1. Impacts of wind power on energy balance of a hydro dominated power system EWEC 2006, Athens MSc Juha Kiviluoma, VTT PhD Hannele Holttinen, VTT

2. 2 Background t Based on model developed in EU-project WILMAR (Wind power integration in liberalised electricity markets) – Risoe, IER at University of Stutgart, Sintef, VTT, KTH, IMM at Technical University of Denmark, Elkraft, Elsam, Nord Pool Consulting t The work continues in IEA Annex on Wind & hydro and the model development in EU-project SupWind t These results part of PhD thesis work of Juha Kiviluoma – Large increases of wind and other renewables in the energy system

3. 3 Research questions t How hydro power regulates large amounts of wind power in hydro dominated system? t How the energy balance of the hydro dominated system changes with large amounts of wind power? t Which power plants are affected? t How the prices change?

4. 4 Model description t Market model of Nordic countries and Germany t Hourly time-scale t Spot market horizon t Long term model for water values t Stochastic presentation of wind (not used in this) t Quite detailed unit presentation t Also heat areas for CHP t Primary and secondary reserves (dependant on wind) t See Meibom at DS1 on Thursday morning

5. 5 Model weak points t Hydro power – Presentation of hydro is not detailed enough – One reservoir water value model t No load flows, static transmission limits t System prices, no market power etc. – Lower bound prices t Low regulation prices t Slow to solve whole year

6. 6 Cases base10%20%30% Wind capacity [GW] NO+SE+FI Germany Denmark 2.5 28.6 4.1 17.8 35.8 4.6 35.7 35.8 4.6 52.5 35.8 4.6 Energy from wind NO+SE+FI+DK [TWh] 164987119 The modelled year has 2001 profile for hydro, wind, load and heat demand Not very windy Average hydro year

7. 7 Assumptions t 17 €/CO 2 ton t Fuel price scenario t Planned transmission lines up to 2010 – Fennoska II 800 MW – Storaebelt 600 MW – NorNed 700 MW (connected to Germany) – Some Nordel internal connections t Import time series from Russia and Poland t Announced power plants and decomissionings until 2010 t Wind is added as extra production, no capacity taken away Model prices Current prices (Finland) IEA (2010) IEA (2030) Light oil53113$/barrel Fuel oil4666$/barrel Crude oil602229$/barrel Coal74694044$/t Nat_gas (Europe)8.45.93.34.3$/Mbtu Model [€2002/GJ] Woodwaste4 Wood4.3 Straw4.4 Waste0 Peat1.5 Light oil7.2 Fuel oil6.2 Coal2.3 Natural gas6.2 Nuclear0.35

8. Production [TWh] in 2010 base case FI_R NO_N NO_M NO_S SE_N SE_M SE_S DK_W DK_E DE_NWDE_NE DE_CS

9. Whole year for the four cases Base 10% 20% 30% TWh

10. base case: production, consumption and transmission [MWh/h]

11. 10% case: production, consumption and transmission [MWh/h] MWh

12. 20% case: production, consumption and transmission [MWh/h] MWh

13. 30% case: production, consumption and transmission [MWh/h] MWh

14. Hydro reservoir fillings

15. Prices [€/MWh] base 10 % 20 % 30 %

16. Maximum power from condensing plants in Nordic countries

17. 17 Condbasew10w20w30 Nuclear6899668261315663 Woodwaste245678100 Peat72965070215879 Coal27058851363 Hydro4668440141323843 CHPbasew10w20w30 Waste7236720571237047 Woodwaste4396453146504873 Wood5489394131612151 Straw3087257525932915 Peat4539429539823009 Coal4898359127902322 Nat gas149712851063592 Fuel oil586526469395 Full load hours of condensing and chp plants

18. 18 Regulation cases in 30% wind case Hydro: NO 28 GW SE 16 GW FI 3 GW Sum47 GW Highest one-hour drop in wind 30 GW  13 GW

19. 19 Regulation cases in 30% wind case High consumption – low wind Nuclear and hydro regulate Hydro: NO 28 GW SE 16 GW FI 3 GW Sum47 GW

20. 20 Available capacity in the model Capacity balance during base case highest consumption

21. Wind shedding (Case I.a) MWh

22. High consumption – low wind (Case II.a)

23. Big drop in wind (Case II.b) MWh

24. Highest consumption MWh

25. 25 Assumptions for conclusions t Wind will get very competitive – Good sites available – Price of development down – Fossils face increasing costs t Other obstacles surmountable – Local grid issues and grid reinforcements – Load flow controls – Landscape, noise and avian concerns

26. 26 Conclusions t 20-30% wind penetration changes the utilisation of other power production decisively t Wind will affect power prices strongly if penetration gets high t At least in the modelled year, hydro power can regulate wind to such extent that usage other condensing than nuclear is minimal (could be covered by demand side measures) t Limitations for wind are most likely in available sites and transmission rather than in regulation Nordic price duration curve

27. 27 Discussion t Power price will drop if countermeasures are not taken t Additional connections to the continental grid would keep the prices up and provide profits t Possibility of increased consumption: heat pumps, industry, traffic sector (oil dependency on agenda) t Price drop obstacle also for wind t Market failure? Nordic price duration curve