What could South Africa’s Energy future look like?
Presentation at workshop hosted by Project 90 by 2030
Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz, Head of the CSIR Energy Centre
Cape Town, 27 February 2017
Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz
+27 83 403 1108
[email protected]
Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz
Chief Engineer
Agenda
Background
CSIR’s Approach and Project Team
Comments on IRP Assumptions
IRP Results and Least-cost Scenario
Energy Sector Implications
2
World:
In 2016, 124 GW of new wind and solar PV capacity installed globally
Solar PV
Wind
Global annual new capacity in GW/yr
120
91
71
56
46
33
4
7
2000
2001
4 0
7
8
0 70
2002
9
8
2003
1
9
13
8
1 12
2004
2005
17
1
22
7
30
76
2
15
20
27
2006
2007
2008
40
31
38
Sources: GWEC; EPIA; BNEF; CSIR analysis
Total South African
power system
(approx. 45 GW)
17
39
39
41
45
2009
2010
2011
2012
51
63
54
35
2013
2014
This is all very new: Roughly 80% of the globally existing
solar PV capacity was installed during the last five years
3
70
73
7
3
57
124
2015
2016
World:
Significant cost reductions materialised in the last 5-8 years
Solar PV
Wind
Global annual new capacity in GW/yr
120
100%
91
71
56
46
33
4
7
0
4
0
7
2000
2001
8
7
0
2002
13
9
9
1
8
1
1
8
2003
2004
17
22
4
Sources: IEA; GWEC; EPIA; BNEF; CSIR analysis
17
20
27
12
2
15
2005
2006
2007
2008
39
39
41
2009
2010
2011
45
2012
70
65%
40
31
124
57
73
38
7
3
Subsidies
7
30
76
Solar PV cost
Wind cost
51
35
2013
2014
63
54
Total South African
power system
(approx. 45 GW)
22%
2015
2016
Cost competitive
South Africa:
From 2013 to 2016, 3.1 GW of wind, solar PV and CSP commissioned
Capacity
online in MW
(end of year)
+1 094
3 134
+520
2 040
+1 053
1 520
5
Solar PV
Wind
CSP
965
960
467
Supply
Sources
1 474
1 460
1 075
210
257
560
2013
2014
200
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Notes: RSA = Republic of South Africa. Solar PV capacity = capacity at point of common coupling. Wind includes Eskom’s Sere wind farm (100 MW)
Sources: Eskom; DoE IPP Office
2020
South Africa:
In 2016, almost 7 TWh electricity produced from wind, solar PV & CSP
Annual energy
produced in TWh
6.9
4.7
Supply
Sources
2.6
Solar PV
Wind
CSP
2.2
2.2
3.7
1.1
0.01
0.1
2013
6
0.05
2.5
1.1
2014
0.5
2015
Notes: Wind includes Eskom’s Sere wind farm (100 MW)
Sources: Eskom; DoE IPP Office
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2016: Wind, solar PV and CSP supplied 3% of the total RSA system load
Actuals captured in wholesale market for Jan-Dec 2016 (i.e. without self-consumption of embedded plants)
Annual
electricity
in TWh
7
231.3
3.7 (1.6%)
2.6 (1.1%)
0.5 (0.2%)
238.2
Residual Load
Wind
Solar PV
CSP
System Load
(domestic and
export load)
Notes: Wind includes Eskom’s Sere wind farm (100 MW)
Sources: Eskom; DoE IPP Office
Actual tariffs: new wind/solar PV 40% cheaper than new coal in RSA
Results of Department of Energy’s RE IPP Procurement Programme (REIPPPP) and Coal IPP Proc. Programme
Significant reductions in actual tariffs …
Actual average tariffs
in R/kWh (Apr-2016-R)
… have made new solar PV & wind power 40%
cheaper than new coal in South Africa today
Actual average tariffs
in R/kWh (Apr-2016-R)
-59%
5
-83%
4
-40%
3.65
3
2.18
2
1.51
1.19
1.17
1
0.87
0
Nov
2011
8
1.03
Solar PV
Wind
Mar
2012
Aug
2013
0.87
0.62
0.62
Solar PV IPP
Wind IPP
0.62
0.69
0.62
Aug
2014
Nov
2015
Baseload
Coal IPP
Notes: Exchange rate of 14 USD/ZAR assumed Sources: http://www.energy.gov.za/files/renewable-energy-status-report/Market-Overview-and-Current-Levels-of-Renewable-EnergyDeployment-NERSA.pdf; http://www.saippa.org.za/Portals/24/Documents/2016/Coal%20IPP%20factsheet.pdf; http://www.ee.co.za/wpcontent/uploads/2016/10/New_Power_Generators_RSA-CSIR-14Oct2016.pdf; StatsSA on CPI; CSIR analysis
Agenda
Background
CSIR’s Approach and Project Team
Comments on IRP Assumptions
IRP Results and Least-cost Scenario
Energy Sector Implications
9
IRP process as described in the Department of Energy’s Draft IRP 2016
document: least-cost Base Case is derived from technical planning facts
