1 / 32

Scandinavia – an ideal region for analysis

weldon
Download Presentation

Scandinavia – an ideal region for analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Transition to Sustainable Energy Services in Northern Europe (TRANSES) A joint research program NTNU / SINTEF / MIT / Chalmers2004 - 2008Mr. Stephen ConnorsLaboratory for Energy and the EnvironmentMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, MADr. Bjorn H. BakkenEnergy SystemsSINTEF Energy ResearchTrondheim, Norwayemail: bjorn.h.bakken@sintef.no

  2. Scandinavia – an ideal region for analysis • Limited geographical scope • Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark • Limited connections to neighbouring countries • Transparency (data availability) • All major energy resources/technologies present • Hydro, nuclear, coal, oil, gas, biomass, wind, … • Hydro dominated supply (stochastic resource availablity) • Electricity dependent demand • Open markets and competition • Common liberalized power market (NordPool) • Emerging European gas market • Emerging “green certificate” markets • New renewables have to compete in current markets • Challenging region for experimenting with new planning models and methodologies!

  3. Energy products of Norway2001

  4. Total energy consumption in Norway1970 - 2001 TWh/year 250 200 150 Natural and other gasses 100 Oil products District heating Electricity Electricity +2.6% p.a. Wood and waste 50 Coal and coke 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

  5. 129.7 39.8 66.0 65.6 21.4 NORWAY Conv. thermal 10.6 Nuclear Hydro 0.8 FINLAND Wind 11.2 0.6 32.3 SWEDEN 4.9 DENMARK Electricity Generation in Nordel 2002 (TWh)

  6. NOU 1998:11Electricity demand scenarios • 2007 • 2002 • 2003

  7. 125 100 75 USD/MWh 50 Range of wind power cost 25 Nordel Elspot prices 1995 - 2004 Weekly average (USD/MWh)

  8. Annual increase in generation and consumption 1960 - 2000 Average increase in generation TWh/year 3.5 Average increase in consumption 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000

  9. Generation capacity vs. consumption1976 - 2001 Average generation 2002 (119 TWh/year)

  10. TRANSES Objectives • Enable governments, industries and communities to meet their future energy service needs in a cost-effective and sustainable manner in a liberalized energy market environment • 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

  11. TRANSES Sponsors • Project idea created by Norsk Hydro, The Industry’s Innovation Fund at NTNU and Dept. of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU • Total budget (2004-08): USD 4,300,000 • Current sponsors: • Norsk Hydro • Norske Shell • Statoil • Statkraft (Norw. State Power Company) • Statnett (Norw. Grid Company) • Statsbygg (Directorate of Public Construction and Property) • Enova (Agency for Energy efficiency and Renewable energy) • The Research Council of Norway(?) • ...

  12. Chalmers NTNU MIT Scientific partners of TRANSES • Dept. of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU • Dept. of Electrical Power Engineering, NTNU • Dept. of Architectural Design, History and Technology, NTNU • SINTEF Energy Research • The Laboratory For Energy and the Environment (LFEE) at MIT • Dept. of Energy Technology, Chalmers • SINTEF Materials and chemistry • Institute for Energy Technology (IFE) • BI (Norwegian School of Management) (?) • Industrial Ecology Programme (IndEcol), NTNU (?)

  13. TRANSES PhD Studies • A number of coordinated PhD studies and possibly PostDoc postitions will be initiated at the different participating institutions. Suggested themes are: • Efficient energy use / Building technology (NTNU + MIT) • The end users role and behaviour (NTNU + MIT) • Hydrogen as future energy carrier (NTNU + IFE) • MCDM / Decision support under uncertainty (NTNU + MIT) • Emissions trading and green certificates (NTNU + Chalmers) • CO2 capture technology (NTNU + Chalmers) • Life Cycle Assessment (NTNU + MIT)

  14. Assumptions (attributes, strategies, uncertainties etc.) Presentation of results (trade-off plots etc.) Stakeholder interaction Supply scenarios (capacities, locations, technologies etc.) Energy system simulator(s) MCDM (extraction of results, trade-off analysis) Economy/ Investm. Demand scenarios (sectors, carriers, services etc.) ”Analytical engine” Data input (resources, technologies, costs, efficiencies, demand etc.) Policy framework (emission control, taxes, incentives, etc.) ”Typical” scenario study TRANSES dialog process TRANSES Analytical framework

  15. WorkPackage orginization WP.03 Stakeholder Workshops WP.08 Energy Scenarios WP.09 MIT Scenarios WP.01 Project Management WP.02 Networking WP.04 Building Sector WP.05 MARKAL WP.06 Hydrogen WP.07 Generation Infrastr. WP.10 Evaluation WP.11 PhD PostDoc

