Feed-In Tariffs and Economic Profit of Small Hydropower Plants in Switzerland - Johannes Manser -

Publish in

Documents

8 views

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 9
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Share
Description
Feed-In Tariffs and Economic Profit of Small Hydropower Plants in Switzerland - Johannes Manser -. Introduction to the Topic (1). Basic Problem: Increase production of renewable energy. Electricity Production in Switzerland (2008). Nuclear Renewables (excl. small hydro)
Transcript
Feed-In Tariffs and Economic Profit of Small Hydropower Plants in Switzerland- Johannes Manser -Introduction to the Topic (1)
  • Basic Problem: Increase production of renewable energy
  • Electricity Production in Switzerland (2008)NuclearRenewables (excl. small hydro)Hydro (incl. Small hydro)Other (non renewable waste, fossil fuels)PhotovoltaicBiofuelsWindRenewable wasteWaste water treatmentSource: Swiss federal office of energy2/9Introduction to the Topic (2)
  • Feed-in Tariffs in Switzerland = KEV (Compensatory feed-in remuneration)
  • introduced in January 2009
  • Compensate costs of solar, biomass, waste, geothermal, wind and small hydropower plants
  • Applicable for small hydro projects renewed or realized after 1 January, 2006
  • Tariffs based on reference plants
  • No further differentiation in terms of site-specific factors!
  • Assumptions:
  • 25 years of depreciation
  • 5% interest rate
  • Annual operation costs = 2% of initial investment costs
  • Influencing factors: Installed capacity, investment costs, investment costs for hydraulic constructions, gross head
  • Large waiting list
  • Chronological consideration of applications
  • 3/9Introduction to the Topic (3)
  • Factsheet Small Hydropower Plants (SHPPs):
  • Up to 10 MW installed capacity
  • 5 different technologies considered:
  • Drinking Water Power Plants (DWPP)
  • Run-off Power Plants (ROPP)
  • Discharge Power Plants (DCPP)
  • Wastewater Power Plants (WWPP)
  • Reserved Flow Power Plants (RFPP)
  • Mature technologies
  • High investment /production costs
  • Long term investments
  • Main Research Questions
  • Do power plants earn extra profits or are the tariffs really compensatory?
  • How efficient is the KEV system for small hydropower plants?
  • What are the possible improvements?
  • Figure: Scheme of a DWPP4/9MethodAppliedSurvey among remunerated SHPPsCollection of data from operating SHPPs (first survey since starting of KEV)Survey in cooperation with Swiss federal office of energy (SFOE)Descriptive AnalysisDetailed information about remunerated SHPPs in SwitzerlandNet Present Value and Break-even Tariff CalculationProfitability analysis of the sample of SHPPs5/9Results – Descriptive Analysis
  • Main Findings:
  • Sample : 190 remunerated SHPPs currently in operation
  • Response Rate: 78% = 148 power plants
  • SHPPs quite homogenously distributed across Switzerland
  • By far mostly used technologies: DCPP, DWPP, ROPP
  • 38% of SHPPs are expanded or renewed plants (62% new plants)
  • Most plants have an installed capacity between 10 and 300kW
  • DWPP are at average very small and can be associated with very high investment costs
  • Most SHPPs finance large parts of investments by equity (ca. 67% at average)
  • Operation costs are at around 2-5% of initial investment costs
  • Large heterogeneity among SHPPs!!
  • Figure: Distribution of SHPPs6/9Results – NPVN= 108 21 53 32 45 63 15 33 30 21 9SHPP TechnologiesSHPP Project TypesSHPP Size [kW]7/9Figure: Result of NPV CalculationsResults – Break-even Tariff (=Production Costs)N= 108 21 53 32 45 63 15 33 30 21 98/9Figure: Average Break-even Tariff vs. Average Received TariffSummary & Conclusion
  • Promotion of SHPPs with high production costs Merit order by auctioning capacity
  • Lack of differentiation
  • Typology-specific approach: appropriate adjustment of reference plants
  • Project-specific approach: determine tariff individually
  • Delayed payments of remuneration
  • Complex administration
  • Time of depreciation
  •  Trade-off: Risk for Investors – Compensation of Costs
  •  25 years against 48 years of weighted average operating time
  • Applied WACC of 5% rather low
  • THANK YOU!
  • 9/9
    Related Search
    Related Documents
    View more...
    We Need Your Support
    Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

    Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

    No, Thanks