Cost situation of land-based wind energy. Results with respect to the financing costs and possible developments in the tendering system

Transcription

1 Cost situation of land-based wind energy Results with respect to the financing costs and possible developments in the tendering system

2 Agenda Cost situation in the two-stage reference yield model cost categories LCOE Sensitivities Changes by the EEG 2017 Estimation of cost situation in the tender system Changes due to the tendering system as in EEG 2017

3 Cost situation in the twostage reference yield model EEG 2014 Transitional arrangements EEG 2017

4 Specific turbine costs [ /kw] Main CapEx NH 100 m 100 m < NH 120 m 120 m < NH 140 m 140 m < NH N=46 2 MW < P 3 MW 3 MW < P 4 MW The average standard deviation is 88 /kw. P = Nameplate capacity NH = Hub Height 3

5 Specific main CapEx (real) [2015 /kw] Specific main CapEx (real) [2015 /kw] Historical development of the specific main CapEx Average cost reduction per kw since 2012: 7% Average cost reduction per square meter of swept rotor area since 2012: 16%. P = Nameplate capacity NH = Hub Height 4

6 Additional CapEx (real) [2015 /kw] Additional CapEx [Rehfeldt, Wallasch et al. 2013] 2010 [Rehfeldt, Wallasch et al. 2011] 2008 [Rehfeldt et al. 2008] 2001 [Ender et al. 2002] 1998 [Rehfeldt et al. 1999] Mittlere Hauptinvestitionskosten Investitionsnebenkosten 25% 75% 0 Foundation Grid connection 26% 17% Infrastucture Planning 20% Other Cost 26% 11% Assumption: no change in real costs - price increase in line with inflation 5

7 OpEx (real) [2015 /kw] 17% Operational Expenditure First decade 8% 4% 5% Second decade 13% 5% 5% 3% 19% 22% 44% 55% [Rehfeldt, Wallasch et al. 2013] 2010 [Rehfeldt, Wallasch et al. 2011] 2008 [Rehfeldt et al. 2008] 2001 [Ender et al. 2002] 1998 [Rehfeldt et al. 1999] Wartung Maintenance & Reparatur & Repairs Pachtzahlungen Lease payments Kaufm. Technical und & commercial techn. BF management Versicherungskosten Insurance costs Rücklagen Reserves Sonstige Others Betriebskosten Assumption: slight real cost reduction compensation of inflation 6

8 Interest rate Financing structures Equity share: 15% Interest of equity: 8% at each site quality, Interest of debt: 2.5% in the first decade, 5% in follow-up 5,5% financing 5,0% Repayment period: 10 to 17 years 4,5% 4,0% 3,5% 3,0% 2,5% 2,0% 1,5% 1,0% 0,5% 0,0% KfW refinancing rate (10 year fixed interest rate) KfW refinancing rate (20 years fixed interest rate) ECB rate 7

9 Choice of turbine configuration Windzone Windzone 1 Windzone 2 Windzone 3/4 Average nameplate capacity kw kw kw Average hub height 139 m 125 m 100 m Average rotor diameter 110 m 102 m 102 m Average specific power 280 W/m² 324 W/m² 354 W/m² These averages are based on a distribution of different turbine types, that are installed in the specific area. 8

10 LCOE [ct/kwh] Levelized cost of energy Reduction of the nominal LCOE since 2012/13 by 12 % on average , ,6 9,9 8,6 9,0 7,8 8,2 7,2 7,7 6,7 7,3 7,0 6,7 6,5 6,3 6,3 6,1 5,8 5,5 5, LCOE 2016/17 in ct/kwh LCOE 2012/13 in ct/kwh [DWG 2013] 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% 150% Site quality 9

11 LCOE [ct/kwh] Change of LCOE [%] LCOE [ct/kwh] Change of LCOE [%] Sensitivity analysis Equity share Impact of reduction / increase of the equity share Interest of dept Impact of reduction / increase of the interest of dept LCOE base case Increase of equity interest by 10% points Reduction of equity share by 5% points 50% 40% LCOE base case Increase of interest of debt by 1% point Reductionof interest of debt by 0.5% points 50% 40% 8 30% 8 30% 6 20% 6 20% 4 10% 4 10% 2 0% 2 0% 0-10% 0-10% Site quality Site quality 10

12 Change of cost and framework with EEG 2017 Tender System EEG 2017

13 Estimation of cost situation in the tender system Considering the new reference yield model Reevaluation of variable and fixed components of OpEx Adapting the technology selection and the corresponding CapEx Assumption of an increase of CapEx Assumption of an increase of interests of debt and equity and the equity share Analysis on behalf of BWE Incentive for high wind locations as in BWE position paper 12

14 Proprortion / corretion factor Proportion factors considering technology depending on IEC classes and BWE incentive 1,60 1,50 1,40 1,30 1,20 1,10 1,00 0,90 0,80 0,70 0,60 IEC- class total height III Ø 199 m II Ø 188 m Verhältnisfaktoren: Proportion factors: Technologieauswahl technology choice depending nach IEC on Klassen, IEC classes Wechsel (II von to III IEC at II 100%) zu IEC and III bei BWE 100%, incentive Anreiz nach BWE-Stellungnahme Korrekturfaktoren Correction factors EEG EEG % 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% 150% Site quality Site quality 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% 150% Average o range of proportion factors 1,34 1,34 1,18 1,06 1,00 0,96 0,89 0,83 0,83 0,83 Correction factors EEG ,29 1,29 1,16 1,07 1,00 0,94 0,89 0,85 0,81 0,79 13

15 Changes due to the tendering system as in EEG 2017 Reference site and site quality New definition of the reference site New calculation of site quality Single-stage model and proportion factors Abolition of the two-stage reference yield model Introduction of tenders Restriction of development by tendered capacity Creating competition between projects 14

16 Wind speed at the reference location [m/s] Change by redefining the reference site 8,0 7,5 7,0 6,5 6,0 Reference location as in EEG ,5 Reference location as in EEG , Hub height [m[ Effect on the reference yield by redefining At low hub heights < as after definition EEG 2014 For large hub heights > as after definition EEG 2014 Site quality = energy yield at the location / reference yield => Redefining the reference site creates an incentive to larger hub heights compared to EEG

17 Calculation and verification of site quality The assumed site quality of the first 5 years is based on an assessment before commissioning Site yield = expected gross yield less Shading effects Lack of technical availability (max. 2%) Electrical efficiency losses Permit constraints (for example by noise emissions, shadows, nature protection or safety of flight operations) Assessment 5, 10 and 15 years of service to prove the site quality Site yield = fed in electricity plus the fictional amount of electricity By technical unavailability > 2% By Curtailment by grid operator By other shutdown or throttling 16

18 Remuneration [ct/kwh] Remuneration by site quality depending on the accapeted bid ,03 Site quality 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% 150% Correction factor 1,29 1,16 1,07 1 0,94 0,89 0,85 0,81 0,79 8,12 7,49 Accepted bid= remuneration at a 100% Location 7, ,58 6,96 6,23 5,95 6 6,42 5,67 5,53 6 5,64 5 5,34 5,1 4,86 Remuneration Vergütung bei with Zuschlagswert accepted bid at von 7 ct/kwh 7 ct/kwh 4,74 4 Remuneration Vergütung bei with Zuschlagswert accepted bid at von 6,5 6,5 ct/kwh ct/kwh Remuneration Vergütung bei with Zuschlagswert accepted bid at von 6 ct/kwh 6 ct/kwh 3 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130% 140% 150% Site quality 17

19 Thank you for your attention Silke Lüers