ENTSO-E HVDCUtilisation andUnavailability Statistics2019

ENTSO-EHVDC Utilisationand UnavailabilityStatistics 2019System Operations Committee

European Network ofTransmission System Operators

for Electricity

ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019

Copyright © 2020 ENTSO-E AISBL

Report rendered June 12, 2020


for Electricity

Executive Summary

The HVDC links are important components for a stable op-eration of the Nordic and Baltic power system while sup-porting the commercial power trade in the European energymarkets. Furthermore, the HVDC links can provide otherimportant functions like voltage and emergency power sup-port to the HVAC grid. Hence, the advantages of keepingthe HVDC links in operation as much as possible are indis-putable. The ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailabil-ity Statistics 2019 report aims to provide an overview of theNordic and Baltic HVDC links as well as a detailed view ofeach individual link. The executive summary concludes themost important parts of the report into one chapter.

OverviewIn 2019, 52.9 TWhof electric energywas transmitted throughtheNordic andBalticHVDC links. This is approximately 58%of the total technical capacity (Emax) and correlates well withthe percentage utilisation fromprevious years. Nevertheless,the transmitted energy and unavailable technical capacity isshowing a slight increasing trend after a significant drop in2012, as shown in Figure E.1.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

50%

100%

% of total sum of Emax

33%40% 37% 35% 35% 36% 33% 31%

57% 50% 56% 58% 57% 56% 57% 58%

10% 10% 10% 11%8% 9%

90 TWh89 TWh89 TWh89 TWh80 TWh75 TWh69 TWh69 TWh

Annual utilisation of all HVDC links

Emax

% Technical capacity not used

% Transmission

% Unavailable technical capacity

Figure E.1: The annual utilisation of all HVDC links since 2012.Technical capacity not used is the amount of energy that has nei-ther been transmitted nor been unavailable due to limitations oroutages.

The total number of disturbance outages registered was 63,preventing 2.8 TWh of potential energy transmission, or3.1%of the total technical capacity (Emax). Maintenance out-ages amounted to 3.5 TWh, or 3.8 % of the total technical ca-pacity (Emax), and limitations reduced the transmission ca-pacity by 3.8 TWh (4.2 % of the total technical HVDC trans-mission capacity). The total amount of unavailable technicalcapacity compared to the total technical capacity (Emax) hasincreased by 1 % per year since 2015 and was in 2019 at itshighest point since 2012, as can be seen from Figure E.1. Thechange is mostly due to increasing planned and unplanned

maintenance outages as well as limitations. The unavail-able technical capacity includes disturbance outages, limi-tations, unplanned and planned maintenance outages andother outages.

The most significant unavailabilities in 2019 occurred forBaltic Cable, EstLink 2, Konti-Skan 1–2, NorNed, Skager-rak 1–4 and SwePol. Baltic Cable limitationsweremainly dueto wind and solar energy feeds and EstLink 2 had 3 more se-vere disturbances caused by a coolingwater leakage, anotherby a faulty capacitor and faulty thyristors in the valve halland the last by a faulty DC voltage divider. Konti-Skan 1–2had theirHVDCconductor lines (inDenmark) and their con-trol systems replaced. NorNed had a faulty bushing in Febru-ary, filter problems inMarch–April andmaintenances in theEemshaven region in Q4. Skagerrak 3 had a major plannedmaintenance for installation and testing of the new controlsystem on the Norwegian side. Skagerrak 4 had cable faultsthat limited the usage of Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4 due to restric-tions on the maximum allowed electrode currents. SwePolhad 1 unplanned maintenance outage due to an oil leakageand 1 disturbance outage due to a valve cooling system fail-ure. The effect of these incidents can be seen in Figure E.2.

Individual HVDC links

Baltic Cable

Baltic Cable continued to have its transmitted energy atabout 30–46 % of the maximum technical capacity (Emax)without a noteworthy change to previous years. The trans-mitted energy was 36 % of the technical capacity (Emax) in2019. However, the amount limited capacity was the highestof all HVDC links during 2019 and was the all-time secondhighest of the annual values since 2012 when only consider-ing Baltic Cable. Limited capacity amounted to nearly 24 %of the total technical capacity (Emax) and was mostly due towind and solar energy feeds.

Estlink 1 and 2

The use of EstLink 1 continued to be small in 2019, about22 % of the technical capacity (Emax), yet it was utilised twiceas much compared to 2018 (11 %). EstLink 1 has previouslybeen utilised more than 22 % of the technical capacity in2015, when it was utilised by approximately 29 %. The per-centage of unavailable hours in 2019 was approximately 0 %for EstLink 1 and 3 % for EstLink 2. The percentage values ofunavailable hours in 2019 were positive, considering that thenumber of disturbances in 2019 were above the average forboth EstLink 1 and 2.

ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019 | i

European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity

Fenno-Skan 1 and 2

The use of Fenno-Skan 1 continued to be very high in 2019with 95 % of the technical capacity (Emax) being used fortransmission. For Fenno-Skan 2, 74 % of the technical capac-ity (Emax) was used for transmission leaving approximately21 % of the technical capacity unused. However, the per-centage of technical capacity used for transmission was stillapproximately 14 percentage units higher than in 2018. Al-most all of the transmitted energy of Fenno-Skan 1 and 2wasimported to Finland. The percentage of unavailable annualhours continued to be insignificant for Fenno-Skan 1. How-ever, the percentage of hours limited during 2019 increasedby 5 % compared to 2018, when it was 1 %. The number ofdisturbances for Fenno-Skan 1 and Fenno-Skan 2were lowerthan the 5-year average.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

% of Emax

Baltic Cable

COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Total

23.5%

11.7%

29.6%

13.7%

14.2%

15.8%

16.7%

5.0%

5.1%

7.5%

4.6%

5.0%

3.2%

2.4%

4.2%

2.5%

1.6%

4.0%

7.3%

8.0%

3.1%

2.6%

5.1%

1.7%

2.5%

1.8%

2.3%

1.5%

8.9%

3.5%

3.0%

3.7%

Unavailability percentage of the rated capacity in 2019 for each HVDC link

% Limitations

% Disturbance outages

% Unplanned maintenance

% Planned maintenance

% Other outages

Figure E.2: Percentage distribution of unavailable technical capac-ity due to limitations, disturbance outages, unplanned and plannedmaintenance and other outages for each link in 2019.

Kontek

Kontek is reaching its past annual utilisation values of ap-proximately 68 %–73 % of the technical capacity (Emax). In2019, 69 % of the technical capacity was used for transmis-sion. A significant reason for this may be that Kontek hadclosely to no outages nor limitations that affected its avail-ability, and was therefore readily available to the marketswithout risk factors.

Konti-Skan 1 and 2

The utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 and 2 has not changed signif-icantly since 2017 and is at about 51 % and 49 % of the tech-nical capacity (Emax). However, the unavailable technicalcapacity was higher than usual due a considerable amountof planned maintenance. Konti-Skan 1 and 2 had extensiveplannedmaintenances due to replacements their of conduc-tor lines in Denmark in May. Furthermore, Konti-Skan 1

control system was replaced in October and November andKonti-Skan 2 control system was replaced in September.

LitPol Link

LitPol Link is continuing in showing an increasing trend intransmitted energy. While the transmitted energy was 34 %of the technical capacity (Emax) in 2016, it was nearly 62 %in 2019. Additionally, the unavailable technical capacity hasdecreased annually since 2016 andwas below 4%of the tech-nical capacity (Emax) in 2019.

NordBalt

NordBalt had its best year of transmission so far since 2016,with 63 % of the technical capacity (Emax) being transmittedthrough it. Furthermore, outages and limitations caused anall-time low of unavailable technical capacity since 2016, be-ing about 8 % of the technical capacity (Emax) in 2019. How-ever, the unused technical capacity remained the same, atabout 29 %, compared to previous years. This could be inter-preted as NordBalt’s utilisation being very planned and reg-ularly with each outage or limitation affecting greatly on itstransmission capabilities.

NorNed

The utilisation of NorNed during 2019 was approximately61 % of the maximum technical capacity. NorNed had 8disturbances and 4 planned maintenances during 2019. InFebruary, the outage was due to a fault on a bushing inFeda, and filter problems limited the transmission capacityin March–April. The unavailable energy in Q4 was due tomaintenance in theEemshaven region. Furthermore, the un-available technical capacity is showing an increasing trendsince 2015 even though it was lower in 2019 than in 2018.

Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4

Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4 have had a notable part of their techni-cal capacity afflicted by disturbance outages and unplannedand planned maintenance outages since 2017, and 2019 wasno exception. In 2019, Skagerrak 4 had 3 major disturbanceoutages due to faults on the Danish land cable, which alsoresulted in limitations for Skagerrak 1, 2 and 3 and all thecables being operated in “careful operation” as of December2019. Last, Skagerrak 1 and 2 had each an annual mainte-nance lasting approximately 57 days, and Skagerrak 3 hada major planned maintenance for installation and testing ofthe new control system on the Norwegian side.

Storebaelt

Storebaelt available capacity is continuing to be high at ap-proximately 98 % of the technical capacity (Emax). However,its utilisation percentage is showing a slight decrease since2015, when it was 69 % of the technical capacity. In 2019,

ii | ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019


for Electricity

54 % of the technical capacity was transmitted through thelink.

SwePol

SwePol transmitted 62 % of its technical capacity (Emax),which is slightly less than in 2018 but still higher than the av-erage utilisation since 2012. The available capacitywas lowerthannormally due to anunplannedmaintenance outage anda disturbance outage. The unplanned maintenance outagewas caused by an oil leakage and the disturbance outagewascaused by a valve cooling system failure.

Vyborg Link

Theannual utilisation ofVyborg Link did not increase in 2019compared to the previous year, as it has done every year since

2014. 61 % of the technical capacity (Emax) was transmittedin 2019, 67 % in 2018 and 25 % in 2014. Nevertheless, thetransmitted energywas at its all-time secondhighest value in2019. The annual maintenance of Vyborg Link lasted 31 daysin July. Normally, maintenance work on Vyborg Link causesonly limitations because the 350 MW units are not workedon simultaneously.

COBRAcable

COBRAcable was commissioned in late 2019, and theDISTAC group is eager to see future results from it as the cur-rent amount of data is not yet ready for extensive analysis.

ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019 | iii

European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of contents

Executive Summary iOverview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iIndividual HVDC links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Table of contents iv

List of figures v

List of tables vii

1 Introduction and background 1

2 Scope 22.1 Contact persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

3 Methods, definitions and calculations 3

4 Technical details of the HVDC links 4

5 Results 65.1 Overview of 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.2 Overview of years 2012–2019 . . . . . . . . . 105.3 Individual presentations of each HVDC link . 13

5.3.1 Baltic Cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155.3.2 COBRAcable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175.3.3 EstLink 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195.3.4 EstLink 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215.3.5 Fenno-Skan 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235.3.6 Fenno-Skan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255.3.7 Kontek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

5.3.8 Konti-Skan 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295.3.9 Konti-Skan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315.3.10 LitPol Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335.3.11 NordBalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355.3.12 NorNed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375.3.13 Skagerrak 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395.3.14 Skagerrak 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415.3.15 Skagerrak 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435.3.16 Skagerrak 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455.3.17 Storebaelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475.3.18 SwePol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495.3.19 Vyborg Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

References 53

Appendices 54

A Schematic presentation of HVDC links 55

B Contact persons 56

C Sorted overview of utilisation and unavailabilityfor all HVDC links 57

D Additional figures 59D.1 Annual utilisation per type of HVDC converter 59D.2 Additional figures with unavailability hours

due to different causes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60D.3 Average utilisation and unavailability per

month per HVDC link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

iv | ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTSEuropean Network of

Transmission System Operatorsfor Electricity

List of figures

E.1 Annual utilisation of all HVDC links in per-centages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

E.2 Percentage distribution of unavailable tech-nical capacity for each HVDC link in 2019 . . ii

1.1 Map of HVDC links in this report . . . . . . . 1

3.1 The hierarchy of the availability and utilisa-tion categories used in the HVDC statistics . 3

5.1 Availability and utilisation overview of eachHVDC link in 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

5.2 Availability and utilisation overview per bid-ding zone in 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

5.3 Percentage distribution of unavailable tech-nical capacity for each HVDC link in 2019 . . 9

5.4 The number of outages for each HVDC linkin 2019. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

5.5 Annual utilisation of all HVDC links in per-centages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

5.6 Annual utilisation of all HVDC links inmegawatt hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

5.7 Combined annual hourly utilisation rate . . . 115.8 Percentage of hours affected by limitations

or outages for all HVDC links . . . . . . . . . 125.9 Map of HVDC links in this report . . . . . . . 135.10 Baltic Cable availability and utilisation monthly 155.11 Annual utilisation of Baltic Cable . . . . . . . 165.12 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Baltic Cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165.13 Annual number of outages for Baltic Cable . 165.14 COBRAcable availability and utilisation monthly 175.15 EstLink 1 availability and utilisation monthly . 195.16 Annual utilisation of EstLink 1 . . . . . . . . . 205.17 Annual percentage of unavailability for Est-

Link 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205.18 Annual number of outages for EstLink 1 . . . 205.19 EstLink 2 availability and utilisation monthly . 215.20 Annual utilisation of EstLink 2 . . . . . . . . . 225.21 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

EstLink 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225.22 Annual number of outages for EstLink 2 . . . 225.23 Fenno-Skan 1 availability and utilisation

monthly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235.24 Annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1 . . . . . . 245.25 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Fenno-Skan 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245.26 Annual number of outages for Fenno-Skan 1 245.27 Fenno-Skan 2 availability and utilisation

monthly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255.28 Annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 2 . . . . . . 265.29 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Fenno-Skan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

5.30 Annual number of outages for Fenno-Skan 2 265.31 Kontek availability and utilisation monthly . . 275.32 Annual utilisation of Kontek . . . . . . . . . . 285.33 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Kontek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285.34 Annual number of outages for Kontek . . . . 285.35 Konti-Skan 1 availability and utilisation monthly 295.36 Annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 . . . . . . . 305.37 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Konti-Skan 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305.38 Annual number of outages for Konti-Skan 1 . 305.39 Konti-Skan 2 availability and utilisation monthly 315.40 Annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 2 . . . . . . . 325.41 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Konti-Skan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325.42 Annual number of outages for Konti-Skan 2 . 325.43 LitPol Link availability and utilisation monthly 335.44 Annual utilisation of LitPol Link . . . . . . . . 345.45 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

LitPol Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345.46 Annual number of outages for LitPol Link . . 345.47 NordBalt availability and utilisation monthly . 355.48 Annual utilisation of NordBalt . . . . . . . . . 365.49 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

NordBalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365.50 Annual number of outages for NordBalt . . . 365.51 NorNed availability and utilisation monthly . . 375.52 Annual utilisation of NorNed . . . . . . . . . . 385.53 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

NorNed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385.54 Annual number of outages for NorNed . . . . 385.55 Skagerrak 1 availability and utilisation monthly 395.56 Annual utilisation of Skagerrak 1 . . . . . . . 405.57 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Skagerrak 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405.58 Annual number of outages for Skagerrak 1 . 405.59 Skagerrak 2 availability and utilisation monthly 415.60 Annual utilisation of Skagerrak 2 . . . . . . . 425.61 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for



Skagerrak 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465.70 Annual number of outages for Skagerrak 4 . 465.71 Storebaelt availability and utilisation monthly 47

ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019 | v

European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity TABLE OF CONTENTS

5.72 Annual utilisation of Storebaelt . . . . . . . . 485.73 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Storebaelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485.74 Annual number of outages for Storebaelt . . 485.75 SwePol availability and utilisation monthly . . 495.76 Annual utilisation of SwePol . . . . . . . . . . 505.77 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

SwePol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505.78 Annual number of outages for SwePol . . . . 505.79 Vyborg Link availability and utilisation monthly 515.80 Annual utilisation of Vyborg Link . . . . . . . 525.81 Annual percentage of unavailability hours for

Vyborg Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525.82 Annual number of outages for Vyborg Link . 52

A.1 A schematic presentation of a converter sta-tion of a LCC HVDC link . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

A.2 A schematic presentation of a converter sta-tion of a VSC HVDC link . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

C.1 Utilisation and unavailability for each HVDClink, sorted by unavailable technical capacity 57

