The UK 2050 Calculator Web Flash Excel Wiki
Register or sign in
This is a wiki Anyone can contribute, therefore we don't vouch for its accuracy.

VII.c Storage, demand shifting, interconnection Costs

Return to the page.

Showing just the changes made in the edit by Tom Counsell at 2011-04-27 17:24:58 UTC

See all changes since this wiki was released




Title: 2050 Storage, demand shifting, backup costs

Content: h1 Michael Clark changes (currently in the spreadsheet)

h1 To do/issues

* No costs for demand shifting
* No cost range for interconnector
* Does the gas standby correctly cause a charge for the gas it consumes?

h1 Data

Markal06 Power sector spreadsheet

Hydro pumped storage is low cost and micro (<1.25MW) is high cost

Interconnector is assumed to be the dummy variable for electricity imports

Back up CCGT is referenced directly from: 2050 Conventional thermal plant costs

h1 Tom Counsell methodology

There are four elements that need to be costed:

# Gas standby generation - done
# Pumped storage - done
#  Interconnection - tbd
# Electric vehicle demand shifting - tbd

h1 Gas standby generation

Initial set of costs taken from range on page 77 of MottMac10. These exclude interest during construction (IDC). Need to figure out what to do about that.

Note that these costs are for a CCGT. It is possible that cheaper, but less efficient, OGTs would be used. Need to figure out a cost for those.

h2 Size

No particular evidence for 1GW typical size. MottMac10 use 830 MW.

h2 Life

MottMac10 suggests a 20 to 30 year operating life. Because of the very low utilisation if it is as a dedicated standby plant, we assume that any built 2010 to 2050 will last beyond 2050 (e.g., up to 40 year life).

h2 Operating costs

The MottMac10 has a variable and a fixed operating cost. Assuming that all this is actually fixed operating cost.

h2 Low costs

MottMac10 nth of a kind costs low.

h2 High costs

MottMac10 first of a kind costs high. 

h1 Pumped storage

Initial set of costs taken from Annex EH-III v3 of Markal3.24Doc.This provides a single estimate, so currently added a +/- 50% to get a fuller range. Underlying data source is said to be the US EPA.

Unclear whether cost of energy to store is factored into this. 2050 Pathway balances over a year, so I think we can assume no energy cost.

h2 Comparators

Dinorwig cost £420m (1983) to build and £5m (1983) to run[£425+million&source=bl&ots=O2Ixg4eXU8&sig=GT91GlMM9GLN4nISC3NL18Suuxo&hl=en&ei=9aJdTZq1KIqv8QOIpPWwCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=dinorwig%20£425%20million&f=false]

h2 Size

Using 1.8 GW, based on the size of Dinorwig.

h2 Life

Assume these last beyond 2050. Markal3.24Doc suggests life of 50 years.

h2 Operating costs

For the variable component of the operating cost: arbitrarily assume that the pumped storage completely discharges once a week (52 times a year).

h2 Low costs

50% below Markal cost.

h2 High costs

50% above Markal cost.

Category: 2050 pathway costs

User: Tom Counsell

Picture updated at: 

Signed off by: 

Signed off at: