REALISEGRID: towards a pan-European transmission networkrealisegrid.rse-web.it/content/files/File/News... · The Second Strategic Energy Review (Nov.2008) clarified that EU will never

REALISEGRID: towards a panREALISEGRID: towards a pan--European European transmission networktransmission network

Gianluigi MigliavaccaRSE S.p.A.

Project Coordinator

Seminar at the Florence School of Regulation – 24th February 2011

24-02-2011 2TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRID

Presentation outline Presentation outline

Challenges of the grid: 2020 and beyond

The project REALISEGRID

“Smart” transmission technologies

Prioritizing transmission investments

Tackling the consensus problem


1. Challenges of the grid: 2020 and beyond

24-02-2011 4TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRID 4TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRIDTREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRID

Challenges for the panChallenges for the pan--European European transmission grids for 2020 and beyondtransmission grids for 2020 and beyond

Integration of very large amounts of variable RES, while keeping network security and reliability at acceptable levels

Renewable generation exceeding local needs at a given time, requiring transport elsewhere

Increasing role of active demand and distributed generation to relieve stress on European electricity system

Liberalization of market inducing increased cross-border power exchanges rising uncertainties and congestion problems

European electricity grids are on the critical path to meet the EU climate change and energy policy objectives

Aging of the present transmission grid; difficulties to get consensusfor building new overhead lines


How increasing wind penetration can affect grid congestionHow increasing wind penetration can affect grid congestion

High windscenarios

• Congestion becomes a pan-European problem. Planning should be coordinated between the TSOs

• Frequent flow changings heavily affect operationand require a coordinated approach

Low windscenarios

High windpotentials

Low windpotentials

Hydro


European European SupergridsSupergrids: horizontal and vertical concepts: horizontal and vertical concepts

Growing support in Europe to the creation of supergrids, connectingmany offshore wind farms in several Member States, so as tomaximize the utilization of RES and reduce the impact on the transmission backbones:

• Vertical: creating a north-south interconnection to ease delivering RES power (around the North Sea) and the big customer centers in the central and southern part of Europe. Two approaches:

– Expanding the current transmission backbones– Creating dedicated highways (concept of overlay network from the recent

Energiekonzept document of the German Bundesregierung)

• Horizontal: interconnecting off-shore and providing a multi-point docking to the AC backbones. Some pilot projects:

– Kriegers Flak connecting 1800 MW between Denmark, Sweden (nowstepped-out) and Germany, €150mil. financing from EC in 2009 for pre-feasibility

– North Sea Offshore grid project connecting 70 GW offshore wind among 9 Countries. In December 2009, it was decided that the ISLES project will carryout a feasibility study. Investments should amount to €30bil.


Connection or interconnection between different grids can be realized both in AC or DC with submarine or land cables. The choice of the AC or DC solution is depending on the power to be transmitted and on the length of the circuit.

AC or DC?AC or DC?


DesertecDesertec SuperGridSuperGrid

Transfer Capacity

Energy Transfer

HVDC investment costs

Source: Desertec


The EU Energy Policy (1/2)The EU Energy Policy (1/2)

• Green Paper “A European Strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy” (2006)

• Communication “An Energy Policy for Europe” (2007)• Communication on Strategic Energy Technology Plan

(SET-Plan, 2007)• Climate and Energy Package (2008) and Directive

2009/28/EC• Third Liberalization Package (2009) and Directive

2009/72/EC• Communication “A strategy for competitive,

sustainable and secure energy” (2010)• Communication “Energy infrastructure priorities for

2020 and beyond. A blueprint for an integrated European energy network” (2010)

Support climate change mitigation:• reducing CO2 emissions;• promoting green generation;• boosting efficiency in the consumption (energy saving)

Increase security of supply

Promote competition:• eliminating cross-border bottlenecks;• harmonizing market regulation throughout Europe;• promoting the creation of a common Internal Energy Market

the PIP (Jan.2007) underlined that electricity and gas networks are the “heart” of a well-functioning energy market;The Second Strategic Energy Review (Nov.2008) clarified that EU will never realize its objectives unless the grid will be soon significantly expanded.Green Paper “Towards a secure, sustainable and competitive European energy network” (Nov.2008)


TEN-E Guidelines: 32 projects labeled as “of European interest”: only 19% is completed, 5% under construction, 76% in the authorization path and/or in study. Bottom-up fixed-list approach failed!Communication: “A strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy”: defines five priorities for energy strategy, among which “building a truly integrated energy market”. To achieve it:• Action 2: establishing a blueprint of the European

infrastructure for 2020-2030, • Action 3: streamlining permit procedures, • Action 4: providing the right financial framework.