C.2 Utilisation and unavailability for each HVDClink, sorted by transmission . . . . . . . . . . 58

C.3 Utilisation and unavailability for each HVDClink, sorted by technical capacity not used . . 58

D.1 Annual utilisation of all LCC HVDC links . . . 59D.2 Annual utilisation of all VSC HVDC links . . . 59D.3 Percentage of hours unavailable due to sea-

sonal causes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60D.4 Annual percentage of hours limited per lim-

itation type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61D.5 Percentage of hours limited between bid-

ding zones due to AC conditions . . . . . . . 61D.6 Percentage of hours unavailable due to

planned maintenance per primary cause perHVDC link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

D.7 Percentage of hours unavailable due toplanned maintenance per primary cause . . 62

D.8 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Baltic Cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

D.9 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor EstLink 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

D.10 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor EstLink 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

D.11 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Fenno-Skan 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

D.12 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Fenno-Skan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

D.13 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Kontek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

D.14 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Konti-Skan 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

D.15 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Konti-Skan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

D.16 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor LitPol Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

D.17 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor NordBalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

D.18 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor NorNed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

D.19 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Skagerrak 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67




D.23 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Storebaelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

D.24 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor SwePol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

D.25 Average monthly availability and utilisationfor Vyborg Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

vi | ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTSEuropean Network of


List of tables

4.1 Main properties of the HVDC links . . . . . . 44.2 Technical details of the HVDC links . . . . . . 5

5.1 Baltic Cable monthly distribution of technicalcapacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

5.2 COBRAcable monthly distribution of techni-cal capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

5.3 EstLink 1 monthly distribution of technicalcapacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5.4 EstLink 2 monthly distribution of technicalcapacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

5.5 Fenno-Skan 1 monthly distribution of tech-nical capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

5.6 Fenno-Skan 2 monthly distribution of tech-nical capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

5.7 Kontek monthly distribution of technical ca-pacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

5.8 Konti-Skan 1 monthly distribution of techni-cal capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5.9 Konti-Skan 2 monthly distribution of techni-cal capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5.10 LitPol monthly distribution of technical ca-pacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

5.11 NordBalt monthly distribution of technicalcapacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

5.12 NorNed monthly distribution of technical ca-pacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

5.13 Skagerrak 1 monthly distribution of techni-cal capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39




5.17 Storebaelt monthly distribution of technicalcapacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

5.18 SwePol monthly distribution of technical ca-pacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

5.19 Vyborg Link monthly distribution of techni-cal capacity (Emax) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019 | vii

Chapter 1. Introduction and backgroundEuropean Network of


1 Introduction and background

This report presents the availability and utilisation of HVDClinks connected to the Nordic and Baltic power system in2019, with an emphasis on disturbance outages. This in-cludes an overview of availability and utilisation for theHVDC links, information about disturbances and unavail-ability and individual presentations of the performance ofeach HVDC link.

The first version of the HVDC statistics for utilisation andunavailability was published in 2011 as an addition to theNordicGridDisturbance andFault Statistics 2010 [1]. At thattime, the report covered only the Nordic power systems andpresented 8 HVDC links. For the statistical year 2012, the

HVAC Grid Disturbance Report and HVDC statistics wereseparated into two reports, which is the format of the reportstoday. In present time, this report includes 19 HVDC linksconnected to the Nordic and Baltic countries.

The total HVDC transmission capacity connected to theNordic and Baltic power systems in 2019 is 10.9 GW, whichmakes the annual transmission capacity 91.1 TWh. Most ofthe HVDC links connect the Nordic synchronous system toother systems. Each HVDC link has a predefined export di-rection only to distinguish a direction of power flow. Theseare presented in Figure 1.1.

LitPol Link

COBR

Acab

le

Estlink 1Estlink 2

Vyborg link

Kontek

Skagerak 1–4

Konti-Skan 1–2

Baltic Cable

SwePol

NordBalt

Fenno-Skan 1–2

Nor

Ned

Storebaelt

Figure 1.1: A map of the 19 HVDC links included in this report. To distinguish the direction of power flow, each link has a predefinedexport direction. This direction is indicated by the arrows.

The HVDC links are important components for a stable op-eration of theNordic and Baltic power systemwhile support-ing the commercial power trade in theEuropean energymar-kets. Furthermore, theHVDC links can provide other impor-tant functions like voltage and emergency power support tothe HVAC grid. Hence, the advantages of keeping the HVDClinks in operation as much as possible are indisputable.

To achieve as much uptime as possible, the number andlength of disturbance outages must be kept at minimum.This requires high-quality hardware components, thorough

installation routines, and efficient fault analysis combinedwith preventive maintenance. However, planned outagesand limitations due to maintenance work are necessary butshould be planned and conducted as efficiently as possible.

Therefore, mapping the available capacity, including the rea-sons for unavailability, is of vital interest for the utilisation ofthis infrastructure. Furthermore, the utilisation of the linksdirectly correlates with the commercial value of the energytrade.

ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019 | 1

European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Chapter 2. Scope

2 Scope

TheENTSO-EHVDCUtilisation andUnavailability Statistics2019 presents a macro view of the availability and utilisationof each HVDC link, including disturbance, maintenance andother outage events as well as limitations. Limitations origi-nating from maintenance work done in the AC grid are alsoincluded if they affect the power transfer of an HVDC con-nection. Furthermore, disturbance outages are more thor-oughly examined than other events.

The scope of the ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavail-ability Statistics 2019 is different from the CIGRE HVDCstatistics, which focuses more on outages, faults and distur-bances of the HVDC links. This means that CIGRE is moredetailed regarding what happens at the HVDC station, and

includes transients, commutation failures, thyristor failuresand soon. In general, DISTAChas themacro viewandCIGREhas themicro view. Butmost of the data is the same for bothreports.

2.1 Contact personsEach country is represented by at least one contact person,responsible for the statistical information of the correspond-ing country. The contact person can provide additional in-formation concerning the HVDC availability and utilisationstatistics. The relevant contact information is given in Ap-pendix B.

2 | ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics 2019

Chapter 3. Methods, definitions and calculationsEuropean Network of


3 Methods, definitions and calculations

To compare the utilisation and availability between HVDClinks, differentways of using themmust be discerned andun-derstood. This chapter explains the availability and utilisa-tion categories used to differentiate betweenmeans of utilis-ing HVDC links. The hierarchy of the categories is illustratedin Figure 3.1.

Technical capacity Emax

Available technical capacity EA

Losses

Unavailable technical capacity EU

Transmission ET

Technical capacitynot used ETCNU

Limitations ELim

Disturbance outages ED

Unplanned maintenance EUM

Planned maintenance EPM

Other outages EOO

Import EI

Export EE

Import losses LI

Export losses LE

Figure 3.1: The hierarchy of the availability and utilisation cate-gories used in the HVDC statistics.

The technical capacity (Emax) of an HVDC link is the max-imum energy that can be physically received through theHVDC link to the converter station, excluding all HVDC linklosses, during a year. The technical capacity is divided intotwo categories: available technical capacity (EA) and unavail-able technical capacity (EU).

The available technical capacity (EA) is further divided intotechnical capacity that has been transmitted (ET), that is, im-ported energy (EI) and exported energy (EE), and into techni-cal capacity that could have been utilised, that is, technicalcapacity not used (ETCNU).

• Exported energy (EI) is the energy transferred from theHVDC link to the exporting AC side. The directionof export is defined for each HVDC link and can beviewed in Table 4.2 or in the respective subchapter inSection 5.3. It does not include export losses (LI), thatis, the energy losses in any of the HVDC link compo-nents during export. It should be noted that these val-ues are measurements and therefore considered fac-tual.

• Imported energy (EE) and import losses (LE) is definedlike the exported energy, but with an opposite point ofview.

• Technical capacity not used (ETCNU) is the amount ofenergy that has not been importedor exportedor beenunavailable due to limitations or outages.

The unavailable technical capacity (EU) is the part of the tech-nical capacity (Emax) that couldnot beutilised. It hasfive sub-categories: limitations (ELim), disturbance outages (ED), un-planned maintenance (EUM), planned maintenance (EPM) andother outages (EOO). An outage occurswhen theHVDC link isfully disconnected from the system and the transfer capacityis reduced to zero. A limitation occurs when the capacity ofthe link has been reduced by between 0–100 %. Limitationsand the outages are described in more detail below:

• A limitation (ELim) is a condition when the transmis-sion capacity of an HVDC link is limited, that is, thepower transmission capacity of the link is less than therated power. The limitation is always motivated froma technical perspective, but not always concerning thelink itself. Themost common causes of limitations are:

– faults on any HVDC link component that do notcause a total outage;

– faults, congestions or outages in the AC gridcausing a limitation in the transmission capac-ity of the link;

– seasonal variations on the transmission capacityof the HVDC link.

• Disturbance outages (ED) is technical capacity lost dueto a fault on the HVDC link or in the AC grid causing atotal outage of the link. This could be a forced outageor an automatic trip.

• Unplanned maintenance outages (EUM) occurs whenthe HVDC link is not in service because of urgentmaintenance, inspection, fault tracing or repairing af-ter disturbances or other faults that cannot wait un-til a maintenance outage can be planned and (re-)scheduled. Unplanned implies that the outage is tobe taken as soon as possible due to increased risk ofre-trip or further damage.

• Plannedmaintenance outages (EPM) is technical capac-ity lost due to maintenance work on the HVDC link.The work must be done to retain an entity’s ability toperform its required function. Examples for plannedmaintenance are annual and preventivemaintenance,replacement and updating of components.

• Other outages (EOO) is technical capacity lost due toany other reason except those mentioned above. Thiscould be, for example, when the markets do not needthe transmission capacity of the link and the link is dis-connected.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Chapter 4. Technical details of the HVDC links

4 Technical details of the HVDC links

Table 4.1 presents the main properties of the HVDC linkswhile Table 4.2 presents the technical properties of theHVDC lines. The predefined export directions are also pre-sented in Figure 1.1.

Schematic presentations of the HVDC links and their con-verter stations, both for line-commutated converters (LCC)and voltage-source converters (VSC) are presented in Ap-pendix A.

Table 4.1: Main properties of the HVDC links.

Link

Commis-sioning

yearMarketconnection

Type ofHVDCconverter

Ratedpower,

mono-polar(MW)

Parallelmonopolar

capacity(MW)

Bipolarcapacity

(MW)Exportdirection

Baltic Cable 1994 Yes LCC 600 South

COBRAcable 2019 Yes VSC 700 West

EstLink 1 2006 Yes VSC 3501000

SouthEstLink 2 2014 Yes LCC 650 South

Fenno-Skan 1 1989 Yes LCC 4001200 1200

WestFenno-Skan 2 2011 Yes LCC 800 West

Kontek 1995 Yes LCC 600 South

Konti-Skan 12 2008 Yes LCC 370680/740

WestKonti-Skan 22 1988 Yes LCC 370 West

LitPol Link 2015 Yes LCC 500 West

NordBalt 2016 Yes VSC 700 South

NorNed 2008 Yes LCC 700 South

Skagerrak 1 1976–1977

Yes LCC 2361000 1000

SouthSkagerrak 2 Yes LCC 236 SouthSkagerrak 3 1993 Yes LCC 478 South

Skagerrak 4 2014 Yes VSC 682 South

Storebaelt 2010 Yes LCC 600 East

SwePol 2000 Yes LCC 600 South

Vyborg Link1

1981,1982,1984,2000

Partly LCC 1400 West

Total 10972 3940 22001 Each commissioning increased capacity by 350 MW. However, the total commercial capacity of Vyborg Link is 1300 MW. Fingrid Oyj, the Finnishtransmission system operator, allocates 100 MW for reserves.

2 Konti-Skan 1 and 2 are rated differently depending of direction of flow. They are rated towards east (import) at 740 MW (370+370) and towards west(export) at 680 MW (340+340). The capacity has been asymmetric due to historical limitations and reserve requirements, along with transmissionmeasurements only being done in DK1. As a step towards correcting this, the rated capacity at the receiving end of DK1 was changed from 680 MWto 715 MW on 1 October 2019. As the final step towards correcting the asymmetrical NTC capacities, measurements will be done on receiving endsof the cables as of 1 February 2020.


Chapter 4. Technical details of the HVDC linksEuropean Network of


Table 4.2: Technical details of the HVDC links

LinkTotal length ofthe link (km)

Length of masscable (km)

Length of PEXcable (km)

Length of DCoverhead line

(km)

Length of DCback-to-back

connection (km)

Baltic Cable 262 250 12

COBRAcable 325 325 650 (2 × 325 km) 0

EstLink 1 105 210 (2 × 105 km)

EstLink 2 171 157 14

Fenno-Skan 1 233 200 33

Fenno-Skan 2 299 196 103

Kontek 160 160

Konti-Skan 1 150 89 61

Konti-Skan 2 150 89 61

LitPol Link < 1 < 1

NordBalt 450 2 × 450

NorNed 580 580

Skagerrak 1 212.5 133.6 78.5

Skagerrak 2 211.4 132.9 78.5

Skagerrak 3 212.9 134.4 78.5

Skagerrak 4 226 226

Storebaelt 57 57

SwePol 254 254

Vyborg Link < 1 < 1


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Chapter 5. Results

5 Results

This chapter presents the utilisation and unavailability of allthe HVDC links as well as individual presentations of eachHVDC link connected to the Nordic and Baltic power sys-tem.

Section 5.1 provides an overview of the HVDC links for the

year 2019 and Section 5.2 provides an overview of the years2012–2019. Section 5.3 presents the availability and utilisa-tion of each HVDC link for the year 2019 as well as an annualoverview of the utilisation and a trend of the utilisation andthe number of outages for the years 2012–2019.

5.1 Overview of 2019

In 2019, 52.9 TWhof electric energywas transmitted throughthe Nordic and Baltic HVDC links. The total number of dis-turbance outages registered was 63, preventing 2.8 TWh ofpotential energy transmission, or 3.1 % of the total technicalcapacity (Emax).

Maintenance outages amounted to 3.5 TWh, or 3.8 % of thetotal technical capacity (Emax), and limitations reduced thetransmission capacity by 3.8 TWh (4.2 % of the total techni-cal HVDC transmission capacity).

Figure 5.1 presents the overview of the availability and utili-sation of HVDC statistics at an aggregated level, thus allow-ing to compare links with each other. It should be notedthat the usages of the links show big variations. Most linksare market dependent, some are mostly used only in one di-rection, and some are used for technical reasons to controlpower flow for system stability according to agreements. Ap-pendix C shows the overviews of the HVDC links using thesame values as Figure 5.1 but ranked according to the high-est unavailable technical capacity, according to the highesttransmission, and according to the highest technical capac-ity not used.

Figure 5.2 compares the availability and utilisation of theHVDC links between bidding zones. That is, it measuresthe utilisation of the energy transfer capacity between thebidding zones ignoring the performance of individual links.However, the number of HVDC links connecting differentbidding zones varies. A map portraying the HVDC links ispresented in Figure 5.9.

Figure 5.3 presents the percentage unavailable technical ca-pacity (EU) of the annual technical capacity (Emax) due to thedisturbance outages. Figure 5.4 presents the number of alldisturbance, maintenance and other outages. The explana-tions for themost notable unavailability in 2019 are listed be-low. Further details are presented in Section 5.3.

• Baltic Cable limitations were mainly due to wind andsolar energy feeds.

• EstLink 2 had 3 more severe disturbance outages. Thefirstwas caused by a coolingwater leakage, the secondby a faulty capacitor and faulty thyristors in the valvehall and the last by a faulty DC voltage divider.

• Konti-Skan 1 and 2 had a considerable amount ofplannedmaintenance due to replacements of conduc-tor lines in Denmark in May. Furthermore, Konti-Skan 1 control system was replaced in October andNovember and Konti-Skan 2 control system was re-placed in September.

• NorNed had 8 disturbances and 4 planned mainte-nances during 2019. In February, the outage was dueto a fault on a bushing in Feda, and filter problems lim-ited the transmission capacity in March–April. Theunavailable energy in Q4 was due to maintenance inthe Eemshaven region.

• Skagerrak 1 had 1 major disturbance during 2019 dueto a failure on the pole transformer on the Norwegianside.

• Skagerrak 4 had 3 more severe disturbances due tofaults on the Danish land cable.

• The plannedmaintenances on Skagerrak 1 and 2 wereannual maintenance lasting approximately 57 dayseach.

