Comparative Analysis of Sustainability Performance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
North Atlantic Energy Network January 2016
North Atlantic Energy Network January 2016 Orkustofnun (OS) - National Energy Authority of Iceland Norges Arktiske Universitet (UiT) - The Arctic University of Norway Energy Styrelsen - Danish Energy Agency Jarðfeingi - Faroese Earth and Energy Directorate Shetland Islands Council - Economic Development Service Greenland Innovation Centre 1 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aim of the North Atlantic Energy Network project was to investigate how isolated energy systems in the North Atlantic can be connected to Norway and Greenland to form an electrical grid in the North Atlantic. Representatives of Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands, Shetland and Norway met in Copenhagen in the end of February 2015 to formulate how to tackle this question. Each country documented its status regarding energy production and potentials in the fields of renewable energy and the technological aspects were investigated. Greenland has a big hydropower and solar energy potential, which is not known in detail. Further work is needed to map the potentials. Due to lack of infrastructure and experience a cable connection between Greenland and the neighbouring countries is not realistic in the nearest future. It is technically possible to connect all of the neighbouring countries around Iceland with subsea cables. Iceland now produces about 18 TWh of electricity per year and could have the potential to double the production from geothermal and hydropower alone. There are many unclear aspects that need to be investigated further to draw a full picture of the pros and cons of interconnectors from Iceland. The legal and regulatory framework must be in place before a project of this kind can be realized and extensive grid reinforcements are needed to support export through a cable at a single connection point in Iceland. -
Cross-Border Electricity Trading in Southeast Europe Towards an Internal European Market †
energies Article Cross-Border Electricity Trading in Southeast Europe Towards an Internal European Market † Despoina I. Makrygiorgou 1,2,*, Nikos Andriopoulos 1,2, Ioannis Georgantas 1, Christos Dikaiakos 1 and George P. Papaioannou 1 1 Research, Technology & Development Department, Independent Power Transmission Operator (IPTO) S.A., 89 Dyrrachiou & Kifisou Str. Gr, 10443 Athens, Greece; [email protected] (N.A.); [email protected] (I.G.); [email protected] (C.D.); [email protected] (G.P.P.) 2 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras, 26500 Patras, Greece * Correspondence: [email protected] † This paper is an extended version of our paper published in 17th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), IEEE, Stockholm, Sweden, 16–18 September 2020; pp. 1–6. Received: 8 December 2020; Accepted: 14 December 2020; Published: 17 December 2020 Abstract: The European Commission’s Target Model’s main objective is to integrate European electricity markets, leading to a single internal energy market and guaranteeing the instantaneous balance between electricity generation and demand. According to the target model for electricity trading, proposed by the European Network Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E), within each zone, electricity can be traded freely without taking into consideration network limitations. In contrast, for cross-border trading, the exchanges with other market areas are taken into account. Cross-border trade poses a further burden on the interconnection lines, resulting in increasing network congestion, which in turn restricts electricity trading. Thus, calculating the available capacity for trade has a significant ramification on the market. Today, the Available Transfer Capacity (ATC) mechanism dominates cross-border trading, but this methodology may be replaced by the Flow-Based (FB) approach across Europe. -
Methodology of Comparison 2013
METHODOLOGY OF COMPARISON 2013 Comparative Analysis of Sustainability Performance Methodological Remarks Convinced that a comparison of environmental, social and governance performance is of interest, not only to the Company itself, but also to its stakeholders, certain comparisons between Terna’s results and those of other com- panies are included in the 2013 Sustainability Report, as was the case in the preceding three years. Listed below are the main criteria adopted in the analysis, as an introduction to the reading and interpretation of the comparisons of individual indicators in the Report: • three panels of companies were identified: an industry panel, composed of the European transmission system operators and the major extra-European operators in terms of kilometres of lines managed; and two multi- industry panels, the first relative to large Italian companies (the 40 companies of the FTSE-MIB at 18 December 2013) and the second relative to the best international performers (the 24 world Sustainability Industry Group Leaders, identified by the RobecoSAM sustainability rating agency and disclosed at the publishing of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index of September 2013). The purpose of the three panels is to guarantee, also relative to the type of indicator reviewed, a comparison between companies with the same operational characteristics, an Italian comparison, and a comparison with the top international performers. The Terna figures do not contribute to the calculation of the average in the case of the RobecoSAM – Supersector Leaders panel; • the companies considered from among those in the three panels were those which publicise the information necessary for comparisons either on their websites, through the Sustainability Report (even if not prepared following the GRI guidelines) or through other documentation (HSE Report, financial report, etc.). -
