW] 20 15 10 5 0-5 100% 85% 50% 15% 0% 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Time [hours] Hydro Production [GW] 20 15 10 5 0-5 100% 85% 50% 15% 0% 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Time [hours] Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
Norwegian reservoir handling Almost similar pattern: Still unused storage potential Higher levels due to increased inflow 2010 2030 Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
Wind and solar pushes fossils out of the spot market 23 Source: Jaehnert, Korpås, Doorman (NTNU)
and into the (emerging) capacity markets 24 Source: Timera Energy (UK)
Capacity remuneration mechanisms throughout Europe Source: ACER, "Report: CAPACITY REMUNERATION MECHANISMS AND THE INTERNAL MARKET FOR ELECTRICITY", 2013
Generation Adequacy Study Given: Scenarios for large-scale RES in Europe and demand for electricty Modelling challenge: Find the optimal mix of the other energy sources Investment costs Operational characterstics and costs Goal of study: Analyze how energy storage affects the need for thermal power Distributed batteries Pumped storage from Norway
Generation Mix study High RES scenario of the northern European power system: ENTSO-E Vision 4. 41 % RES-share Demand [GW] 250 200 150 100 50 0 Four thermal technologies Nuclear, Coal, CCGT and OCGT. 250 Time [hour of the year] Two storage technologies with fixed costs and efficiencies: Norwegian PHES and batteries. PHES includes cost of HVDC cables Optimal installed capacities and operation each hour is determined by the model Residual demand [GW] 200 150 100 50 0-50 -100 Time [hour of the year]
Results: Installed Capacity Introduction of Norwegian PHES decrease coal power Battery reduces the OCGT capacity The additional capacity with a capacity market is OCGT Installed capacity [GW] 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Energy-only market Energy market & Capacity market No storage PHES Battery No storage PHES Battery
Results: Installed Capacity PHES + Batteries in the same system: Nearly the same installed capacity. Increased base load capacity. Decreased mid-merit capacity. This suggests that both technologies are needed in the system. Installed capacity [GW] 250 200 150 100 50 0 No storage PHES Battery PHES+Battery
Storage level (GWh) 50 Which storage technology? BATTERY Storage level (GWh) 16000 PUMPED STORAGE Hour of the year
Which storage technology? PHES need a bigger price difference due to higher losses PHES can store much more due to abuntant reservoir capacity
Sensitivity: Battery costs Optimisitc reference investment cost Converter cost: 200 EUR/kW Storage size cost: 50 EUR/kWh With ~4,5 hour storage capacity, this corresponds to 100 /kwh (converter included) Battery capacity (GW) Tesla Powerwall (6,4 kwh without converter) presently costs ~3000 $* * http://www.wholesalesolar.com/ 25 20 15 10 5-50% 0 +30% Cost change
Sensitivity: Increased renewable share and nuclear costs Installed capacity [GW]
Balancing Reserve Capacity vs Energy Reserve procurement Reserve capacity (RC) [EUR/MW] TSOs ensure sufficient reserves in the system during operation Pmax PDA P RCup BEup System balancing Balancing energy (BE) [EUR/MWh] TSOs activate reserves to counteract system imbalances Pmin RCdown BEdown t Source: Doorman (NTNU) 34
Total balancing market costs for different wind forecast horizons No integration : Reserve procurement No integration : System balancing Full integration: Reserve procurement Full integration: System balancing Source: Jaehnert (NTNU) 35
Large benefits of integrating the Northern and continental balancing markets Total annual balancing costs (Mill.EURO) Source: Farahmand (NTNU/SINTEF) 3
Significant savings are achieved with integrated intra-day markets Total annual balancing costs Activated reserves Source: Aigner (NTNU) 3
Slide made by Karen Byskov Lindberg Impact of ZEBs on the Nordic Power System Assumptions on ZEBs 50 % of Norwegian building stock is ZEB in 2030 PV generation 17 TWh/a (20 GW) in 2030 EMPS model 2030 Minimises total system cost Stochastic optimisation 30 scenario years (climatic) Time horison: 1 year, with 3hr time resolution Unit commitment and dispatch Lindberg, Impact of ZEB on the energy system
Slide made by Karen Byskov Lindberg Energy efficiency Brings more energy in the system GWh/day 100 80 60 40 TOTAL ELECTRIC LOAD PROFILE BAU ZEB_HP 20 PV production 0 1 41 81 121 161 201 241 281 321 361 Day of the year Brings more energy in the system «Deterministic» on a monthly scale 300 PV PRODUCTION PROFILE Reservoir levels Hydro power producers adapts to the changes «Known» PV production soaring in spring Seasonal storage of water less critical Decreased spillage of water Increased power production GWh/wk Reservoir level [%] 200 100 0 100 % 80 % 60 % 40 % 20 % 0 % 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 Week of the year Week 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 BAU - max ZEB_HP - max BAU - avg ZEB_HP - avg BAU - min ZEB_HP - min Lindberg, Impact of ZEB on the energy system
Slide made by Karen Byskov Lindberg Power Prices Average power prices Annual average price: -9 to -15 % Profile in summer is turned upside-down 50 Winter. NO2. 50 Summer. NO2. Price (orenok/kwh) 45 40 35 30 25 1 7 1319 1 7 1319 1 7 1319 45 40 35 30 25 1 7 1319 1 7 1319 1 7 1319 BAU ZEB_DIR ZEB_HP ZEB_OTH Thursday Friday Saturday Thursday Friday Saturday Lindberg, Impact of ZEB on the energy system
Slide made by Karen Byskov Lindberg Power Exchange Average Nordic power balance Increasing from +36 TWh (BAU) to +60 TWh (ZEB_HP) Massive export to UK, NL, DE & Baltikum MW 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0-2000 -4000-6000 -8000-10000 1 Net export from Norway. All connections in total. 90 % 66 % 3hr-period of the year 256 511 766 1021 1276 1531 1786 2041 2296 2551 2806 max export max import BAU ZEB_HP Lindberg, Impact of ZEB on the energy system
Summary of research findings Distributed Batteries and Norwegian Pumped Hydro complements each other Batteries balances short-term variations and replaces open-cycle gas Pumped hydro balacances short-term AND long-term variation and replaces coal + some combined cycles gas Large system-benefits of sharing balancing markets across borders and across cables in the North Sea Market design and grid access are critical factors The hydro reservoirs can handle more connections to the continent and more wind+pv in the Nordic area Norwegian hydro is a cost-efficient and reliable partner to wind and solar power