• Skagerrak 3 had 1 major planned maintenance for in-stallation and testing of the new control system on theNorwegian side.

• The limitations on Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4 were duetomaintenances and restrictions on themaximum al-lowed electrode currents, which were put in place be-cause of the Skagerrak 4 cable faults.

• SwePol had 1 unplanned maintenance outage due toan oil leakage and 1 disturbance outage due to a valvecooling system failure lasting 29 days.


Section 5.1. Overview of 2019European Network of


% Transmission % Unavailable technical capacity % Technical capacity not used

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% of Emax

Baltic Cable

COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Total

38%

15%

76%

38%

44%

20%

28%

34%

34%

35%

29%

26%

32%

33%

26%

23%

39%

24%

33%

31%

26%

58%

62%

61%

15%

17%

58%

40%

13%

28%

22%

21%

33%

14%

11%

36%

80%

22%

60%

95%

74%

69%

51%

49%

61%

63%

61%

45%

53%

3%

5%

6%

4%

4%

8%

5% 11.4 TWh

90.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

0.9 TWh

3.1 TWh

5.7 TWh

3.5 TWh

7.0 TWh

5.3 TWh

3.2 TWh

3.2 TWh

4.4 TWh

6.1 TWh

6.1 TWh

2.1 TWh

2.1 TWh

4.2 TWh

6.0 TWh

5.3 TWh

5.3 TWh

Utilisation overview of each HVDC link in 2019Emax

Figure 5.1: Overview of the availability and utilisation of each HVDC link in 2019. The unavailable technical capacity (EU) is the amountof technical capacity (Emax) not available due to limitations or outages. Transmission (ET) is the amount of technical capacity (Emax)imported and exported through the HVDC link. Technical capacity not used (ETCNU) is the amount of energy that has not been importedor exported or been unavailable due to limitations or outages. More detailed explanations can be read in Chapter 3. Appendix C showsthe overviews of the HVDC links using the same values as Figure 5.1 but ranked according to the highest unavailable technical capacity,according to the highest transmission, and according to the highest technical capacity not used.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section 5.1. Overview of 2019

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% of Emax

DK1–DK2

DK1–NL

DK2–DE

FI–EE

FI–RU

FI–SE3

LT–PL

NO2–DK1

NO2–NL

SE3–DK1

SE4–DE

SE4–LT

SE4–PL

Grand Total

39%

15%

28%

51%

33%

14%

35%

27%

26%

34%

38%

29%

24%

31%

59%

41%

44%

37%

79%

24%

23%

23%

22%

11%

14%

14%

21%

54%

39%

25%

43%

61%

53%

23%

38%

28%

25%

58%

4%

3%

9%

5%

4%

5%

4%

8%4%

8%

5%

7% 6%

4%

4%

11.4 TWh

10.5 TWh

14.3 TWh

90.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

0.9 TWh

5.3 TWh

8.8 TWh

4.4 TWh

6.1 TWh

6.5 TWh

5.3 TWh

6.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

Overview of utilisation between bidding zones in 2019

% Other outages




% Limitations

% Export

% Import


Emax

Figure 5.2: Overview of the availability and utilisation of each HVDC link in 2019. More detailed explanations about each utilisationcategory can be read in Chapter 3.


Section 5.1. Overview of 2019European Network of


0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

% of Emax

Baltic Cable

COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Total

23.5%

11.7%

29.6%

13.7%

14.2%

15.8%

16.7%

5.0%

5.1%

7.5%

4.6%

5.0%

3.2%

2.4%

4.2%

2.5%

1.6%

4.0%

7.3%

8.0%

3.1%

2.6%

5.1%

1.7%

2.5%

1.8%

2.3%

1.5%

8.9%

3.5%

3.0%

3.7%

Unavailability percentage of the rated capacity in 2019 for each HVDC link

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.3: Percentage distribution of unavailable technical capacity (EU) due to limitations, disturbance outages, unplanned and plannedmaintenance and other outages for each link in 2019.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Number of events

Baltic Cable

COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

4

2

8

5

2

2

5

9

2

1

8

3

1

1

6

1

3

2

3

2

2

4

5

5

3

2

4

8

1

1

4

2

3

1

2

6

4

3

1

1

Number of outages in 2019

Disturbances

Unplanned maintenances

Planned maintenances

Other outages

Figure 5.4: The number of disturbance outages, unplanned maintenance and planned maintenance outages and other outages for eachlink in 2019.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section 5.2. Overview of years 2012–2019

5.2 Overview of years 2012–2019

Because the HVDC links are an important component in theNordic and Baltic power systems, it is also very interestingto see how the links have been utilised during the past years.Figure 5.5 presents the annual utilisation (%) of all HVDClinks and Figure 5.6 presents the annual utilisation with allutilisation categories.

As can be seen, the percentage distribution of transmission(ET) and unavailable technical capacity (EU) is showing a

slight increasing trend after a significant drop in 2012. How-ever, the total technical capacity (Emax) of all HVDC links hasincreased, as can be seen in Figure 5.6.

Figure 5.7 presents the combined annual hourly utilisationrate for all HVDC links. Figure 5.8 presents the percentageof hours a link has been affected by either a limitation, un-planned or planned maintenance or disturbance or otheroutages.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of total sum of Emax

33%40% 37% 35% 35% 36% 33% 31%

57%50% 56% 58% 57% 56% 57% 58%

10% 10% 10% 11%7% 7% 8% 9%

90 TWh89 TWh89 TWh89 TWh80 TWh75 TWh69 TWh69 TWh



% Transmission

% Unavailable technical capacity

Emax

Figure 5.5: The annual utilisation of all HVDC links since 2012. The unavailable technical capacity (EU) is the amount of technical capacity(Emax) not available due to limitations or outages. Transmission (ET) is the amount of technical capacity (Emax) imported and exportedthrough the HVDC links. Technical capacity not used (ETCNU) is the residual energy that has neither been transmitted nor been unavailabledue to limitations or outages. More detailed explanations can be read in Chapter 3.


Section 5.2. Overview of years 2012–2019European Network of


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0 TWh

20 TWh

40 TWh

60 TWh

80 TWh

Sum of annual utilisation [TWh]

23 TWh28 TWh

27 TWh28 TWh

31 TWh 32 TWh 30 TWh 28 TWh

15 TWh15 TWh

13 TWh18 TWh 14 TWh 16 TWh 19 TWh

30 TWh20 TWh 27 TWh

34 TWh 33 TWh 35 TWh 35 TWh 34 TWh

9 TWh


Technical capacity not used

Import

Export

Limitations

Disturbance outages



Other outages

Figure 5.6: Annual utilisation of all HVDC links presented in megawatt hours (MWh). Technical capacity not used (ETCNU) is the residualenergy that has neither been transmitted nor been unavailable due to limitations or outages. Transmission (ET) is the amount of technicalcapacity (Emax) imported and exported through the HVDC links. Limitations, disturbance outages, unplanned and planned maintenanceoutages and other outages form together the unavailable technical capacity (EU). More detailed explanations can be read in Chapter 3.From 2012, there are 14 HVDC links included. As of 2014, EstLink 2 and Skagerrak 4 were added. In 2016, LitPol Link and NordBaltwere added. In 2019, COBRAcable was added. The maximum technical capacity (Emax) is marginally higher in 2012 and 2016 becausethey are leap years.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Percentage of hours 76.4% 72.3% 73.5% 72.2% 72.5% 69.6% 71.2% 70.6%

12.5% 13.4% 10.0%

12.9% 12.8% 13.3% 10.9% 12.4% 11.7%16.0%

5.0% 7.9% 8.1% 9.4%7.3%

9.3%

Percentage of hours categorised by utilisation rate, all HVDC links

Utilisation rate80–100%

60–80%

40–60%

20–40%

0–20%

0%

Figure 5.7: Combined annual hourly utilisation rate for all HVDC link. The HVDC links were utilised by more than 80 % of their respectivemaximum technical capacity 70.9 % of the time during 2019.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section 5.2. Overview of years 2012–2019

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Percentage of all hours unavailable during a year

15% 10%

2%

7%9%

8%

8% 7%

5%4%

2%3% 1%

3% 2% 3%

2%

3%5% 4%

3% 3%5% 4%

6%

Percentage of hours unavailable, all HVDC links

% hours limited

% hours disturbance outage

% hours unplanned maintenance

% hours planned maintenance

% hours other outage

Figure 5.8: The percentage of hours all HVDC links have been affected by either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or adisturbance or other outage. The percentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with a limitation or outage and dividing it bythe total number of hours in a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affected by both an outage and a limitation.


Section 5.3. Individual presentations of each HVDC linkEuropean Network of


5.3 Individual presentations of each HVDC link

This section presents the performance of each HVDC link.Figure 5.9 presents the geographical location of each HVDClink along with their predefined export direction. The cate-gories used in the following presentations of each separateHVDC link are presented and defined in Chapter 3.

Note that the sums in the tables for each link may show a

technical capacity Emax higher than the Emax stated in thediagram. This is due to power flows that may momentarilybe higher than rated technical capacity of the links. Othertimes, when power flow is below the rated technical capacity(and there is no limitation reported), the difference is regis-tered in the category “technical capacity not used”.

LitPol Link

COBR

Acab

le

Estlink 1Estlink 2

Vyborg link

Kontek

Skagerak 1–4

Konti-Skan 1–2

Baltic Cable

SwePol

NordBalt

Fenno-Skan 1–2

Nor

Ned

Storebaelt

Figure 5.9: A map of the 19 HVDC links included in this report. To distinguish the direction of power flow, each link has a predefinedexport direction. This direction is indicated by the arrows.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section 5.3. Individual presentations of each HVDC link

This page intentionally left blank.




5.3.1 Baltic Cable

Figure 5.10 presents the availability and utilisation ofBaltic Cable for 2019 and Table 5.1 presents the numericalvalues behind it. Baltic Cable is connected between south-ern Sweden (bidding zone SE4) and Germany (bidding zoneDE-TenneT). The operations started in 1994 and the trans-mission capacity is 600 MW.

In 2019, Baltic Cable had an available technical capacity of

74 %. The technical capacity not used was 38 %. Totally,1.3 TWh (25 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromSweden to Germany and 0.6 TWh (11 % of the technical ca-pacity) was imported to Sweden.

The annual maintenance of Baltic Cable lasted from lateSeptember to early October. Additionally, Baltic Cable had4 disturbance outages with only minor impact.

2019 Total

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

34% 37%23%

37%53%

34% 38%46% 41%

31%43% 38%

12% 13%

12%

16%

20%

10%16%

12%

18%25%

20%

25%26%

54% 49%

19%

23%16%

23%

36%25%

45%

22% 17%10% 14%

24%

30%

25% 27%28%

9%

38%

11%

25%

24%

Monthly utilisation of Baltic Cable [Export SE4 -> DE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

HVDC linkBaltic Cable

COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.10: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Baltic Cable in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.1: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for The Baltic Cable in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.


Technical capacity not used, GWh

Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh

Disturbance outages, GWh

Unplanned maintenance., GWh

Planned maintenance, GWh

Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 5260.8

51.4

14.1

-

136.6

-

3.1

1238.6

1327.7

566.8

1988.1

446.7

3.9

1.1

-

-

-

-

120.6

103.6

53.5

169.0

432.1

3.4

1.7

-

-

-

1.3

106.5

67.3

69.1

187.9

447.0

6.3

2.1

-

125.8

-

-

133.2

20.0

28.5

139.5

432.0

4.1

1.0

-

10.8

-

1.2

102.9

98.4

43.1

175.7

446.7

4.0

2.1

-

-

-

-

62.1

87.1

91.0

206.5

447.7

6.6

0.4

-

-

-

-

40.5

220.5

18.5

168.2

432.8

6.0

0.3

-

-

-

-

41.8

233.2

12.8

145.0

446.6

4.2

0.4

-

-

-

-

74.0

115.3

21.0

236.2

432.5

3.4

1.4

-

-

-

-

96.6

109.4

67.1

159.4

446.3

2.9

1.2

-

-

-

-

201.6

89.0

54.8

101.0

403.7

3.3

1.3

-

-

-

0.6

99.3

102.2

53.9

147.7

446.7

3.3

1.2

-

-

-

-

159.6

81.7

53.5

151.9

% total

100.0%

1.0%

0.3%

-

2.6%

-

0.1%

23.5%

25.2%

10.8%

37.8%

Monthly utilisation of Baltic Cable [Export SE4 -> DE]



Figure 5.11 presents the annual utilisation of Baltic Cable perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.12 presents the percentage of hours of a yearBaltic Cable has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-

bance outage, an unplanned or planned maintenance out-age or other outage annually during the years 2012–2019.Figure 5.13 presents the annual number of disturbance out-ages, unplanned and planned maintenance and other out-ages during the years 2012–2019.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%

% of the total technical capacity

18%

50% 46%57%

36%27% 32% 38% 38%

19%14%

15%

22%

11% 10%55%

13% 33% 28%28%

41% 25%

25% 31%

16% 26%

13%

24% 11%22% 18%

9%

8%

Annual utilisation of Baltic Cable [Export SE4 -> DE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.11: Annual utilisation of Baltic Cable according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

% of all hours unavailable during a year

13%

23%27%

44%

23%

33%

22%18%

23%

5%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Baltic Cable

% hours limited% hours disturbance outage% hours unplanned maintenance% hours planned maintenance% hours other outage

Figure 5.12: Percentage of hours Baltic Cable has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Number of outages

6

6

4

3

2

4 4

3

1

7

3

67

2 2

Number of outages annually for Baltic Cable

DisturbancesUnplanned maintenancesPlanned maintenances

Figure 5.13: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Baltic Cablefor the years 2012–2019. Baltic cable has not had any other out-ages during the years 2012–2019.




5.3.2 COBRAcable

Figure 5.14 presents the availability and utilisation ofCOBRAcable for 2019 and Table 5.2 presents the numericalvalues behind it. COBRAcable has been in operation since2019. In Denmark (bidding zone DK1) it is connected to En-drup substation and in Netherlands to Eemshaven (biddingzone APX NL). The transmission capacity of COBRAcable is700 MW.

In 2019, COBRAcable had had an available technical capac-ity of 95 %. The technical capacity not usedwas 15%. Totally,0.6 TWh (39 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromDenmark to the Netherlands and 0.7 TWh (41 % of the tech-

nical capacity) was imported to Denmark.

In 2019, COBRAcable was already used in trialmode andwasavailable to the market as of 11 September, even though itwas officially commissioned 5 November. Therefore, there isno unused technical capacity (ETCNU) before 5 November, ascan be seen in Figure 5.14.

COBRAcable had two disturbance outages, whichweremostlikely teething troubles. Additionally, scheduled mainte-nance (lasting 3 days) was performed in late November be-fore the final handover to operation in November.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

26% 24%38%

64%

41%

71%

38%

22%

62%

36%

59%

29%

20% 52%

16%

15%

41%

39%

Monthly utilisation of COBRAcable [Export DK1 -> NL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.14: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for COBRAcable in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3. There is no unused technical capacity (ETCNU) during July–November because COBRAcable was commissioned 5 November. Technical capacity not used is ignored during the testing periodbefore commissioning.

Table 5.2: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for COBRAcable in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 1598.0

17.4

15.8

-

80.7

0.1

-

-

618.5

655.5

243.2

520.8

7.6

2.7

-

10.0

-

-

-

268.5

114.9

127.4

449.1

2.5

4.0

-

70.7

0.1

-

-

91.4

171.1

115.8

352.3

2.8

6.1

-

-

-

-

-

101.6

250.7

-

247.9

4.1

2.4

-

-

-

-

-

145.9

102.0

-

23.0

0.2

0.4

-

-

-

-

-

8.2

14.8

-

4.9

0.1

0.1

-

-

-

-

-

3.0

1.9

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

% total

100.0%

1.1%

1.0%

-

5.1%

0.0%

-

-

38.7%

41.0%

15.2%

Monthly utilisation of COBRAcable [Export DK1 -> NL]



This page intentionally left blank because COBRAcable has no historical data past 2019.




5.3.3 EstLink 1

Figure 5.15 presents the availability and utilisation of Est-Link 1 for 2019 and Table 5.3 presents the numerical val-ues behind it. EstLink 1 has been in operation since 2006and is the first HVDC connection between Finland and Esto-nia. In Finland, it is connected to Espoo substation (biddingzone FI) and in Estonia, it is connected to Harku substation(bidding zone EE). The transmission capacity of EstLink 1 is350 MW.