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Constraint:
RE limits
Planning
Facts
Least Cost
Base Case
Constraint:
Forcing in
of nuclear,
CSP, biogas,
hydro, others
Constraint:
Advanced CO2
cap decline
Case
Cost
Base Case
Base
Scenario 1 Base + Rxx bn/yr
Scenario 2 Base + Ryy bn/yr
Scenario 3 Base + Rzz bn/yr
…
…
1) Public consultation
on costed scenarios
2) Policy adjustment
of Base Case
3) Final IRP
Scenario 3
11
Sources: based on Department of Energy’s Draft IRP 2016, page 7; http://www.energy.gov.za/IRP/2016/Draft-IRP-2016-Assumptions-Base-Case-and-Observations-Revision1.pdf
The CSIR has embarked on power-system analyses to determine the
least-cost expansion path for the South African electricity system
The Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) is the expansion plan for the South African power system until 2050
• Starting point of the IRP Base Case: pure techno-economic analysis to determine least-cost way to supply electricity
• Later process steps: least-cost mix can be policy adjusted to cater for aspects not captured in techno-economic model
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case entails a limitation: Amount of wind and solar PV capacity that the model is allowed to build per
year is limited, which is neither technically nor economically justified/explained (no techno-economical reason provided)
The CSIR is therefore conducting a study to determine the Least Cost electricity mix in RSA until 2050
• Majority of assumptions kept exactly as per the Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
• First and most important deviation from IRP 2016: no new-build limits on renewables (wind/solar PV)
• Second (smaller) deviation: costing for solar PV and wind until 2030 aligned with latest IPP tariff results
• Scope of the CSIR study: purely techno-economical optimisation of the costs directly incurred in the power system
Two scenarios from the Draft IRP 2016 are compared with the Least Cost case
• “Draft IRP 2016 Base Case” – new coal, new nuclear
• “Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget” – significant new nuclear
• “Least Cost” – least-cost without constraints
12
An hourly capacity expansion and dispatch model (incl. unit commitment) using PLEXOS
is
run for all scenarios to test for technical adequacy  same software platform as by Eskom/DoE for the IRP
Sources: CSIR analysis
CSIR team has significant expertise from power system planning,
system operation and grid perspective
Dr Tobias Bischof-Niemz
• Head of the CSIR Energy Centre
• Member of the Ministerial Advisory Council
on Energy (MACE)
• Member of IRP2010/2013 team at Eskom,
energy planning in Europe for large utilities
Robbie van Heerden
• Senior Specialist: Energy Systems
(CSIR Energy Centre)
• Former General Manager and long-time
head of System Operations at Eskom
Crescent Mushwana
14
• Research Group Leader: Energy Systems
(CSIR Energy Centre)
• Former Chief Engineer at Eskom strategic
transmission grid planning
Joanne Calitz
• Senior Engineer: Energy Planning
(CSIR Energy Centre)
• Previously with Eskom Energy Planning
• Medium-Term Outlook and IRP for RSA
Mamahloko Senatla
• Researcher: Energy Planning
(CSIR Energy Centre)
• Previously with the Energy Research
Centre at University of Cape Town
Jarrad Wright
• Principal Engineer: Energy Planning
(CSIR Energy Centre)
• Commissioner: National Planning
Commission (NPC)
• Former Africa Manager of PLEXOS
Agenda
Background
CSIR’s Approach and Project Team
Comments on IRP Assumptions
IRP Results and Least-cost Scenario
Energy Sector Implications
15
Draft IRP 2016 limits the annual build-out rates for solar PV and wind
The imposed new-build limits for solar PV and wind mean that the IRP model is not allowed in any given
year to add more solar PV and wind capacity to the system than these limits
No such limits are applied for any other technology. No techno-economical reason/justification is provided
for these limits. No explanation given why the limits are constant until 2050 while the power system grows
27
Year
System Peak
