Offshore Electricity Infrastructure in Europe - European Wind Energy ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Based on this connection scenario (called the “hub base case sce nario”) in a second step two highly costefficient interconnected grid designs were then drawn up - the “Direct Design” and “Split Design”. In the Direct Design, interconnectors are built to promote unconstrained trade between countries and electricity markets as average price difference levels are high. Once additional direct interconnectors become non-beneficial, tee-in, hub-to-hub and meshed grid concepts are added to arrive at an overall grid design (for an explanation of these terms, see Section III of the Executive Summary). The Split Design is essentially designing an offshore grid around the planned offshore wind farms. Thus, as a starting point not only direct interconnectors are investigated but also interconnections are built by splitting the con nection of some of the larger offshore wind farms between countries. These “split wind farm connections” establish a path for (constrained) trade. These offshore wind farm nodes are then - as in the Direct Design - further interconnected to establish an overall ‘meshed’ design where beneficial. The overall investment costs are €86 bn for the Direct Design and €84 bn for the Split Design. This includes €69 bn of investment costs for the most efficient connection (hub-connections where beneficial as in the FIGURE 1.1: TOTAl INvESTMENTS FOR ThE OvERAll GRId dESIGN Infrastructure cost (€bn) 100 Reference and base case 90 92 80 83 78 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 69 0 Radial Base case Hub Base case OffshoreGrid – Final Report Split offshore grid design Direct offshore grid design hub base case scenario) of the 126 GW of offshore wind farms to shore, as well as about €9 bn for interconnectors planned within the Ten Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP) of the European transmission system operator association (ENTSO-E). The rest of the investments that make up the €84 bn or €86 bn for this further interconnected grid are €7.4 bn for the Direct Design and €5.4 bn for the Split Design. These relatively small additional investments generate system benefits of €21 bn (Direct Design) and €16 bn (Split Design) over a lifetime of 25 years – benefits of about three times the investment. Both designs are thus highly beneficial, from a socioeconomic perspective. When comparing in relative terms by looking at the bene fit-to-CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) ratio, the Split Design is slightly more cost-effective than Direct Design and yield a higher benefit return on investment. The investments in offshore grid infrastructure have to be compared with the offshore wind energy produced over 25 years which amounts to 13,300 TWh. This represents a market value of €421 bn when assuming an average spot market price of €50/MWh. In this context, the infrastructure costs represent about a fifth of the value of the electricity that is generated offshore. The additional cost for creating the meshed offshore grid (even including wind farm connections Overall grid design System bene�ts due to reduced electricity generation costs over 25 years (€bn) 100 86 84 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 € 21 € 16 20 10 Direct Design Split Design 0 ENTSO_E Interconnectors Hub and Tee-in connections Radial Connections Annual generation bene�ts 9
Executive Summary and TYNDP interconnectors) would amount to only about €¢ 0.1 per KWh consumed in the EU27 over the project life time [57]. 3 In addition to connecting 126 GW of offshore wind power to the grid, the offshore interconnection capacity in northern Europe is, as a result, boosted from 8 GW today to more than 30 GW. There are many other benefits from the investments in an offshore grid, including connecting generation in Europe (in particular wind energy) to the large hydro power “storage” capacities in northern Europe, which can lower the need for balancing energy within the different European regions. Offshore hubs also mitigate the environmental and social impact of laying multiple cables through sensitive coastal areas and allow for more efficient logistics during installations. Furthermore a meshed offshore grid based on the teein concept and hub-to-hub interconnections makes the offshore wind farm connection more reliable and can significantly increase security of supply within Europe. The overall circuit length needed for both offshore grid designs is about 30,000 km (10,000 km of AC cables, 20,000 km of DC cables). The hub base case scenario accounts for 27,000 km, while the additional circuit length to build the Direct or the Split Design is only about 3,000 km. As AC circuits use 1 x 3 core AC cable and DC circuits use 2 x 1 core DC cables, the total cable length is even higher. Figure 1.1 on page 9 summarises the overall investments required of the different grid options. III. Analysis of different connection concepts There are different ways of building offshore grid infrastructure to interconnect power mar kets and offshore wind power. In this report, different innovative configurations for interconnection are assessed for feasibility, looking at factors such as technological availability, infrastructure costs, system operation costs, geographical situation, electricity production and trade patterns: • Wind farm hubs: the joint connection of various wind farms in close proximity to each other, thus forming only one transmission line to shore. • Tee-in connections: the