Energy storage in the UK and Korea: Innovation, Investment and Co-operation Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea Peter Taylor & Lloyd Davies, University of Leeds
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea Contents 1. Introduction... 3. Flexibility... 3 3. The role of energy storage... 7. Energy storage innovation... 9 Professor Peter Taylor holds a Chair in Sustainable Energy Systems at the Centre for Integrated Energy Research, University of Leeds. His research and teaching are at the energy technology / policy interface and he has particular interests in long-term, low-carbon energy technology transitions and the innovation and other policies needed to achieve them. From 7 to 11, Peter was Head of the Energy Technology Policy Division at the International Energy Agency in Paris. This Appendix supplements the report Energy storage in the UK and Korea: Innovation, Investment and Co-operation published by the Centre for Low Carbon Futures in July 1. The report considers how energy storage can play a role in the energy systems of the UK and Korea, to identify opportunities for research and industrial collaboration between the countries. The report and other Appendices are available online at www.lowcarbonfutures.org/energy-storage.
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea 1. Introduction Structured interviews were undertaken with 1 stakeholders in Korea to get their perspectives on the potential future role of energy storage in the energy system and the opportunities and barriers to deploying storage technologies. The stakeholders comprised representatives of the following types of organisations (numbers of interviewees in brackets): government research institutes (5), technology developers (3), academics () and electricity companies (). The interviews were preceded by a brief explanation of the purpose of the overall project and the definition of energy system flexibility, which was described as its ability to cope with events that may cause imbalance between supply and demand while maintaining system reliability in a cost-effective manner. Each of the questions is presented below, together with an analysis of the answers.. Flexibility Q1. Assuming Korea maintains its current energy policy goals, do you believe that the need for flexibility in the energy system over the period to 3 will: Increase substantially Increase slightly Stay about the same Decrease slightly Decrease substantially Please explain the thinking behind your selection. 1 1 Increase substantially Increase slightly Stay about the same Decrease slightly Decrease substantially The vast majority of stakeholders believed that the need for additional system flexibility would increase substantially over the period to 3, with the remainder replying that the need would increase slightly. A range of longer-term developments were highlighted as drivers for this need for 3
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea increased flexibility and these are explored further in question two. However, in the short-term many stakeholders noted the problems that Korea is facing in meeting peak electricity demand in both winter and summer. The reasons for these difficulties include surging consumption combined with nuclear plant being taken off-line due to safety issues and protests against new transmission lines delaying a number of new power-stations from starting-up. The stakeholders indicated that there was therefore a need for a range of options that could help increase system flexibility to manage these demand peaks. Q. Rate the following as to their importance as a driver for increased energy system flexibility over the period to 3: Increase in variable renewables (e.g. on- and off-shore wind and solar PV) Increase in electric vehicles Increase in electric heating (e.g. heat pumps) Increase in CHP and district heating Increase in space cooling Rate as: Very important, important, minor importance, not relevant Please explain the thinking behind your ratings. Are there other factors not listed above that you would rate as either very important or important? 1 1 Variable renewables Electric vehicles Electric heating Combined heat and power Space cooling Very important Important Minor importance Not relevant Don't know Almost all stakeholders indicated that an increase in variable renewables would be a very important driver for increased system flexibility, although the one dissenting view noted that the targets for renewable energy in Korea were modest compared to those seen in Europe. An increase in electric vehicles was also thought to be a very important or important driver by over half of respondents. However, other stakeholders expected only a slow uptake of electric vehicles noting that Korean car manufacturers were yet to embrace the technology to the same extent as a number of Japanese
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea companies. Views on the importance of electric heating and cooling as a driver for increased system flexibility were mixed, with some stakeholders believing that the current low-cost of electricity could stimulate increased uptake of these technologies, while others thought that in the longer term electricity prices would rise and consequently electric heating and cooling were unlikely to add significantly to peak demand problems. Most stakeholders believed that combined heat and power was likely to only be of minor importance in terms of its impact on the need for future energy system flexibility. Q3. At what point in the future do you think that the current energy system will prove to be insufficiently flexible to cope with the developments identified in Question? Before 15 15 - - 5 5-3 After 3 Not applicable (as Q1 did not reveal a belief that the need for system flexibility will increase) Please explain the thinking behind your answer. 5 3 1 Before 15 15- -5 5-3 After 3 Don't know The majority of stakeholders thought that the need for increased system flexibility would occur before, with some believing that the recent problems in meeting peak demand demonstrated that system was already not flexible enough. Other stakeholders saw these immediate issues as having been caused by a set of unusual circumstances that would soon be resolved and that the developments identified in Question would only require increased system flexibility after. 5