Communication “Energy infrastructure priorities for 2020 and beyond”: new methodology not based on bottom-up contributes of the TSOs but on a shared methodology for prioritizing projects on the basis of European priorities at 2020 (four corridors for electricity, three for gas) and a long-term perspective of a smart-supergrids continental interconnection. Improvement permitting and consensus. Set up of new financial instruments.

The EU Energy Policy (2/2)The EU Energy Policy (2/2)


Need to invest in the transmission gridNeed to invest in the transmission grid

The last years: demand increase vs reduced grid developmentIt is generally agreed that new investments are needed, motivated on the basis of a technical-economical evaluation comparing costs with benefits for the system (market competitiveness, interests of consumers and other market players)


2. The Project REALISEGRID


The project REALISEGRID (The project REALISEGRID (http://realisegrid.rsehttp://realisegrid.rse--web.itweb.it))

The ultimate objective of REALISEGRID is to develop a set of criteria, metrics, methods and tools to assess how the transmission infrastructure should be optimally developed to support the achievement of a reliable, competitive and sustainable electricity supply in the EU

Research centers and universitiesRSE (I), Coord & WP3Politecnico di Torino (I), WP2Technische Universiteit Delft (NL)Technische Universität Dortmund (D)Technische Universität Dresden (D)EC Joint Research Centre - Inst. EnergyUniverza v Ljubljani (SL)The University of Manchester (UK)Observatoire Méditerranéen Energie (F)R&D Center for Power Engineering (RU)Vienna University of Technology, EEG (A)

TSOs• RTE (F)• APG (A)• Terna (I)• TenneT (NL)

Industry• Technofi (F), WP1• ASATREM (I)• KANLO (F)• Prysmian (I)• RIECADO (A)

http://realisegrid.rse-web.it/


Identification of technical performances, economic benefits and costs of novel technologies aimed at increasing capacity, reliability and flexibility of the transmission infrastructure

Definition of long term scenarios for the European power sector, characterized by different evolutions of demand and supply, such as the integration of a large amount of intermittent renewable energy sources (e.g. wind power), meeting specific targets concerning security of supply and sustainability

Implementation of a framework to facilitate harmonisation of pan-European approaches to electricity infrastructure evolution and to evaluate benefits of transmission investments

Activities of REALISEGRIDActivities of REALISEGRID

24-02-2011 15TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRIDModeling toolsModeling tools

RegulationRegulation

Planning PracticePlanning Practice

Testing BedTesting Bed

Work Package 3 Work Package 3 ““Transmission investmentsTransmission investments””

WP3WP3.1 Analyzing current practice

and developing a robust set of criteria for improved

transmission planning in presence of a large penetration

of RES-E generation

WP3.2 Evaluate bottlenecks and investment needs in cross-

border capacities in the European Electricity markets

WP3.3 Set up a methodology and a supporting tool to carry out

multi-criteria cost-benefit analysis supporting the

development of trans-European transmission infrastructure

WP3.4 Creation of a tool to support coordinated investment in

electricity and gas infrastructure

WP3.5 Validation of the cost-benefit methodology set up in

WP3.3 on a real case concerning the TEN-E priority axis EL2

WP3.6 analyzing the impact of regulation and incentive

mechanisms on transmission investment

WP3.7 deriving a benefit-based approach to improve consensus

on new infrastructures


3. “Smart” transmission technologies


A collective scan toolA collective scan tool

Collective discussionlevel of convergence

Collective workshops

Technical andscientific

literature review

TSOs knowledge

Cost Benefit Analysis

REALISEGRID technology

experts

PASSIVE EQUIPMENT

ACTIVEEQUIPMENT

RT MONITORING EQUIPMENT

EQUIPMENT IMPACTING on

TSOs OPERATION

SHORT LIST for WP3

Performance (security and stability)

Barriers (maturity and accesibility)1st LISTof promising technologies SCAN criteria

Transmission technologyRoadmap

REFINED LISTof promising

techologies in four clusters

24-02-2011 18TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRIDTREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRID

Identifying Identifying ““smartsmart”” transmission technologies transmission technologies Inclusion principle: technologies potentially helpful for TSOsand possibly interacting with the transmission planning


Potentials analysis for the selected technologies Potentials analysis for the selected technologies

Techno‐economic challenges

2010‐2020 2020‐2030 2030‐2040

Full scale use within the EU27 interconnected transmission system

Technology n

RD&D as seen by manufacturers

Integration tests as seen by TSOs

An An actionaction agenda agenda waswas filledfilled in in forfor eacheachtechnologytechnology, , usingusing TSO and TSO and manufacturersmanufacturersinformationinformation

0

1

2

3

4

5

Increased system reliability

System losses reduction

Extended power flow controllability

Increased transmission capacity

Reduced environmental impact

Benefits from technology XX integration replacing conventional solutions

Reference: Conventional HVAC network

P1: technology XX

A qualitative A qualitative benefitsbenefits evaluationevaluation waswas addedadded


1 HTC . Advanced designs for high current carrying capacity, reduced weight, l ine sags and corrosion for high temperature conductors

14 PST . Increase response time at an acceptable cots thanks to power electronics

5 RTTR . Interoperable RTTR system combined with short‐term weather forecasts for OHL monitoring

2 HTC . Evaluation of the long‐term reliabil ity of cables reconductored with HTC (ageing models, endurance testing)

15 PST . Inter‐TSO standardisation of PST modelling 6 RTTR Industrialization of RTTR systems for underground/submarine applications

3 HTC . Improved HTC maintenance based on HTC ageing models and operations

16 PST . Coordinated use of PST (coordination centers in Europe)

7 RTTR . Combined use of RTTR, PST and WAMS to control highly congested areas

4 HTC . Exploration of new materials (nano materials for conductors) 17 PST . Large scale experiments of fast response time PST in Europe (TCPST)

8 RTTR . Grid optimization using RTTR at EU level

19 UG/Submarine XLPE cables

. New materials for reduced thickness of cable section (reduce number of junctions)

18 PST . Implementation of fast response time PST in Europe (TCPST)

9 WAMS . Improved WAMS signal accuracy and standards development


. Advanced installation techniques for installation costs reduction (incl. design of accessories)

30 HVDC . Improved efficiency of VSC based on new switching topologies

10 WAMS . Development of standards for WAMS algorithms


. Improved commissioning based on fast qualification methods and field applications

31 HVDC . Development of MTDC (Multiterminal HVDC) and exploration of meshed HVDC configurations

11 WAMS . Evaluation of WAMS benefits based on full scale demos by TSOs


. Innovative cable materials (carbon nano‐tube) for improved performances

32 HVDC . Extended domain of use of HVDC (far‐offshore, ultradeep, ultravoltage)

12 WAMS . Wide use of WAMS in Europe to monitor/control inter‐area power oscillations


. Automated underground cable installation and remote sensing system for O&M

33 HVDC . New types of semiconductors for a new generation of thyristors (Sil icium carbide, Gall ium nitride, diamond)

13 WAMS . Use of WAMS data for control issues (WACS) by some TSOs


. Integration of dynamic l imits into system operation procedures and tools

34 HVDC . Test of selected options of MTDC for HVDC backbone in Europe combining VSC and CSC


. Carbon nanotubes used in transmission system 35 HVDC . Superconducting DC cable transmission (SCDC)

26 GILs . New generation of GIL with enhanced safety in operation (reduced corrosion, gas mixtures with lower SF6 content) and improved installation techniques for cost reduction

36 HVDC . Deployment of an MTDC backbone in Europe

27 GILs . Assessment of GILs performances in operation based on historical data and models and comparison with possible alternative solutions for TSOs (OHL; XLPE)

42 FACTS . Improved performance of FACTS based on new power electronic topologies and semiconductors

28 GILs . Field tests of long‐distances applications based on N2/SF6 mixtures

43 FACTS . Development of standards for FACTS

29 GILs . Implementation of GIL based solutions as underground technologies to enter densely populated areas

44 FACTS . Virtual Man‐Machine interface for grid operators

37 HTS cables . Development of more efficient and affordable (costs and size) cryogenic refrigeration system

45 FACTS . New types of semiconductors replacing sil icon (Si licium carbide, Gallium nitride, diamond)

38 HTS cables . Commercial exploitation of 2nd generation of HTS materials (YBCO and advanced deposition techniques) in 2020

