Thailand power system flexibility study - Microsoft
Transcript of Thailand power system flexibility study - Microsoft
Page 1
Thailand power system flexibility study
Launch webinar, 4 June 2021
Renewable Integration and Secure Electricity Unit
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 2
Background of Thailand Power System Flexibility study
• In 2018, the IEA conducted a RE grid integration study to understand integration
challenges (in collaboration with MoEN, EGAT, EPPO, DEDE). Key findings were:
- Much more ambitious wind and solar targets are possible from the operational aspect
- Flexibility is key to integrate more solar and wind (both technical and contract)
• ‘Grid flexibility’ is one of the main elements in the 2018 PDP
• 2020-21 In-depth flexibility analysis to understand the value and impact of flexibility options
• Two main avenues to enhance its flexibility: Technical and contractual.
Contractual flexibility
• Analyse impacts of existing power
purchase and fuel supply contract
structures on system flexibility.
• Identify appropriate options for the
existing and future contract structures,
both for fuel supply and offtake of electricity.
Technical flexibility
• Analyse the value of technical flexibility
options from technical and economic
perspectives
• Flexible resources include flexible power
plants, battery energy storage systems
(BESS) and pumped storage hydro
Interaction between
technical and
contractual flexibility is
important
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 3
Generation mix in Thailand
• 47 GW installed capacity and around 30 GW peak demand. Gas-fired is the largest generation source
• 4% annual share of VRE (variable renewables: Solar PV and Wind) in 2020
• The VRE target in PDP: 4% in 2025, 6% in 2030 and 8% in 2037.
2%13%
7%
9%
62%
1%3% 3%
Generation Capacity 2019 (MW)
Bioenergy
Coal
DomesticHydropower
ImportHydropower
Natural gas
Solar
Wind
Other
Share of RE generation according to PDP, 2019, 2025 and 2030
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2019 2025 2030 (PDP) 2030 (15% VRE)
Renew
able
genera
tion (
TW
h)
Domestic hydro Imported hydro Bioenergy
Solar Wind Other renewables
Page 4IEA 2021. All rights reserved.
Technical flexibility
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 5
Scenario overview
• Assessment in both short- (2025) and medium-term (2030)
• Considers different flexibility options and accelerated deployment of renewables
• Includes technical (generation, transmission) and contractual (fuel supply) constraints
Modelling year
2025
2030
Renewable scenarios
PDP 2025: 4% VRE
• 3.6 GW solar PV, 1.7 GW wind
PDP 2030: 6% VRE
• 8 GW solar PV and 1.7 GW wind
Accelerated 2030: 15% VRE
• 18 GW solar PV, 6 GW wind
Flexibility options
Power plant flexibility
• Minimum stable level (MW)
• Fast ramp rate (MW/min)
• Short start-up time (Minutes)
Storage
• Pumped storage hydro (PSH)
• Battery energy storage (BESS)
Gas contract flexibility
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 6
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
30 000
35 000
40 000
45 000
06May
07May
08May
09May
10May
11May
12May
MW
Total load Net load
2019
16Sep
17Sep
18Sep
19Sep
20Sep
21Sep
22Sep
2030 – PDP target (6% VRE)
Net demand profiles for Thailand during peak period
• Greater variability of demand with more VRE. Larger gap between daily minimum and peak demand
• Higher ramping requirement in the evening peak on Sundays and public holidays
09Sep
10Sep
11Sep
12Sep
13Sep
14Sep
15Sep
2030 – ASEAN RE target (15% VRE)
Load and net load profiles during the peak period with different share of VRE, 2019 and 2030
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 7
Flexibility requirements with more solar and wind power
The larger gap between minimum and peak demand leads to greater flexibility requirements and operational
challenges that result in more frequent cycling of conventional power plants.
Gap between daily minimum and peak demand with 15% share of VRE in 2030
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000
12 000
14 000
16 000
18 000
20 000Ja
n
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
MW
2019 (3% VRE)
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
2030 (Accelerated 15% VRE)
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
2030 (PDP 6% VRE target)
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 8
Greater flexibility requirements with more solar and wind generation
Greater variability in net load profiles with more solar PV and wind but it is still manageable. Hydropower and CCGT
provide a large amount of ramping requirements to meet evening peak when solar generation reduces.
Generation output by technology during peak demand periods
0
10
20
30
40
50
09 Sep
00:00
10 Sep
00:00
11 Sep
00:00
12 Sep
00:00
13 Sep
00:00
14 Sep
00:00
15 Sep
00:00
GW
2030 Base (6% VRE)
SolarPV Wind Storage Hydro Bioenergy Gas
Oil Coal Geothermal VRE curtailment Load Net Load
0
10
20
30
40
50
09 Sep
00:00
10 Sep
00:00
11 Sep
00:00
12 Sep
00:00
13 Sep
00:00
14 Sep
00:00
15 Sep
00:00
2030 (15% VRE)
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 9
Flexible power plants provide small operational cost savings
• Key characteristics of flexible
power plants: low minimum stable level; high ramp rates; fast start-up time.
