1. 1

2. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 I also want to talk about EROI :

3. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 I also want to talk about EROI : Electricity Renewables O 2 C Intermittency

4. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The use of intermittent sources for electricity production in Germany, Sweden, Europe F. Wagner, Max-Planck-Institute for Plasmaphysics Garching/Greifswald 4 Germany burns coal Europe uses more gas RES are large in Germany Sweden is nearly CO2-free Nuclear is important in EU Topics to be covered: Germany: integration of RES in large scales Sweden: replacement of nuclear power by wind EU: benefits of cooperation Electricity production (2012/13) in the 3 regions GermanySwedenEU coal EU-28 3179 TWh 630 TWh 135 TWh

5. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The “Energiewende” in Germany Energies 100% case 5

6. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The “Energiewende” in Germany Method: Analyse the time series (2012) of load, wind, PV, scaled to 100% Assumptions: Consumption (load) stays at 500 TWh Hydro cannot be increased No nuclear power No import-export No bio-gas PV: 20% (optimal mix) Wind: 1/3 offshore Energies 100% case 6

7. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 How much power has to be installed? Enough to serve Europe in good days The remaining need for back-up power? 88%; 2 parallel systems P back-up = 73 GW (max. load: 83 GW) W back-up = 26% The extent of surplus energy? Formally enough to serve Poland Dimension of storage? For the 100% case: 660 x present capacity The dynamics of the back-up system? From 0 up to the load; strong gradients The conditions for DSM (demand-side management)? Cheap electricity prices during the day! The amount of CO2 reduction? Not to the level of France, Sweden... Conditions of a 100% supply by RES? Use of biogas (e.g. 40 TWh) and savings (down to 30%) What could be a reasonable share by intermittent RES? 40% (in energy) What are the costs of the transition? Very high: ~ 300 Mrd€ for 20% W+PV* What are the economic implications? substantial * Finadvice Major Results 7 P won =176GW ; P woff =33GW; P PV =97GW

8. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 How much power has to be installed? 100% case W+PV Back-up 8 load Fossil power increases

9. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 How much power has to be installed? Energy TWh 9 load

10. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The extent of surplus energy? The electricity export strongly increases. Numerically, the export agrees with the PV energy generated 10

11. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Need of back-up depending on storage capacity 11 Dimension of storage? Seasonal storage = 660 x present pumped water storage

12. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The amount of CO2 reduction? 12 Countries with hydro + nuclear are where Germany will never be with REs and gas as back-up with present German fossil fuel mix with gas alone Germany: 2002-2015 2015

13. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The alternative use of gas 13 with present German fossil fuel mix with gas alone Germany: 2002-2015 2015 Countries with hydro + nuclear are where Germany will never be with REs and gas as back-up

14. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Conditions of a 100% supply by RES factor of load reduction Main knobs: savings/efficiency + use of biomass Minor knobs: decrease of population, import (dispatchable power), geo-th-power 14 level of consumption/present consumption

15. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Conditions of a 100% supply by RES factor of load reduction Main knobs: savings/efficiency + use of biomass Minor knobs: decrease of population, import (dispatchable power), geo-th-power 15 level of consumption/present consumption Surplus/load = 50%

16. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 What could be a reasonable share by intermittent RES? 40% possible limit 16 2015 2014 2013 2011 2015

17. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 What are the costs of the transition? Household prices increase nearly linearly Feed-in-tariff 2015: 24 Mrd € Spot market price (annual average): - no business any longer to produce electricity by gas - CHP-limit ~ 5€cent/kWh Overproduction: Germany finances electricity use of its neighbours 17 CHP

18. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 What are the costs of the transition? Source: F. Wagner Finadvice 18 CHP W+PV power (W/capita)

19. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 What are the economic implications? Electricity price ~ 1/flh The operation of gas power station loses economic basis - not only because of electricity price This fate will be shared by other thermal power stations – one after the other … also by a future storage system 19 Def.: full-load-hours (flh) = energy produced (TWh)/production capacity (GW)

20. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 What are the economic implications? http://www.boerse.de/historische-kurse/RWE-St-Aktie/DE0007037129 “new industry” Market share on PV module production 2008: 20% 2015: 2% 20 EON RWE price of shares (€)

21. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Lessons from German “Energiewende” Large-scale Wind and PV electricity possible if the necessary space is allocated Large power to be installed – comparable to the load of Europe → high costs Back-up system required in all scenarios: little saving in thermal power Storage technology not available; its future operation not economic CO 2 reduction by RES: not to the level already achieved by others in EU High costs to build-up the system Market-rules out of force: price follows weather, not demand (loss of landscape, loss of bio-diversity) 21

22. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 TWh Källa: Energimyndigheten Electricity production Can Sweden replace nuclear by wind power? 22

23. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Hydropower follows the load 23 present situation Data for analysis provided by E. Rachlew

24. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Operation of hydro-power plants Electricity production is only one requirement for hydro-system water supply flood prevention + avoidance of low water levels fishing recreation and environment Hydro-system with several power stations along the river → coherent action to avoid spills 24 Limits in P hy and gradP hy which vary during season Procedure: obey limits of each day

25. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The case without nuclear power 25

26. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The alternatives 26 Hydro electricity constant: 62 TWh

27. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 The consequences A gas back-up system is necessary → the specific CO2 emission increases by 50% PV is rather ineffective to replace back-up Storage is not meaningful because surplus power is too little Excessive surplus production leads to the replacement of hydro by wind power 27

28. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Benefit from an EU-wide RES field 28 Germany, wind+PV Denmark, wind Belgium, wind France, wind+PV UK, wind Ireland, wind Spain, wind+PV Czech Rep., wind+PV Sweden, wind+PV Construction of an EU-wide RES field

29. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Annual duration curves for German RES field (dashed) and EU-wide RES field Benefit from an EU-wide RES field 29 Germany, wind+PV Denmark, wind Belgium, wind France, wind+PV UK, wind Ireland, wind Spain, wind+PV Czech Rep., wind+PV Sweden, wind+PV Construction of an EU-wide RES field Only wind has averaging effect Production: 1TWh for each case

30. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 the back-up energy is reduced by 24%, the maximal back-up power by 9%, the maximal surplus power by 15%, the maximal grid power by 7%, the typical grid fluctuation level by 35% the maximal storage capacity by 28% Germany´s benefit of an EU-wide RES field 30

31. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Structure of wind field over Europe 31 … expressed in terms of regression coefficient

32. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Germany France UK Spain Belgium Czech Rep. Denmark Ireland 100% Useful surplus (from Germany´s point of view) surplus normalised for each case „useful“ surplus (surplus produced when Germany is in need) 32 In case of surplus – also the neighbours produce it

33. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Interconnector capacity 33

34. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 demandhydro-electr.P(Won)P(Woff)P(PV) back-up surplus TWh GW TWh sum3179496819128325625 EU power installations 34 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php/Electricity_and_heat_statistics http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-final-energy- consumption-by-mode/assessment-5 For comparison: EU, 2013 Derived heat: 680 TWh Road transport: 3305 TWh

35. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 EU-wide consequences Large RES power necessary for all countries National RES use demand typically north-south grids Cross-border exchange requires east-west grids Exchange over large distances beneficial Large interconnector capacities needed Not all countries benefit equally from an EU-wide RES field Economic consequences: Utilities lose business model IEA: EU loses 1/3 of global market share of energy intensive exports over next 2 decades* * Finadvice 35

36. Les Houches 6.-13.3.2016 Considerations prior to an „Energiewende“ 36 The generation power has to increase by up to a factor of 4 High costs, rising electricity prices High use of space Storage crucial but not available and not economic in operation Hydro+nuclear much better in CO2-reduction System without market incentives Strong impact on economy of present utilities Development of new industries not guaranteed Joint transition within EU highly doubtful