DOCSLIB.ORG

Økonomisk Regulering Av Northconnect

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Økonomisk Regulering Av Northconnect Offentlig ISBN nr. 978-82-8368-049-2 Økonomisk regulering av NorthConnect På oppdrag fra NVE Desember, 2018 THEMA Rapport 2018- 17 THEMA-Rapport 2018-17 Økonomisk regulering av NorthConnect Om prosjektet Om rapporten Prosjektnummer: NVE-18-06 Rapportnavn: Økonomisk regulering av NorthConnect Prosjektnavn: Fastsettelse av Rapportnummer: 2018-17 avkastningskrav for NorthConnect Oppdragsgiver: Norges vassdrags- og ISBN-nummer 978-82-8368-049-2 energidirektorat Prosjektleder: Åsmund Jenssen Tilgjengelighet: Offentlig Prosjektdeltakere: Snorre Thorsønn Borgen Ferdigstilt: 7. desember 2018 Christoffer Noreng Anders Lund Eriksrud Eivind Magnus Brief summary in English The interconnector project NorthConnect between Norway and Scotland will be subject to a revenue cap regulation that transfers extraordinary revenues to Norwegian network customers while shielding the customers from the costs of the project. Hence there is no mitigation of downside risk for the investor. This means that the capital cost element in revenue cap must be higher than cost of capital of an unregulated interconnector. We estimate this level to be around 1,75 times the cost of capital. The cost of capital of an interconnector is furthermore estimated to correspond to a power generation project. Om THEMA Consulting Group Øvre Vollgate 6 THEMA Consulting Group tilbyr rådgivning og analyser 0158 Oslo, Norway for omstillingen av energisystemet basert på dybde- Foretaksnummer: NO 895 144 932 kunnskap om energimarkedene, bred samfunns- www.thema.no forståelse, lang rådgivningserfaring, og solid faglig kompetanse innen samfunns- og bedriftsøkonomi, teknologi og juss. Disclaimer Hvis ikke beskrevet ellers, er informasjon og anbefalinger i denne rapporten basert på offentlig tilgjengelig informasjon. Visse uttalelser i rapporten kan være uttalelser om fremtidige forventninger og andre fremtidsrettede uttalelser som er basert på THEMA Consulting Group AS (THEMA) sitt nåværende syn, modellering og antagelser og involverer kjente og ukjente risikoer og usikkerheter som kan forårsake at faktiske resultater, ytelser eller hendelser kan avvike vesentlig fra de som er uttrykt eller antydet i slike uttalelser. Enhver handling som gjennomføres på bakgrunn av vår rapport foretas på eget ansvar. Kunden har rett til å benytte informasjonen i denne rapporten i sin virksomhet, i samsvar med forretningsvilkårene i vårt engasjementsbrev. Rapporten og/eller informasjon fra rapporten skal ikke benyttes for andre formål eller distribueres til andre uten skriftlig samtykke fra THEMA. THEMA påtar seg ikke ansvar for eventuelle tap for Kunden eller en tredjepart som følge av rapporten eller noe utkast til rapport, distribueres, reproduseres eller brukes i strid med bestemmelsene i vårt engasjementsbrev med Kunden. THEMA beholder opphavsrett og alle andre immaterielle rettigheter til ideer, konsepter, modeller, informasjon og ”know-how” som er utviklet i forbindelse med vårt arbeid. Page ii THEMA Consulting Group Øvre Vollgate 6, 0158 Oslo, Norway www.thema.no INNHOLD 1 INNLEDNING ....................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Bakgrunn og problemstilling ........................................................................ 7 1.2 Om rapporten ............................................................................................. 7 2 ØKONOMISK REGULERINGSMODELL FOR NORTHCONNECT ...................... 9 2.1 Norsk regulering av utenlandsforbindelser i dag ......................................... 9 2.1.1 NVEs økonomiske regulering ...................................................................... 9 2.1.2 Statnetts utenlandsforbindelser ................................................................. 10 2.1.3 EUs regelverk ........................................................................................... 10 2.2 Beskrivelse av cap/floor-modellen i UK med sentrale parametere ............ 11 2.3 Fastsettelse av nivået på avkastningen .................................................... 14 2.4 Incentiver for tilgjengelighet ...................................................................... 16 2.5 Tilpasning av cap and floor-rammeverket til norsk regulering.................... 17 2.5.1 Forslag til modell ....................................................................................... 17 2.5.2 Risikoegenskaper ..................................................................................... 17 2.6 Prinsipielt om finansieringsmulighetene .................................................... 19 3 AVKASTNINGSKRAVET TIL EN UREGULERT UTENLANDSFORBINDELSE . 21 3.1 Generelt om fastsettelse av avkastningskrav for en privat investor ........... 21 3.1.1 Teoretisk modell ....................................................................................... 21 3.1.2 Generelle parametere i modellen .............................................................. 22 3.2 Systematisk risiko for kraftproduksjon ....................................................... 