Mitigating Environmental Emissions from the Power Sector: Analysis of Technical and Policy Options i

1
Mitigating Environmental Emissions from the Power
Sector Analysis of Technical and Policy Options
in Selected Asian Countries

• Ram M. Shrestha
• S. C. Bhattacharya
• Asian Regional Research Programme in Energy,
  Environment and Climate (ARRPEEC)
• Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand

2
Overview of presentation

• ARRPEEC power sector project
• Status of power sector
• Least cost generation options under CO2 emission
  targets
• Identification of some CDM projects
• Conclusions

3
Share of the power sector in total national CO2
emissions (1990 and 1999)

• Power sectors share in CO2 emission in 1999 12
  in Sri Lanka to over 42 in China and India
• The sectors share increasing in China, India,
  Indonesia and Sri Lanka.
• Decreasing share in Thailand and Vietnam

Yearly Emission by fuel type
4
The ARRPEEC Power Sector Project Network
AIT Asian Institute of Technology SPPERC
State Power Economic Research Center,
China IIT-K Indian Institute of Technology,
Kanpur CEA Central Electricity Authority,
India FIIEE The Foundation of Indonesian
Institute of Energy Economics SLEMA Sri
Lanka Energy Managers Association SIIT
Sirindhorn International Institute of
Technology, Thailand IE Institute of Energy,
Vietnam
Collaborating Institutions
5
The ARRPEEC Power Sector Project Specific
Objectives

• Determination of least cost supply-side options
  for GHG and other harmful emissions mitigation
  subject to CO2 emission targets,
• Identification of some CDM projects and
  assessment of their GHG and other harmful
  emissions mitigation potential
• Assessment of environmental implications of
  Independent Power Producers (IPPs) and
  Distributed Power Generation (DPG)

6
Power systems and countries covered
a1999
7
Research approach planning horizon

• Least cost power generation planning model
• Planning horizon 2003 to 2017

8
Candidate generation technologies
Note
BIGCC Biomass Gasification Combined Cycle, PFBC
Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion, CFBC
Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustion, IGCC
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
9
Least cost electricity generation technologies
under the BAU case during 2003-2017

• In the BAU case (i.e.without a CO2 emission
  reduction target), clean coal and non-hydro
  renewable options are found cost effective only
  in NREB-India, Indonesia and Thailand.

10
Cleaner thermal generation technologies selected
under least cost planning in the BAU and emission
reduction cases during 2003-17

• Clean coal power generation technologies cost
  effective in Yunnan-China, NREB- India,
  Indonesia and Thailand and generation share to
  decrease under reduction cases
• Combined cycle plants selected in all countries
  (except Sri Lanka) and its generation share to
  increase under emission reduction cases

11
Renewable technologies selected under least cost
planning in the BAU and CO2 emission reduction
cases during 2003-17
Dendro thermal cost effective in Sri Lanka at
20 reduction target

• Wind cost effective at 5 in Yunnan-China, and
  at 10 and more in Thailand and Sri Lanka
• Geothermal and solar PV cost effective at 5
  and more in Yunnan-China
• BIGCC cost effective at 5 in NREB-India and
  dendro-thermal at 20 in Sri Lanka

12
Trends of generation share in total generation
under CO2 emission reduction cases

• Share of gas-fired combined cycle (CC)
  generation to increase in Indonesia, NREB-India,
  Thailand and Vietnam
• Share of hydro generation to increase in
  NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Yunnan-China
• Share of biomass (BIGCC) increase in NREB-India
  and Thailand
• Share of conventional coal-fired generation to
  decrease in NREB- India, Sri Lanka, Thailand,
  Vietnam and Yunnan-China (shift to CC and hydro)
• Share of clean coal generation (PFBC) to
  decrease in Indonesia (shift to CC)

Generation share by technology
13
CO2 Emission-mix by type of generation technology
during 2003-17 under BAU and 15 CO2 emission
reduction cases
Emission share of coal plants to decrease and
that of CC (gas-based) to increase in NREB-India
and Indonesia
14
CO2 Emission-mix by type of generation technology
during 2003-2017 under BAU and 15 CO2 emission
reduction cases
Emission share of coal plants to decrease and
that of CC (gas-based) to increase in Thailand
and Vietnam
15
Effect on total cost of power generation under
CO2 emission reduction targets

• Total generation cost increase by
• 0.2 (Indonesia) to 1.8 (Yunnan-China) at 5
  reduction target compared to BAU case
• 1.0 (Indonesia) to 7.3 (Yunnan-China) at 15
  reduction target

16
Marginal Abatement Costs, /tonne of CO2 at 1998
prices

• MAC range from
• 1.0 to 2.5 /tonne of CO2 at 5 reduction target
• 2.9 to 12.5 /tonne of CO2 at 10 reduction
  target
• 3.1 to 7.3 /tonne of CO2 at 15 reduction target

17
CO2 Mitigation (Supply) Curves during 2003-2017

• Cost of CO2 reduction relatively high in Sri
  Lanka
• Cumulative CO2 emission reduction during
  2003-2017,
• 215 million tons at MAC of 2 /tonne CO2
• 1,110 million tons at MAC of 3 /tonne CO2
• 2,192 million tons at MAC of 5 /ton CO2

18
Effects on SO2 Emissions under CO2 reduction
targets

• SO2 emissions to increase in Indonesia under CO2
  reduction targets gt5
• Disproportionately large reduction in SO2
  emission
• At 15 CO2 emission reduction target, SO2
  emissions to reduce by over 30 in Yunnan
  (China), NREB (India) and Thailand and by over
  20 in Vietnam.

