from long term global energy system to national energy ... · iaea from long‐term global energy...
TRANSCRIPT
IAEA
From long‐term global energy system research to national energy analyses and
planning
Dr. H‐Holger RognerInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Austria
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
IAEA
Modelling energy system transformation at IIASA Origin dates back to 1974
Spatial focus: Global – world segregated into 11 regions
Temporal focus: Long‐term: 50 to 100 years plus
Objectives: Analysis of long‐term demand & supply strategies under different
technology & resource futures Development of robust technology strategies and related investment
portfolios to meet a range of policy objectives, and Appreciation of uncertainty
Several models – demand & economic development, supply, resources, impacts
Primus inter pares: MESSAGE (Model of Energy Supply Systems And their General Environmental Impact)
IAEA
NAM PAO
WEU
EEU
FSU
MEA
AFR
LAM
SAS
PAS
CPA
1 NAM North America 2 LAM Latin America & The Caribbean3 WEU Western Europe 4 EEU Central & Eastern Europe
5 FSU Former Soviet Union6 MEA Middle East & North Africa7 AFR Sub-Saharan Africa8 CPA Centrally Planned Asia & China
9 SAS South Asia10 PAS Other Pacific Asia 11 PAO Pacific OECD
OECD
REFS
ALM
ASIA
Geographical resolution – the “Regions”
IAEA
Air pollution emission coefficients & abatement costs
IIASA Integrated Assessment Framework
G4MSpatially explicit
forest management
modelGLOBIOMIntegrated agricultural, bioenergy and forestry model
MESSAGESystems engineering model (all GHGs, all energy sectors, water)
Consistency of land‐cover changes (spatially explicit maps of agricultural, urban,
and forest land)
Carbon and biomass price
Agricultural and forest bioenergy potentials,land‐use emissions and mitigation
potential
MAGICCSimple climate
model
GAINSGHG and air pollution
mitigation model
emissions
Demandresponse
Iteration
MACROAggregated
macro‐economic model
Energy service prices
Socio‐economic drivers
EPICAgricultural crop model
AccessFuel choice model
for cooking
Transport Module Modal split,
cost & value of time
Scenario Storyline• demographic change• economic development• technological change• policies
Socio‐economic drivers
IAEA
Characterization of MESSAGE
Linear and mixed integer programming (LP & MIP) model Continuous variables for linear processes Integer or binary variables for unit commitment and decisions
Equations to reflect operational constraints Technical Legal Environmental
Optimization target (objective) minimize system cost maximize profit minimize import dependence etc.
IAEA
An Energy “Chain”
Oil extractionCoal import
Power plant Refinery
End user
PRIMARY SECONDARY FINAL USEFUL
Conversion ConversionTransmission & Distribution
OilNatural gasCoalHydroSolarUranium
Diesel Kerosene Gas ElectricityHeatCoal
Low temp heatHigh temp heatColdLightMechanical energy
T&D Network
Diesel Kerosene Gas ElectricityHeatCoal
IAEA
MESSAGE: Model for Energy Supply System Alternatives and their General Environmental Impacts
OUTPUT
MESSAGE
INPUT
Energy systemstructure (including vintage of plant and equipment)
Base year energyflows and prices
Energy demandprojections (e.g. MAED)
Technology and resource options & their techno‐economic performance profiles
Technical andpolicy constraints
Primary and final energy mix Electricity generating mix Capacity expansion/retirement Emissions & waste streams Resource use (energy, water, land,
etc.) Trade & import dependence Investment requirements Prices
TWh
IAEA
Schematic illustration of GEA pathways
End‐use transformation
Supp
lytran
sformation
GEA Supply GEA EfficiencyGEA Mix
Supply flexibility
Source: Riahi et al, 2011
IAEA
GEA‐Supply
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Prim
aryen
ergy, EJ p
er year
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Rapid up‐scaling of all options, including renewables and nuclear
CCS needed as transitional technology& BioCCS for negative emissions
Modest efficiency focus
Supply‐side Focus(= high demand‐side flexibility)
Source: Adapted from Riahi et al, 2011
Coal wCCSCoal woCCSBiomass wCCSBiomass woCCS
NuclearGas wCCSGas woCCS
Oil
EfficiencyGeothermalSolarWind
IAEA
2500GEA‐Efficiency
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Prim
ary en
ergy, EJ p
er year
0
500
1000
1500
2000Efficiency & intensity improvements, process and behavioral change
Fossil CCS (optional bridging technology)
Bio‐CCS & negative emissions (long‐term)
Phase‐out of oil in the medium term(necessary)
Coal wCCSCoal woCCSBiomass wCCSBiomass woCCS
NuclearGas wCCSGas woCCS
Oil
EfficiencyGeothermalSolarWind
Efficiency & Demand‐side Focus(= high flexibility for supply)
