Optimisation of the Overall System

Optimisation of the Overall System
Optimisation of the Overall System

Summary

The switch to an energy supply based on renewable energies must be affordable. This requires that the individual elements of the energy system be viewed holistically and coordinated cost-effectively.

Many studies have shown that the cost of a system based on at least 80 per cent renewable energy can be in the same cost range as a system based on gas, coal, and nuclear power plants. However this does not apply for every development path from the current to a new system. The topic of optimisation therefore has an important political significance – because if it is not possible to keep the cost of the overall system in defensible limits, the project will lose the support of German society and the transition to renewable energy will be doomed.

The cost of the overall system is composed of the cost of producing electricity, the distribution of electricity, and storage capacity (as well as other flexibility options). Due to the different characteristics of renewable energy compared to fossil fuels, in the future there will be a much greater interaction between these two cost drivers than previously.

The central question is: What is the cost-optimal mix of renewable energy? In addition to the cost of electricity, the costs of integrating the power system have to be considered: The generation of energy close to where consumers live and work can reduce the need for electricity transmission networks. Moreover, an optimal mix of technologies and an effective distribution system in Germany could in turn reduce the need for flexibility options and storage capacity.

A second issue is the long-term development of technology and costs, as well as the impact on today’s decision making. Innovations can prevail with surprising speed and costs decrease unexpectedly quickly – making reliable forecasts today is difficult, if not impossible. Yet many decisions for the further development of the power system have to be taken today.

An additional challenge is the modelling of scenarios of the future power system in Germany and Europe. Currently, there is a wide range of energy system models for mapping developments between now and 2030 or 2050. But the results of these models vary greatly, however, because of differences in assumptions and modeling methodology. A growing consensus among experts is crucial though for sound and evidence-based policy decisions.

 

 

Core results

  1. Wind and solar PV drive power system development.

    As part of Europe’s renewable energy expansion plans, the PLEF countries will strive to draw 32 to 34 percent of their electricity from wind and solar by 2030. The weather dependency of these technologies impacts power systems, making increased system flexibility crucial.

  2. Regional European power system integration mitigates flexibility needs from increasing shares of wind and solar.

    Different weather patterns across Europe will decorrelate single power generation peaks, yielding geographical smoothing effects. Wind and solar output is generally much less volatile at an aggregated level and extremely high and low values disappear. For example, in France the maximum hourly ramp resulting from wind fluctuation in 2030 is 21 percent of installed wind capacity, while the Europe-wide maximum is only at 10 percent of installed capacity.

  3. Cross-border exchange minimises surplus renewables generation.

    When no trading options exist, hours with high domestic wind and solar generation require that generation from renewables be stored or curtailed in part. With market integration, decorrelated production peaks across countries enable exports to regions where the load is not covered. By contrast, a hypothetical national autarchy case has storage or curtailment requirements that are ten times as high.

  4. Conventional power plants need to be flexible partners of wind and solar output.

    A more flexible power system is required for the transition to a low-carbon system. Challenging situations are manifold, comprising the ability to react over shorter and longer periods. To handle these challenges, the structure of the conventional power plant park and the way power plants operate will need to change. Renewables, conventional generation, grids, the demand side and storage technologies must all become more responsive to provide flexibility.

  1. The European power system will be based on wind power, solar PV and flexibility.

    The existing climate targets for 2030 imply a renewables share of some 50 percent in the electricity mix, with wind and PV contributing some 30 percent. The reason is simple: they are by far the cheapest zero-carbon power technologies. Thus, continuous investments in these technologies are required for a cost-efficient transition; so are continuous efforts to make the power system more flexible at the supply and demand side.

  2. Making the Energy-Only Market more flexible and repairing the EU Emissions Trading Scheme are prerequisites for a successful power market design.

    A more flexible energy-only market and a stable carbon price will however not be enough to manage the required transition to a power system with high shares of wind and solar PV. Additional instruments are needed.

  3. A pragmatic market design approach consists of five elements: Energy-only market, emissions trading, smart retirement measures, stable revenues for renewables, and measures to safeguard system adequacy.