23 3.2.1 Kvalitativ analyse av risikoen ved en utenlandsforbindelse ....................... 23 3.2.2 Empiri – systematisk risiko i kraftproduksjon ............................................. 25 3.2.3 Systematisk risiko ved kraftproduksjon vs. flaskehalsinntekter .................. 26 3.3 Vurdering av gjeldsgrad og kredittpremie .................................................. 30 3.3.1 Gjeldsgrad ................................................................................................ 31 3.3.2 Kredittpremie ............................................................................................ 32 3.4 Avkastningskrav til NorthConnect ............................................................. 33 4 FINANSIELL MODELL FOR NORTHCONNECT ............................................... 34 4.1 Lønnsomheten av NorthConnect før regulering ........................................ 34 4.1.1 Kostnader ................................................................................................. 34 4.1.2 Inntektsscenarioer .................................................................................... 34 4.1.3 Forventet avkastning og risiko .................................................................. 36 4.2 Økonomisk reguleringsmodell ................................................................... 36 4.2.1 Nivå på inntektstaket ................................................................................ 36 4.2.2 Avregningsperiodens lengde..................................................................... 38 4.3 Nøkkeltall for kredittvurdering ................................................................... 39 THEMA-Rapport 2018-17 Økonomisk regulering av NorthConnect 4.4 Samlet vurdering av reguleringsmodellen ................................................. 42 REFERANSELISTE .................................................................................................... 43 Page 2 THEMA Consulting Group Øvre Vollgate 6, 0158 Oslo, Norway www.thema.no THEMA-Rapport 2018-17 Økonomisk regulering av NorthConnect SAMMENDRAG OG KONKLUSJONER Bakgrunn og problemstilling Selskapet NorthConnect har søkt om konsesjon for å bygge en 1400 MW likestrømsforbindelse mellom Norge og Skottland samt om konsesjon for utenlandshandel. Norges vassdrags- og energidirektorat (NVE) er ansvarlig for å anbefale en modell for den økonomiske reguleringen av NorthConnect. Målet med reguleringen er å bidra til at NorthConnect blir bedriftsøkonomisk lønnsomt for investor gitt at prosjektet vurderes av konsesjonsmyndighetene til å være samfunnsøkonomisk lønnsomt. Samtidig er det et krav fra Stortinget om at prosjektet skal reguleres slik at norske nettkunder ikke belastes kostnadene ved prosjektet og at ekstraordinære inntekter fra prosjektet skal tilfalle det norske samfunnet. På britisk side vil prosjektet bli underlagt en såkalt cap and floor-regulering der nettkundene er med på å dele både oppside og nedside. På denne bakgrunnen har NVE bedt THEMA om å utarbeide en rapport der følgende spørsmål skal besvares: Hvordan kan en inntektsrammeregulering for NorthConnect utformes som ivaretar både energilovens formål og oppfyller Stortingets krav til reguleringen? Hva er en rimelig referanserente i NorthConnects inntektsramme? Anbefalt modell: Tilpasning av cap and floor-modellen til norsk regulering Analysen er gjort under forutsetning av at det er en kommersiell profittmaksimerende investor som skal fatte investeringsbeslutningen. Vi tar ikke hensyn til reguleringen av prosjektet på britisk side eller konsekvenser av prosjektet for de nåværende eierne utover de direkte prosjektinntektene, for eksempel konsekvenser via endrede kraftpriser. Med utgangspunkt i cap and floor-modellen og de overordnede føringene for reguleringen av NorthConnect foreslår vi en regulering av NorthConnect som oppsummert i tabellen nedenfor: Element Forslag Kommentar Varighet av reguleringen 25 år Tilsvarende som britisk side Kortere enn forventet teknisk levetid av kabelen Perioder Evaluering av merinntekt hvert Tilsvarende som britisk side femte år Metode/reguleringsprinsipp Måling av avkastning relativt til Tilsvarende som britisk side, men investert kapital bare i forhold til tak Kostnadsfastsettelse Vurdering av kapitalkostnader på Tilsvarende som britisk side, idriftsettelsestidspunktet samme prinsipp for tidfesting av Driftskostnader vurderes ex ante, kapitalbasen som i den norske med muligheter for reestimering reguleringen etter søknad Kapitalkostnader Realannuitet basert
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Interconnector Services