• Flexible power plants can result in operational cost
savings to the system, but very small (<0.1%)
• The main cost saving
components are fuel and start-up costs
• Greater operational cost savings with higher VRE but these savings are still small
Annual operational cost savings from power plant flexibility in 2025 and 2030
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
- 20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
MSL flex 2025 MSL flex_high RE
2025
MSL flex 2030 MSL flex_ASEAN
RE 2030
2025 2030
VR
E p
enetr
ation (%
)
Mill
ion T
HB
Fuel cost Ramp cost Start and shutdown cost VOM cost VRE penetration
PDP
(4% VRE)
Accelerated RE
(6% VRE)
PDP
(6% VRE)
Accelerated RE
(15% VRE)
2025 2030
Lowering minimum stable level leads to greater cost savings compared to higher
ramp rates and faster start-up time.
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 10
Economic impact of flexible power plants
The annualised cost of retrofits power plants to make them more flexible (i.e. lower the minimum stable level)
outweighs the operational cost savings. This is due to constraints in fuel and power purchase contracts.
Operational cost savings relative to plant retrofit costs with 15% VRE, 2030
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Investment Cost savings Increased costs Net cost
Mill
ion T
HB
Fuel cost VOM cost Start and shutdown cost
Retrofit cost Ramp cost Net cost
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 11
Potential role of storage in providing flexibility
• Storage (either PSH or batteries) can make the system flexible by allowing storage of cheap energy during
off-peak periods and generating during peak periods
• Storage reduces VRE curtailment, although curtailment levels are very low (only occurring during New Year holidays where demand is very low)
Generation output during period of minimum net load with and without storage
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
01 Jan
00:00
01 Jan
06:00
01 Jan
12:00
01 Jan
18:00
02 Jan
00:00
02 Jan
06:00
02 Jan
12:00
02 Jan
18:00
GW
BASE ASEAN RE 2030
Geothermal Coal Oil Gas Bioenergy Hydro
Storage Wind SolarPV VREcurtailment Load Net Load
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
01 Jan 00:00 01 Jan 12:00 02 Jan 00:00 02 Jan 12:00
GW
2030 (15% VRE) with battery storage
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 12
Flexible power plants and storage can become complementary options
• With 15% share of VRE in 2030, a combination of flexible power plants and storage can provide further
cost savings, but still modest compared to the overall cost.
- The investment cost plant retrofits and storage still outweigh the operational cost savings.
- The small cost savings due largely to inflexible fuel supply and power purchase contracts
- 50
0
50
100
150
200
250
Flexible powe plants 800 MW BESS Flexible plants and
BESS
Mill
ion T
HB
Fuel cost Ramp cost Start and shutdown cost VOM cost
Operational cost savings from combined flexibility options at 15% VRE share in 2030
Flexible power plants
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 13
The value of technical options depends on fuel supply contracts
• The operational cost savings from a
flexible fuel supply contract are
significantly greater than the savings from
flexible power plants and storage options
- Minimum take-or-pay obligations
• A significant reduction in operational
costs as system operators can access a
large amount of latent flexibility in the
system and dispatch the system in a
more cost-effective manner.
0
200
400
600
800
1 000
1 200
1 400
1 600
1 800
2 000
Flexible power plants and
storage
Flexible contracts
Mill
ion T
HB
Fuel cost Ramp cost Start and shutdown cost VOM cost
Operational cost savings from a flexible fuel supply
contract in 2030
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 14
Summary - Technical Flexibility
• As the share of VRE increases, so the power system’s need for flexibility will grow
- Higher ramping requirements and larger gap between daily minimum and peak demand
- Operational practices and planning should take into consideration these flexibility requirements.
• Thailand’s system has inherent technical flexibility through gas & hydro generation and transmission network. The system can technically integrate up to 15% share of VRE by 2030 (19GW solar, 6GW wind)
• Power plant retrofits, pumped storage hydro and battery storage can provide flexibility services but they
are not a priority in the short- to medium-term under the current context of Thailand’s power sector
- Contractual constraints (fuel contract and PPA) limit mobilising this technical flexibility by preventing the use of otherwise available and cost-optimal resources in the system.
• As Thailand accelerates its clean energy transition with more renewables, flexible power plants, pumped storage and battery storagecan become a complementary and economically viable option
- This is subject to institutional changes to fuel supply and power purchase contracts
- Mobilising available technical flexibility may call for regulatory incentives to facilitate and promote
the use of flexibility options
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 15
The IEA's participation in this ev ent was made possible through the
Clean Energy Transitions in Emerging Economies programme has
receiv ed funding f rom the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research
and innov ation programme under grant agreement No 952363.
Page 16IEA 2021. All rights reserved.
Additional slides
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 17
The role of pumped storage hydro and battery storage
• New PSH can reduce the operational costs (lower start-up costs from thermal plants). The difference in
the cost savings between fixed-speed and variable-speed PSH is almost negligible
• Investing in PSH and BESS is not a priority in the short to medium term given small cost savings
- 40
- 20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
PSH_FS 2030 PSH_VS 2030 400 BESS 2030 800 BESS 2030
Mill
ion T
HB
Fuel cost Ramp cost Start and shutdown cost VOM cost
0
10
20
30
40
PSH_FS
2030
PSH_VS
2030
400 BESS
2030
800 BESS
2030
MW
h
Operational cost savings from storage options at 15% VRE share, 2030
PSH
(Fixed speed)
PSH
(Variable speed)
Battery
(400MW)
Battery
(800MW)
VRE curtailment with different storage options
PSH
(FS)
PSH
(VS)
Battery
(400MW)
Battery
(800MW)
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 18
Potential role of flexible power plants to the system
• Lower minimum generation levels of thermal fleet can allow the system to better accommodate the
daily swing in net demand
Generation by fuel type during period of minimum net demand with 15% VRE
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
01 Jan
00:00
01 Jan
06:00
01 Jan
12:00
01 Jan
18:00
02 Jan
00:00
02 Jan
06:00
02 Jan
12:00
02 Jan
18:00
GW
Base 2030 ASEAN RE
Geothermal Coal Oil Gas Bioenergy Hydro
Storage Wind SolarPV VREcurtailment Load Net Load
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
01 Jan
00:00
01 Jan
06:00
01 Jan
12:00
01 Jan
18:00
02 Jan
00:00
02 Jan
06:00
02 Jan
12:00
02 Jan
18:00
GW
MSL flex_ASEANRE 2030
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 19
Thailand’s power system is capable of handling variable renewables
Thailand’s power system can potentially handle 15% share of VRE in 2030. Very low levels of annual VRE curtailment,
with less than 0.1%. VRE curtailment only occurs during the New Year holidays with extremely low net demand
Generation output by technology during low demand periods
0
10
20
30
40
50
01 Jan 00:00 01 Jan 12:00 02 Jan 00:00 02 Jan 12:00
GW
2030 Base (6% RE)
SolarPV Wind Storage Hydro Bioenergy Gas
Oil Coal Geothermal VRE curtailment Load Net Load
0
10
20
30
40
50
01 Jan 00:00 01 Jan 12:00 02 Jan 00:00 02 Jan 12:00
GW
2030 (15% VRE)
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 20
Potential economic benefits of flexible power plants
• The benefit of lower minimum stable
level on operational costs outweighs those of faster ramp rates and shorter start-up times in the model
• The retrofit costs associated with improving the MSL are also
considerably lower than the costs to improve the start-up time and ramp rates
Operational cost savings relative to retrofit costs, 2025
- 50
0
50
100
150
200
MSL flex 2025 Plant flex 2025
Mill
ion T
HB
Fuel cost Ramp cost
Start and shutdown cost VOM cost
Retrofit cost Net cost
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 21
Storage and renewables can contribute in providing system services
Power systems need to reward and incentivise flexibility and capacity contributions of different technologies in
providing flexibility and stability services, which they are technically capable of
Share of different technologies in providing in energy and system services
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Thermal Hydro Geothermal Variable renewables Other renewables Storage
0% 50% 100%
Stability
Ramping
flexibility
Energy
2019 (4% VRE) 2030 (15% VRE)
Peak
capacity / adequacy
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 22
Greater flexibility requirements with more solar and wind power
The highest upward ramps occur in the holiday seasons. With 15% share of VRE, the highest 3-hour upward ramps
could reach 13.2 GW (~75 MW/minute) or 50% of daily peak demand in 2030
Daily peak 3-hour upward ramping as % of daily peak demand
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
% o
f daily
net peak
dem
and
2030 (6% VRE) 2030 (15% VRE)
IEA 2021. All rights reserved. Page 23
The impact on power system stability depends on the level of VRE
• System inertia decreases with higher share of VRE due to the displacement of synchronous generator
• Inertial can be a key challenge for the system with a high instantaneous VRE infeed (>50%)
• Initial approximation shows reasonable levels of inertia in Thailand’s system (>40GW.s)
• Dynamic studies are required to determine inertial requirement to limit RoCoF to a certain level (e.g.
Texas, Ireland and GB)
020 00040 00060 00080 000
100 000120 000140 000160 000180 000200 000
25Dec
26Dec
27Dec
28Dec
29Dec
30Dec
31Dec
MWs2030 Base (6% VRE)
High to low rangeof inertia
020 00040 00060 00080 000
100 000120 000140 000160 000180 000200 000
25Dec
26Dec
27Dec
28Dec
29Dec
30Dec
31Dec
2030 (15% VRE)
A range of system inertia in Thailand based on high and low estimates