HYDROPOWER AND POWER-TO-GAS STORAGE OPTIONS: THE BRAZILIAN ENERGY SYSTEM CASE Larissa de S.N.S. Barbosa1,2, Javier Farfan Orozco3, Dmitrii Bogdanov3, Pasi Vainikka2, Christian Breyer3 1University of São Paulo, Brazil, 2VTT, Technical Research Finland, 3Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland Neo-Carbon 5th Researchers Seminar February 15-16, 2016 Center of
Agenda Motivation Methodology and Data Results for the Energy System Alternatives Summary 2
Brazil s potential and incentives for RE Enormous potential for RE development Regulatory framework Low carbon initiatives Brazil relies mostly in hydropower for electricity generation Urgent need for the diversification of electricity generation sources Hydro dams can act as virtual batteries 3
Agenda Motivation Methodology and Data Results for the Energy System Alternatives Summary 4
Key Objective Definition of an optimally structured energy system based on 100% RE supply optimal set of technologies, best adapted to the availability of the regions resources, optimal mix of capacities for all technologies and every sub-region of Eurasia, optimal operation modes for every element of the energy system, least cost energy supply for the given constraints. LUT Energy model, key features linear optimization model hourly resolution multi-node approach flexibility and expandability Input data historical weather data for: solar irradiation, wind speed and hydro precipitation available sustainable resources for biomass and geothermal energy synthesized power load data gas and water desalination demand efficiency/ yield characteristics of RE plants efficiency of energy conversion processes capex, opex, lifetime for all energy resources min and max capacity limits for all RE resources nodes and interconnections configuration 5
Methodology Full system Renewable energy sources PV ground-mounted PV single-axis tracking PV rooftop Wind onshore Hydro run-of-river Hydro dam Geothermal energy CSP Waste-to-energy Biogas Biomass Electricity transmission node-internal AC transmission interconnected by HVDC lines Storage options Batteries Pumped hydro storages Adiabatic compressed air storage Thermal energy storage, Power-to-Heat Gas storage based on Power-to-Gas Water electrolysis Methanation CO 2 from air 6 Activities Gasof storage Solar Economy group Christian Breyer christian.breyer@lut.fi Energy Demand Electricity Water Desalination Industrial Gas
Scenarios assumptions Brazil divided into 5 sub-regions Studied Scenarios: Country-wide open trade (sub-regions interconnected by HVDC grids) Integrated (Country-wide open trade with water desalination and industrial gas production) 7 Source: MME, 2015.
8 Scenarios assumptions Financial assumptions (year 2030) Generation costs Technology Capex [ /kw] Opex fix Lifetime Opex var [ /kwh] [ /(kw a)] [a] PV fixed-tilted 550 8 0 35 PV rooftop 813 12 0 35 PV 1-axis 620 9 0 35 CSP 528 11 0 25 Wind onshore 1000 20 0 25 Geothermal 4860 87 0 30 Hydro Run-of-River 2560 115.2 0.005 60 Hydro Dam 1650 66 0.003 60 Water electrolysis 380 13 0.001 30 Methanation 234 5 0 30 CO 2 scrubbing 356 14 0.0013 30 CCGT 775 19 0.002 30 OCGT 475 14 0.011 30 Biomass CHP 2500 175 0.001 30 Waste incinerator 5240 235.8 0.007 20 Biogas CHP 370 14.8 0.001 20 Hot heat burner 100 2 0 30 Heating rod 20 0.4 0.001 30 Biogas digester 680 27.2 0 20 Biogas upgrade 250 20 0 20 Steam Turbine 600 12 0 30 Capex Opex fix Technology [ /(m 3 a)] [ /(m 3 Opex var [ /(m 3 Lifetime )] a)] [a] Water Desalination 2.23 0.097 0 30 Technology Energy/Power Ratio [h] Battery 6 PHS 8 A-CAES 100 TES 8 Gas Storage 80*24 Efficiency [%] Battery 90 PHS 85 TES 90 A-CAES 70 Gas Storage 100 Water Electrolysis 84 CO 2 Scrubbing 78 Methanation 77 CCGT 58 OCGT 43 Geothermal 24 Biomass CHP 40 MCW Incinerator 34 Biogas CHP 40 Biogas upgrade 98 Hot heat burner 95 Heating rod 99 Steam Turbine 42 CSP collector 51
