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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4.5.2 The direct design methodology The Direct Design Methodology is built on three steps: Step 1) The construction of direct interconnectors taking the large price difference between countries as guidance. Step 2) Beneficial tee-in solutions or the interconnection of countries via hub-to-hub connections were identified.(Step 2 was only started when step 1 could not identify any more beneficial direct interconnectors) Step 3) Beneficial meshed connections were identified. (Step 3 was only started when neither step 1 nor step 2 could identify beneficial connection solutions) Each step is explained in more detail below. Step1: Direct design methodology – direct interconnectors To assess the economic viability of direct interconnectors within Northern Europe a justification formula was developed to test the profitability of interconnectors. This worked as follows: • The power market model was used to initially create a reference case of energy price differences between the countries around the North and Baltic Seas, • The price differences were used to determine the potential interconnector revenue. The capital cost of each interconnector is calculated, • Costs and revenues are compared, and the interconnectors are ranked according to profitability, 27 Ten proved to be a sufficiently large number. If it had shown that there would have been more than ten beneficial links, the number of selected links to be tested would have been increased. Furthermore please note that, as explained below, an iterative process was carried out and step 1 of the Direct Design was repeated in order not to miss any beneficial direct interconnectors. 28 Note that this methodology did identify that multiple 1,000 MW interconnectors between the same countries could be beneficial, and hence in order to separately identify the net benefit, each interconnector has been modelled discretely at 1,000 MW. In reality where a net benefit is identified for multiple interconnectors between the same countries, a more cost effective design such as a single 2,000 MW bipole may be implemented. 29 Either based on long term supplier/interconnector capacity contracts (60%) or on short term supplier/interconnector capacity contracts (100%). The interconnector utilisation figure was derived from the average utilisation of the England France (2,000 MW), Moyle (Scotland – Northern Ireland, 500 MW) and NorNed (700 MW) interconnectors using data downloaded from the ENTSO-E website from 2008 to 2010. OffshoreGrid – Final Report • The ten most promising links are selected and studied in detail in the power market model 27 . The starting point for all calculations is the Hub Base Case scenario 2030. The price differences for this case are shown in Table 4.6. Based on these, the potential revenue for interconnectors between all countries which can be connected geographically was calculated using the following assumptions: • 25 year payback period, 6% discount rate • Minimum interconnector utilisation of 63.7% • 1,000 MW building blocks for each interconnector 28 • Interconnector receiving revenue derived from either 60% or 100% of the price differences multiplied by the expected utilisation (depending on the type of contracts) 29 . Some of the ten interconnectors identified were between countries that also shared a land border. Adding links between adjacent countries via an offshore grid is unlikely to be the most economically efficient solution and including such links in the model may affect the overall effectiveness of the offshore grid design. Hence, despite the remit of this project excluding reinforcements to the onshore network, it was reasonable to add onshore AC 1,000 MW capacity reinforcements into the power market model where the price differentials indi cated a need case between adjacent countries in order to make the evaluation of an offshore grid design as realistic as possible. Following the identification using the above described process, the power market model was run with each interconnector added in turn to produce the total electricity generation cost for the European system. The direct interconnectors were beneficial when the total generation cost was reduced by more than the capital cost of the assets over their lifetime. The direct inter- 59
esults connectors that were beneficial were retained and any that were not beneficial were removed from the model. Besides reducing the total generation costs, adding interconnectors also reduces the price differences between countries. Accordingly, the building or omitting of direct interconnectors has an immediate impact on the price levels and the profitability of the remaining proposed interconnectors. To come around this, an iterative process was performed and step 1 was repeated. Within this process the updated price differences were used to identify more interconnectors to study in the power market model until the price differences were lowered sufficiently so that adding further direct interconnectors produced no net benefit. The beneficial direct interconnectors selected as a starting point for step 2 of the Direct Design Methodology are shown in the map in Figure 4.21. The development of the price level differences that go along with the different offshore grid design steps are given in detail in Annex D.III on www.offshoregrid.eu. Step 2: Direct design methodology – hub-to-hub and tee-in connections (integrated design) The most promising cases assessed for either hubto-hub connection or wind farm tee-in connection possibilities, are those direct interconnectors that FIGURE 4.21: dIREcT dESIGN METhOdOlOGY – STEP 1: MAP OF ThE SElEcTEd dIREcT INTERcONNEcTORS Wind Farms Onshore substation To shore Connection of Wind Farms (Hub and Individual) Existing Interconnectors Entso-E TYNDP Interconnectors Kriegers Flak – Three Leg Interconnector 2x Direct Interconnector close to each other 2x Direct Interconnector close to each other Direct Design step 1 – Direct Interconnectors Direct Design step 2 Hub-to-hub and Tee-in interconnectors Direct Design step 3 Meshed Grid Design 2x Direct Interconnector close to each other More detailed maps including information on the voltage level, the number of circuits and the technology (monopole or bipole DC) can be downloaded from www.offshoregrid.eu 60 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 and 10: Executive Summary I. The OffshoreGr
Page 11 and 12: Executive Summary and TYNDP interco
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: esults 4.5 Overall grid design 4.5.
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 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?