Wir schaffen Wissen - heute für morgen

Potential impact of post Fukushima nuclear policy on the future roleof CCS in climate mitigation scenarios in Switzerland

Nicolas Weidmann, Hal Turton, and Ramachandran Kannan

Energy Economics Group, Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis, Paul ScherrerInstitute, Switzerland

IEW2012, June 19, 2012

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Outline

1 IntroductionScope, ObjectiveSwiss MARKAL modelScenario definitions

2 Scenario analysisReference scenario, climate scenarioNuclear phase-out under climate constraintCarbon capture and storage

3 Conclusion and OutlookSummary and conclusionOutlook

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Overview Swiss energy system

Primary and final energy consumption

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Primary energy Final energy(by fuel)

Final energy(by end usesector)

PJSwiss primary and final energy consumption 2010

Agriculture / stat. Diff

Transport

Services

Industry

Residential

District heat

Electricity

Other renewables

Nuclear

Hydro

Gas

Oil products

Oil

Waste

Coal

Wood

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Overview Swiss energy system

Electricity generation mix (2010)

Power sector nearly decarbonisedSelf sufficiency in annual electricity generation but stilldependent on import for seasonal demandsElectricity trading is important (power system balance, revenue)

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Overview Swiss energy system

Challenges for the future Swiss energy system

Development of future electricity demand (population/GDPgrowth increase, electrification)Nuclear phase-outClimate policyEnergy securityFuture availability of technologies supporting low carbon energysystem

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Objective and Methodology

ObjectiveAnalyze how uncertainties may affect future Energy system andcost-effectiveness of technologiesIdentify robust combinations of technologies and fuelsPotential role of low carbon electricity sources (new renewables,CCS) under nuclear and climate constraints

Scenario analysisUncertainties → Definition of scenariosScenarios analysed using Swiss MARKAL energy system model

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Swiss MARKAL model

Description of modeling framework

Technology-rich bottom-up energy system model of entire Swissenergy system (single region model)Extensive representation of end-use efficiency technologies40-years time horizon (2010-2050)Calibration to years 2000-2010

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

History of Swiss MARKAL model

Model development initiated by M. Labriet at the University ofGeneva (Labriet, 2003)

Building up first version of the model including five end-usesectors, conversion and supply

Further developments and analyses by T. Schulz (Schulz,2007; Schulz et al., 2007, 2008)

Implementation of extensive end-use technology options intransport and residential sector (including energy saving optionsbased on marginal cost curves)

and N. Weidmann (Weidmann, Turton, and Wokaun,2009; Weidmann, Kannan, and Turton, 2011; ETS, 2009)

Further development of the model in all end-use sectorsCalibration of the entire model to 2010 data and demand updateDevelopment and implementation of CCS module

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Swiss MARKAL model

Reference energy system

Refineries

Residential(lighting

cooking, heating, cooling)

Transport(cars, trucks, aviation,

ships, railway)

Industry(lighting. Heating, autoproduction of

electricity)

Services (lighting, heating,

applications)

Agriculture

Gas powerplant

Import of Natural gas

Import of Oil

Import of uranium

Natural gas

ElectricitySolar energy

Hydro energy

Domestic Biomass

Hydro powerplant

Nuclear powerplant

Solar PV

Wind energy Wind turbine

Fischer-Tropsch Bio fuels

Biomass CHP

Electricity sector

Heat

Renewable resources

End-

use

tech

nolo

gies

Resources Conversion End-use Energy services

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Swiss MARKAL model

CCS module

ENGACCSR30Powerplant

ENGACCSR50Powerplant

ENGACCSR10Powerplant

ENGACCS30Powerplant + capt.

ENGACCS50Powerplant + capt.

Electricity

CCS_COMB_1Combine captured CO2 streams

CCS_STGStorage of CO2

STGPOT

IMPSTGPOT1Import of STGPOT (storage potential 1)

CO2_STOR

User-def. constraint: A_CCS_A∑ Activityi(CCS_COMB_1,CCS_COMB_2, CCS_CAP)

= Activity(CCS_TRANS)

User-defined constraint: A_CCS_1∑ Activityi*ENVACTcapt,i (ENGACCS tech)

= Activity of CCS_COMB_1

CCSCAPTE30Capturing of CO2

IMPSTGPOT2Import of STGPOT (storage potential 2)

Swiss MARKAL CCS Module

CCS_TRANSTransport of CO2

User-def. constraint: A_CCS_BActivity(CCS_TRANS)= Activity(CCS_STG)

CO2

CCS_CONV_1Combine captured CO2 streams

User-defined constraint: A_CCS_3Activity(CCS_CONV_2)

=∑ Activityi*ENVACTi(CCS_CAPTxx)

