Date post: | 05-Apr-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | sieghild-stoyer |
View: | 103 times |
Download: | 1 times |
The German Wind Resource and Norwegian Hydro – Interesting PossibilitiesLars Audun Fodstad, SVP, Statkraft Energy AS,
BMU5th July 2010, Berlin
3200 EMPLOYEES..
90%
264 POWER AND DISTRICT HEATING PLANTS
35%OF NORWAY’S POWER GENERATION
RENEWABLEENERGY
...IN MORE THAN
20 COUNTRIES
WITHIN RENEWABLES IN EUROPENo. 1
FROM STATKRAFT’S KEY AREAS
side 3
European Flexible Generationand Market Operations
Develop and optimize hydro portfolio in Norway and Sweden, including small hydro in Norway
Evaluate European growth opportunities for flexible hydropower, including France
Build and upgrade gasfired power plants in core markets (Continent/UK)
THE NORTH SEA AREA WIND POWER DEVELOPMENT – 2020 SCENARIO
Offshore: 40 000
MW
Total onshore/offshore:100 000
MW
Creating a Wind Belt onshore/offshore from UK via France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Southern Sweden
side 4
Høy konsentrasjon av vindkrafti vårt nærområde
GRID AND GRID INTEGRATION - MAIN CHALLENGES
Infrastructure DevelopmentConnecting VarRES to
Load centres Flexibility optionsStorage facilities
Enabling market development See entsoe’s TYNDP
Handling the wind production’s variability
Wind power developing from a minor to a main part of the production portfolio with dispatch priority
Creates new need for flexibility in the other parts of the electricity system
side 5
TRANSMISSION CHALLENGES
Bringing 40 000 MW onshoreHVAC can and will be used for relatively small capacities over shorter distancesHVDC has to be used for larger capacities and longer distances –the new VSC technology is able to operate without a grid backup
Bringing 100 000 MW to the load centres
Upgrading AC overhead linesHVDC cable connections?
Difficult, but it has to be doneside 6
Source: entsoe TYNDP
THE WIND PRODUCTION’S VARIABILITY
Page 7
FLEXIBILITY CHALLENGES Ref. TradeWind 2020
Variations in wind power production
Europe looked upon as one bus barMax. 54 % of installed capacityMin. 9 % of Installed capacityDifference 45 % of installed capacity or 95 GWLess than four days between top and bottom
Regional example: The Netherlands as one bus barMax. 93 % of installed capacityMin. 0 % of installed capacityRises from 7 to 90 % of installed capacity (6 GW in 2030)
in six hours (time resolution for wind data)
side 8
FLEXIBILITY OPTIONS
ProductionNuclearFossil fired, gas and coalReservoir based hydro
StoragePumped StorageCAESBatteries/EV
DSM/Smart Grids
Connecting and further develop the Norwegian hydro resource to deliver a significant part of the needed flexibility?
side 9
Page 10
EUROPEAN HYDRO FLEXIBILITY – SLIDE I
Reservoir based hydro power in the production mixIn general used for storage and peak power productionIn Norway developed for storage and base load
Key factors for hydro as storage and peak powerAnnual Energy Production, inflow TWhReservoir Capacity TWhInstalled Capacity MW
Hydro Energy Production, Storage Capacity and Rated Power (1998)
UCTE 86 TWh 57 TWh 49 GW Norway 112,6 TWh 84,1 TWh 27,3 GW NORDEL, ex.NO 76,2 TWh 38,6 TWh 19,1 GW
Page 11
EUROPEAN HYDRO FLEXIBILITY – SLIDE II
Ratio between Annual Production/Installed Capacity, i.e. the number of hours necessary to deliver Annual Production
UCTE 1755 h Norway 4125 hNORDEL, ex.NO 3980 h
Ratio between Reservoir Capacity/Installed Capacity, i.e. the number of hours necessary to empty the reservoirs without any inflow
UCTE 1160 hNorway 3080 hNORDEL, ex.NO 2020 h
NORWEGIAN HYDRO FLEXIBILITY OPTIONS – SLIDE I
HydroInstalled capacity 28 GW
Can contribute a lot to balancing, regulation, peak and back-up production except for some hours at winter peak loadExample: The existing 1 GW connection to Denmark
Expansion possibilities in Southern Norway 7 - 8 GWConverting from base load to peak load production by installing additional generators in the existing power stations
Pumped storageInstalled capacity 1 GW
Mainly built for seasonal pumping
Expansion possibilities in Southern Norway 15 - 20 GWStorage capacity for continuous pumping 120 hoursUsing only existing reservoirs both upstream and downstream
side 12
NORWEGIAN HYDRO FLEXIBILITY OPTIONS – SLIDE II
Norway has alone close to 50 % of the hydro reservoir capacity in Europe
To take advantage of this huge flexibility resource it is necessary to connect it to nodes in the wind belt
side 13
POWER FLOW
From the wind belt to NorwayHigh wind generationInsufficient transmission capacity to the load centresLow demandLow, zero or negative prices
From Norway via the wind belt to the load centres on the continent and UK
Low wind generationThe transmission capacity to the load centres are idleHigh demandHigh prices
