ELECTRICITY GENERATION - FACTS AND FIGURES - VGB PowerTech
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
FACTS AND FIGURES ELECTRICITY GENERATION 2018|2019
FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
DEVELOPMENT OF THE GLOBAL AND EUROPEAN ELECTRICITY DEMAND
T he global population of 7.6 billion people is increasing by 90 million
people per year.
Electricity consumption will grow faster than any other form of energy con-
Contents
n Electricity demand worldwide and in the EU 2 – 3
sumption due to an increasing demand and population growth − one quarter
n Renewables (RES) in the EU 4
of the global population does not yet has access to electricity. Additionally,
electromobility and sector-coupling will increase electricity demand. The n Hydro power, wind energy, biomass 5–7
IEA estimates in its “Current Policies” scenario that in all fields and regions n Wind energy and secure provision of capacity 8–9
the annual demand will increase by 2.0 % until 2040. The worldwide gross
n Distributed power, storage technologies 10 – 11
electricity consumption will increase from 24,765 billion kWh to 42,321 bil-
lion kWh. The “New Policy Scenario” of the IEA – this scenario covers a n Flexible conventional power plants 12 – 13
reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions with respect to known policies an- n Framework for conventional power plants 14 – 15
nouncements – also notes an increase up to 39,290 billion kWh. About n Nuclear power worldwide 16 – 17
13 %, i.e. 3,244 billion kWh, of electricity globally generated was provided
in the European Union (EU). A 0.2 % (“Current Policies”) or 0.3 % (“New n Small modular reactors 18 – 19
Policies Scenario” with a slightly higher electricity demand) p.a. rise in de- n New power generation capacities needed 20 – 21
mand is expected in the EU by 2040. n Best Available Techniques 22 – 23
Further scenarios e.g. by BP, ExxonMobile and the U.S. Energy Administra-
n Global climate policy needed 24 – 25
tion (EIA) and are available. According to all forecasts the worldwide electric-
ity demand will increase by 2040 in a range of 34,000 to 42,000 billion kWh n VGB: Activities and members 26 – 27
per year. n Imprint 28Expected growth in electricity generation in billion (109) kWh worldwide Expected growth in electricity generation in billion (109) kWh in the EU
45,000
4,500
IEA: Current Policies
Current Policies +5 %
40,000 +71 % 4,000 +0,2 % per year
+2.0 % per year
New Policies Scenario
New Policies Scenario 3,500
+8 %
+61 % +0,3 % per year
New Policies Scenario (IEA)
EIA - Reference Scenario
30,000 +1.9 % per year
Current Policies (IEA)
3,000
BP - Energy Outlook
New Policies Scenario (IEA)
Current Policies (IEA)
Wind, 2,500
ExxonMobil
biomass, solar Wind,
biomasse, solar
20,000
Hydro 2,000
Hydro
Nuclear
1,500 Nuclear
Fossil
10,000 Fossil
1,000
500
0
2016 2040 0
Year 2016 2040
Year
Sources: IEA, EU Commission, VGB (own calculations)
PAG E 2 – 3FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
RENEWABLES – EU’S AMBITIOUS TARGETS FOR 2020
The EU and their member states have set binding, ambitious targets to Sweden 49 Target
53.8
promote the expansion of renewable energy sources. For the electricity sec- Finland 38.7 38 Target reached
reached
tor, the EU expects renewables to account for 34 % by 2020. Latvia
Austria
37.2
33.5 34
40
Since the implementation of the EU Directive for climate protection and Denmark 32.2 30 Target reached
energy ‒ often referred to as the “20-20-20 package” ‒ adopted in Decem- Estonia
Portugal
28.8
28.5 31
25 Target reached
ber 2008, the share of renewables in gross final energy consumption has Croatia 28.3 20 Target reached
increased steadily. In 2016 the share reached 17 %, almost twice as high as Lithuania
Romania
25.6
25.0
23 Target reached
24 Target reached
in 2004 (8.5 %). Slovenia 21.3 25 EU-targets for RES till 2020:
At 53.8 %, Sweden‘s share of renewables was by far the highest in 2016. In Bulgaria
Italy
18.8
17.4
16 Target reached
17 Target reached 20 % share of renewable
energy in gross final energy
total, eleven of the 28 EU member states have met their 2020 targets: Bul- Spain 17.3 20
consumption
16.0 23
garia (18.8 %, Czech Republic (14.9 %), Denmark (32.3 %), Estonia France
Greece 15.2 18 10 % share of energy
from renewable sources
(28.8 %), Croatia (28.3 %), Italy (17.4 %), Lithuania (25.6 %), Hungary Czech. Republic 14.9 13 Target reached in transport
Germany
(14.2 %), Romania (25.0 %), Finland (38.7 %) and Sweden (53.8 %). Hungary
14.8
14.2
18
13 Target reached
Austria misses less than 1-%-point to reach its target for 2020. Slovakia 12.0 14 EU
Energy from renewables will play a key role for the years after 2020. For this Poland
Cyprus
11.3
9.3 13
15 2016: 17.0 % 2020: 20 %
reason, the member states have agreed on a new EU target of at least 27 % Ireland 9.5 16
United King. 9.3 15
by 2030. Belgium 8.7 13 2016
Netherlands 6.0 14 Target 2020
Malta 6.0 10
Luxembourg 5.4 11
EU-28 17.0 20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Share of renewables of gross final energy consumption in %
Source: Eurostat (2018, data base: 2016)
Source: Eurostat 2018 (data base: 2016)HYDRO POWER – AN INDISPENSABLE SOURCE OF ENERGY
Hydro power is not only a reliable renewable energy source, but also the
frontrunner in Europe in the generation of electricity from renewable en-
ergy sources. With a production of more than 351 TWh – around 37.0 % Target for RES-electricity Status 2016 – Total: 951 TWh
of the electricity generated from renewable energy sources – hydro power in EU-28 Target in 2020: 1,196 TWh
makes a significant contribution to achieving the EU target of 34 % of 2016 2020
83 target; current targets achieved
In brackets (...): Individual
electricity generation from renewable energy sources by 2020. 29.2 % 34.0 % 304
In addition to the predictable and constant generation of run of river pow-
er plants for base load coverage, the provision of reserve power and peak
load to ensure security of supply and, in particular, control power to main- Wind energy
Hydro power
tain grid stability in an increasingly flexible energy market is becoming
303
more and more important. In Europe, these requirements are primarily met (495; 61 %) 351
by high-efficiency pumped storage and storage hydro power plants with a (355; 99 %)
total installed bottleneck capacity of more than 47,443 MW.
