Aiymgul Kerimray, Rocco De Miglio, Aidyn Bakdolotov, Igor Kolyagin, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SLIDE 1

TIMES-Kazakhstan: from a national to a regional analysis and modelling

Aiymgul Kerimray, Rocco De Miglio, Aidyn Bakdolotov, Igor Kolyagin, Bakytzhan Suleimenov, Yerbol Akhmetbekov June 1st 2015 ETSAP Workshop Abu Dhabi, Dusit Thani Hotel

National Laboratory Astana

SLIDE 2

ENERGY BALANCE OF KAZAKHSTAN IN 2012

TFC/TPES = 55% IEA (2013) High exports High energy industry

• wn use and losses

SLIDE 3

GDP ENERGY INTENSITY OF KAZAKHSTAN

• Kazakhstan takes 11th place in the world with its GDP energy intensity
• There are some differences in IEA and NU assessments (8-15%)

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 toe/1000 $2005USD

GDP energy intensity in 2011

Kazakhstan IEA Kazakhstan-NURIS

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 toe/1000$2005USD

GDP Energy intensity over 2007- 2012

NURIS IEA

SLIDE 4

REASONS FOR INEFFICIENCIES

Geographical: the continental climate, large territory, low population density 6 people/sq.m. and uneven distribution of power generating capacities over the territory Administrative and economic: lack of metering for energy saving, low profitability Technical: high wear of the equipment in the energy intensive sectors, high wear of electric lines, dilapidation of the housing stock

• Low efficiencies of power plants, almost 50

% of generating capacities has run for more than 30 years

• Huge transmission (5%) and distribution

(13%) losses of electricity

• Up to 35% of losses of heat in distribution

0.56 0.70 0.71 0.83 0.61 0.60 0.68 0.67

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

TFC/TPES (2012)

SLIDE 5

TOTAL PRIMARY ENERGY SUPPLY

• 10000
• 5000

5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 Coal &peat Crude oil Natural gas RES&Nuclear Oil products

Total primary energy supply over 2007-2012, ktoe (NU)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

SLIDE 6

ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY SECTORS

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Industry Transport Residential Other Non-energy use

Energy consumption by sectors, 2007-2012, ktoe (NU)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

SLIDE 7

GHG EMISSIONS IN KAZAKHSTAN

• 50000

50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 kt CO2 eq.

GHG emissions historical dynamics, 1990-2012

Fuel combustion Industrial processes Agriculture LULUCF Waste

SLIDE 8

TIMES-KAZAKHSTAN MODEL

Developed since 2011 under the project funded by Ministry of Education and Science of RoK GOAL: to explore the evolution of the system in the long-term, to design and test national energy-environmental related policies and strategy Collaboration: ASATREM, E4SMA Geographical boundaries: national (monoregional) Time horizon: 2009-2050 System boundaries: the entire energy system (from the upstream to the demand) Additional modules and features:

• Own-price elasticities for the end-use demands
• Endogenous retirement profiles of the power plants
• Domestic and/or International ETS
• LULUCF and industrial processes emissions (III-VI National Communication

UNFCCC)

• Scenarios considered:
• GHG reduction potential
• Energy efficiency improvement potential
• Impact of ETS

SLIDE 9

DRIVERS OF THE MODEL

• The population is assumed to grow at 1.25%pa
• GDP was expected to rise at an annual rate of 6%pa until 2020, and 5%pa until 2030: IMF

projections in 2013)

SLIDE 10

MODELING RESULTS – ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Two scenarios were :

• reducing energy intensity of GDP by 40% by 2020 (compared to the 2008

level) as set in the Energy Saving-2020 programme

• introducing an incentive of US$20 (at 2000 prices) per ton of CO2 equivalent

reduced starting from 2020 (CO2TAX). The efficiency gaps (EFF(ET)j <= EFF(NTi)j) between an existing “reference” technology (ET) and the new ones (NTi) available for the same energy sector/service (j), as well as the “virtual” savings due to the use of more efficient technologies (Q(NTi)j).