    Interconnector Services Industry Challenges OUR SERVICES AT A GLANCE The electricity sector around the world is undergoing significant changes, often driven by the decarbonisation Interconnector policy and regulation agenda. For most countries, however, security of supply • Design of regulatory regimes remains the number one priority. At the same time, (including Cap and Floor in consumer price also remains a key issue. Interconnectors Great Britain) are uniquely well placed to meet these challenges of • Policy design (e.g. incentives to sustainability, security and affordability. increase interconnection) Interconnectors are unique transmission • Energy market design (e.g. design assets that enable the flow of electricity of capacity market to incorporate interconnectors) over high voltage cables between different NorthConnect countries or regions. The economic Icelink rationale for interconnectors is driven by Quantitative analysis fundamental differences in the generation mixes in the connecting countries which • Power market fundamentals lead to systematic electricity price NSN modelling spreads over long periods of time. For • Cost-benefit analysis (e.g. example, the generation portfolio in Moyle Viking arbitrage revenues, Capacity Great Britain (primarily thermal and Greenwire Market, ancillary services) renewable generation, with some nuclear) Greenlink BritNed is very different from that in France • Socio-economic impact analysis East-West (predominantly nuclear) or Norway Nemo • Financial analysis (e.g. to support (predominantly hydro). This is beneficial to IFA2 IFA FABLink ElecLink investment decisions) consumers as it allows cheaper electricity Aquind to be imported at times of high local prices and to generators as it allows surplus Strategic support generation to be exported at times of low • Advising on negotiations with Currently operational local prices.
    [Show full text]
  • Expert Perspectives on Norway's Energy Future
    Research Paper Antony Froggatt, Paul Stevens and Siân Bradley Edited by Germana Canzi and Amanda Burton Energy, Environment and Resources Programme | June 2020 Expert Perspectives on Norway’s Energy Future Future on Norway’s Energy Expert Perspectives Expert Perspectives on Norway’s Energy Future Froggatt, Stevens and Bradley Stevens Froggatt, Chatham House Contents Abbreviations 2 Summary 3 1 Preamble: Energy Transition in a Post-COVID-19 World 5 2 Challenges and Opportunities for Norway 8 3 Norway’s Energy Future 13 4 Conclusions and Recommendations 38 Annex: Expert Perspectives 40 About the Editors 90 About the Interviewees 91 About the Authors 95 Acknowledgments 96 1 | Chatham House Expert Perspectives on Norway’s Energy Future Abbreviations CCS carbon capture and storage CCU carbon capture and use CCUS carbon capture, use and storage COP Conference of the Parties EIA Energy Information Administration EV electric vehicle GHG greenhouse gas GtCO2e gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent IEA International Energy Agency IPCC International Panel on Climate Change LUC land-use change mtoe million tonnes of oil equivalent NETs negative emissions technologies SAF sustainable aviation fuels SMR steam methane reformer SWF sovereign wealth fund UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 2 | Chatham House Expert Perspectives on Norway’s Energy Future Summary • The world is undergoing a transition away from fossil fuels towards renewable energy. However, the speed and depth of this transition is uncertain and controversial. This will have significant implications for Norway, one of the world’s largest exporters of both energy and capital. • With international efforts to limit increases in global temperature to 2°C, and as close as possible to 1.5°C, appearing increasingly off-track, there is an urgent need for a rapid move away from the unabated use of fossil fuels.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base for Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Final Report
    Planning Scotland’s Seas The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base for Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Final Report Marine Scotland The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base for Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Final Report Date: July 2013 Project Ref: R/4136/1 Report No: R.2097 © ABP Marine Environmental Research Ltd Version Details of Change Date 1.0 Draft 29.04.2013 2.0 Draft 15.05.2013 3.0 Final 07.06.2013 4.0 Final 28.06.2013 5.0 Final 01.07.2013 6.0 Final 05.07.2013 Document Authorisation Signature Date Project Manager: S F Walmsley PP 05.07.2013 Quality Manager: C E Brown 05.07.2013 Project Director: S C Hull 05.07.2013 ABP Marine Environmental Research Ltd ABPmer is certified by: Quayside Suite, Medina Chambers, Town Quay, Southampton, Hampshire SO14 2AQ Tel: +44 (0) 23 8071 1840 Fax: +44 (0) 23 8071 1841 Web: www.abpmer.co.uk Email: [email protected] All images copyright ABPmer apart from front cover (wave, anemone, bird) and policy & management (rockpool) Andy Pearson www.oceansedgepzhotography.co.uk The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base for Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Summary Introduction The Marine (Scotland) Act and the UK Marine and Coastal Access Act contain provisions for the designation of a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Scottish territorial and offshore waters in order to protect marine biodiversity and geodiversity and contribute to a UK and international network of MPAs.
