mitigating environmental emissions from the power sector: analysis of technical and policy options...

Mitigating Environmental Emissions from the Mitigating Environmental Emissions from the Power Sector: Analysis of Technical and Policy Power Sector: Analysis of Technical and Policy

Options in Selected Asian CountriesOptions in Selected Asian Countries

Ram M. Shrestha S. C. Bhattacharya

Asian Regional Research Programme in Energy, Environment and Climate (ARRPEEC)

Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand

COP 8, 01 November 2002, New Delhi, India 2AIT

Overview of presentationOverview of presentation

ARRPEEC power sector projectStatus of power sector Least cost generation options under CO2

emission targetsIdentification of some CDM projectsConclusions


Share of the power sector in total national Share of the power sector in total national COCO22 emissions (1990 and 1999) emissions (1990 and 1999)

Power sector’s share in CO2 emission in 1999: 12% in Sri Lanka to over 42% in China and India

The sector’s share increasing in China, India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Decreasing share in Thailand and Vietnam

Share of the Power Sector CO2 Emission

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Pe

rce

nt

1990

1999

Yearly Emission by fuel typeYearly Emission by fuel type


The ARRPEEC Power Sector Project The ARRPEEC Power Sector Project Network Network

Collaborating InstitutionsCollaborating Institutions

AIT = Asian Institute of Technology

SPPERC = State Power Economic Research Center, China

IIT-K = Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur

CEA = Central Electricity Authority, India

FIIEE = The Foundation of Indonesian Institute of Energy Economics

SLEMA = Sri Lanka Energy Managers Association

SIIT = Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology, Thailand

IE = Institute of Energy, Vietnam


The ARRPEEC Power Sector Project: The ARRPEEC Power Sector Project: Specific ObjectivesSpecific Objectives

Determination of least cost supply-side options for GHG and other harmful emissions mitigation subject to CO2 emission targets,

Identification of some CDM projects and assessment of their GHG and

other harmful emissions mitigation potential

Assessment of environmental implications of Independent Power

Producers (IPPs) and Distributed Power Generation (DPG)


Power systems and countries coveredPower systems and countries covered

a=1999

Capacity (%) Generation (%)

Chinaa Yunnan Grid 7,616 4 3India NREB 25,847 30 34Indonesia Java-Bali Grid 15,512 70 80Sri Lanka Whole country 1,835 100 100Thailand Whole country 22,296 100 100

Vietnama Whole country 5,785 100 100

Country/Regions Power system Installed capacity in 2000 (MW)

Share in total national


Research approach & planning Research approach & planning horizonhorizon

Least cost power generation planning model

Planning horizon: 2003 to 2017


Candidate generation technologiesCandidate generation technologies

Note:BIGCC = Biomass Gasification Combined Cycle, PFBC = Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion,

CFBC = Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustion, IGCC = Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle

Generation Technology Options

Region/ Countries

Conventional Thermal Cleaner and Efficient Renewable

Yunnan – China Conventional Coal CFBC Hydro, Geothermal, Solar PV, Wind

NREB – India Conventional Coal Combined Cycle, IGCC, PFBC, Nuclear

Hydro, BIGCC, Wind, Solar PV

Indonesia Conventional Coal, Oil and gas turbine

IGCC, PFBC, Combined Cycle

Geothermal, Hydro

Sri Lanka Conventional Coal, Diesel generator, Oil based gas turbine

IGCC, PFBC, Oil based CC

Wind, Dendro-thermal, Hydro

Thailand Conventional Coal and Oil-fired plants

Combined Cycle, IGCC, PFBC

BIGCC, wind, Solar PV

Vietnam Conventional Coal, Oil based gas turbine

PFBC, Combined Cycle Hydro


Least cost electricity generation Least cost electricity generation technologies technologies

under the BAU case during 2003-2017under the BAU case during 2003-2017

Region/Country Generation Technologies

Yunnan -- China Conventional Coal, Hydro

NREB -- India Conventional Coal, IGCC, PFBC, Combined Cycle, Nuclear, Hydro, Wind

Indonesia Conventional Coal, PFBC, Combined Cycle, Gas turbine, Hydro, Geothermal

Sri Lanka Conventional Coal, Diesel generator, oil-bases gas turbine

Thailand Conventional Coal, IGCC, Combined Cycle, Biomass

Vietnam Conventional Coal, Combined Cycle, Hydro

In the BAU case (i.e.without a CO2 emission reduction target), clean coal and non-hydro renewable options are found cost effective only in NREB-India, Indonesia and Thailand.