46 FACTS . Significant deployment of FACTS (shunt) used for voltage control issues in Europe

39 HTS cables . Demonstration of superconducting cables for novel network architecture

47 FACTS . Significant deployment of both shunt and series FACTS used for power flow controllability in Europe

40 HTS cables . HTS cables are field‐tested for niche applications (short distance transmission in dense urban area, DC applications)

51 FCLs . Common testing facil ities among European TSOs (based on agreed testing standards)

41 HTS cables . Field tests of HTS cables for long‐distance applications 52 FCLs . Reduced costs and losses of FCLs

48 Innovative Towers

. Eco‐design of towers reducing the environmental impacts (visual, corrosion, ageing) combined with increased mechanical and electricity transfer characteristics (design of towers and composite materials)

53 FCLs . Demonstration of relocatable FCLs


. Common TSO RD&D laboratory on tower modelisation issues 54 FCLs . Combined use of FCL and superconductivity


. Deployment of innovative towers using composite materials allowing increased transmission capacity

The final roadmap The final roadmap


FACTS, PST, HVDCFACTS, PST, HVDC

Transmission capacity increase

Upgrade to 380kV possible?

Upgrade equipment to

380kV

Ampacity upgrade possible?

Conversion to HVDC feasible?

Change overhead

conductors

Convert to HVDC

New transmission capacity sufficient?

Built new line

done

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No


Issue Problem Corrective action Conventional solutions

Most appropriate FACTS/HVDC solutions

Low voltage at heavy load Supply reactive power Shunt capacitor, series

capacitor SVC, STATCOM, TCSC, SSSC, UPFC, VSC-HVDC

Remove reactive power supply

Line disconnection, shunt capacitor

SVC, STATCOM, SSSC, UPFC, VSC-HVDC High voltage at

low load Absorb reactive power Shunt capacitor disconnection, shunt reactor

SVC, STATCOM, SSSC, UPFC, VSC-HVDC

High voltage after outage Absorb reactive power Shunt reactor SVC, STATCOM, SSSC,

UPFC, VSC-HVDC

Supply reactive power Shunt capacitor, reactor, series capacitor

SVC, STATCOM, TCSC, SSSC, UPFC, VSC-HVDC Low voltage after

outage Prevent overload Series reactor, series capacitor, PST

TCSC, SSSC, TCPST, UPFC, VSC-HVDC, CSC-HVDC

Voltage level

Low voltage and overload

Supply reactive power and limit overload

Combination of series reactor/capacitor and PST

TCSC, SSSC, UPFC, VSC-HVDC

Line/transformer overload Reduce overload New lines/transfomers,

series reactor/capacitor TCSC, SSSC, TCPST, UPFC, VSC-HVDC

Thermal limits Tripping of parallel circuit (line)

Limit circuit (line) loading

New series reactor/capacitor


Adjust series reactance Series capacitor/reactor TCSC, SSSC, TCPST, UPFC, VSC-HVDC, CSC-HVDC Parallel line load

sharing Adjust phase angle PST SSSC, TCPST, UPFC, VSC-HVDC Loop flows

Flow direction reversal Adjust phase angle PST SSSC, TCPST, UPFC, VSC-

HVDC

Short circuit levels

Excessive breaker fault current

Limit short circuit current

Series reactor, new circuit breaker, fault current limiter


Subsynchronous resonance

Potential turbine/generator shaft damage

Mitigate oscillations Series compensator TCSC, SSSC, UPFC

Cost range System component Voltage level Power rating min max

Unit

Phase Shifting Transformer (PST) (1) 400 kV 100..1600 MVA 10 40 kEUR/MVA

Fixed Series Capacitor (FSC) (1) 400 kV 100..1000 MVAR 10 20 kEUR/MVAR

SVC 400 kV 100..850 MVAR 30 50 kEUR/MVAR STATCOM 400 kV 100..400 MVAR 50 75 kEUR/MVAR TCSC 400 kV 25..600 MVAR 35 50 kEUR/MVAR SSSC 400 kV 100..400 MVAR 50 80 kEUR/MVAR TCPST (TCQBT) 115 kV..220 kV 50..150 MVA 12 70 kEUR/MVA UPFC 400 kV 100..325 MVA 90 130 kEUR/MVA

HVAC OHL, single circuit(2) 400 kV 1500 MVA 400 700 kEUR/km HVAC OHL, double circuit(2) 400 kV 2×1500 MVA 500 1000 kEUR/km HVAC underground XLPE monopolar cable 400 kV 1000 MVA 1000 3000 kEUR/km HVAC underground XLPE bipolar cable 400 kV 2×1000 MVA 2000 5000 kEUR/km Reactive power compensation for HVAC monopolar cable 400 kV - 15 15 kEUR/MVAR

(1) Related device, not to be considered as FACTS. (2) Cost ranges correspond to the base case, i.e. installation over flat land. For hilly landscape +20% and +50% for installations over mountains or urban areas have to be factored in.

FACTS, PST, HVDCFACTS, PST, HVDC


Smart transmission VS distribution technologiesSmart transmission VS distribution technologies

DG penetration in an electricity system [MWDGinst]

Towards fully active and smart distribution grid

Status quo of transmission grid

Moderate transmission grid expansion

Significant transmission grid expansion

Cost of “smart” technologies and components to be implemented on distribution grid level [€ / MWDGinst]

Transmission grid expansion

New information, communication, control and data management systems

Bidirectional load flow management devices

Fully autonomous and intelligent “cells” on distribution grid level


4. Prioritizing transmission investments


Transmission planning processTransmission planning processScenarios

development

Security analysis

Security criteria

met?No expansion

Y

NIdentification of

first, broad group of solutions

Techno-economic

assessment

Environmental/ social

assessment

Final ranking of solutions

Identification of second, restricted group of solutions

Decision making

Cost-benefit analysis

Traditional approach

REALISEGRIDproposedapproach

REALISEGRID integratedanalysis of investments(welfare optimal and traditional reliability/security)

cost-benefit

Candidates selection


Overview of the methodology: what, why, howOverview of the methodology: what, why, how

Cost-benefit assessment for new transmission infrastructure investments

WHATWHAT

• Methodology for prioritizing alternative investments both at national and trans-national level (see Infrastructure Package)• Possible KPI for establishing a dynamic addendum to the ROI ofthe TSOs• Information to the public on system advantages from new infrastructure as well as about inaction cost

WHYWHY

• OPF analysis with and without the new investment (or series of investments constituting a corridor)• The tool has to be able to take into account the reliability of both network elements and generators as well as the variable behaviorof wind generators• New elements like PSTs and HVDC lines have to be correctly represented

HOWHOW


MultiMulti--criteria analysis: general theorycriteria analysis: general theory

Top-down criteria tree, evaluation matrix, utility functions, weights

Root

Group 1 Group 2

Sub-Group 11

Sub-Group 12

… Sub-Group 21

Sub-Group 22

…

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 …

Criterion 1

Criterion 2

…

1

Utility function translates: into [0 1] or into monetary terms (better)

Avoid double-counting!


The adopted methodologyThe adopted methodology

Transmission expansion benefits

Competitiveness

RES exploitation

Emissions savings

External costs reduction

Fossil fuel costs reduction

Reliability increase

Congestions reduction

Market competitiveness increase

Losses reduction

Security of energy supply

Environmental sustainability

Utility function translation into monetary terms

Weighted sum translation a mono-dimensional ranking

€Solution A Solution B Solution C

Sensitivity analysis on weighing factors needed

Years0

Authorization phase Building phase

RoWRoW

Amortization phase

II

ΔB1,t1

ΔB2,t1

…

ΔB1,t2

ΔB2,t2

…

ΔB1,tn

ΔB2,tn

…

ΔB1,t1

ΔB2,t1

…

ΔB1,t2

ΔB2,t2

…

ΔB1,tn

ΔB2,tn

…

NPVNPV00NPVNPV00

CCCCCC

C

CC CCCCCC

C

CC


The tool: REMARKThe tool: REMARKMain features:• Detailed model of the network: nodes, lines, transformers,

generators, loads• Three types of generation: fixed, random variable (wind),

dispatchable• Fixed hourly nodal load• Non-sequential Montecarlo-based combination of:

unavailability of lines, transformers, generators [hours/year] maintenance schedules for generators [weeks/year]statistical profile of wind generation (cumulative prob. distribution

curve)Each run corresponds to a random extraction of one hour

• Geographic system/market zones subdivision• OPF solution of the mixed AC/DC grid is calculated through a

simplified DC methodOptimisation objective:

• Maximisation of Social Welfare (if bid-ups are available) or• Minimisation of variable operating costs (sum of production

costs and load shedding costs)


• Lienz (AT) - Cordignano (IT)• New interconnection between Italy and

Slovenia• Udine Ovest (IT) - Okroglo (SI)• S. Fiorano (IT) - Nave (IT) - Gorlago (IT)

[completed]• S. Fiorano (IT) - Robbia (CH) [completed]• Venezia Nord (IT) - Cordignano (IT)• St. Peter (AT) - Tauern (AT)• Südburgenland (AT) - Kainachtal (AT)

[completed]• Austria - Italy (Thaur-Brixen) interconnection

through the Brenner rail tunnel.

CostCost--benefit analysis: test bedbenefit analysis: test bed

REALISEGRID is going to use the new methodology to carry out a cost/benefits classification of the most important projects belonging to Trans European Network priority axis "EL.2. Borders of Italy with France, Austria, Slovenia and Switzerland: increasing electricity interconnection capacities". This region is one of the most interesting ones to assess the impact and the benefits of futurecross-border transmission projects.


Basic hypotheses of the testing bedBasic hypotheses of the testing bed• Three “tab” years 2015, 2020 and 2030, for which relevant simulation scenarios, “with” and “without” the new infrastructure are created

• We suppose that the region TSOs want to invest in new interconnection projects with a limited amount of available funds: only the projects showing the best cost-benefit characteristics will be selected. Temporal priorities relevant to the EL2 connectors as indicated in the TYNDP 2010 are temporarily disregarded (but considered as a key to analyze the results of the analysis).

• The investment is supposed taking place one-shot in 2008, and the building phase taking exactly seven years for all alternatives (differences due to public consensus are disregarded), so that the new infrastructures become operative in 2015.

• The benefits are actualized to the investment time (NPV) for a period equal to the amortization phase, supposed 20 years long. The actualization rate is supposed equal to 8%.

• The EL2 reinforcements were grouped into three distinct corridors that don’t mutually interact, whereas within each corridor all the reinforcements are necessary in order to obtain an overall increase of the transit capability. Needed internal reinforcements have been added to the corridors bundle too.


Grouping EL2 lines into three corridorsGrouping EL2 lines into three corridors

3 12

• C1 (Germany – Austria – Italy, Veneto):5 double circuit lines 380 kV

Isar – St. PeterSalzach – St. Peter (in “without” scenario)Salzach - TauernTauern – Lienz (in “without” scenario)Lienz-CordignanoCordignano-Venezia Nord (in “without” scenario)

• C2 (Italy, Friuli - Slovenia): 2 double circuit lines 380 kV

Bericevo – Okroglo (in “without” scenario)Okroglo – Udine Ovest

• C3 (Brenner; Germany – Austria – Italy, TAA): 5 double circuit lines 380 kV

Oberbachern – ThaurThaur–Cardano (GIL)Cardano - S.MassenzaS.Massenza – Nogarole RoccaWest-Tirol – Thaur –Zell Ziller


Average costs considered in the testing bedAverage costs considered in the testing bed

• HVAC OHL, single circuit 400 kV: 550 k€/km

• HVAC OHL, double circuit 400 kV: 750 k€/km

• HVAC OHL (220>400 kV) uprating: 500 k€/km

• HVDC underground cable pair 1000 MW: 1300 k€/km

• GIL 400 kV: 5500 k€/km

• VSC converter terminal (bipolar) 1000 MW: 100000 k€


1. Social Welfare Increase (actually, dispatching cost reduction) – already expressedin money

2. Reduction of losses – monetized by multiplying by average European market price 3. Reduction of wind overproduction – monetized by multiplying by a reasonable

remuneration factor to wind owners (remunerated at market price)Market price in 2010 was taken equal to 54€/MWh (average between annual averagefigures of IPEX and EEX in 2010), then, prices trend was assumed from the document “Trends to 2030-Update 2007” edited by EC DG-TREN .