    [Show full text]
  • Scottish Government Arctic Policy: Mapping Report Jafry, Tahseen; Mikulewicz, Michael; Mattar, Sennan; Davidson, Magnus; Bremner, Barbara
    Scottish Government Arctic Policy: Mapping Report Jafry, Tahseen; Mikulewicz, Michael; Mattar, Sennan; Davidson, Magnus; Bremner, Barbara Publication date: 2019 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in ResearchOnline Citation for published version (Harvard): Jafry, T, Mikulewicz, M, Mattar, S, Davidson, M & Bremner, B 2019, Scottish Government Arctic Policy: Mapping Report. Scottish Government. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please view our takedown policy at https://edshare.gcu.ac.uk/id/eprint/5179 for details of how to contact us. Download date: 01. Oct. 2021 SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT ARCTIC POLICY MAPPING REPORT Compiled by Professor Tahseen Jafry Centre for Climate Justice Glasgow Caledonian University Project Team Dr Michael Mikulewicz and Sennan Mattar GCU Centre for Climate Justice Magnus Davidson and Barbara Bremner Environmental Research Institute, University of the Highlands and Islands June 2019 compiled in November 2018 Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 5 Context and background ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Integration of Electricity Markets
    Norwegian School of Economics Bergen, Autumn 2018 Integration of Electricity Markets An Analysis of TSO-Owned and Non-TSO-Owned Cross-Border Interconnectors Sofie Handal Bruvik & Sigrid Marthea Hernes Supervisor: Lassi Ahlvik Master Thesis within the profile of Economics and the profile of Energy, Natural Resources and the Environment NORWEGIAN SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS This thesis was written as a part of the Master of Science in Economics and Business Administration at NHH. Please note that neither the institution nor the examiners are responsible - through the approval of this thesis - for the theories and methods used, or results and conclusions drawn in this work. Abstract The European electricity market is gradually becoming more integrated due to increased cross- border transmission capacity. Integrated electricity markets are expected to improve social welfare through security of supply and efficient electricity generation. Thus, inadequate cross- border transmission capacity causes an inefficient allocation of resources at a regional level. The integration of electricity markets will impact electricity prices and the social welfare in the connected regions. A cross-border interconnector between the bidding zone NO5 in Norway and the market area Great Britain will exploit the different price levels and structures of the regions. The interconnector is expected to increase electricity prices in NO5 and decrease electricity prices in Great Britain. Further, the social welfare is expected to increase in both NO5 and Great Britain. This thesis estimates the annual congestion rent of a 1 400 MW interconnector between NO5 and Great Britain. The Norwegian share of the congestion rent is estimated to vary between e51,4 million and e168,4 million in the period from 2026 to 2045.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Fredrik Rüter 9 February 2016
    Curriculum Vitae Fredrik Rüter 9 February 2016 Name RÜTER Fredrik Date of Birth 8 May 1960 Nationality Swedish Position Senior Consultant Languages Swedish: mother tongue Danish and Norwegian: good understanding conversation and reading English: fluent (business, conversation, reading, writing) German, Spanish and French: very very basic conversation Coordinates FRECC Reimersholmsgatan 59 SE–117 40 Stockholm SWEDEN +46 76 555 61 05 [email protected] Summary CV In HVDC and Power Cable industry since 1986 Extensive Technical experience of submarine and underground HV cables, XLPE, MI, LPOF Extensive experience from production, installation and testing of HV cables Served as Chairman for Cigré Study Committee B1 (Insulated Cables) Extensive Line Management experience (R&D, Technology, QA, Sales, Consultancy Services) Certified QA System Auditor Trained EMS Auditor (Environmental Management System) Experience from Project Development Certified Project Manager (PMI) Served as Project Manager for large Projects (>100 MEUR) Extensive international experience and network Senior Consultant in several cable projects, producing technical specification, partaking in procurement and selection process, technical support to project manager during implementation, acting company representative on- and offshore et cetera Experience of assisting cable projects in Environmental permit process, including environmental court hearings Familiar with testing facilities in Europe Engineering Manager in large submarine HVDC Projects Extensive
    [Show full text]
  • EU Framework Program for Research and Innovation Actions (H2020 LCE-21-2015)
