for174 _ines b insolations project impact of self-consumption on integration of photovoltaics in...
TRANSCRIPT
FOR174 _INES B
INSOLATIONS PROJECT
IMPACT OF SELF-CONSUMPTION ON INTEGRATION OF PHOTOVOLTAICS IN MARTINIQUE
1
FRANCK AL SHAKARCHI
SESSION T-1: RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGY ON ISLAND POWER GRIDS
INTRODUCTION ON CEA TECH AND ONSMART ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY
| PAGE 2
16 000 employees in 10 research centers4 B€ annual budget580 priority patents filed / year120 new high tech companies created
Defence Applications
Division
NuclearEnergyDivision Research &
Technology DivisionMaterial
Science Division
Life ScienceDivision
Smart Electrical Systems LaboratoryScope:• Electricity Storage Systems• Electric vehicles• Integration of solar generation• Demand-side management• Smart grids & micro-gridsServices:• Modelling and simulations• Smart management and SCADA• Demonstrators and experimental grids
4 500 employees550 M€ budget500 priority patents / year50 spin-off companies
NEW ENERGYTECHNOLOGIES1 400 employees
1 052 patent portfolio170 M€ budget 2013
NanomaterialsThermal, Biomass & H2
Electric vehiclesSolar energy
INTRODUCTION ON THE PROJECT
Consortium:Agence Martiniquaise de l’Energie (AME)Solar Electric MartiniqueCommissariat à l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA)
Funding:Agence de l’Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l’Energie (ADEME)
Objective:Identify the technical and financial conditions for deployment of PV self-consumption
systems in Martinique islandThrough simulations of individual systems and their aggregated impact on the global mixTaking into account externalities (positive and negative)
|PAGE 3
WHAT IS A SOLAR HOME SYSTEM ?
|PAGE 4
NOT ONLY A SIMULATION: A REALITYCONCRETE SOLAR HOME SYSTEMS PROJECTS
|PAGE 5
MILLENER for the French islands:Two type of systems:
500 solar home systems1000 demande-response systems
French overseas territories:Corsica. La Réunion and GuadeloupeNot Martinique
EDF SEI and other partners
Many other countries around the world:Germany:
electricity price in Germany ~ electricity cost in Martiniqueless solar ressource
USAAustralia…
MARTINIQUE ELECTRICITY MIX – 2012
Production:471 MW installed capacity1591 GWh produced electricity
Consumption:254 MW peak load~1422 GWh delivered electricity to customers
~43% domestic~49% services~8% industry
Cost of mix:total cost of power generation: 408 M€Compensation from CSPE : 329 M€
|PAGE 6
Capacity (MW) Production (GWh)0
200400600800
10001200140016001800
Wind powerPVWaste incinerationLFOHFO
EDF SEI HFO and
LFO
semi-base LFO
PV Wind Waste Global0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
Total cost (M€)CSPE (M€)
COSTS COMPARISONS BETWEEN PV GENERATION AND POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSILE FUELS
oil @ 150€/bbl oil @ 100€/bbl oil @ 50€/bbl0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Power generation cost (€/MWh) including 15€/TCO2
HFO - base LFO - semibase LFO - peak
High power generation costs in La Martinique:
From 160 to 280 €/MWhDepending on oil pricesRequiring subsidiesLittle local jobs~700 gCO2/kWhHigh PV purchasing cost due to previous installations at high FIT
Use the subsidies for cheap PV generation:
PV cost gone down Stable pricesLocal jobsLittle CO2 emissionsTarget replacement of peak and semi-base production
CEA estimation based on raw data from CRE. IEDOM. Préfécture
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2022 20230
50
100
150
200
250
300
Comparaison of PV power generation cost according to installed year with average production cost (with 2012 Martinique mix structure)
Average production cost with 50€/bbl
Average production cost with 100€/bbl
