1. Cooperation roadmap RF-EU (Electric Power sector) Moscow, 23-24. 05
1. UPS of Russia (some figures)
2. Russian electric industry priorities
3. Interaction (collaboration) benefits
4. Collaboration barriers
5. Target situation
6. Concrete proposals

2. Nordic Interconnection
Global view
Western Europe
Installed capacity: 765 GW
Maximal load: 452 GW
Consumption: 2861 TWh
Nordic Interconnection
Installed capacity: GW
Maximal load: 61.1 GW
Consumption: 375 TWh
IPS/UPS
Installed capacity: 337 GW
Maximal load: 216, GW
Consumption: 1285 TWh
IPS/UPS
Nordic
ENTSO-E 2

3. Milestones of the recent history of the synchronous zone:
IPS/UPS structure
IPS/UES Structure
IPS/UES Structure
Milestones of the recent history of the synchronous zone:
In 1962 “MIR” power systems Interconnection was established with the total installed capacity more than 400 MW. It united power systems from Berlin to Chita
1991 – the power grid of Armenia stopped parallel operation with IPS/UPS
1993 – breakdown of the power Interconnection “MIR”;
2000 – restoration of parallel operation of the UPS of Kazakhstan and IPS of Ukraine with UPS of Russia
2002 – transfer of Burshtyn island (Ukraine) to parallel operation with UCTE;
2003 – transfer of the power system of Turkmenistan to parallel operation with the power system of Iran.
IPS of the East (Р inst~ 9 GW) functions separately with IPS/UPS.
Kazakhstan
Georgia
Armenia
Azer
Belarus
Lithuania
Latvia
Estonia
Moldova
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Kyrgyz
Tajikistan
Mongolia
Finland
Iran
Turkey
Roman
Hungary
Slovakia
Poland
Norway
Romania
1000
2200/1800
300
400
1600/1900
1200/1000
2700/2800
1200/1500
1700
900
Siberia
Center
Urals
Middle Volga
South
North-West
Ukraine
Kaliningrad
680
1400
327
150
2100
2000/2200
900/1250
1200
1600/2100
1300/1750
400
800/300
1800/2500
+/-1150
IPS/UES Structure
IPS/UES Structure 3

4. UPS of Russia installed capacity – 215 GW
NPP
CC, GT
Industrial TPP+HPP
HPP
CHP
TPP

5. UPS of Russia Peak load and consumptionGW
TWh
Peak load
Peak load
Consumption

6. Limited Volumes of exchanges
Insignificant Russian Export/Import
Limited Volumes of exchanges
Countries
2010 , billion kWh
Baltic countries
2010, billion kWh
Export
Import
Export
Import
Azerbaijan
0.018
0.203
Estonia
Belarus
0.029
Latvia
0.007 6
Ukraine
0.032
0.081
Lithuania
5.106
0.003
Finland
11.058
Total for the Baltiсs
5.113
0.003
Norway
0.21
Integral indicators for Russia in 2010:
Export – billion kWh,
Import – billion kWh.
Georgia
0.212
1.117
Kazakhstan
1.376
1.498
China
0.983
Mongolia
0.214
0.021
The shown data demonstrate insignificant for the Russian power sector volume of foreign trade – export comprises less than 2% of the total output of power plants of the country, and import – basis points of the total consumption of electricity in Russia.
S. Ossetia
0.118
14.249
2.92
Total 6

7. IPS/UPS – West Europe interconnectorsBG HR CZ
(I)
(II)
(III)
(X)
(XI)
(IV-IX) LT BY UA RO SK PL HU YU RU
BIH EE LV
Blue – 750 kV
Red – 400 kV
Green – 220 kV

8. Vyborg Converter Complex – 4x355MW Blue – NORDEL frequency
Plus some hydro-units islanded to NORDEL by 110; 154 kV lines.
Vyborg Converter Complex – 4x355MW ~
330 kV
Yllikkãlã
Kumy
Kamenogorskaya
Severnaya
N-W TPP (CC)
3 x 150
Vostochnaya
400 kV
Blue – NORDEL frequency
FINLAND
RUSSIA
Red – UPS frequency
RUSSIA – FINLAND ELECTRIC BORDER

9. Evolution of the system of agreements
Electric ring BRELL 9 9

10. 2. Russian electric industry priorities
Innovation policy, energy efficiency & energy saving trough the whole chain;
Developing the renewable sources;
Increasing the share of NPP in the energy mix (in the western part – Leningrad NPP-2, 1-st unit 1200 MW in 2014; Baltic NPP in Kaliningrad region, 2x1200 MW in 2016, 2018);
Modernization of existing capacities, implementation of new technologies on the base organic fuels aiming the increase of efficiency and the share of coal;
Aggravation of ecological requirements (though in comparison with EU no well-defined quantitative references);
Attraction (involvement) of foreign investment (even in NPP, e.g. Baltic NPP);
Reinforcement of the main grid kV, especially intersystem links between European and Asian parts of UPS, including DC links;
Increasing the controllability of UPS - flexible capacities, energy storage devices (PSPP) technologies, “intelligent” control systems.

