1 wartsila
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
SMART GRID INTERNATIONAL FORUM MARCO A.G. GOLINELLI - VICEPRESIDENTE WÄRTSILÄ ITALIA S.P.A.
ROME, 25.06.2012
Content
Wartsila
Market trends and challenges
Smart power system
Smart Power Generation
Scenario for EU 2050 roadmap
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 2 © Wärtsilä
Market trends and challenges
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 3 © Wärtsilä
Smart Grid, Super Grid, Demand Response .....
but power generation?
• Green house gas emission targets and challenges
• Typical present capacity mix
• Cyclic operation impact on the power system
• How to manage the increasing variability
• Cyclic operation impacts on steam power plants
20-20-20 system challenges
• Typical target for year 2020, e.g. EU and USA:
– 20% energy share from renewable sources
– 20% less greenhouse gas emissions
– 20% increase in energy efficiency
• 20 % renewable energy in 2020 means 5-7 times more wind power
capacity in the EU!
– Wind power capacity will greatly exceed average load
– System operation and operation profiles of thermal plants need to
change
– Variable wind power and larger day/night load variations increase
demand for dynamic flexibility of generation assets
– It is generally agreed that security of supply is at risk, but there has not
been any perceived solution
• Present electricity markets are generally based on selling energy
(kWh’s) and do not reward dynamic flexible capacity adequately to
encourage investments
• New parallel capacity markets must be developed to enable private
investments in fast, flexible system balancing capacity (kW’s)
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 4 © Wärtsilä
System impact of wind power
• Reaching 20% renewable power requires approximately 285 GW of installed wind
capacity in the EU
• A wind speed change from 9 -> 7 m/s could change wind power output with ~100 GW.
Such wind speed changes are barely notable and happen all the time.
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 5 © Wärtsilä
Source: Vestas
Balancing renewables?
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 6 © Wärtsilä
European wind power generation in January 2010 at various regions.
Zero carbon system?
• As in EU, Zero carbon targets for 2050 are discussed in some countries
• Present situation globally
– Fossil fuel (coal, gas & oil) based electricity production decreased
from 75% in 1973 to 68% in 2008
– Renewables share of electricity production in 2010
• Denmark 19.3 %, Spain 33.7 %, Norway 64 %, UK 3.3 %
• Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies still require substantial
innovation and investment, both the capturing process and storaging
– The confidence in CCS becoming a technically and economically
viable option is not strengthening and several CCS development
projects have been put on hold
At present there is no perceived solution for reaching a reliable zero
carbon system
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 7 © Wärtsilä
Present situation Germany
1% 3% 4%
6%
11%
11%
31%
14%
3%
16%
Capacity mix 2010
3% 3% <1 %
4%
22%
3%
43%
14%
1% 7%
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 607 TWh Total installed capacity: 168 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 8 © Wärtsilä
Biogas Biomass Geothermal Hydro Nuclear Solar PV
Coal Gas Oil Wind
Present situation Oman
93%
7%
Capacity mix 2010
96%
4%
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 19 TWh Total installed capacity: 6 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 9 © Wärtsilä
Gas Oil
Present situation Sweden
<1 % 11%
44% 25%
<1 %
<1 %
3%
12%
5%
Capacity mix 2010
6%
49% 40%
<1 %
<1 %
2% 1% 2%
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 138 TWh Total installed capacity: 37 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 10 © Wärtsilä
Biogas Biomass Geothermal Hydro Nuclear Solar PV
Coal Gas Oil Wind
Present situation India
1%
2%
0%
23%
2%
0%
53%
10%
1% 8%
Capacity mix 2010
<1 % <1 %
14%
3%
<1 %
69%
8%
1% 3%
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 829 TWh Total installed capacity: 172 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 11 © Wärtsilä
Biogas Biomass Geothermal Hydro Nuclear Solar PV
Coal Gas Oil Wind
Present situation China
<1 %
<1 %
22%
1 %
<1 %
69%
1% 1%
5%
Capacity mix 2010
<1 % <1 %
15%
2%
<1 %
78%
1% 1% 2%
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 4373 TWh Total installed capacity: 978 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 12 © Wärtsilä
Biogas Biomass Geothermal Hydro Nuclear Solar PV
Coal Gas Oil Wind
Present situation Japan
<1 %
1%
<1 %
17%
15%
1%
18%
27%
20%
1%