Load in MW (as
per Draft IRP)
New-build limit
Solar PV in MW/yr
(as per Draft IRP)
2020
44 916
1 000
2.2%
1 600
3.6%
2025
51 015
1 000
2.0%
1 600
3.1%
2030
57 274
1 000
1.7%
1 600
2.8%
2035
64 169
1 000
1.6%
1 600
2.5%
2040
70 777
1 000
1.4%
1 600
2.3%
2045
78 263
1 000
1.3%
1 600
2.0%
2050
85 804
1 000
1.2%
1 600
1.9%
Note: Relative new-build limit = New-build limit / system peak load
Sources: IRP 2016 Draft; CSIR analysis
Relative new-build
limit Solar PV
(derived from IRP)
New-build limit Wind
in MW/yr
(as per Draft IRP)
Relative new-build
limit Wind
(derived from IRP)
Today: Both leading and follower countries are installing more new
solar PV capacity per year than South Africa’s IRP limits for 2030/2050
Annual new solar PV
capacity relative to
system peak load
Germany
Leader
Spain
Italy
UK
Follower
Australia
Japan
China
Follower
2nd wave
India
South Africa
17%
10%
9%
9%
RSA new-build limits
in 2030 and 2050
7%
7%
6%
6%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
2007
2%
0%
1% 0% 0%
0%
0%
2008
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0% 0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2009
2010
3% 3%
2%
2%
1%
2%
1%
0%
1%
0%
2011
1%
1%
1% 0%
2012
28
Sources: SolarPowerEurope; CIGRE; websites of System Operators; IRP 2016 Draft; CSIR analysis
3%
3%
2%
2%
2013
RSA’s IRP relative
new-build limit
decreases
over time
3% 3%
3%
1%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
2014
2015
0%
2030 (1.7%)
2050 (1.2%)
Today: Both leading and follower countries are installing more new
wind capacity per year than South Africa’s IRP limits for 2030/2050
Annual new wind
capacity relative to
system peak load
8%
Germany
Leader
Spain
Ireland
China
Follower
India
Brazil
South Africa
8%
RSA new-build limits
in 2030 and 2050
7%
7%
6%
6%
6% 6%
5%
5%
5%
4%
4%
3%
3%
4%
4%
2%
1%
0% 0%
2006
2%
2%
2% 2%
2% 2% 2%
2%
1%
0%
0%
2007
3% 3%
3%
2%
2% 2% 2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
2009
3% 3%
2%
0%
2011
29
Sources: GWEC; CIGRE; websites of System Operators; IRP 2016 Draft; CSIR analysis
2012
RSA’s IRP relative
new-build limit
decreases
over time
2030 (2.8%)
2%
1%
1%
2010
3%
2013
2050 (1.9%)
2% 1%
1%
1%
0%
2008
4%
3%
3%
3%
4%
5%
5%
4%
1%
1%
0%
2014
0%
2015
0%
2016
Solar PV penetration in leading countries today is 2.5 times that of
South Africa’s Draft IRP 2016 Base Case for the year 2050
Total solar PV capacity
relative to system peak load
70%
Germany
Leader
Spain
Italy
UK
Australia Follower
Japan
China
Follower
2nd wave
India
South Africa
South Africa IRP 2016 Base Case
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2005
30
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
Year
Sources: SolarPowerEurope; CIGRE; websites of System Operators; IRP 2016 Draft; CSIR analysis
2040
2045
2050
Wind penetration in leading countries today is 1.7-1.8 times that of
South Africa’s Draft IRP 2016 Base Case for the year 2050
Total wind capacity
relative to system peak load
70%
Germany
Leader
Spain
Ireland
China
Follower
India
Brazil
South Africa
South Africa IRP 2016 Base Case
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2005
31
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Year
Sources: GWEC; CIGRE; websites of System Operators; IRP 2016 Draft; CSIR analysis
2035
2040
2045
2050
Agenda
Background
CSIR’s Approach and Project Team
Comments on IRP Assumptions
IRP Results and Least-cost Scenario
Energy Sector Implications
32
Inputs as per IRP 2016:
Key resulting LCOE from cost assumptions for new supply technologies
Lifetime cost
per energy unit1
(LCOE) in R/kWh
(Apr-2016-R)
1.00
1.09
Fixed
(Capital,
O&M)
2.89
1.41
1.41
Variable
(Fuel)
0.62
Solar PV
Wind
Baseload
Coal (PF)
Nuclear
Gas (CCGT)
Mid-merit Coal
Gas (OCGT)
Diesel (OCGT)
0
1 000
0
400
1 000
600
600
82%
90%
50%
50%
10%
10%
0
Assumed capacity factor2 
38
Same assumptions used
as per IRP 2016
0.62
CO2 in kg/MWh
1
3.69
Lifetime cost per energy unit is only presented for brevity. The model inherently includes the specific cost structures of each technology i.e. capex, Fixed O&M, variable O&M, fuel costs etc.