Natural gas

CCSCAPTE50Capturing of CO2

User-defined constraint: A_CCS_1xActivity(ENGACCSR)*EFF(CCS_CAPT)

>= Activity(CCS_CAPT)

CCSCAPTE10Capturing of CO2

CHPNGCCR30CHP Powerplant

CHPNGCCR50CHP Powerplant

CHPNGCCR10CHP Powerplant

CCSCAPTH30Capturing of CO2

CCSCAPTH50Capturing of CO2

CCSCAPTH10Capturing of CO2

CCS_CONV_2Combine captured CO2 streams

Heat

User-defined constraint: A_CCS_5Activity(CCS_CONV_2)

=∑ Activityi*ENVACTi(CCSCAPTHxx)

User-defined constraint: A_CCS_2xActivity(ENGHCCSR)*EFF(CCSCAPTH)

>= Activity(CCSCAPTH)

CHPNGCCS30CHP Powerplant

CHPNGCCS50CHP Powerplant

Conv

. NG

CC C

CSCH

P N

GCC

CCS

retr

ofitt

ing

retr

ofitt

ing

CCS_COMB_2Combine captured CO2 streams

User-defined constraint: A_CCS_6∑ Activityi*ENVACTcapt,i (CHPNGCCS tech)

= Activity of CCS_COMB_2

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Scenario definitions

Ref : Reference scenario (nuclear replacement, no (climate)policies)NoNuc: Nuclear phase-outClim: Climate target (domestic CO2 reductions by 20% by2020, 60% by 2050)Cumul A: Cumulative CO2 targetCumul B: Cumulative CO2 target with fixed end point)CCS: Carbon Capture and Storage technologies available

General model assumptionsOil, coal, and geothermal based power generation are fully restrictedHydro assumed to follow a fixed production path (34.8 TWhel in 2035, 33.0 TWhel in 2050)Renewable potentials (Solar PV: 13.7 TWhel , Wind: 4 TWhel , Biomass: 28.1 TWhth)Discount rate: 3%

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Reference scenario

Primary energy supply

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

PJPrimary energy - Ref

Solar

Wind

Biomass

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Climate scenario

Primary energy supply

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Ref Clim

PJ

Primary energy - Ref vs. Clim.

GeoSolarWindBiomassHydroNuclearGasOilCoal

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Climate scenario

Electricity and CO2 emissions

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Ref Clim

PJ

Electricity gen. - Ref vs. Clim

Solar WindBiomass CHP NGA CHPNGA CC NuclearHydro Other

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Ref Clim

Mill

ion

tons

of C

O2

CO2 emissions - Ref vs. Clim

Electricity TransportResiden�al IndustryService AgricultureUpstream

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Climate scenario

Final energy in residential heating and car sector

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Ref Clim

PJ

Final energy res. heat. - Ref vs. Clim

Savings ElectricityDistrict heat Natural gasOil Biomass

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Ref Clim

PJ

Final energy car sector - Ref vs. Clim

Ba�ery HydrogenNatural gas GasolineDiesel

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Nuclear phase-out under climate constraint

Primary energy supply

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim Clim +NoNuc

PJ

Primary energy - Clim. vs. Clim.+NoNuc

Geo

Solar

Wind

Biomass

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Nuclear phase-out under climate constraint

Electricity supply

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim Clim + NoNuc

PJElectricity gen. - Clim. vs. Clim + NoNuc

SolarWindBiomass CHPNGA CHPNGA CCNGA CC CCSNuclearHydroOther

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Nuclear phase-out under climate constraint

CO2-emissions

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim Clim +NoNuc

Mill

ion

tons

of C

O2

CO2 emissions - Clim vs. Clim+NoNuc

Electricity

Transport

Residen�al

Industry

Service

Agriculture

Upstream

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Nuclear phase-out under climate constraint

Final energy in residential heating and car sector

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim Clim + NoNuc

PJ

Final energy res. heat. - Clim vs. Clim+NoNuc

Savings ElectricityDistrict heat Natural gasOil Biomass

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim Clim + NoNucPJ

Final energy car sector - Clim vs. Clim+NoNuc

Ba�ery HydrogenNatural gas GasolineDiesel

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

CCS

Electricity supply

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

35020

3020

3520

4020

4520

50

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Clim Clim+CCS Clim+NoNuc Clim+NoNuc+CCS

PJ

Electricity gen. - CCS in nuclear replacement and nuclear phase-out

SolarWindBiomass CHPNGA CHPNGA CCNGA CC CCSNuclearHydroOther

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

CCS

Final energy in residential heating and car sector

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim + NoNuc Clim + NoNuc+ CCS