Capacity mix 2010
<1 % 1% <1 %
7%
25%
0%
26%
31%
8%
<1 %
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 1139 TWh Total installed capacity: 283 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 13 © Wärtsilä
Biogas Biomass Geothermal Hydro Nuclear Solar PV
Coal Gas Oil Wind
Present situation USA
1% <1 %
<1 %
9%
9% <1 %
29%
40%
6% 4%
<1 %
Capacity mix 2010
1% 1% <1 %
6%
20%
<1 %
44%
24%
1% 2% <1 %
Power generation mix 2010
Total generated power: 4017 TWh Total installed capacity: 1143 GW
Source: Power eTrack
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 14 © Wärtsilä
Biogas Biomass Geothermal Hydro Nuclear Solar PV
Coal Gas Oil Wind Solar Thermal
Existing capacity situation
• The situation varies greatly between different countries
• There is substantial excess installed capacity in many countries, but the
capacity is not suitable for future system balancing needs
• Coal is a dominant base load fuel
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 15 © Wärtsilä
Transfer to low carbon generation
• The dominant role of coal is difficult to change
• Replacing it with some other dispatchable low/no carbon generation capacity is a major
challenge. The options are:
• Hydro – local solution on rivers where more hydro power can be built
• Nuclear – politically sensitive and limited uranium reserves
• CCS – not feasible today and requires major global R&D
• Biomass – global reserves not adequate for replacing coal
• Natural gas – fastest and simplest solution to dramatically reduce carbon emissions
• Replacing all coal based power generation with natural gas would reduce CO2:
– globally by 4080 million tons per annum
– in the EU by 532 million tons per annum, which represents almost half of the EU 2020
climate package target of 1160 million tons per annum.
• Substantial reduction of CO2 requires both wide wind and solar integration and transfer to
natural gas generation
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 16 © Wärtsilä
Typical present 100 GW power system
• The system consists mainly of inelastic base load capacity
• Good dispatching forecastability
– Statistical load data available
– No wind variability
• Increasing daily load variations
• At low load periods (night)
– Some CCGT’s are stopped
– Other CCGT’s ramp down to minimum load
– Coal regulates
Annual Hours
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000
Sys
tem
Load (
GW
)
Annual system load duration curve and
dispatchable capacity System peak load 100 GW
Average capacity factor 0.5
Annual system energy 500 TWh
Hydro+nuclear+coal 70 %
CCGT Base load 22 %
CCGT Peaking 8 %
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 17 © Wärtsilä
Grid reserve
0
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 Lo
ad (
MW
) Hour
Average daily load curve CCGT peak-load mode CCGT baseload mode Coal Hydro+Nuclear
Cyclic operation – System operator’s view
• System balancing becomes more and more challenging
due to cyclic demand and increasing share of variable
renewable capacity
• The current system capacity mix does not enable
optimum and reliable system operation
– Existing generation capacity is mainly based on
inelastic steam power plants which are not capable
of required dynamic flexibility and have poor part
load efficiency
– The capacity mix has to change so that there is
proportionally less inelastic base load capacity, and
the following needs to be added:
• Dynamic and flexible capacity for system balancing,
which can be either hydro (reservoir) or natural gas
based generation
• Two way demand response to reduce or increase the
momentary load
• Strengthening (changing?) the grid where applicable
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 18 © Wärtsilä
Cyclic operation – Damage cost
• Cyclic operation has a significant
impact on the O&M cost of thermal
(steam) power plants
– Increased damage to equipment
due to thermal stresses with
related higher maintenance and
capital costs, and forced outage
rates
– Lower efficiencies below those
explained by the "heat rate
curves"
– Potentially shortened unit life
Source: Intertek
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 19 © Wärtsilä
Pöyry report - Challenges of intermittency
Direct quotes from Pöyry’s report:
• “Wind 2030 and solar output will be highly variable and will not ‘average out’
• By wholesale market prices in some countries will have become highly volatile and
driven by short term weather patterns
• Thermal generation becomes ‘intermittent’ in its operation
– Inevitably the large amount of thermal capacity that essentially operates as a
backup to the wind becomes more valuable for its capacity than its energy
output.