Changing full-load hours for new-build options drastically changes the fixed cost components per kWh (lower full-load hours  higher capital costs and fixed O&M costs per kWh);
Assumptions: Average efficiency for CCGT = 55%, OCGT = 35%; nuclear = 33%; IRP costs from Jan-2012 escalated to May-2016 with CPI; assumed EPC CAPEX inflated by 10% to convert EPC/LCOE
into tariff; Sources: IRP 2013 Update; Doe IPP Office; StatsSA for CPI; Eskom financial reports for coal/diesel fuel cost; EE Publishers for Medupi/Kusile; Rosatom for nuclear capex; CSIR analysis
2
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case is a mix of roughly 1/3 coal, nuclear, RE each
As per Draft IRP 2016
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
Total electricity
produced in TWh/yr
550
523
500
431
450
22
400
13
36
300
250
66
344
350
248
17
200
23
13
33
34
35
15
28
(5%)
93
(18%)
39
(7%)
33
(6%)
165
(32%)
150
100
207
235
229
2030
2040
50
0
2016
51
Sources: DoE Draft IRP 2016; CSIR analysis
159
(30%)
More stringent
2050 carbon limits
Solar PV
Wind
Gas (CCGT)
Nuclear
CSP
Peaking
Hydro+PS
Coal
Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget case: 40% nuclear energy share by 2050
As per Draft IRP 2016
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget
Total electricity
produced in TWh/yr
Total electricity
produced in TWh/yr
550
523
500
431
450
22
400
350
13
36
300
250
66
344
248
17
200
23
13
33
34
35
550
28
(5%)
93
(18%)
39
(7%)
33
(6%)
165
(32%)
15
44
(8%)
500
433
450
400
345
350
23
300
250
63
248
17
15
23
235
229
159
(30%)
50
0
2016
2030
2040
52
Sources: DoE Draft IRP 2016; CSIR analysis
2050
33
29
206
(39%)
134
207
100
161
50
More stringent
carbon limits
63
(12%)
35
(7%)
103
57
150
207
109
(21%)
39
200
150
100
525
63
(12%)
85
0
2016
2030
2040
2050
No RE limits, reduced wind/solar PV costing, warm water demand flexibility
Solar PV
Wind
Gas (CCGT)
Nuclear
CSP
Peaking
Hydro+PS
Coal
Least Cost case is largely based on wind and solar PV
As per Draft IRP 2016
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget
Total electricity
produced in TWh/yr
Total electricity
produced in TWh/yr
550
523
500
431
450
22
400
350
13
36
300
250
66
344
248
17
200
23
13
33
34
35
165
(32%)
15
44
(8%)
500
433
450
345
350
23
300
63
248
17
15
23
57
150
207
235
229
159
(30%)
50
0
2016
2030
2040
53
Sources: DoE Draft IRP 2016; CSIR analysis
2050
207
2030
2040
17
22
15
150
207
212
50
63
(12%)
0
49
248
200
100
85
35
300
250
87
346
350
161
50
2016
400
206
(39%)
134
100
More stringent
carbon limits
33
29
130
(25%)
433
450
63
(12%)
35
(7%)
103
527
500
109
(21%)
39
400
250
550
525
200
150
100
Total electricity
produced in TWh/yr
550
28
(5%)
93
(18%)
39
(7%)
33
(6%)
Least Cost
282
(54%)
189
15
44
(8%)
20
(4%)
36
(7%)
9
22 16
15
83
0
2050
2016
2030
2040
No RE limits, reduced wind/solar PV costing, warm water demand flexibility
Solar PV
Wind
Gas (CCGT)
Nuclear
CSP
Peaking
Hydro+PS
Coal
2050
Least Cost means no new coal and no new nuclear until 2050,
instead 90 GW of wind and 70 GW of solar PV plus flexible capacities
As per Draft IRP 2016
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
Total installed
net capacity in GW
Total installed
net capacity in GW
Least Cost
Total installed
net capacity in GW
250
250
250
200
200
200
150
100
50
51
5 3
37
111
12
85
7 21
11
12
8 17
2 6
5 8
39
33
0
2016
54
Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget
2030
2040
135
16
30
13
22
8
20
Note: REDZ = Renewable Energy Development Zones
Current REDZ cover 7% of South Africa‘s land mass
Sources: DoE Draft IRP 2016; CSIR analysis
129
100
50
51
5 3
37
25
2050
149
150
More stringent
carbon limits
98
13
20
10
7
8
0
2016
2030
19
100
8
2040
33
50
8
26
10
51
5 3
37
0
2050
93
100
10
17
19
73 1 782 GW
52
150
36
34
34
178
25
22
8
Technical
potential
237 in REDZ
only
2016
19
16
60
22
31
2 5
5 7 2
34