Summer Outlook Report 2012 and Winter Review 2011/2012
SUMMER OUTLOOK REPORT 2012 AND WINTER REVIEW 2011/2012 European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity An Overview of System Adequacy: Summer Outlook Report 2012 and Winter Review 2011/2012 ENTSO -E Avenue Cortenbergh 100 • 1000 Brussels • Belgium • Tel +32 2 7410950 • Fax +32 2 741 0951 • [email protected] • www.entsoe.eu SUMMER OUTLOOK REPORT 2012 AND WINTER REVIEW 2011/2012 European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 3 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 4 3 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 5 3.1 SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 5 3.2 AIMS AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 7 4 WINTER REVIEW .................................................................................................... 10 5 SUMMER OUTLOOK ............................................................................................... 11 5.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................... 11 5.2 INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS ................................................................................. -
Minutes SDAC Joint Steering Committee Meeting 04/06/2020,13:30 – 17:00 CET, Conference Call
Minutes SDAC Joint Steering Committee Meeting 04/06/2020,13:30 – 17:00 CET, conference call Present parties 50Hertz Cropex EPEX Spot Litgrid PSE Terna Admie EirGrid (TSO) ESO MAVIR REE TGE Amprion Eirgrid (SEMO PX) EXAA Nasdaq REN Transelectrica APG ElecLink Fingrid Nemo Link RTE Transnet BW AST Elering GME NGIC SEPS TTG BritNed ELES HEnEx OKTE SONI (SEMO PX) TTN BSP Elia HOPS OMIE SONI (TSO) ČEPS EMCO Nord Pool HUPX OPCOM Statnett Creos Energinet IBEX OTE Svk Attending by phone Not present Present chairs, TF leaders, PMOs, observers BMTF leader/PMO Entso-e MRC OPSCOM leader MSD TSO co-leader OST Swissgrid EC JSC Secretary MRC OPSCOM PMO MSD PMO PCR chair & PMO TSO co-chair EMS MEPSO MSD NEMO co-leader NEMO co-chair Procedures TF leader Attending by phone Not present Meeting agenda # Topic For 1 Welcome, practicalities 1.1 Confirm quorum Inf 1.2 Adoption of the agenda Dec 1.3 Approval of minutes of past meetings/calls (incl. part for publication) Dec 1.4 Review open action points Inf 2 Strategy/governance – decisions required 2.1 Way forward Central Settlement Entity Inf 3 Important points to highlight and decisions requested by TFs 3.1 Status extension projects and communication towards EC Dec 3.2 MRC OPSCOM Dec 3.3 MSD Dec 3.4 Procedures TF Inf 3.5 BMTF Dec 3.6 JSC members questions to reports in back-up section Dis 4 Important points for SDAC from ENTSO-E/ NC/ NRAs/ ACER/ EC 4.1 Preparations for next TCG and MESC Inf 4.2 EC consultation on first light amendment of some relevant regulations incl. -
UCTE Transmission Development Plan
UCTE Transmission Development Plan Edition 2008 union for the co-ordination of transmission of electricity Table of contents Executive Summary 3 1 Introduction 5 2 Evolution of the UCTE Generation-Load Balance 12 3 Development of Interconnections 19 4 Transmission Network Development 37 Appendix 1 39 Detailed Information on Interconnection Projects Appendix 2 66 UCTE Members Internal Grid Development EXecutiVE summaRY Executive Summary In order to meet the objectives of the European energy policy, the transmission grid must be devel- oped while maximizing security and minimizing the total cost ( from generation to retail ). Grid devel- opment is influenced by two interrelated parameters: consumption and generation. If consumption is expected to follow a rather low growth rate as a result of improved energy efficiency, generation is affected by major changes resulting from the development of renewable energy sources and the renewal of the oldest thermal plants. The UCTE Transmission System Operators ( TSOs ) therefore have two objectives: maximising the security of supply and integrating the market in order to allow an efficient use of the generation and by this way minimise total costs. Over the next 10 years, net installed generation capacity in UCTE attributable to both new projects already submitted to the TSOs and expected decommissioning of existing plants or attributable to energy policy objectives amounts be approximately 220 GW ( including 80 GW of wind power ). At the same time, consumption over the same period is forecasted to increase by approximately 90 GW. Since rising generation capacity is strongly linked to market conditions, there is almost certain that all generation projects submitted to the TSOs will not be confirmed. -