• Unless market designs change, the investment case for thermal plant is challenging
– and this holds even for a significant shortfall against targets of renewables
deployment
• ‘Flexible demand’ may be an important dynamic, but its role is complex
• Equally, the challenge for policy makers and regulators is to create suitable market
structures without relying on the ‘golden bullets’ of more interconnection and
demand side response while definitely making efforts to promote and develop both
of these. In particular the European Target Model will need to encompass the value
of capacity and ‘flexibility’.”
Source: The challenges of intermittency in North West European power markets, Pöyry, March 2011
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 20 © Wärtsilä
Scenario 2030
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 21 © Wärtsilä
European Turbine Network - Position paper
Direct quotes from ETN position paper:
• “Highly flexible power production units need to be added to the grid
– The variability of renewable energy sources will require highly flexible power
production units as back-up to balance any short-falls in production
• CCS incompatible with flexible generation
– Flexible operation requires that power plants operate in cyclic mode, which
hamper current Carbon Capture Storage (CCS) technologies, therefore new
carbon capture technologies need to be developed for cyclic mode.
• Efficiency, emissions and cost penalties
– CO2 reduction by renewables is partly off-set by the lower efficiency and
higher emissions of power stations maintaining a spinning reserve to provide
back-up in case of reduced renewables production. This may also result in
higher price for CO2 reduction”
Source: European Turbine Network A.I.S.B.L. – Enabling the Increasing Share of Renewable Energy in the Grid –
Technological Challenges for Power Generation, Grid Stability and the role of Gas Turbines – Position Paper
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 22 © Wärtsilä
Smart power system
• Low carbon system capacity mix and operation
• Competitive technology comparison
• The role of gas
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 23 © Wärtsilä
Daily load curves, 20 % at 2020 system
Daily system load curve and capacity dispatch
Flexicycle!
0 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000 90.000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Load
(M
W)
Hour
Load curve, future - high wind
Solar Wind
Wind curtailment Flexible capacity
Low-carbon baseload
0 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000 90.000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Load
(M
W)
Hour
Load curve, future - low wind
Solar Wind
Flexible capacity Low-carbon baseload
0 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000 90.000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Load
(M
W)
Hour
Load curve, future - average wind
Solar Wind
Wind curtailment Flexible capacity
Low-carbon baseload
System dispatching challenges
• 49 GW wind capacity > more than system night load!
• Wind speed change 7 9 m/s leads to a wind power output change of 13,5 GW! Such wind speed changes happen all
the time!
