PROJECTED COSTS OF GENERATING ELECTRICITY 2015 Edition Laszlo Varro, Head, Gas Coal & Power Markets, IEA Jaejoo Ha, Head, Division of Nuclear Development, NEA
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity, 2015 Joint study of the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) under the supervision of the Expert Group on Electricity Generating Cost (EGC) with member country responses to cost data survey 8th edition (1981, 1984, 1989, 1992, 1998, 2005, 2010) Focus on levelised lifetime costs for broad set of generation technologies being built between now and 2020 Does not include grid integration and variability issues covered by other IEA and NEA analyses Focuses on maintaining cross-country and time-series comparability 2
Methodology for International Comparisons Calculates the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) Uses discount rates of 3%, 7% and 10% Assumes global markets for standardised electricity generation equipment Allows for country-specific factors: licensing requirements, environmental requirements, and labour and fuel costs Allows for site-specific factors: greenfield versus brownfield developments, infrastructure connections and cooling water, as well as wind and solar patterns 3
Contents of the Electricity Generating Cost Study The report consists of three parts Part I: Methodology and data, including analysis of country-provided cost data Part II: Statistical and sensitivity analysis Part III: Boundary issues Chapter 8: Financing issues Chapter 9: Emerging generating technologies Chapter 10: The system cost and system value of electricity generation Chapter 11: Looking beyond baseload: The future of the Projected Cost of Generating Electricity series 4
Countries included in the study Austria Belgium Brazil China Denmark Finland France Germany Hungary Italy Japan Korea Netherlands New Zealand Portugal Slovak Republic South Africa Spain Switzerland Turkey United States United Kingdom 5
Summary Statistics Number Net capacity (MW) Overnight cost (USD/kWe) Technology of plants Min Mean Median Max Min Mean Median Max Natural gas CCGT 13 350 551 475 900 627 1 021 1 014 1 289 Natural gas OCGT 4 50 274 240 565 500 708 699 933 Coal 14 605 1 131 772 4 693 813 2 080 2 264 3 067 Nuclear 11 535 1 425 1 250 3 300 1 807 4 480 5 026 6 215 Solar PV residential 12 0.003 0.007 0.005 0.02 1 867 2 371 2 307 3 366 Solar PV commercial 14 0.05 0.29 0.14 1 728 1 583 1 696 1 977 Solar PV large 12 1 21 4 200 937 1 562 1 436 2 563 Solar thermal (CSP) 4 50 135 146 200 3 571 5 964 6 072 8 142 Onshore wind 21 2 36 14 200 1 200 1 940 1 841 2 999 Offshore wind 12 2 275 223 833 3 703 4 985 4 998 5 933 Hydro small 12 0.4 3.1 2 10 1 369 5 127 5 281 9 400 Hydro large 16 11 1 093 50 13 050 598 3 492 2 493 8 687 Geothermal 6 6.8 62 27 250 1 493 4 898 5 823 6 625 Biomass and biogas 11 0.2 154 10 900 587 4 447 4 060 8 667 CHP (all types) 19 0.2 5.3 1.1 62 926 4 526 2 926 15 988 6
Overview of results conventional and nuclear technologies Note: Assumes region-specific fuel prices for US, Europe, Asia; 85% load factor; CO 2 price of 30 USD/tonne. 7
Overview of results solar PV and wind 8
CCGTs: gas price dominates leading to different roles by region In North America and the Middle East, low gas prices drive a rapid growth of the share of gas-fired generation. 9
Coal: financing and project costs matter more than carbon pricing at USD30/tCO 2 Access to financing has a major impact on the competitiveness of coal. Low regional investment costs provide robust competitiveness in Asia. 10
Nuclear: an attractive low-carbon technology in the absence of cost overruns and with low financing costs 11
Commercial rooftop solar: low financing cost helps, but bright sunshine and installation costs matter more 12
Onshore wind: good sites with good investment policies are winning 13
Beyond baseload the limitations of LCOE 14
Market-based private investment makes up a small portion of total global investment 15
Conclusions from the Executive Summary (1/2) This eighth edition of Projected Costs of Generating Electricity focuses on the cost of generation for 22 countries, and within these countries for a subset of technologies. Caution must therefore be taken when attempting to derive broad lessons from the analysis. Nevertheless, some conclusions can be drawn. First, the vast majority of the technologies included in this study are low- or zero-carbon sources, suggesting a clear shift in the interest of participating countries away from fossil-based technologies, at least as compared to the 2010 study. Second, while the 2010 study noted a significant increase in the cost of baseload technologies, the data in this report suggest that any such cost inflation has been arrested. This is particularly notable in the case of nuclear technologies, which have costs that are roughly on a par with those reported in the prior study, thus undermining the growing narrative that nuclear costs continue to increase globally. 16
Conclusions from the Executive Summary (2/2) Finally, this report clearly demonstrates that the cost of renewable technologies in particular solar photovoltaic have declined significantly over the past five years, and that these technologies are no longer cost outliers. Increasingly, the plant-level costs of an individual technology are becoming of lesser importance. What is more and more relevant is the ability of a technology to ensure secure and cost-efficient supply at the system level. Despite the general relevance of these conclusions, the cost drivers of the different generating technologies nonetheless remain both market- and technology-specific. As such, there is no single technology that can be said to be the cheapest under all circumstances. As this edition of the study makes clear, market structure, policy environment and resource endowment all continue to play an important role in determining the final levelised cost of any given investment. 17