Hydro power is therefore not only an extremely efficient, reliable and stor- 180
(232; 77 %) 111
able form of energy, but also an indispensable renewable source of energy (103; 108 %)
7
which has to be conserved and further developed within the framework of (11; 60 %)
the energy transition.
Biomass
For more than 20 years, the VGB PowerTech supports an intensive techni-
cal exchange of experience between leading hydro power operators for the
Geothermal Solar energy
ongoing improvement of efficiency.
Source: Eurostat 2018 (data base: 2016)
PAG E 4 – 5FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
WIND ENERGY – A MAINSTAY OF THE ENERGY TRANSITION
In order to meet the European Union’s targets for the energy and climate
package by 2020, it is also imperative to further expand the use of wind Wind power:
energy. In Germany at the end of 2017, around 29,844 wind turbines with Capacities in Europe
end of 2017 in MW
a total capacity of 56,132 MW were in operation. At that time, the installed
capacity of wind turbines in Europe was 177,506 MW and worldwide Total Europe*:
FI
539,123 MW. 177,506 MW
NO 2,071
A retrospective analysis of the wind turbine market reveals continuous fur- 1,162 SE
6,619
ther development of system technology, accompanied by increasing rated ES 310
power, rotor diameter and hub height. From the first small plants with an IR DK LV 66 RU
15
5,476
average output of around 30 kW and rotor diameters of less than 15 m in 3,127
UK NL LT 493
18,872 4,341 BY
the mid-1980s, machines with a rated power of 8 MW and more as well as DE PL
3
BE
rotor diameters of 160 m have been developed. Wind turbines have already 2,843 56,132 5,782
paid for themselves in terms of energy after three to seven months of op- LU
FR 120
CZ
308
UA
592
SK 3
eration. This means that after this time the turbine has produced as much 13,759 CH 70 AT
2,632 HU RO
energy as is required for its production, operation and disposal. In addition PT
SI HR
329 3,029
to the consistent further development of system technology, the optimiza- 5,316 ES
23,170
IT
9,479
3 613
BG
tion of maintenance strategies in particular will play a decisive role in the 691
future in order to increase technical availability and thus economic effi- GR TR
6,857
2,651
ciency. Especially reliability, weight, costs and efficiency play a key role in
this respect.
CY 158
* Including not listed countries. Source: WindEuropeBIOMASS – THE ALL-ROUNDER
Energy production from biomass is a decisive component of the energy
transition. Currently, 180 TWh of electricity is produced from biomass in
Europe, which means that biomass accounts for 19 % of renewable electric- Biomass: Development of electricity generation in the EU
ity generation. Biomass is used as a fuel in thermal power plants or is fer- Sweden Finland Germany United Kingdom EU-28
mented to produce methane in biogas plants. Biomass power plants per- 250
form the same tasks for the stability of the electricity grid as fossil-fired
power plants. They are suitable for base load as well as for the supply of
Electricity generation in billion (109) kWh
balancing and control power. In addition, it is also possible to convert coal- 200
fired power plants to biomass in order to continue using existing sites. Bio
gas is usually used in gas engines to generate electricity or can be feeded
into the natural gas grid. This contributes a considerable storage potential. 150
Biomass power plants and biogas plants can be used both in centralized and
distributed systems. Biomass, as an all-round renewable energy source, is
therefore an indispensable component of future energy supply systems. 100
Since 2002, VGB PowerTech supports an intensive exchange of experience
on energy generation from biomass. The topic biogas was added in 2007.
The exchange of experience takes place in cooperation with the correspond- 50
ing committees of conventional power generation. This ensures that exist-
ing know-how in power plant technology is maintained and deepened.
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2020
Year
Source: Eurostat
PAG E 6 – 7FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
CONTRIBUTION OF WIND ENERGY TO THE SECURE PROVISION OF CAPACITY IN EUROPE
F rom 2011 to 2017 the cumulative rated capacity of wind turbines in
Germany almost doubled (+107 %) to about 56,000 MW. The annual
wind electricity production of 107 TWh accounted for around 18 % of
From the beginning of 2015 to the end of 2017, the cumulative rated ca-
pacity of wind turbines in 21 European countries increased by almost one
third to 170,000 MW (Germany’s share: almost one third) and annual
total generation in Germany. With regard to the contribution of wind en- wind power electricity production by almost one fifth to 342 TWh.
ergy to the security of supply, the development of the annual minimum The utilisation of the „European wind park“ amounts to about 24 % of the
values as a measure of the permanently available capacity over the year is nominal capacity. The permanently available (secured) capacity in Europe
revealing: These values have remained at an unchanged low level of less with the assumption of no grid losses occur is 4 to 5 % of the rated capacity
than 160 MW since 2011, although the cumulative nominal capacity of in the period under review; in Germany it is 0.3 %. Thus, in terms of secu-
the “German wind portfolio” has almost doubled within the same time: rity of supply, also for Europe a backup capacity must be available practi-
wind energy in Germany has replaced conventional ‒ schedulable ‒ power cally up to the annual peak load plus reserves.
plant capacity of maximal 158 MW.