Establishing the Institutional Set- up for Organized Day-Ahead Market in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Finland Energy Community Norway Members Sweden European Union Estonia Observers Contracting parties Latvia Denmark Candidate Lithuania Ireland Great Britain Netherlands Poland Germany Belgium Luxembourg Czech Republic Slovakia Ukraine Austria Moldova Hungary France Slovenia Romania Croatia Bosnia & Herzegovina Serbia Italy Montenegro Kosovo* Bulgaria Georgia FYR of Portugal Macedonia Albania Spain Armenia Greece Turkey Malta Cyprus Establishing the institutional set- up for organized day-ahead market in Bosnia and Herzegovina SEEC Ltd. and MRC Consultants and Transaction Advisers March 2018 This report is a deliverable under the Technical Assistance to Connectivity in the Western Balkans, Component 2: Regional Energy Market. www.energy-community.com Establishing the Institutional Set-up for Organized Day-ahead market in Bosnia and Herzegovina TECHNICAL REPORT Prepared for March 2018 MRC Consultants and Transaction Advisers General Moscardo 32, 1-A, 28020 Madrid (Spain) www.mrc-consultants.com SEEC Ltd. and MRC Consultants and Transaction Advisers and their directors and staff neither owe nor accept any duty of care to any third party whether in contract or in tort (including without limitation negligence or statutory duty or howsoever otherwise arising) and shall not be liable in respect of any loss, damage or expense of whatsoever nature which is caused by any third party’s reliance upon information derived from the report. If any third party wishes to rely upon the report or information derived there from, they do so entirely at their own risk. The information used in preparing this Report has been obtained from a variety of sources as indicated within the Report. Our work has not included an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. -
Nordic and Baltic Grid Disturbance Statistics 2019
Nordic and Baltic Grid Disturbance Statistics 2019 Regional Group Nordic European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity Nordic and Baltic Grid Disturbance Statistics 2019 Copyright © 2020 ENTSO-E AISBL Report rendered 22 September 2020. European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity Executive Summary The Nordic and Baltic Grid Disturbance Statistics 2019 gives of the secondary faults were caused by technical equipment, both an overview of the disturbances, faults, and energy not operation and maintenance, and other causes in 2019. How- supplied (ENS) in the Nordic and Baltic transmission sys- ever, other causes were the reason for 71 % of all secondary tems, as well as a deeper dive into the statistics of individual faults ENS. Other causes were also the dominating cause of HVAC components used in the power system. To interpret secondary faults ENS in 2018. the results of the statistics correctly, one must understand the definition of a disturbance and the scope of a fault within 100 it. 80 A fault is defined as the inability of a component to perform Country ) Denmark m its required function, with the addition that faults only are re- p p ( 60 Estonia n o i ported when they result in a trip of one or several breakers. A t Finland p m u Iceland s disturbance is an event including one or more faults. In short, n o Latvia C 40 / a disturbance is a combination of one or several faults as long S Lithuania N as they occur in the same area and time. Disturbances al- E Norway Sweden 20 ways focus on the fault initiating the disturbance. -
Repower – Kosovo Demand Side Response in Kosovo Power System
REPOWER – KOSOVO DEMAND SIDE RESPONSE IN KOSOVO POWER SYSTEM DATE: July 2019 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by AECOM. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ REPOWER – KOSOVO i/77 REPOWER-KOSOVO DEMAND SIDE RESPONSE IN KOSOVO POWER SYSTEM Contract Number: AID-OAA-I-13-00012 Task Order: AID-167-TO-14-00007 Submitted to: USAID/Kosovo Prepared by: AECOM International Development DISCLAIMER: The authors’ views expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ REPOWER – KOSOVO 2/77 Contents 1. GENERAL CONCEPT OF DEMAND SIDE RESPONSE ................................................. 4 2. OTHER COUNTRIES EXPERIENCE ............................................................................... 10 2.1. Austria ............................................................................................................................................................. 13 2.2. Belgium ............................................................................................................................................................ 16 2.3. Bosnia and herzegovina ............................................................................................................................... 19 2.4. Croatia ........................................................................................................................................................... -
