Transcript ความเป็นไปได้ของแผน PDP ทางเ

‘Working for Desirable Future’:
Transparency and participation
in electricity sector planning in Thailand
Suphakit Nuntavorakarn
Healthy Public Policy Foundation, THAILAND
26th September 2011 FESTI International Conference, Bishkek
Installed Capacity by Type of Producers,
April 2011
SPP (CHP and
RE), 2,182.30,
Total 31,516.61 MW 6.92%
Hydro, 3,424.18,
10.86%
EGAT 14,998.12 MW
47.59%
Import 2,184.60 MW
6.93%
IPP 12,151.59 MW
38.56%
SPP 2,182.30 MW
6.92%
Thermal ,
4,699.00, 14.91%
Diesel, 4.4,
0.01%
Renewable
Energy by EGAT,
4.54, 0.01%
From www.egat.co.th
IPP, 12,151.59,
38.56%
Malaysia, 300,
0.95%
Laos, 1884.6,
5.98%
Combined Cycle
, 6,866.00,
21.79%
Power Development Plan (PDP)
•
PDP is the long-term strategic plan of the Thai power
sector (15-20 years timeframe)
• PDP determines the future investment on power
generation - how many and which types of power
plant – and the transmission network.
– For example, total investment of PDP2010 120
billion USD
• So PDP also determines the future impacts of the
power sector, including environmental, economic,
social, and health impacts
Power Development Plan 2010-2030 (PDP2010)
Installed Capacity by fuel type
MW
PDP2010 : (GDP Base Case)
70,000
ดีเซล
65,000
พลังงานหมุนเวียน
60,000
น้ ามันเตา
ื้ ต่างประเทศ
ซอ
55,000
Renewables
7%
7%
ก๊าซธรรมชาติ
7%
ถ่านหินนาเข ้า
50,000
8%
ลิกไนต์
45,000
7%
นิวเคลียร์
40,000
พลังน้ า
35,000
5%
5%
6%
6%
7%
30,000
5%
8%
7%
6%
6%
7%
10% 11% 12%
7%
7%
13% 14%
Natural Gas
51%
20,000
68% 65% 64% 66% 67% 64% 63% 61% 60%
57%
10,000
5,000
0
54%
8%
15%
49%
8%
8%
16% 17%
47%
18%
18%
17% 18%
8%
15% 15%
25,000
15,000
7%
45% 45%
18%
Import
44% 43%
43% 42%
Imported coal
51%
15% 17%
13% 13% 15%
11%
12% 11%
Nuclear
9%
9%
5%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
6%
8%
7%
7%
8%
8%
8%
8%
4%
7%
6%
7%
6%
7%
5%
7%
5%
7%
5%
7%
5%
7%
5%
8%
5%
11% 10% 10%
9%
9%
9%
8%
9%
9%
9%
9%
8%
8%
8%
7%
7%
7%
7%
6%
6%
6%
2553
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
5%
7%
7%
7%
2554
2010
2555
ปี
2030
Drivers and institutional
improvements on PDP
Triggering the changes: local communities
protesting against large power plant projects
• Concerns about negative
impacts
• Is the project really
necessary? Due to over
demand forecast
• Is there other energy
options? Renewable
energy in their area
instead?
Triggering the changes: consumer groups who are
questioning about the unfair electricity tariff
ั วนต่อค่าใชจ้ า่ ยทงั้ หมดของคร ัวเรือนไทย ปี พ.ศ. 2533-2549
ค่าใชจ้ า่ ยด้านพล ังงานต่อปี และสดส่
20,000
12.00%
18,000
10.00%
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
6.00%
8,000
4.00%
6,000
4,000
2.00%
2,000
-
0.00%
2533
2535
2537
2539
2541
2543
2545
ปี
Reference : National Statistic Office
2547
2549
ร้อยละ
บาทต่อคร ัวเรือนต่อปี
8.00%
ค่าใชจ่้ าย
เกีย่ วกับ
พลังงาน
ทัง้ หมดต่อปี
สัดส่วนของ
ค่าใชจ่้ าย
Energy expenses
and their burden
on
Thai households
1990-2006
Academic contributions and
public communication
• Information and analysis on the electricity sector
- to create basic understanding for different social sector and
to get their attentions on various issues about PDP
• Development and impact assessment on
Alternative Power Development Plans
- to create ‘Choice Awareness’ on many energy options and
these can be discuss deliberately as a social learning process
• Electricity Governance Assessment
- focus on transparency, public participation, and accountability in
the Thai power sector
Inequality of Electricity Consumption
3 Huge Shopping Malls VS. The Whole Province
GWh
GWh
Question on Systematic Over-Demand Forecast
48,000
Jun-93
Dec-94
Oct-95
Apr-96
Oct-96
Jun-97
Sep-97
Sep-98(MER)
Feb-01
Aug-02
Jan-04(LEG)
Jan-04(MEG)
Apr-06 (MEG)
Jan-07
ACTUAL
44,000
40,000
36,000
32,000
28,000
24,000
20,000
16,000
12,000
8,000
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
The figures of over demand forecast
PDP2007
Over forecast (MW)
Actual peak
demand (MW)
PDP2004
Year
PDP2004
PDP2007
2547
19,600
-
19,325
275
-
2548
21,143
-
20,538
606
-
2549
22,738
-
21,064
1,674
-
2550
24,344
22,586
22,586
1,758
-
2551
26,048
23,957
22,568
3,480
1,389
ROIC and Investment Efficiency
• Using Return on Invested
Capital (ROIC) as the main
criteria for setting electricity
tariff may lead to over
investment
• since more investment means
more profit
• Strong regulation on
investment plans is needed,
but the Regulators still lack of
data, knowledge, and human
resources to check and
balance
ROIC = Net profit after tax
Investment
EGAT 8.4%
MEA 4.8%
PEA
Result :
Over Demand Forecast and prefer high investment options
The cycle of supporting more investment
under ‘monopoly’ power
Power Planning
that prefer
high investment
options
2
Benefits of
utilities,
energy
companies
, etc.
1
Over
Demand Forecast
3
Electricity tariff that allow
the pass on of excess costs to consumers
Ft : Fuel Adjustment Charge
• EGAT: a part of the electricity tariff that increase or
decrease automatically, according to changes in fuel costs
and other uncontrol costs
• The mechanism to pass on the costs to consumers, which
includes
– Fuel costs
– Electricity price for private producers and import (including
profit guarantee, compensation for inflation and exchange
rate)
– Expenses according to government policies (e.g.
Community Development Funds, ‘Adder’ for renewable
energy, etc.)
– Compensation for lower sale (or over investment)
DSM and Energy Efficiency are
the cheapest energy options
ที่มา: World Bank, World Development Report 2010
DSM in PDP2010
Saving target of T5 high efficiency light bulb program
2010-2019
ปี
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
MW
43
129
215
344
473
584
498
369
198
Save 0.3% of
the peak demand in 20
years
Saving target of DSM program for 2020-2030
ปี
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
MW
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
16
Fast Growth of Renewable Energy in Thailand
การเพิม่ ขึน้ ของกาลั งการผลิ ตติดตั้งจากพลั งงานหมุนเวียน
MW
1,400
1,200
1,000
VSPP
800
600
SPP Non-Firm
400
200
SPP-Firm
0
2537
1994
2538 2539 2540 2541 2542 2543 2544 2545 2546 2547 2548 2549 2550 2551 2552
2009
Example of PDP-Alternative
Installed Capacity of Different PDP Options
Installed Capacity in 2030 from Different
Technology Deployment in Various PDP Options
80,000
DSM
70,000
Nuclear
60,000
Renewables
50,000
Co-generation
40,000
Import
30,000
Hydro
20,000
Oil
10,000
Maximum
30%-NoNuke
30%-Nuke
15%-NoNuke
15%-Nuke
Lignite
PDP2010
0
Coal
Natural Gas
Share of Installed Capacity in Different PDP Options
GHG reduction measures
Share of Installed Capacity in 2030 from 1. increase DSM
Different Technology Deployment in 2. increase Renewables
3. decrease coal
10.2
12.8
10.0
12.5
8.4
8.0
2.9
2.8
30.5
29.0
29.8
31.4
18.4
DSM
7.0
Nuclear
17.7
Renewables
10.0
12.5
Co-generation
2.8
Hydro
25.7
Oil
Import
Lignite
Maximum
-
32.3
16.6
18.5
17.7
30%-NoNuke
20.0
14.5
9.9
15.1
7.1
14.8
30%-Nuke
40.0
17.5
14.7
14.4
15%-NoNuke
60.0
17.9
9.3
7.3
8.6
10.5
15%-Nuke
80.0
0.4
7.5
8.8
10.7
PDP2010
100.0
Coal
Natural Gas
Energy Generation in Different PDP Options
Energy Generations from Different Technology Deployment
in Various PDP Options
400,000
DSM
350,000
Nuclear
300,000
Renewables
250,000
Co-generation
200,000
Import
150,000
Hydro
100,000
Oil
50,000
Maximum
30%-NoNuke
30%-Nuke
15%-NoNuke
15%-Nuke
Lignite
PDP2010
0
Coal
Natural Gas
Comparative Impact Assessment on
various Alternative PDPs
Economics
Environment
Social
Significant Reduction of GHG Emission
Total GHG Emission of Different PDP Options
200.00
PDP2010
15%-Nuke
15%-NoNuke
100.00
30%-Nuke
30%-NoNuke
Reduce GHG by 40%
50.00
Maximum
Year
2030
2028
2026
2024
2022
2020
2018
2016
2014
2012
0.00
2010
Million Tons
150.00
Good for Reducing Air Pollution (SOx)
SOx Emission in Different PDP Options
500.00
450.00
400.00
PDP2010
15%-Nuke
300.00
15%-NoNuke
250.00
30%-Nuke
200.00
30%-NoNuke
150.00
Reduce SOx by 50%
100.00
50.00
Year
20
30
20
28
20
26
20
24
20
22
20
20
20
18
20
16
20
14
20
12
0.00
20
10
Thousand Tons
350.00
Maximum
Good for Reducing Pollution (Hg)
Total Hg Emission in Different PDP Options
30.00
25.00
PDP2010
15%-Nuke
15.00
15%-NoNuke
30%-Nuke
10.00
30%-NoNuke
5.00
Maximum
0
2
4
6
8
0
2
4
6
8
0
201
201
201
201
202
202
202
202
202
203
0.00
201
Ton
20.00
Year
Reduce Hg by
75%
Higher GDP Contribution and Lower Imported Cost
Overall Costs of Different PDP Options
9,000.0
Reduce import
by 16.9%
8,000.0
7,000.0
3,160.6
2,682.1
3,077.2
2,627.7
3,142.7
Imported Cost
5,000.0
GDP Contribution
5,012.6
5,206.4
5,227.0
5,385.5