Scenarios assumptions Financial assumptions (year 2030) Storage and transmission costs Technology Capex Lifetime Opex fix [ /(kwh a)] Opex var [ /kwh] [ /kwh] [a] Battery 150 10 0.0002 10 PHS 70 11 0.0002 50 A-CAES 31 0.4 0.0012 40 TES 24 2 0 20 Gas Storage 0.05 0 0 50 Technology Capex [ /(m 3 h)] Opex fix [ /(m 3 Opex var Lifetime h a)] [ /(m 3 h)] [a] Water Storage 65 1 0 50 Technology Capex [ /(m 3 h km)] Opex fix [ /(m 3 h km a)] Opex var [m 3 h km] Lifetime [a] Horizontal pumping 15 2.3 0.0004 30 Vertical pumping 23 2.4 0.0036 30 WACC = 7% Capex Opex fix Lifetime Technology Opex var [ /kw] [ /(kw km)] [ /(kw km a)] [a] Transmission Line 0.612 0.0075 0 50 Technology Capex [ /kw] Opex fix [ /(kw a)] Opex var [ /kw] Lifetime [a] Converter Station 180 1.8 0 50 9
Scenarios assumptions Full load hours Region PV fixed-tilted PV 1-axis Wind FLH FLH FLH Brazil South 1470 1877 2012 Brazil São Paulo 1544 1984 1653 Brazil Southeast 1588 2069 1541 Brazil North 1499 1904 823 Brazil Northeast 1668 2296 3371 FLH of sub-region computed as weighed average of regional sub-areas (about 50 km x 50 km each): 0%-10% best sub-areas of region 0.3 10%-20% best sub-areas of region 0.3 20%-30% best sub-areas of region 0.2 30%-40% best sub-areas of region 0.1 40%-50% best sub-areas of region 0.1 10 HYDROPOWER AND POWER-TO-GAS OPTIONS: THE BRAZILIAN ENERGY SYSTEM CASE Data: based on NASA (Stackhouse P.W., Whitlock C.H., (eds.), 2009. SSE release 6.0) reprocessed by DLR (Stetter D., 2012. Dissertation, Stuttgart)
Scenarios assumptions PV and Wind LCOE (weather year 2005, cost year 2030) 11
Scenarios assumptions Generation profile (area aggregated) PV generation profile Aggregated area profile computed using earlier presented weighed average rule. Wind generation profile Aggregated area profile computed using earlier presented weighed average rule. 12
Scenarios assumptions Load (area aggregated) Synthesized load curves for each region Total load for Brazil (2030) 13 Total load for Brazil (2030) - excluding PV prosumers Larissa Noel ext-larissa.noel@vtt.fi
Agenda Motivation Methodology and Data Results for the Energy System Alternatives Summary 14
Results 2030 Scenario Total LCOE Total ann. cost Total CAPEX RE capacities Generated electricity [ /kwh] [bn ] [bn ] [GW] [TWh] Country-wide 0.061 51 401 290 859 Integrated 0.053 62 508 401 1108 Total LCOE*** prosumer LCOE primary prosumer LCOS prosumer Total ann. Cost prosumer Total CAPEX prosumer RE capacities prosumer Generated electricity prosumer [ /kwh] [ /kwh] [ /kwh] [bn ] [bn ] [GW] [TWh] 0.099 0.050 0.049 15 143 152 236 * additional demand for water desalination is extremely low (<1%) ** LCOS does not include the cost for the industrial gas (LCOG) *** fully included in table above LCOW: 1.4 /m 3 LCOG: 0.071 /kwh,gas 15
Results Components of LCOE country-wide and country-wide desalination gas Country-wide open trade Integrated 16
Results Import / Export (year 2030) Integrated Key insights: Net Importers: São Paulo, Southeast, South Net Exporters: North, Northeast 0% Electricity from storage 10% Electricity trade 2% Electricity excess 17
