Introduction to the power sector baseline scenarios and ... · PDF fileIntroduction to the...
18
Introduction to the power sector baseline scenarios and the IRENA SPLAT-W/MESSAGE tool International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Innovation and Technology Centre Development of the ECOWAS RE and EF National Action Plans and SE4ALL Abidjan, 17-19 March 2014
Transcript of Introduction to the power sector baseline scenarios and ... · PDF fileIntroduction to the...
Introduction to the power sector baseline scenarios and the IRENA SPLAT-W/MESSAGE tool International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Innovation and Technology Centre Development of the ECOWAS RE and EF National Action Plans and SE4ALL Abidjan, 17-19 March 2014
RE target setting
Common inconsistencies: Bottom-up targets do not meet the overall energy
needs Sum of sector targets does not meet the overall
energy needs Top-down targets imply unrealistic speed of
technology transition
It is crucial to have an accounting framework for: Overall future energy needs Overall future energy supply mix
2
Energy system models
Bottom up models Accounting – suited to demand side analysis (e.g.,
LEAP, MAED) Optimization – suited to supply side analysis (e.g.,
MARKAL, TIMES, MESSAGE etc)
IRENA SPLAT-W model: optimization model built based on the MESSAGE modelling framework
3
NREAP and SPLAT-W
Interested countries can use SPLAT-W to benchmark their power sector trajectory
Define the future energy mix (installed capacity and power generation by technology to meet a given set of demand)
Assess implications on policy goals (financial, environmental, energy security etc)
Compare with alternative future energy mix under different scenarios
4
NREAP scenario
At the request of ECREEE, a NREAP scenario is being developed for each ECOWAS countries using SPLAT-W.
Note on process IRENA’s desk-top study, not meant to give recommendations
on countries trajectories It provides a useful benchmark Interested countries are invited to verify data with IRENA
(data verification sheet) Interested countries are invited to use the tool to
develop/adjust the scenario Many ECREEE countries have trained national experts
5
How did we define the NREAP scenario? (1)
Step 1 • Power demand till 2030 is defined for industry, urban, rural
demand
• Demand patterns (seasonal, weekly, daily) are defined for each demand category
• Distribution losses are defined for each demand category
Step 2 • Database of existing power plans and international transmission
lines are set up, with performance parameters
6
How did we define the NREAP scenario? (2)
Step 3 • Database of projects (PP or interconnector) under
implementation/considerations are set up
• Database of possible power generation options is set up with economic and performance parameters
PP with fossil fuel inputs (diesel 1kW system, Diesel 100kW system, utility diesel, utility HFO, coal, OCGT, CCGT)
Hydro (utility / decentralized – only to serve rural demand) Biomass Wind (20% CF, 30% CF) Solar PV (utility scale) Solar PV 1 kW decentralized (no storage / 1 hour storage / 2 hour storage) CSP (no storage, with storage, with gas co-firing)
• Database of RE resource availability is set up
7
How did we define the NREAP scenario? (3)
Step 4 The model calculates the least-cost combinations of power supply options to meet the specified demand at a specified time, under certain conditions
Step 5 Certain conditions includes:
NREAP regional targets are met Reserve margin to be at least 10% (installed ‘firm’ capacity need to be 10%
higher than peak-demand) Capacity credits of non-dispatchable RE technologies vary depends on CF
and level of spatial distribution of resources locations Coal and biomass plants cannot be ramped-up very fast Among those interconnecting projects being considered, economically
viable ones would be implemented to allow electricity trade Other conditions are similar to those assumed under WAPP master plan Trade with Central Africa / CO2 price could be added as an option
8
Share of renewable [capacity]
9
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
20
26
20
27
20
28
20
29
20
30
Share of RE capacity: Regional results
in relation to peak in relation to total installed capacity
(non-hydro) (non-hydro)
Share of renewable [capacity]
10
0%
50%
100%
150%
200%
250%
300%
350%
400%
450%
500%
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
In relation to peak
Benin Burkina Cape Verde Cote d'Ivoire GambiaGhana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Liberia MaliNiger Nigeria Senegal Sierra Leone Togo
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
In relation to total installations
Cote D’Ivoire
11
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
20
26
20
27
20
28
20
29
20
30
TWh
Industry Urban Rural
Final energy demand Existing PP (as of 2010) Gas Turbine: 790 MW Hydro: 585 MW (1.8-2.4 TWh)
In the pipeline Gas Turbine: 860 MW
Resources Additional identified hydro:
3-5 TWh Wind 20% CF: 430 TWh CSP 220 TWh Solar PV 10,300 TWh
Fuel availability
Coal: import Gas: domestic Oil: import
Import from neighbors
Existing: Ghana, Burkina Faso Committed: Ghana, Liberia,
Mali
Cote D’Ivoire
12
LCOE at generation
50
100
150
200
250
300
2010 2030
LCO
E ($
/MW
h)
HFO
OCGT
CCGT
CCGT (in the pipeline)
Supercritical coal
Hydro (280 MW project)
Hydro (50MW project)
Small Hydro
Biomass
Bulk Wind (20% CF)
Solar PV (utility)
Solar PV (roof top)
Rooftop PV with 1h Battery
Rooftop PV with 2h Battery
Solar thermal no storage
Solar thermal with Storage
Solar thermal with gas co-firing
Cote D’Ivoire LCOE with TnD needs
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2010 2030
LCO
E ($
/MW
h)
industry
2010 2030
urban
2010 2030
Rural Diesel Centralized
Diesel 100 kWsystemHFO
OCGT
CCGT
CCGT (in thepipeline)Supercritical coal
Hydro (280 MWproject)Hydro (50MWproject)Small Hydro
Biomass
Bulk Wind (20%CF)Solar PV (utility)
Solar PV (roof top)
Rooftop PV with1h BatteryRooftop PV with2h BatterySolar thermal nostorageSolar thermal withStorageSolar thermal withgas co-firing
Cote D’Ivoire
14
Electricity production [TWh] Share of RE [capacity]
Rural demand [GWh] RE capacity [GW]
(10)
(5)
-
5
10
15
20
25
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030
Dist.Solar PVMini HydroDist. OilNet ImportsWindSolar ThermalSolar PVBiomassHydroNuclearGasOilCoaldom. System dmd
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
20
18
20
19
20
20
20
21
20
22
20
23
20
24
20
25
20
26
20
27
20
28
20
29
20
30
RE share capacity (peak) (total installed capacity)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030
Grid Diesel Mini-hydro
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Hydro Biomass Mini Hydro Dist.Solar PV
Cote D’Ivoire
Annualized costs [billion $]
Investment needs [billion $]
-1
0
1
2
3
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
O&M
Inv.
Fuel
Ann.Dom.Trans InvAnn.TransInvImport costs
ExportRevenues
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Bill
ion
$
InternationalTransmissionDomestictransmissionDecentralized
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cote D'Ivoir ECOWAS average
Average generation costs [$/MWh]
Development of power sector baseline trajectory for ECOWAS countries
IRENA’s desk-top study, developed using SPLAT-W Normative scenario, illustrating the implications of EREP on
each country Provide useful benchmark Data review sheet can be made available to interested
countries The SPLAT-W is available with tutorials
16
Contributions to NREAP
Planning for the Global Energy Transition
IRENA’s resources: Sound statistics and data
Statistical methodology: [email protected] GIS mapping and assessment of theoretical
generation potential RE technology costing analysis: [email protected] RE technology brief
• Transparent methodology: SPLAT-W model (benchmarking, transfer the tool, list of resource people)
• Ownership of the planning skill: long term CB is being discussed, engaging local experts
17