SLIDE 11

MODELING RESULTS – ENERGY EFFICIENCY

200 400 600 10 20 30 40 50 2009 202020252030 202020252030 202020252030 BaU Energy intensity reduction target CO2TAX CO2 emissions in Mt Mtoe

Energy Efficiency Improvements (EEI) in different part

• f Energy System and CO2 emissions

Coal Transformation 220 kV - transmission 500 kV - transmission ELC - End-use ELC - distribution ELC - after meters NGA - End-use NGA - transformation NGA - distribution grids NGA - transport Heat - distribution Heat - transport Oil - End-use TOTCO2

SLIDE 12

MODELING RESULTS – ENERGY EFFICIENCY

5 10 15 20 25 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2009 202020252030 202020252030 202020252030 BaU Energy intensity reduction target CO2TAX Consumption (Mtoe) Primary Energy (Mtoe)

Dynamics of TPES, Electricity and Heat Consumption of Kazakhstan

Coal Oil Natural gas Renewables Electricity Electric District heat

SLIDE 13

MODELING RESULTS – ENERGY EFFICIENCY

SLIDE 14

KAZAKHSTAN’S 16 REGIONS TIMES MODEL

14/19

Geographical boundaries: 14 regions and 2 cities: Astana (capital) and Almaty (financial center) Time horizon: 2011-2050 System boundaries: the energy system GOAL: to explore the potentials and the need of the different oblasts, the synergies across the regions (energy exchanges), and to assess the energy related investment location decisions. State of development: early stage (electricity and heat chains are described)

Kazakhstan has a large territory of 2.7 mln km2 (9th place in the world ) 3000 km from west to east and 1700 km from south to north

SLIDE 15

MAP OF PIPELINES IN KAZAKHSTAN

SLIDE 16

AVERAGE YEAR TEMPERATURE IN KAZAKHSTAN, ˚C

Heating season varies from 143 to 231 days from region to region Average year temperature varies from 2ºС in the north to 13ºС in the south

SLIDE 17

FUEL-ENERGY BALANCE – REGIONS LEVEL (ASTANA CITY E.G.)

Astana city 2011 (ktoe)

Coal Crude Oil Oil Products Combustible Renewables & Waste Electricity Heat Total Production

• Imports

1,179.45 1,016.89 2,839.87

• 380.25
• 5,416.46

Exports

• 12.55
• 1,018.94
• 2,532.07
• 278.51
• 3,842.07

International marine bunkers

• International aviation bunkers
• Stock changes

5.55 1.14 104.70 0.04

• 111.41

Total primary energy supply 1,172.45

• 0.91

412.50 0.04 101.73

• 1,685.81

Transfers 12.80

• 17.39
• 4.59

Statistical differences

• 0.17

0.92

• 1.33

0.08 0.03

• 0.04
• 0.51

Main activity producer electricity plants

• Autoproducer electricity plants
• Main activity producer CHP plants
• 1,039.44
• 204.26

