Energy Storage - A Competitive Way To Achieve High COE Growth

Transcription

1 2009 may 29 Printemps de la recherche EDF R&D Energy storage : a competitive way to achieve a very low carbon generation mix?

2 Reduce fossil energy dependance, CO2 emissions Increase power system flexibilibity To allow a large amount of renewables intermittency and maintain reliability, the power system flexiblity migth be increased, combining both supply and demand flexibilty technological levers. Base-load generation + Semi base and peak load generation ± Energy storage = Demand - Undisptachabled and intermitent renewables To achieve significant CO2 emision reduction targets from the supply side, part of the flexible but carboned fossile fuel plants into generation mix should be reduced. 2 May energy storage efficiently complete a nuclear and renewables mix to fullfill both technical and environnemental issues, at a competitive cost?

3 How can energy storage create value? MW Ex: TAC 1 Report Energy d énergie report Demande In a nutshell : storage capacity can be seen as a conventional semi-base load or peak plant using off-peak electricity as a fuel Ex: Nucléaire heures Additional energy storage capacities would make it possible to: 1. Reduce or delay needs for conventional generation capacity investments 3

4 How can energy storage create value? MW Ex: Nucléaire Ex: TAC 1 2 Report Energy d énergie report Demande In base-load electricity is cheap and low carbon (nuclear and renewables), energy storage might become a competive and low carbon alternative to conventional plants used heures Additional energy storage capacities would make it possible to : 1. Reduce or delay needs for conventional generation capacity investments 2. Reduce use of most expensive and/or carboned energy 4

5 How can energy storage create value? MW 3 Ex: Nucléaire Ex: TAC 1 2 Report Energy d énergie report Demande Smoothing demand and renewables variations would reduce need for flexible conventional plants, started-up just to ramp up and down generation. heures Additional energy storage capacities would make it possible to : 1. Reduce or delay needs for conventional generation capacity investments 2. Reduce use of most expensive and/or carboned energy 3. Reduce additional operational costs (starting costs, dynamic constraints) 5

6 How can energy storage create value? MW 3 Ex: TAC 1 2 Report Energy d énergie report Demande Storage technologies may supply «fast response» capacities required to maintain reliability on the grid up to real-time timescales. Ex: Nucléaire 4 heures Additionnal energy storage capacities would make it possible to : 1. Reduce or delay needs for conventionnal generation capacity investments 2. Reduce use of most expensive and/or carboned energy 3. Reduce additionnal operationnal costs (start-up costs, dynamic constraints) 4. Supply spinning reserve and grid stability control 6

7 Main factors that would drive storage value Storage could become more and more cost-effective : As fuel prices increase, «fuel substitution» storage benefits would increased As CO2 regulation gets more constrainning, CO2 prices would increase, reinforcing competitiveness of storage as a low carbon generation solution As intermittent renewables penetration goes on, the need (and therfore value) of flexible levers as storage would increase. Others factors that will impact storage value : Economical and technical progress expected in storage technologies Demand shape may significantly evolve : PAC, VHR, EV Regulation context Interconnexions framework 7

8 Overview of an propective R&D study : may storage become a competitive way to acheive a very low carbon generation mix? Disruptive propective R&D scenario of the French perimeter : High fuel-fossile pricing (Oil : 100 /bl) A CO2 significant concern (80 /ton CO2 emission prices) Major evolutions of electricity consumption : 0 fuel building, PAC, EV, VHR Refers to «2050 demand scenario - Printemps de la recherche 2008» A large penetration of wind (80 TWh/year) and solar (10TWh) power, completing current H20 capacities (70TWh) : 25% of energy consumption A conventional generation mix optmised according to competitiveness of different technologies. Annual marginality duration : nuclear (EPR) 6000h/year, gas (CCGT) 2000 h/year, fuel turbine (TAC) Question targeted : Can storage become a competitive alternative to fossile flexible conventionnal plants (CCGT and TAC)? What type of storage (ratio energy/power) would, then, be the most adapted to power system need? Daily, Weekly, Seasonaly storage? 8

