Norway—A Report on TRANSES/GLUE joint research projects · 2014-09-30 · SINTEF Energiforskning...

SINTEF Energiforskning AS

NorwayNorway——A Report on A Report on TRANSES/GLUETRANSES/GLUEjoint joint researchresearch projectsprojects

Dr. Bjorn H. BakkenEnergy SystemsSINTEF Energy ResearchTrondheim, Norway

email: [email protected]://www.energy.sintef.no

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.energy.sintef.no/


Trondheim (1300)

Oslo (450)The Foundation for Scientific and The Foundation for Scientific and Industrial Research at the Norwegian Industrial Research at the Norwegian Institute of TechnologyInstitute of Technology

Established 1950 by The Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH)

Turnover 2005: $ 300 mill.

Employees: 1.800

Established 1950 by The Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH)

Turnover 2005: $ 300 mill.

Employees: 1.800


The Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim

20,000 full-time students935 Scientific employees149 PostDoc731 PhD Students

Partnership with NTNUPartnership with NTNU

Joint use of laboratories and

instruments

SINTEF employees teach at NTNU

NTNU personnel working on

SINTEF projects


SINTEF Energy ResearchSINTEF Energy Research

Employees (2005): 179Turnover (2005): $ 35 mill.


Sources of fundingSources of funding


Energy system analysisEnergy system analysisat SINTEF Energy Research (~60 pers.)at SINTEF Energy Research (~60 pers.)

ms

sec.

min

.da

y/w

eek

year

Time scale

Design & Operation of power electronics

Power system stability /Integration of RES-E

Congestion /Reserve management

Production planning /Resource management

Investments /System planning(MARKAL) / eTransport

EMPS / SHOP / USELOAD

PSS/E / MatLab / SPF

PSS/E / MatLab /SIMPOW

EMTDC/PSCAD


TRANSES TRANSES ––Transition to Sustainable Transition to Sustainable Energy Services in Northern Energy Services in Northern Europe Europe

A joint research program NTNU / SINTEF / MIT / Chalmers2004 – 2007


TRANSES ObjectivesTRANSES Objectives

Outline and evaluate likely technology portfolios, deployment paths and policy options to meet future energy service needs in a cost-effective and sustainable manner in a liberalized energy market environment

Create an international arena for dissemination of results, dialogue and exchange of ideas in order to gain a swifter transition to sustainable energy services

Provide a toolbox of computational tools, methods and databases for analysis and decision support under uncertainty

PhD education and long-term scientific cooperation between the institutions involved


TRANSES SponsorsTRANSES Sponsors

Project idea created by Hydro, The Industry’s Innovation Fund at NTNU and Dept. of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU

Project management by SINTEF Energy Research

Current budget (2004-2007): USD 2.1 million

Current sponsors:HydroStatoilNorske ShellStatkraft (Norwegian State Power Company)Statnett (Norwegian Grid Company)Statsbygg (Directorate of Public Construction and Property)Enova (Agency for Energy efficiency and Renewable energy)NVE (Norwegian Water and Energy agency)...


Scientific partners of TRANSESScientific partners of TRANSES

Dept. of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNUDept. of Electrical Power Engineering, NTNUDept. of Architectural Design, History and Technology, NTNUSINTEF Energy Research The Laboratory For Energy and the Environment (LFEE) at MIT Institute for Energy Technology (IFE) Programme for Sustainable Development (Prosus), UiODept. of Energy Technology, ChalmersSINTEF Materials and chemistry....

MITNTNU


ElectricityElectricity GenerationGeneration in Nordel 2002 (TWh)in Nordel 2002 (TWh)

DENMARK

SWEDEN

FINLAND

NORWAY

Conv. thermalNuclearHydroWind

65.6 66.0

11.20.6

0.8

129.7

39.8

21.410.6

32.3

4.9


Total energy Total energy consumptionconsumption in Norwayin Norway1970 1970 -- 20012001

50

100

150

200

250

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

Natural and other gassesOil productsDistrict heatingElectricityWood and wasteCoal and coke

Electricity +2.6% p.a.