side 14
ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE - BENEFIT
The only additional infrastructure needed is the connection between the wind belt and the Norwegian hydro resources
Benefit from interaction between wind and hydro resources
Taking care of excess wind power production otherwise lostDelivering balancing, reserve, peak and back-up powerReducing the need for fossil fired reserves both running and ready to startReducing emissions
side 15
16
EXCHANGE WITH NORWAY – EXAMPLE I
Page 17
Import of excess wind power
10000 MW in 1500 hours = 15 TWh
Storage in Norwegian reservoirs
5000 MW reduced ordinary hydro production = 7,5 TWh
5000 MW pumping, total efficiency factor 0,7 = 5,25 TWh
Export of ”Peak Power”
10000 MW in 1275 hours = 12,75 TWh
Alternative fossil fired ”Peak Power”
Result: 12,75 TWh saved RES and reduced emissions
EXCHANGE WITH NORWAY – EXAMPLE II
Page 18
Import of excess wind power
10000 MW in 1000 hours = 10 TWh
Storage in Norwegian reservoirs
5000 MW reduced ordinary hydro production = 5,0 TWh
5000 MW pumping, total efficiency factor 0,7 = 3,5 TWh
Export of ”Peak Power”
10000 MW in 850 hours = 8,5 TWh
Alternative fossil fired ”Peak Power”
Result: 8,5 TWh saved RES and reduced emissions
Page 19
EXISTING NORWEGIAN PUMPED STORAGE
Hydro Developments with Pumped StorageSira-Kvina, Duge power station, seasonal storage:
2x100 MW reversible unitsHead 215 mReservoir capacity 1 400 Million m3Tunnel length approx. 13 kmInaugurated 1978
Ulla-Førre, Saurdal power station, seasonal storage, see also following slides:
4x160 MW, two of them reversible unitsHead 450 mReservoir capacity 3 105 Million m3Inaugurated
Page 20
SOME POSSIBLE PROJECTS
Expansion Project Tonstad power station
Further Expansion Possibilities in Sira-Kvina and several other Norwegian Hydro Power Systems located in South Norway
• 7 power stations - 16 units
• Total capacity 1760 MW
• Annual production ~ 6 TWh
• Reservoir capacity 5,6 TWh
SIRA-KVINA MAIN DATA
Page 22
RESERVOIRS – POWER STATIONS
All Connections Reservoirs - Power Plants are Tunnels
All Power Plants are in Caverns
All outlets into reservoir or sea
Total Head Developed 930/900 m to the sea
Sira-Kvinas anlegg
WATERWAY
Page 24
EXPANSION PROJECT TONSTAD - SLIDE I
Head 430 m
Tunnel length 11 km
Existing installation4x160 MW1x320 MW
Expansion2x480 MW reversible units
EXPANSION PROJECT TONSTAD - SLIDE II
Page 26
SIRA-KVINA FURTHER EXPANSION
Tonstad power station
Additional capacity 960 MW reversible
Total capacity then 2880 MW (1920 MW reversible)
Solhom power station
Existing capacity 200 MW
Additional capacity 1000 MW reversible
EXCHANGE WITH NORWAY - GERMAN REPORT
Page 27
100% erneuerbare Stromversorgung bis 2050: klimaverträglich, sicher, bezahlbar
Vorläufige Fassung vom 5. Mai 2010
Page 28
“Zusammenfassung und Empfehlungen” I
Die Ergebnisse der Szenarien für 2050 im Überblick
– Das Potenzial an regenerativen Energiequellen reichtaus, um den Strombedarf in Deutschland und Europavollständig zu decken.
– Dabei kann Versorgungssicherheit gewährleistetwerden: Zu jeder Stunde des Jahres wird dieNachfrage gedeckt. Voraussetzung ist der Aufbauder entsprechenden Erzeugungskapazitäten und dieSchaffung von Möglichkeiten für den Ausgleichzeitlich schwankender Einspeisung von Strom durchentsprechende Speicherkapazitäten.
Page 29
“Zusammenfassung und Empfehlungen” II
Die Ergebnisse der Szenarien für 2050 im Überblick
– Eine vollständig nationale Selbstversorgung ist zwardarstellbar, aber keineswegs empfehlenswert.
– Die Kosten der Stromversorgung können durch einenregionalen Verbund mit Dänemark und Norwegenoder einen größeren europäisch-nordafrikanischenVerbund im Vergleich zur nationalen Selbstversorgungerheblich gesenkt werden.
Page 30
“Zusammenfassung und Empfehlungen” III
Die Ergebnisse der Szenarien für 2050 im Überblick
– Eine anspruchsvolle Energiespar- undEffizienzpolitik senkt die ökonomischen undökologischen Kosten der Versorgung miterneuerbaren Energien.
Page 31
“Zusammenfassung und Empfehlungen” IV
Die Ergebnisse der Szenarien für 2050 im Überblick
– Der derzeitige Bestand an konventionellen Kraftwerkenist als „Brücke“ hin zu einer regenerativenStromversorgung ausreichend. Bei einerdurchschnittlichen betrieblichen Laufzeit von35 Jahren kann der Übergang schrittweise gestaltetwerden. Hierfür muss der jährliche Zubau anregenerativen Erzeugungskapazitäten bis etwa 2020in moderatem Umfang weiter gesteigert werden.
Page 32
The German Wind Resource and Norwegian Hydro
A PERFECT MATCH?
Page 33
THANK YOU!
Lars Audun Fodstad
Direct +47 24 06 74 30
Mobile +47 913 01 785
Statkraft Energy AS
Lilleakerveien 6 P.O.Box 200 Lilleaker
NO-0216 Oslo, Norway
www.statkraft.com