    Together, they form the Power Market Pentagon; all of them are required for a functioning market design. Their interplay ensures that despite legacy investments in high-carbon an inflexible technologies, fundamental uncertainties about market dynamics, and CO2 prices well below the social cost of carbon, the transition to a reliable, decarbonised power system occurs cost-efficiently.

  4. The Power Market Pentagon is a holistic approach to the power system transformation. When designing the different elements, policy makers need to consider repercussions with the other dimensions of the power system.

    For example, introducing capacity remunerations without actively retiring high-carbon, inflexible power plants will restrain meeting CO2 reduction targets. Or, reforming the ETS could trigger a fuel switch from coal to gas, but cannot replace the need for revenue stabilisation for renewables.

From study The Power Market Pentagon
  1. A power system with a 95 percent share of renewables has the same or even lower costs than a fossil-based system under most assumptions for future fuel and CO₂ prices.

    A coal-based system would only be significantly less expensive if extremely low CO₂ prices are expected in 2050 (20 euros/t). Similarly, a natural gas-based system would only be significantly less expensive if gas prices are low and CO₂ prices are not high (i.e. below 100 euros/t).

  2. A renewables-based system insulates the economy against volatile commodity prices, as the costs of fossil-based systems heavily depend on fuel and CO₂ price trends.

    Variable costs (largely for fuel and CO₂) account for 30 to 67 percent of the total costs of the fossil-based systems. By contrast, variable costs represent just 5 percent of costs in the renewables-based systems.

  3. A power system with a 95 percent share of renewables reduces CO₂ emissions by 96 percent their 1990 levels at CO₂ abatement costs of about 50 euros/t.

    A renewables based energy transition can thus be considered efficient climate policy, as CO₂ damage costs are estimated a lot higher (80 euros/t over the short-term, and at 145 to 260 euros/t over the long term).

  1. The heating sector needs to phase out oil: A cost-efficient, climate friendly energy mix for building heating would most likely consist of 40 per cent natural gas, 25 per cent heat pumps, and 20 per cent district heating – with little to no oil.

    In this scenario, the importance of natural gas remains roughly the same as today, while oil heating is almost entirely replaced by heat pumps. District heating is another key factor. By 2030, district heating will primarily draw on heat from CHP plants, but it will increasingly rely on solar thermal energy, deep geothermal energy, industrial waste heat, and large-scale heat pumps as well.

  2. Efficiency is decisive: To meet 2030 targets, energy use for building heating must decline by 25 per cent relative to 2015 levels.

    Energy efficiency is a pillar of decarbonisation because it makes climate protection affordable. Improving energy use efficiency in buildings requires a green retrofit rate of 2 per cent and a high retrofit depth. But current trends in building modernisation fall far short of these targets.

  3. The heat pump gap: Based on current trends, some 2 million heat pumps will be installed by 2030 – but 5 to 6 million are needed.

    To close this gap, heat pumps must be installed early on not only in new buildings but also in existing buildings, for example as bivalent systems with fossil fuel-fired boilers for peak demand. If heat pumps can be flexibly managed and existing storage heaters replaced with efficient heating units by 2030, the 5 to 6 million heat pumps will affect only a slight rise on peak demand that thermal power plants must cover.

  4. Renewable electricity for heat pumps: By 2030, renewable energy must comprise at least 60 per cent of gross power consumption.

    To reach the 2030 climate protection target, additional electricity consumption in the heating and traffic sector must be covered by CO2-free energy sources. But the new renewable energy capacities stipulated in EEG 2017 will not suffice to do so.

From study Heat Transition 2030
  1. Energiewendeszenarien müssen alle Sektoren und Emissionen gemäß Kyoto-Protokoll umfassen.

    Denn der stärkste Treiber für abweichende Ergebnisse im Strombedarf sind unterschiedliche Interpretationen der Klimaschutzziele sowie unterschiedliche Abdeckungen der nichtenergetischen Emissionen. Für mehr Vergleichbarkeit sollten öffentliche Auftraggeber hier für mehr Klarheit bei zentralen Annahmen sorgen.

  2. Für robuste Ausbaupfade der Erneuerbaren Energien stellt die Annahme zur Verfügbarkeit von Biomasse eine wichtige Einflussgröße dar.

    Die Annahmen zu Biomasseimporten beeinflussen den Strombedarf erheblich; die Spannbreite liegt zwischen 0 und 200 Terawattstunden (Primärenergie) im Jahr 2050. Geht man davon aus, dass Biomasse aufgrund von Nutzungskonkurrenzen und steigender Bevölkerung weltweit ein knappes Gut sein wird, bedeutet dies einen entsprechend höheren Stromeinsatz im Verkehr.

  3. Ohne ambitionierte Effizienzsteigerungen insbesondere im Wärmesektor erhöht sich der Strombedarf deutlich.

    Die Annahme hoher Dämmstandards bei der Gebäudesanierung halbiert den Wärmebedarf der betreffenden Haushalte. Wird dieses Effizienzniveau nicht erreicht, könnte der Stromverbrauch 2050 um 100 Terawattstunden pro Jahr höher ausfallen. Aber auch bei Industrie und allgemeinem Verbrauch ist Effizienz entscheidend für die Stromverbrauchsannahmen.

  4. Der Ausbau der Erneuerbaren Energien muss die wachsende Bedeutung von Strom berücksichtigen.

    Der Strombedarf wird 2050 höher liegen, als bislang vielfach angenommen, wenn das Klimaschutzziel nach Kyoto eingehalten, Biomasse für den Verkehr nur begrenzt verfügbar und die energetische Gebäudesanierung nicht vollständig realisiert wird. Ein Windkraft- und Photovoltaikausbau von 2,5 Gigawatt netto pro Jahr gemäß EEG 2014 reicht dann nicht aus.

  1. Three components are typically discussed under the term “integration costs” of wind and solar energy: grid costs, balancing costs and the cost effects on conventional power plants (so-called “utilization effect”).

    The calculation of these costs varies tremendously depending on the specific power system and methodologies applied. Moreover, opinions diverge concerning how to attribute certain costs and benefits, not only to wind and solar energy but to the system as a whole.

  2. Integration costs for grids and balancing are well defined and rather low.

    Certain costs for building electricity grids and balancing can be clearly classified without much discussion as costs that arise from the addition of new renewable energy. In the literature, these costs are often estimated at +5 to +13 EUR/MWh, even with high shares of renewables.

  3. Experts disagree on whether the “utilization effect” can (and should) be considered as integration costs, as it is difficult to quantify and new plants always modify the utilization rate of existing plants.

    When new solar and wind plants are added to a power system, they reduce the utilization of the existing power plants, and thus their revenues. Thus, in most cases, the cost for “backup” power increases. Calculations of these effects range between -6 and +13 EUR/MWh in the case of Germany at a penetration of 50 percent wind and PV, depending especially on the CO? cost.

  4. Comparing the total system costs of different scenarios would be a more appropriate approach.

    A total system cost approach can assess the cost of different wind and solar scenarios while avoiding the controversial attribution of system effects to specific technologies.

  1. Le terme de coûts d’intégration de l’éolien et du solaire PV recouvre typiquement trois composants : les coûts de réseau, les coûts d’équilibrage et le coût de l’impact des énergies renouvelables sur l’utilisation des centrales thermiques conventionnelles (appelé «effet sur l’utilisation»).

    Le calcul de ces coûts varie considérablement en fonction des systèmes électriques considérés et de la méthodologie employée. De plus, les avis divergent en ce qui concerne la manière d’attribuer certains coûts ou bénéfices, exclusivement à l’éolien et au solaire PV, ou à l’ensemble du système électrique.

  2. Les coûts de réseau et d’équilibrage sont relativement bien définis et plutôt faibles.

    Certains coûts liés au renforcement des réseaux et à l’équilibrage du système électrique peuvent être attribués sans trop de discussion à l’ajout de capacités renouvelables. Dans la littérature, ces coûts sont la plupart du temps estimés entre +5 et + 13 EUR/MWh, même à des niveaux de pénétration renouvelables élevés.

  3. Les experts ne sont pas unanimes sur la manière de considérer « l’effet sur l’utilisation des centrales conventionnelles », puisque cet effet est difficile à quantifier et que toute nouvelle capacité modifie l’utilisation des capacités existantes.

    Lorsque de nouvelles capacités photovoltaïque ou éolienne sont ajoutées au système électrique, elles réduisent l’utilisation des centrales existantes, et donc leurs revenus. Ainsi, dans la plupart des cas le coût de l’électricité résiduelle (« backup ») augmente. Le coût de cet effet sur l’utilisation des centrales conventionnelles peut varier entre -6 et +13 EUR/MWh pour le cas du système électrique allemand avec 50 % d’électricité renouvelable variable, en fonction du coût du CO?.

  4. Comparer les coûts globaux du système électrique dans le cadre de différents scenarios peut constituer une démarche plus adaptée.

    Une approche basée sur les coûts globaux du système électrique permet de comparer différents scénarios de développement des ENR, tout en évitant la question controversée de l’attribution des effets systémiques à certaines technologies spécifiques.

  1. Increased integration between the Nordic countries and Germany will become ever more important as the share of renewables increases. The more renewables enter the system, the higher the value of additional transmission capacity between Nordic countries and Germany will become.

    In particular, additional generation from renewables in the Nordics – reflected in the Nordic electricity balance - will increase the value of transmission capacity. There is a lot of potential for trade, due to hourly differences in wholesale electricity prices throughout the year.

  2. A closer integration of the Nordic and the German power systems will reduce CO2 emissions due to better utilisation of renewable electricity.

    This is caused by reduced curtailment of renewables, improved integration of additional renewable production sites and increased competitiveness of biomass-fuelled power plants.

  3. Higher integration will lead to the convergence of wholesale electricity prices between the Nordic countries and Germany. But even with more integration, the Nordic countries will see lower wholesale electricity prices if they deploy large shares of renewables themselves.

    In general, additional integration will lead to slightly higher wholesale electricity prices in the Nordics and to slightly lower prices in Germany. But this will be counteracted by the decreasing price effect that higher wind shares in the Nordics have on the wholesale power market.

  4. Distributional effects from increased integration are significantly higher across stakeholder groups within countries than between countries.

    This strongly impacts the incentives of market players such as electricity producers or consumers (e.g., energy-intensive industries) for or against increased integration. Distributiona leffects need to be taken into account for creating public acceptance for new lines and for the cross-border allocation of network investments.

  1. Increased integration between the Nordic countries and Germany will become ever more important as the share of renewables increases. The more renewables enter the system, the higher the value of additional transmission capacity between Nordic countries and Germany will become.

    In particular, additional generation from renewables in the Nordics – reflected in the Nordic electricity balance - will increase the value of transmission capacity. There is a lot of potential for trade, due to hourly differences in wholesale electricity prices throughout the year.

  2. A closer integration of the Nordic and the German power systems will reduce CO2 emissions due to better utilisation of renewable electricity.

    This is caused by reduced curtailment of renewables, improved integration of additional renewable production sites and increased competitiveness of biomass-fuelled power plants.22

  3. Higher integration will lead to the convergence of wholesale electricity prices between the Nordic countries and Germany. But even with more integration, the Nordic countries will see lower wholesale electricity prices if they deploy large shares of renewables themselves.

    In general, additional integration will lead to slightly higher wholesale electricity prices in the Nordics and to slightly lower prices in Germany. But this will be counteracted by the decreasing price effect that higher wind shares in the Nordics have on the wholesale power market.3

  4. Distributional effects from increased integration are significantly higher across stakeholder groups within countries than between countries.

    This strongly impacts the incentives of market players such as electricity producers or consumers (e.g., energy-intensive industries) for or against increased integration. Distributiona leffects need to be taken into account for creating public acceptance for new lines and for the cross-border allocation of network investments.

  1. Der Ausbau der Erneuerbaren Energien muss nicht auf Stromspeicher warten.

    In den nächsten 10 bis 20 Jahren kann die benötigte Flexibilität im Stromsystem durch andere Flexibilitätsoptionen (zum Beispiel flexible Kraftwerke, Lastmanagement) günstiger bereitgestellt werden als durch neue Stromspeicher. Erst bei sehr hohen Anteilen von Erneuerbaren Energien werden neue Stromspeicher wirklich benötigt.