Results Installed Capacities 2030 Scenario Wind PV Hydro RoR Hydro dams Waste Biogas Biomass Battery PHS PtG CCGT OCGT electrolyzers [GW] [GW] [GW] [GW] [GW] [GW] [GW] [GWh] [GWh] [GW el ] [GW] [GW] Country-wide 8 165 12 85 0.2 8 12 243 1 0.05 7 0.03 Country-wide Des-Gas 16 272 12 86 0.2 4 12 244 1 25.2 0.1 0.03 2030 Scenario PV fixed-tilted PV 1-axis PV prosumers PV total Battery system Battery prosumers Battery total [GW] [GW] [GW] [GW] [GWh] [GWh] [GWh] Country-wide 0.2 13 152 165 0.2 243.3 243.5 Country-wide Des-Gas 0.1 120 152 272 0.3 243.3 243.6 18
Results Regions Electricity Capacities Country-wide open trade Key insights: Country-wide scenario shows high PV selfconsumption capacities 19 Integrated Key insights: Integrated scenario is dominated by PV Brazil-NE utilize its excellent wind resources PV single-axis and wind are the main sources of electricity for water desalination and industrial gas Larissa Noel ext-larissa.noel@vtt.fi
Results Storages 2030 Scenario Countrywide Storage capacities Throughput of storages Full cycles per year Battery PHS A-CAES TES Gas Battery PHS [GWh el ] [GWh el ] A- CAES TES Gas Battery PHS A- CAES TES Gas [GWh el ] [GWh el ] [GWh th ] [TWh el ] [TWh el ] [TWh el ] [TWh el ] [TWh th ] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] 243.5 1.1 23.1 1.4 72233 77 0.2 0.2 1.4 55 316 147 9 0.1 0.7 Integrated 243.6 1.2 32.4 3.7 89315 77 0.2 0.3 3.7 1.4 316 182 11 0.1 0.02 Key insights: Low storage capacities Hydro dams as virtual batteries Stable equatorial weather conditions SNG storage displaced by SNG generation for providing system stability 20
Results Energy flow of the System for Integrated scenario (2030) 21 Larissa Noel ext-larissa.noel@vtt.fi
Agenda Motivation Methodology and Data Results for the Energy System Alternatives Summary 22
LCOE of alternatives are NO alternative Key insights PV-Wind-Gas is the least cost option (in South America with existing hydro) nuclear and coal-ccs is too expensive nuclear and coal-ccs are high risk technologies high value added for PV-Wind due to higher capacities needed 23 HYDROPOWER AND POWER-TO-GAS OPTIONS: THE BRAZILIAN ENERGY SYSTEM CASE Source: Agora Energiewende, 2014. Comparing the Cost of Low-Carbon Technologies: What is the Cheapest option, Berlin
Agenda Motivation Methodology and Data Results for the Energy System Alternatives Summary 24
Summary Current vision for Brazil in the year 2030 Greenpeace, 2015: Energy [R]evolution Scenario for Latin America: High shares of Solar and hydropower Limitations for hydropower expansion according to Winemiller et al., 2016 Available online at:http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6269/128.full Available online at: www.greenpeace.org/international/global/international/publications/climate/2015/energy- Revolution-2015 25
Summary 100% Renewable Energy system is reachable in Brazil by the year 2030! in 2030, hydro continues to dominate in the electricity sector in terms of TWh hydro dams and stable equatorial weather conditions give Brazil the best conditions for 100% RE systems the shift to power in the gas and desalination is driven by higher supply of least cost solar PV and wind sites the integration of other sectors increase the system s flexibility 100% RE system is more cost competitive than a nuclear-fossil option! 26
Thanks for your attention and to my co-authors and the team! The authors gratefully acknowledge the public financing of Tekes, the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation for the Neo-Carbon Energy project under the number 40101/14, and CNPq (Brazil National Council for Scientific and Technological Development)