1. Pathways of the
energy transition in
Germany
– an energy system
PD Dr.-Ing. Markus Blesl
74RD SEMI-Annual ETSAP Meeting
2. Agenda
1. Current situation
2. Setting of frameworks
3. Modelling approach
4. Scenario analysis
5. Conclusion
17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 2
3. Agenda
1. Current situation
2. Setting of frameworks
3. Modelling approach
4. Scenario analysis
5. Conclusion
17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 3
4. Year 2020 2030 2040 2050
Red.
comp.
1990
40% 55%
(61%*)
70% 80% bis
95%
German targets
*Conversion-Sector (Electricity; district heat, refineries etc.)
0
100
200
300
400
1990 20102011201220132014201520162017
Kohlen Erdgas Sonstige 2030 target
Current situation: Climate targets & structure commission
• Measurements to achieve
the 2030 targets of the
energy sector including
• a plan to reduce the
electricity generation by
coal with a time schedule
and additional
institutional options
Structure commission (since
7/2018)
CO2 Emission electricity generation [Mt]
coal gas others
5. Pledge to build no new plants from 2020 on by producers in all
member states except Poland & Greece (Eurelectric)
Coal phase-out plans in EU member states
Own illustration based on
information from Politico &
Eurostat
*share of coal in
electricity production
6. Agenda
1. Current situation
2. Setting of frameworks
3. Modelling approach
4. Scenario analysis
5. Conclusion
17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 6
7. Setting the framework
What are the discussion levels?
Alternative burden
sharing options
Additional institutional
options
Assumed as fixed:
climate targets GER
Coalition of the Willing (CoW)
United Europe (Utd-EU)
Influence of European ambition
Climate
action GER
Sectoral
targets (CAP)
Slow coal
phase out (CS)
Cross-sector
targets (CST)
Fast coal
phase out (CP)
Status Quo Europe (limited European ambitions)
Level of EU cooperation influences mitigation cost and achievable
climate targets considerably
Scenario framework
+ further studies, e.g.
German projection
report according to
EUR-Lex - 32013R0525
Projections e.g. on
population, industrial
structure, transport
activity etc.
Certificate
elimiation
Support EE
8. Scenarios: Germany in EU context
Scenario #1: Germany all alone Scenario #2: Coalition of the
willing
Scenario #3: Europe united
• Implementation of a
national measure (e.g.
regulated phase-out like for
nuclear)
• Other EU member states
according to national plans
• EU level stagnating(?)
• Club of progressive member
states takes joint measures
around EU ETS
• Other EU member states
according to national plans
• EU level stagnating(?)
• EU member states give up
national plans
• Targets on EU level backed
by strong and credible
policy (EU ETS fixed)
• Waterbed effect: Under a joint cap, emission reduction in
one state(s) leads to increase in other state(s)
• Important to consider counter measures like active
managed MSR, minimum price or cancellation of EUAs
• Scenario discussion based on work for the
9. Agenda
1. Current situation
2. Setting of frameworks
3. Modelling approach
4. Scenario analysis
5. Conclusion
17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 9
10. 10
The Times PanEU Model
Characterization TIMES PanEU
European energy system model
EU28, Norway, Switzerland, Baden-Württemberg
Technology-oriented, bottom-up optimization model
with perfect foresight
Country-specific detailing of the energy generation and
the demand sector, as well as detailed mapping of the
boundary coupling line capacities according to ETSO
Intertemporal optimization in the
period 2010 – 2050
12 (up to 280) sub-annual time segments
(four seasonal and three daily segments; five typical
weeks)
Emissions: Greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O)
Sector-based: public and industrial energy supply,
industry, households, Commercial and tertiary sector,
transport, agriculture and refineries
Objective function: minimization of the total costs
(optimization model)
11. Agenda
1. Current situation
2. Setting of frameworks
3. Modelling approach
4. Scenario analysis
5. Conclusion
17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 11
12. 0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2030 2050
MtCO2
EU-28 GHG emissions
D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU
Options for transformation paths
GHG emissions
• CoW allows to reduce emissions according to the 40% target in the short
term (2030)
• In the long run (2050) a stronger engagement or an EU-wide measure is
necessary, otherwise the 80% target cannot be achieved!
National actions in form of
a „Coalition of the Willing“
(CoW) as a possibility to
bridge the gaps for fulfilling
the EU climate targets
D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU D-CAPD-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU
In case waterbed effect can
completely eliminated, GHG
emissions could be lower in
some scenarios
13. Options for transformation paths
Effects on the German electricity sector
• Electricity prices increase with stronger climate ambitions
• The reduced electricity generation in Germany in most scenarios is partially
replaced by imports basing mainly on non-renewables
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU
Average electricity price 2015 –
2050 in %-difference to D-CAP
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2030 2050
Electricity imports in TWh
D-CAP D-CAP-CP CoW Utd-EU
14. Options for transformation paths
Mitigation costs for Germany
• In the short run (2030) Germany profits from higher overall EU ambitions and joined
activity (Utd-EU)
• In the long run (2050), for achieving the European 80% target, Germany (and the EU)
has to expect a considerable increase in CO2 abatement cost
Compensation costs
not covered
Compensation costs
not covered
0 100 200 300 400 500
D-CAP
D-CAP-CP
CoW
Utd-EU
CO2 prices in €/t in 2050
ETS Sectoral target CoW markup EU target
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
D-CAP
D-CAP-CP
CoW
Utd-EU
CO2 prices in €/t in 2030
ETS Sectoral target CoW markup EU target
Marginal CO2 abatement cost/CO2 prices
in EUR/tCO2 in 2030
Marginal CO2 abatement cost/CO2 prices in
EUR/tCO2 in 2050
15. Scenario comparison of the GHG emissions of Germany between
sectoral and cross targets in 2030
• Abatement costs in the other sectors are higher as in the conversion sector
• A fast phase out of coal in the power sector will be cost efficiency measure; can
reduce the burden in the other sector and might be therefore reasonable
• The sectoral targets of the conversion sector should be higher
0
40
80
120
160
200
Energiewirtschaft
/ Sonstige
Verkehr Industrie Haushalte /
Gewerbe /
Landwirtschaft
GHGemissions2030
Sektorziele 2030 Kostenoptimale ZieleCost optimal target
IndustryConversion Transport Residential /
Commercial /
Agriculture
Sector targets 2030
16. Analyzed (regulatory instruments) - Pathway of a coal phase out
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2017 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Installedelectricalplantcapacityofcoal
plants[GW]
Decommissioning Slow phase out of coal (D-CAP 2030) Fast phase out of coal
19. 0
50
100
150
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Electricitygeneration
coalpowerplant
[TWh/a]
CO2-Preis Ordnungsrecht (langsam)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
CO2emissions
[MtCO2]
Rebound of coal and Gas residual amount in the case of a institutional
phase out of coal in comparison with a price driven pathway
Residual amount of emission from gas
Rebound
CO2 price institutional slow phase out
20. • A fast phase out of coal will increase the electricity generation cost round
about 3%
• The undiscounted cumulative additional cost of the fast phase out
of coal for the energy system of Germany are 41 – 106 Bio. €
(without possible compensation costs)
• This corresponds to an extra payment of 34 – 90 € per household in
Germany
0
2
4
6
8
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Electricitygeneration
cost[ct/kWh]
ohne Kohleausstieg
ordnungsrechtlicher
Kohleausstieg (schnell)
KSP90 mittels CO2-Preis
Without coal
phase out
Electricity generation costs change only a little bit in case of a
phase out of coal
Institutional fast coal
phase out
Sectoral target with CO2
price
21. • Replacement options: Beside the installation of gas power plants an increase of electricity imports can substitute
coal power plants
• Reinforced installation of renewable electricity generation options in Germany (open competitive bidding for
generation quantities or capacities) can restrict the electricity import
Additional institutional options: Additional Renewable electricity generation
• Beside this effects the independency with the electricity generation by gas combined heat and power
(CHP) and the district heating generation in Germany
300
400
500
600
700
800
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Districtheatinggeneration[PJ/a]
D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CS+CF
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Netelectricityexpoortin[TWh]
D-CAP-CS D-CAP-CP D-CAP-CS+EE D-CAP-CP-CF
22. Agenda
1. Current situation
2. Setting of frameworks
3. Modelling approach
4. Scenario analysis
5. Conclusion
17.11.2018University of Stuttgart 22
23. Conclusions
1. United action on European Union level (Utd EU) is
• preferable for Germany and the EU in the short term AND
• necessary in the long term
2. A Coalition of the Willing (CoW) implementing a minimum price for CO2
OR
a accelerated coal phase out in Germany
• can achieve similar GHG mitigation targets as a united EU approach
only in the short run BUT
• only at higher costs AND
• increases most probably acceptance problems in German coal regions
Different policies and ambitions can achieve the same short term
targets, but cost and acceptance differ significantly!
In the long term stronger ambition is needed!
• Further analysis will be done in the
24. E-Mail
Telefon +49 (0) 711 685-
Universität Stuttgart
Energiewirtschaft und Systemtechnische Analyse (SAM)
PD Dr.-Ing. Markus Blesl
87 865
Institut für Energiewirtschaft und Rationelle Energieanwendung (IER)
Markus.Blesl@ier.uni-stuttgart.de
Thank you for your attention !