    This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 691287 EU Framework Program for Research and Innovation actions (H2020 LCE-21-2015) Project Nr: 691287 Guiding European Policy toward a low-carbon economy. Modelling sustainable Energy system Development under Environmental And Socioeconomic constraints D6.3 (D21) Transition Challenges Version 4 Due date of deliverable: 23/09/2019 Actual submission date: 27/09/2019 Disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liabilities This document has been prepared by MEDEAS project partners as an account of work carried out within the framework of the EC-GA contract no 691287. The information and views set out in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. Neither Project Coordinator, nor any signatory party of MEDEAS Project Consortium Agreement, nor any person acting on behalf of any of them: (a) makes any warranty or representation whatsoever, express or implied, (i). with respect to the use of any information, apparatus, method, process, or similar item disclosed in this document, including merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, or (ii). that such use does not infringe on or interfere with privately owned rights, including any party's intellectual property, or (iii). that this document is suitable to any particular user's circumstance; or (b) assumes responsibility for any damages or other liability whatsoever (including any consequential damages, even if Project Coordinator or any representative of a signatory party of the MEDEAS Project Consortium Agreement, has been advised of the possibility of such damages) resulting from your selection or use of this document or any information, apparatus, method, process, or similar item disclosed in this document.
    [Show full text]
  • SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.55 February 2012
    SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.55 February 2012 The content of this e-journal was for the most part originally prepared for Nuclear Free Local Authorities and is reproduced, as adapted, with their permission but without liability for its contents. This e-journal focuses on nuclear waste issues in Scotland. It does not deal with the UK Government‘s proposed new reactor programme. For an update on the so-called ―facilitative actions‖ see here: http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/nuclearnews/NuClearNewsNo36.pdf Scotland’s Higher Activity Waste Policy CoRWM discussed its scrutiny of the Scottish Higher Activity Waste (HAW) Policy development process and consultation at its meeting in York on 14th September. The minutes record that the Scottish Government has: “...produced a policy that was adequate for some waste producers but not definite enough for those waste producers with HAW not suitable for near site, near surface disposal.” (1) Around 25% of the waste in question is considered to be unsuitable for near-surface disposal, and would need to be stored until there are further technological developments. These wastes include plutonium contaminated materials, and raffinates – both the result of reprocessing at Dounreay and sludges. (2) The CoRWM statement implies that Scottish Government Policy is to ―dispose‖ of the other 75% of Scottish HAW in near surface disposal facilities. However, the finalised Scottish Government Policy made clear that: ―...Scottish Government Policy at the present time is that long-term storage is still the primary long- term management option‖ (3) (emphasis added) Although ―disposal‖ of Higher Activity Waste (HAW) is still included as an option in the policy the practise is quite tightly defined and will require waste to be monitored and retrievable, and any ‗disposal‘ should be as close to the surface as practical and near to the site where it is produced.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B.2: Desk Top Survey and Route Engineering Study Route Option Analysis Report
    Appendix B.2: Desk Top Survey and Route Engineering Study Route Option Analysis Report NorthConnect KS Phone +47 38 60 70 00 Serviceboks 603, Lundsiden Mail: [email protected] N-4606 Kristiansand Web: www.northconnect.no Norway Desk top survey and route engineering study Route Option Analysis Report NorthConnect KS Assignment Number: A30722-S04 Document Number: A-30722-S04-REPT-002 Xodus Group Ltd The Auction House 63A George St Edinburgh EH2 2JG UK T +44 (0)131 510 1010 E [email protected] www.xodusgroup.com Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 1 INTRODUCTION 11 1.1 Project Background 11 1.2 Project Development 12 1.3 Project Description 14 2 OBJECTIVES 16 3 SCOPE OF WORK 17 4 METHODOLOGY 19 5 SUBSEA CABLE ROUTE ENGINEERING 20 5.1 Cable Characteristics 20 5.2 Geotechnical & Geophysical Assessment 20 5.3 Cable Installation 30 5.4 Cable Protection 31 5.5 Scour Protection 31 5.6 Cable & Pipeline Crossing Arrangements 31 5.7 Thermal Properties of Seabed Soils 32 6 CONSTRAINT MAPPING 33 6.1 Introduction 33 6.2 Digital Data Sources 33 6.3 Consultations 34 6.4 Type of Constraints 34 6.5 Weighting of Constraints 37 6.6 Safety & Buffer Distances 38 6.7 Iterative Approach 40 6.8 Challenges & Limitations 41 7 VALUE, DECISION AND RISK MANAGEMENT 43 Desk top survey and route engineering study – Route Option Analysis Report Assignment Number: A30722-S04 Document Number: A-30722-S04-REPT-002 iii 7.1 Objectives 43 7.2 Project Drivers & Success Criteria 43 7.3 Corridor Option Screening & Selection 46 7.4 Route Option Screening & Selection 54 8
