Anton ChaushevskiFaculty of Electrical Eng.& IT,

Sts Cyril and Methodius University - Skopje

Workshop on Cost Estimation and Cost Analysis of Nuclear Projects and Programmes

Idaho National Laboratory, USA

Nuclear in the Energy Mix Perspective of North Macedonia

INL, September 30 – October 03, 2019

•Existing Power System (PS)

•New production capacities candidates

•Long term scenarios for Power System

•Activities in energy planning Model for hourly operation of power plants

Environmental impacts from fossil fuels technologies

•Nuclear option for future development

Content

•Import is 30% of electricity needs (2000-3000 GWh/year)

• Base load from TPP on lignite (over 30 years old units in operation)

• Domestic lignite with limited reserves (next 20 years)

•Base load in critical status after 2030

•Needs for new base load production capacities

•Small grid with Max. power needs 1500-2000 MW

•Yearly energy needs 9000 GWh

•The largest single generation unit is 220MW (thermal unit)

Current situation in Electric Power System

•Challenges in new technology which is environmentally acceptable (REN in first period next 5-10 years)

•Nuclear power is an energy option after 2030

•SMR as reasonable and acceptable investments for small country as a new nuclear beginner

•ELEM - power plants and private producers

•MEPSO – national TSO

•EVN and other distributions

Existing power system and main companies Map of the grid

Бугарија

Грција

АлбанијаЛерин

Червена Могила

Солун

Вруток

Шпиље

Глобочица

Охрид2

Ресен

Битола4

Битола1

Битола3 СуводолБ.Гнеотино

Сопотница

Битола

Осломеј

Кичево

Битола 2

Прилеп1

Прилеп3Прилеп2

Самоков

КозјакСв.Петка

ТиквешФени

Неготино

Гевгелија

Струмица2

Струмица1 Сушица

Радовиш

БеровоБучим

ДубровоНеготино

Градска

Кавадарци

ЗгрополциЦентрална

Велес2

Велес

ТопилницаШтип2

Штип1

О.Поле КочаниДелчево

М.Каменица

К.Паланка

Пробиштип

Кратово

Куманово 1

Куманово 2Рафинерија

Бунарџик

Скопје 4

Скопје2

Скопје3

Ѓ.Петров

Гостивар

Југохром

Теарце ТЕ ТО

Вaландово

Косово

Урошевац

Скакавица

Петрич

Србија

Штип

Скопје 5

Струга

Тетово 1

Тетово 2

Полог

Скопје1

Бошков мост

Железара

Петровец

Богданци

Охрид1

Охрид

ТИРЗ Тетово

Ново КосовоВрање

ХЕЦ

ВЕЦ

ТЕЦ

ТЕТО

400 kV ДВ

110 kV ДВТС 400/110 kV

ТС 110/x kV

Состојба 2020

Елбасан

Куманово

ИЗ Неокази

рудникИловица

The structure of the Power system

TSO

MEPSO

Regulated consumeELEM with TPPs & HPPs

GENERATION SYSTEM

Independent Power ProducersCHP, CC,....

CONSUMERS

Large Ind. consumersIMPORT from Market

Connection Export to Market

Distribution Companies,

EVN

PVSmall HPP

Wind Farms

2014 2015 2016TPP 3507 3092 2699

Bitola 3317 2986 2672Oslomej 190 106 27

CHP Energetika 0 0 1.3HPP 958 1528 1490

Mavrovo 398 439 553Crn Drim 326 529 586

Tikves 116 313 145Treska 118 247 206

Wind Park 70 121 110ELEM Total 4535 4741 4299

CHP TETO+Kogel 192 179 554IMPORT 3072 2656 2191

REN (Substitice) 256 350 449Small HPP 242 308 389

PV 14 22 24Biomass 0 20 36

DEMAND 8055 7926 7493

Supply structure in GWh for last yearsRegulating consumers and customers (7500-8000 GWh)

Industrial consumers for 110 kV are not included (free on the market) (1000-1500 GWh)

