1. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 1 RES-E Case Study Analyses and Synthesis of Results Dr.-Ing. Derk J. Swider Institute of Energy Economics and the Rational Use of Energy (IER) Universität Stuttgart, Germany Coordinator of WP2 and WP5 of the GreenNet-EU27 project, financially supported by the European Commission (Contract No. EIE/04/049/S07.38561). Legal Disclaimer: The sole responsibility for the content of this work lies with the authors. It does not represent the opinion of the European Communities. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

2. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 2 Outline RES-E Case Study Analyses and Synthesis of Results 1.Introduction 2.Description of electricity systems 3.Conditions for RES-E grid integration 4.Costs for RES-E grid integration 5.Best-practice cases for RES-E grid integration 6.Conclusions

3. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 3 Motivation Proposition: The costs of integrating RES-E in an existing grid can form a significant barrier for the deployment of RES-E. Just starts to get into the focus of energy policy makers as it gains importance if wind offshore is considered. The allocation of grid reinforcement and extension costs may lead to first-mover disadvantages. This may reduce the willingness to invest and may thus hamper the deployment of RES-E.

4. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 4 Country specific analysis For different European countries the questions What conditions apply for RES-E grid integration? Who has to pay for any additional costs? are answered based on literature reviews and stakeholder interviews.

5. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 5 Electricity systems (I) Considered electricity systems differ in terms of their respective size but are similar in consumption per capita.

6. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 6 Electricity systems (II) 2010 targets (EU Directive 2001/77/EC)

7. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 7 Supporting schemes (I) Feed-in tariff Are characterized by a defined price paid to the RES-E generators. Any arising additional costs are passed through to the consumers by way of a premium on the price. Has the advantage of investment security but also the disadvantage of a risk of over-funding. Quota Are characterized by selling RES-E at market prices. The financing of additional costs is remunerated by all consumers (in some countries producers) obliged to purchase a certain number of certificates from RES-E producers. Has the advantage of a market-based instrument but also the disadvantage of risks for investors.

8. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 8 Supporting schemes (II) Most of the countries decided to use the feed-in tariff as a supporting scheme for the development of RES-E. The implementation of these schemes is different from country to country which effects the RES-E development.

9. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 9 Grid connection (I) In general, national governments demand RES-E to be connected with priority compared to conventional generation. They are usually connected to the next available connection point of the existing grid with the procedure defined in grid codes. Normally, RES-E does not have the same requirements as conventional plants regarding the provision of system services.

10. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 10 Grid connection (II) Distribution grid Transmission grid taken from WP6 presentation

11. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 11 Grid related costs In the case studies three cost categories are distinguished: 1)Shallow grid integration costs; 2)Deep grid integration costs; 3)Other fixed and variable costs. Costs related to the central connection point of a RES-E site are considered as shallow grid integration costs All expenses in the existing grid related to the connection of the new RES-E site are considered to be deep grid integration costs.

12. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 12 Cost allocation (I) Shallow approach Advantage: reasonable incentive Deep approach Advantage: reflects real costs Super-shallow approach Advantage: high incentive to invest All these approaches may lead to an inefficient system as they do not sufficiently provide locational signals. taken from WP6 presentation

13. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 13 Cost allocation (II) It can be seen that there is no consensus, due to the fact that there are many different stakeholders involved. RES-E cost allocation is of major importance and can adversely affect the economic viability of RES-E.

14. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 14 Grid integration costs (I) Grid integration costs are often not specified separately or it is not always clear what they comprise. Grid integration costs are always site specific; influencing factors are most importantly distance, trajectory, etc. (EUR/kW)

15. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 15 Grid integration costs (II)

16. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 16 Unit generation costs (I) Cost estimation based on the average lifetime levelized electricity generation cost (EGC) approach as applied in the OECD study. The OECD study focused on calculating busbar costs, at the station, and did not include transmission and distribution costs. With: I t Investment expenditures in the year t M t Operations and maintenance expenditures in the year t F t Fuel expenditures in the year t E t Electricity generation in the year t r Discount rate

17. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 17 Unit generation costs (II) Feed-in tariffs for established RES-E technologies are usually well chosen and provide sufficient support to invest. Feed-in tariffs for newer RES-E technologies, as for example for wind offshore, do often not provide sufficient support to invest.

18. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 18 Best practice cases (I) For RES-E the most important and influencing actors in the energy market are energy policy makers and associated regulators. Often two partly opposite aims are followed: i.establishing an efficient and cost minimized market ii.introduction of a defined share of RES-E generation Principally fixed RES-E investment incentives, like a feed-in tariff, reduce the developers’ exposure to risk. Regarding the past development of RES-E the situation in Germany seems to be the most favorable of all considered countries. However, for wind offshore the grid integration costs may constitute a significant barrier to invest (lead Germany to switch to a super-shallow approach).

19. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 19 Best practice cases (II) taken from WP6 presentation

20. GreenNet-EU27 Results on WP5: Case studies on RES-E grid integration 20 Recommendations Large-scale RES-E grid integration… …may be hampered by barriers due to the chosen supporting scheme and cost allocation approach (first-mover disadvantages). …requires clarification concerning the distribution of any additional expenses between the market actors (plant and grid operators). Therefore… …create mechanisms in grid regulation policies able to identify and remunerate investments caused by RES-E grid integration. …try to have the major part of the grid integration costs, especially deep costs, covered by the grid operator (remunerate to society). Then barriers for new RES-E deployment are reduced and ambitious goals can be met with minimal (extra) costs for society.