In 2019, EstLink 1 had an available technical capacity of 98%.The technical capacity not used was 76 % due to that Est-

Link 2 is prioritised because of its lower transmission lossesand because EstLink 1 is often used in Automatic FrequencyControl Mode. Totally, 0.6 TWh (20 % of the technical capac-ity) was exported from Finland to Estonia and 0.1 TWh (2 %of the technical capacity) was imported to Finland.

The annualmaintenance of EstLink 1 lasted four days in June2019. Additionally, EstLink 1 had 8 short disturbance out-ages with only minor impact Most of them had the same re-occurring (and externally originated) cause.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax 90%

81%91%

79%73%

36%52%

85%93%

70%

94%

74%

16% 18%26%

48%

48%

13%29% 25%

15%

76%

20%

Monthly utilisation of EstLink 1 [Export FI -> EE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.15: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for EstLink 1 in 2019. The availabilityand utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.3: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for EstLink 1 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are not includedin the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 3066.0

14.3

44.0

5.0

40.9

-

2.9

-

626.3

50.4

2340.6

260.4

1.1

4.5

-

-

-

-

-

66.1

2.3

192.0

252.0

1.5

1.9

-

-

-

-

-

12.5

3.1

236.3

260.8

1.0

4.8

-

-

-

-

-

76.4

2.4

182.0

252.0

1.5

2.0

0.8

-

-

-

-

14.4

3.4

233.4

260.4

1.5

2.9

3.4

-

-

0.2

-

32.9

3.7

220.2

260.4

0.5

7.1

-

-

-

-

-

124.0

1.4

135.0

252.0

0.4

6.6

0.8

38.7

-

-

-

119.9

2.4

90.3

260.4

1.1

4.3

-

-

-

0.9

-

66.6

4.1

188.8

252.0

1.2

3.3

-

-

-

1.8

-

45.9

4.0

200.3

260.1

1.5

2.0

-

0.2

-

-

-

17.7

5.4

236.7

235.2

1.3

2.8

-

-

-

-

-

37.3

7.3

190.6

260.4

1.7

1.7

-

2.0

-

-

-

12.5

10.9

235.0

% total

100.0%

0.5%

1.4%

0.2%

1.3%

-

0.1%

0.0%

20.4%

1.6%

76.3%




Figure 5.16 presents the annual utilisation of EstLink 1 perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.17 presents the percentage of hours of a year Est-Link 1 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%

% of the total technical capacity 39% 40%

69% 70%77%

90%82% 76%

68%

11% 15%

47% 40%17%

28%19% 20%

23%

8%

Annual utilisation of EstLink 1 [Export FI -> EE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.16: Annual utilisation of EstLink 1 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%


10%

2% 8% 6%

3%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for EstLink 1


Figure 5.17: Percentage of hours EstLink 1 has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

Number of outages

12

55 9

7

2 3

8

5 42 3 4 3 3

5

3

Number of outages annually for EstLink 1

DisturbancesUnplanned maintenancesPlanned maintenancesOther outages

Figure 5.18: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for EstLink 1 forthe years 2012–2019.




5.3.4 EstLink 2

Figure 5.19 presents the availability and utilisation of Est-Link 2 for 2019 and Table 5.4 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. EstLink 2 was commissioned in Feb 2014 and isthe second HVDC connection between Finland and Esto-nia. In Finland, it is connected to Anttila substation (biddingzone FI) and in Estonia, it is connected to Püssi substation(bidding zone EE). The transmission capacity of EstLink 2 is650 MW.

In 2019, EstLink 2 had an available technical capacity of 97%.The technical capacity not used was 38 %. Totally, 3.2 TWh(55 % of the technical capacity) was exported from Finland

to Estonia and 0.3 TWh (4 % of the technical capacity) wasimported to Finland.

No annual maintenance for EstLink 2 was held in 2019. Nor-mally, there is annual maintenance for HVDC links but forEstLink 2 the maintenance happens every second year. Ad-ditionally, there were 5 disturbances during 2019, of which 3had a more severe impact. The disturbance outage in Aprilwas caused by a cooling water leakage, the disturbance out-age in June by a faulty capacitor and faulty thyristors in thevalvehall and the last one inDecemberwas causedbya faultyDC voltage divider.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

53%43%

62%

42%32%

11%

43% 48%

30%

52%

29%

21%

14%

26%

44%31%

48% 67%

84%89%

56% 50%

68%

45%

57%

13%

8%

8% 8%

38%

55%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.19: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for EstLink 2 in 2019. The availabilityand utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.4: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for EstLink 2 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are not includedin the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 5694.2

4.9

65.6

-

-

-

141.7

-

3151.4

252.8

2148.2

483.6

0.1

5.6

-

-

-

65.0

-

274.0

3.3

141.3

468.0

0.3

4.1

-

-

-

-

-

209.6

13.4

245.0

484.3

0.2

7.1

-

-

-

-

-

331.3

7.5

145.5

468.0

0.2

4.6

-

-

-

-

-

233.0

9.9

225.1

483.6

0.1

5.5

-

-

-

-

-

269.6

6.2

207.9

483.6

-

9.5

-

-

-

-

-

431.8

-

51.8

468.1

-

8.7

-

-

-

36.9

-

391.7

0.2

39.3

483.6

0.2

6.8

-

-

-

0.2

-

322.3

8.3

152.9

468.0

0.2

4.4

-

-

-

36.9

-

225.3

7.3

198.4

483.0

0.7

2.9

-

-

-

2.8

-

148.0

33.5

298.7

436.8

1.1

4.0

-

-

-

-

-

190.4

59.2

187.2

483.6

2.0

2.5

-

-

-

-

-

124.5

103.9

255.2

% total

100.0%

0.1%

1.2%

-

-

-

2.5%

-

55.3%

4.4%

37.7%




Figure 5.20 presents the annual utilisation of EstLink 2 perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2014–2019.

Figure 5.21 presents the percentage of hours of a year Est-Link 2 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand total

0%

50%

100%


32%20%

42%

59%47%

38% 40%

11%

13%

13%53% 72%

43%

27%38%

55% 48%

11%

Annual utilisation of EstLink 2 [Export FI -> EE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.20: Annual utilisation of EstLink 2 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2014–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%


21%

11%

4%

5%3%4%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for EstLink 2


Figure 5.21: Percentage of hours EstLink 2 has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2014–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Number of outages

6

41

22

57

23

23

Number of outages annually for EstLink 2

DisturbancesPlanned maintenances

Figure 5.22: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for EstLink 2 forthe years 2014–2019. EstLink 2 had neither unplanned mainte-nance nor other outages during this period.




5.3.5 Fenno-Skan 1

Figure 5.23 presents the availability and utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1 for 2019 and Table 5.5 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Fenno-Skan 1has been in operation since 1989 andis the first HVDC connection between Finland and Sweden.In Finland (bidding zone FI), Fenno-Skan 1 is connected toRauma and in Sweden to Dannebo (bidding zone SE3). Thetransmission capacity used to be 500 MW during summerand 550 MW during winter but was permanently decreasedto 400 MW on 1 July 2014 after detailed DC cable investiga-tions were completed. The investigations were started aftera cable fault 12 February 2013.

In 2019, Fenno-Skan 1 had an available technical capacityof 98 %. The technical capacity not used was 3 %. Totally,

0.7 GWh (0.2 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromFinland to Sweden and 3.2 TWh (95%of the technical capac-ity) was imported to Finland.

The annual maintenance of Fenno-Skan 1 lasted five daysfrom late September to early October. Fenno-Skan 1 had nodisturbance outages during 2019.

It should be noted, that Fenno-Skan 1 and 2 is sometimesoperated at equivalent transmission levels but with reverseddirections to keep the temperature of Fenno-Skan 1 at ade-quate levels. The utilisation is still regarded as import andexport even though the resulting net exchange between Fin-land and Sweden is zero.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

100%100%100%

28%

98% 99% 97% 97%

71%

91% 91%97% 96%

9% 9%

95%

Monthly utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1 [Export FI -> SE3]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.23: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Fenno-Skan 1 in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.5: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Fenno-Skan 1 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 3511.2

0.3

87.8

-

58.3

-

-

1.2

8.1

3327.4

116.2

298.5

0.1

7.5

-

-

-

-

-

4.9

285.2

8.4

288.8

0.1

7.3

-

-

-

-

0.2

1.9

281.5

5.3

298.4

-

7.0

-

26.2

-

-

-

-

272.3

-

288.5

-

6.7

-

26.0

-

-

-

-

262.0

0.5

298.2

-

7.6

-

-

-

-

-

-

298.0

0.2

298.1

-

7.5

-

-

-

-

0.7

-

297.2

0.2

288.6

-

7.8

-

-

-

-

-

-

288.6

-

298.2

-

6.0

-

-

-

-

0.4

-

213.1

84.7

288.4

-

7.4

-

-

-

-

-

0.1

280.6

7.7

297.6

-

7.7

-

2.9

-

-

-

1.2

289.0

4.5

269.3

-

7.2

-

2.0

-

-

-

-

266.1

1.2

298.5

-

7.9

-

1.2

-

-

-

-

293.7

3.6

% total

100.0%

0.0%

2.5%

-

1.7%

-

-

0.0%

0.2%

94.8%

3.3%




Figure 5.24 presents the annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1per utilisation andunavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.25 presents the percentage of hours of a year Fenno-Skan 1 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


15%22% 18%

11%

46%41%

71%

76%

92% 92% 92% 95%73%

19%

25%16%

13% 11%

9%

Annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1 [Export FI -> SE3]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.24: Annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


42%

46%

94%

25%16%

13% 11%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Fenno-Skan 1


Figure 5.25: Percentage of hours Fenno-Skan 1 has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

Number of outages

109

9

9 4

3

2

7

2

5

2 35

Number of outages annually for Fenno-Skan 1


Figure 5.26: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplannedmaintenance outages and other outages for Fenno-Skan 1during 2012–2019. Fenno-Skan 1 had no other outages during theyears 2012–2019.




5.3.6 Fenno-Skan 2

Figure 5.27 presents the availability and utilisation of Fenno-Skan 2 for 2019 and Table 5.6 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Fenno-Skan 2has been in operation since 2011 andis the second HVDC connection between Finland and Swe-den. In Finland (bidding zone FI) Fenno-Skan 2 is connectedtoRaumaand in Sweden toFinnböle (bidding zone SE3). Thetransmission capacity of Fenno-Skan 2 is 800 MW.

In 2019, Fenno-Skan 2 had an available technical capacity of95 %. The technical capacity not used was 21 %. Totally,0.2 TWh (3 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromFinland to Sweden and 5.0 TWh (72 % of the technical ca-

pacity) was imported to Finland.

The annual maintenance of Fenno-Skan 2 lasted four daysin September. Additionally, Fenno-Skan 2 had 2 disturbanceoutages with only minor impact during 2019.

It should be noted, that Fenno-Skan 1 and 2 is sometimesoperated at equivalent transmission levels but with reverseddirections to keep the temperature of Fenno-Skan 1 at ade-quate levels. The utilisation is still regarded as import andexport even though the resulting net exchange between Fin-land and Sweden is zero.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

30% 31% 32% 36%

18% 21%11% 16%

27%

68% 62% 58%58%

51%

66% 92% 88%

85% 89%76%

67%

31%

13% 12%9% 9%

20%

72%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.27: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Fenno-Skan 2 in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.6: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Fenno-Skan 2 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 7010.5

3.5

108.7

-

78.8

-

6.5

348.6

179.7

5029.9

1367.1

595.3

0.8

8.3

-

-

-

-

-

39.7

396.4

159.2

576.3

0.2

9.5

-

-

-

-

27.9

12.7

440.6

95.1

596.4

-

12.0

-

-

-

-

53.2

0.1

532.1

10.9

576.3

-

11.3

-

69.7

-

-

-

-

488.3

18.3

595.5

-

11.9

-

-

-

-

6.5

1.3

524.9

62.8

595.5

-

12.7

-

-

-

-

0.2

1.2

549.1

45.0

576.2

-

7.8

-

-

-

-

74.9

2.2

379.9

119.2

595.3

0.1

5.8

-

-

-

-

182.9

3.1

303.8

105.5

576.2

0.4

7.0

-

-

-

5.6

3.0

24.2

333.4

210.0

594.5

1.2

6.7

-

9.1

-

-

-

50.8

341.9

192.7

537.7

0.7

7.0

-

-

-

-

-

36.3

332.5

168.9

595.4

0.1

8.7

-

-

-

0.9

-

8.2

406.7

179.6

% total

100.0%

0.1%

1.6%

-

1.1%

-

0.1%

5.0%

2.6%

71.7%

19.5%




Figure 5.28 presents the annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 2per utilisation andunavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.29 presents the percentage of hours of a year Fenno-Skan 2 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


21%36%

18% 22% 28%40% 39%

20%28%

57%

55%80% 75% 70%

56% 53%

72%65%

19%

Annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 2 [Export FI -> SE3]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.28: Annual utilisation of Fenno-Skan 2 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%


10%

19%

4%

7%

2%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Fenno-Skan 2


Figure 5.29: Percentage of hours Fenno-Skan 2 has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

Number of outages

7

5

8

3 5

1

3

21

23

1

6 4

2

43

1

Number of outages annually for Fenno-Skan 2


Figure 5.30: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplannedmaintenance outages and other outages for Fenno-Skan 2for the years 2012–2019.




5.3.7 Kontek

Figure 5.31 presents the availability and utilisation of Kontekfor 2019 and Table 5.7 presents the numerical values behindit. Kontek has been in operation since 1995. In Denmark itis connected to Bjaeverskov (bidding zone DK2) and in Ger-many to Bentwisch (bidding zone DE-50Hertz). The trans-mission capacity of Kontek is 600 MW.

In 2019, Kontek had an available technical capacity of 97 %.The technical capacity not used was 28 %. Totally, 1.3 TWh(25 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromDenmark

toGermany and 2.3 TWh (44%of the technical capacity)wasimported to Denmark.

The annual maintenance of Kontek was done in two parts(one in April and the second in August), with each of themlasting approximately 4.5 days. Additionally, Kontek had twominor disturbance outages. The first was due to a breakerfault on a line connecting the connected busbar of Kontek,and the second was due to an operational fault duringmain-tenance.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

28% 30%21%

28%38%

31% 31% 26% 31%23% 24% 21%

48%38% 61%

37%

35%

12%22%

56% 48% 69%54%

45%

23%32%

18%

19%

28%

57%48%

22%34%

15%16% 14% 8%

28%

44%

25%

Monthly utilisation of Kontek [Export DK2 -> DE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.31: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Kontek in 2019. The availabilityand utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.7: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Kontek in 2019. Note that import and export losses are not includedin the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 5256.0

26.7

47.8

-

131.5

-

1.5

65.1

1300.7

2302.5

1454.6

446.4

3.3

4.1

-

-

-

-

-

150.9

200.3

95.2

432.0

0.5

4.8

-

-

-

-

65.1

26.2

235.2

105.5

447.0

0.7

6.6

-

-

-

1.3

-

36.0

308.0

101.7

432.0

1.9

4.4

-

-

-

-

-

93.5

206.6

131.9

446.4

0.3

5.3

-

63.5

-

0.3

-

17.3

248.6

116.7

446.4

4.5

2.0

-

-

-

-

-

212.2

96.5

137.6

432.0

5.1

1.1

-

-

-

-

-

244.5

53.7

133.8

446.4

2.4

3.1

-

-

-

-

-

123.3

154.1

169.0

432.0

1.6

3.3

-

68.0

-

-

-

83.3

160.4

120.3

445.8

1.6

5.7

-

-

-

-

-

79.6

271.0

95.2

403.2

2.6

3.1

-

-

-

-

-

129.1

152.8

121.3

446.4

2.1

4.4

-

-

-

-

-

104.8

215.2

126.4

% total

100.0%

0.5%

0.9%

-

2.5%

-

0.0%

1.2%

24.7%

43.8%

27.7%

Monthly utilisation of Kontek [Export DK2 -> DE]



Figure 5.32 presents the annual utilisation of Kontek per util-isation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.33 presents the percentage of hours of a year Kontekhas been affected by either a limitation, a disturbance out-

age, an unplanned or planned maintenance outage or otheroutage annually during the years 2012–2019. Figure 5.34presents the annual number of disturbance outages, un-planned andplannedmaintenance andother outages duringthe years 2012–2019.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


24% 26% 23% 20% 23% 19% 21%28% 23%

11%

47%

34%

14%

31%

18%27%

44%

28%

59%

23%39%

60%36%

49% 26%

25%

40%

12%23%

10%

Annual utilisation of Kontek [Export DK2 -> DE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.32: Annual utilisation of Kontek according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. The utilisationand unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%


12%

23%

10%3%

4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Kontek


Figure 5.33: Percentage of hours Kontek has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

Number of outages

2

12

1

1

1

21

1

4

6

21

3

3

5

12 2

1

Number of outages annually for Kontek


Figure 5.34: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Kontek forthe years 2012–2019.