Feed-in capacities in Europe range from 5 to 63 % of rated power and vary
Therefore state-of-the-art back-up-capacity is necessary up to the annual (fluctuate) widely. The three trend lines show that changes in wind power
peak demand plus reserves. For comparison: in 2016, the Germany-wide production are essentially determined by the annual wind supply. The sea-
annual peak demand of 80,400 MW occurred on 7 December at 17:45. sonal sequence of wind power production known from Germany − signifi-
Photovoltaics are 100 % unavailable at night and in late winter afternoons cantly higher in winter than in summer − does not change with an Europe-
(guaranteed output: 0 MW). wide distribution of wind turbines and production. There are no effects of
an expansion-induced increase in the Europe-wide distribution of wind
turbines on the minimum output.Key Key
figures for wind
figures energy
for wind in Germany
energy sincesince
in Germany 20112011 Key Key
figures for wind
figures energy
for wind in 21
energy in European countries
21 European sincesince
countries 20152015
Quarter-hourly resolution
Quarter-hourly resolution Hourly resolution
Hourly resolution
60,000
60,000 100 100 AT AT
56,164
56,164
BE BE
55,000
55,000 Nominal capacity PN PN 90 90
Nominal capacity Real Real
datadata
20172017 BG BG
50,000
50,000 Real Real
datadata
20162016 CZ CZ
Standardised capacity P/PN in %
80 80
Standardised capacity P/PN in %
44,580
44,580 DE
Real Real
datadata
20152015 DE
45,000
45,000 DK DK
39,408 70 70 TrendTrend
20152015
39,408 EE EE
40,000
40,000 Maximum PMax PMax
Maximum TrendTrend
20162016 ES ES
33,477
33,477 60 60 TrendTrend
20172017 FI FI
35,000
35,000 32,926
Capacity in MW
32,926
Capacity in MW
FR FR
28,712
28,712
30,000
30,000 26,268
26,268 50 50 GR GR
IE IE
25,000 22,870
22,870
25,000 40 40 IT IT
LT LT
20,000
20,000
30 30 NL NL
Arithmetic mean
Arithmetic valuevalue
mean Pµ Pµ Utilisation: ≈ 24≈%24 %
Utilisation: NO
15,000
15,000 11,720
NO
11,720 PL
8,8518,851
20 20 PL
10,000
10,000 PT PT
5,0665,066 5,3885,388 RO RO
5,000 Minimum PMin PMin 10 10Guaranteed capacity:
Guaranteed ≈5%
capacity: PN% PN
≈5
5,000 Minimum SE SE
88 88 121 121 105 105 158 158
UK UK
0 0 0 0
2011
20112012
20122013
20132014
20142015
20152016
20162017
2017 Jan Jan
Feb Feb
Mar Mar
Apr Apr
MayMay
Jun Jun
Jul Jul
Aug Aug
Sep Sep
Oct Oct
Nov Nov
Dec Dec
YearYear Month
Month
Sources: BMWi, BWE, Germany TSOs, VGB (own calculations) Sources: German TSOs, entso-e, VGB (own calculations)
PAG E 8 – 9FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
DISTRIBUTED POWER GENERATION – NEW SUPPLY SYSTEM STRUCTURES
D istributed generation is an essential part of the energy transition and
will increase significantly in the coming years. However, the complex
system of distributed energy supply, consisting of generation – transmission
Growth of distributed power production in different regions
120,000
– distribution – consumption, must be considered in its entirety. North America Western Europe Eastern Europe
Combined heat and power plants are mainly based on the classic piston 100,000
engine process. In addition, fuel cells, micro gas turbines and Stirling en-
gines can open up new fields of application for combined heat and power
Capacity in MW
(CHP). They represent important technical innovations, as they enable the 80,000
use of CHP technology even in the very small power range. This applies in
particular to applications in the local heating sector, but also in the com- 60,000
mercial and industrial sectors.
In connection with the increase in distributed energy generation, these sys-
tems will increasingly have to offer the necessary network services in the 40,000
future, including the provision of control power.
To support the necessary measures, smart metering will now also be intro- 20,000
duced in Germany since 2017 onwards, depending on consumption
(>10,000 kWh/a in 2017; >6,000 Wh/a in 2020 for private house-holds).
It has to be considered that a high standard of IT security must be main- 0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
tained for the measurement and control systems.
Year
Source: Navigant ResearchSTORAGE TECHNOLOGIES – AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF SYSTEM STABILITY
I n parallel with the increase in decentralized energy supply and the steady
increase in electricity generation from fluctuating renewable energy
sources, there is an urgent need to expand storage capacity in the future.