11. 3. EU-RF interaction (collaboration) benefits
Joint operation of Power systems could give big benefits in terms of reliability and optimization taking into account the extensive border between EU and Russia (especially between the two biggest synchronous zones) and the existing huge interface transmission infrastructure:
Optimization of generation park;
Minimization of generating capacity reserves;
Mutual assistance in emergency conditions, extreme whether (esp. for bordering power systems);
That mains automatically the integration of EU PS (Baltic IPS);
Reduction of needs of internal grid reinforcement etc.
Power systems joint operation gives incentives in further collaboration incl. implementation of new technologies and finally decreases the electric sector pressure on the environment.

12. 4. Collaboration barriers
Uncertainty with authorities at national and Union’s institutions in decision making process; with the full unbundling of the sector often the distribution of roles is not clear at national level;
unilateral firm (unchangeable) decisions (without consultations) affecting the another side (input fee, 3-d energy packet);
incompatible (different) approaches to power systems extension: ENTSO-E’s presupposes step by step connection of parts of IPS/UPS with their separation from the synchronous zone (its dismemberment) on the base of ENTSO-E rules; Russian approach – connection of two synchronous zones with further gradual increase of exchanges on the base of agreed rules;
limited confidence and transparency (reciprocally).

13. 5. Target situation
Full integration of power systems and electricity markets with corresponding coordinating/control institutions.
Electricity as universal energy resource in many branches of economy incl. transport will in the considered future more and more replace primary sources (gas, coal, oil) therefore:
it should affordable,
permanently available (uninterrupted),
generated using high efficiency technologies (incl. mix of electricity, heat, cold production),
ecologically clean.
So it is an international challenge.

14. 6. Concrete proposals-1
1. Ensuring adequate collaboration between SO UPS of Russia (FGC UES) and ENTSO-E and other adjacent TSOs in order:
- not to endanger the security of current synchronous function of EU and RF power systems (Baltic IPS and BRELL ring) – elaboration/coordination of common rules regarding calculation of transport capacity, load/frequency control, planning, special protection schemes etc.
- in future to mutually exchange information and coordinated taking into account the prospective development of each other, realization of joint projects; special attention merits the Baltic ring where a lot of NPPs is planned including Baltic NPP in Kaliningrad region (2x1150 MW, 2016, 2018), Leningrad NPP-2 (1-st unit 1150 MW in 2014), Lithuanian NPP (up to 3 GW by 2020), Belarus NPP (2x1150 MW by ), Polish nuclear program (2020) and new transmission lines Baltics – Kaliningrad – Poland – Germany, reinforcement of Russia – Northern Europe are needed.
We appreciate the support of such project on the EU level as crucially necessary.

15. 6. Concrete proposals-2
2. Western-Eastern power systems interconnection.
“The completion of the Feasibility Study has opened a new era in the cooperation between Western and Eastern TSOs/companies responsible for a reliable operation of the transmission systems in the interest of the electricity industry and citizens in EU and CIS” (citation from Key conclusions of the “Feasibility Study: Synchronous Interconnection of the Power Systems of IPS/UPS with UCTE”).
We should give a decision for coming generations. Otherwise we have neither synchronous nor non-synchronous links between the two biggest European power systems.
The IPS/UPS dismemberment is not acceptable because it weaknesses the security of remaining part, incl. power evacuation from NPP (e.g. Kursk near the Ukrainian border). (If such separation becomes unavoidable mutually agreed measures/timing should be undertaken.)
Now ENTSO-E is promoting «Study roadmap towards Modular Development Plan on pan-European Electricity Highways System (MoDPEHS). Way to 2050 pan-European power system». It is in parallel discussion with the Energy roadmap 2050 and may be worth to consider it as a potential platform to solve this problem.

16. 6. Concrete proposals-3
3. It is important to mutually exchange views when preparing regulatory decisions in order to possibly improve them and to prevent negative consequences for another side.
Also conferences, round-tables etc on new technologies, regulatory economic/market mechanisms are considered helpful (no shortages in that field).

17. Thank you for attention!