5.3.8 Konti-Skan 1

Figure 5.35 presents the availability and utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 for 2019 and Table 5.8 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Konti-Skan 1 has been in operation since 1965 andit is connected in south-western Sweden to Lindome (bid-ding zone SE3) and in Denmark to Vester Hassing (biddingzone DK1). It has a transmission capacity of 370 MW to-wards east and 340 MW towards west.

The capacity has been asymmetric due to historical limi-tations and reserve requirements, along with transmissionmeasurements only being done in DK1. As a step towardscorrecting this, the rated capacity at the receiving end ofDK1was changed from680MWto 715MWon 1October 2019. Asthe final step towards correcting the asymmetrical NTC ca-pacities, measurements will be done on receiving ends of the

cables as of 1 February 2020.

In 2019, Konti-Skan 1 had an available technical capacity of85 % and the technical capacity not used was 34 %. Totally,0.7 TWh (22 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromSweden to Denmark and 0.9 TWh (28 % of the technical ca-pacity) was imported to Sweden.

Konti-Skan 1 and 2 had large amounts of planned mainte-nance due to replacements of conductor lines in Denmarkin May and Konti-Skan 1 control system replacement in Oc-tober and November. Additionally, Konti-Skan 1 had 5 dis-turbance outages during 2019 of which some were due toinstallation errors of previously mentioned planned mainte-nances.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

41% 43% 47%38%

19% 23%35%

44%34%

26%15%

44%

53%

27% 27%

25%

65%

26% 43%

24%

25%

29% 24%31%

21%

75%

53%

29% 20%

14%

31%

56%

37%

9%

9%

34%

22%

28%

14%

Monthly utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 [Export SE3 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.35: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Konti-Skan 1 in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.8: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Konti-Skan 1 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 3241.2

14.0

20.1

-

445.5

-

12.8

25.3

923.1

724.4

1110.0

275.3

1.6

1.6

-

-

-

0.2

-

85.9

67.5

121.7

266.4

0.5

0.2

-

173.4

-

-

0.3

37.1

14.8

40.7

275.7

0.1

1.8

-

100.8

-

9.5

4.4

23.9

66.0

70.9

266.4

0.5

4.0

-

3.3

-

1.1

2.7

54.5

113.6

91.2

275.3

1.0

2.0

-

-

-

-

0.6

80.7

72.2

121.9

275.3

2.5

0.7

-

-

-

-

7.9

146.5

24.6

96.3

266.4

3.7

0.1

-

-

-

-

1.6

199.0

3.5

62.4

275.3

1.0

0.2

-

153.7

-

2.0

1.3

57.4

7.7

53.2

266.4

1.3

1.8

-

14.3

-

-

-

83.0

66.7

102.4

274.9

0.7

2.0

-

-

-

-

6.6

65.2

75.1

128.1

248.6

1.1

1.8

-

-

-

-

-

72.8

68.0

107.8

275.3

-

3.9

-

-

-

-

-

17.1

144.7

113.5

% total

100.0%

0.4%

0.6%

-

13.7%

-

0.4%

0.8%

28.5%

22.3%

34.2%




Figure 5.36 presents the annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 1per utilisation andunavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.37 presents the percentage of hours of a year Konti-Skan 1 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%

% of the total technical capacity 38%

53%

33% 31% 36% 41% 45%34% 39%

10%

20%

29%19%

54%

26%25%

22%26%

46%12%

17%

19%

26% 27%

28%22%

14% 29%

14%8%

Annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 [Export SE3 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.36: Annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%


14%32%

15%

9%

4%5%3%

3%6% 7%

4% 5%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Konti-Skan 1


Figure 5.37: Percentage of hours Konti-Skan 1 has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

Number of outages

11

6

3 84

6

2

53

35

4

35

35 4

2

Number of outages annually for Konti-Skan 1


Figure 5.38: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Konti-Skan 1for the years 2012–2019.




5.3.9 Konti-Skan 2

Figure 5.39 presents the availability and utilisation of Konti-Skan 2 for 2019 and Table 5.9 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Konti-Skan 2 is connected between Sweden andDenmark in parallel to Konti-Skan 1 and has been in oper-ation since 1988. It has a transmission capacity of 370 MWfromwest to east and 340MW from east to west. The capac-ity has been asymmetric due to historical limitations and re-serve requirements, along with transmission measurementsonly being done in DK1. As a step towards correcting this,the rated capacity at the receiving end of DK1 was changedfrom 680MWto 715MWon 1October 2019. As the final steptowards correcting the asymmetrical NTC capacities, mea-surements will be done on receiving ends of the cables as of

1 February 2020.

In 2019, Konti-Skan 2 had an available technical capacity of83 % and the technical capacity not used was 34 %. Totally,0.9 TWh (28 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromSweden to Denmark and 0.8 TWh (21 % of the technical ca-pacity) was imported to Sweden.

Konti-Skan 1 and 2 had large amounts of planned mainte-nance due to replacements of conductor lines in Denmarkin May and Konti-Skan 2 control system replacement inSeptember. Additionally, Konti-Skan 2 had 5 disturbanceoutages during 2019 of which some were due to installationerrors of previously mentioned planned maintenances.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

41% 40%47%

38%

19% 22%35%

44%

88%

34% 35% 42%

53%

25%

27%

25%

10%

26%30% 27%

22%

29%23%

31%

16%

75%

54%

29%27%

21%29%

56%

9%

8%

34%

21%

28%

14%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.39: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Konti-Skan 2 in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.9: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Konti-Skan 2 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 3241.2

21.4

17.3

-

460.1

-

51.3

28.4

920.5

679.0

1101.8

275.3

1.8

1.4

-

20.0

-

0.8

-

78.6

61.7

114.3

266.4

1.3

2.1

-

27.4

-

15.8

1.1

55.5

72.5

94.1

275.7

2.0

2.3

-

10.9

-

2.8

8.5

75.0

83.9

94.4

266.4

-

0.2

-

233.8

-

-

-

1.7

5.9

24.9

275.3

1.6

1.9

-

-

-

-

1.1

80.7

72.3

121.1

275.3

3.5

0.6

-

-

-

-

7.9

148.6

23.0

95.8

266.4

4.9

0.1

-

-

-

1.1

1.5

200.9

3.4

59.5

275.3

1.0

0.2

-

153.7

-

15.0

1.5

45.4

7.4

52.3

266.4

1.9

1.6

-

14.3

-

-

-

83.1

66.5

102.5

274.9

1.5

1.7

-

-

-

-

6.8

64.1

75.1

128.9

248.6

1.6

1.5

-

-

-

15.9

-

71.4

61.4

100.0

275.3

0.3

3.8

-

-

-

-

-

15.5

145.7

114.1

% total

100.0%

0.7%

0.5%

-

14.2%

-

1.6%

0.9%

28.4%

20.9%

34.0%




Figure 5.40 presents the annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 2per utilisation andunavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.41 presents the percentage of hours of a year Konti-Skan 2 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


37% 38% 35% 42% 41%34% 39%

12%17%

18%

36%55%

26% 27%

21%27%

44% 32%34%

23%26% 27%

28%

27%

14%

Annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 2 [Export SE3 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.40: Annual utilisation of Konti-Skan 2 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%


10%

15%4%

5%4% 2%

3%

2%

3%

2%

2%

3%4%

6%4% 5% 4%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Konti-Skan 2


Figure 5.41: Percentage of hours Konti-Skan 2 has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

20

Number of outages

14

5

3

9

4

2

6

9

2

6 3 64

2 3

8

Number of outages annually for Konti-Skan 2


Figure 5.42: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Konti-Skan 2for the years 2012–2019.




5.3.10 LitPol Link

Figure 5.43 presents the availability and utilisation ofLitPol Link for 2019 and Table 4.1 presents the numerical val-ues behind it. LitPol Link has been in operation since the endof 2015. In Lithuania, it is connected to Alytus (bidding zoneLT) and in Poland to Ełk (bidding zone PL).The transmissioncapacity of LitPol Link is 500 MW.

In 2019, LitPol Link had had an available technical capacity

of 96 %. The technical capacity not used was 35 %. Totally,2.3 TWh (53 % of the technical capacity) as exported fromLithuania to Poland and 0.4 TWh (9 % of the technical ca-pacity) was imported to Lithuania.

The annual maintenance of LitPol Link lasted six days inMay. Additionally, LitPol Link had 2 disturbance outageswith only minor impact in 2019.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

37% 33%26%

34% 30% 36%47%

34% 38% 38% 33% 32%

30%

17% 12%15%

32%49%

67% 63%

45%

57%45%

63%49%

53% 58% 51%

21%

35%

53%

9%

Monthly utilisation of LitPol Link [Export LT -> PL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.43: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for LitPol Link in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.10: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for LitPol Link in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 4380.0

35.2

6.6

7.2

77.5

8.5

0.7

61.7

2308.9

384.7

1530.7

372.0

2.9

0.9

-

-

5.0

-

3.2

191.2

55.4

117.2

360.0

3.2

0.5

-

-

-

-

4.7

210.3

26.1

118.9

372.5

2.9

0.4

-

-

-

-

13.4

198.9

18.2

142.0

360.0

2.8

0.7

-

-

-

-

4.1

177.1

42.8

135.9

372.0

3.6

0.1

-

-

-

0.7

3.5

234.8

5.1

128.0

372.0

2.7

0.4

-

-

3.5

-

3.7

167.5

21.5

175.8

360.0

3.1

0.4

-

-

-

-

7.1

203.8

19.3

129.8

372.0

2.6

0.1

7.2

77.5

-

-

2.8

167.5

4.0

113.0

360.0

3.4

0.1

-

-

-

-

5.0

227.5

3.8

123.7

371.5

3.7

0.3

-

-

-

-

8.1

248.1

18.2

97.1

336.0

2.5

0.9

-

-

-

-

2.6

164.5

57.4

111.5

372.0

1.9

1.8

-

-

-

-

3.5

117.8

112.8

137.9

% total

100.0%

0.8%

0.2%

0.2%

1.8%

0.2%

0.0%

1.4%

52.7%

8.8%

34.9%

Monthly utilisation of LitPol Link [Export LT -> PL]



Figure 5.44 presents the annual utilisation of LitPol Link perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2016–2019.

Figure 5.45 presents the percentage of hours of a yearLitPol Link has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand total

0%

50%

100%


52%43% 40% 35%

43%

10%

11% 16% 12%

24% 35%37%

53% 37%

9%

9%8%

Annual utilisation of LitPol Link [Export LT -> PL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.44: Annual utilisation of LitPol Link according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2016–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%


16%15% 14%

42%

4%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for LitPol Link


Figure 5.45: Percentage of hours LitPol Link has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2016–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Number of outages

5

3

2

3

3

3

1

1

12

1

Number of outages annually for LitPol Link


Figure 5.46: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for LitPol Linkfor the years 2016–2019.




5.3.11 NordBalt

Figure 5.47 presents the availability and utilisation of Nord-Balt for 2019 and Table 5.11 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. NordBalt has been in operation since 2016. InSweden, it is connected to Nybro (bidding zone SE4) and inLithuania to Klaipeda (bidding zone LT). The transmissioncapacity of NordBalt is 700 MW at the receiving end.

In 2019, NordBalt had had an available technical capacity of

92 %. The technical capacity not used was 29 %. Totally,3.6 TWh (58 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromSweden to Lithuania and 0.3 TWh (5 % of the technical ca-pacity) was imported to Sweden.

The annual maintenance of NordBalt lasted eight days inSeptember. Additionally, NordBalt had 1 disturbance outagewith only minor impact during 2019.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

43% 40%47%

33%24%

16% 15% 10%22%

47% 49%

10% 13%12% 10%

43% 41%35%

55%

52% 91% 79% 84%

58%

75%

47% 39%

22% 28%

8%

29%

58%

Monthly utilisation of NordBalt [Export SE4 -> LT]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.47: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for NordBalt in 2019. The availabilityand utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.11: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for NordBalt in 2019. Note that import and export losses are not includedin the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 6132.0

10.0

159.3

9.8

142.3

-

3.0

313.3

3573.2

285.3

1805.1

520.8

1.8

8.9

-

-

-

-

11.0

202.8

53.6

253.4

504.0

0.9

10.2

-

-

-

-

2.7

236.5

25.6

239.2

521.5

0.2

17.5

-

-

-

-

9.5

392.5

5.1

114.5

504.0

-

13.2

-

142.3

-

-

19.0

289.9

0.4

52.3

520.8

0.1

20.0

-

-

-

-

3.2

437.8

3.1

76.7

520.8

-

18.7

-

-

-

3.0

25.0

409.7

0.4

82.6

504.0

-

20.8

-

-

-

-

9.6

456.4

0.2

37.8

520.8

0.2

11.8

9.8

-

-

-

114.5

268.5

4.6

123.4

504.0

0.7

12.2

-

-

-

-

38.8

278.0

18.5

168.7

520.1

2.1

8.1

-

-

-

-

29.5

183.7

60.9

246.0

470.4

2.0

8.3

-

-

-

-

30.8

194.8

58.9

185.9

520.8

1.9

9.7

-

-

-

-

19.7

222.5

54.0

224.6

% total

100.0%

0.2%

2.6%

0.2%

2.3%

-

0.0%

5.1%

58.3%

4.7%

29.4%

Monthly utilisation of NordBalt [Export SE4 -> LT]



Figure 5.48 presents the annual utilisation of NordBalt perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2016–2019.

Figure 5.49 presents the percentage of hours of a year Nord-Balt has been affected by either a limitation, a disturbance

outage, an unplanned or planned maintenance outage orother outage annually during the years 2016–2019. Fig-ure 5.50 presents the annual number of disturbance out-ages, unplanned and planned maintenance and other out-ages during the years 2016–2019.

2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand total

0%

50%

100%


31% 32% 28% 29% 30%

42%50%

47%

58%49%

18%12% 15%

8%

Annual utilisation of NordBalt [Export SE4 -> LT]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.48: Annual utilisation of NordBalt according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2016–2019. The utilisationand unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%


11%

18%

12%

15%

9%

7%4% 2%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for NordBalt


Figure 5.49: Percentage of hours NordBalt has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2016–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

20

25

Number of outages

16

12

23

5 2 2

Number of outages annually for NordBalt


Figure 5.50: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for NordBalt forthe years 2016–2019.




5.3.12 NorNed

Figure 5.51 presents the availability and utilisation ofNorNedfor 2019 and Table 5.12 presents the numerical values behindit. NorNed has been in operation since 2008, and is, with alength of 580 km, the longest HVDC link connected to theNordic power system. InNorway on the south-western coast(bidding zone NO2) it is connected to Feda substation andin Netherlands to Eemshaven (bidding zone APX NL). Thetransmission capacity of NorNed is 700 MW.

In 2019, NorNed had had an available technical capacity of82 %. The technical capacity not used was 11 %. Totally,

2.4 TWh (38 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromNorway to the Netherlands and 1.4 TWh (23 % of the techni-cal capacity) was imported to Norway.