• Dynamic thermal capacity will have to stretch tens of GWs up and down within less than 30 minutes
• System balancing will be a major challenge
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 24 © Wärtsilä
System capacities, 20 % at 2020 system 1(2)
• System peak load 100 GW
• Needs 110 GW installed dispatchable
capacity (10% margin for contingency
situations)
• 20% of power produced with renewables
requires e.g.:
– 49 GW wind capacity (capacity factor 25%)
– 9 GW solar capacity (capacity factor 20%)
• The >8000h base load capacity need is
about 32 GW
• The gap between installed base load
capacity and the system peak load must
be covered with 78 GW of flexible,
dispatchable capacity
32 GW
Flexible capacity 78 GW
Wind 49 GW
Solar 9 GW
Dispatchable
Capacity 110 GW
Variable
Capacity 58 GW
Low-carbon
baseload
Capacity, future system
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 25 © Wärtsilä
System capacities, 20 % at 2020 system 2(2)
Base load capacity
• Zero - or lowest possible - CO2
• Lowest possible marginal costs
• Quantity 32 GW Over 8000 h of full power operation
• No need for agility of dispatch, load range 60…100
Flexible capacity
• High agility of dispatch
• Lowest possible CO2 (high efficiency in a wide load range)
• Lowest possible marginal costs
• Decentralized locations in load pockets
• Quantity Dispatchable capacity above base load
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 26 © Wärtsilä
Competitive technology comparison
*) Simple cycle / combined cycle
Electrical
efficiency
full load, %
Typical plant
size, MW
Normal starting
time to full load,
minutes
Dynamic
capabilities
CO2,
g/kWh
Nuclear 31-33 1000 - 2000 >2000 Poor -
Coal 33-45 300 - 4000 >180 Poor 820 - 1050
CCGT gas 50-57 200 - 1500 60-90 Not good 370
Gas engines 46 1 - 500 5-10 Excellent 430
Aero GT 33-41 1-300 10-13 Good 500
HDGT 30-35 100-1000 13-30 Decent 560
Flexicycle 46/50 100-500 10/60 * Very good 400
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 27 © Wärtsilä
Competitive technology comparison
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 28 © Wärtsilä
Electrical
efficiency,
net
Flexibility
Starting time
Ramp rate
Part load operation
Operational flexibility vs. electrical efficiency
40%
50%
Medium High
Wärtsilä
SC
Aero-
GT’s
Industrial
GT’s
Coal
CCGT’s
Steam Power Plants Simple Cycle Combustion Engines
Nuclear
Wärtsilä Flexicycle™
30%
Low
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 29 © Wärtsilä
The role of gas
• Recent technical breakthroughs and commercialisation of shale gas
have lead to:
– Substantial increase in perceived lifetime/availability of gas reserves globally
– Reduction of gas price in the US from 10 $/MMBtu (2008) to less than half
– Rapid decline in demand for LNG in US and consequential surplus of supply.
US will become an exporter of LNG instead of the major importer.
– The new competitive situation is leading to
• Deindexation of gas prices from oil (LFO)
• Small scale LNG becoming commercially interesting
• Huge interest in LNG in locations with no gas infrastructure
• The use of gas in power generation will increase as it is competitively
priced and is a low carbon fuel
• The role of gas in power generation is covering multiple segments
– Base load to intermittent, in systems with low share of installed wind capacity
– Peaking to system balancing, as the share of wind capacity increases and the
net load to thermal plants decreases
– This is because gas power plants:
• Can be constructed rapidly with a reasonable cost
• Produce less CO2 emissions than other thermal dispatchable plants
• Can offer favourable dynamic characteristics
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 30 © Wärtsilä
The role of gas
Quotes:
• Jeff Immelt, CEO, GE: “The world is starting a natural gas power generation
cycle”
• John Krenicki, Vice Chairman, GE : “We are looking at a 25-year very bullish
gas market”
• Linda Cook, Executive Director Gas & Power, Royal Dutch Shell: “The
decreasing cost of LNG is making it more competitive in more markets.”
• Maxime Verhagen, Deputy Prime Minister of the Netherlands: “For many
decades to come, gas will remain critically important to the energy mix
worldwide. In our effort to move to an efficient and low carbon economy, natural
gas as the cleanest of fossil fuels is indispensable. The Netherlands aims to
contribute to this transition by serving as a gas hub to North-West Europe.”
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 31 © Wärtsilä
Smart Power Generation
• Definition
• Features
• Benefits
• Operating modes
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 32 © Wärtsilä
Reliable Sustainable
Affordable
Smart
Power
System
Smart Power Generation
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 33 © Wärtsilä
1) All in One! A unique combination of valuable
features!
2) The missing piece of the low carbon power
system puzzle!
Fuel
Flexibility
Operational
Flexibility
Energy
Efficiency
Smart
Power
Generation
Why is this technology Smart?
All in One! A unique combination of valuable
features!
• Extreme flexibility in operation modes, best
available dynamic features, highest available
simple cycle energy efficiency and wide fuel
portfolio form a unique combination, not
available with any other technology.
• The unique combination of valuable features
brings benefits both to power systems and
power producers.
