1. business and industrial
2. energy
3. electricity

Hans Auer
Energy Economics Group (EEG)
Vienna University of Technology
Overview of the
GridTech Project
The sole responsibility for the content of this presentation lies with the authors. It does not necessarily
reflect the opinion of the European Union. Neither the EACI nor the European Commission are responsible
for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
About the
project
GridTech is a project co-funded by the
European Commission under the
Intelligent Energy Europe Programme.
Contract number:
Duration:
May 2012 - April 2015
IEE/11/017 / SI2.616364
Full title:
Impact Assessment of New
Technologies to Foster RESElectricity Integration into the
European Transmission System
Budget:
1,958,528
EC contribution:
1,468,896
About the
project
GridTech’s main goal:
 Conduct a fully integrated
assessment of new grid-impacting
technologies and their
implementation into the European
electricity system.
This will allow comparing different
technological options, towards the
exploitation of the full potential of future
electricity production from renewable
energy sources (RES-E), with the lowest
possible total electricity system cost.
Project structure
Transmission
expansion:
non-technical
barriers
RES integration:
market issues
Innovative
technologies
screening
Cost-benefit
methodology
Pan-European study
(top-down approach)
Regional case studies
(bottom-up approach)
Results and recommendations
Grid-impacting technologies (overview)
• Onshore and offshore wind
energy
• Large-scale solar
technologies: Concentrated
Solar Power (CSP) and
Photovoltaics (PV)
Electricity
generation
technologies,
with a focus
on variable
RES-E
• Pumped Hydro Energy
Storage
• Compressed Air Energy
Storage
Bulk energy
storage
technologies
Demand
Response
Technologies/
Measures and
electric
vehicles
• HVDC - High Voltage Direct Current,
both VSC (Voltage Source Converter)based and CSC (Current Source
Converter)-based
• FACTS - Flexible Alternating Current
Transmission System
• PST - Phase Shifting Transformers
• WAMS - Wide Area Monitoring System
• DLR - Dynamic Line Rating-based OHLs
• HTLS - High Temperature Low Sag
Conductor-based OHLs
Transmission
technologies
directed at
improvements in
network control and
flexible electricity
system operation
2020
and beyond
Within the 2020, 2030 and 2050 time horizons, the aim is to
assess, among innovative technologies, i) which, ii) where,
iii) when, and iv) to which extent they could effectively
contribute to the further development of the European
transmission system
… fostering the integration of an everincreasing penetration of RES-E generation
2030
2020
2050
… and boosting the creation of a
pan-European electricity market,
while maintaining competitive and
sustainable electricity supply.
Scenario definition
Scenario/year
2020
2030
2050-1
(with PTDF)
2050-2
(without PTDF)
S0
(baseline)
base TGT-2020
base EST-2020
base EDT-2020
base TGT-2030
base EST-2030
base EDT-2030
base TGT-2050
base EST-2050
base EDT-2050
base TGT-2050x
base EST-2050
base EDT-2050
S1
(TGT-oriented)
base TGT-2020
base EST-2020
base EDT-2020
advanced TGT-2030*
base EST-2030
base EDT-2030
advanced TGT-2050*
base EST-2050
base EDT-2050
advanced TGT-2050x
base EST-2050
base EDT-2050
S2
(EST-oriented)
base TGT-2020
base EST-2020
base EDT-2020
base TGT-2030
advanced EST-2030
base EDT-2030
base TGT-2050
advanced EST-2050
base EDT-2050
base TGT-2050x
advanced EST-2050
base EDT-2050
S3
(EDT-oriented)
base TGT-2020
base EST-2020
advanced EDT-2020
base TGT-2030
base EST-2030
advanced EDT-2030
base TGT-2050
base EST-2050
advanced EDT-2050
base TGT-2050x
base EST-2050
advanced EDT-2050
*: by application of MTSIM planning modality