NorNed had 8 disturbances and 4 planned maintenancesduring 2019. In February, the outage was due to a faulton a bushing in Feda. Furthermore, filter problems inEemshaven caused maintenance outages and limitations inMarch–April. The unavailable energy inQ4was due tomain-tenance in the Eemshaven region.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

43%31% 28% 30% 29%

17% 17%26% 21% 17%

28%20%

19%

12%

43%23% 23%

12%

28%

10%27%

42%

31%

38% 22%

21% 29%79%

70%

46%

67%24%

31%

26%

25%18%

16%

23%

52%

15%

26%

23%

38%

Monthly utilisation of NorNed [Export NO2 -> NL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.51: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for NorNed in 2019. The availabilityand utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.12: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for NorNed in 2019. Note that import and export losses are not includedin the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 6136.5

84.6

50.7

-

89.3

-

248.2

463.0

2352.0

1411.3

1572.6

520.9

4.3

5.3

-

-

-

-

118.3

136.1

159.7

106.7

504.2

5.7

8.3

-

-

-

-

0.7

154.0

209.6

139.9

521.7

4.1

4.9

-

77.5

-

2.6

84.6

126.1

140.8

90.1

504.8

13.0

1.9

-

11.8

-

-

-

335.8

50.5

106.8

521.1

9.0

5.7

-

-

-

-

-

238.6

147.1

135.4

521.5

14.0

2.5

-

-

-

-

-

366.8

65.1

89.6

505.5

15.1

0.7

-

-

-

-

-

399.3

18.9

87.3

520.9

4.8

4.0

-

-

-

-

96.2

153.5

122.2

149.0

504.0

2.9

3.5

-

-

-

-

127.5

106.3

117.2

152.9

520.2

4.0

8.4

-

-

-

0.1

35.1

115.0

225.7

144.3

470.4

0.9

2.2

-

-

-

243.4

-

24.8

56.8

145.4

521.0

6.9

3.4

-

-

-

2.1

0.6

195.7

97.7

224.9

% total

100.0%

1.4%

0.8%

-

1.5%

-

4.0%

7.5%

38.3%

23.0%

25.6%

Monthly utilisation of NorNed [Export NO2 -> NL]



Figure 5.52 presents the annual utilisation ofNorNedper util-isation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.53 presents the percentage of hours of a yearNorNedhas been affected by either a limitation, a disturbance out-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


19% 18%26%

12%

23%

88%68%

89% 94%

68%81%

63%

38%

74%

14%

9% 9%

8%9%

Annual utilisation of NorNed [Export NO2 -> NL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.52: Annual utilisation of NorNed according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. The utilisationand unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


10%

18%

27% 19%

14%

4%

6%

9%

5%

9%

3% 3% 3% 3%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for NorNed


Figure 5.53: Percentage of hours NorNed has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

Number of outages

11

32

3

2

6

3 8

2

2 2

9

64

Number of outages annually for NorNed


Figure 5.54: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for NorNed forthe years 2012–2019.




5.3.13 Skagerrak 1

Figure 5.55 presents the availability and utilisation of Skager-rak 1 for 2019 and Table 5.13 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Skagerrak 1 and Skagerrak 2 have been in opera-tion since 1976 and are the oldest HVDC links in operation inthe Nordic countries. In Norway, the links are connected toKristiansand on the southern coast (bidding zone NO2) andin Denmark to Tjele (bidding zone DK1), approximately 15km east of the town of Viborg in the northern part of Jutland.The transmission capacity is 236 MW at the receiving end.

In 2019, Skagerrak 1 had an available technical capacity of72 %. The technical capacity not used was 32 %. Totally,0.5 TWh (22 % of the technical capacity) was exported from

Norway to the Denmark and 0.4 TWh (18 % of the technicalcapacity) was imported to Norway.

Skagerak 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been operated in “careful oper-ation” since December 2019 due to the cable faults on Sk-agerak 4, which in turn caused limitations due to restrictionson the maximum allowed electrode currents. The annualmaintenance was done during refurbishment of Skagerak 1AC equipment on the Danish side and lasted 58 days fromlate September to late November. Additionally, Skagerrak 1had 1 major disturbance during 2019 due to a failure on thepole transformer on the Norwegian side.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

100%

56%

32% 37%26%

61% 55% 50%

19%

38%

10%

32%

47%50%

44%

10%

11%12%

11%21%

28%29% 42%

70%37%

21%

12%

25%

62%

15%

72%9%

8%

32%

18%

22%

16%

Monthly utilisation of Skagerrak 1 [Export NO2 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.55: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Skagerrak 1 in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.13: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Skagerrak 1 in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 2067.7

21.4

18.5

-

325.7

-

151.9

95.0

450.0

381.3

663.8

175.6

0.3

0.9

-

-

-

109.1

20.7

5.6

21.8

18.4

169.9

0.2

-

-

122.1

-

42.8

0.2

4.2

0.3

0.2

175.8

-

-

-

175.8

-

-

-

-

-

-

169.9

2.9

0.1

-

26.1

-

-

13.4

63.5

2.0

64.9

175.6

5.9

0.9

-

-

-

-

-

122.9

19.3

33.4

175.6

3.7

0.6

-

-

-

-

1.3

74.5

11.7

88.2

169.9

2.6

0.8

-

-

-

-

10.0

50.0

16.6

93.3

175.6

0.6

0.6

-

-

-

-

37.7

14.5

15.5

107.9

170.1

2.2

4.0

-

1.7

-

-

2.6

47.0

74.9

43.8

175.4

0.6

4.4

-

-

-

-

9.1

13.9

88.2

64.3

158.6

1.6

3.5

-

-

-

-

-

33.6

74.1

50.9

175.6

0.9

2.8

-

-

-

-

-

20.2

57.0

98.4

% total

100.0%

1.0%

0.9%

-

15.8%

-

7.3%

4.6%

21.8%

18.4%

32.1%




Figure 5.56 presents the annual utilisation of Skagerrak 1 perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.57 presents the percentage of hours of a year Ska-gerrak 1 has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


41%53%

41% 36%

53%

32%41%

26% 11% 11%11%

12%

18%13%

55%31%

38% 28% 41%

31%

19%

22%

33%

11%21%

11% 16%9%

Annual utilisation of Skagerrak 1 [Export NO2 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.56: Annual utilisation of Skagerrak 1 according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%


16%27%

10% 11%

11%

24%

11%16%

7%

7%

4%

8%

8%

6% 6%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Skagerrak 1


Figure 5.57: Percentage of hours Skagerrak 1 has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

20

Number of outages

2018

4 3

2

3

2 3 3

8

2

Number of outages annually for Skagerrak 1


Figure 5.58: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Skagerrak 1for the years 2012–2019. Skagerrak 1 had no other outages dur-ing the years 2012–2019.




5.3.14 Skagerrak 2

Figure 5.59 presents the availability and utilisation of Skager-rak 2 for 2019 and Table 5.14 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Skagerrak 1 and Skagerrak 2 have been in opera-tion since 1976 and are the oldest HVDC links in operation inthe Nordic countries. In Norway, the links are connected toKristiansand on the southern coast (bidding zone NO2) andin Denmark to Tjele (bidding zone DK1), approximately 15km east of the town of Viborg in the northern part of Jutland.The transmission capacity of Skagerrak 2 is 236 MW at thereceiving end.

In 2019, Skagerrak 2 had an available technical capacity of78 %. The technical capacity not used was 33 %. Totally,

0.5 TWh (22 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromNorway to the Denmark and 0.5 TWh (23 % of the technicalcapacity) was imported to Norway.

Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been operated in “careful opera-tion” since December 2019 due to the cable faults on Skager-rak 4, which in turn caused limitations due to restrictions onthemaximum allowed electrode currents. The annual main-tenance of Skagerrak 2 was done during replacement of thenewcontrol systemon theNorwegian side and lasted 57daysfrom late May to July. Additionally, Skagerrak 2 had one mi-nor disturbance during 2019.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

100%

32% 36%26%

58%

19%

47%54%

30% 32%

33%

47%51%

44%

11%

10%

33%37%

12%21%

28%

15%

70%41% 19%

30% 19%20%

12%

56%

76%

13% 8%9%9%

33%

23%

22%

17%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link





Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 2068.0

22.4

24.2

-

344.6

-

0.6

103.8

461.5

475.4

682.1

175.6

1.6

3.4

-

-

-

0.6

20.6

33.5

64.5

56.4

170.0

2.2

2.9

-

-

-

-

13.4

50.2

55.5

50.9

175.8

1.7

0.9

-

23.5

-

-

7.0

33.4

17.1

94.8

169.9

3.2

0.3

-

-

-

-

15.0

69.9

5.6

79.4

175.6

6.4

1.1

-

-

-

-

-

123.1

19.4

33.2

175.6

1.3

0.3

-

134.0

-

-

-

25.8

5.9

9.9

169.9

-

-

-

169.9

-

-

-

-

-

-

175.6

0.3

0.4

-

15.5

-

-

35.9

10.7

12.2

101.3

170.2

2.4

3.6

-

1.7

-

-

2.6

47.0

74.9

43.9

175.5

0.7

4.5

-

-

-

-

9.3

13.9

88.9

63.3

158.6

1.7

4.0

-

-

-

-

-

33.7

74.2

50.7

175.6

0.9

2.9

-

-

-

-

-

20.3

57.1

98.2

% total

100.0%

1.1%

1.2%

-

16.7%

-

0.0%

5.0%

22.3%

23.0%

33.0%







2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


42%57% 54%

27%

47%33%

41%

26% 10%

10%

10%23% 13%

55%31%

38%32% 30%

19%

18% 22% 31%28%

14% 11% 17%9%

7%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%


15% 19%

14%28%

14% 11%17%

8%

7%

5%

8%

8%

9%

6% 6%




2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

5

10

15

20

Number of outages

12

18

13

4

2 3

8

3



Figure 5.62: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Skagerrak 2for the years 2012–2019. Skagerrak 2 had no other outages dur-ing the years 2012–2019.




5.3.15 Skagerrak 3

Figure 5.63 presents the availability and utilisation of Skager-rak 3 for 2019 and Table 5.15 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Skagerrak 3 has been in operation since 1993. InNorway, it is connected to Kristiansand (bidding zone NO2)and in Denmark to Tjele (bidding zone DK1). The transmis-sion capacity of Skagerrak 3 is 478 MW at the receiving end.

In 2019, Skagerrak 3 had an available technical capacity of78 %. The technical capacity not used was 26 %. Totally,1.1 TWh (26 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromNorway to Denmark and 1.1 TWh (26 % of the technical ca-

pacity) was imported to Norway.

Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been operated in “careful oper-ation” since December 2019 due to the cable faults on Ska-gerrak 4, which in turn caused limitations due to restrictionson the maximum allowed electrode currents. There was noannual maintenance done on Skagerrak 3 in 2019. Instead,there was 1 major planned maintenance for installation andtesting of the new control system on the Norwegian side,which lasted from late March to April. Additionally, Skager-rak 3 had 1 minor disturbance.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

28%37%

21%38%

30% 33% 31% 26% 29% 28%

11%

45% 32%47%

34%

18% 12%

86%

22%32%

58%

27%

12%

28%

52%46%

33%

61%34% 14%

20%29%

15%27% 30%

22%

8%

9%

26%

26%

26%

12%

9%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link





Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 4187.5

25.4

28.3

-

370.9

-

15.0

490.6

1109.5

1103.8

1097.8

355.6

0.3

5.1

-

-

-

-

106.6

4.0

207.3

37.7

344.2

1.2

2.8

-

-

-

-

92.0

47.0

109.2

95.9

356.1

2.9

2.0

-

-

-

-

53.8

120.3

78.0

104.1

344.2

5.0

0.6

-

-

-

-

20.2

208.3

26.2

89.5

355.6

2.6

0.5

-

-

-

-

103.2

119.0

21.5

112.0

355.7

3.6

1.1

-

-

-

-

32.5

164.8

42.8

115.6

344.2

3.8

1.6

-

-

-

-

-

178.1

62.8

103.2

355.7

2.3

3.2

-

-

-

-

-

100.5

121.3

133.9

344.2

0.3

0.1

-

294.4

-

15.0

-

14.2

5.8

14.8

355.2

0.4

4.4

-

76.5

-

-

18.9

19.8

166.1

73.9

321.2

0.8

2.6

-

-

-

-

63.4

38.8

101.3

117.7

355.7

2.2

4.3

-

-

-

-

-

94.6

161.5

99.6

% total

100.0%

0.6%

0.7%

-

8.9%

-

0.4%

11.7%

26.5%

26.4%

26.2%







2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


25% 29% 28% 29% 30%23% 25% 26% 27%

30%16% 12% 14%

19% 20%26% 18%

65%

34%

44% 49%55%

38%39% 26% 44%

12%20%

13%

8%

8% 9%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


10%

14%

11%21%

20%

13%9%

7%

3%7% 8% 9% 9%




2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

10

20

30

Number of outages

31

20

5 6 44

9



Figure 5.66: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Skagerrak 3for the years 2012–2019.




5.3.16 Skagerrak 4

Figure 5.67 presents the availability and utilisation of Ska-gerrak 4 for 2019 and Table 5.16 presents the numerical val-ues behind it. Skagerrak 4 has been in commercial operationsince 29 December 2014. In Norway, it is connected to Kris-tiansand (bidding zone NO2) and in Denmark to Tjele (bid-ding zone DK1). The transmission capacity is 682MW at thereceiving end.

In 2019, Skagerrak 4 had an available technical capacity of67 %. The technical capacity not used was 23 %. Totally,1.3 TWh (21 % of the technical capacity) was exported from

Norway to the Denmark and 1.3 TWh (23 % of the technicalcapacity) was imported to Norway.

Skagerrak 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been operated in “careful oper-ation” since December 2019 due to the cable faults on Ska-gerrak 4, which in turn caused limitations due to restrictionson the maximum allowed electrode currents. There was noannual maintenance done on Skagerrak 4 in 2019. Addition-ally, Skagerrak 4 had 6 disturbance outages of which 3 weremajor due to faults on theDanish land cable. The cable faultsoccurred in February, July and October.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

100%

26%42% 38%

31%25% 22%

11%27% 21%

44%

10%

46%23% 34%

18%

10%15%

57%

26%

18%

28%

51%

32%55%

12%

13%

14%17%

10%81%

18%34%

29%

16%

73%

35%

8%

23%

23%

21%

30%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link





Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 5974.4

24.2

33.2

-

-

-

1766.6

191.4

1275.1

1348.3

1392.9

507.4

1.1

7.8

-

-

-

-

39.0

71.0

290.4

107.0

491.0

1.1

1.8

-

-

-

171.9

47.1

63.7

73.4

134.8

508.1

1.1

0.5

-

-

-

369.6

0.7

61.8

21.4

54.7

491.0

5.0

0.8

-

-

-

79.7

1.9

268.1

35.2

106.2

507.4

-

-

-

-

-

507.4

-

-

-

-

507.4

3.3

1.2

-

-

-

172.5

0.1

160.7

49.6

124.4

491.0

5.1

2.2

-

-

-

-

-

251.1

87.9

152.0

507.4

2.7

4.1

-

-

-

-

0.2

141.6

172.7

192.9

491.0

1.7

2.7

-

-

-

-

82.8

86.6

113.4

208.1

506.7

0.5

5.5

-

-

-

93.1

19.5

28.4

234.4

131.2

458.3

0.2

1.1

-

-

-

372.3

-

9.2

44.8

32.0

507.4

2.5

5.5

-

-

-

-

-

132.9

225.1

149.4

% total

100.0%

0.4%

0.6%

-

-

-

29.6%

3.2%

21.3%

22.6%

23.3%







2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grand total

0%

50%

100%

% of the total technical capacity 36%

29% 29% 31%23% 30%

12%14% 20% 22%

23%18%

49%52% 45% 42%

21%

42%

30%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%


12% 14%

30%

3%

8%

4%




2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Number of outages

3

6

4 2

6

1

1 19

42 2

2 2



Figure 5.70: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Skagerrak 4for the years 2015–2019.




5.3.17 Storebaelt

Figure 5.71 presents the availability and utilisation of Store-baelt for 2019 and Table 5.17 presents the numerical valuesbehind it. Storebaelt has been in operation since 2010. It con-nects the western part of the Danish system, which belongsto the Continental European synchronous system (Jutlandand the island of Fynen), with the eastern part, belonging tothe Nordic synchronous system (Zealand). The link is con-nected to Fraugde on Fynen (bidding zone DK1) and to Her-slev on Zealand (bidding zone DK2). The transmission ca-

pacity is 600 MW.

In 2019, Storebaelt had an available technical capacity of97 %. The technical capacity not used was 39 %. Totally,2.9 TWh (54 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromJutland to Zealand and 0.2 TWh (4 % of the technical capac-ity) was imported to Jutland.