9 Impact of «1 GW of storage» on conventional plants management : investment and operational costs 1000 Impact sur les investissements : Capacité évitée sur le parc thermique pour 1 GW de stockage inséré Conventionnal investments reduction (MW) Impact sur l'exploitation : Production évitée sur le parc Fosile-fuel thermique energy pour 1 GW reduction de stockage (GWh.year) inséré 2800 Investissement évité (MW) GW of storage that can stored 50 GWh (50h) can avoid 800 MW of capacity investment Capacité du réservoir (GWh) Capacity of storage (energy) : GWh Constante de temps des cycle de remplissage/vidange (h) Energie reportée (GWh par an) Production thermique évitée GW of storage that can stored 50 GWh (50h) can avoid to use fossil plant 1200h a year Capacité du réservoir (GWh) Constante Capacity de temps of storage des cycle de (energy) remplissage/vidange : GWh (h) Additional storage capacity coupled with nuclear and renewables base-load capacity has to be compared to CCGT invesments, used betwen 1000h and 2000h a year. 9

10 Economic valuation analysis k / MW of storage / year of operation Gains ou coûts sur 1 année ( par kw de stockage inséré et par an) Comparaison des gains et des coûts 1 GW Economic de stockage valuation apparaît-il analysis rentable? 1GW daily or weekly storage capacities Gains : Part benefits Combustibles would cover storage investment Gains : Part Investissements costs Coût fixe Capacité du réservoir (GWh) Constante Capacity de temps of storage des cycle (energy) de remplissage/vidange : GWh (h) Storage fix costs Investment costs of seasonal storage capacity are too expensive benefits : reduce conventional investment costs benefits : reduce conventional operational costs (fuel) In our scenario (high fossil and CO2 prices, high penetration of renewables), additionnal daily or weekly storage capacity would become a cost-effective alternative to CCGT conventional invesments. 10

11 Economic valuation analysis : sensitiveness Insertion «Non marginal non marginale» storage de stockage insertion (10GW) 1GW storage insertion : Variante : Pétrole 50 /baril ; CO2 : 40 /t Oil : 50 /bl; CO2 : 40 /ton 700 Comparaison des gains et des coûts 10 GW de stockage apparaît-il rentable? 700 Comparaison des gains et des coûts 1 GW de stockage apparaît-il rentable? Gains ou coûts sur 1 année ( par kw de stockage inséré et par an) Gains : Part Combustibles Gains : Part Investissements Coût fixe Gains ou coûts sur 1 année ( par kw de stockage inséré et par an) Gains : Part Combustibles Gains : Part Investissements Coût fixe Capacité du réservoir (GWh) Constante de temps des cycle de remplissage/vidange (h) Capacité du réservoir (GWh) Constante de temps des cycle de remplissage/vidange (h) As storage capacity would be develop, energy report opportunities would be fullfilled and limited, which would reduced new storage investments rentability. With more conservative hypothesis, CCGT will still be more competitive than energy storage. 11

12 Conclusion Context evolution might increase storage competitiveness As fuel prices increase, «fuel substution» storage benefits would increase As CO2 regulation gets more contraining, CO2 prices would increase, reinforcing competitiveness of storage as a low carbon generation solution As intermittent renewables penetration goes on, the need (and therefore value) of flexible levers such as storage would increase. To achieve a very low carbon generation mix into our disruptive scenario Energy storage capacities might become a cost-effective alternative to conventional flexible fossile-fuel plants (CCGT) Such storage capacity would be optimally designed to make it possible to report energy at a daily or weekly timescales, up to 2000h a year. Coupled to low carbon technologies (nuclear and renewables), storage has to be seen as an low carbon plant, which would contribute to significantly reduce CO2 emissions from the supply side. Whatever fossiles fuel and CO2 prices are, investment costs of storage are too important to make such an invesment competitive to extreme-peak needs (annual duration 100 h). 12