Specification High capacity High amount of energy
Storage time Seconds Minutes Hours (days)
The systems can be divided into central storage power plants, distributed
small storage facilities, and short or long-term storage facilities. It is also Application
(examples)
Redispatch ˝Black start“ Stand-alone networks,
electricity trading
Voltage stabilisation Uninterruptible
possible to store electrical or thermal energy. A decisive criterion for the power supply Peak-load smoothing
Frequency stabilisation Load balacing
selection of the appropriate storage technology is the time range which is to Soft-hybrides
Batterie-power vehicles
be covered. Choosing the right location also plays an important role. Classification Thermal Local Decentral Central storage
Short-time storage
Market-driven conditions are required for the use of the various storage technologies storage small storage large batteries power plants
technologies. The current possible alternatives include, for example, the Storage
concepts Sensitive storages Double-layer Lead-acid Lead-acid Pumped-storage
expansion of the electricity grid, making the existing power plant port-folio Latent storages capacitors batteries (Pb) batteries (Pb) power plants
Lithium-Ion Lithium-Ion Compressed-air
more flexible, and also the use of demand side management. Chemical
storages
Superconducting
magnetic batteries (LIB) batteries (LIB) power plants
At present, only the use of hydroelectric power in the form of pumped stor- energy storage Nickel-cadmium Natrium-
batteries (NiCd) sulphur
Hydrogen-storage
age power plants is available as a fully developed technology. Large-scale Fly-wheel Nickel-metal- batteries (NaS) power plants
hydrid batteries
battery systems have already proven their technical suitability for use in the (NiMH)
Redox-flow-
batteries (RFB)
Type of storage
control power market and can also be used commercially in niche applica-
Virtual storage
tions. Electrical (electromagnetic or -static field)
Electro-chemical (chemical energy)
Mechanical (kinetic or potential energy)
Source: Fraunhofer ISI (2012)
PAG E 10 – 11FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
FLEXIBLE CONVENTIONAL POWER PLANTS – GUARANTEEING SECURITY OF SUPPLY
T he CO2 emissions of coal-fired power plants have been gradually re-
duced as a result of technological development. In consequence, the
average global efficiency has risen from roughly 30 % to about 33 %, and
The new power plants currently under construction have therefore been
designed for particularly flexible operation, especially in Germany.
Essential technical criteria for flexibility are stable minimum load, start-up
the consistent application of state-of-the-art technology with an efficiency and shutdown times as well as minimum operation and downtimes, load
level of 44 % to 47 %, the CO2 volume could continue to be significantly gradients and the control ranges in different load scenarios. Another com-
reduced worldwide. In countries with a growing share of fluctuating renew- pletely different aspect is flexibility with regard to quality fluctuations in the
able energy sources in electricity generation, the primacy of efficiency is main fuel and the use of substitute, refuse derived, fuels.
increasingly being replaced by the need for flexibility.
New and appropriately upgraded thermal power plants can contribute to
Generation by conventional plants must adapt quickly and flexibly to the the integration of renewable energies into a modern power supply system
residual load at all times, i.e. be available to compensate for the difference through their flexible operation. The focus of technical developments is on
between consumption and fluctuating feed-in from photovoltaic and wind the exploitation of existing potential for flexible plant operation. Against
energy plants. Short-term feed-in fluctuations are triggered by the rapidly the backdrop of the expansion targets for renewable energy throughout
increasing output of photovoltaic systems. The resulting effects become the Europe, a broad and flexible thermal power plant portfolio will continue to
decisive driver for the day to day feed-in fluctuation with the increasing be indispensable in the future in order to ensure economic efficiency and
intensity of solar radiation from spring onwards. In the medium to long security of supply at all times.
term, the average cycle lies between strong and weak wind phases; in north-
western Europe, it corresponds to about three to five days. Due to limited
interconnection capacities, the necessary flexibility for permanent load bal-
ancing has to be met to a large extent by the power plants in Germany.Flexibility parameters of thermal power plants:
High load gradients, low minimum load,
Flexibility of thermal power plants – State-of-the-art short ramp-up times
1,300 Plant type Hard coal Lignite CCGT Gas turbine
Lignite (e.g. BoA) Nuclear
1,200 Load gradient
2/4/8 2 /Max
4 /capacity
8 4~1,300
/ 8 / 12 8 / 12 / 15
Capacity in MW
Max
in %capacity
per minute~1,000 MW MW
Nuclear power plants Min capacity ~420 MW Min capacity ~520 MW
1,000 ... ramp rate
Max +/-30 MW/min Max ramp rate +/-63 MW/min
in the load range 40 ... 90 50 ... 90 40* ... 90 40* ... 90
of %
Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCGT) Hard coal
800 Minimum load
Max capacity ~2 x 440 MW Max capacity ~800 MW
in % of 40 / 25 / 15 60 / 40 / 20 50 / 40 / 30 * 50 / 40 / 20*
Lignite fired power plants Min capacity ~520*/260** MW Min capacity ~210 MW
nominal capacity
Max ramp rate +/-36 MW/min Max ramp rate +/-20 MW/min
600
Combined Cycle Ramp-up time
Power Plants (CCGT) *in two
hours (h),operation
boiler 3/2/1 6/4/2 1,5 / 1 / 0,5FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
NEW FRAMEWORK FOR THE OPERATION OF CONVENTIONAL POWER PLANTS
A t the end of the last century, the development of the electricity sector was
strongly influenced by the liberalisation of the energy market in Europe.
