Electricity generation and cooling

water use in the UK

Edward Byers Dr Jaime Amezaga Prof Jim Hall

Contents 1. Cooling of power stations

2. UK assessment of electricity sector water use

3. Sensitivity analysis

4. Regulation and policy

Power stations Drought map

Deloitte EnvironmentAgency.gov.uk – Drought Map in March 2012

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

ML/

da

y

All Water abstraction England & Wales

Electricity supply industry Public water supplyOther industry Fish farming, cress growing, amenity pondsAgriculture (excl. spray irrigation) Mineral washingSpray irrigation Other

Source: Environment Agency, 2009

How much will the sector use

in the future?

Future electricity pathways

• 6 Pathways

– 4 from Carbon Plan

– 2 author developed

• All meet 2050 decarbonisation

targets

1. UKM-326 cost-optimised

2. CP1-REN high renewables

3. CP2-NUC high nuclear

4. CP3-CCS high CCS

5. CCS+ no nuclear

6. UKM+ 26% higher demand

Source: Byers et al. 2014

Fresh, tidal and sea water

Tidal and seawater abstractions dominate abstraction volumes due to once through

cooling – 2050 use exceeds current levels by 148-399%

Volumes are not necessarily an issue – but thermal discharges to often sensitive aquatic

e viro e ts are…

Source: Byers et al. 2014

Freshwater only

Freshwater use declines in the 2020s due to LCPD closures and use of closed loop cooling

Freshwater use picks up again due to CCS, particularly coal+CCS

Pathways with high CCS exceed current levels by 37-107%

High nuclear and renewable pathways minimise freshwater use

Source: Byers et al. 2014

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600F

res

hw

ate

r c

on

su

mp

tive

in

ten

sit

y (

on

fre

sh

wate

r o

nly

) M

L/T

Wh

2050 FW CCS capacity (GW), % coal: % gas

13, 67:33

9, 67:33

17, 50:50

14, 33:67

4.6, 33:67

0.59, 33:67

MARKAL 3.26

CP1 High renewables

CP2 High nuclear

CP3 High CCS

CCS+

UKM+

Carbon and water intensity

Source: Byers et al. 2014

Sensitivities

Source: Byers et al. 2014

Policy and regulatory issues

Currently

• Abstractions allocated on historical needs

• Varying water-use efficiency amongst abstractors

• Inefficient users prevent new entrants

• Trading favours legacy and inefficient license holders

• There is no discharge guarantee (consumptiveness)

Policy and regulatory options

Energy sector options

Mandate or prohibit specific water-efficient cooling systems Might inhibit innovation

Limit capacity on freshwater Unlikely at national, but possible on regional levels

Water-use performance standard (l/kWh) Similar to Emissions Performance Standard

Drives innovation (in cooling and thermal efficiency)

Sectoral cooperation During times of scarcity, sector could cooperate to efficiently maximise output

Thanks for listening

e.a.byers@newcastle.ac.uk

Current cooling method and source

Sources: Bing! Maps, 2014; Byers et al. 2014

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

FW Open

FW Closed

FW Hybrid

TW Open

TW Closed

TW Hybrid

Sea

Air / hybrid

Co

olin

g m

eth

od

an

d s

ou

rce

GW capacity

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal/biomass

Future cooling sources

2010 2020 2030 2040 20500

20

40

60

80

100Nuclear

%

2010 2020 2030 2040 20500

20

40

60

80

100OCGT & CCGT / CCGT+CCS

%

2010 2020 2030 2040 20500

20

40

60

80

100Coal / Biomass / Coal+CCS

%

FW TW SW AC

• Trend of recent and current capacity development from the DECC Infrastructure

Portal

• Large Combustion Plant Directive capacity closures in 2016

• Nuclear decomissioning and new nuclear build locations

• ‘edu tio i air ooled due to o parative redu tio of OCGT apa ity

• Preference of CCGT over coal on freshwater locations

• DECC Carbon capture & storage Roadmap (2012)

Source: Byers et al. 2014

Validation and data quality

Uncertainties and validation challenges

• No water-use factors are available for the UK, despite various requests (Energy UK, EA, DECC,

power companies)

• EA water body classification (FW/TW/SW) and cooling abstraction source

• Cooling method survey using satellite imagery – good, but not exact

• Annual variability of electricity generation, FW-TW split, and static assumptions about cooling

method & source – obscures the validation

Even data to indirectly infer UK water-use factors is difficult to come by, hence derived from a variety

of sources, principally Macknick et al 2012.

EA provided esti ated ele tri ity se tor a stra tio s data fro AB“TAT, split y hydro a d o -

hydro – crucial for model validation,

Source: Byers et al. 2014

Future electricity generation

Source: DECC, The Carbon Plan, 2011

MARKAL 3.26

CP1 Renewables

CP2 Nuclear

CP3 CCS

Source: DECC 2050 Pathways model v2.1, 2012

Calculating water use Generation Cooling method Water use factors Cooling source

1. CCGT

2. Coal

3. Nuclear

4. CCGT+CCS

5. Coal+CCS

6. Etc.

i. Once through

ii. Closed wet tower

iii. Hybrid

iv. Air-cooled

• Abstraction

• Consumption

(proportion of

abstraction)

a. Freshwater

b. Tidal water

c. Sea water

GWh/yr % distribution ML/GWh % distribution

CCGT: 25 GWe

124,570 GWh/yr

Closed wet tower

53.9%

A: 0.93

C: 0.72 ML/GWh

Freshwater: 32.9%

A: 20,608

C: 15,953

Coal: 29 GWe

120,476 GWh/yr

Closed wet tower

61.8%

A: 2.11

C: 1.77 ML/GWh

Freshwater: 76.2%

A: 119,708

C: 100,419

Σ

ML/yr

2010