The annual maintenance of Storebaelt lasted 4 days in Octo-ber. Additionally, Storebaelt had no disturbance outages.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

28% 34%42% 44% 44% 49% 52% 47%

18%33%

40% 37%

71% 57%

54% 47% 50% 40% 45% 47%

80% 51%

51%59%

15%

8%

39%

54%

Monthly utilisation of Storebaelt [Export DK1 -> DK2]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.71: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Storebaelt in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.17: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Storebaelt in 2019. Note that import and export losses are notincluded in the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 5256.0

48.3

3.4

-

66.8

-

-

62.4

2856.7

210.0

2060.0

446.4

4.4

0.3

-

-

-

-

-

262.2

18.0

166.1

432.0

3.7

0.6

-

-

-

-

1.5

221.1

36.0

173.3

447.0

3.8

0.2

-

65.1

-

-

-

226.1

9.7

146.0

432.0

6.1

0.1

-

-

-

-

-

347.3

6.1

78.7

446.4

3.6

0.4

-

1.7

-

-

-

211.6

21.4

211.7

446.4

3.3

0.2

-

-

-

-

1.2

201.9

11.3

232.1

432.0

2.8

0.4

-

-

-

-

21.7

174.3

22.3

213.7

446.4

3.8

0.4

-

-

-

-

-

222.9

25.9

197.6

432.0

3.4

0.4

-

-

-

-

9.9

203.6

27.6

190.9

445.8

4.1

0.3

-

-

-

-

0.9

240.0

17.0

187.8

403.2

3.8

0.2

-

-

-

-

27.2

228.8

10.9

136.3

446.4

5.4

0.1

-

-

-

-

-

317.0

3.8

125.6

% total

100.0%

0.9%

0.1%

-

1.3%

-

-

1.2%

54.4%

4.0%

39.2%

Monthly utilisation of Storebaelt [Export DK1 -> DK2]



Figure 5.72 presents the annual utilisation of Storebaelt perutilisation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.73 presents the percentage of hours of a year Store-baelt has been affected by either a limitation, a disturbance

outage, an unplanned or planned maintenance outage orother outage annually during the years 2012–2019. Fig-ure 5.74 presents the annual number of disturbance out-ages, unplanned and planned maintenance and other out-ages during the years 2012–2019.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


52%

36% 37%28%

19%35% 34% 39% 35%

40%

52%54%

69%77%

60% 61% 54%58%

8%

Annual utilisation of Storebaelt [Export DK1 -> DK2]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.72: Annual utilisation of Storebaelt according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%


14%

2%5%

4%

9%

2%

2% 2% 1% 1%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Storebaelt


Figure 5.73: Percentage of hours Storebaelt has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

1

2

3

4

5

Number of outages

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

3

1 1

2 2

Number of outages annually for Storebaelt


Figure 5.74: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Storebaeltfor the years 2012–2019. Storebaelt had no other outages duringthe years 2012–2019.




5.3.18 SwePol

Figure 5.75 presents the availability and utilisation of SwePolfor 2019 and Table 5.18 presents the numerical values behindit. SwePol Link has been in operation since 2000 and it con-nects the Swedish and Polish transmission grids. In south-eastern Sweden (bidding zone SE4) it is connected to Stärnöand in Poland (bidding zone PL) to Slupsk. The transmissioncapacity is 600 MW.

In 2019, SwePol had an available technical capacity of 86 %.The technical capacity not used was 24 %. Totally, 3.1 TWh

(59 % of the technical capacity) was exported from Swedento Poland and 0.2 TWh (4 % of the technical capacity) wasimported to Sweden.

The annualmaintenance of SwePol lasted 11 days in Septem-ber 2019. Additionally, SwePol had one more severe un-plannedmaintenance outage due to an oil leakage and 6mi-nor plannedmaintenance outages. Last, SwePol had 1majordisturbance outage due to a valve cooling system failure inAugust. The disturbance outage lasted for 29 days.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

32% 27% 32% 33% 34%

12%19%

12%23% 24%

34%

18%12%

48%61% 62% 66% 60%

72%70%

52%

75% 72%62%

94%

16%

35%

24%

59%

8%

Monthly utilisation of SwePol [Export SE4 -> PL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.75: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for SwePol in 2019. The availabilityand utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.18: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for SwePol in 2019. Note that import and export losses are not includedin the technical capacity (Emax), as is shown in Figure 3.1.



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Import losses, GWh

Export losses, GWh

Total, GWh 5256.0

88.6

4.5

-

186.1

70.3

419.0

61.0

3077.2

188.4

1254.0

446.4

8.0

0.4

-

-

-

-

0.8

277.5

17.0

151.1

432.0

9.1

0.2

-

2.3

1.8

-

3.3

311.2

8.3

105.1

447.0

9.7

0.1

-

-

-

-

5.3

337.4

2.9

101.3

432.0

6.6

-

-

151.8

-

-

2.3

225.3

-

52.6

446.4

0.4

-

-

-

-

419.0

-

9.9

-

17.4

446.4

8.9

-

-

24.8

-

-

23.4

312.8

0.5

85.0

432.0

9.0

-

-

-

68.5

-

0.6

310.6

-

52.3

446.4

7.6

-

-

-

-

-

23.1

269.9

0.5

152.9

432.0

8.2

-

-

-

-

-

2.2

287.0

1.7

141.0

445.8

7.9

0.7

-

-

-

-

-

274.5

29.6

141.6

403.2

7.1

1.2

-

-

-

-

-

244.5

49.2

109.5

446.4

6.2

1.9

-

7.1

-

-

-

216.5

78.8

144.0

% total

100.0%

1.7%

0.1%

-

3.5%

1.3%

8.0%

1.2%

58.5%

3.6%

23.9%

Monthly utilisation of SwePol [Export SE4 -> PL]



Figure 5.76 presents the annual utilisation of SwePol per util-isation and unavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.77 presents the percentage of hours of a year SwePolhas been affected by either a limitation, a disturbance out-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


47%63%

32%25% 29% 32% 30% 24%

35%

15%50%

19%

59%67% 52%

59% 59%

59%

53%

11% 8%

Annual utilisation of SwePol [Export SE4 -> PL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.76: Annual utilisation of SwePol according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. The utilisationand unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


63%

21%

8%

6%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for SwePol


Figure 5.77: Percentage of hours SwePol has been affected byeither a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Number of outages

8

5

2

8

3

6

51

1

1

2

5

9

43

65

6

Number of outages annually for SwePol


Figure 5.78: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for SwePol forthe years 2012–2019. SwePol had no other outages during theyears 2012–2019.




5.3.19 Vyborg Link

Figure 5.79 presents the monthly availability and utilisationof the Vyborg Link for 2019 and Table 5.19 presents the nu-merical values behind it. The Vyborg Link is a back-to-backHVDC connection between Russia and Finland. The HVDCsubstation is situated in Vyborg, Russia. The 400 kV linesfromVyborg are connected to substationsYllikkälä andKymiin southern Finland.

Vyborg link has been commissioned four times. It was firstcommissioned in year 1981, and further in 1982, 1984, and2000. Each commissioning increased the transmission ca-pacity by 350 MW. Today, the total technical capacity is4 × 350 MW and the commercial transmission capacity is1.3 GW. Fingrid Oyj, the Finnish transmission system oper-ator, allocates 100 MW for reserves. Earlier, the direction oftransmission has been only to Finland but during Septem-

ber 2014, one 350MWunit was successfully tested to be ableto export electricity to Russia. The possibility of commercialtrade from Finland to Russia started on 1 December 2014.

In 2019, the Vyborg Link had an available technical capacityof 95 %. The technical capacity not used was 33 %. Totally,7.0 TWh (62 % of the technical capacity) was exported fromRussia to Finland and none was imported to Russia.

The annual maintenance of Vyborg Link lasted 31 days inJuly. Normally, maintenance work on Vyborg Link causesonly limitations because the 350 MW units are not workedon simultaneously. Furthermore, additional (corrective)plannedmaintenancework lasting 25dayswas held from theend of October to themiddle of November. Last, Vyborg Linkhad 3 disturbance outages with only minor impact during2019.

2019 Total


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

20% 21% 24%33% 31%

52%41% 35% 36%

28% 25%

50%

79% 78% 75%67% 69%

48%

13%

65% 58%69% 67%

50%

22%

25%

33%

61%

Monthly utilisation of Vyborg Link [Export RU -> FI]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages


COBRAcable

EstLink 1

EstLink 2

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Skagerrak 4

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

Figure 5.79: Percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Vyborg Link in 2019. Theavailability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.

Table 5.19: Monthly distribution of the technical capacity (Emax) for Vyborg Link in 2019. Measurements from the other side of theVyborg Link is unknown and therefore losses are based on assumptions. Therefore, transmission losses have been omitted from thistable.

% total

100.0%

-

3.0%

-

0.1%

2.4%

61.5%

-

33.1%



Import, GWh

Export, GWh

Limitations, GWh




Other outages, GWh

Total, GWh 11389.0

-

341.0

-

7.9

269.1

7000.0

-

3771.0

967.2

-

-

-

1.8

-

480.8

-

484.6

936.0

-

69.8

-

-

1.8

626.1

-

238.3

968.5

-

25.5

-

2.5

-

672.5

-

267.9

936.0

-

-

-

-

52.1

542.5

-

341.4

968.2

-

-

-

-

-

633.6

-

334.6

967.2

-

237.8

-

-

208.8

128.7

-

391.9

936.0

-

0.3

-

-

0.7

444.7

-

490.3

967.2

-

-

-

-

-

670.4

-

296.8

936.0

-

-

-

-

-

624.5

-

311.5

965.9

-

3.5

-

3.6

-

726.9

-

231.9

873.6

-

4.0

-

-

1.6

683.6

-

184.4

967.2

-

-

-

-

4.1

765.9

-

197.2

Monthly utilisation of Vyborg Link [Export RU -> FI]



Figure 5.80 presents the annual utilisation of Vyborg Linkper utilisation andunavailability category for the years 2012–2019.

Figure 5.81 presents the percentage of hours of a year Vy-borg Link has been affected by either a limitation, a distur-


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Grandtotal

0%

50%

100%


56%63%

74% 71%

53% 48%

28% 33%

53%

34%36%

25% 29%

46% 50%

67% 61%

44%

9%

Annual utilisation of Vyborg Link [Export RU -> FI]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

Figure 5.80: Annual utilisation of Vyborg Link according to the utilisation and unavailability categories for the years 2012–2019. Theutilisation and unavailability categories are described in more detail in Chapter 3.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%


12% 12%

2%

2%

6%

7%

9%

3%

Percentage of unavailable hours annually per category for Vyborg Link


Figure 5.81: Percentage of hours Vyborg Link has been affectedby either a limitation, unplanned or planned maintenance or a dis-turbance or other outage annually for the years 2012–2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with alimitation or outage and dividing it by the total number of hoursin a year. It should be noted, that any single hour can be affectedby both an outage and a limitation.

2012 2013 2014 2017 2019

0

2

4

6

8

Number of outages

1

3

1

2

2

4

1

Number of outages annually for Vyborg Link

DisturbancesPlanned maintenancesOther outages

Figure 5.82: The annual number of disturbances, unplanned andplanned maintenance outages and other outages for Vyborg Linkfor the years 2012–2019.


REFERENCESEuropean Network of


References

[1] DISTAC, “Nordic Grid Disturbance Statistics 2010.” https://www.fingrid.fi/contentassets/03690e21eae3449f8fe5d8d96b746e12/pohjoismainen-vika-ja-hairiotilasto-2010-2.pdf, August2010.


https://www.fingrid.fi/contentassets/03690e21eae3449f8fe5d8d96b746e12/pohjoismainen-vika-ja-hairiotilasto-2010-2.pdf

https://www.fingrid.fi/contentassets/03690e21eae3449f8fe5d8d96b746e12/pohjoismainen-vika-ja-hairiotilasto-2010-2.pdf

Appendices

54

Chapter A. Schematic presentation of HVDC linksEuropean Network of


A Schematic presentation of HVDC links

Figure A.1 and Figure A.2 show the schematic presentationsof a HVDC converter station having line-commutated con-verters (LCC) and voltage-source converters (VSC), respec-tively. All the figures also show definitions for the origin of anevent. The origin of each event is used for categorizing a dis-turbance or a limitation for statistical purposes. The figures

also show the locations of the circuit breakers and measure-ment points for transferred energy on a link.

It should be noted, that these figures are only show an exam-ple of a possible LCC or VSC converter station as there aremultiple different ways to construct one.

DC line (OHL/cable)

thyristorbridge DC filter

convertertransformer

smoothingreactor

electrode

DC substationAC substationAC grid

AC filter

AC transformer

AC line

AC External grid - DC converter and yard- DC electrodes

- DC Overhead line- DC Cable

AC busbar, feeder, filters and transformer

Origin of event:

Schematic of a line-commutated converter HVDC station

Origin of event on station level:- Control center operation- Converter station operation- Control, protection and communication

Circuit breaker

Measurement point

Figure A.1: An example of a line-commutated converter (LCC) station schematic with the connection to the AC grid. The other (remote)side of the HVDC link has a similar albeit mirrored version of the converter station.

IGB-transistors orother semiconductors

UD C

+UDC

DC capacitor

AC filter

AC transformer

AC line

Schematic of a voltage-source converter HVDC station

DC line (OHL/cable) DC substationAC substationAC grid

AC External grid - DC converter and yard- DC electrodes

- DC Overhead line- DC Cable

AC busbar, feeder, filters and transformer

Origin of event:

Origin of event on station level:- Control center operation- Converter station operation- Control, protection and communication

Circuit breaker

Measurement point

convertertransformer

Figure A.2: An example of a voltage-source converter (VSC) station schematic with the connection to the AC grid. The other (remote)side of the HVDC link has a similar albeit mirrored version of the converter station.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Chapter B. Contact persons

B Contact persons

Denmark: EnerginetTonne Kjærsvej 65DK-7000 Fredericia, Denmark

Anders BratløvTel. +45 51 38 01 31E-mail: [email protected]

Morten VadstrupTel. +45 25 32 27 74E-mail: [email protected]

Estonia: Elering ASKadaka tee 42Tallinn, Estonia

Irene PuusaarTel. +372 508 4372E-mail: [email protected]

Kaur KrusellTel. +372 564 86011E-mail: [email protected]

Finland: Fingrid OyjLäkkisepäntie 21, P.O. Box 530FI-00101 Helsinki, Finland

Markku PiironenTel. +358 30 395 4172Mobile +358 40 351 1718E-mail: [email protected]

Lithuania: Litgrid ABViršuliškių skg. 99BLT-05131, Vilnius

Valdas TarvydasTel. +370 7070 2207E-mail: [email protected]

Vaidotas RukšaTel. +370 7070 2298E-mail: [email protected]

Norway: Statnett SFNydalen allé 33, PB 4904 NydalenNO-0423 Oslo

Jørn Schaug-PettersenTel. +47 23 90 35 55E-mail: [email protected]

Sweden: Svenska kraftnätSturegatan 1, P.O. Box 1200SE-172 24 Sundbyberg

Tarek TallbergTel. +46 10 475 86 79Mobile: +46 72 244 96 97E-mail: [email protected]

Jeremy IehlTel: +46 10 475 87 78Mobile: +46 70 512 28 18E-mail: [email protected]

Production of the Hillner Consultingreport: Henrik Hillner

Tel. +358 41 505 7004E-mail: [email protected]

Publisher: ENTSO-E AISBLRue de Spa 81000 Brussels, BelgiumTel. +32 2 741 09 [email protected]


Chapter C. Sorted overview of utilisation and unavailability for all HVDC linksEuropean Network of


C Sorted overview of utilisation and unavailability forall HVDC links

This chapter contains sorted versions of Figure 5.1 Availability and utilisation overview of each HVDC link in 2019.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% of Emax

Skagerrak 4

Skagerrak 1

Baltic Cable

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Konti-Skan 2

Konti-Skan 1

SwePol

NorNed

NordBalt

Fenno-Skan 2

Vyborg Link

COBRAcable

Kontek

LitPol Link

EstLink 2

Storebaelt

Fenno-Skan 1

EstLink 1

Total

44%

40%

36%

45%

53%

49%

51%

62%

61%

63%

74%

61%

80%

69%

61%

60%

58%

95%

22%

58%

23%

32%

38%

33%

26%

34%

34%

24%

26%

29%

20%

33%

15%

28%

35%

38%

39%

76%

31%

33%

28%

26%

22%

21%

17%

15%

14%

13%

11%

8%

6%

5%

5%

4%

4%

3%

11.4 TWh

90.1 TWh

6.0 TWh

2.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

2.1 TWh

4.2 TWh

3.2 TWh

3.2 TWh

5.3 TWh

6.1 TWh

6.1 TWh

7.0 TWh

0.9 TWh

5.3 TWh

4.4 TWh

5.7 TWh

5.3 TWh

3.5 TWh

3.1 TWh

Utilisation overview of each HVDC link in 2019

% Unavailable technical capacity % Technical capacity not used % Transmission

Emax

Figure C.1: Overview of each HVDC link sorted by descending unavailable technical capacity (EU) in 2019.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Chapter C. Sorted overview of utilisation and unavailability for all HVDC links

% Transmission % Technical capacity not used % Unavailable technical capacity

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% of Emax

Fenno-Skan 1

COBRAcable

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

NordBalt

SwePol

LitPol Link

Vyborg Link

NorNed

EstLink 2

Storebaelt

Skagerrak 3

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 4

Skagerrak 1

Baltic Cable

EstLink 1

Total

13%

49%

45%

44%

14%

40%

36% 26%

21%

15%

17%

22%

33%

28%

22%

11%58%

15%

20%

28%

29%

24%

35%

33%

26%

38%

39%

26%

34%

34%

33%

23%

32%

38%

76%

31%

95%

80%

74%

69%

63%

62%

61%

61%

61%

60%

58%

53%

51%

6%

4%

8%

4%

5%

5%

3%

11.4 TWh

90.1 TWh

3.5 TWh

0.9 TWh

7.0 TWh

5.3 TWh

6.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

4.4 TWh

6.1 TWh

5.7 TWh

5.3 TWh

4.2 TWh

3.2 TWh

3.2 TWh

2.1 TWh

6.0 TWh

2.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

3.1 TWh

Utilisation overview of each HVDC link in 2019 Emax

Figure C.2: Overview of each HVDC link sorted by descending transmission (ET) in 2019.