  2. Der Markt für neue Energiespeicher wird dynamisch wachsen.

    Neue Märkte für Batterien und Power-to-X entstehen insbesondere im Verkehrs- und Chemiesektor. Diese können Flexibilität im Stromsektor als Zusatznutzen anbieten. Forschung und Entwicklung sowie Marktanreizprogramme sind daher auf eine systemunterstützende Integration auszurichten.

  3. Speicher müssen gleichberechtigten Zugang zu Märkten für Flexibilität erhalten.

    Schon heute können Speicher einige Systemdienstleistungen kosteneffizient erbringen. Märkte für Flexibilität – wie der Regelleistungsmarkt oder ein zukünftiger Kapazitätsmarkt – müssen deshalb technologieoffen ausgestaltet werden.

  4. Im Verteilnetz sollten Speicher ein Element im Baukasten der Netzbetreiber werden.

    In speziellen Fällen können netzdienlich eingesetzte Speicher den Netzausbau in der Niederspannungsebene kosteneffizient vermeiden. Der regulatorische Rahmen sollte solche kosteneffizienten Entscheidungen grundsätzlich ermöglichen.

  1. The expansion of renewable energy does not have to wait for electricity storage.

    In the next 10 to 20 years the flexibility required in the power system can be provided for by other, more cost-effective technologies such as flexible power plants, demand side management. New storage is required only at very high shares of renewable energies.

  2. The market for new storage technologies will grow dynamically.

    New markets for battery storage and power to gas technologies are expected to emerge, especially in the transport and chemical sector. Storage developed in these sectors can enable further flexibility for the electricity system as an additional service. Research and development as well as market incentive programs should maximize the system-supporting contribution of new storage technologies.

  3. Storage must receive equal access to markets for flexibility.

    Storage can already today deliver several ancillary services at competitive costs. Flexibility markets – such as the ancillary services or future capacity markets – should therefore be designed such that they are technology-neutral.

  4. Storage should become a tool in the toolbox of distribution system operators.

    In specific cases, storage that is used to support a grid can help to avoid grid expansion in the low-voltage distribution grid. The regulatory framework should enable such cost-efficient decisions.

  1. Power-to-Heat ist eine kostengünstige Technologie, die für die Energiewende viele Vorteile bietet.

    Power-to-Heat kann nicht nur Strom aus Erneuerbaren Energien, der sonst abgeregelt werden würde, für den Wärmesektor nutzen, sondern auch dem Strommarkt zusätzliche Flexibilität bieten – durch die Bereitstellung von Regelenergie und den Einsatz in Zeiten negativer Strompreise.

  2. Power-to-Heat kann jetzt schon am Regelleistungsmarkt fossile Must-run-Kraftwerke reduzieren.

    In Zeiten von negativen Strompreisen kann es dazu kommen, dass fossile Kraftwerke nur deshalb nicht aus dem Markt gehen, weil sie Leistung für den Regelenergiemarkt vorhalten. Power-to-Heat kann diese Dienstleistung kostengünstig bereitstellen und dadurch Kohlenstoffdioxid-Emissionen reduzieren.

  3. Windstrom, der derzeit aufgrund von Netzengpässen abgeregelt wird, sollte in Zukunft an Power-to-Heat-Anlagen verkauft werden können. Hierfür ist eine Regelungsanpassung im EEG nötig.

    Aufgrund von Netzengpässen werden heute etwa 3,5 Prozent des in Schleswig-Holstein erzeugten Windstroms abgeregelt, während zeitgleich Wärme aus fossilen Brennstoffen erzeugt wird. Das ist ineffizient.

  4. Erneuerbarer Strom, der in Zeiten von negativen Börsenpreisen abgeregelt wird, sollte künftig für Power-to-Heat genutzt werden können. Eine Reduktion der Umlagen in solchen Situationen würde dies ermöglichen.

    Wenn Power-to-Heat-Anlagen bei Strompreisen niedriger als minus 20 Euro pro Megawattstunde zum Einsatz kommen, vermeiden sie die Abregelung von EE Anlagen und entlasten die EEG-Umlage.

  1. Die Steigerung der Energieeffizienz senkt die Kosten des deutschen Stromsystems deutlich.

    Jede eingesparte Kilowattstunde Strom reduziert Brennstoffe, CO2-Emissionen, fossile und erneuerbareKraftwerksinvestitionen sowie Netzausbau. Eine Reduktion des Stromverbrauchs bis 2035 um 10 bis 35Prozent gegenüber der Referenzentwicklung senkt die Kosten im Jahr 2035 um 10 bis 20 Milliarden Euro2012.