x: by use of commercial flows
Pan-European
study
Pan-European zonal model (2030, potential/updated)
Pan-European
model: 2030
S0 inputs
Total generation capacity at 2030 (derived from an
extended ENTSO-E 2030 V3 scenario):
• Nuclear
108.6 GW
• Lignite
56.6
GW
• Hard Coal (incl. CCS)
76.5
GW
• Gas (CCGT, OCGT, ST) (incl. CCS) 311.2
GW
• Oil/oil shale
16.6
GW
• Other non RES (CHP, waste)
53
GW
• Hydro (ROR, reservoir, PHES)
297
GW
• Wind (onshore, offshore)
373.7 GW
• Solar (PV, CSP)
243.2 GW
• Other RES (biomass, geothermal, tidal, wave)
78.1
Total load demand at 2030: 4772 TWh
Total inter-zonal HVAC capacity: 131.0 GW
Total inter-zonal HVDC capacity: 32.7 GW
Total bulk storage (PHES, SPHES): 71.5 GW
GW
Pan-European
study results
(2030 S0, base)
Main (updated) outcomes:
Load shedding is null
RES curtailment (9.4 TWh) is rather high
Zonal marginal costs are higher than in 2020
HVDC corridors are rather fully utilised
The system needs reinforcements across
British islands, in Balkan, Iberian and Baltic
regions, on north-south Central Europe axis
and around isolated zones
2030 S0 (base) results: RES curtailment
2030 S0 (planning) results: expansion needs
HVDC expansions (up to 5000 MW):
• ES-FR (5000 MW, VSC USC)
• GB-FR (5000 MW, VSC USC)
• GB-IE (1338 MW, VSC USC)
• CY-TR (409 MW, VSC USC)
• SE-DE1 (1341 MW, CSC USC)
• IE-IS (915 MW, CSC USC)
• GB-NO (1014 MW, CSC USC)
Pan-European
study results
(2030 S1, TGT)
Main outcomes:
Load shedding is null
High benefits are brought by TGT (HVDC) in
terms of RES curtailment reduction (7.5
TWh) and dispatch cost decrease (4.6 b€)
with respect to 2030 S0
Zonal costs are changing depending on
countries, RES penetration, energy mix
Impact of TGT (HVDC) on CO2 emission
leads to ca. 0.28 MtCO2 emission reduction
HVDC corridors are rather fully utilised
Pan-European
study results
(2030 S2, EST)
EST capacity expansions over 2030 S0:
New PHES capacity: 3890 MW (in CY, EE, TR)
Expanded PHES capacity: 4424 MW (in FR, LT,
NO, PL)
New SPHES capacity: 3143 MW (in IE, IT)
New CAES capacity: 2225 MW (in DE1, ES, NI)
Main outcomes:
Load shedding is null
RES curtailment is reduced (by 1.44 TWh) due
to EST effect
Dispatch cost reduction amounts to 800 M€
with respect to 2020 S0
CO2 emissions reduction by EST: 0.41 MtCO2
Pan-European
study results
(2030 S3, EDT)
Main outcomes:
Load shedding is null
EDT (DR) brings higher benefits than in
2020 in terms of RES curtailment
reduction (1.4 TWh) and dispatch cost
reduction (1.34 b€) over S0 (base)
Zonal costs are changing depending on
countries, RES penetration, energy mix
Impact of EDT (DR) on CO2 emissions
variation is negative (CO2 emissions
increase: 7.4 MtCO2)
Pan-European
study
Pan-European zonal model (2050, potential/updated)
2050-1 S0 (base) results: RES curtailment
2050-1 S0 (planning) results: expansion needs
HVDC (onshore) expansions (100-10000 MW):
• DE1-DK (6048 MW, VSC USC)
• GB-FR (10000 MW, VSC USC)
• GB-IE (1463 MW, VSC USC)
• CY-TR (771 MW, VSC USC)
• FR-IT (9819 MW, VSC UGC)
• EE-FI (822 MW, VSC USC)
• GB-BE (10000 MW, CSC USC)
• GB-NL (3238 MW, CSC USC)
• GR-IT (4245 MW, CSC USC)
• NO-DK (9500 MW, VSC USC)
• SE-DE1 (5192 MW, CSC USC)
• SE-LT (1740 MW, VSC USC)
• IE-FR (9741 MW, VSC USC)
• GR-TR (10000 MW, VSC OHL)
• RO-TR (2515 MW, CSC USC)
• AT-SK (309 MW, VSC UGC)
• DE1-AT (2460 MW, VSC OHL)
HVAC expansions (100-10000 MW):
• BG-TR (4653 MW, OHL)
• LT-LV (481 MW, OHL)
• LT-PL (3093 MW, OHL)
TGT/EST/EDT Benefits
TGT benefits
2030
2050-1
(with PTDF)
2050-2
(without PTDF)
Dispatch cost
reduction
4562 M€
191 b€
174 b€
RES curtailment
reduction
CO2 emissions
reduction
2050-1
(with 7774
PTDF)GWh
2050-2
(without PTDF)
EST benefits
7456 GWh
2030
8822 GWh
Dispatch277
cost
ktCO2