• With its true flexibility, Smart Power
Generation is the most valuable asset also in
the coming low carbon power markets.
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 34 © Wärtsilä
The missing piece of the low carbon power system puzzle! Smart power generation enables the global transition to a sustainable, reliable and affordable energy
infrastructure.
It is a new, unique solution for flexible power generation and an essential part of tomorrow´s optimized
and secure low carbon power systems.
Smart power generation can operate in multiple modes, from efficient base load power production to ultra
fast dynamic system balancing.
Smart Power Generation improves the system total efficiency, and solves the variability challenges of
maximized wind integration.
Reliable Sustainable
Affordable
Smart
Power
System
Enable!
What is Smart Power Generation
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 35 © Wärtsilä
Fuel
Flexibility Operational
Flexibility
Energy
Efficiency
Smart
Power
Generation
Features of Smart Power Generation
• Agility of dispatch
– Megawatts to grid in 1 minute from start
– 5 minutes to full load from start
– Fast shut down in 1 minute
– Fast ramp rates up & down
– Unrestricted up/down times
– High starting reliability
– Remote operator access including start & stop
– Black start capability
• Low generation costs
– High efficiency (46% in simple cycle and >50% in
combined cycle)
• High dispatch with low CO2
– Wide economic load range
• Multiple units
• Any plant output with high efficiency
– No derating enabling higher dispatch in hot climate
and at high altitude
– Low maintenance costs, not influenced of frequent
starts and stops, and cyclic operation
– Low/no water consumption
• High plant reliability and availability
– Multiple units enable firm (n-2) power (n=number
of installed units)
– Typical unit availability > 96%
– Typical unit reliability ~ 99%
– Typical unit starting reliability > 99 %
• Optimum plant location and size
– Location inside load pockets i.e. cities
– Flexible, expandable plant size enables step by
step investments
– Low pipeline gas pressure requirement (5 bar)
• Fuel flexibility
– Natural gas and biogases with back-up fuel
– Liquid fuels (LBF, LFO, HFO)
– Fuel conversions
• Low environmental impact
– Low CO2 and local emissions even when ramping
and on part load
• Easy maintenance
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 36 © Wärtsilä
Benefits to power producers
• Operate on multiple markets
– Energy markets
– Capacity markets
– Ancillary services markets
• High dispatch enabled by high efficiency
• Dependable and committable
– Multiple generating units
– High unit reliability and availability
• Optimum plant location close to
consumers
• Fuel flexibility – hedge for the future
• Fast access to income through fast-track
project delivery
• Competitive O&M costs
Fuel
Flexibility Operational
Flexibility
Energy
Efficiency
Smart
Power
Generation
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 37 © Wärtsilä
Benefits to power systems
• Secures the supply of affordable and
sustainable power
– Enable highest penetration of wind and
solar power capacity
– Maximizing the use of wind power capacity
by minimizing wind curtailment
– Ensure system stability in wind variability
and contingency situations
– Avoid negative prices
• Ensures true optimization of the total power
system operation
– Remove the abusive starts and stops, and
cyclic load from base load plants that are
not designed for it
– Improves the total system efficiency
• Enables reaching the 20 % 2020 renewable
energy share targets set by many countries
Reliable Sustainable
Affordable
Smart Power Generation
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 38 © Wärtsilä
Smart
Power
System
0
10 000
20 000
30 000
40 000
50 000
60 000
70 000
80 000
90 000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Load
(M
W)
Hour
Load curve, future - high windSolar Wind Wind curtailment Flexible capacity Low-carbon baseload
True flexibility through multiple operation modes
All in one!
• Base load generation
– The technology is proven in base load applications with 47,000 MW of
references worldwide
• Rapid load following in the morning and in the evening
– Starting, loading and stopping units one by one along with changing load
• Peaking during high consumption periods
• Balancing wind power i.e. “Wind chasing”
– Starting, loading and stopping rapidly when wind conditions change
• System balancing
– Fast frequency regulation and efficient spinning reserve
• Ultra fast zero-emission NSR grid reserve for any contingency situation
– Starting and producing power in just 1 minute, and full power in 5 minutes
• Fast grid black start in case of a power system black out
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 39 © Wärtsilä
Smart Power Generation in the 2050 roadmap scenarios
The role of Smart Power Technology in Energy 2050 Roadmap scenarios has
been assessed and simulated through dynamic calculations with Plexos dispatch
modeling software.