Cleaner thermal generation technologies selectedCleaner thermal generation technologies selected under least cost planning in the BAU and emission under least cost planning in the BAU and emission

reduction cases during 2003-17reduction cases during 2003-17

Annual CO2 Emission Reduction Targets

Technology 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 30%

CFBC Yunnan -China Yunnan-China Yunnan-China - -

IGCC NREB-India, Thailand

NREB-India, Thailand



Thailand Thailand

PFBC Indonesia, NREB-India

Indonesia, NREB-India



Indonesia -

CC (gas based)

Indonesia, NREB-India, Thailand, Vietnam




Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam

Thailand, Vietnam

CC (Oil-based)

- - Sri Lanka Sri Lanka Sri Lanka

•Clean coal power generation technologies cost effective in Yunnan-China, NREB- India, Indonesia and Thailand and generation share to decrease under reduction cases

•Combined cycle plants selected in all countries (except Sri Lanka) and its generation share to increase under emission reduction cases


Renewable technologies selectedRenewable technologies selected under least under least cost planning in the BAU and COcost planning in the BAU and CO22 emission emission

reduction cases during 2003-17reduction cases during 2003-17Annual CO2 Emission Reduction Targets

Technology 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 30%

Wind NREB-India Yunnan-China, NREB-India

Yunnan, NREB-India, Thailand,

Sri Lanka

Yunnan-China, NREB-India, Thailand,

Thailand, Sri Lanka

Thailand,

Sri Lanka

Geothermal Indonesia Indonesia,

Yunnan-China

Indonesia,

Yunnan-China

Indonesia,

Yunnan-China

Indonesia -

Solar PV Yunnan-China Yunnan-China Yunnan-China - -

BIGCC * Thailand NREB-India, Thailand



Thailand Thailand

Hydro Yunnan-China, NREB-India, Indonesia, Vietnam

Yunnan-China, NREB-India, Indonesia, Vietnam

Yunnan-China, NREB-India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Vietnam

Yunnan-China, NREB-India, Indonesia, Vietnam

Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka

Indonesia, Vietnam

* Dendro thermal cost effective in Sri Lanka at 20% reduction target

• Wind: cost effective at 5% in Yunnan-China, and at 10% and more % in Thailand and Sri Lanka• Geothermal and solar PV: cost effective at 5% and more in Yunnan-China• BIGCC: cost effective at 5% in NREB-India and dendro-thermal at 20% in Sri Lanka


Trends of generation share in total generation Trends of generation share in total generation under COunder CO22 emission reduction cases emission reduction cases

• Share of gas-fired combined cycle (CC) generation to increase in Indonesia, NREB-India, Thailand and Vietnam

• Share of hydro generation to increase in NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Yunnan-China

•Share of biomass (BIGCC) increase in NREB-India and Thailand

• Share of conventional coal-fired generation to decrease in NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam and Yunnan-China (shift to CC and hydro)

• Share of clean coal generation (PFBC) to decrease in Indonesia (shift to CC)

Generation share by technologyGeneration share by technology


COCO22 Emission-mix by type of generation technology during Emission-mix by type of generation technology during 2003-17 under BAU and 15% CO2003-17 under BAU and 15% CO22 emission reduction emission reduction

casescases

Emission share of coal plants to decrease and that of CC (gas-based) to increase in NREB-India and Indonesia

BAU case NREB-India

Conventional Coal76%

IGCC3%

PFBC6%

CC15%

15% reduction case NREB-India


IGCC5% PFBC

8%

CC30%

15% reduction case (Indonesia)