    [Show full text]
  • Interconnector License Applications - Interconnectors Between Norway
    Licence application Interconnector Licence Applications - interconnectors between Norway and Germany, and Norway and Great Britain May 2013 I DISCLAIMER 15 May 2013 Statnett SF submitted an application for a licence under Section 4-2 of the Norwegian Energy Act to the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy for facilitation of international power trading for two projects. One of the applications relates to power trading with Germany, while the other deals with power trading with the UK. The purpose of this English translation of the application is to provide Statnett partners and the relevant authorities in Germany and the United Kingdom insight into what information this Norwegian application contains. Since this version of the application may contain inaccurate translations, we want to emphasize that it is the Norwegian version of the application which is the official version. Oslo, 28 June 2013 II INTERCONNECTOR LICENSE APPLICATIONS - INTERCONNECTORS BETWEEN NORWAY AND GERMANY, AND NORWAY AND GREAT BRITAIN Statnett SF hereby applies to the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy for a licence under Section 4-2 of the Norwegian Energy Act for facilitation of international power trading for two projects. One of the applications relates to power trading with Germany, while the other deals with power trading with the UK. These are two independent projects and Statnett is applying for a licence pursuant to Section 4-2 of the Energy Act for each individual project. The basis for the two applications is largely identical, and Statnett has therefore opted to compile the applications in a single document. We present the analyses of the socioeconomic benefit from day-ahead trading in a separate report attached to this document.
    [Show full text]
  • SUBMISSION from VATTENFALL Introduction Vattenfall Has Been
    SUBMISSION FROM VATTENFALL Introduction Vattenfall has been developing and operating wind energy in Scotland and the UK since 2008. We have made a long term commitment to support the delivery of Scotland‟s ambitious renewables and climate change targets. Vattenfall is one of the largest energy companies in Europe with over 100-years of experience generating renewable electricity. Currently it generates energy from six energy sources: wind, biomass, hydro, gas, coal and nuclear. It also produces the most heat in Europe from combined heat and power plants distributed through extensive district heating networks. It is investing principally in wind power in the UK because it is currently one of the most promising markets in Europe. In the UK, Vattenfall operates 590 megawatts (MW) of on and offshore wind power from five schemes, including Edinbane on the Isle of Skye. Therefore, we consider it appropriate to present written evidence to the Committee on what we consider to be the key opportunities and challenges for both Vattenfall‟s investment plans and Scotland‟s ambitions. Enclosed is our written evidence accompanied by an annex which describes the extensive activity we have undertaken in the past three years in developing our renewable energy capability in Scotland from our base in Edinburgh. Vattenfall would also be pleased to provide oral evidence to the Committee and we look forward to hearing from you. Vattenfall Vattenfall is developing an extensive portfolio across the UK in both on and offshore wind. In Scotland we are developing five onshore schemes. If successful they will accompany our operating Edinbane Wind Farm on the Isle of Skye.
    [Show full text]
  • HVDC Cable Route Scoping Report
    HVDC Cable Route Scoping Report 2016.04.25_NorthConnect_PER_REP_HVDC Scoping Report_ Rev A Last approval: 2016.04.25 Date: By: Control: Approved by: 2016.04.25 2016-04-25_NorthConnect_PER_REP_HVDC Scoping Report_Rev A Contents GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 4 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................. 7 2.1 NORTHCONNECT JOINT VENTURE .................................................................................... 7 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 7 2.3 SCOPE OF PLANNING AND MARINE LICENSE APPLICATION ........................................... 8 2.3.1 Onshore Cabling .............................................................................................................................. 8 2.3.2 Horizontal Directional Drilling ................................................................................................ 9 2.3.3 Offshore Cabling ........................................................................................................................... 10 2.3.4 Fibre Optic Utility Building ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]