reduction
54516 ktCO2
800 M€
57116 ktCO2
871 M€
36229 GWh
1444 GWh
33024 GWh
3665 GWh
3515 GWh
CO2 emissions
reduction
412 ktCO2
1831 ktCO2
1810 ktCO2
Load shedding
reduction
0 GWh
-6 MWh
0 MWh
Load shedding
RES curtailment
0 GWh
reduction
reduction
848 M€
Target
countries
AUSTRIA
BULGARIA
GERMANY
IRELAND
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
SPAIN
In addition to top-down modelling on EU30+ and taking
stock from it in a consistent data input-output flow,
GridTech focuses on 7 countries, representative of the
existing and future European electricity systems, studied
at 2020, 2030 and 2050 by detailed grid/zonal analyses.
Summary: Technology Focus in Target Countries
Country
2020
2030
2050
Spain
FACTS
DSM
Storage
HVDC Morocco-Spain-France
EVs
DSM
Ireland
HVDC VSC LCC vs. AC (onshore
and offshore) in combination
with storage
Storage (other)
DSM
DSM
Smart Grids
HVDC overlay grid
Smart Grid + DSM
Storage (large scale)
HVDC overlay grid (offshore and
onshore)
Smart grid + DSM
HTLS
The
Netherlands DLR
Italy
HVDC interconnector
HTLS
HVDC Interconnectors
Smart Grid + DSM
Storage
HVDC
Storage
Austria
HVAC line Salzburg
Storage (PHS)
HVAC line
Storage (PHS)
HVDC line (AT-SK)
DLR and FACTS
Storage (PHS)
Bulgaria
DLR
HTLS
Storage (hydro)
DSM
Batteries, EVs, PHES
DLR HVAC
Storage (battery)
EVs
DSM
Germany
First HVDC Projects
Expansion of HVDC Lines to a
meshed grid
Storage plants
European on and offshore HVDC
grid
Smart Grids
90%
80%
2014
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
2020
20%
10%
8500
8000
7500
7000
6500
6000
5500
5000
4500
4000
HVDC line
DSM+EV
3500
2050
3000
DSM and CAES storage
2500
2030
2000
FACTS device to solve
local constraints
1500
2020
1000
0%
0
Grid Technology Focus
ES->MO
100%
500
8760 hours simulation
Full transmission network
MO->ES
Unconstrained power flow (% of transfer capacity)
Spanish Case
description
Power flow in the interconnection
Power flow limits in South Spain
MO@2020:
11GW RES vs. 7.5 GW load
Scenarios for RES importing by Spain (3,013 hours)
Demand
RES
Number of hours
Additional hourly
RES imports (MW)
90%
70%
10
0
80%
40%
7
100
80%
20%
194
200
70%
80%
47
400
65%
50%
284
500
65%
10%
589
600
40%
20%
1,882
0
400
300
200
Adapted RES generation curve
Annual operation
benefits
100
GWh
Selected results
for 2020
scenario
Results
0
Nuclear
-100
Thermal
Conventional RES generation
hydro (including
PHES)
PHES
Consumption
-200
-300
-400
30M€/year savings vs. 5-10M€ investment
Dutch Case
description
Dutch 380 kV network
 Focus: transporting
large amounts of
offshore wind power
located in the West
coast to the East side of
the country via the
onshore network
2030 solutions
BASE
Current capacity (3,000A)
A
DLR (4,000A, depending on
weather conditions)
B
Capacity upgrade (4,000A)
C
4,000 A + 4,000 A HVAC
line
D
4,000 A + 1,000 MW HVDC
line
E
4,000 A + 2,000 MW HVDC
line
Red line: represents the corridor limiting the West
(Randstad area) – East (rest of the Netherlands) flow
Congestion characteristics
Number of hours
Energy
8000
7000
12000
6000
10000
5000
GWh
8000
Hours
Selected
results for
2030 scenario
14000
4000
6000
3000
4000
2000
2030 solutions
2000
1000
BASE
Current capacity (3,000A)
0
A
DLR (4,000A, depending on
weather conditions)
B
Capacity upgrade (4,000A)
C
4,000 A + 4,000 A HVAC
line
D
4,000 A + 1,000 MW HVDC
line
E
4,000 A + 2,000 MW HVDC
line
Base
A-2030 B-2030 C-2030 D-2030 E-2030
0
Base
A-2030 B-2030 C-2030 D-2030 E-2030
Conclusions and Policy Recommendations
1. Transmission expansion and implementation of grid-impacting technologies are cost-effective solutions and significantly
contribute to the 10% electricity interconnection target of the European Union by 2020 and the tentative 15% target by 2030.
