Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 1
Maximilian Seier, Liselotte Schebek
GHG effects of load shifting on German
wastewater treatment plants
LCM 2017 Conference
3-6 September 2017
Luxembourg, Luxembourg
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 2
Agenda
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Conclusions
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 3
Expansion of renewable electricity generation needs flexibility options, i.e. load
shifting
The use of flexibility options results in effects on costs and GHG emissions
Effects of integration of renewables on electricity generation
agora-energiewende.de
Renewables Nuclear Lignite Hard coal Natural gas
Marg
inal costs
[€/M
Wh
]
supply
demand
oil
time
Re
sid
ua
l lo
ad
[G
W]
valley filling
peak
shaving
peak
shaving
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 4
Why wastewater treatment plants?
biopowerbg.com/
Which effects does load shifting on German WWTP cause regarding costs for
WWTP operators and GHG emissions in the system wide electricity generation?
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 5
Agenda
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Conclusions
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 6
Methods
Development of a MOM
for 2015 and validation
Scenario transfer to 2030
Merit Order Model (MOM) 2030
WWTP Technical operation model
Optimization of electricity supply
costs and assessment of effects on
costs and GHG emissionsParameters
Feed-in from renewables
Costs of energy carriers
Conventional power plant fleet
Co-generation
…
..
Data gathering and
interpolation of model
parameters
Data aggregation to
reference size classes
Parameters
Electricity demand
Nominal output of CHP
Electric efficiency of CHP
Volume of gas storage
…
..
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 7
Methods: MOM and Scenario transfer
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
11
55
30
94
63
61
77
71
92
51
07
91
23
31
38
71
54
11
69
51
84
92
00
32
15
72
31
12
46
52
61
92
77
32
92
73
08
13
23
53
38
93
54
33
69
73
85
14
00
54
15
94
31
34
46
74
62
14
77
54
92
95
08
35
23
75
39
15
54
55
69
95
85
36
00
76
16
16
31
56
46
96
62
36
77
76
93
17
08
57
23
97
39
37
54
77
70
17
85
58
00
98
16
38
31
78
47
18
62
5
€/M
Wh
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
11
50
29
94
48
59
77
46
89
51
04
41
19
31
34
21
49
11
64
01
78
91
93
82
08
72
23
62
38
52
53
42
68
32
83
22
98
13
13
03
27
93
42
83
57
73
72
63
87
54
02
44
17
34
32
24
47
14
62
04
76
94
91
85
06
75
21
65
36
55
51
45
66
35
81
25
96
16
11
06
25
96
40
86
55
76
70
66
85
57
00
47
15
37
30
27
45
17
60
07
74
97
89
88
04
78
19
68
34
58
49
48
64
3
Kg
CO
2eq
./kW
h
0102030405060708090
100
S1 S2 S3
gene
rati
on c
apac
ity
[GW
]
power plant capacity
Wind PV Biomass Run-of-river Lignite
Hard Coal Natural Gas Oil Others
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 8
Methods: WWTP Technical Operation Model
Metadata
RSC 1 >= 10,000 [PE] <= 15,000 [PE]
number of WWTP in RSC 36
total number of inhabitants attached in RSC 367.502
Demand side
exemplary, daily load profile
Supply side
electricity consumption in RSC [kWh] 12.191.626
biogas production in RSC [m³] 2.816.903
CHP nominal output in RSC [kWel] 1.224
biogas storage volume in RSC [Nm³] 3.994
0,0
200,0
400,0
600,0
800,0
1.000,0
1.200,0
1.400,0
1.600,0
1.800,0
2.000,0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
elec
tric
ity d
eman
d [
kW
]
time [h]
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 9
Agenda
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Conclusions
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 10
Results: Effects on electricity supply
-200,0
-150,0
-100,0
-50,0
0,0
50,0
100,0
150,0
S1 S2 S3
chan
ge in
pow
er p
lant
ele
ctri
city
gen
erat
ion
[GW
h/a]
Scenario
RE Lignite Hard coal Natural gas Oil
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 11
Results: Costs and GHG effects
-20.000.000
-15.000.000
-10.000.000
-5.000.000
0
S1 S2 S3
∆C [€/a
]
-30.000
-20.000
-10.000
0
10.000
20.000
30.000
S1 S2 S3
∆G
HG
[t C
O2e
q./a
]
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 12
Agenda
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Conclusions
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 13
Conclusions and outlook
• Load shifting is a viable option for integration of renewable energies,
costs savings and GHG reductions
• WWTP:
• WWTP do have a significant potential for integration of renewable surplus
electricity
• Is is questionable if saving potentials are an adequate motivation for WWTP
operators
• WWTP storage capacities may serves as short time storages (~9 hours)
• WWTP storage capacities are more adequate for surplus PV integration than
wind power excess generation
28.11.2017 | Department for Civil and Environmental Engineering | Institute IWAR | Prof. Liselotte Schebek | 14
Acknowledgements
Thank you for your attention!
if you want to read more:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.116