CCT13%

Oil1%

CC22%

GT20%

BAU case (Indonesia)


GT17%

CC7%

Oil1%

CCT35%


COCO22 Emission-mix by type of generation technology during Emission-mix by type of generation technology during 2003-2017 under BAU and 15% CO2003-2017 under BAU and 15% CO22 emission reduction emission reduction

casescases

Emission share of coal plants to decrease and that of CC (gas-based) to increase in Thailand and Vietnam

BAU case (Vietnam)


CC23%

Gas turbine

1%

Oil7%

15% reduction case (Vietnam)

Oil7%

Conventional Coal53% Gas

turbine1%

CC39%

BAU case Thailand

Coal-fired68%

Oil-fired13%

GT1%

CC18%

IGCC0%

15% reduction case Thailand

Coal-fired51%

IGCC0%

CC32%

GT1%

Oil-fired16%


Effect on total cost of power generation Effect on total cost of power generation under COunder CO22 emission reduction targets emission reduction targets

0

2

4

6

8

10

0 5 10 15 20

CO2 emission reduction target (%)

Cha

nge

is to

tal c

ost

(%)

China-Yunan India-NREB Indonesia

Sri Lanka Thailand Vietnam

Total generation cost increase by:

• 0.2% (Indonesia) to 1.8% (Yunnan-China) at 5% reduction target compared to BAU case

• 1.0% (Indonesia) to 7.3% (Yunnan-China) at 15% reduction target


Marginal Abatement Costs, Marginal Abatement Costs, $/tonne of CO$/tonne of CO22 at 1998 prices at 1998 prices

MAC range from: 1.0 to 2.5 $/tonne of CO2 at 5% reduction target 2.9 to 12.5 $/tonne of CO2 at 10% reduction target 3.1 to 7.3 $/tonne of CO2 at 15% reduction target

Country/Regions

5% 10% 15% 20% 30%

Yunnan-China 1.0 4.3 7.3 7.9 10.6

NREB-India 1.8 3.4 5.4 - -

Indonesia 2.4 3.3 3.9 4.8 5.5

Sri Lanka - 12.5 - 15.5 18.3

Thailand 2.5 2.9 3.1 3.5 4.3

Vietnam 2.4 2.8 3.2 4.1 5.5

CO2 emission reduction targets


COCO22 Mitigation (“Supply”) Curves Mitigation (“Supply”) Curves during 2003-2017during 2003-2017

Cost of CO2 reduction relatively high in Sri Lanka Cumulative CO2 emission reduction during 2003-2017,

215 million tons at MAC of 2 $/tonne CO2

1,110 million tons at MAC of 3 $/tonne CO2

2,192 million tons at MAC of 5 $/ton CO2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Cumulative CO2 emission reduction (million tonnes)

Mar

gina

l aba

tem

ent c

ost

($/t

onne

CO2

)

Indonesia

India - NREB

Thailand

0

5

10

15

20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Cumulative CO2 emission reduction (million tonnes)

Mar

gina

l aba

tem

ent c

ost

($/t

onne

CO2

)

China - Yunan

Sri Lanka

Vietnam


Effects on SOEffects on SO22 Emissions Emissions under COunder CO22 reduction targets reduction targets

SO2 emissions to increase in Indonesia under CO2 reduction targets >5% Disproportionately large % reduction in SO2 emission At 15% CO2 emission reduction target, SO2 emissions to reduce by over 30% in

Yunnan (China), NREB (India) and Thailand and by over 20% in Vietnam.