TWh/year


Annual increase in generation and Annual increase in generation and consumption 1960 consumption 1960 -- 20002000

1990-20001980-19901970-19801960-1970

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

TWh/year

Average increasein generationAverage increasein generation

Average increasein consumptionAverage increasein consumption


GenerationGeneration capacitycapacity vs. vs. consumptionconsumption1976 1976 -- 20012001

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001

TWh/

year

Consumption

Average generation 2002 (119 TWh/year)


WP.09Generation

Infrastr.

TRANSES TRANSES WorkPackageWorkPackage organization (2003)organization (2003)

WP.06BuildingSector

WP.08Energy

Demand

WP.07MARKAL

WP.10Hydrogen

WP.11PhD

PostDoc

WP.04Energy

Scenarios

WP.05MIT

Trade-off

WP.03StakeholderWorkshops

WP.03StakeholderWorkshops

WP.

01Pr

ojec

t Man

agem

ent

WP.

02N

etw

orki

ng


21SINTEF Energy Research

Example of spot price scenarios

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1 21 41 61 81 101

Week number

Mar

ket p

rice(

NO

K/M

Wh)

EMPS:EMPS: MMultiulti--Area Area PPower ower Market Market SSimulatorimulator


Reservoir utilization in EMPS ModelReservoir utilization in EMPS Model

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

34 38 42 46 50 54 58 62 66 70 74 78 82 86 90 94 98 102

Week

GW

h

Minimum25 percentileMedian75 percentileMaximum

25SINTEF Energiforskning AS

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

1990

1989

1983

1943

1976

1967

1968

1954

1935

1962

1965

1975

1934

1972

1937

1987

1946

1933

1955

1931

1971

1986

1980

1951

1947

1948

1936

1977

1941

1970

Hydro year

Am

ount

(TW

h/ye

ar)

Eksp Finland 0.1 TWh/årEksport Danmark 0.3 TWh/årEksport Sverige 5.2 TWh/årImport Finland 0.2 TWh/årImport Danmark 4.3 TWh/årImport Sverige 14.8 TWh/år

Electricity import to Norway (TWh/year)Electricity import to Norway (TWh/year)


Storable inflow

Reservoir

Non-storableinflow

Power plant

Hydro production

Transmission capacityto other subsystems

Wind powerproduction

Thermal pro-duction units

Firm load Pricedependent

load

EMPS: Sub system EMPS: Sub system modelmodel


2004: Outlining main scenarios2004: Outlining main scenarios


Generation Capacity Generation Capacity –– GreenBusGreenBusNordPoolNordPool areaarea

GreBus

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Ann

ual G

ener

atio

n (T

Wh)

Hydro Nuc Fossil BioWind CHP+ Imp


Power prices (excl. investments)Power prices (excl. investments)NorwayNorway

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

ore/

kWh

BusUsa GreBus Seq RedC CeH2 Beyo


COCO22 emissionsemissionsNord Pool AreaNord Pool Area

Annual emissions CO2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

MTo

nn

BusUsa GreBus Seq RedC CeH2 Beyo


DEM

AN

DD

EMA

ND

DEM

AN

D

IND

USTR

YH

OU

SEHO

LD/SER

V.TR

AN

SPOR

T

HEA

T GR

ID

ELEC. G

RID

POWER PLANT

CHP

HEAT PLANT

HYDRO/WIND/SOLAR/WAVE

OIL

BIOMASS

OIL -REFINERY

NATURAL GAS

OIL/GASBIOMASS

COAL/COKECOAL/COKE

2005: MARKAL 2005: MARKAL simulationssimulations


Structure of the Nordic model Structure of the Nordic model (Electricity trade in Nordic countries 2003, source: NORDEL)(Electricity trade in Nordic countries 2003, source: NORDEL)

4 national models (el and heat) linked by electricity grid

Fossil fuels common for the Nordic market (equal price)

RES specific for each country

Major electricity and heat production technologies harmonised

Model years: 1995 – 2035


MarkalMarkal: Electricity production scenarios: Electricity production scenarios

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

TWh

OTHER REN

BIOMASS

WIND

NATURE GAS

CO2 CAP NGS

COAL

CO2 CAP COAL

FOSSILE OTHER

NUCLEAR

HYDRO


2006: Multiple scenario strategies (MIT/IFE) 2006: Multiple scenario strategies (MIT/IFE) From 6 to 1152 scenariosFrom 6 to 1152 scenarios