Typical yearly and daily demand

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

P (MW)

30 December 201620 October 201606 August 201616 May 2016

Existing iInstalled capacitiesInstalled Power

P (MW)Yearly Available Generation

W (GWh)TPP coal 825 4800TPP oil 210 1000CHP gas 287 2000HPP (Large&Small) 675 1545Wind farm 37 120PV 17 22Biomass 6 18TOTAL 2057 9470

Emission factors and environmental impactsfrom fossil fuel thermal power plants

LIGNITE CO2 SO2 H2O N2 O2 TotalNm3/kg-Fuel 0.435 0.004 0.723 2.384 0.146 3.693kg / kg Fuel 0.855 0.012 0.581 2.981 0.209 4.637kg/Nm3 Gasses 0.231 0.003 0.157 0.807 0.057 1.256g/kJ 0.111 0.002 0.075 0.387 0.027 0.602g/kWh 1249.0 16.9 848.6 4354.7 305.3 6774.5

OIL CO2 SO2 H2O N2 O2 TotalNm3/kg-Fuel 1.587 0.014 0.336 8.634 0.530 11.101kg / kg Fuel 3.117 0.040 0.270 10.793 0.757 14.976kg/Nm3 Gasses 0.281 0.004 0.024 0.972 0.068 1.349g/kJ 0.078 0.001 0.007 0.269 0.019 0.373g/kWh 821.2 10.5 71.1 2843.1 199.3 3945.3

NATURAL GAS CO2 SO2 H2O N2 O2 TotalNm3/kg-Fuel 0.999 0.000 1.999 9.842 0.604 13.444kg / kg Fuel 1.962 0.000 1.606 12.303 0.863 16.734kg/Nm3 Gasses 0.146 0.000 0.119 0.915 0.064 1.245g/kJ 0.051 0.000 0.041 0.317 0.022 0.431g/kWh 331.1 0.0 271.0 2075.4 145.5 2823.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Lignite Oil Natural. Gas

CO2 (gr/kWh)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Lignite Oil Natural. Gas

SO2 (gr/kWh)

Generation prices of electricity Thermal PP (coal), 55 Euro/MWh CC thermal PP (gas), 65 Euro/MWh Hydro Power (Run off, Storage), 20 Euro/MWh

REN Small Hydro 45-120 Euro/MWh (Feed in tariff) Wind Power, 89 Euro/MWh (Feed in tariff) PV Solar, Market price + Add. Biomass 180 Euro/MWh (Feed in tariff)

Small HPP (80MW) 389 GWh Wind power (37MW) 110 GWh PV (18MW) 24 GWh Biomass (7MW) 36 GWh

REN in 2016

Operation Planning of Power Generation in the Power System

MODELS for Planning of Power System • Long – term planning (year, few years, decades)New investments in power plants, National Strategy planning,...• Short term planning (in a day, week, …, year)Operation of existing power plants…

k –Thermal power plant contracts (TPP & NPP) with Pter (t), m - Hydropower plants, each with power Phyd (t) n - Additional systems or interconnectionsREN – Renewable (Wind farms, PV and others)

)()()()()( tPtPtPtPtP loadN

sysR

RENM

hydK

ther =+++ ∑∑∑∑

Other Constraints: • Water balance for HPP, • Energy production balance for TPP• Contracts for import/export• Planned outages

min))(())((1 11 1

⇒∆⋅+∆⋅ ∑∑∑∑= == =

ttPKttPKN

n

T

tsysn

K

k

T

tterk

Power balance between generation and consumption in each time interval according to the relation

Model for hourly operation of power plants in PS Optimization function -Total Operation Costs -minimum

Modelling thermal units

Thermal Power Plants (TPP &NPP)Production costs depend on power output (CAP+Fuel+O&M)

32)( PCPBPAPK ⋅+⋅+⋅=

)()()( 2,,,,,, tkktkkktktkktktkk PCPBAPPqPPK ⋅+⋅+⋅=⋅=

Modelling Hydro Power units

Hydro Power Plants Specific spent water per energy depend on turbine discharge and storage level