PJ

Final energy res. heat. - CCS w/ & w/o Nuclear

Savings ElectricityDistrict heat Natural gasOil Biomass

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010

2020

2035

2050

2020

2035

2050

Ref Clim + NoNuc Clim + NoNuc+ CCS

PJ

Final energy car sector - CCS w/ & w/o nuclear

Ba�ery HydrogenNatural gas GasolineDiesel

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Alternative CO2-reduction pathways

CO2-emissions

05

1015202530354045

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Clim Cumul A Cumul B

Milliontons

ofCO

2

CO2 emissions CO2 reduction pathwaysElectricityTransport

ResidentialIndustry

ServiceAgriculture

UpstreamOcCCTotal

051015202530354045

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Clim + CCS Cumul A + CCS Cumul B + CCS

Milliontons

ofCO

2

CO2 emissions CO2 reduction pathways with CCSCCSElectricityTransportResidentialIndustryServiceAgricultureUpstreamOcCCTotal

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

System costs

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

Ref Clim Clim +NoNuc

Cumul A +NoNuc

Cumul B +NoNuc

Incremental total discounted system costs (rel. to Ref)

no CCS

CCS

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Summary and conclusion

Changes over time across entire energy system (supply andend-use). Climate-, nuclear policy constraints have system-wideeffects (e.g. interplay between end-use and power sectors)Car sector: Trends towards higher efficiency (across all scenarios)and low carbon intensity (climate scenarios). However, fossilfuels will play major role during the next 40 years.Residential heating: Implementation of energy saving optionsand low carbon heatings systems attractive across wide range ofscenarios (with and without climate targets)

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Summary and conclusion (cont.)

New renewables become attractive towards the end of timehorizon. Climate targets and nuclear phase-out promote earlierdeployments.CCS only attractive under nuclear phase-out and stringentclimate targets. First, new renewables are deployed.CCS has effects on end-use sectors:

Residential heating: Electrification of energy system → more heatpumps, less saving measuresCar sector: Decarbonisation of electricity sector → lowerefficiency and more fossil fuels in car sector

Costs: Nuclear phase-out → increase in system costs. CCS couldreduce costs for climate mitigation under nuclear constraint(dependent on stringency of climate target).

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

Outlook

Improvements and extension of technology detail in services andindustrial sectors (including energy efficiency options)Sensitivity analysis on crucial model input parameters(technology costs, discount rate)Extension of CCS module in Swiss MARKAL model and analysisof additional CCS scenariosEnergy service demand update (to be implemented in SwissMARKAL and Swiss TIMES models)

Introduction Scenario analysis Conclusion and Outlook References

References

ETS (2009), “Energie-strategie 2050 - impulse für die schweizerische energiepolitik. grundlagenbericht”, Tech. rep.,Energietrialog Schweiz, URL <http://www.energietrialog.ch/cm_data/Grundlagenbericht.pdf> .

Labriet, Maryse (2003), “Switzerland markal: Structure and assumptions”, Tech. rep., University of Geneva(Logilab), updated version 2.0.

Schulz, Thorsten Frank (2007), Intermediate steps towards the 2000-Watt society in Switzerland: Anenergy-economic scenario analysis, Ph.D. thesis, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule ETH Zürich, URLhttp://dx.doi.org/Nr.17314,DOI:10.3929/ethz-a-005478373 , nr. 17314, DOI: 10.3929/ethz-a-005478373.

Schulz, Thorsten Frank, Leonardo Barreto, Socrates Kypreos, and Samuel Stucki (2007), “Assessingwood-based synthetic natural gas technologies using the swiss-markal model”, Energy, 32(10), 1948–1959.

Schulz, Thorsten Frank, Socrates Kypreos, Leonardo Barreto, and Alexander Wokaun (2008),“Intermediate steps towards a 2000 watt society in switzerland: An energy-economic scenario analysis”, EnergyPolicy, 36 (4), 1303–1317.

Weidmann, Nicolas, Ramachandran Kannan, and Hal Turton (2011), “Swiss climate change and nuclearpolicy: a comparative analysis using an energy system approach and a sectoral electricity model”, Swiss Journal ofEconomics and Statistics, Special issue on Swiss energy modeling.

Weidmann, Nicolas, Hal Turton, and Alexander Wokaun (2009), “Case studies of the swiss energy system -sensitivity to scenario assumptions assessed with the swiss markal model. studie im auftrag des energie trialogschweiz (www.energietrialog.ch).”, Tech. rep., Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen PSI, Switzerland.

Thank you for your attentionAcknowledgements: Prof. A. Wokaun, Dr. S. Hirschberg, Dr. H. Turton Members of Energy Economics Group, Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis CARMA (Carbon management in power generation) - Project