  2. Die Steigerung der Energieeffizienz im Strombereich ist gesamtwirtschaftlich sinnvoll.

    Eine eingesparte Kilowattstunde Strom bewirkt je nach betrachtetem Szenario eine Kosteneinsparungim Stromsystem zwischen 11 und 15 Cent2012 im Jahr 2035. Sehr viele Effizienzmaßnahmen sind wesentlichgünstiger umzusetzen, ihre Umsetzung ist damit aus gesamtwirtschaftlicher Sicht sinnvoll.

  3. Je geringer der Stromverbrauch, desto geringer fällt auch der Ausbaubedarf der Stromnetze aus.

    Der langfristige Ausbaubedarf im deutschen Übertragungsnetz bis zum Jahr 2050 kann bei einer deutlichenSteigerung der Energieeffizienz von 8.500 Kilometern Leitungslänge auf einen Ausbaubedarf zwischen1.750 und 5.000 Kilometern gesenkt werden.

  4. Eine Senkung des Stromverbrauchs senkt CO2-Emissionen und Brennstoffimportkosten.

    Durch eine Reduktion des Stromverbrauchs um mehr als 15 Prozent gegenüber einer Referenzentwicklungkönnen im Jahr 2020 die CO2-Emissionen um 40 Millionen Tonnen und die Importausgaben für Steinkohleund Erdgas um 2 Milliarden Euro2012 reduziert werden.

  1. Improving energy efficiency would significantly lower the costs of the German electricity system.

    Each saved kilowatt-hour of electricity reduces fuel and CO2 emissions, as well as investment costs forfossil and renewable power plants and power grid expansion. If electricity consumption can be lowered by10 to 35 percent by 2035 compared to the Reference scenario outlined in the study, the costs for electricitygeneration will reduced by 10 to 20 billion euros2012.

  2. Improvements in the energy efficiency of the electricity sector can be achieved economically.

    One saved kilowatt-hour of electricity would lead to reduced electrical system costs of between 11 to 15euro cents2012 by 2035, depending on the underlying assumptions. Many efficiency measures wouldgenerate lower costs than these savings, and would therefore be beneficial from an overall economicperspective.

  3. Reductions in future power consumption mean a lower need to expand the power grid.

    A significant increase in energy efficiency can significantly reduce the long-term need to expand thetransmission grid: between 1,750 and 5,000 km in additional transmission lines will be needed by 2050,down from 8,500 km under the “business as usual” scenario.

  4. Reducing power consumption would reduce both CO2 emissions and import costs for fuel.

    Reducing power consumption by 15 percent compared to the Reference scenario would lower CO2 emissionsby 40 million tonnes and would reduce spending on coal and natural gas imports by 2 billion euros2012 in2020.

  1. Effizienz und Flexibilität wachsen zusammen zu einem gemeinsamen Konzept: Flex-Efficiency.

    Denn mit immer mehr Erneuerbaren Energien in der Stromversorgung bekommt Effizienz eine zeitliche Komponente: Wenn die Sonne nicht scheint oder der Wind nicht weht, steigen die Strombörsenpreise – und Stromeffizienz wird wertvoller als in Zeiten hoher Erneuerbare Energien-Stromproduktion.

  2. Flex-Efficiency wird zum Paradigma für Design und Betrieb von Industrieanlagen.

    Mit zunehmenden Anteilen von Wind- und Solarstrom werden die Preisschwankungen an der Strombörse steigen. Bei der Entwicklung neuer Industrieanlagen sollten Energieeffizienz und Flexibilität schon heute gemeinsam gedacht werden, um in Zukunft von den Stunden mit niedrigen Preisen zu profitieren.

  3. Die Flexibilitätsmärkte und deren Produkte sollten weiter verbessert werden.

     Marktzugang, Marktstrukturen und die richtigen Produkte (zum Beispiel abschaltbare Lasten und weiteres Demand Side Management) sind entscheidend dafür, dass Marktpreissignale einen aus Systemsicht optimierten und zugleich wirtschaftlichen Betrieb der Anlagen oder entsprechende Investitionen anreizen.