Modelling is based on the Spanish power system.
The Spanish system is fairly isolated, with limited interconnectivity, and can
therefore show impacts of large scale renewable integration as an “example of
how such a system behaves” without modelling major grid constraints and the
whole power system cost structure to get the price signals over the
interconnections correct.
.
40 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
The Model
Modelling is based on true Spanish load data (10 minute intervals) from 2010 and
on true 10 minute wind generation data from the same year.
The system capacity mix is specific for each scenario and the scenario data is
based on EU information of Spain.
Modelling covers one full year (2030), in 1 hour intervals, and takes into
consideration dynamic characteristics (for example starting and stopping times,
costs and emissions) of various power plants.
Such modelling reveals optimum operation model from cost and CO2 emission
point of view, and situations with major overproduction and lack of energy, which
would lead to obvious system reliability problems.
41 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
The Model
The power systems contains about 30 GW of combined cycle gas turbine plants.
The same amount of Smart Power Generation plants were “installed” in the
system to operate in parallel with the CCGT’s.
The software freely dispatches all the plants, allowing them to operate when their
overall cost (including starting and stopping etc.) is the best for the national power
system.
The scenarios state that biomass fired power generation is running first i.e.
probably has some kind of feed‐in tariff. However, from total system cost point of
view this does not provide lowest cost and often not even the lowest total CO2 (as
biomass is replacing wind and nuclear).
One challenge: the software knows the coming wind conditions exactly for the full
year ahead, and can plan the operation of inelastic older thermal plants without
any forecasting errors in wind generation. In real life the system reserves need to
be bigger as the wind error can be several % even over the next 10 minutes, and
even more over an hour.
42 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Reference scenario
The Reference scenario includes current trends and long‐term projections on economic
development (gross domestic product (GDP) growth 1.7% pa). The scenario includes
policies adopted by March 2010, including the 2020 targets for RES share and GHG
reductions as well as the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) Directive. For the analysis,
several sensitivities with lower and higher GDP growth rates and lower and higher energy
import prices were analysed.
Findings: Smart Power Generation (orange) technology produces the fast peaks with
lower costs and emissions than the Combined Cycle Gas Turbine plants. Combined cycle
gas turbine plants are used as soon as they have adequate running time available (which
the software knows “too well” as it knows the accurate wind production data of the days
ahead). Coal plants are not running at all due to excessive costs. Nuclear produces on
almost full power all through the period. Because of high costs, pump storage is very little
utilised for balancing during high wind periods. No major overproduction or underproduction
occurs in this scenario during this period i.e. system balance is maintained quite well.
43 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Reference Scenario
44 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
EU 2050 Roadmap Scenarios High Energy Efficiency
Political commitment to very high energy savings; it includes e.g. more stringent minimum
requirements for appliances and new buildings; high renovation rates of existing buildings;
establishment of energy savings obligations on energy utilities. This leads to a decrease in
energy demand of 41% by 2050 as compared to the peaks in 2005‐2006.
Findings: The load is lower in this scenario than in the others. Nuclear plants need to
reduce their output to minimum during the high wind periods and still there is substantial
overproduction of electricity (wind power must be curtailed or energy stored). Restarting
nuclear plants takes several days and costs a lot so that is not an option. Pump storage
does not provide a cost efficient method for balancing. Smart Power Generation technology
takes away the abusive peaky generation pulses from Combined Cycle Gas Turbines
(CCGT). CCGT plants do not run at all during high wind periods.
Coal is not used either. This scenario offers quite a challenging environment for the system
operator as over‐ and underproduction occurs frequently and in substantial quantities.