464.78

• 370.40

Autoproducer CHP plants

• 0.06
• 0.06

Main activity producer heat plants

• 71.04
• 45.60
• 25.44

Energy industry own use

• 0.02
• 23.21
• 0.04
• 46.26
• 32.42
• 101.93

Losses

• 5.33
• 14.49
• 37.10
• 149.72
• 206.65

Final consumption 69.25 0.01 356.02 0.08 222.67 328.20 976.22 Industry 20.83

• 38.90

0.04 32.63 18.86 111.26 Iron and steel 12.60

• 0.10
• 0.44

0.16 13.30 Chemical and petrochemical

• 0.00
• 0.00

0.01 0.01 Non-ferrous metals

• Non-metallic minerals

5.64

• 9.21

0.00 3.59 6.37 24.82 Transport equipment

• 0.17
• 0.17

Machinery 0.03

• 0.28
• 0.48

1.01 1.80 Mining and quarrying

• 0.05
• 0.01
• 0.06

Food and tobacco 2.20

• 1.32
• 2.13

3.02 8.67 Paper, pulp and print

• Wood and wood products
• 0.05
• 0.03

0.05 0.13 Construction 0.34

• 27.10

0.04 22.96 7.63 58.07 Textile and leather

• 0.01
• 0.03

0.04 0.09 Non-specified (industry) 0.02

• 0.77
• 2.78

0.58 4.15 Transport 0.05

• 219.39
• 0.38

0.14 219.97 Road 0.01

• 208.58
• 208.59

Domestic aviation

• 10.35
• 10.35

Rail 0.04

• 0.35
• 0.14
• 0.53

Pipeline transport

• 0.10
• 0.25

0.14 0.50 Domestic navigation

• Non-specified (transport)
• Other

48.36 0.01 90.83 0.04 189.66 309.20 638.09 Residential 32.66

• 68.78
• 53.41

215.82 370.67 Commercial and public services 15.65 0.01 18.98 0.04 136.18 93.17 264.03 Agriculture/forestry 0.00

• 0.46
• 0.01
• 0.48

Fishing 0.04

• 2.61
• 0.05

0.21 2.91 Non-specified (other)

• Non-energy use
• 6.90
• 6.90

Non-energy use industry/transformation/energy

• 6.90
• 6.90
• 48 FEBs for 16

regions were reclassified (2010- 2012) to IEA format

• Different data

sources

• Analysis of statistical

differences

• Country balances

were updated accordingly

• For the first time

regions level FEB

SLIDE 18

REGIONAL INDICATORS

76% 47% 57% 29% 53% 84% 46% 77% 57% 44% 57% 34% 54% 83% 58% 85%

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90

Akmola obl. Aktobe obl. Almaty obl. Atyrau obl. WKO Zhambyl obl. Karaganda obl. Kostanay obl. Kyzylorda obl. Mangistau obl. SKO Pavlodar obl. NKO EKO Astana city Almaty city

TFC/TPES

WORLD AVERAGE

8.2 9.9 5.3 6.6 4.7 3.4 32.6 8.7 5.3 14.7 3.7 66.8 11.7 8.7 10.2 5.8 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

CO2 emissions per capita, t/person

Kazakhstan average World average

SLIDE 19

• 10000
• 5000

5000 10000 15000 20000 Akmola obl. Aktobe obl. Almaty obl. Atyrau obl. West-Kazakhstan obl. Zhambyl obl. Karaganda obl. Kostanay obl. Kyzylorda obl. Mangistau obl. South-Kazakhstan obl. Pavlodar obl. North-Kazakhstan obl. East-Kazakhstan obl. Astana city Almaty city

Total primary energy supply by fuel type, ktoe

Coal Crude oil Oil products Gas Electricity

REGIONAL INDICATORS

100 200 300 400 500 600

Consumption of heat by houses provided by district heating per living area by regions of Kazakhstan, kwh/m2

2011 Kazakhstan average Russia Finland

SLIDE 20

REGIONAL INDICATORS

20/19

Final consumption structure differ from region to region:

• Gas consumption varies from 0 to 48%
• Coal consumption varies from 0.1 to 42%
• Oil products varies from 12 to 52%
• Industrial consumption varies from 6 to 72%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Final consumption by type of fuel, by regions, %

Heat Electricity Gas Oil products Crude oil Coal

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Akmola obl. Aktobe obl. Almaty obl. Atyrau obl. WKO Zhambyl obl. Karaganda obl. Kostanay obl. Kyzylorda obl. Mangistau obl. SKO Pavlodar obl. NKO EKO Astana city Almaty city

Final consumption by sector, by regions %

Non-energy use Agriculture/forestry Services Population Transport Industry

SLIDE 21

CONCLUSIONS, FUTURE WORK

21/19

• There is significant room for energy efficiency saving in

Kazakhstan even in BAU optimal solution (22Mtoe in 2030)

• CO2 reduction targets require higher gas penetration
• Regions of Kazakhstan differ significantly and energy efficiency

potential is different

• 16 regions model will improve the quality of modeling results but

requires more data and time

SLIDE 22

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

Aiymgul Kerimray aiymgul.kerimray@nu.edu.kz