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea Q. What role would you expect the following options to play by 3 in providing flexibility to the energy system given the importance you assigned to the different drivers in Question. Storage Demand response Interconnection Back-up flexible fossil capacity Rate each as Very significant, significant, minor, none and ask to quantify the role in each case if possible (e.g. Storage very significant, 1-15 GW) 1 1 Storage Demand response Interconnection Back-up fossil Very significant Significant Minor None All stakeholders saw energy storage as being very significant or significant in providing increased system flexibility by 3, with the vast majority of respondents also identified demand response as playing either a very significant or significant role. These stakeholders frequently cited these options as being part of the Korean Government s plans for the roll-out of smart grids in the country. Views on interconnection were generally much less positive with many stakeholders pointing out that the country is currently not connected to its neighbours (North Korea (land border), with China and Japan also nearby) and that the political situation meant that this was unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. A few respondents were more positive and highlighted that a connection to Japan could be a possibility. Most stakeholders thought that back-up fossil plant would play only a minor role by 3 generally citing its high costs and reliance on imported fuels (e.g. oil products or gas) as disadvantages.
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea 3. The role of energy storage Q5. Thinking about the deployment of energy storage to increase system flexibility, what are three most important developments that could increase its role by 3? What are the three most important developments that could decrease its role. When asked about the most important developments that would increase the role of energy storage by 3, stakeholders most frequently identified cost reductions and improved performance of the technologies, an increase in the share of nuclear, wind and or photovoltaic generation, further government support and an increase in electricity prices. Factors that were thought most likely to decrease the role of storage were mostly related to developments in competing flexibility options, including lower gas prices (e.g. from the world-wide exploitation of shale gas) leading to improved economics of back-up generation and a significant role for demand response. Q. In which areas is energy storage the best-placed option to provide flexibility to the energy system, now, and in 1 years? Seconds e.g. Renewable generation introduces harmonics and affects power supply quality. Minutes e.g. Rapid ramping to respond to changing supply from wind generation affecting power frequency characteristics. Hours e.g. Daily peak for electricity is greater to meet demand for heat. Hours days: Variability of wind generation needs backup supply. Months e.g. Increased use of electricity for heat leads to strong seasonal demand profile Answer each as very likely, quite likely, possible, quite unlikely, very unlikely 1 9 7 5 3 1 Seconds Minutes Hours Hours-days Months Very likely Quite likely Possible Quite unlikely Very unlikely 7
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea The majority of stakeholders believed it was very likely that energy storage would be the best-placed option to provide flexibility over short durations of the order of seconds and minutes and quite likely to provide flexibility over periods of hours. These responses seemed largely driven by the belief that lithium battery technologies would be the dominant form of storage and that this technology is best able to provide flexibility over these short durations. Those stakeholders that identified storage as being quite likely the best option for periods of hours to days often noted that such storage would be provided by other technologies such as redox flow batteries or compressed air energy storage. Storage over periods of months was thought quite or very unlikely by the majority of stakeholders. Q7. How likely is additional energy storage to be situated on the following parts of the system? Generation level Transmission level Distribution level Customer level Don t know Rank as very likely, quite likely, possible, quite unlikely, very unlikely 7 5 3 1 Generation Transmission Distribution Customer Very likely Quite likely Possible Quite unlikely The vast majority of stakeholders believed that storage located on the transmission or distribution systems was either very or quite likely, noting that most of the activity to date has been in these areas. Generation level storage was also thought very or quite likely by more than half of respondents or though others were less optimistic believing that it was better to have storage closer to the location of demand. Two-thirds of stakeholders identified customer level storage as being very or quite likely (e.g. for back-up generation), although others were less sure due to a combination of high cost and regulatory barriers.