This led to a rethinking of the information policy of operational data of pow-
The trends shown in the diagram underline a steady increase of unplanned,
unavailable UA for coal-fired power plants from 1998 (approx. 3 %) to 2017
(approx. 8 %), while the planned share is declining since 2010. The unplanned
er plants. For example, in 1998 about 270 fossil-fired plants from Europe share of gas turbines has remained constant on an average at approx. 3 % since
participated in the data collection of VGB´s KISSY-system (Power Plant In- 2007, while the planned share is 8 % on average.
formation System). By 2007 this number had risen to over 350 plants − with When interpreting trends, the change in the KISSY database must be taken
the result that the average values of the early 1990s reflected a significantly into account. The number of plants is constantly changing due to the decom-
different plant park than today. The legal requirements, such as the introduc- missioning of old plants and the commissioning of new plants. However,
tion of the European ETS (Emissions Trading System) in 2005 or the pre- KISSY‘s database has increased significantly over the last 15 years and has be-
ferred feed-in of renewables, led to more flexibility and partial load as well as come much more international.
lower utilisation for fossil-fired plants. Other examples are the decommission-
ing of nuclear power plants in Germany (decided and started in 2011, which
Sources
will be completed in 2022) or the transition of a significant number of fossil- Technical and Commercial Key Indicators for Power Plants,
fired power plants from the electricity market to the grid reserve. Due to these VGB-S-002-03-2016-08-EN, VGB PowerTech, ISBN 978-3-86875-934-1 (eBook, free of charge)
framework conditions, the number of plants was then reduced to around 230 Availability of Power Plants 2008 – 2017, Edition 2018, VGB-TW 103Ve,
Issue 2018, VGB PowerTech, ISBN: 978-3-96284-087-7
in 2017. With these changes of the market and political requirement, a more
Analysis of Unavailability of Thermal Power Plants 2008 – 2017, VGB-TW 103Ae,
flexible start-up behaviour of the power plants is demanded or forced, which Issue 2018, VGB PowerTech, ISBN: 978-3-96284-091-4
is reflected in the availability and in particular in the unavailability (UA) of
the plants.Energy availabilty of European power plants Unavailability (UA) of European power plants
Energy availabilty, coal Energy availabilty, natural gas UA planned, coal UA disposable, coal UA not disposable, coal
Energy availabilty, coal Energy availabilty, natural gas UA planned, nat. gas UA disposable, nat. gas UA not disposable, nat. gas.
100 12
10
80
Energy availabiltyin %
Unavailability in %
8
60
6
40
4
20
2
0 0
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Year Year
PAG E 14 – 15FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
NUCLEAR POWER – CONTINUED EXPANSION WORLDWIDE
I n 2017, electricity generation from nuclear power was around 2,490 bil-
lion kWh worldwide and slightly above the 2016 figure of about 2,477 bil-
lion kWh. The nuclear-based generation is mainly determined by the shut-
Electricity generation from nuclear power worldwide
100 3,000
downs of Japanese nuclear power plants following the Fukushima event and Electricity generation from nuclear power plants in billion (109) kWh
Availability in %
the political decision in Germany to shut down – first temporarily and then 2,500
permanently – 8 nuclear power plant units. The share of nuclear power in
worldwide electricity generation has been roughly at some 11 %. The EU is
Others 2,000
the leading economic area worldwide in nuclear energy production with 14
countries operating nuclear power plants and a production of about 796 bil- Japan
50 1,500
lion kWh.
Since the first commercial nuclear power plant was commissioned in Calder USA
Hall in the United Kingdom in 1956, around 78,810 billion kWh of elec- 1,000
tricity have been produced on a cumulated basis. This corresponds to about
three times the current annual global electricity demand. The growth of 500
EU
nuclear electricity generation in the 1980s is remarkable. During that time,
large power plant projects with unit outputs in excess of 1,000 MW, which 0 0
had been launched in the 1970s due to the pressure of the first oil price 1956 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
crisis, went into operation and provided considerable generation capacity.
Today, the operation of nuclear power plants is characterised by high avail-
ability with a worldwide average of nearly 80 %. Source: atw – Int. Journal for Nuclear Power 5/2018NUCLEAR POWER: PLANTS, PLANNED SHUTDOWNS, NEW PLANTS AND PROJECTS
USA
France 58 - 2 + 1
99 + 2 + 18 4 +1 +2
4+2
Finland
Hungary
C urrently 449 nuclear power plants with a
total capacity of 420,383 MW are being op-
erated worldwide in 31 countries: another 57
Japan 42 + 2 - 4 39 + 18 + 32 China plants are under construction, while roughly 200
United Kingdom 15 + 10 3 +1 Argentina
plants are being planned or pre-planned to be
Russia 36 + 6 + 16 2 +1 + 4 Brazil
commissioned by 2030 (state December 2017).
Canada 19 + 7 2+2 Mexico
Germany 7 -7 5 +2+2
Following the Japanese events of March 11,
Pakistan
South Korea 24 + 4 + 12 2 South Africa
2011, new built plans were abandoned in Italy
India 22 + 6 + 8 Nuclear power plants worldwide 1-1+1 Armenia
and Switzerland only. This does not apply to the
Ukraine 15 + 2 in operation 2018: 449 1 The Netherlands plants in e.g. East and South East Europe, Asia,
Sweden 8 2+2 Romania states of the Middle East as well as North and
Spain 7 1+1 Slowenia South America. The impact of the current North-
Belgium 7 1+1 Iran American shale gas boom on local power plant
Taiwan, China 6 +2 +4 + 2 UAE structure as well as plant operation and construc-
+4 Poland
Bulgaria 2 +2
+1 Lithuania
tion of new nuclear power plants cannot be esti-
Slowakia 4 +2+2 mated yet.
+4 Vietnam
Switzerland 5-1
+3 +1 Turkey Long-term planable perspectives in terms of elec-
Czech Republic 6+2 +2 Belarus
+2 Bangladesh
tricity generation costs and nuclear fuel supply
motivate investors to launch new construction
New build: 57 Planned shut-downs: 14 Projects: 200 (including projects in further 14 countries)
programmes.