2 x 3 x 2 x 2 = 24 unique FuturesEnergy Demand Growth (2)Fuel Prices (3)CO2 Taxes (2)European Electricity Prices (2)

12 x 2 x 2 = 48 unique StrategiesElectricity Supply (12)

Renewables, Hydro, CCS, Nuclear etcNon Transportation Heat & Efficiency (2)

Biomass, End-Use EfficiencyAlternate Transportation Fuels (2)

Conventional, Hybrids & Biofuels

Total no. of scenarios: 24 x 48 = 1152


Total costs Total costs vsvs emissions (1152 total)emissions (1152 total)

Costs vs Emissions

600000

650000

700000

750000

800000

850000

900000

950000

4000

000

5000

000

6000

000

7000

000

8000

000

9000

000

1000

0000

1100

0000

CO2 [1000 tonnes]

Mill

EUR

Obj func


Wind power costs Wind power costs vsvs emissions emissions

Costs vs Emissions

600000

650000

700000

750000

800000

850000

900000

950000

4000

000

5000

000

6000

000

7000

000

8000

000

9000

000

1000

0000

1100

0000

CO2 [1000 tonnes]

Mill

EUR

Ref windMax wind


CCS costs vs. emissionsCCS costs vs. emissions

Costs vs Emissions

600000

650000

700000

750000

800000

850000

900000

950000

4000

000

5000

000

6000

000

7000

000

8000

000

9000

000

1000

0000

1100

0000

CO2 [1000 tonnes]

Mill

EUR

Costs without CCSCosts w CCS


TransportTransport

Costs vs Emissions

600000

650000

700000

750000

800000

850000

900000

950000

4000

00050

00000

6000

00070

00000

8000

00090

00000

1000

0000

1100

0000

CO2 [1000 tonnes]

Mill

EU

R

Ref TransportBio and Hybrids


Total costs Total costs vsvs emissionsemissions

Costs vs Emissions

600000

650000

700000

750000

800000

850000

900000

950000

4000

000

5000

000

6000

000

7000

000

8000

000

9000

000

1000

0000

1100

0000

CO2 [1000 tonnes]

Mill

EU

R

Strat base + futures varStrat max + futures varStrat var + futures baseStrat var + future maxStrat var + future low


Demand Demand

Costs vs Emissions

600000

650000

700000

750000

800000

850000

900000

950000

4000

000

5000

000

6000

000

7000

000

8000

000

9000

000

1000

0000

1100

0000

CO2 [1000 tonnes]

Mill

EU

R

Ref demandHigh demandReduced demand


2008 2008 -->>(GLUE) / (GLUE) / LinkSLinkSLinking Global and Linking Global and LocalLocalEnergyEnergy StrategiesStrategies

Joint research program DoE – OEDUMCP – NTNUJGCRI/Battelle - SINTEF


Industry&

Centralizedenergy supply

Natural gasHydrogen

Natural gasHydrogen

ElectricityElectricity

District heating/cooling

District heating/cooling

Waste heat

Waste heat

SolarSolar

PVPV

WindWind

HydroHydro

GasGasOilOil

BiomassBiomass

Buildings& Transport

BiomassBiomass

BiomassBiomass

WindWind

CHPCHP

HPHP

HPHP

BiomassBiomass

DSM/DRDSM/DR

UnderstandingUnderstandingregional regional impactsimpactsofof climateclimate targetstargets


Main objectivesMain objectives

Find optimal investment strategies in local energy systems from a global perspective but utilizing regional advantages

Analyze and suggest policy recommendations and instrumentssupporting a sustainable development of regional energy systems based on regional differences in technology, economy and resources

Analyze how a given region can contribute to specific emission and climatic targets (e.g. stabilization of atmospheric concentration of CO2 at 550 ppm) in terms of technology

Analyze how projected climate changes will influence the future development of a regional energy system with increasing share of renewables, both in the demand and supply sectors

The project will deliver 4 PhD candidates and 10-15 international publications


Improve existing studies byImprove existing studies by

including stochastic elements in both supply (wind, hydro, solar etc) and demand (temperature etc)considering integrated markets of electricity, gas and emissions quotasconsidering uncertainty and riskgeographic distribution of investments, resources and marketsincluding physical infrastructure of electricity grids, gas networks etcanalysing and giving recommendations with respect to regional governance and policy instrumentshandling different perspectives of business actors vs. governments; corporate vs. socio-economic?