45 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
EU 2050 Roadmap Scenarios High Energy Efficiency
46 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Diversified supply technologies
No technology is preferred; all energy sources can compete on a market basis
with no specific support measures. Decarbonisation is driven by carbon pricing
assuming public acceptance of both nuclear and Carbon Capture & Storage
(CCS).
Findings: Again nuclear power plants need to reduce their output to
minimum during the high wind period and still there is overproduction of
electricity, and hereby nuclear plants lose a big part of their revenues. Pump
storage again does not provide a cost effective means for system balancing.
Smart Power Generation technology takes care of the fast peaks and balancing .
CCGT plants do not run at all during high wind periods. Substantial over‐ and
underproduction occurs again over longer periods of time.
47 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Diversified supply technologies
48 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
High Renewable energy sources (RES)
Strong support measures for RES leading to a very high share of RES in gross
final energy
consumption (75% in 2050) and a share of RES in electricity consumption
reaching 97%.
Findings: Major overproduction of electricity takes place during the study
week almost every day for extended periods. Nuclear power plants need to
reduce their output to minumum most of the time.
Pump storage does not help as overproduction is almost constant. Smart Power
Generation
technology takes care of system balancing and fast load peaks. CCGT plants do
not run at all during high wind periods, and operate only a few hours during the
whole week 8. It is obvious that there is a lot of excess energy for producing
hydrogen or for some other “storage” during this week.
49 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
High Renewable energy sources (RES)
50 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Delayed CCS
Similar to Diversified supply technologies scenario but assuming that CCS is
delayed, leading to higher shares for nuclear energy with decarbonisation driven
by carbon prices rather than technology push. In 2030 there is almost no CCS in
the system so the actual performance and costs of CCS‐coal are not relevant.
Findings: During the study week nuclear power plants reduce their output to
minimum load over several lengthy periods. Smart Power Generation again runs
the peaks and effectively works as the system balancer. CCGT plants do not run
at all during high wind periods. The system is out of balance on Tuesday and
Wednesday for longer periods of time. Again the biomass fired generation is
pushing all the other generation types up on the graph.
51 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Delayed CCS
52 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Low nuclear
Similar to Diversified Supply Technologies scenario but assuming that no new
nuclear (besides reactors currently under construction) is built, resulting in a
higher penetration of CCS (around 32% in power generation).
Findings: Nuclear plants are used but again they operate long periods on
minimum load. The amount of nuclear plants is not really affecting their
operating profile in the scenarios, they always need to reduce their output to
minimum when the wind blows strongly. Pump storage does not provide an
economical solution for balancing even in this fifth scenario. Smart Power
Generation again handles the peaks and system balancing. CCGT plants run only
when they can run on extended periods (due to long and expensive starts and
stops). If wind forecasting errors were included, starting and stopping them would
be more risky and Smart Power Generation would operate even more hours.
53 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Low nuclear
54 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Conclusions
This dynamic power system study looked at the 2030 situation, in Spain, as part
of the EU system, with the EU targets and actions in place. All 5+1 scenarios were
modelled and studied. The results indicate that the high portion of renewables
dramatically change the way the system is operated.
Wind power pushes coal totally and gas plants partially out of the system, and
forces even the nuclear plants to run on minimum load during long hours, thereby
making their economy and payback look worse for the nuclear plant investors.
Biomass fired plants do not have a clear role in the system as they produce high
cost power and force lower cost nuclear to reduce output, and also cause
substantial overproduction over longer periods especially in the high renewable
scenarios.
The carbon emissions of the power system are in all scenarios between 20...45 %
of the average level of 2007...2009, which was 337 kg/MWhe. A distinctive step
forward in decarbonising.
55 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Conclusions
Gas fired power plants have a central role in balancing the system.
This they can do with high efficiency and with low carbon emissions.
The results clearly indicate that economically and environmentally Smart Power
Generation is a better solution than CCGT’s in balancing.
The optimum quantity (in GW) of Smart Power Generation varies depending on
the capacity mix in question.
To reach the optimum cost and system efficiency, CCGT plants are needed, in
parallel with Smart Power Generation.