% Technical capacity not used % Unavailable technical capacity % Transmission

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% of Emax

EstLink 1

Storebaelt

Baltic Cable

EstLink 2

LitPol Link

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

Vyborg Link

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 1

NordBalt

Kontek

Skagerrak 3

NorNed

SwePol

Skagerrak 4

Fenno-Skan 2

COBRAcable

Fenno-Skan 1

Total

22%

58%

36%

60%

61%

51%

49%

61%

45%

40%

63%

69%

53%

61%

62%

44%

74%

80%

95%

58%

26%

15%

15%

17%

31%

22%

28%

26% 21%

13%

14%

33%

11%

76%

39%

38%

38%

35%

34%

34%

33%

33%

32%

29%

28%

26%

24%

23%

20%

4%

5%

4%

8%

6%

3%

5%

11.4 TWh

90.1 TWh

3.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

5.3 TWh

5.7 TWh

4.4 TWh

3.2 TWh

3.2 TWh

2.1 TWh

2.1 TWh

6.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

4.2 TWh

6.1 TWh

5.3 TWh

6.0 TWh

7.0 TWh

0.9 TWh

3.5 TWh

Utilisation overview of each HVDC link in 2019 Emax

Figure C.3: Overview of each HVDC link sorted by descending technical capacity not used (ETCNU) in 2019.


Chapter D. Additional figuresEuropean Network of


D Additional figures

This appendix was introduced to allow experimenting with new kinds of figures without affecting the rest of the report.Furthermore, it shows what kind of statistical data can be derived from the data collected by the DISTAC group.

D.1 Annual utilisation per type of HVDC converter

Figure D.1 presents the annual utilisation of all HVDC linksusing line-commutated converters (LCC) and Figure D.2 all

HVDC links using voltage-source converters (VSC).

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0 TWh

20 TWh

40 TWh

60 TWh

80 TWh

23 TWh28 TWh

27 TWh28 TWh


15 TWh15 TWh


30 TWh20 TWh 27 TWh


9 TWh

Annual utilisation of all LCC HVDC linksTypeLCC


Import

Export

Limitations

Disturbance outages



Other outages

Figure D.1: Annual utilisation of all HVDC links using line-commutated converters (LCC) together presented in megawatt hours (MWh).

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

0 TWh

20 TWh

40 TWh

60 TWh

80 TWh

23 TWh28 TWh

27 TWh28 TWh


15 TWh15 TWh


30 TWh20 TWh 27 TWh


9 TWh

Annual utilisation of all VSC HVDC linksTypeVSC


Import

Export

Limitations

Disturbance outages



Other outages

Figure D.2: Annual utilisation of all HVDC links using voltage-source converters (VSC) together presented in megawatt hours (MWh).


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section D.2. Additional figures with unavailability hours due to different causes

D.2 Additional figures with unavailability hours due to differentcauses

This section presents additional figures with a more detailedcategorisation of unavailability. The figures presenting thepercentage of hours unavailable may be interesting whenone considers how often any size of unavailability is affect-ing an HVDC link.

Figure D.3 presents the percentage of hours all the Nordicand Baltic HVDC links have been affected by a limitationdue to seasonal causes during a year. Figure D.4 presentsthe percentage of hours all the Nordic and Baltic HVDC links

have been limited, distributed per type of limitation. Thelimitation types are AC limiting and DC limiting. Figure D.5presents the percentage of hours the HVDC connection be-tween each bidding zone has been limited due to an AC lim-iting condition during 2019.

Figure D.6 presents the percentage of hours each HVDC linkhas been available due to planned maintenance, distributedper cause, during 2019. Figure D.7 presents the same but forall links during 2019.

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Year

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

Percentage of all hours unavailable during a year

0.2%0.0% 0.0%

0.2%

2.1%

0.2%

Percentage of hours unavailable, seasonal causes, all HVDC links

Figure D.3: Percentage of hours all HVDC links have been affected by a limitation due to seasonal causes. The percentage is calculatedby counting the number of hours with a limitation due to a seasonal cause and dividing it by the total number of hours in a year.


Section D.2. Additional figures with unavailability hours due to different causesEuropean Network of


2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Year

0%

5%

10%

15%%hours limitations LOD/y

1.8%

3.5%

4.9%

7.9%

8.0%5.0% 4.9%

5.6%

3.7%4.5%

6.9%

2.5% 2.4%

4.3%

Percentage of hours limited per limitation type, all HVDC links

Limitation typeAC limiting condition

DC limiting condition

Figure D.4: Annual percentage of hours all HVDC links have been affected by a limitation per limitation type. The limitation types areAC limiting and DC limiting. The percentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with a limitation and dividing it by the totalnumber of hours in a year.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Percentage of all hours limited during a year

DK1–DK2DK1–NL

DK2–DEFI–EEFI–RU

FI–SE3LT–PL

NO2–DK1NO2–NL

SE3–DK1SE4–DESE4–LT

SE4–PL

18.7%

33.3%

2.1%

1.6%0.0%0.2%

5.1%1.3%

6.2%

2.0%

8.2%2.3%

Percentage of hours limited between bidding zones due to AC conditions

Figure D.5: Percentage of hours the connection between each bidding zones has been limited due to AC conditions in 2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with an AC limiting condition and dividing it by the total number of hours in ayear.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section D.2. Additional figures with unavailability hours due to different causes

HVDC link

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

% hours planned maintenance

Baltic Cable

COBRAcable

EstLink 1

Fenno-Skan 1

Fenno-Skan 2

Kontek

Konti-Skan 1

Konti-Skan 2

LitPol Link

NordBalt

NorNed

Skagerrak 1

Skagerrak 2

Skagerrak 3

Storebaelt

SwePol

Vyborg Link

13.7%

14.1%

15.8%

16.6%

1.3%

1.5%

1.0%

2.5%

1.8%

2.3%

1.3%

2.9%

8.5%

1.2%

3.8%

1.5%

2.6%

8.9%

1.0%

0.7%

Percentage of hours planned maintenance per primary causeAnnual maintenance

Commissioning

Corrective maintenance

Maintenance

Modication or refurbishment work

Testing

Upgrade or refurbishment work

Figure D.6: Percentage of hours each HVDC link has been unavailable due to planned maintenance, distributed per cause, in 2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with a planned maintenance and dividing it by the total number of hours in ayear.

2019

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

% of hours planned maintenance

1.2%

3.8%

Primary causeAnnual maintenance

Commissioning

Corrective maintenance

Maintenance

Modication or refurbishment work

Testing

Upgrade or refurbishment work

Percentage of hours planned maintenance per primary cause, allHVDC links

Figure D.7: Percentage of hours all HVDC has been unavailable due to planned maintenance, distributed per cause, in 2019. Thepercentage is calculated by counting the number of hours with a planned maintenance and dividing it by the total number of hours in ayear.


Section D.3. Average utilisation and unavailability per month per HVDC linkEuropean Network of


D.3 Average utilisation and unavailability per month per HVDC linkThe figures in this section present average monthly utilisation starting from 2012 or the year the HVDC link was added intothe ENTSO-E HVDC Utilisation and Unavailability Statistics.

COBRAcable is not included in this figure because it was commissioned in late 2019.

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecGrand..

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

34% 37% 36% 33% 39%45%

36% 36% 36% 40% 41% 43% 38%

11%

15%10%20%

13%

16%

20%

14%

11%

31%

10%

10%

10%

40%42%

38% 25%29%

30%

41%20%

15%

32% 27% 31%

17% 11%13%

10%

17%15%

13% 12%

9%9% 9% 9% 8% 8%

7%

9%

9%

9%

9%

8%9%

Average monthly utilisation of Baltic Cable [Export SE4 -> DE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.8: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Baltic Cable during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

73% 67% 68% 65% 65%51%

58%

77% 72% 72% 68%78%

68%

11%

18%23% 26% 22%

29%

31%

40%

16%12%

25%18%

15%23%

10%15% 9%

Average monthly utilisation of EstLink 1 [Export FI -> EE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.9: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for EstLink 1 during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


European Network ofTransmission System Operatorsfor Electricity Section D.3. Average utilisation and unavailability per month per HVDC link


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

41% 35% 41%34% 36% 35% 31%

49% 48%40% 44% 40% 40%

10%

11%

11%11%

17%

12%

49%57%

47%

43% 49% 60%

47%

38% 42%47%

43%52% 48%

10%

8%

7%

Average monthly utilisation of EstLink 2 [Export FI -> EE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2014

Figure D.10: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for EstLink 2 during2014–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

74%

12% 10%17% 16% 11%

72%74%

10% 13%

77%

11%

73%

78% 84%79%

59%66% 67% 71% 73%

15%12%

15% 15%14%25%

9% 9%8%

9%

8%

7%

Average monthly utilisation of Fenno-Skan 1 [Export FI -> SE3]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.11: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Fenno-Skan 1 during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

25%32% 33% 30% 32% 32%

16% 20% 21%27%

37%31% 28%

67% 59%50% 55%

62% 66%84% 77%

68%67%

58%64% 65%

13% 10% 9%

Average monthly utilisation of Fenno-Skan 2 [Export FI -> SE3]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.12: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Fenno-Skan 2 during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.





0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

24% 22% 20% 19%27% 24% 26% 23% 24% 25% 20% 22% 23%

27%21% 30%

24%

29%28% 23%

41%31% 31%

21%31% 28%

48%56% 47%

36%

33%30%

47% 20%

24%

44%

46%

46%40%

13%13% 20%21%

11%7%

Average monthly utilisation of Kontek [Export DK2 -> DE]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.13: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Kontek during 2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

40% 41% 42% 42% 38% 39% 40% 37% 39% 37% 33% 38% 39%

37%30% 24% 21% 23% 22% 15%

30%19% 25% 29%

33%26%

12% 20% 24% 25%36% 41%

30%

20%19% 20%

11% 22%10%

13%12%

12% 15%13% 13% 12%9%9%

9%

8%

Average monthly utilisation of Konti-Skan 1 [Export SE3 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.14: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Konti-Skan 1 during2016–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

40% 44% 45% 43% 38% 38% 40% 36% 31% 34% 38% 41% 39%

40%39%

30% 27%

19% 19%24%

23%

13%

24%28%

34%27%

18% 15%25%

22%

30%41%

34% 38%

24%

30%26%

22%27%

11%

29%

8%

Average monthly utilisation of Konti-Skan 2 [Export SE3 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.15: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Konti-Skan 2 during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.




0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

45% 42%35% 39% 39% 45% 49% 50%

43% 45% 43% 38% 43%

20%14% 10%

11%

16% 10%

12%

37%

13% 20% 12%

27%

51% 48%41%

38%22% 32%

34%41% 38% 36%

37%

13%

8% 9%

8%7%

9%

Average monthly utilisation of LitPol Link [Export LT -> PL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2016

Figure D.16: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for LitPol Link during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

52%41% 36%

27%18% 13% 18% 20% 17%

31%42% 43%

30%

30%43% 45%

53%63%

59% 52%59%

50%

57%34%

44%

49%

10%

10%

26%16% 13%

32%

10%

7% 8%9% 9%

8%8%

9%

Average monthly utilisation of NordBalt [Export SE4 -> LT]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2016

Figure D.17: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for NordBalt during2016–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

14% 12% 14% 12% 12% 10% 15% 14% 10% 11% 12%

76%76% 67%

67%79% 85%

78%71%

72%79% 68% 69% 74%

12%10% 14%

8% 9%

8%7%

7%

Average monthly utilisation of NorNed [Export NO2 -> NL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.18: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for NorNed during 2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.





0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

48%42% 39% 36% 35% 37% 38% 37% 41% 41%

47% 47%41%

26%23%

18%14%

13%

16%

10%

10%18%

39%

25%30%

36%

31%48% 46% 41% 38%

20%

20%

23%33%

18%11%

28%

9%

8%

7% 9% 8%

8%

9%

Average monthly utilisation of Skagerrak 1 [Export NO2 -> DK1]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.19: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Skagerrak 1 during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

51%44% 42%

32%38% 33% 34% 38% 39% 43% 49% 47%

41%

23%

21%16%

11%

13%

16% 12%

16% 24%33%

25%30%

34%

28%40% 38% 36% 32% 24%

26%26%

31%

10%

12% 12%12%

18% 12%

7% 7%8%

9% 7%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

30% 29% 26% 23% 26% 21% 25% 24%31% 32% 30% 28% 27%

30%24%

22%15% 13%

10%13% 11%

13%

15% 22%35%

18%

38%40%

41%

36%47% 58%

54%49%

51%45% 38%

29%

44%

10%24%

9%

8%9% 7%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012





0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

32% 28% 31%40% 37%

30% 28%17%

24% 29% 32% 29% 30%

30%

21%

30%26%

16%

18%

20%14%

11%17%

38%

18%

37%

33%

30%29%

42%58%

53%

48%

63%42%

38%

29%

42%

9% 9%8%

7%7%9%



% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2015



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

28% 29%37%

47% 43% 38% 44%35%

29% 34% 31%24%

35%

70% 68%58%

45% 46%49%

51%60%

62% 59% 61% 72%58%

Average monthly utilisation of Storebaelt [Export DK1 -> DK2]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.23: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Storebaelt during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

34% 37% 36% 36% 36% 33% 29%36% 31% 36% 38% 40% 35%

54% 54% 56%54% 58%

58%60% 48%

42%

53% 50% 50%53%

12%21%

7%

Average monthly utilisation of SwePol [Export SE4 -> PL]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.24: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for SwePol during 2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.





0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% of Emax

35%43% 49%

60% 66% 69%61% 59%

53% 52%43% 47%

53%

65%57% 50%

40% 34% 31%

11%

36% 45% 47%53%

53% 44%15%

13%

Average monthly utilisation of Vyborg Link [Export RU -> FI]


% Import

% Export

% Limitations




% Other outages

since 2012

Figure D.25: Average percentage distribution of the availability and utilisation per category according to month for Vyborg Link during2012–2019. The availability and utilisation categories are defined in detail in Chapter 3.


ENTSO-E HVDCUtilisation andUnavailability Statistics2019

Documents

Transcript of ENTSO-E HVDCUtilisation andUnavailability Statistics2019