Average production cost with 150€/bbl
6 kWp PV system production cost in La Mar-tinique
1 MWp PV system power generation cost in La Martinique
€/M
Wh
EDF SEI HFO and LF
O
semi-b
ase LF
O PVW
indW
asteGlobal
0.0
200.0
400.0
Unitary cost (€/MWh)
PV SELF-CONSUMPTION TO ADD VALUE FOR PV AND INCREASE ITS INTEGRATION
Some limits to PV integrationIntermittencyNot 24 hours a dayVoltage inversionNo ancillary services
Technical requirements of PV self-consumption systems (~ CRE RFP)PV production smoothing through ramp control (15% Ppeak / 30min)ÞNo need of power reserves to compensate PV fluctuations
Minimum injection at peak time (20% of PV rated power from 19 to 21)ÞReduction of expensive peak LFO power generation
Power injection limitation (45% of power subscription) ÞNo more voltage impact on distribution grids
Primary frequency support (10% PV rated power and 15 min)Þ Positive impact for the electricity system
SIMULATIONS CARRIED OUT
SHS operation simulationModelling approaches:2 types: simulink with non-perfect control and matlab with perfect control
Domestic loads11 houses: 3, 6 and 9 kVA subscribtionPV3 locations x 3 PV sizing
Le Lamentin, Rivière Salée and Grand RivièreHouse power subscribtion x 2/3, 1 and 4/3
Batteries2 technologies x 3 battery sizingLead acid: 2h, 4h and 6h of power subscriptionLithium: 1h, 2h and 3h of house power subscriptionAgeingPV: linear ageing with timeBatteries: post-treatment computation considering calendar and cycling ageing
Economic data3 scenarios for feed-in and self-consumption tariffs1 scenario for system cost with two scenarios of loan rates3 scenarios for global mix cost assessment
GLOBAL ANALYSIS CONSIDERING DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEWS
Solar Home Systems
Martinique Electricity
Mix
Externalities:CO2 and air
quality
SHS installators
Public authorities
Global Martinique Economy
SIMPLIFIED INTERACTION DIAGRAMME AROUND SOLAR HOMES
Solar Home Systems
Martinique Electricity
Mix
EDF SEICRE CSPE
Externalities:CO2 and air
quality
SHS installators
Public authorities
Global Martinique Economy
Tax return
Buy
Pay taxes
Buyselectricity
Sells electricity
Produceselectricity
Consummeselectricity
Coversoverproductioncosts
Emissions Generatesactivity
Pay taxes
Martinique power grid
Develops &maintains
IMPACTS TO BE CONSIDERED DURING SOLAR HOME SYSTEMS ASSESSMENTS
Avoided fuel power generation costs and their negative externalitiesPower generation cost:
Fuel costs for oil @ 40/80/120 €/bblGHG: 15/30/45 €/TCO2Air quality: 36 €/MWh (based on CRE)
Grid development and maintenance cost50€/MWh for electricity consumed (from self-consumption as well)
UPS for adaptation to climate change and power quality12 €/kWh delivered in UPS (based on RTE customer satisfaction study)
Local jobs creation20 direct jobs per MW SHSIndirect jobs
MODELLING OF INCOMES FOR SHS
Avoided fuel power generation costs and their negative externalitiesPower generation cost:
Fuel costs for oil @ 40/80/120 €/bblGHG: 15/30/45 €/TCO2Air quality: 36 €/MWh (based on CRE)
Grid development and maintenance cost50€/MWh for electricity consumed (from self-consumption as well)
UPS for adaptation to climate change and power quality12 €/kWh delivered in UPS (based on RTE customer satisfaction study)
Local jobs creation20 direct jobs per MW SHSIndirect jobs Tax return and direct subsidies
Feed-inand self-consumption
tariffs
ELECTRICITY PRICES AND TARIFFS3 SCENARIOS WITH TIME-VARYING TARIFFS
€/MWh Feed-in tariff Self-consumption tariff
Electricity price from grid
06-19h and 21-00h 1. 2502. 2003. 150
1. 2002. 1503. 100
-130
Peak time 19-21h 1. 4102. 3303. 250
1. 3602. 2803. 200
-130
Night time 00-06h 1. 1802. 1453. 110
1. 1302. 953. 60
-130
Tax return and other subsidies : 1k€/kWp of system
View of tariffs for 2012.
