Expert Elicitation of Future Wind Energy Costs: Onshore Focus
Ryan WiserLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
IEA Wind Technology Collaborative PlatformLyngby, DenmarkNovember 2017
This work was funded by the Wind Energy Technologies Office, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of
Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.
Presentation Overview: Summarize Results of IEA Wind Task 26 Expert Survey on Wind Energy Costs
• Motivation
• Approach
• Results
• Conclusions
2
Full ReportNature Energy Article
http://rdcu.be/khRk https://emp.lbl.gov/iea-wind-expert-survey
Wind Technology Has Come a Long Way
3
Turbines are getting larger… …and lighter (relative to swept rotor area)
NM520.9*
NM520.9*
N-621.3
N-621.3
NM721.5
V821.65
V821.65
V821.65
V821.65
V902.0
V902.0
V902.0
V1002.0
V1002.0
V105*2.0
0
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
66
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Aluminum (left axis)
Fiberglass (left axis)
Copper (left axis)
Steel/Iron (right axis)
Total Turbine (right axis)
kg/m
2(f
or
Alu
min
um
, Fib
erg
lass
, Co
pp
er)
kg/m
2(f
or
Ste
el/
Iro
n a
nd
To
talT
urb
ine
)
Note: Data shown above is for the U.S. market; see: https://energy.gov/eere/wind/downloads/2016-wind-technologies-market-reporthttps://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/66861.pdf
Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) for Onshore Wind Has Steeply Declined Historically, Improving Wind’s Economic Position
4
0
150
300
450
600
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
LCO
E (€
/MW
h)
in r
eal
20
14
Eu
ros
On
sho
re L
CO
E ($
/MW
h)
in r
eal
20
14
US
do
llars
Historical Global LCOE
Historical US LCOE: Good to Excellent Sites
Historical Denmark LCOE
Historical Coastal European LCOELR: 17.8%
LR: 18.6%
LR: 10.5%
LR: 15.5%
????
• Wind energy has grown rapidly, supported by policies and cost reductions
• Long-term contribution and need for ongoing policy depends on future costs
• Uncertainty about future cost reduction, and conditions that might drive greater reduction
The Triple Threat: Natural Gas, Solar, Market Saturation (and Policy Too!)
5
Models Germany
Nat. Gas Solar
Sources: LBNL (U.S. gas prices), IEA (global wind and solar tendering prices), Hirth (model and German value factor estimates)
Improving Wind’s Competitive Position Will Require a Focus on COST and VALUE
Cost
Value
IEA Wind Survey of 163 of the World’s Foremost Wind Experts
What
Expert survey to gain insight on possible magnitude of future wind cost reductions, sources of reductions, and enabling conditions needed to realize continued innovation
Covers onshore, fixed-bottom offshore, and floating offshore wind
Why
Inform policy & planning, R&D, and industry investment & strategy while also improving treatment of wind in energy-sector models
Complement other tools for evaluating cost reduction, including learning curves, engineering assessments, other ways to synthesize expert knowledge
Who
Largest single expert elicitation performed on an energy technology in terms of expert participation: 163 of the world’s foremost wind energy experts
Led by LBNL & NREL, under auspices of IEA Wind task 26, with large number of critical advisers
7
Survey focus was primarily on changes in levelized cost of energy (LCOE) from 2014 to 2020, 2030, and 2050 under low/median/high scenarios, and on build-up of LCOE in 2014 & 2030; LCOE excludes any subsidies and excludes grid interconnection costs outside plant boundary
Diverse Set of 163 Survey Participants (34% response rate)
A smaller group of 22 “leading experts” was pre-identified as uniquely-qualified
8
Expectations for Significant LCOE Reduction for Onshore Wind: Median “Best Guess” Scenario, Median Respondent
9
Lines/markers indicate the median expert responseAll dates are based on the year in which a new wind project is commissioned
-10%-24%
-35%
-60%
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
-10%-24%
-35%
-60%
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Uncertainty Revealed When Reviewing Range of Expert Responses: Median “Best Guess” Scenario
10
Lines/markers indicate the median expert responseShaded areas show the 25th to 75th percentile range of expert responses
-10%
-24%
-35%-20%
-44%
-53%-60%
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Sizable Opportunity Space for LCOE Reductions (& Uncertainty) Illustrated by Low / High Scenario Results
11
Median Estimate
High Estimate 90th percentile
Low Estimate 10th percentile
Smaller “Leading Experts” Group Expects Greater LCOE Reduction than Larger Survey Group: Median & Low Scenarios
12
Leading experts foresee greater LCOE reductions in comparison to larger group minus those leading experts
-13%
-27%
-48%
-26%
-57%-66%
-80%
-60%
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Large Group Median
Leading Expert Median
Large Group Low
Leading Expert Low
How Will We Get There? Factor-Contribution to Median and LowLCOE Scenarios, 2014 to 2030
13
Absolute Change in five factors
from 2014 to 2030
Relative Impact of five factor changes
from 2014 to 2030 on LCOE reduction
Capacity Factor: +17%Project life: +25%
CapEx: -24%OpEx: -25%WACC: -11%
Onshore LowLCOE: -44%
36%
39%
0%
11%
14%CapEx
Capacity Factor
Financing Cost
OpEx
Project Life
CapEx: -12%OpEx: -9%WACC: 0%
Capacity Factor: +10%Project life: +10%
Onshore MedianLCOE: -24%
34%
27%
12%
12%
15%
Continued Wind Turbine Scaling Recognized as the Most Critical Advancement Driver
14
RegionHub Height Specific Power
2016 2030 2016 2030
U.S. 83 115 233 250
Germany 128
115
314
260Denmark 84 316
Sweden 104 298
Expert survey results suggest move to average of ~115 meter towers in Europe and U.S., and ~250 W/m2 specific power; these expectations match closely with the EA Analyses “LIKELY” scenario for Europe in 2030 (125 m hub height, 250 W/m2)
It’s Not Just Turbine Size: Drivers for LCOE Reduction by 2030 Are Diverse
15
Survey asked about expected impact of 28 different technology, market, and other changes on LCOE reductions by 2030; Table shows top 10 responses
Experts Were Generally Somewhat More Optimistic about Future Onshore Wind LCOE Reduction than Other Forecasts
16
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Ch
ange
in L
CO
E re
lati
ve t
o 2
01
4 b
ase
line
Literature DerivedEstimates
Expert Survey:ALL High scenario
Expert Survey:ALL Median scenario
Expert Survey:ALL Low scenario
Conclusions
• Turbine technology and cost has improved dramatically, but competitive threats remain
• Addressing those threats means improving both the cost and value of wind energy
• Significant additional opportunities remain for LCOE reduction, but uncertainties are large
– Other forecasts have, arguably, been conservative but also not adequately reflective of uncertainties
• CapEx improvements is important, but certainly not the only pathway to LCOE reductions
– Capacity factor, financing, OpEx, and project life all play important roles
• Use of CapEx-based learning may explain relative conservatism of other forecasts
• CapEx learning (6-9%) is lower than historical LCOE learning (10-19%) and survey (14-18%)
• Use of CapEx learning alone may result in understatement of cost reduction potential
• Further turbine scaling viewed as a primary continued lever for advancement
– Has both cost reduction and value enhancement implications
17
Contact Information
18
Ryan Wiser Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
email: [email protected]
Website: http://emp.lbl.gov
Mailing list: https://emp.lbl.gov/join-our-mailing-list
For the full report on the survey results and a complete slide deck, see:https://emp.lbl.gov/iea-wind-expert-survey
Article summarizing survey results published in Nature Energy:http://rdcu.be/khRk