Sources: IAEA, atw – Int. Journal for Nuclear Power, status: 6/2018
PAG E 16 – 17FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
SMALL MODULAR REACTORS (SMR)
T he development of advanced reactor types − mainly based on the relia-
ble light water reactor technology − has been pushed worldwide over
the past decades. Today, nuclear power plants can be built and operated in a
These concepts are characterised above by the following properties:
ll Highest safety standards through passive systems or physically inherent
safety features.
reliable regulatory environment at competitive prices and with the highest ll Modular design. Depending on requirements, single modules can be
safety standards. These Generation III+ reactors now are the basis for new build at a site step by step and optimised to individual local require-
construction programmes and will continue to do so in the coming decades. ments and investment. The modular design also enables modular
But the geographical focus of nuclear new build is shifting. The future new construction with all the advantages of series production.
construction programmes will focus on the Asian countries that already use ll Long maintenance intervals and operating times for nuclear fuel loading
nuclear energy today and on “newcomer” countries in Africa and Asia. for several years. This results in low operating costs.
However, nuclear technology also offers many opportunities for further ll Installation of the modules in underground caverns and thus also close
development and innovation beyond the reliable nuclear power plant types to the demand. In addition to power generation, this also makes it
with outputs of up to 1,600 MW that have been commercially introduced possible to supply district or process heat.
into the markets. A particular interest of concepts and projects lies in small ll Island operation. Remote regions can be self-sufficiently supplied with
and medium capacity reactors up to approx. 300 MW, the so-called “Small energy − electricity and heat − from SMR.
Modular Reactors” (SMR).(1) (3)
Some examples for “Small Modular Reactors”:
(MR, capacity < 300 MW)
ll Integral Pressurized Water Reactor (IPWR) by NuScale:
12 modules with a total capacity of 600 MWe. (1)
ll TerraPower: Traveling Wave Reactor. Steps of the project. (2)
ll High-temperature reactors in a complex supply system:
Concept for the supply with electricity, heat and hydrogen
for private consumers and industry. (3)
(2)
PAG E 18 – 19FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
NEW POWER GENERATION CAPACITIES REQUIRED
F or more than two decades, European electricity generation has been in-
vesting predominantly in renewable energy sources and gas-fired power
plants, whereas in the 1970s and 1980s, investments focused on conven-
The future of today´s electricity generating capacities in operation
1,000
tional coal-fired and nuclear power plants. This structural change is above all Other
the result of various financial support systems for renewables in the indi- Geothermal
Capacity in operation in GW*
vidual European countries. 800
Hydro
Conventional power plants in Europe, mainly coal-fired and nuclear power Photovoltaic
plants, have therefore now reached a technical age at which future decom- Waste
600
missioning is foreseeable. The typical technical lifetimes of coal-fired power Peat
plants are about 40 years, those of nuclear power plants about 60 to 80 Biomass
years, and those of hydroelectric power plants about 100 years. In addition, 400 Wind, offshore
it is also foreseeable that in the coming years, renewables capacities will
Wind, onshore
increasingly reach the end of their technical operating life; the service life of
Nuclear
wind power and photovoltaic systems is considered to be 20 to 30 years. 200
Based on typical service life data and individual political decisions (e.g. Oil
phasing out nuclear power in Germany by 2022), it can be estimated that Lignite
by the year 2030 around 30 % of the electricity generation capacities cur- 0 Hard coal
rently in operation in Europe will be decommissioned. By 2050, this figure 2015 2025 2035 2045 2050
Year
will be around 80 %. * ˝Mortality“, Base: Capacities in operation end of 2014
This estimate makes it clear that with today‘s time horizons for planning,
construction and commissioning of power generation plants of 10 years and
more, suitable replacement capacities for a secure electricity supply will
have to be prepared in good time – now. Source: Investment Requirements in the EU electricity sector up to 2050
Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Energy and Environment, Energy TechnologyPLANNED AND ANNOUNCED NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN EUROPE
T he need to replace existing power generation capacities in Europe has
led many companies to plan new construction projects. Despite the
massive expansion of energy from renewables, coal, natural gas and nuclear
Projected and announced power plant capacities in Europe
energy continue to be the most important primary energy sources for reliable Share of energy source 2018 Gas (33,348 MW, 28.0 %)
available power generation. Highly efficient new plants are replacing less Oil (0 MW, 0 %)
efficient power plants. In addition to a significant reduction in CO2 emis-
sions, new power plants will also reduce further emissions and their increased Hard coal (13,915 MW, 11.7 %)
flexibility will contribute to a secure electricity supply and the integration of Lignite and peat (2,260 MW, 1.9 %)
renewable energy into the supply system. However, due to a lack of long-
term political framework conditions across Europe, investment in new ca- Nuclear (24,270 MW, 20.3 %)
pacities is stalled. Hydro (10,595 MW, 8.8 %)
According to the updated VGB PowerTech new construction statistics, the
Wind (33,603 MW, 28.2 %)
{
technology of gas-fired power plants accounts for the largest share of the
available capacity of conventional plants at around 28 % (approximately Biomass
(291 MW, 0.3 %)
33,348 MW). With a share of approx. 20 % (24,270 MW) these are fol-
Residues and waste
lowed by nuclear power plant projects, particularly in Eastern European (120 MW, 0.1 %)
countries. The new construction projects for power plants fired by hard coal Other renewables
and lignite are in third place with a combined share of around 14 % Total*: 118,952 MW (550 MW, 0.7 %)
(16,175 MW) of the total capacity.
Projects based on non-schedulable generation technologies continue to fo-
cus on wind power plants with a capacity share of approx. 28 % * without photovoltaic, oil: no projects.