Smart Power Generation reduces the average system level variable generation
costs from 1 to 5,5 % depending on scenario. Also the CO2 emissions were
reduced in all scenarios from 1 to 12 %.
This is a remarkable result taking into account that in the Spanish energy system
in question has a high penetration of highly efficient Combined Cycle Gas Turbine
plants.
56 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Cost reduction
Average cost reduction with Smart Power Technology.
57 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Conclusions
CO2 emissions in different scenarios and CO2 emission reductions achieved with Smart
Power technology.
58 © Wärtsilä 03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation
Conclusion
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 59 © Wärtsilä
The EU 2050 Roadmap highlights:
‐ “ the need for flexible resources in the power system (e.g. flexible generation,
storage, demand management) as the contribution of intermittent renewable
generation increases”
‐ ” Access to markets needs to be assured for flexible supplies of all types,
demand management and storage as well as generation, and that flexibility needs
to be rewarded in the market. All types of capacity (variable, baseload, flexible)
must expect a reasonable return on investment.”
Decentralization of the power system will dramatically increase due to more
renewable generation.
Together with all the Smart technologies, Smart Power Generation technology
has the potential to play a key role in new EU policy implementation and enable
the targeted extremely low carbon levels because –the back up system has to be
efficient, low carbon and located at the right places in the grid.
Reference: STEC, Pearsall, Texas USA, 202 MW
Quotes:
• John Packard, Manager of Generation, STEC: “These flexible units have
allowed us to respond to changes in the grid when the wind stops blowing and
some of those wind resources are no longer available. Units like this can be
started to compensate for the loss of that capacity. Certainly the capital cost is
always important, but the ability to dispatch these units in increments that fit our
load, allows us to keep the units at peak efficiency rather than partially load a
larger unit where the efficiency might not be as good. So, one of the biggest
economic drivers is again that flexibility”
• Lloyd Freasier, Plant Manager, Pearsall, STEC: “The water use will be
almost zero opposed to the old steam plant. And we get rid of many chemicals,
the acids and caustics, chlorine and the hydrogen in the generators”
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 60 © Wärtsilä
Reference: Chambersburg, USA ,23 MW
Quotes:
• William F. McLaughlin, President of Town Council, Chambersburg: “Key factors were
affordability and flexibility, it fitted within our financial ability and it was overall the best package
for the product and services that we’re going to keep running the plant over the long haul. From
a technical stand point, the fact that we are dual fuel, natural gas and oil, gave us a substantial
advantage in dealing with the environmental situation, the controls and licensing aspects from
both the Pennsylvania department of environmental protection and the EPA. We meet or
exceed all their criteria.
• Alexander Grier, Senior Vice President, Downs Associates: “We wanted engines that would
be able to run hour and hours at a time, but be able to be started and stopped again. Because
of market conditions it might be started and stopped two or three times per day. It’s kind of an
unusual peaking plant. It’s more of a market following plant than it is a traditional peaking plant.”
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 61 © Wärtsilä
Reference: GSEC Antelope, USA 170 MW
Quote:
• Mark W. Schwirtz, President, General Manager, GSEC: “One of the driving
factors for our new generation at this point is that we need peaking capacity.
We are looking at something that is relatively low capital cost. From a
renewable stand point, there is a lot of wind generation going in at this area and
in order to back that wind generation up, we needed something that started
quickly, in less than 10 minutes. This was technology that we felt that could do
that. There are other technologies out there, but what led us to the decision to
pick the Wärtsiläs, was that they start very quickly and are efficient units. And
they provide multiple shafts, which gives us that that shaft diversity so we can
bring that generation on in small increments. This we feel will have value in the
markets that we participate in. If we look at efficiency, it is very important to us
to get the most out of our fuel dollar. The more efficient the unit, the better it is
for us. We looked at this water use, it was another key factor. And the ease of
the operation was important to us.”
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 62 © Wärtsilä
THANK YOU!
Smart Power Generation
03 July 2012 Smart Power Generation 63 © Wärtsilä