~50% renewables by 2050
No expansion of nuclear (choice)
Source: Adapted from Riahi et al, 2011
IAEA
Zooming from global to national
National (sustainable) energy development objectives Long‐term regional/global averages provide indications at best National specificity
• National energy security • Indigenous resources• Detailed representation of the existing infrastructure (vintage,
performance, reliability)• Variability of demand• Menu of technology options• Investment, finance, market structure and subsidies• Affordability & access• Demand side vs supply side considerations• Local generating costs
MESSAGE adapted to meet national and subnational requirements
IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
MESSAGE adopted in 1998 (replacement of WASP used since the early 1970s)
IAEA provides energy planning services to its MS Training of MS experts in the use of MESSAGE Model distribution (to governmental institutions) E‐Learning, E‐Assistance & help desk Note: Data & assumptions are the responsibility of MS
Objective: Capacity building in energy analysis & comprehensive energy planning
Decision support system at the national level Essential for a national decision to introduce nuclear
power
IAEA
Load curves
Variability of demand: electricity, heat, natural gas Intermittency of renewables Transmission
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000
Hours
GW
IAEA
Example: Oil exporting country in the region
Transformation of the national energy system Associated gas on the decline Subsidized energy & water not sustainable Galloping electricity & water demands
No compromise on energy security Use current & future oil revenues to finance
transition Explore different futures and technology options Understanding future uncertainties Communication tool (transparency)
IAEA
Model representation of load curves
0
1 000
2 000
3 000
4 000
5 000
6 000
7 000
8 000
9 000
10 000
0
1 00 0
2 00 0
3 00 0
4 00 0
5 00 0
6 00 0
7 00 0
8 00 0
9 00 0
10 000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
MW
DayActual average daily profile Time steps & load pattern modelled
IAEA
Investments Fuel costsWaste/decom
Reliability Secutiy Environment Material Acceptance
Wind 1,200 0 15 low intermittend
high very good very high high
Coal (imported fuel)
1,800 4 80base load / intermediate
very high
low high low ‐ high
IGCC (oil) 1,900 0.5 ‐ 12 25base load / intermediate
very high low medium high
Nuclear 4,800 0.7 1,800 base load high very good high low
Gas combined cycle turbine
1,350 1 ‐ 5 40base load / intermediate
medium medium low high
Gas turbine 400 1 ‐ 6 12 peak low medium low high
Concentrated solar
4,200 0 50 low intermittend
high good high medium
End‐use efficiency 225 0 1 ‐
very high excellent low mixed
Comparative assessment of options
How to interpret the results?
How to combine these criteria?
How
to com
pare th
ese alternatives?
IAEA
Generating capacity – Business‐as‐usual
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
30 000
35 000
40 000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
MW
Wind
CSP
SolarPV
Nuclear
CCGT‐MSF
IGCC‐MSF
Steam‐MSF
Steam
IGCC
CCGT
OCGT
GT_plan
CC_plan
Pre‐2006
IAEA
Generating capacity – Transformation (TR)
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
30 000
35 000
40 000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
MW
Wind
CSP
SolarPV
Nuclear
CCGT‐MSF
IGCC‐MSF
Steam‐MSF
Steam
IGCC
CCGT
OCGT
GT_plan
CC_plan
Pre‐2006
IAEA
Difference in capacities between BAU and TR
‐15 000
‐10 000
‐5 000
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
2015 2020 2025 2030
MW
Wind
CSP
SolarPV
Nuclear
CWE_CCGT
CWE_IGCC
CWE_Steam
Steam
IGCC
CCGT
OCGT
GT_plan
CC_plan
Pre‐2006
IAEA
Difference in generation between BAU and TR
‐ 90
‐ 70
‐ 50
‐ 30
‐ 10
10
30
50
70
90
2015 2020 2025 2030
TWh
Imports
Wind
CSP
SolarPV
CCGT‐MSF
IGCC‐MSF
Steam‐MSF
Steam
IGCC
CCGT
OCGT
Nuclear
GT_plan
CC_plan
Pre 2006
IAEA
Fresh water supply in TR
‐ 200
0
200
400
600
800
1 000
1 200
1 400
1 600
1 800
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Million m
3
MSF_CCGT
MSF_IGCC
MSF_Steam
Stor_out
Stor_in
RO
Pre 2006
IAEA
Sensitivities & solution space for nuclear power
Netback ($/bbl)
77
5
3
9
10
70
40
2030
5060
Discount rate%/year
46
810
1214
1234
65
IAEA
Distribution of MESSAGE to IAEA member States
Model transferred to 102 countries by the end of 2015
IAEA
MESSAGE has been the tool for
Numerous national electrification and energy plans
Energy policy formulation at various jurisdictional levels
Utility capacity expansions and investment decisions
Accounting of material (energy and non‐energy) flows
Communication of energy related GHG emissions to UNFCCC