Benefits considered in the testing bed/1Benefits considered in the testing bed/1

Source: GME Newsletter January 2010

Source: EC DG-TREN

54 54.5656.78 57.34 58.46


4. Reduction of load curtailments – monetized by multiplying EENS by the VOLL. The latter is assumed equal to 15000 €/MWh, figure estimated for Italy by the report: Cost of Electricity Interruptions – Deliverable 5.6.3 produced byRSE for the project SECURE

Benefits considered in the testing bed/2Benefits considered in the testing bed/2

Country Sector €/kWhnot supplied

€/kWinterrupted

NOTES

Great Britain All sectorsTransmission

4.1852.9

DistributionTransmission

Italy All sectors 15.0 Transmission

Sweden UrbanSuburbanRural

12.08.87.4

2.51.91.6

Distribution

Norway ResidentialCommercialIndustrial

0.9611.87.9

Distribution

Ireland All sectors 7.2 Distribution

Portugal All sectors 1.5 Distribution

Source: SECURE Deliverable 5.6.3


Benefits considered in the testing bed/3Benefits considered in the testing bed/35. CO2 emission reduction - was translated into money assuming an average

2010 price on the European ET market: 14 €/tCO2 and taking the forecast values at 2015, 2020 and 2030 from the World Energy Outlook report 2009

Source: GME Newsletter January 2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

$/tCO2€/tCO2

WEO forecast

A sixth benefit could be added in the final analysis: the reduction of money spent to import fuel from extra-EU countries


Scenario hypotheses/1Scenario hypotheses/1• Three reference years: 2015, 2020, 2030 • Two only scenarios among the four of the WP2

• Optimistic: emission target reached in 2020• Pessimistic: emission target reached in 2030

Drivers

Optimistic Pessimistic

Population HIGH LOW Welfare HIGH LOW

Climate Change Mitigation STRONG WEAK Technological Improvement HIGH LOW

Oil and gas supply HIGH LOW Electric interties BOUNDED BOUNDED

Source: REALISEGRID D2.2

• Fuel prices: from WEO 2009"450" ($2008) 2008 2015 2020 2025 2030IEA crude oil imports (€/kWh) 0.0371 0.0331 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343Natural gas imports (€/kWh) 0.0313 0.0318 0.0335 0.0335 0.0335OECD steam coal imports (€/kWh) 0.0132 0.0093 0.0087 0.0079 0.0071LIGNITE (€/kWh) 0.0059 0.0042 0.0039 0.0036 0.0032Nuclear (€/kWh) 0.0029 0.0029 0.0029 0.0029 0.0029

reference 2008 2015 2020 2025 2030IEA crude oil imports (€/kWh) 0.0371 0.0331 0.0381 0.0410 0.0439Natural gas imports (€/kWh) 0.0313 0.0318 0.0367 0.0397 0.0426OECD steam coal imports (€/kWh) 0.0132 0.0099 0.0114 0.0117 0.0119LIGNITE (€/kWh) 0.0059 0.0045 0.0051 0.0053 0.0054Nuclear (€/kWh) 0.0029 0.0029 0.0029 0.0029 0.0029


Scenario hypotheses/2Scenario hypotheses/2Assumptions on the network data:

The perimeter of the test-bed model includes: France, Germany, Switzerland,Austria, Italy, Slovenia and Croatia and western Balkans.Basic model: UCTE 2008 Winter Peak STUM (for grid, load and generation)2015, 2020, 2030 grid updates: ENTSO-E TYNDP 2010 + info by Terna/APG

2015 2020 2030

Optimistic

Pessimistic

Load: trend SAF 2010-2025 optimisticGeneration: trend SAF 2010-2025 optimistic

Load: trend SAF 2010-2025 optimisticGeneration: SAF 2010-2025 optimistic

Load: trend WP2 optimisticGeneration: trend WP2optimistic

Load: trend SAF 2010-2025 pessimisticGeneration: trend SAF 2010-2025 pessimistic

Load: trend SAF 2010-2025 pessimisticGeneration: trend SAF 2010-2025 pessimistic

Load: trend WP2 pessimisticGeneration: trend WP2 pessimistic

SAF = ENTSO-E System Adequacy Forecast


Very Very firstfirst results results Limitations:

• only 2015 • building phase neglected

Total annuity cost BenefitsAlgebraic sum

(unitary weights)

Corridor C1(Italy Veneto- Austria)

Corridor C2(Italy Friuli - Slovenia)

Corridor C3(Italy TAA - Austria through Brennerpaß)

• Optimistic: 274• Pessimistic: 267

M€



WIE IMMER OHNE GEWÄHR

26

9

98




• C1 and C3 provide similar results (a sensitivity analysis could be helpful)• benefits are generally much higher than costs• Exception: C2 pessimistic case more favorable than optimistic (to be further investigated)


5. Tackling the consensus problem


Public perception of electric transmission linesPublic perception of electric transmission lines

Source: Furby et al. Public Perceptions of electric power transmission lines - Journal of Environmental Psychology (1988) 8. 19-43

Direct effectsof the lines

Management related issues

Perceived negative visual impact oftransmission lines

Perceived negative impact on property value

Noise, interference withmigratory paths, on diarycows, …

“Burden to me, benefits to others”

Felt lack ofdemocracy: “I am leftaside”

Symbolicinterpretation ashome invasion

Lack of “serious”information Conflict dynamics

can change the ratio between the different factorsdue to opportunityreasons

Perceived impact on human heath (EMF) –psychometric analysis(dread vs unknown)

Impact on the economicsystem

24-02-2011 42TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRID 42TREN/FP7/EN/219123/REALISEGRID

The complexity of authorization procedures and to get consensus for new infrastructures is a key problem to cope with the future challenges.

In order to obtain support by public opinion, two synergic actions have to be combined:

• a good information flow to the population (bottom-up approach). This information has to account for all costs and benefits and clearly show the cost of inaction. The ground points are:– Provide a clear vision of benefits and costs bound with the new infrastructure.

Clearly state the cost for the society deriving form inaction or sub-optimal actions;

– Promote a cultural action, meeting all the points of the perception of a new line. Clarify the relationship between RES integration and grid development. Clarify the relationship between costs and different technical solutions (e.g. cabling).

– Promote a thorough evaluation of property value, so as to bring about a fair compensation value that can be agreed by all the parties.

• a clear regulatory approach (top-down approach) harmonized throughout Europe:– Act on the legal framework: simplify, harmonize, set time limits and

rationalize the procedure (number of entities, number of phases, etc)– Create, especially for the most important projects an “arbiter” to promote

compromises and managing the entire procedure in trans-national cases.

Consensus: the position of REALISEGRIDConsensus: the position of REALISEGRID


How to speedHow to speed--up grid development and increase consensus?up grid development and increase consensus?Problems Actions

Social acceptanceSocial acceptance• “serious” information to the public opinion• clear information of inaction costs• reflect on compensation policies

• “serious” information to the public opinion• clear information of inaction costs• reflect on compensation policies

Duration of authorization proceduresDuration of authorization procedures• institute a “facilitator” (ENTSO-E, ACER)• streamline role of all institutions in approval• introduce maximum time for approval• make a binding pre-approval possible

• institute a “facilitator” (ENTSO-E, ACER)• streamline role of all institutions in approval• introduce maximum time for approval• make a binding pre-approval possible

Lag between transmission and generation development times

Lag between transmission and generation development times

• entice TSOs to anticipate on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis• discourage generators from initiatingprocedure if not sure this will be realized• favor merchant investment if convenient

• entice TSOs to anticipate on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis• discourage generators from initiatingprocedure if not sure this will be realized• favor merchant investment if convenient

Choice of innovative technologiesChoice of innovative technologies• mature technologies should be used to:

extend usage existing infrastructure reduce impact and realization time

• mature technologies should be used to: extend usage existing infrastructure reduce impact and realization time

Lack of harmonized legal frameworkLack of harmonized legal framework • harmonizing legal framework in Europe• incentivize transited TSOs

• harmonizing legal framework in Europe• incentivize transited TSOs

Short/mid term Long termThis analysis has been specifically carried out in support of the creation of the Infrastructure package by EC. The Interim Report created by REALISEGRID isdownloadable from the project web.


The deThe de--bottlenecking problem: a wider viewbottlenecking problem: a wider view

1. Build-up new infrastructure

2. Anticipate needs in the planning

3. Speed up and harmonize legal procedures (top-down)

4. Facilitate merchant investment wherever convenient5. Refurbish the existing

infrastructure

6. Reform the electricity market

7. Act on public opinion and on compensation policy (bottom-up)

8. Boost TSO investment optimality


The REALISEGRID webThe REALISEGRID webhttp://realisegrid.rse-web.it


Gianluigi Migliavacca

via Rubattino,5420134 Milano

E-mail: [email protected]

Thank you for your attention…

Documents

REALISEGRID: towards a pan-European transmission networkrealisegrid.rse-web.it/content/files/File/News... · The Second Strategic Energy Review (Nov.2008) clarified that EU will never