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

CO2 emission reduction target

SO2 e

mis

sion

redu

ctio

ns

(%)




Effects on NOEffects on NOxx Emissions Emissions under COunder CO22 reduction targets reduction targets

Relatively higher NOx reduction in Yunnan (China) At 15% reduction target, NO2 reduction by over 15% in NREB-India, Vietnam and

Yunnan-China

-10

0

10

20

30

40

0% 10% 20% 30%

CO2 emission reduction target

NO

x em

issi

on re

duct

ions

(%)




Identification of CDM Identification of CDM Projects in the Power SectorProjects in the Power Sector


Project/Options considered for CDMProject/Options considered for CDM

Country/Region Clean/Efficient Technologies Renewable Technologies

Indonesia Geothermal, Solar PVNREB-India BIGCC, Solar PV Sri Lanka IGCC, PFBC, CC-LNG Wind, Dendro-thermalThailand IGCC, PFBC BIGCC, Mini-hydroVietnam PFBC Hydro, GeothermalYunnan-China IGCC, CFBC Wind, Geothermal, Solar PV

MethodologyMethodology


COCO2 2 reductions and MAC of the candidate cleaner reductions and MAC of the candidate cleaner thermal CDM projects during 2003-17 at 1998 thermal CDM projects during 2003-17 at 1998

pricesprices

Country Candidate CDM Projects

Capacity (MW)

Marginal abatement cost

($/tonne CO2)

CO2 emission

reductions

(106 tonnes)IGCC 300 83 2.0

PFBC 300 115 0.8CC-LNG 500 31 15.3IGCC 500 12 10.0

PFBC 500 100 4.0Vietnam PFBC 350 5 12.2

IGCC 300 16 9.2CFBC 300 16 6.1

Sri Lanka

Thailand

Yunnan-China

Wide variations in MAC for CTTs: IGCC: 12 $/tonne (Thailand) to 83 $/tonne of CO2(Sri Lanka) PFBC: 5 $/tonne (Vietnam) to 115 $/tonne CO2 (Sri Lanka) CC-LNG: 31 $/tonne $/tonne CO2 (Sri Lanka)


COCO2 2 reductions and MAC of the candidate RETs reductions and MAC of the candidate RETs based CDM Projects during 2003-17 at 1998 pricesbased CDM Projects during 2003-17 at 1998 prices

Country Candidate CDM Projects

Capacity (MW)

Marginal abatement cost

($/tonne CO2)

CO2 emission

reductions

(106 tonnes)Geothermal 110 5.8 15.7Solar PV 100 16.4 20.6BIGCC 1320 94.4 55.5Solar PV 500 364.4 13.5Wind 300 36.3 5.9Dendro 300 48.0 6.2BIGCC 1000 3.0 101.0Mini Hydro 100 2.2 12.0Hydro 250 92.5 10.3Geothermal 200 73.3 1.3Wind 200 11.3 10.4Geothermal 200 4.9 19.6Solar PV 200 11.9 10.2

NREB-India

Sri Lanka

Thailand

Vietnam

Yunnan-China

Indonesia

Wide variations in MAC for RETs: Solar PV: 12 $/tonne (Yunnan-China) to 364 $/tonne of CO2 (NREB-India) Wind: 11 $/tonne (Yunnan-China) to 36 $/tonne of CO2 (Sri Lanka) Geothermal: 5 $/tonne (Yunnan-China) to 73 $/tonne of CO2 (Vietnam) BIGCC: 3 $/tonne (Thailand) to 94 $/tonne of CO2 (NREB-India) Mini-Hydro: 2.2 $/tonne of CO2 (Thailand)


ConclusionsConclusions

At present costs, clean coal options (i.e., IGCC in NREB-India and Thailand and PFBC in Indonesia and NREB-India) and renewable options (geothermal in Indonesia, wind power in NREB-India and BIGCC in Thailand) are cost effective under the BAU case.

Clean coal technologies would be cost effective at 5% CO2 reduction target in Yunnan (China)

Marginal abatement cost ranges from:

1.0 to 2.5 $/tonne of CO2 at 5% CO2 emission reduction target and from 2.8 to 12.5 $/tonne of CO2 at 10% CO2 emission reduction target

Disproportionately large percentage reduction in SO2 emission would take place at the selected CO2 emission reduction targets except in Indonesia and Sri Lanka.