  4. Investitionen in Flex-Efficiency brauchen eine Kombination von marktlichen und anderen Anreizen.

    Marktpreise generieren gute Anreize für die Optimierung und den Betrieb großer, energieintensiver Anlagen. Sie versagen jedoch oft bei „durchschnittlichen“ Prozessen, Speichern und Querschnittstechnologien. Ergänzende Instrumente sind erforderlich, um dieses Potenzial zu heben.

From study Flex-Efficiency
  1. Effizienz und Flexibilität wachsen zusammen zu einem gemeinsamen Konzept: Flex-Efficiency.

    Denn mit immer mehr Erneuerbaren Energien in der Stromversorgung bekommt Effizienz eine zeitliche Komponente: Wenn die Sonne nicht scheint oder der Wind nicht weht, steigen die Strombörsenpreise – und Stromeffizienz wird wertvoller als in Zeiten hoher Erneuerbare Energien-Stromproduktion.

  2. Flex-Efficiency wird zum Paradigma für Design und Betrieb von Industrieanlagen.

    Mit zunehmenden Anteilen von Wind- und Solarstrom werden die Preisschwankungen an der Strombörse steigen. Bei der Entwicklung neuer Industrieanlagen sollten Energieeffizienz und Flexibilität schon heute gemeinsam gedacht werden, um in Zukunft von den Stunden mit niedrigen Preisen zu profitieren.

  3. Die Flexibilitätsmärkte und deren Produkte sollten weiter verbessert werden.

     Marktzugang, Marktstrukturen und die richtigen Produkte (zum Beispiel abschaltbare Lasten und weiteres Demand Side Management) sind entscheidend dafür, dass Marktpreissignale einen aus Systemsicht optimierten und zugleich wirtschaftlichen Betrieb der Anlagen oder entsprechende Investitionen anreizen.

  4. Investitionen in Flex-Efficiency brauchen eine Kombination von marktlichen und anderen Anreizen.

    Marktpreise generieren gute Anreize für die Optimierung und den Betrieb großer, energieintensiver Anlagen. Sie versagen jedoch oft bei „durchschnittlichen“ Prozessen, Speichern und Querschnittstechnologien. Ergänzende Instrumente sind erforderlich, um dieses Potenzial zu heben.

From study Flex-Efficiency
  1. Policy makers have a large scope of action in designing policies for the regional distribution of onshore wind and photovoltaics.

    Regional distribution of this renewable energy has little impact on the total cost of power supply.

  2. Finding the right balance is important in expanding offshore wind power.

    To promote technology development and reduce the cost of electricity for consumers, expansion should be continued, but on a lower level than current plans foresee.

  3. Grid expansion is an important prerequisite for the Energiewende.

    Solely in terms of cost, a few years of delays for the additional transmission lines foreseen in the German Grid Development Planning act would not be critical. Further expansion of renewables does not have to wait for these new transmission lines.

  4. A strong focus on battery storage systems combined with photovoltaic is currently not desirable.

    Only if cost of such systems drop by 80 % in the next 20 years would a renewable expansion path focusing on photovoltaics + storage be an economically viable option.

  1. Policy makers have a large scope of action in designing policies for the regional distribution of onshore wind and photovoltaics.

    Regional distribution of this renewable energy has little impact on the total cost of power supply.

  2. Finding the right balance is important in expanding offshore wind power.

    To promote technology development and reduce the cost of electricity for consumers, expansion should be continued, but on a lower level than current plans foresee.

  3. Grid expansion is an important prerequisite for the Energiewende.

    Solely in terms of cost, a few years of delays for the additional transmission lines foreseen in the German Grid Development Planning act would not be critical. Further expansion of renewables does not have to wait for these new transmission lines.

  4. A strong focus on battery storage systems combined with photovoltaic is currently not desirable.

    Only if cost of such systems drop by 80 % in the next 20 years would a renewable expansion path focusing on photovoltaics + storage be an economically viable option.

Events

You can find our presentations and publications from the previous events in the menu "events".

top

Projects

top

Latest News

top

All Content

All