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea. Energy storage innovation Q. How important are each of the following barriers to the deployment of energy storage over the next 5-1 years? Technology cost and performance Uncertainty in future value Regulatory framework Market structure Lack of business models Please rate as Very important, important, minor importance, not a barrier 1 1 Technology cost & performance Uncertainty in future value Regulatory framework Market structure Lack of business models Very important Important Minor importance Not a barrier All stakeholders saw the current regulatory framework as being either a very important or important barrier to the deployment of energy storage. Most stakeholders also replied that technology cost and performance was a very important or important barrier, with over half of respondents believing the same about the market structure. In contrast, more than half of stakeholders saw uncertainty in the future value of energy storage as being only a minor barrier and the views on a lack of business models were very mixed with responses ranging from this being a very important barrier to not a barrier. 9
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea Q9. What do you see as the most important priorities for innovations in energy storage technologies? The most important priorities for innovation were almost unanimously focused on the needs of lithium-ion batteries and were identified as reductions in the cost of the technology and improvements in its performance (notably increased energy density and power output, higher reliability and longer cycle life and increased efficiency). Improved safety and environmental performance were also highlighted, together with improved power controls and software. Q1. The government should provide (further) explicit support for the development and/or deployment of storage over the next 5+ years as it does for a range of low carbon technologies Strongly agree Slightly agree Neutral Slightly disagree Strongly disagree Don t know 1 1 Strongly agree Slightly agree Neutral Slightly disagree Strongly disagree All stakeholders agreed either strongly or slightly that the Government should provide further support to help energy storage technologies. The reasons given included the wider national benefits resulting from the deployment of energy storage and the ability of government to reduce risk and so allow companies to access cheaper capital. Other stakeholders cautioned that any support should be temporary and aimed at creating a sustainable market for energy storage and that general guidance was needed from government, but that they should not interfere too much in the market. 1
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea Q11. How would you rate the desirability of the following forms of support for energy storage. Additional support for R&D Additional support for demonstration Regulatory reforms to remove barriers and create a more level playing field Deployment support (e.g. mandates, capital subsidies, operational subsidies etc.) Select ratings from: Very desirable, desirable, not needed 1 1 1 Research & development Demonstration Regulation Deployment Very desirable Desirable Not needed Reform of the regulatory system was seen as very desirable by all stakeholders, which is not surprising given that the current regulatory structure was seen as a major barrier to the deployment of storage. Additional support for R&D and for deployment was also seen as very desirable by just over half of respondents and as desirable by the remainder although some noted that R&D was already well supported by the government already. Some stakeholders suggested that lithiumbattery technologies were now sufficiently developed that a downstream market would suffice to encourage the required R&D funding from the private sector. Instead, these stakeholders believed that government R&D funding should be focused on alternative storage technologies. Additional support for demonstration was seen as desirable by the large majority of stakeholders, but again some respondents noted that there was reasonable support for this today. 11
Appendix.1: Stakeholder interviews from Korea Q1. How meaningful (e.g. desirable, important?) would it be to have a deployment target for energy storage? Select from: Very meaningful, meaningful, not meaningful 1 1 Very meaningful Meaningful Not meaningful All stakeholders thought that a deployment target for storage would be very meaningful or meaningful for any storage. Indeed the Korean government already sets short-term (-3 years ahead) indicative targets for storage but a number of stakeholders also thought that a longer term, mandatory, target would be beneficial, with California cited as an example. Other stakeholders explained that even an indicative target would be an important signal for Korean companies. 1