Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Dr. Stefanie NEVELING - Bundesnetzagentur Dr. Benoît ESNAULT – Commission de Régulation de l’Energie GIF TF co-chairs 18th Madrid Forum Madrid, 27/28 September.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Dr. Stefanie NEVELING - Bundesnetzagentur Dr. Benoît ESNAULT – Commission de Régulation de l’Energie GIF TF co-chairs 18th Madrid Forum Madrid, 27/28 September."— Presentation transcript:

1 Dr. Stefanie NEVELING - Bundesnetzagentur Dr. Benoît ESNAULT – Commission de Régulation de l’Energie GIF TF co-chairs 18th Madrid Forum Madrid, 27/28 September st Ten Year Network Development Plan: ERGEG opinion

2 2 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Introduction ENTSOG published its first TYNDP in December 2009 ERGEG « pilot » evaluation of the 1st European TYNDP: Aims at preparing the future task of the Agency Methodology assessed in the light of ERGEG recommendations on the TYNDP (July 2010) Based on the findings of the EWI Study commissioned by ERGEG : “Model-based Analysis of Infrastructure Projects and Market Integration in Europe with Special Focus on Security of Supply Scenarios” (May 2010) Applied “TIGER”-model:  minimises gas dispatch costs subject to infrastructure, supply & demand assumptions;  represents an economic flow model assuming efficient organisation of transport & storage market (i.e. realisation of all efficient swaps & efficient capacity management)

3 3 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Is the EU gas network sufficiently integrated? EWI’s results Physical need for network expansion until 2019: decreasing domestic production (e.g. in DK / S)  strong need for new cross- border capacity DE  DK missing links in SE-EU for sufficient supplies during winter months (mainly HU & Balkans, somewhat eased with Nabucco or South Stream online) resultant investments induced by new major infrastructures (e.g. Nord Stream/NEL) preventive measure against crises  reverse flow projects mainly for Eastern EU countries in case of Russian supply disruption “Potential” bottlenecks: For Western-EU, a potential need for capacity increases to improve market integration has been identified at several borders: DE  NL, DE  BE, DE  CH, DE  CZ, UK  BE, SK  AT, AT  SI, SI  HR, DE  FR on peak days Such congestions are to be analysed on a case-by-case basis and might even be healed without physical capacity increases There are some general West-to-East bottlenecks in the LNG “glut” scenario. Detected bottlenecks by EWI-study:

4 4 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 EWI‘s simulation results compared to ENTSOG‘s TYNDP findings HR BA Sl RS HU RO IT ES FR GB DE PL CZ PT AL BY UA DK LT BG GR MK AT CH NL BE SK demand-supply gaps found by EWI & ENTSOG demand-supply gaps found by ENTSOG Sufficient Capacity to cover demand (incl. peak- day) for all Euro-pean countries, except for DK, SE, SI, HU, BA, MK, RS results found both by EWI & ENTSOG SE

5 5 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Is the EU gas network sufficiently integrated in case of a crisis? Scenario: „Reference“ (only Nord Stream I)Scenario „South Stream“ (Reference + South Stream) ERGEG/EWI study: Detected bottlenecks in “Ukraine crisis” scenario

6 6 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Comments on TYNDP: scenario & modeling requirements Results of ENTSOG’s supply, demand & capacity analysis: Demand assumptions higher than EU COM’s Primes Baseline Scenario Supply assumptions lower than forecasts by IEA Aggregated capacity will be sufficient to satisfy peak-day & annual demand except for 3 regions w/ demand potentially > transport capacity ERGEG comments:  Profound & detailed database on existing and FID infrastructure projects  But: lacking homogeneity in terms of details per country, identification of bottlenecks by regions is too broad (cannot be pinpointed)  Security of supply dimension not sufficiently studied yet (“crisis sc.”)  no enhanced EU infrastructure modeling or simulations (“Top-down perspective”) in varying infrastructure / supply / demand scenarios yet  Next TYNDP shall include maps presenting congestion in EU

7 7 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Methodology analysis: need for a top-down supervision Combining top-down and bottom-up approaches is a key ERGEG recommendation Data collection and assumptions The first TYNDP: mainly built on data collection from TSOs and ministries (bottom-up approach) Lack of data homogeneity and transparency of assumptions  Need for a transparent top-down process which would facilitate the assessment of the TYNDP For the future TYNDP: ENTSOG should ensure that TSOs elaborate coherent and consistent national capacity reports Adjacent TSOs consistently address common cross-border infrastructure projects

8 8 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Role of stakeholders and market consultation Extensive consultation process conducted by ENTSOG: bilateral meetings and workshops with relevant market participants Stakeholders should contribute to data collection Collection of data for the 1st TYNDP focused on TSOs and ministries Lack of involvement of project sponsors Data on domestic European production was not provided by producers Lack of data on non-EU gas production ERGEG recommendation on the role of stakeholders: Ensure a regular dialogue Data communication to ENTSOG Consultation on the Community-wide TYNDP

9 9 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Addressing market integration and security of supply Market integration Should be formally included in the analysis Identify where the European system lacks of capacity The TYNDP should contribute “to non-discrimination, effective competition, the efficient functioning of the market or a sufficient level of cross-border interconnection open to third-party access”. Security of supply TEN-E projects, the EEPR and the reverse flow study: no details on how these projects were taken into account in the TYNDP Scenario comparisons should include simulations of the behaviour of the EU infrastructure – test different scenarios of infrastructure Need to simulate system’s reaction over longer periods of exceptionally high demand

10 10 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Conclusions ERGEG welcomes ENTSOG’s challenging work Instructive process for all actors involved Comprehensive database on infrastructures and projects Findings on the status of the European gas system According to EWI-Study and ENTSOG’s TYNDP, the EU gas grid - in technical terms - is well developed (under assumptions taken) But some (physical and potential) bottlenecks identified Precondition to avoid inefficient network expansion:  effective capacity management Room for improvements: Methodology & homogeneity of assumptions Results (identification of bottlenecks) more precise (map) Security of supply dimension (missing “crisis scenarios”) Gas flow modeling for varying scenarios

11 11 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Way forward Analysis of consultation results / comments by stakeholders on EWI-study Providing input & advice to the EU COM - on Energy Infrastructure Package ENTSOG - on TYNDP methodology for the 2nd TYNDP and 2010 Network modeling improvements; next milestone: ENTSOG workshop 7. October ACER - on its future tasks related to TYNDP, refining further aspects, such as coordination & relation to national /regional network development plans

12 12 18th Madrid Forum, Madrid, 27/28 September 2010 Thank you!


Download ppt "Dr. Stefanie NEVELING - Bundesnetzagentur Dr. Benoît ESNAULT – Commission de Régulation de l’Energie GIF TF co-chairs 18th Madrid Forum Madrid, 27/28 September."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google