2. Short-term (2015-2020), grid-impacting technologies like FACTS and DLR are cost-effective solutions to increase the use of
existing transmission capacity and to avoid transmission network congestion and RES-E curtailment. Therefore, providing
adequate incentives for TSOs to invest in this type of technology is recommended.
3. Mid-term (2020-2025), DSM and energy storage technologies increase system flexibility and contribute to the integration of
larger amounts of RES-E production and reduction of system operation costs. Both have strength in terms of benefits to the
system (DSM very cost-effective; storage in congested/island regions). In addition, the distribution of benefits among market
participants will not be the same in the two technology cases (many customers (DSM) versus few storage owners (storage)).
4. Long-term (2025-2030), significant transmission expansions are necessary in the European electricity system. When having
in mind the 10% interconnection target by 2020 (15% by 2030) the GridTech analyses clearly indicates that the fulfilment also
depends on future RES-E capacity installations. Therefore, it is necessary to implement corresponding incentives that both
policy ambitions are met simultaneously, future interconnection and RES-E targets.
5. Very long-term (beyond 2030), the development of HVDC networks can play a significant role for RES-E integration. However,
also the availability and roll-out potential of smart grid solutions needs to be considered. Therefore, it is very important that
TSOs and DSOs start cooperating in Europe already right now.
6. Legislation and regulatory procedures for upgrading existing and/or implementation of new transmission projects needs to
be further harmonized across Europe and within Member States and lead times need to be shortened (“one-stop-shop”).
7. Active incorporation/involvement of local people/communities is very important to reach consensus and to overcome the
so-called “NIMBY” effect  ultimately resulting in faster realisation of important transmission projects.
Interconnection Targets – Energy Union
Map of interconnection levels in 2020 after
implementation of current PCIs
GridTech result for scenario 2020 S0
Source: EC COM(2015) 82.
