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

laf@statkraft.com

Statkraft Energy AS

Lilleakerveien 6 P.O.Box 200 Lilleaker

NO-0216 Oslo, Norway

www.statkraft.com