19
2030
2040
No RE limits, reduced wind/solar PV costing, warm water demand flexibility
Solar PV
Wind
Gas (CCGT)
Nuclear
CSP
Peaking
Hydro+PS
Coal
37
18
5
10
2050
Plus 25 GW demand
response from residential
warm water provision
535 GW
Areas already applied for Environmental Impact Assessments can cater
for 90 / 330 wind / solar PV capacity
-22
Polokwane
-24
-26
Latitude
All EIAs
(status early 2016)
Wind: 90 GW
Solar PV: 330 GW
Johannesburg
-28
Upington
All REDZ
(phase 1)
Bloemfontein
Durban
-30
Wind: 535 GW
Solar PV: 1 782 GW
-32
-36
16
55
Port Elizabeth
Cape Town
-34
18
20
22
24
26
Longitude
28
EIA: Onshore Wind
EIA: Solar PV
REDZ
30
32
34
Sources: https://www.csir.co.za/sites/default/files/Documents/Wind_and_PV_Aggregation_study_final_presentation_REV1.pdf;
https://www.csir.co.za/sites/default/files/Documents/Wind%20and%20Solar%20PV%20Resource%20Aggregation%20Study%20for%20South%20Africa_Final%20report.pdf
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case:
Weekly electricity demand profile in 2050
Demand in GW
Exemplary Week under Draft IRP 2016 Base Case (2050)
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Demand
58
Sources: CSIR analysis, based on DoE‘s Draft IRP 2016
Sunday
Total cost of power generation: Draft IRP 2016 Base Case R86 bn/year
more expensive by 2050 than Least Cost (without cost of CO2)
Total cost of power
generation in bR/yr
(constant 2016 Rand)
522
550
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget
Least Cost
500
450
398
+86
(+20%)
413
436
400
350
300
300
250
286
359
262
200
132
150
100
50
Note: Medium-term from 2016 to 2030 not in the main focus of a long-term IRP study
and therefore only indicative. Will be investigated in more detail in a separate sub-study.
0
67
2010
Sources: CSIR analysis
2016
2020
2030
2040
518
2050
Least Cost without renewables limits is R82-86 billion/yr cheaper by
2050 than IRP 2016 Base Case and IRP 2016 Carbon Budget case
As per Draft IRP 2016
Draft IRP 2016 Base Case
~525 TWh/yr
Draft IRP 2016 Carbon Budget
~525 TWh/yr
~525 TWh/yr
5%
18%
8%
30%
1%
7%
70
Coal
25%
7%
4% 8%
1%
12%
32%
12%
21%
1%
6%
Least Cost
2%
39%
54%
7%
R522 billion/yr
R518 billion/yr
R436 billion/yr
Ø tariff = 1.29 R/kWh
Ø tariff = 1.29 R/kWh
Ø tariff = 1.13 R/kWh
200 Mt/yr
100 Mt/yr
70 Mt/yr
38 bn l/yr
16 bn l/yr
9 bn l/yr
Nuclear
Hydro + Pumped Storage
Gas (CCGT)
Peaking
Other
Wind
Note: Average tariff projections include 0.30 R/kWh for transmission, distribution and customer service (today‘s average cost for these items)
CSP
Solar PV
Sources: Eskom on Tx, Dx cost; CSIR analysis
Agenda
Background
CSIR’s Approach and Project Team
Comments on IRP Assumptions
IRP Results and Least-cost Scenario
Energy Sector Implications
72
South Africa’s energy system relies on domestic coal and imported oil
Simplified energy-flow diagram (Sankey diagram) for South Africa in 2014 in PJ
Primary Energy
Conversion
End Use
Oil
897
Non-energy
179
Liquefaction
709
T
Coal
6 200
Transport
749
E
Nuclear
151
Power Plants
2 829
Electricity
700
H
Renewables
661
Natural Gas
161
74
Sources: IEA; CSIR analysis
Heat
1 503
Export
1 935
Today, very little sector coupling – electricity relatively easy to decarbonise, but transport and heat sector more challenging
Primarily supplied by
Decarbonisation potential
Electricity
Coal
Very high RE potential
RE fully cost competitive
Transport
Oil
Liquid biofuels limited potential
Needs coupling to electricity
Heat
Coal/biomass
Electricity
Biomass limited potential
Needs coupling to electricity
E
T
H
75
E
Workhorses of the future energy system: solar PV and wind
Solar PV and wind are the cheapest bulk energy providers
Their technical potential can be considered unlimited, especially in a large country like South Africa
76
E
Additional renewable electricity sources in South Africa
Biogas from