GridTech result for scenario 2030 S1
GridTech result for scenario 2050 S1
Synthesis/Recommendations: Pan-European Study
There are several technological options available today and in the future: tailor-made
solutions depend on the specific cases/regions (local/regional situation important)
Large investments and electricity system extensions are needed to foster huge RES-E
integration
HVDC technologies have performed very effectively
From a welfare perspective, the use of DR is supposed to be very effective -> price
signals to industry and customers are needed
Energy storage may be less effective to improve system behavior in less congested
systems -> this depends on the fact that storage needs constraints to be put in
operation and the pan-European case reflects a quite ideal situation while the
regional case studies with grid constraints may see a wider storage application
One good exception in terms of energy storage is the case of islands (like Ireland )
where storage (PHES, SPHES) can strongly impact and help systems with
interconnection capacity gaps
Storage vs. DR -> DR may be favoured in less congested systems over storage as it is
generally cheaper and more efficient; benefits for storage see above
Flexibility, controllability and socio-environmental impact are crucial aspects to be
further investigated
Synthesis/Recommendations of Directly GridImpacting Technologies: Target Country Studies
Technology
Main technical conclusions
Main economic conclusions
Scalability (i.e. “size” of the
solution increases)
Replicability (i.e. technical/regulatory/
economic conditions change)
Upgrade of
existing
corridors
additional capacity year round,
independent of weather
conditions
positive economic CBA ratio
limits due to magnetic fields
and mechanical strength of
towers
increase of transmission capacity on existing
corridors positive
New AC
corridors
HVDC
HVDC
overlay
network
FACTS
DLR
greatly reduces congestion
non-controllable flows in highly
meshed network
massive integration of RES-E
generation possible
greatly reduces congestion and
increases controllability
bulk RES-E power flows through
Europe and reduces need of
energy storage
better controllability of power
flows (reduction of bottlenecks)
effective solution to avoid local
grid constraints (effectiveness
reduces in highly congested
areas)
effective solution to avoid local
grid constraints caused by wind
power
fast implementation possible
positive economic CBA ratio
huge benefits in annual
operation costs savings, huge
required investment costs
cost-effective integration of
RES-E
increased meshed network on
short circuit rating (limits)
limits on grid extension
possibilities
vulnerable for regulatory or procedural changes
HVDC still needs research (multi-terminal)
HVDC grids are based on
scalability
cost and benefit allocation project specific
harmonization of rules, grid-codes still needed
no complete economic
assessment has been
performed
possible on European size
generally cost-effective
solution
Several devices located close
together may have undesired
effects in a transmission area
(need for coordinated
operation)
applicable everywhere
most cost-effective solution
complex licencing procedures, long lead times
development of technology for meshed DC
networks is essential and needs to be
coordinated on European scale
European consensus on technology and necessity
of bulk transmission
impact depends on grid topology and on level of
congestion, the implementation depends on
national regulations
costs not recognized by national regulatory
authorities (NRAs)
impact rather independent of change in
conditions
mainly effective in areas with
local congestion caused by wind cost-effective solution to increase transmission
power
capacity
Synthesis/Recommendations of Indirectly GridImpacting Technologies: Target Country Studies
Technology
Main technical conclusions
Main economic conclusions
effective solution for balancing
cost-effective solution
isolated power systems and for reappropriate solution in case of
(Enlargement dispatching
market failing till completion of
of reservoirs) effective for additional RES-E
perfect common internal electricity
utilization
market (IEM)
effective solution for balancing
more cost-effective solution than
isolated
power
systems
and
for
reenlargement of existing PHES
PHES
dispatching
reservoir
(capacity
PHES
expansion)
DSM
DSM + EV
CAES
effective for additional RES-E
utilization
application similar to storage
device (“efficiency” of 100%)
increases flexibility, allowing
higher integration of generation
units with lower flexibility and
marginal costs
integration of electric vehicles
(EVs), together with DSM
contributes significantly to system
flexibility
similar to DSM, CAES increases
system flexibility (but lower
“efficiency” of 65%)
in case of high CO2 prices, PHES
expansion is vastly beneficial
very cost-effective solution
cost-benefit ratio depends on the
yearly benefits during the assets
lifetime and other potential
benefits
integration of EVs increases costs,
EVs + DSM significantly reduce
operation costs
investment costs for DSM are
comparatively low
lower benefits than DSM due to
lower efficiency
Scalability (i.e. “size” of the
solution increases)
in case of completion of perfect
common IEM, competitive
power of PHES decreases and
expose investments at higher
risk
in case of completion of perfect
common IEM, competitive
power of PHES decreases and
expose investments at higher
risk
Replicability (i.e. technical/regulatory/
economic conditions change)
implementation depends on national
regulations
costs typically not recognized by NRAs
implementation depends on national
regulations
costs typically not recognized by NRAs
achieving an “efficiency” of
type of consumers, load profiles,
100% greatly depends on
flexibilities and tariff designs (setting
development of Smart Grids and
economic incentives) are crucial
third-party agents
role of aggregators needs to be further
small customers only will engage
clarified
if benefits are higher than costs
type of consumer/EV user, load profiles,
flexibilities and tariff designs (setting
for DSM and smart charging and economic incentives) are crucial
discharging of EVs
role of aggregators needs to be further
clarified
limited places
efficiency and costs depend on type of
storage