The Economics of Marine Renewable Energy
Peter McGregorFraser of Allander Institute, Department of Economics,
University of Strathclyde
Second Forum on Economics of Marine Renewable EnergyHMRC, UCC,Cork, 13th June 2011
Our research
• Macroeconomic impact analysis– Contributing to our understanding of the relationship between
developments in the marine industry and the wider economy
• Calculating the costs and benefits of marine energy provision – Identifying the ‘cost competitiveness’ of marine energy– Calculating the cost & benefits of marine energy to society
• Portfolio theory applications for marine energy– What contributions can wave and tidal energy make to the
broader portfolio of electricity generation in the UK?
I. Macroeconomic impact analysis
• Marine energy is attracting significant investment in the UK (and worldwide)
- Increasing number of commercial installations now operating/due to be operationalised in UK waters
• Associated domestic expenditures could provide an important demand stimulus for the local, regional and national economies:– R&D, manufacturing, installation, O&M
• UK has a ‘first mover’ advantage in the world tidal energy industry.– Potential for the development of an export market for UK tidal
devices and technologies?
Estimating the economic impact of expenditures on tidal energy installations
• Many uncertainties involved in estimating economic (esp economy-wide) benefits– Unknowns: cost of devices; deployment timepath; subsidies
• But important for appropriate policy-making
– Important as national and regional governments look to justify assistance for renewable energy projects
• We estimate the UK economy-wide benefit from a demand stimulus to the tidal energy industry– 25-sector CGE model of the UK, UKENVI– Simulate expenditure over 2008-2025 across sectors– Incorporate estimates of both domestic and export demand
CGE models
• Initially tightly based on Walrasian GE theory: complete specification of demand, supply and equilibrium– But now often accommodate market imperfections
• Widely employed to analyse energy-economy-environment issues– Link to micro theory – optimising households and firms– Multisectoral – so capture the wide variation in sectoral
impacts– System-wide: accommodate economic interdependencies– Can explore a huge number of actual and hypothetical
policy instruments/packages and other ‘disturbances’
Results: GDP
We find that the demand stimulus could potentially deliver a significant UK economic benefit…
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Ab
solu
te d
em
and
sti
mu
lus
and
GD
P im
pac
t (£
m)
Year
Absolute GDP impact
Total demand stimulus
…but the increase in GDP relative to base falls short of the annual aggregate stimulus
Results: employment
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Abs
olut
e ch
ange
in a
ggre
gate
em
ploy
men
t
Results: sectoral employment
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
Ab
solu
te c
han
ge in
em
plo
ymen
tin
yea
r 20
25
(i) The levelised cost of wave and tidal energy
• The present value of the total cost of building & operating an energy plant over its economic life
• Conventional approach to comparing the cost of energy technologies; widely used in discussions of energy policy
• Include ‘private’ costs, i.e. costs to the developer (construction, fuel, O&M, decommissioning)
• Calculations exclude revenues; social costs and benefits; system factors
Point estimates of levelised costs of electricity
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Wa
ve
Tid
al
On
sho
re w
ind
Off
sho
re w
ind
PW
R N
ucl
ea
r
CC
GT
Pu
lve
rise
d f
ue
l
IGC
C w
ith C
CS
Re
tro
fit c
oa
l
Pu
lve
rsie
d f
ue
l with
CC
S
IGC
C C
oa
l
CC
GT
with
CC
S
Electricity generation technology
Le
ve
lis
ed
co
st
of
ge
ne
rati
on
(£
/MW
h)
Carbon Capture and Storage
Waste fund and decommissiong
Fuel delivery
Pre-development costs
Variable O&M
Fixed O&M
Fuel
Construction
The impact of policy support mechanisms on cost competitiveness
• In the UK, “banded” ROCs to provide technology-differentiated support.
- Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) – intended to act as a subsidy to renewables
- Onshore wind receives 1 ROC/MWh; wave, tidal, offshore wind receive 2 Rocs/MWh
- In Scotland, proposed additional ROCs proposed for wave (to 5 Rocs in total) and tidal (3 ROCs in total)
• We include these in levelised cost calculations as negative private costs
Levelised costs with ‘banded’ ROCs
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Le
ve
lis
ed
co
st
of
ge
ne
rati
on
(£
/MW
h)
Electricity Generation Technology
DTI - Low ROC price
DTI - High ROC price
SG - Low ROC price
SG - High ROC price
Levelised cost
(ii) The social costs and benefits of wave and tidal energy provision
• Social optimality drives public policy - government is concerned with social costs and benefits (not just levelised costs)
• Different technologies have different ‘externalities’ attached to them (the social cost of carbon emissions; visual disamenity)
• Cost benefit analysis – measure whether the benefits of the technology exceeds the costs, from the viewpoint of society
• Use WTP & WTA theory: Are those who would gain from the project willing to pay more, in aggregate, than those who would be worse off than the project?
CBA in practice...
Assume marine energy project of 50MW
Output displaces either gas or coal or onshore wind energy (i.e. gas/coal/onshore wind counterfactuals)
20 year lifetime, after 2 year construction phase (22 year project lifetime)
Future costs and benefits discounted at HM Treasury discount rate for project (3.5%) in central case
For net benefit to society, “disamenity” values matter
Provisional results (1)
£ MILLIONSTIDAL
DISPLACES GAS
TIDAL DISPLACES
COAL
TIDAL DISPLACES
WINDCONSTRUCTION 67.61 53.04 35.38O&M 13.38 10.96 -9.95EXTRA BALANCING COSTS TO GRID - - -CO2 RELEASED DURING MANUFACTURE 0.85 1.93 -VISUAL DISAMENITY - - -74.08NON-USE DISAMENITY -203.71 -203.71 -TOTAL COSTS -121.87 -137.78 -48.65AVOIDED FUEL COSTS 45.47 15.17 -AVOIDED GDP LOSSES 6.06 6.06 -AVOIDED CO2 DURING OPERATION 19.40 43.91 -TOTAL BENEFITS 70.93 65.14 -
192.80 202.92 48.65 NET PROJECT BENEFIT
COST
SBE
NEF
ITS
Analysis of alternative electricity portfolios
• Use of standalone measures of levelised costs of technologies can be misleading- Ignores financial risk- Can understate the value of renewables projects relative to
fossil alternatives
• Each generating technology is one component within a wider electricity portfolio
• What contribution can each technology make to the portfolio?
• Compare technologies not on basis of standalone levelised cost, but on cost contribution relative to risk contribution to a portfolio of generating technologies - Where risk is a measure of cost variability
• “Portfolio effect”: (typically) renewable technologies can help to decrease portfolio risk for a given level of portfolio cost- Largely due to their zero correlation with fuel prices
Sensitivity: greater marine share
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%
Risk: standard deviation
Co
st:
p/k
Wh
Double Wave and Tidal limits Central
Top Related