Dynamic modelling of tariffs: 1% decrease over 10 years then constant tariffs (91% of 2012 tariffs)
MODELLING OF SHS COSTS
Initial installationPV panels and others €/kWp 1500Inverter-charger €/kVA 780Solar charger €/kWp 220Installation for PV €/kWp 520Lead-Acid €/kWh 150Lithium €/kWh 750Installation for batteries €/kWh 50
MaintenanceShare/year of investment 1%
Components replacementOthers €/kWp 300Inverter-charger €/kVA 780Solar charger €/kWp 220Installation for PV €/kWc 200Lead-Acid €/kWh 150
Lithium €/kWhDecreasing price to
250 in 10 yearsInstallation for batteries €/kWh 50
Modelling of loans as well:- 3% rate- 0% rate
« Static » modelling ofreplacement need:- PV equipment (not modules)
after 10 years- Batteries: at 80% of SOH
More optimal dynamicmodelling according to prices is possible
Exemple:- 6 kWp + 12 kWh Li-ion- 27k€ installation
Forecast on rapid decreaseof Li batteries prices
EXEMPLE OF SIMULATIONS RESULTS
Smoothing andmaximisation ofself-consumption
Peak production with limitation of injection @ 45%
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT FROM THE END-CUSTOMER POINT OF VIEW – SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
low medium high-100
0
100
Tariff
RO
I (%
)
low medium high0
50
100
Tariff
(RO
I >
5 %
) (%
)
Loan 0% rate
low medium high-100
0
100
Tariff
RO
I (%
)
low medium high0
20
40
Tariff
(RO
I >
5 %
) (%
)
Loan 3% rate
GrandRiviere RiviereSalee LeLamentin-100
0
100
Location
RO
I (%
)
GrandRiviere RiviereSalee LeLamentin50
60
70X: 3Y: 68.52
Location
(RO
I >
5 %
) (%
)
X: 2Y: 68.52
Loan 0%, medium tariff
1 2 3-50
0
50
ESS energy (h)
RO
I (%
)
1 2 3
60
80
100
ESS energy (h)
(RO
I >
5 %
) (%
)
Liion
2 4 6-100
0
100
ESS energy (h)R
OI
(%)
2 4 60
50
100
ESS energy (h)
(RO
I >
5 %
) (%
)
Lead Acid
Loan 0%, medium tariff
2/3 1 4/3-100
0
100
PV installed capacity (pu of house power subscription)R
OI (
%)
2/3 1 4/3
60
80
100
PV installed capacity (pu of house power subscription)
(RO
I > 5
%) (
%)
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT FROM THE END-CUSTOMER POINT OF VIEW – SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Projects feasibility according to tariffs and loan rateCurrently, no acceptable return with low tariffs, even with 0% rate loanWith medium and high tariffs, possible economically viable projects:•More than 50% are viable with 0% rate loan•With 3% rate loan, ~25% viable projects with medium tariffs and ~40% with high tariffs
This is with current system costs: with Li batteries prices going down, lower tariffs are possible.
Optimal sizing of systemPV size : better return with 1 kWp per kVA of power suscriptionBatteries:•Better return with Li-ion vs Lead-Acid•Better returun with battery sizing of 2kWh per kVA of power suscription•With « dynamic » sizing modelling, 1kWh could be a better option for Li
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT FROM THE END-CUSTOMER POINT OF VIEW – SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Possible scenario of 25% integration of SHS
With prices going down, higher integration is possible with lower tariffs
Martinique domestic customers~ 164 000 customersSubscriptions: 3 kVA: ~25%+6 kVA: ~70%+9 kVA: ~5%SHS sizing : 1 power ratio and from 1 to 2 energy ratio vs house subscription
25% integration SHS scenario~ 41 000 customers~ 220 MWp of PV and 440 MWh of batteries in total
Power impact on the global mixPower generation impact (avoided global production) :
210 GWh during base+65 GWh at peak time+10 GWh at night45% of house consumption provided by PV-storage
Power capacity impact:Max SHS power during day time 60 MW with ramp rate controlAt peak time (or whenever), power capability of ~100 MW and 100 MWh22 MVA x 15 min of reserve for frequency regulation
25% INTEGRATION OF SHS SCENARIOTARIFFS COSTS, CSPE AND GRID REVENUES
Total costs: 55M€ for medium and 70M€ with high tariffs
CSPE: 40M€ with medium tariffs and 55M€ with high tariffs
+ 3.3 M€ for compensation of grid
revenue losses
This considers decreasing tariffs. Otherwie costs would be 60 and 75 M€.