⋅+⋅+⋅=

2

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,neto

tm

tmmneto

tm

tmmmneto

tm

tmneto

tm

tm

H

PC

H

PBA

H

P

H

PQ

P(t)

...

maxP

minP

1t 3t2t 4t nt

varP

totP

)( 1tP

)( 2tP

)( 3tP

)( 4tP

)( ntP

t∆

t

ttP

t

tWP

n

i

n

i

t

tii

t

ti

tot ∆

⋅=

∆=

∑

∑=

=

1

1

)()(

minvar PPP tot −=

Electricity load representative

In order to reduce the dimension of the problem , the number of time interval (T) can be smaller with different duration (appropriate to the demand)

Wide options of Generation planning ( long & short terms) Operating regime of HPP’s & TPP’s Flexible opportunity for interval’s dividing: months, weeks. days, hours (few,...,2,1) Balance of total & variable load Water balance for HPP’s reservoirs Electricity exchange (import, export)

Model possibilities

Existing power system of Macedonia

Lignite TPP – 820 MW, 4500 GWhBitola, OslomejGas TPP – 280 MW, 2000 GWhTE TO, Kogel, Energetika ELEM Oil TPP – 210 MW, 1200 GWhNegotinoHYDRO – 580 MW, 1450 GWh

Basin Wannual [GWh] Wshare [%]1 Mavrovo HPPs 488 33.662 Crn Drim HPPs 513 35.383 Treska HPPs 190 13.104 Crna HPPs 184 12.695 Small HPPs 75 5.17

Total 1450 100.00

DEMAND near 9000 GWhDomestic production around 6500 GWhImport (Gap) of 2500 GWh

Future projection of new power plants

Basin Pinst. Wyear InvestmentMW GWh mil €

Boskov Most Radika 68.2 117 70Lukovo pole and HPP Crn Kamen Mavrovo 5 163 45Galiste Crna river 193.5 264 200Cebren Crna river 333 340 319Spilje 2 Crn Drim 72 33 35Gradec Vardar 54.6 252 157Veles Vardar 93.0 300 25110 HPPs in the Vardar valley Vardar 176.8 784 486TOTAL 1032 2343 1563

Lignite TPP – 300 MW, 2000 GWh1 units x 300 MWGas TPP – 500MW, 3000 GWh2 units Nuclear – up to 1000 MW, 8000 GWh

HYDRO – near 1000 MW, 2300 GWhRenewable (up to 400 GWh) Small HPP 60 MW Wind 150 MW PV 20 MW

Simulation of Scenario in hourly optimization Case with NPP

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

P(MW)

Hydro

Import PUMP

Gas

NUCLEAR

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

P(MW)

Hydro

Import PUMP

Gas

NUCLEAR

Winter Week

Summer Week

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1 7 13 19 25 31 37 43 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 97 103

109

115

121

127

133

139

145

151

157

163

P (MW) Treska

Mavrovo

CRNA

Crn Drim

Gradec

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1 7 13 19 25 31 37 43 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 97 103

109

115

121

127

133

139

145

151

157

163

P (MW) Treska

Mavrovo

CRNA

Crn Drim

Gradec

Conventional HPPConventional+ Reversible HPPCovering the peak demand

Comparison of covering the base load No Nuclear and large NPP option

Coal + Import6400 GWh

Nuclear NPP 6800 GWh

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

117

033

950

867

784

610

1511

8413

5315

2216

9118

6020

2921

9823

6725

3627

0528

7430

4332

1233

8135

5037

1938

8840

5742

2643

9545

6447

3349

0250

7152

4054

0955

7857

4759

1660

8562

5464

2365

9267

6169

3070

9972

6874

3776

0677

7579

4481

1382

8284

5186

20

P (MW)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

117

735

352

970

588

110

5712

3314

0915

8517

6119

3721

1322

8924

6526

4128

1729

9331

6933

4535

2136

9738

7340

4942

2544

0145

7747

5349

2951

0552

8154

5756

3358

0959

8561

6163

3765

1366

8968

6570

4172

1773

9375

6977

4579

2180

9782

7384

4986

25

P(MW)