• Municipal solid waste
• Waste water
• Agricultural waste
• Animal waste
• Energy crops
Other forms of biomass
Hydro
CSP (Concentrated Solar Power)
Power-to-Power storage
• Pumped hydro
• Battery storage
77
 additionally: source of CO2
T
Transport sector consists of a number of sub-sectors
Ground transportation of people
Ground transportation of goods
Aviation
Shipping
78
T
In-principle options to decarbonise transportation
Liquid biofuels
• Biodiesel
• Bioethanol
• Biogas
E
E
Power-to-Gas/-Liquids
• H2
• Methane
• Methanol
• Other liquid fuels
Power-to-eMobility
• Electricity
79
Sources: https://sh-gruene-partei.de/sites/sh-gruene-partei.de/files/2016-05-20_gruenstrom-enge-sande_quaschning.pdf


T
Hydrogen or hydro-carbons can be produced from RE electricity
Inputs
Electrolysis
Fuel Production
Outputs
Renewable electricity
E
H2
H2
H2
Methane
Methanol
Other liquid fuels
H2O
CO2
CO2
80
Sources: CSIR Energy Centre analysis
T
Power-to-eMobility: battery driven for urban areas and highway
overhead lines for long-distance transport of goods
Electrification of passenger transport
“Around the corner”
(2020s will see
large global uptake)
Electrification of transport of goods
Pilot projects
81
H
Space heating/cooling and warm water largely electrified already in
RSA, industrial process heat to be converted from coal to electricity
Space heating/cooling
Warm water
82
Industrial process heat
E
Electricity demand during a typical week
GW
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Electricity Demand
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Day of the Week
83
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
E
Future energy system will be built around variability of solar PV & wind
Actual scaled RSA demand & simulated 15-minute solar PV/wind power supply for week from 15-21 Aug ‘11
GW
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2
1
Demand shaping
3 Biogas, hydro, CSP
2
Power-to-Power
4 Sector coupling
1
Monday
84
Sources: CSIR analysis
3
Tuesday
Wednesday
Excess Solar PV/Wind
Residual Load (flexible power)
Useful Wind
Useful Solar PV
Thursday
Day of the week
Electricity Demand
Friday
4
High Renewables: energy in RSA mostly from domestic renewables
Hypothetical energy-flow diagram (Sankey diagram) for South Africa in the year 20??
T
Transport
H2
PtL fuels
H2
E
Electricity
Liquid biofuels
CO2
H
Heat
85
100% of South Africa’s energy needs could be supplied by renewables
Sector coupling (electricity, transport, heat) is an essential factor for cost-efficient High Renewables
Electricity will be the new primary energy source, with the bulk of the kWh coming from solar PV and wind
• Biomass will supply up to its economical potential 1) heat, 2) liquid biofuels and 3) biogas (CHP)
• Other flexible sources of electricity can complement variability from solar PV and wind (e.g. CSP, hydro)
All residual demand will be electrified
• All heat demand not met by burning biomass or CHP from biogas will be electrified (flexible demand)
• Whatever transport demand that can be electrified will be electrified
• Residual transport demand (aviation, trucks, sea shipping) will be supplied by biofuels/Power-to-Liquid
• In addition to heat (CHP), biogas will be a source of highly flexible electricity and of CO2 (for P-t-L)
With abundant, very cheap clean electricity, new demand in South Africa might be created
• Seawater desalination (new flexible pumping load) to address water shortage in RSA
• Export of CO2-neutral liquid fuels to less solar- and wind-endowed countries (e.g. EU)
86 Abundant wind/solar can make South Africa global leader in cost-competitive renewables energy systems
Re a leboha
Ha Khensa
Enkosi
Siyathokoza
Thank you
Re a leboga
Ro livhuha
Siyabonga
87
Note: „Thank you“ in all official languages of the Republic of South Africa
Dankie