(33,603 MW). Source: Data base VGB, state: 9/2018
SEI T E 20 – 21FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
LARGE COMBUSTION PLANTS – BEST AVAILABLE TECHNIQUES REFERENCE DOCUMENT
T he European (EU) targets for emissions from power plants were adopt-
ed by the Member States on 28 April 2017 at the proposal of the Euro-
pean Commission as part of the LCP BREF revision procedure (Large Com-
Working Group (TWG) following its publication. The comments and
amendments thus collected from the members were forwarded to the Seville
office. It took the EIPPCB almost two years (end of March 2015) to analyse
bustion Plants ‒ Best Available Techniques Reference Document). The and evaluate the 8,500 comments received.
document describes the state of the art for large combustion plants and sets At the final meeting of the TWG in June 2015, the EIPPCB presented and
BAT-AEL (Best Available Techniques ‒ Associated Emission Levels) for dif- discussed a revised final draft of the BAT conclusions and a comprehensive
ferent emissions that can be achieved with Best Available Techniques. background paper. After incorporating the new findings, the paper was
On 17 August 2017, the BAT conclusions for large combustion plants were submitted to the Information Exchange Forum (Article 13 Forum) consist-
published in the Official Journal of the EU. This updates the previous BAT ing of the EU Commission, Member States and representatives of industry
reference document from 2006 and redefines the state of the art. All large and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) for comments. Following
combustion plants with a rated thermal capacity of at least 50 MW are af- this processing step, the documents, together with the Forum’s written
fected. On the date of publication of the conclusions, the four-year imple- comments, were forwarded to the so-called Article 75 Committee of the
mentation period started for the EU member states. During this period, the EU Commission and Member States. There, the adoption of the new LCP
emission limit values must be incorporated into national law in order to BREF was decided on 28 April 2017.
ensure compliance with the specified ranges in the future.
The revision process for the LCP BREF began in October 2011 with a kick-
off meeting in Seville, Spain. As part of this so-called Seville process, the
EIPPCB (The European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bu-
reau) published the first draft of the new document in June 2013. It was
reviewed in particular and commented on by the members of the TechnicalEU reduction targets for SO2, NOx and volatile organic compounds (NMVOC)
for the period 2020/2029 and from 2030 (reference year = 2005). Reduction of important emissions from thermal power plants
Reduction SO2 2020/2029 NOx 2020/2029 NMVOC 2020/2029 in public electricity and heat supply in the EU-28
Region and from 2030 and from 2030 and from 2030
Austria 26 % 41 % 37 % 69 % 21 % 36 %
120
Belgium 43 % 66 % 41 % 59 % 21 % 35 % NOx PM2.5 SOx
Bulgaria 78 % 88 % 41 % 58 % 21 % 42 %
Croatia 55 % 83 % 31 % 57 % 34 % 48 %
Cyprus 83 % 93 % 44 % 55 % 45 % 50 % 100
Czech Republic 45 % 66 % 35 % 64 % 18 % 50 %
Emissions (2004 = 100 %)
Denmark 35 % 59 % 56 % 68 % 35 % 37 %
Estonia 32 % 68 % 18 % 30 % 10 % 28 %
Finland 30 % 34 % 35 % 47 % 35 % 48 %
80
France 55 % 77 % 50 % 69 % 43 % 52 %
Germany 21 % 58 % 39 % 65 % 13 % 28 %
Greece 74 % 88 % 31 % 55 % 54 % 62 %
Hungary 46 % 73 % 34 % 66 % 30 % 58 %
Ireland 65 % 85 % 49 % 69 % 25 % 32 % 60
Italy 35 % 71 % 40 % 65 % 35 % 46 %
Latvia 8% 46 % 32 % 34 % 27 % 38 %
Lithuania 55 % 60 % 48 % 51 % 32 % 47 %
Luxembourg 34 % 50 % 43 % 83 % 29 % 42 % 40
Malta 77 % 95 % 42 % 79 % 23 % 27 %
The Netherlands 28 % 53 % 45 % 61 % 8% 15 %
Poland 59 % 72 % 30 % 39 % 25 % 26 %
Portugal 63 % 83 % 36 % 63 % 18 % 38 %
77 % 88 % 45 % 60 % 25 % 45 % 20
Romania
Slovakia 57 % 82 % 36 % 50 % 18 % 32 %
Slovenia 63 % 92 % 39 % 65 % 23 % 53 %
Spain 67 % 88 % 41 % 62 % 22 % 39 %
Sweden 22 % 22 % 36 % 66 % 25 % 36 % 0
United Kingdom 59 % 88 % 55 % 73 % 32 % 39 % 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
EU-28 total 59 % 78 % 42 % 62 % 28 % 40 % Year
Source: EU Commission Source: EEA (European Environment Agency) 2018
PAG E 22 – 23FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
CLIMATE POLICY: GLOBAL APPROACH NEEDED
Between 1990 and 2014, the total greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) in the Current Policies New Policies Sustainable Dev.
European Union (EU-28) decreased by 20 % (World Bank, state: 2016). At in billion tce
the beginning of 2014, the EU announced new targets for the climate and
2015
2025
2040
2025
2040
2025
2040
energy policy which are to be met by 2030. Compared to the 1990 reference
values, GHGE are to be reduced by 40 % in order to support the global
target of limiting global warming to less than 2 °C. By 2050, GHGE are to Coal 5,482 5,950 7,207 5,489 5,613 4,391 2,539
be reduced by 80 to 95 %. It is also planned to raise the annual upper limit Oil 6,181 6,879 7,824 6,619 6,900 6,067 4,723
(cap) of GHGE from currently 1.74 to 2.2 % for the post-2020 period.
Natural gas 4,197 5,020 6,689 4,909 6,223 4,853 4,940
For the stabilisation and actual reduction of GHGE emissions, action, based
Nuclear 959 1,199 1,424 1,199 1,431 1,314 1,990
on the principle of effectiveness and cost efficiency, has to be taken world-
wide. Cost-efficient measures such as insulation of buildings, fossil-fired Hydro 477 584 733 590 761 613 851
power plants with higher efficiencies, the application of CCU (Carbon Cap- Biomass 1,841 2,153 2,469 2,186 2,573 1,817 2,226
ture and Utilisation), expanded use of renewables or further use of technolo- Other 286 630 1,223 700 1,619 904 2,851
gies with low GHGE like nuclear energy must be applied with priority and renewables
without prejudice in order to mitigate the globally increasing amount of Total* 19,476 22,414 27,570 21,689 25,120 19,887 20,120
GHGE. Share of 60 % 63 % 70 % 63 % 70 % 63 % 68 %
The International Energy Agency (IEA) developed a stabilisation concept non-OECD
countries
which is to stabilise GHGE at a value of 450 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere
(“Sustainable Development Scenario”) through a bundle of measures in com- IEA stabilisation concept. Share of the energy sources.
parison to the reference scenario (“Current Policies”). * incl. roundings
Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2017CO2 emissions total and per capita from fossil fuel combustion CO2 emissions from different power plants
for selected regions for 2014 and changes from 1990 to 2014 in g CO2 equivalent per kWh,
calculated for the life cycle of the power plant
t CO2 per capita billion (109) t CO2 per year
BoA technology
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 20
Lignite 950 to 1,230
EU-28 6.4
Region | Change 1990 to 2014
- 21 % 3,241
Hard coal 790 to 1,080
India 1,7
+ 262 % 2,238 Oil 890
USA 16.5
+4 % 5,254 Natural gas 640
143 Gas
China 7.5 combined 410 to 430 Electricity generation with CCU
+ 321 % 10,291 cycle
127
Photovoltaik 35 to 160
World 4.97
+ 63 % 36,138
Nuclear 16 to 23
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 30
Wind 8 to 16 Result range due to different
methods of calculation
Hydro power 4 to 13 and different site implications.
Sources: U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Environmental System Science Data Infrastructure for a Sources: PSI Paul Scherrer Institut/Switzerland, ESU-services, VGB (own calculations)
Virtual Ecosystem (ESS-DIVE) 2018
PAG E 24 – 25FAC TS A N D FI G U R ES EL E C T R I C I T Y G EN ER AT I O N 2018 l 2019
VGB POWERTECH E.V.
VGB PowerTech e.V. is the international technical association for generation Structure of the VGB membership:
and storage of power and heat with head office located in Essen (Germany).
Currently VGB has 437 members, comprising operators, manufacturers, and Fossil-fired power plants 227,500 MW
institutions connected with energy engineering. Nuclear power plants 34,500 MW
Our members come from 33 countries and represent an installed power plant Hydro power plants and other renewables 40,000 MW
capacity of 302,000 MW located in Europe. Total 302,000 MW
The activities of VGB PowerTech comprise: EU: 414 members in 20 countries
ll Provision of an international platform for the accumulation, exchange, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland,
and transfer of technical know-how. France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg,
ll Acting as “gate-keeper” and provider of technical know-how for the The Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden
member companies and other associations of our industry.
ll Harmonisation of technical and operational standards.
ll Identification and organisation of joint R&D activities. Other Europe: 11 members in 3 countries
ll Exclusive member access to qualified expert knowledge. Russia, Switzerland, Turkey
ll Representation of members´ interests.
Outside Europe: 12 members in 10 countries
VGB is performing these tasks in close cooperation with Eurelectric on
Argentina, Canada, China, Japan, Malaysia,
European-level and further national and international associations.
Mongolia, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, USA
Total: 437 members in 33 countriesTASKS OF THE INTERNATIONAL
TECHNICAL ASSOCIATION VGB POWERTECH
General Assembly
VGB PowerTech e. V. supports its members with all technical
issues of generation and storage of electricity and heat in Board Technical Advisory
order to further optimise Scientific Advisory Board Board
of Directors
ll Safety
ll Efficiency Management
ll Environmental friendliness
ll Economic efficiency and Competence Areas for the Generation and Storage of Power and Heat
ll Occupational safety and health protection
Nuclear Renewables Environmental
Power Plant Technology, Technical
The competence areas “Nuclear Power Plants”, “Power Plant Power and Distributed Chemistry, Safe-
Technologies Generation Services
Plants ty and Health
Technologies”, “Renewables and Distributed Generation”,
and “Environmental Technology, Chemistry, Safety and
Health” are dealing with all aspects of nuclear, conventional
and renewable generation. They are cooperating closely to
fully exploit the synergies.
The engineering services of the “Technical Services”, the
VGB Research Foundation, data bases, and publications. e.g.
the technical journal VGB POWERTECH perfectly round
off the portfolio of expertise of VGB PowerTech. VGB Committees
PAG E 26 – 27VGB PowerTech e.V. Editorial: Oliver Then (responsible),
Deilbachtal 173 Mario Bachhiesl, Sven Göhring, Thomas Linnemann,
45257 Essen | Germany Ludger Mohrbach, Stefan Prost and Christopher Weßelmann
August 2018
Phone: +49 201 8128 – 0 www.vgb.org | info@vgb.org
Fax: +49 201 8128 – 302You can also read