5,404.1
30%-Nuke
30%-NoNuke
Maximum
2,000.0
5,114.2
15%-NoNuke
3,000.0
15%-Nuke
4,000.0
PDP2010
Billion THB
6,000.0
3,039.0
1,000.0
0.0
Options
increase GDP
by 5.6%
Good for the Economy and Environment
Overall Economic Costs of Differrent PDP Options
16,000.0
14,000.0
7,177.3
6,707.9
6,465.1
6,078.6
5,932.2
3,160.6
3,039.0
2,682.1
3,077.2
2,627.7
5,999.3
10,000.0
8,000.0
6,000.0
5,114.2
5,012.6
5,206.4
5,227.0
5,385.5
5,404.1
15%-Nuke
15%-NoNuke
30%-Nuke
30%-NoNuke
Maximum
-
External Cost
Imported Cost
4,000.0
2,000.0
3,142.7
PDP2010
Billion THB
12,000.0
Options
GDP Contribution
Good for Society, More Job Creation
Job Creation in Different PDP Options
Create more jobs by
188,000 persons
450,000
400,000
PDP2010
350,000
15%-Nuke
15%-NoNuke
250,000
200,000
30%-Nuke
150,000
30%-NoNuke
100,000
Maximum
50,000
Year
203
0
202
8
202
6
202
4
202
2
202
0
201
8
201
6
201
4
201
2
0
201
0
Persons
300,000
Institutional Improvements on PDP:
The policy network
• Expanding from mainly local communities against
projects, NGOs, and some academics
• To different parts of the society, for example, consumer
networks, community energy movement, National
Human Rights Commission, several Ministries, Senate
committee, the regulators, as well as EGAT and Ministry
of Energy
• The network itself was transformed from ‘physical’
network to ‘coordinate by contents’ and more open
aiming at social learning process on PDP
Institutional Improvements on PDP:
The role of private sector
• The group on renewable energy, SPP and
VSPP, was rather active, but conservative on
pushing for change.
• The large power companies, IPP, have been
passive to push for changes.
Outcomes on PDP process and key features
1. Goals for
the PDP
2. Future
demand
forecast
not a clear step as
it was done by
the same group
of authorities and
experts
The routine goals on energy
security and least cost
Systematic overestimation
Lower the forecast of 4,207 MW
in 2030 during public
participation, equals to 4,800
million USD investment
Plus lower CO2 emission and, to
some extent, renewable energy
and social acceptance of PDP
Outcomes on PDP process and key features
3. DSM and EE Not consider in
the planning
process
Integrate DSM in load forecast
and the generation expansion
(but with extremely low figure)
4. Renewable
energy
Not consider
majority of RE
projects as
dependable
capacity
Include the re-estimated RE
target and approved dependable
capacity of each RE technology
5. Combined
Heat and
Power (CHP)
Problems in the
continuity of the
policy on buying
electricity from
new CHP projects
Include CHP of 7,177 MW within
2030
Outcomes on PDP process and key features
6. Centralized
supply options –
coal, natural
gas, large
hydropower,
nuclear
7. Public
Hearing in the
planning
process and
draft PDP
Being the key
candidate plants and
usually with bias
assumptions to favor
these options
Still being the key
candidate plants, but with
more reasonable
assumptions, particularly
natural gas
no public hearing Only in 2009 and 2010 that
on the draft PDP the public hearing on the
draft PDP was arranged
Future challenges
1) Sharpen the analysis and more effective communications,
for example
- improve from Forecast to Foresight and more detail analysis for
peak and off-peak period, and base-intermediate-peaking
supply options
- improving dependable capacity and load factor of renewable
energy
2) Proactive participation of local communities and policy networks
in PDP process as well as other policy and planning process
3) Promote good governance and solving Conflict of Interests of the
senior staffs in the Ministry of Energy
4) Ensure accountability of the government on PDP decision-making
process as well as share and fair responsibility of each electricity
user category
Thank you
for your attention
35