ConclusionsConclusions

Some renewable power generation projects (e.g., BIGCC and mini-hydro in Thailand and geothermal in Indonesia and Yunnan-China) are found promising at present as possible CDM projects due to their low marginal abatement cost (2.2 to 5.8 $/tonne CO2).

Other renewable options (i.e., solar PV in Indonesia and Vietnam and wind power in Yunnan-China) would be promising as a CDM project if the price for CER is to reach above 16.5 $/tonne CO2 (=> “larger demand for CERs”).


Thank You


COCO22 Emission from the Power Sector Emission from the Power Sector (1980-1997), 10(1980-1997), 1066 tons tons

Sri Lanka

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

CO

2 E

mis

sion

s (m

illi

on to

n)

OilThailand

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

CO

2 E

mis

sion

s (m

illi

on to

n)

Gas

Oil

Coal

Vietnam

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

CO

2 E

mis

sion

s (m

illi

on to

n)

Gas

Oil

Coal

Indonesia

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

CO

2 E

mis

sion

s (m

illi

on to

n)

Gas

Oil

Coal

India

0

100

200

300

400

500

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

CO

2 em

issi

on (m

illi

on to

ns)

Gas

Oil

Coal

China

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

CO

2 em

issi

on (m

illi

on to

ns)

Gas

Oil

Coal


Power Sector Project:Power Sector Project:Collaborating Research InstitutesCollaborating Research Institutes

Collaborating National Research Institute Principal Investigator

SP Power Economic Research Center, China Prof. Hu Zhaoguang

Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur and Central Electricicty Authority, India

Prof. S. C. Srivastava and Mr. Daram Paul

Indonesian Institute of Energy Economics, Indonesia Mr. Bernardus S. Wahyuputro

Sri Lanka Energy Managers Association, Sri Lanka Mr. W. J. L. Shavi Fernando

Siridhorn International Institute of Technology, Thailand Dr. Bundit Limmeechokchai

Institute of Energy, Vietnam Dr. Pham Khanh ToanAsian Institute of Technology Prof. Ram M Shrestha

Prof. S.C. Bhattacharya


Least-cost Generation Planning Least-cost Generation Planning ModelModel

Minimize: Total System Costs

(capital + O&M +Fuel + DSM Cost)

Subject to:

• Power demand constraints

• Annual energy constraints

• Hydro-energy constraints

• Reliability constraints

• Fuel or resource availability constraints

• Emission constraints

Capacity Mix

Optimal expansion plan

Generation Mix/Fuel Mix

Emission Factors

Total Cost

CO2, SO2 and NOx Emissions

Electricity Generation Planning Model

Demand-sideData

Electricity Demand

Emissions constraints

Supply-side Data


Generation share of technologies in total Generation share of technologies in total generation generation

under BAU and COunder BAU and CO22 emission reduction cases emission reduction cases

• Share of gas-fired combined cycle generation to increase in Indonesia, NREB-India, Thailand and Vietnam

• Share of hydro generation to increase in NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Yunnan-China

•Share of biomass (BIGCC) increase in NREB-India and Thailand

• Share of conventional coal-fired generation to decrease in NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam and Yunnan-China

• Share of clean coal generation (PFBC) to decrease in Indonesia

Generation share by technology


Share of gas-fired combined cycle Share of gas-fired combined cycle generation technologies in total generation generation technologies in total generation


BAU case

15% reduction

caseNREB-India 13 27Indonesia 37 57Thailand 28 39Vietnam 21 30

Share in %

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1 2 3 4 5

Gen

erat

ion

shar

e of

gas

-fir

ed p

ower

pla

nts

(%)

BAU Case5% reductions targets10% reductions targets15% reductions targets

NR

EB

-Ind

ia

Indo

nesi

a

Tha

iland

Vie

tnam

• Share of hydro generation to increase in NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Yunnan

• Share of BIGCC to increase in NREB-India and Thailand


Share of coal-fired technologies in total generation Share of coal-fired technologies in total generation under BAU and COunder BAU and CO22 emission reduction cases emission reduction cases

