Difference between revisions of "Results for Helsinki energy decision 2015"

From Opasnet
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{variable}} == Scope == What are the more accurate results for Helsinki energy decision 2015? == Answer == === Scenarios examined === We examined two different sets ...")
 
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
We examined two different sets of scenarios. The first set was a collection of suggested policies that were interesting to examine for the decision making. The second set was more technical, and it aimed to find the differences in the cost-efficieency of different power plant solutions rather than actual feasible solutions. The sets were as follows:
 
We examined two different sets of scenarios. The first set was a collection of suggested policies that were interesting to examine for the decision making. The second set was more technical, and it aimed to find the differences in the cost-efficieency of different power plant solutions rather than actual feasible solutions. The sets were as follows:
 +
 +
'''Suggested policies'''
 +
 +
; Business as usual (BAU): The already existing power plants are renovated to burn biofuels and will remain in use as long as possible.
 +
; Process heat: As much of the excess eat from different processes will be taken into use. The most important heat sources are the Neste oil refinery in Porvoo and the nuclear power plant possibly built in Loviisa that produces CHP.
 +
; Helen's proposition: The suggestion of Helen brought out in June 2015. New biofuelled heat plants are built and CHP is slowly given up.
 +
; Zero investment: As little new construction is carried out as possible.
 +
; Carbon neutral 2050: All fossil fuels are given up by 2050 and are replaced by biofuels and process heat.
 +
; CHP bio: Electricity and heat are co-produced in especially the new Vuosaari C -bio-CHP-plant.
 +
; Distributed and sea: Heat is produced with distributed geothermal, heat pumps and bigger heat pump plants taking heat from the sea as possible.
 +
 +
 +
'''The technical scenario set''' includes all existing and suggested new power plants. They are then inspected scenario to scenario in a rough order of cost-efficiency, beginning from the best. In the next scenario then shows which remaining plants will be run to optimise cost-efficiency.
 +
 +
; All1: All plants are in use.
 +
; Loviisa2: District heating is mainly produced in the nuclear heat plant in Loviisa. This is when the small and insignificant plants are shut down, so they're not confusing the interpretation of further analysis.
 +
; DataAndSea3: District heating is mostly produced from excess heat from data centers and with sea heat pumps. Loviisa nuclear heat is not taken into use.
 +
; NesteAndDeep4: District heating is mostly produced from excess heat from Neste, in Viosaari C power plant and with deep drilling. The data center heat and sea heat pumps are not used.
 +
; Existing5: District heating is mostly produced with the existing plants, meaning Hanasaari, Salmisaari and Vuosaari CHP plants. Vuosaari C is not built.
 +
; Backup6: Disrtict heating is mostly produced in the back-up oil and gas heat plants.
 +
; Lowcost: Only the most cost-effective plants from the previous scenarios are run. This means Loviisa nuclear plant, data centers' and Neste's excess heat, Katri Vala heat pumps and the small back-up oil heat plants.

Revision as of 16:28, 9 September 2015


Scope

What are the more accurate results for Helsinki energy decision 2015?

Answer

Scenarios examined

We examined two different sets of scenarios. The first set was a collection of suggested policies that were interesting to examine for the decision making. The second set was more technical, and it aimed to find the differences in the cost-efficieency of different power plant solutions rather than actual feasible solutions. The sets were as follows:

Suggested policies

Business as usual (BAU)
The already existing power plants are renovated to burn biofuels and will remain in use as long as possible.
Process heat
As much of the excess eat from different processes will be taken into use. The most important heat sources are the Neste oil refinery in Porvoo and the nuclear power plant possibly built in Loviisa that produces CHP.
Helen's proposition
The suggestion of Helen brought out in June 2015. New biofuelled heat plants are built and CHP is slowly given up.
Zero investment
As little new construction is carried out as possible.
Carbon neutral 2050
All fossil fuels are given up by 2050 and are replaced by biofuels and process heat.
CHP bio
Electricity and heat are co-produced in especially the new Vuosaari C -bio-CHP-plant.
Distributed and sea
Heat is produced with distributed geothermal, heat pumps and bigger heat pump plants taking heat from the sea as possible.


The technical scenario set includes all existing and suggested new power plants. They are then inspected scenario to scenario in a rough order of cost-efficiency, beginning from the best. In the next scenario then shows which remaining plants will be run to optimise cost-efficiency.

All1
All plants are in use.
Loviisa2
District heating is mainly produced in the nuclear heat plant in Loviisa. This is when the small and insignificant plants are shut down, so they're not confusing the interpretation of further analysis.
DataAndSea3
District heating is mostly produced from excess heat from data centers and with sea heat pumps. Loviisa nuclear heat is not taken into use.
NesteAndDeep4
District heating is mostly produced from excess heat from Neste, in Viosaari C power plant and with deep drilling. The data center heat and sea heat pumps are not used.
Existing5
District heating is mostly produced with the existing plants, meaning Hanasaari, Salmisaari and Vuosaari CHP plants. Vuosaari C is not built.
Backup6
Disrtict heating is mostly produced in the back-up oil and gas heat plants.
Lowcost
Only the most cost-effective plants from the previous scenarios are run. This means Loviisa nuclear plant, data centers' and Neste's excess heat, Katri Vala heat pumps and the small back-up oil heat plants.