19
Effects on NOx Emissions under CO2 reduction
targets

• Relatively higher NOx reduction in Yunnan (China)
• At 15 reduction target, NO2 reduction by over
  15 in NREB-India, Vietnam and Yunnan-China

20
Identification of CDM Projects in the Power
Sector
21
Project/Options considered for CDM
Methodology
22
CO2 reductions and MAC of the candidate cleaner
thermal CDM projects during 2003-17 at 1998 prices

• Wide variations in MAC for CTTs
• IGCC 12 /tonne (Thailand) to 83 /tonne
  of CO2(Sri Lanka)
• PFBC 5 /tonne (Vietnam) to 115 /tonne
  CO2 (Sri Lanka)
• CC-LNG 31 /tonne /tonne CO2 (Sri Lanka)

23
CO2 reductions and MAC of the candidate RETs
based CDM Projects during 2003-17 at 1998 prices

• Wide variations in MAC for RETs
• Solar PV 12 /tonne (Yunnan-China) to 364
  /tonne of CO2 (NREB-India)
• Wind 11 /tonne (Yunnan-China) to 36 /tonne
  of CO2 (Sri Lanka)
• Geothermal 5 /tonne (Yunnan-China) to 73
  /tonne of CO2 (Vietnam)
• BIGCC 3 /tonne (Thailand) to 94 /tonne
  of CO2 (NREB-India)
• Mini-Hydro 2.2 /tonne of CO2 (Thailand)

24
Conclusions

• At present costs, clean coal options (i.e., IGCC
  in NREB-India and Thailand and PFBC in Indonesia
  and NREB-India) and renewable options (geothermal
  in Indonesia, wind power in NREB-India and BIGCC
  in Thailand) are cost effective under the BAU
  case.
• Clean coal technologies would be cost effective
  at 5 CO2 reduction target in Yunnan (China)
• Marginal abatement cost ranges from
• 1.0 to 2.5 /tonne of CO2 at 5 CO2 emission
  reduction target and from 2.8 to 12.5 /tonne of
  CO2 at 10 CO2 emission reduction target
• Disproportionately large percentage reduction in
  SO2 emission would take place at the selected CO2
  emission reduction targets except in Indonesia
  and Sri Lanka.

25
Conclusions

• Some renewable power generation projects (e.g.,
  BIGCC and mini-hydro in Thailand and geothermal
  in Indonesia and Yunnan-China) are found
  promising at present as possible CDM projects due
  to their low marginal abatement cost (2.2 to 5.8
  /tonne CO2).
• Other renewable options (i.e., solar PV in
  Indonesia and Vietnam and wind power in
  Yunnan-China) would be promising as a CDM project
  if the price for CER is to reach above 16.5
  /tonne CO2 (gt larger demand for CERs).

26

• Thank You

27
CO2 Emission from the Power Sector (1980-1997),
106 tons
28
Power Sector ProjectCollaborating Research
Institutes
29
Least-cost Generation Planning Model

• Minimize Total System Costs
• (capital OM Fuel DSM Cost)
• Subject to
• Power demand constraints
• Annual energy constraints
• Hydro-energy constraints
• Reliability constraints
• Fuel or resource availability constraints
• Emission constraints

30
Generation share of technologies in total
generation under BAU and CO2 emission reduction
cases

• Share of gas-fired combined cycle generation to
  increase in Indonesia, NREB-India, Thailand and
  Vietnam
• Share of hydro generation to increase in
  NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Yunnan-China
• Share of biomass (BIGCC) increase in NREB-India
  and Thailand
• Share of conventional coal-fired generation to
  decrease in NREB- India, Sri Lanka, Thailand,
  Vietnam and Yunnan-China
• Share of clean coal generation (PFBC) to
  decrease in Indonesia

Generation share by technology
31
Share of gas-fired combined cycle generation
technologies in total generation under BAU and
CO2 emission reduction cases

• Share of hydro generation to increase in
  NREB-India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Yunnan
• Share of BIGCC to increase in NREB-India and
  Thailand

32
Share of coal-fired technologies in total
generation under BAU and CO2 emission reduction
cases
33
Generation share of technologies in total
generation under BAU and CO2 emission reduction
cases
Indonesia
NREB-India
34
Generation share by technologies in total
generation under BAU and CO2 emission reduction
cases
Thailand
Vietnam
35
Generation share of technologies in total
generation under BAU and CO2 emission reduction
cases
Yunnan-China
Sri Lanka
36
CDM Projects Selection
37
Marginal Abatement Costs, /tonne of C at 1998
prices

• Ranges of MAC values
• 3.5 to 9.0 /tonne of Carbon at 5 reduction
  target
• 10.3 to 46.0 /tonne of Carbon at 10 reduction
  target
• 12.8 to 57.0 /tonne of Carbon at 20 reduction
  target

Note
Marginal abatement costs are expressed in 1998 US
.