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Gen

erai

on s

hare

of c

oal-

fire

d po

wer

pla

nts

(%) BAU Case

5% reductions targets10% reductions targets15% reductions targets

Yun

nan-

Chi

na

NR

EB

-In

dia

Indo

nesi

a

Tha

iland

Vie

tnam

BAU 15% reduction

caseYunnan-China: 32 27NREB-India: 64 47Indonesia: 54 34Thailand: 52 32Vietnam: 26 16

Share in %


Generation share of technologies in total Generation share of technologies in total generation generation under BAU and COunder BAU and CO22 emission reduction cases emission reduction cases

NREB-India

Indonesia

BAU case (NREB-India)

Others2%

Conventional coal52%

PFBC6%

IGCC6% Hydro

20%

CC14%

15% reduction case (NREB-India)

CC26%

Hydro24%

IGCC5%

PFBC6%


Others4%

BIGCC2%

BAU case (Indonesia)

GT8%

Hydro5%

Oil1%

CC29%

PFBC27%


Geothermal2%

15% reduction case (Indonesia)Geothermal2%


PFBC8%

CC51%

Oil1%

Hydro5%GT

7%


Generation share by technologies in total generation Generation share by technologies in total generation


Thailand

Vietnam

BAU case (Thailand)

BIGCC0%


Oil10%

CC30%

IPP5%

Hydro2%

Gas turbine

1%

15% reduction (Thailand)

Gas turbine

1%

Hydro2%

IPP6%

CC40%

Oil10%


BIGCC9%

BAU case (Vietnam)

Hydro47%

Import2%

CC21%

Oil3%


15% reduction case (Vietnam)Convent

ional coal16%

Oil2%

CC30%

Import2%

Hydro50%


Generation share of technologies in total generation Generation share of technologies in total generation under BAU and COunder BAU and CO22 emission reduction cases emission reduction cases

Yunnan-China

Sri Lanka

BAU case (Yunnan-China)

Coal32%

Hydro68%

15% reduction case (Yunnan-China)

Coal27%

Hydro73%

BAU case (Sri Lanka)


Hydro34%

Oil26%

10% reduction case (Sri Lanka)


Hydro34%

Oil37%


CDM Projects Selection CDM Projects Selection

Emission Amount in Base Case (E0)

Total Cost in Base Case (*) (C0)

Total Cost with the candidate CDM project as a committed plant (Case 1) Test Cost Criterion

C1>C0

Emission Amount in Case 1 (E1)

Env. Additionality CriterionE1(GHG) <E0(GHG)

E1(others) E0 (others)

Abatement Cost CriterionI < MAC

No CDM Project

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Potential CDM

Incremental Costs Assessment

Implications of CDM

Additional Emission Mitigation

Incremental Cost of CDM (I)

Marginal Abatement Cost in Investing Country (MAC)

(*) The Candidate CDM project not selected in the Baseline.


Marginal Abatement Costs, Marginal Abatement Costs, $/tonne of C at 1998 prices$/tonne of C at 1998 prices

Note:Marginal abatement costs are expressed in 1998 US $.

Ranges of MAC values: 3.5 to 9.0 $/tonne of Carbon at 5% reduction target 10.3 to 46.0 $/tonne of Carbon at 10% reduction target 12.8 to 57.0 $/tonne of Carbon at 20% reduction target

5% 10% 15% 20% 30%

Yunnan-China 3.5 15.7 26.8 28.9 38.8NREB-India 6.6 12.5 19.7 - -Indonesia 8.8 12.2 14.4 17.5 20.2Sri Lanka - 46.0 - 57.0 67.0Thailand 9.0 10.7 11.5 12.8 15.9Vietnam 8.7 10.3 11.8 15.2 20.0

CO2 emission reduction targets

mitigating environmental emissions from the power sector: analysis of technical and policy options...

Documents

nreb india

nrebindia yunnan

thailand slide

india fiiee

sri lanka thailand

vietnam thailand

ait cop

new delhi