connection of a wind farm or a wind farm hub to a pre-existing or planned transmission line or interconnector between countries, rather than directly to shore. • Hub-to-hub connection: the interconnection of several wind farm hubs, creating, thus, transmission corridors between various countries (i.e. the wind farm hubs belonging to different countries are connected to shore, but then also connected to each other). This can also be interpreted as an alternative to a direct interconnector between the countries in question. Based on all these design options as well as using conventional direct country-to-country interconnections, an overall grid design was developed (as already discussed in section II). A detailed techno-economic cost benefit analysis of the design was carried out in order to find how it could be made most cost-effective. Which connection concept is best depends on several factors, such as the distribution of the offshore wind farms (for example, whether there is more than one farm planned in the vicinity), the wind farms’ distance to shore, and in the case of interconnecting several wind farms and/or countries, the distance of the farms to each other and the electricity trade between the countries. Recommendations and general guidelines regarding the choice of the best connection concept are discussed below. It is important to point out that policy makers and regulators will require a significant amount of advance planning and insight in order to provide the correct incentives to simulate the development of meshed grid solutions. These incentives should be targeted towards creating favourable conditions for the necessary investments required, as well as ensuring they 3 The additional cost for creating the meshed offshore grid (excluding wind farm connections and TYNDP interconnectors) would amount to only about €¢ 0.01 per KWh. 10 OffshoreGrid – Final Report
Page 1 and 2: OffshoreGrid: Offshore Electricity
Page 3 and 4: PRINcIPAl AUThORS: Jan De Decker, P
Page 5 and 6: Table of contents FOREWORd 6 EXEcUT
Page 7 and 8: FOREWORD The OffshoreGrid project i
Page 9: Executive Summary I. The OffshoreGr
Page 13 and 14: Executive Summary One of the keys t
Page 15 and 16: Executive Summary Splitting wind fa
Page 17 and 18: Executive Summary 16 OffshoreGrid -
Page 19 and 20: introduction 1.1 Context and backgr
Page 21 and 22: introduction TAblE 1.1: STAkEhOldER
Page 23 and 24: Key Assumptions and Scenarios In th
Page 25 and 26: Key Assumptions and Scenarios FIGUR
Page 27 and 28: Key Assumptions and Scenarios Curre
Page 29 and 30: Methodology - Simulation inputs and
Page 31 and 32: Methodology - Simulation inputs and
Page 33 and 34: esults This chapter explains and su
Page 35 and 36: esults (figure to the right) in Nor
Page 37 and 38: esults 4.2.1 Hubs and individual co
Page 39 and 40: esults The Baltic Sea is still a ra
Page 41 and 42: esults connections to shore where t
Page 43 and 44: esults 4.2.4 Conclusion and discuss
Page 45 and 46: esults and NordSee Ost Group into t
Page 47 and 48: esults 1986 (the Cross Channel link
Page 49 and 50: esults UK-Germany connection are re
Page 51 and 52: esults tee-in solution becomes pref
Page 53 and 54: esults • Large wind farms (capaci
Page 55 and 56: esults • Very large wind farm hub
Page 57 and 58: esults • A three-leg interconnect
Page 59 and 60: esults 4.5 Overall grid design 4.5.
Page 61 and 62:
esults connectors that were benefic
Page 63 and 64:
esults connections were tested in m
Page 65 and 66:
esults existing HVDC converters at
Page 67 and 68:
esults direct and integrated) ident
Page 69 and 70:
esults configuration were rated dif
Page 71 and 72:
esults FIGURE 4.31: cOMPARISON OF c
Page 73 and 74:
esults farm connections, the reduct
Page 75 and 76:
esults Overall design comparison Fi
Page 77 and 78:
esults • Costs and benefits of th
Page 79 and 80:
esults • There are other connecti
Page 81 and 82:
esults These merits also hold for t
Page 83 and 84:
Towards an Offshore Grid - Further
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
conclusions and recommendations The
Page 93 and 94:
conclusions and recommendations •
Page 95 and 96:
conclusions and recommendations •
Page 97 and 98:
conclusions and recommendations 6.5
Page 99 and 100:
conclusions and recommendations 98
Page 101 and 102:
Acknowledgements and Funding The Of
Page 103 and 104:
eferences [1] Weather Research and
Page 105 and 106:
eferences [47] Observatoire Médite
Page 107 and 108:
Annex A - Scenario details A.I Offs
Page 109 and 110:
Annex A - Scenario details A.II Pri
Page 111 and 112:
Annex A - Scenario details 2008 sce
Page 113 and 114:
Annex A - Scenario details Due to t
Page 115 and 116:
Annex B -technology Assumptions B.I
Page 117 and 118:
Annex B -technology Assumptions tab
Page 119 and 120:
Annex c - details on Methodology an
Page 121 and 122:
Annex c - details on the Methodolog
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Annex d - details of results D.I Wi
Page 131 and 132:
Annex d - details of results FiGuRe
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Annex d - details of results infras
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Annex d - details of results table
Page 141 and 142:
Annex d - details of results table
Page 143 and 144:
Annexes coal and gas, there is a de
Page 145 and 146:
Annex e - regulatory Frameworks and
Page 147 and 148:
Annex F - transfer to the Mediterra
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
show all

Offshore Electricity Infrastructure in Europe - European Wind Energy ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?