3.8 Proceedings Paper

Hydropower and power-to-gas storage options: The Brazilian energy system case

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2016.10.101

关键词

100% renewable energy; Brazil; grid integration; solar PV; hydro dams; power-to-gas; economics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a 100% renewable energy (RE) system for Brazil in 2030 was simulated using an hourly resolution model. The optimal sets of RE technologies, mix of capacities, operation modes and least cost energy supply were calculated and the role of storage technologies was analysed. The RE generated was not only able to fulfil the electricity demand of the power sector but also able to cover the 25% increase in total electricity demand due to water desalination and synthesis of natural gas for industrial use. The results for the power sector show that the total installed capacity is formed of 165 GW of solar photovoltaics (PV), 85 GW of hydro dams, 12 GW of hydro run-of-river, 8 GW of biogas, 12 GW of biomass and 8 GW of wind power. For solar PV and wind electricity storage, 243 GWh(el) of battery capacity is needed. According to the simulations the existing hydro dams will function similarly to batteries, being an essential electricity storage. 1 GWh of pumped hydro storage, 23 GWh of adiabatic compressed air storage and 1 GWh of heat storage are used as well. The small storage capacities can be explained by a high availability of RE sources with low seasonal variability and an existing electricity sector mainly based on hydro dams. Therefore, only 0.05 GW of PtG technologies are needed for seasonal storage in the electricity sector. When water desalination and industrial gas sectors' electricity demand are integrated to the power sector, a reduction of 11% in both total cost and electric energy generation was achieved. The total system levelized cost of electricity decreased from 61 (sic)/MWh to 53 (sic)/MWh for the sector integration. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据