Direct fuel power generation costDirect fuel costs + share of other variable costs + no fix costsGHG249 kTCO2 avoidedAir qualityCRE evaluates impact of fuel power generation on air quality is 36€/MWh
25% INTEGRATION OF SHS SCENARIOIMPACT ON ELECTRICITY MIX GLOBAL COST
M€ 40€/bbl 80€/bbl 120€/bbl
Fuel costs 23.7 47.4 71.2
Other variable costs (personnel, taxes,…)
11.5
Fix costs 13.2
M€ 15€/TCO2 30€/TCO2 45€/TCO2
GHG 3.7 7.5 11.2
Air quality 12.5
To be compared with tariff costs, grid development revenue compensation58.3 M€ for medium tariffs and 73.8 M€ for high tariffs
25% INTEGRATION OF SHS SCENARIOFEASIBLE SCENARIOS
Total costs in M€ considering 100% air quality cost
Fuel costs + 27% other variable cost40€/bbl 80€/bbl 120€/bbl
26.8 50.5 74.3
GHG costs
15€/TCO2 3.70 43.0 66.7 90.5 High and medium feasible30€/TCO2 7.5 46.8 70.5 94.3 Medium feasible. not high45€/TCO2 11.2 50.5 74.2 98.0 Close to medium feasibility (10% gap)
no feasibility
Total costs in M€ considering 50% air quality cost
Fuel costs + 27% other variable cost40€/bbl 80€/bbl 120€/bbl
26.8 50.5 74.3
GHG costs
15€/TCO2 3.70 36.8 60.5 84.330€/TCO2 7.5 40.6 64.3 88.145€/TCO2 11.2 44.3 68.0 91.8
Total costs in M€ considering no air quality cost
Fuel costs + 27% other variable cost40€/bbl 80€/bbl 120€/bbl
26.8 50.5 74.3
GHG costs
15€/TCO2 3.70 30.5 54.2 78.030€/TCO2 7.5 34.3 58.0 81.845€/TCO2 11.2 38.0 61.7 85.5
Other scenarios can be considered if taking into account more share ofvariable costs and some share of fix costs
No impact on EDF SEI jobs, nor on fuel plant capacity
25% integration SHS scenario~ 41 000 customers~ 220 MWp of PV and 440 MWh of batteries in totalÞ~10 MWp and 20 MWh of batteries installed per yearÞ~1700 domestic customers equipped with SHS per year
Economic impact of 25% integration SHS scenarioFor installation activity: 20 jobs per MWp installed of SHS:
10 jobs per MWp PV + 5 jobs per MWh installedPossible creation of local industry for system integration and assembly:
1h per kWh + 1h per kWc + management/administration
25% INTEGRATION OF SHS SCENARIOIMPACT ON LOCAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
Direct local jobs: 200
Possible local assembly : 25 jobs
Direct jobs could be a little less considering a reduced battery sizing.
CONCLUSIONS
SHS deployment scenarios with benefits for each actor FEASIBLE25% SHS integration:•41 000 customers•220 MWp of PV and 440 MWh of batteries in total
Global feasibility conditions for medium tariffs :• 80 €/bbl for oil• 30€/TCO2 for GHG and no air quality externalitiesOr 15€/TCO2 for GHG and 50% air quality externalitiesAlmost feasible without no air quality cost if 15€/TCO2
Best system sizing:1 kWp per kVA of house power subscription1 to 2 kWh per kVA of house power subscription
Feedback and some possible improvementsAcces of data and transparency : need for a global and open partnershipFine tuning of tariffs & tax return schemes
80€/bbl
01/2005 05/2005