  16. Transition to Sustainable Energy Services in Northern Europe (TRANSES) A joint research program NTNU / SINTEF / MIT / Chalmers2004 - 2008Mr. Stephen ConnorsLaboratory for Energy and the EnvironmentMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, MADr. Bjorn H. BakkenEnergy SystemsSINTEF Energy ResearchTrondheim, Norwayemail: bjorn.h.bakken@sintef.no

  17. TRANSESProject plan - Overview

  18. TRANSES – current activities (first year) • Identify adequate analytical tools • Preliminary studies with EMPS model and MIT Trade-off • New or existing models and methodologies • Input data and assumptions • Current system, new resources, technological alternatives, macroeconomic trends etc. • Establishing efficient ways of cooperation between participating institutions • Core activities in Trondheim, Norway • Employing PhD students • Establish stakeholder group • Initial stakeholder meetings • Extend the funding for the project

  19. Multi-Attribute Trade-Off Analysis (1) • TRANSES: Not just another scenario study! • Scenario-Based Multi-Attribute Trade-off Analysis • Scenario planning approach developed to facilitate dialogue and learning among multi-stakeholder audiences • Graphical presentation of trade-offs • Large Number of Technological Options • Multi-Option Strategies • Large Number of Uncertainties • Multiple Futures (fuel prices, demand etc.) • Large Number of Goal States/Attributes • Multiple Stakeholders, Conflicting Goals • MIT has extensive experience in applying Multi-Attribute Trade-Off Analysis • New England, Switzerland, Shandong (China), ….

  20. Multi-Attribute Trade-Off Analysis (2) Source: SR Connors, MIT

  21. Multi-Attribute Trade-Off Analysis (3) • Features • Helps facilitate stakeholder dialogues • Identifies “Good” and “Bad” strategies • Identifies competing/complementary sets of options • Recognizes different “Deployment Schedules” of different options • Identifies “Robust/Flexible” versus “Optimal” strategies • Supported by • Simulation and optimisation tools • E.g. EMPS model, Markal, Prosym, others • “Analytical package” still to be determined • Stakeholder workshops • Emphasize stakeholder interaction and dialogue • Challenges • Market aspect • Decentralised planning, multiple decision makers • Consistent representation of investments • Market driven, high risk

  22. Demand uncertainties • Driving forces for growth in electricity demand • Substitution of oil to electricity • Increased comfort (kWh/m2) • Increased activities (m2 and NOK) • Domestic changes (m2 per capita) • Uncertainties in demand • Development of district heating • Development of natural gas • Development of hydrogen • etc.

  23. Residential electricity consumption in Norway (%)

  24. Peak demand records1990 - 2002 Available generation capacity in winter (23 – 24.5 GW)

  25. Exisiting demand scenarios • SINTEF 1996 • Energy +1% p.a. • Peak power +1.2% p.a. • NOU 1998:11 • ‘Green Brainpower’ +0.8% p.a. • ‘Climate Road’ +0.2-0.7% p.a. • ‘Steady Course’ +1.3% p.a. • ‘Long Journey Up’ +1.5% p.a. • Nordel area: +8% from 2000 to 2010

  26. Supply options (1) • Hydro power • Politically and environmentally controversial • International electricity exchange • European markets? • Emissions trading and certificate markets? • Conventional gas power • Politically and environmentally controversial • Gas power with CO2 removal • High investments and reduced efficiency • Direct use of gas • Expensive infrastructure • Environmentally controversial

  27. Supply options (2) • Wind power • High potential, but not without problems • District heating with renewable energy sources • Expensive infrastructure • Biomass and waste • Currently only heat generation • Waste is paid fuel! • Hydrogen • Promising technology • Expensive • Not an energy source!!

  28. Demand side options (1) • Local energy studies • Demand forecasts • Resource mapping • Supply and infrastructure • Local generation • Utilize electricity and heat • Heat pumps • Alternative for heating, but increases dependence on electricity • Passive (thermal) solar systems • End-user flexibility / Demand side bidding

  29. Demand side options (2) • Power intensive industries 30-35 TWh • Selling power “back” to the market • Increased efficiency (kWh/NOK) • Transport sector • Main source of CO2 in Norway • Building locations • New building codes and techniques • Less effect than expected • Slow turnover of buildings

  30. Climate issues • Global, regional (Europe) and national level • Kyoto protocol • GHG emissions related to 1990 level • Joint international implementation possible • EU directives • Pre-Kyoto GHG permit trading system limited to large thermal power plants • National directives and incentives • Pre-Kyoto GHG permit trading system under development • Swedish green certificate market established May 2003 • Possible development to common Nordic market

  31. Range of wind power cost Nordel Elspot prices 1995 - 2003 Weekly average (EURO/MWh) 900.00 800.00 700.00 1995 600.00 1996 1998 500.00 NOK/MWh 2000 400.00 2002 2003 300.00 2004 200.00 100.00 0.00 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 Week

More Related