12th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling

The <strong>12th</strong> <strong>International</strong> <strong>Symposium</strong> on District Heating and Cooling,September 5 th to September 7 th , 2010, Tallinn, EstoniaThe main advantage with capacity trading is to avoidpeak load, which often is oil-based, which is costly bothfor the fuel price but also because of the emissions.Another point is that, as the Fortum representativesaid, it is possible to even out effect between systems.One system may have cheaper base load than theother, and for tax reasons it may be cheaper to buyfrom the other than to use peak load.One factor that is pointed out for a successfulcooperation is that both parties can benefit from it. Asin all business, it is important that the cooperation becorrect from a business standpoint and that both partsare satisfied [24].The extent of cooperation varies between thecompanies. Some have more extensive cooperationwith daily trades, like Fortum and Söderenergi, whileothers, for example Fortum and E.ON, do not tradeevery day. In the latter case, they normally do not tradeas much during winter, although sometimes when peakload is needed it is decided quickly [25]. Anotheradvantage with the interconnections is that thecompanies can cooperate regarding revisions of theplants. While one company has revision duringsummer, the other can produce for the other company.The factors that are seen as barriers are seldomtechnical. The companies think that the technicalproblems often can be solved while making theinterconnection and at that point there is a need tonegotiate certain aspects. For example, who providesthe electrical energy for the pumps and takesresponsibility for the regulation of the water pressure inthe culverts and repairing the system in a joint part ofthe system? However, this is often solved:Yes, the other things we can handle while building thetechnical parts. At that point we hopefully haveidentified all technical barriers so that they can betaken into account. They should not appear duringproduction. Settlement of account and such things,they are not a big problem although complicated.However, it is nothing that makes you pass on aprofitable cooperation [23].In the above quote, we see one of the disadvantageswith today's cooperation, on which all the companiesagree, and that is the settlement of accounts. It iscomplicated to control the systems and the trades, andit requires staff to do so.5.2 Barriers towards more co-operationsIn the interviews the companies expressed satisfactionwith the present cooperation. Few actual barriers assuch were expressed, except the ones that today‘ssituation creates. For example, it is almostgeographically impossible to expand the systems tosmaller systems nearby. As could be seen in themodelling, the systems are also already wellinterconnected:Yes, the principal structure is already established. (…)It is this connection, between the central and thenorthwest system, it is the only one. That is not solvedyet [23].This particular connection would interconnect the twomain systems, and has been discussed in someinvestigations [26], [27]. However, it is yet to be done.This connection is most important for Fortum, as forexample E.ON thought that it made little difference tothem.The other main connection still missing is connectionbetween the south system and Vattenfall's system inthe southeast. Vattenfall thinks that the question hasbeen raised on occasion, although never realized. Theygive no specific reason for this; they state that allcooperation is important and that differentinvestigations have shown the advantages, although itis difficult to quantify what it means practically [28].Stockholms Energi (now Fortum) previously owned oneof the plants, and there were plans to interconnect thesystems then. Fortum gives no explanation for why theinterconnection has not been done earlier or now.Although no direct comments regarding the lack ofinterconnection were made, one of the intervieweeswho previously worked at Vattenfall said that there wasan opinion at Vattenfall that they prefer to keep tothemselves, without interconnections, and should notwork towards cooperation. Comments without aspecific direction were also expressed in interviews thatthere was a lack of will to cooperate from somecompanies. There is also a history of rivalry betweenVattenfall and the former Stockholms Energi [29]. It ispossible that this rivalry stills exists. Fortum alsoexpressed opinions about the fact that other companiesare building their own CHP plants instead of trying tofind regional solutions.5.3 Building CHP in the systemAs seen in the scenarios, in the near future in Swedenmany CHP plants are planned and will start to be built.In Stockholm most of the companies have plans forCHP, and two of them have already built in the lastyears, for example Igelsta (Söderenergi) and Jordbro(Vattenfall). Other companies are making plans, suchas Norrenergi, EON and Fortum. The reasons forbuilding CHP are varied, but the most clear is that theysee economic advantages in selling electricity, and ourstagnating heat load ahead. By selling electricity thereis a possibility to keep profits high, even with astagnating heat load. The system is also relatively oldand well established; the potential for furtherconnections are getting smaller as saturation in the293