CASE OF OPERATION OF THE POWER SYSTEM WITH WIND FARMS PLANNING IN A YEAR FOR 8760 HOURS

Simulation of power generation units operation:• TPPs of: Pmin=870MW < P(t) < Pmax=1270MW• HPPs for average hydrology of: Pinst=628MW• Wind power plants of 150 MW with an annual production of 300 GWh. • Annual demand of 10,000 GWh.

ТPPPmin(MW)

Pinst (MW)

Annual generationW (GWh)

Lignite (Bitola1,2,3, & Oslomej) 550 800 5000Gas (TE-TO, Kogel, Energetika) 160 260 2000Oil (Negotino) 160 210 1000Total 870 1270 8000

HPPPinst(MW)

Annual generation for average inflow W (GWh)

ELEM –storage HPP 550 1500EVN 38 110Small HPP 40 120Total 628 1730

Power system operation in the selected winter week

TPP operation for both cases, with and without wind power

Covering the demand and wind power for selected winter week

HPP operation for both cases, with and without wind power

Power system operation in the selected summer week

TPP operation for both cases, with and without wind power

Covering the demand and wind power for selected summer week

HPP operation for both cases, with and without wind power

Suppressed (pished) power in the system for each hour of the year(case with wind farm of 600MW total installed power)

The power pushed into the system as theresult of wind power injection can bereduced if the technical minimum power ofthe thermal units can be decreased in orderto accept the power from wind farms.Otherwise, can be reduced with additionalhydro power units (storage or reversible), orflexible gas power turbines.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

2038

2039

2040

Wyear (GWh)

ImportRenewableHydroNew GasGasNew coalLignite

Covering the electricity needs up to 2040•Reduced fossil fuel scenario•Annual growth rate of 2,5%•Gap of electricity needs - IMPORT or NUCLEAR•After 2035 - over 6000 GWh

Security rules for grid N-1 security rule

– is fulfilled if all technical criteria are respected when contingency event occurs in the network

Extreme contingencies– busbar outage– complete power plant outage

N-2 security rule– double circuits outage – simultaneous outage

of two different lines

Cascade outages Loading Voltage profile Max outage of load/production Voltage stability Dynamic stability

Technical criteria

MK grid long-term visions & NPP integration

27

Bitola

Dubrovo

Skopje

Kosovo B

Nis

Sofija

Chervena Mogila

Blagoevgrad

Thessaloniki

Amyndeo

Florina

Ag. Dimitrios

Filippi

Kardia

Zemlak

Elbasan

Fierze

Prizren

Vau Dejes

Podgorica

Ribarevina

PlevljaTrebinje

Arachtos

N

Stip

Tirana

New interconnection projects

28

Some facts Big gap in covering the power needs in Macedonia, for the last

10 years which is 30% of the total demand. Fossil option (coal and gas) for long term supply is uncertainty

and insecure (depend on transportation limitations and global energy policy with gas pipe lines).

Environmental consequences from fossil fuel option as an additional challenge.

Nuclear option as a real long term power supply security. Small and medium size reactors (SMR) are preferable, or

sharing large scale NPP as regional project Stakeholders for NEP are ELEM, MEPSO, DRS-Directorate for

Radiation Safety, Universities with academia

•Low investments for small country

•Modularity of the technology and relatively easier for implementation for new beginner country in nuclear power (HR needs, nuclear regulatory authorities,…)

•Transport problem for large and heavy equipments (no sea port or any water transport, only roads and railway)

•Implementation the environmental friendly technologies

SMR as Energy option after 2030

Sharing Large NPP as regional project •Possibility to start of new beginner in nuclear technology

•HR needs and nuclear regulation

•Letter of interest for NPP Belene send to Bulgarian authorities

•Long way to negotiations for until decision