Assessing “gas transition” pathways to low carbon electricity – An Australian case study

Future generation portfolios including varying quantities of gas-fired and renewable generation were compared on the basis of expected costs, cost risk and greenhouse gas emissions, with a view to understanding the merits and disadvantages of gas and renewable technologies. A Monte-Carlo based generation portfolio modelling tool was applied to take into account the effects of highly uncertain future gas prices, carbon pricing policy and electricity demand. Results suggest that portfolios sourcing significant quantities of energy from gas-fired generation in 2030 and 2050 are likely to be significantly higher cost and significantly higher risk than the other alternatives considered. High gas portfolios also do not achieve the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions levels that appear required to avoid dangerous global warming. For example, portfolios that source 95% of energy from gas-fired generation in 2050 experience expected generation costs that are $65/MWh (40%) higher than portfolios that source only 20% of energy from gas-fired generation. These high gas portfolios also exhibit a cost risk (standard deviation in cost) that is three times higher. The lowest cost portfolios in 2050 source less than 20% of energy from gas with the remaining energy sourced from renewables. Even in the absence of a carbon price, the lowest cost portfolio in 2050 sources only 30% of energy from gas-fired generation, with the remaining 70% of energy being sourced from renewable technologies. Results suggest the optimal strategy for minimising costs, minimising cost risk and reducing GHG emission levels in future electricity industries may involve minimising energy sourced from gas, and increasing renewable generation. In the Australian case study considered, the modelling suggests it is appropriate to target renewable energy penetrations approaching 60% of energy by 2030 and 80–100% by 2050. In the lowest cost and lowest risk portfolios, firm capacity is provided primarily by the transition of existing coal-fired plant into a peaking role, and later by further investment in peaking open cycle gas turbine plant. These results are found to be robust to a wide range of assumptions around future carbon prices.

[1]  M. O'Malley,et al.  Establishing the role that wind generation may have in future generation portfolios , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[2]  I. MacGill,et al.  Using renewables to hedge against future electricity industry uncertainties—An Australian case study , 2015 .

[3]  P. Denholm,et al.  Implications of high renewable electricity penetration in the U.S. for water use, greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, and materials supply , 2014 .

[4]  John Foster,et al.  Australian Power: Can renewable technologies change the dominant industry view? , 2013 .

[5]  David Connolly,et al.  The first step towards a 100% renewable energy-system for Ireland , 2011 .

[6]  I. MacGill,et al.  Comparing least cost scenarios for 100% renewable electricity with low emission fossil fuel scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market , 2014 .

[7]  I. MacGill,et al.  Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market , 2013 .

[8]  José L. Bernal-Agustín,et al.  Optimal investment portfolio in renewable energy: The Spanish case , 2009 .

[9]  I. MacGill,et al.  Assessing the value of wind generation in future carbon constrained electricity industries , 2013 .

[10]  Jung-hua Wu,et al.  Electricity portfolio planning model incorporating renewable energy characteristics , 2014 .

[11]  Michael G. Pollitt,et al.  An assessment of the present and future opportunities for combined heat and power with district heating (CHP-DH) in the United Kingdom , 2010 .

[12]  Bryan Maybee,et al.  Evaluation of power investment decisions under uncertain carbon policy: A case study for converting coal fired steam turbine to combined cycle gas turbine plants in Australia , 2014 .

[13]  R. Garnaut The Garnaut Review 2011: Australia in the Global Response to Climate Change , 2011 .

[14]  Patrick Hearps,et al.  Australian sustainable energy: Zero carbon Australia stationary energy plan , 2010 .

[15]  Birgit Fais,et al.  Comparing different support schemes for renewable electricity in the scope of an energy systems analysis , 2014 .

[16]  Umberto Desideri,et al.  MCFC-based CO2 capture system for small scale CHP plants , 2012 .

[17]  Dolf Gielen,et al.  Re-considering the economics of photovoltaic power , 2013 .

[18]  Iain MacGill,et al.  Simulations of scenarios with 100% renewable electricity in the Australian National Electricity Market , 2012 .

[19]  Anindya Bhattacharya,et al.  Power sector investment risk and renewable energy: A Japanese case study using portfolio risk optimization method , 2012 .

[20]  H. Rogner,et al.  Incorporating flexibility requirements into long-term energy system models – A case study on high levels of renewable electricity penetration in Ireland , 2014 .

[21]  Jung-hua Wu,et al.  A portfolio risk analysis on electricity supply planning , 2008 .

[22]  B. Mathiesen,et al.  100% Renewable energy systems, climate mitigation and economic growth , 2011 .

[23]  Iain MacGill,et al.  A Monte Carlo based decision-support tool for assessing generation portfolios in future carbon constrained electricity industries , 2012 .

[24]  Francisco Javier Ramos-Real,et al.  Efficient power generating portfolio in Brazil: Conciliating cost, emissions and risk , 2013 .