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM AS of 16 OCTOBER 2019 Important: This Preliminary Program Is Subject to Changes
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM AS OF 16 OCTOBER 2019 Important: This preliminary program is subject to changes. It is strongly recommended to check back regularly. TERA SPONSORS GIGA SPONSORS WORKSHOP AMBASSADORS MEDIA PARTNERS ORGANIZER WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WORKSHOP WINDINTEGRATION TIMETABLE 16 OCTOBER 2019 17 OCTOBER 2019 18 OCTOBER 2019 Wind Workshop Day 1 Wind Workshop Day 2 Wind Workshop Day 3 REDWOOD B REDWOOD C REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD C REDWOOD A SESSION 3A: SESSION 3B: SESSION 3C: SESSION 7A: SESSION 7B: SESSION 7C: FREQUENCY WINDEUROPE MODELLING 9:00 – 10:40 GRID FORMING II OFFSHORE WIND FORECASTING II 08:40– 10:40 ASPECTS SESSION POWER COFFEE BREAK (30MIN) COFFEE BREAK (30MIN) FOYER REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD C REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD C REGISTRATION SESSION 4A: SESSION 4B: SESSION 4C: SESSION 8A: SESSION 8B: SESSION 8C: GRID FORMING I EIRGRID/IRELAND/ FORECASTING I VIRTUAL IEA – ENERGY HARMONICS II 9:00 – 14:00 11:10 – 13:00 11:10 – 13:00 ROCOF SYNCHRONOUS TRANSITION IN MACHINES ASIA LUNCH 12:00 – 14:00 LUNCH 13:00 – 14:00 LUNCH 13:00 – 14:00 REDWOOD A/B/C REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD C REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD C WELCOME & SESSION 1: SESSION 5A: SESSION 5B: SESSION 5C: SESSION 9A: SESSION 9B: SESSION 9C KEYNOTE SESSION MIGRATE PROJECT IEC TC 88 STANDARD HARMONICS I RESILIENCY HYBRID POWER GRID ASPECTS & PLANTS INTEGRATION 14:00 – 15:40 14:00 – 15:50 14:00 – 15:40 SYSTEM SOLUTIONS RESTORATION GROUP PHOTO / COFFEE BREAK (40MIN) COFFEE BREAK (30 MIN) SHORT BREAK (20 MIN) REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD C: REDWOOD A REDWOOD B REDWOOD -
Technical Information on Projects of Common Interest
Technical information on Projects of Common Interest accompanying the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/89 of 18 November 2015 amending Regulation (EU) 347/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure as regards the Union list of projects of common interest 1. Priority Corridor Northern Seas Offshore Grid ('NSOG') Construction of the first interconnection between Belgium and United Kingdom: No TYNDP Definition Details on location Promoter(s) Type / technology employed Implementation status Date of reference commissioning 1.1 Cluster Belgium — United Kingdom between Zeebrugge and Canterbury [currently known as "NEMO" project], including the following PCIs: 74-443 1.1.1 Interconnection between Zeebrugge 1.1.1 Gezelle (BE) – 1.1.1 Nemo Link 1.1.1 New DC sea link including 140 km of DC subsea 1.1.1 Under construction 1.1.1 technical (BE) and the vicinity of Richborough (UK) Richborough (UK) Limited cable with 1000 MW capacity between Richborough commissioning 2018 and Gezelle (vicinity of Zeebrugge) (offshore + with operation in 2019 onshore) 74-449 1.1.2 Internal line between the vicinity of 1.1.2 Vicinity of 1.1.2 National 1.1.2 New 400kV substation in Richborough and new 1.1.2 Permitting 1.1.2 2018 Richborough and Canterbury (UK) Richborough to Canterbury Grid Electricity 400kV AC double circuit OHL between Richborough (UK) Transmission plc and Canterbury (onshore) (UK) N/A 1.1.3 No longer considered a PCI N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.2 N/A No longer considered a PCI N/A N/A -
Winter Review and Summer Outlook 2009
European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity An Overview of System Adequacy: Winter Review and Summer Outlook Report 2009 ENTSO-E • Boulevard Saint-Michel, 15 • 1040 Brussels • Belgium • Tel +32 2 737 15 80 • Fax +32 2 741 69 49 • [email protected] • www.entsoe.eu European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity Contents 1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................3 1.1 Winter Review 2008/09....................................................................................................3 1.2 Summer Outlook 2009 .....................................................................................................8 2 Introduction and Methodology ...................................................................................11 2.1 Scope & Objectives of the Report ..................................................................................11 2.1.1 Winter Review Report ..................................................................................................11 2.1.2 Summer Outlook Report..............................................................................................11 2.2 Sources of Information & Methodology ..........................................................................11 2.2.1 Winter Review Report ..................................................................................................11 2.2.2 Summer Outlook Report..............................................................................................12