Ref. to IEA Energy Outlook 2006, Stern Report etc.


EMPS model of EuropeEMPS model of Europe


Average pricesAverage prices(Weekend / Average / Workday)


ConsumptionGeneration

Consumption and Consumption and generationgeneration

Scale:

French generation: 523 TWh


Energy flow in Europe


Weekly breakdown and/or adjusted• Energy demand• Capacities• Technologies• Market clearing prices• Emissions/Penalties

Main feedback loopsMain feedback loops

GovernancePolicy instruments

(ProSus, UMCP)

GovernancePolicy instruments

(ProSus, UMCP)

’EMPS’ modelMarkets &

Technologies

’EMPS’ modelMarkets &

Technologies

Aggregated annual data

(MWh)

Decision supportInfrastruct. design

(El / gas / H2)(NTNU)

Decision supportInfrastruct. design

(El / gas / H2)(NTNU)

Weekly ave. (MWh)vs.

duration curves (MW)

Glo

bal /

Clim

ate

leve

lR

egio

nal /

Te

chno

logy

leve

l

Atmospheric Composition Climate and Sea Level

Human Activities Ecosystems

Atmospheric Chemistry

Ocean Carbon

Cycle

Climate

Ocean· Temperature

· Sea level

Energy

System

Other Human

Systems

Agriculture,

Livestock &

Forestry

Coastal

System

Terrestrial

Carbon

Cycle

Crops &

Forestry

Unmanaged

Ecosystem

& Animals

Hydrology

SGM/Minicam


SGM/MinicamSGM/Minicam

’EMPS’ type model• operational• static


For each 5-year timestep:• Investments• Energy demand (MWh)• Capacities/Technologies (MWh)• Climate trajectories (?)

• temperature?• precipitation?

• Quota markets (?)• Emissions / Emission constraints?

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045

• 70 climatic years• precipitation• temperatures

• Marginal production cost• Inter-area transmission

capacities• Generation capacities (MW)

TopTop--downdown data transferdata transfer




• 70 climatic years• precipitation• temperatures

• Marginal production cost• Inter-area transmission

capacities• Generation capacities (MW)

For each 5-year time-step, and quantity portfolio; a stochastic outcome per sub-area per week:• Energy market clearing price

• including curtailment cost• Operation profiles of technologies• Energy demand• Emissions / penalties• 52-104 weeks

Decision support/Investments

(NTNU)

Decision support/Investments

(NTNU)

MW capacity vs.

MWh generation

Regional Regional analysisanalysis

MW

time


Bridging Bridging ’’engineeringengineering’’and and ’’policy implementationpolicy implementation

IMPACT MODEL¨Classic” engineering models

EMPS / SGM

IMPACT MODEL¨Classic” engineering models

EMPS / SGM

PREFERENCE MODELAdvanced decision support methods

PREFERENCE MODELAdvanced decision support methods

GOVERNANCE MODEL¨Classic” social

science methods

GOVERNANCE MODEL¨Classic” social

science methods

Recommendations for local/regional technology

options and policy instruments

Recommendations for local/regional technology

options and policy instruments


NorwayNorway——A Report on A Report on TRANSES/TRANSES/LinkSLinkSjoint joint researchresearch projectsprojects

Dr. Bjorn H. BakkenEnergy SystemsSINTEF Energy ResearchTrondheim, Norway

email: [email protected]://www.energy.sintef.no

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.energy.sintef.no/

Date post:	21-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Norway—A Report on TRANSES/GLUE joint research projects · 2014-09-30 · SINTEF Energiforskning...

Documents