About the project
As Europe's energy transition moves towards increasingly higher shares of variable renewable energy, there is a growing need for conjointly transforming the electricity transmission grid. This transformation includes grid expansion, e.g. for connecting offshore wind parks or entire national grids, but also the development of new transmission technologies. For Norway, further European integration of power transmission is of particular importance for efficient use of the country's vast renewable energy sources and marketing them in the European electricity market, and thus for long-term value creation.
It is widely agreed that transmission infrastructure policy, investment and transformation are significantly lagging behind changes in electricity supply across Europe, and that this tension between interdependent domains threatens to constrain the energy transition. Key challenges include coordination across different countries and actors, ill-aligned regulatory regimes, lack of industry competences and systemic uncertainties.
Technological developments in the field of power transmission are confronted with national (Norway, UK, Germany) and European level studies on (transmission) policy regimes and in-depth analyses of industry actors. To provide a better understanding of these particular challenges and the energy transition in general, the project applies a multi-disciplinary approach, combining analytical frameworks from innovation system and transition studies with concepts from political sciences and industry analyses.
Objectives
InGrid has three main objectives:
The primary objective of this project is to generate new knowledge about the institutional, technological, and economical, challenges related to the transformation of transmission power grids across Europe to make way for greater energy systems integration that, in turn, can facilitate longterm, sustainable restructuring of European countries' energy systems, efficient use of renewable energy sources, power system flexibility, and further increasing the shares of renewable energy. This new knowledge is useful for informing decision makers in policy and industry in a time of farreaching change in European power systems.
The second objective is to improve our theoretical understanding of both transnational governance challenges and technological complementarities for socio-technical transitions.
The third objective is to understand the current performance and ongoing transformation in the field of power transmission technology.
News
2016: Energy Transition 2.0
The energy transition enters a new phase. At the beginning it was primarily about the expansion of new renewables such as wind or solar. Meanwhile, also the survival of incumbent technologies and actors is at stake. According to Jochen Markard at ETH Zürich this represents a challenge for society, economy and policy making.
23 Billion Euro. This is what operators of nuclear power plants in Germany have to pay into a public fund, which then covers the costs for the mid- to long-term storage of nuclear waste [1]. What eventually exceeds this amount will be paid by the state. If this deal materializes, the long-term risks of nuclear waste disposal will be socialized. Why is this necessary? Well, the economic survival of the ‘big four’ German utilities is more uncertain than ever before and it is high time to settle their estates.
Phase II
While in the first phase of the energy transition, expansion of (mostly renewable) alternative generation was in the focus, in the second phase also the decline of established technologies, industries and firms becomes important. The four big German utilities RWE, E.on, EnBW and Vattenfall have been struggling for years now with declining revenues from conventional generation based on nuclear, coal or gas. At the same time, they have delayed entry into alternative technologies and services for too long. Today they have lost much of their value and it is highly uncertain, whether and how they will survive.
That firms disappear is daily business in other industries such as ICT. For the electricity sector it is rather new. Consumers and policy makers were used to electricity supply being very stable – also with regard to the organizations responsible. Market liberalizations and now the energy transition have changed the sector fundamentally. And – dissimilar to ICT – policy is involved and affected: Power supply is just too important for society and economy, infrastructure is all too essential (natural monopolies with positive externalities) and the investments are long-term and capital intense.
The challenges are enormous. Below I discuss three of the many topics that will be important in the second phase of the energy transition.
Values, societal dialogue and vested interests
Whether it is about wind parks, energy crops, fracking or nuclear phase-out: The energy transition is closely intertwined with societal values. How important are climate protection, landscape, safe supply or energy independence for us? Which risks are we ready to take, which role for public policy, how centralized or decentralized should energy supply be?
For these value-laden questions there are no objective or general answers. Political processes and societal dialogues may deliver answers. However, given the uncertainties and complexity of the energy transition, it is an open question whether the regular and established political processes are even suitable to develop reliable, long-term goals and instruments for this transformation.
One of the challenges here is the high influence of vested interests. For example in the Netherlands, a pioneer in the area of consensus-oriented sectoral change, transition management was captured by powerful established players [2]. Also in other countries, incumbent utilities try to defend their interests and influence policy making in their favor.
Different paths
There is not the energy transition. Different countries, regions and municipalities take different approaches, pursue different paths. The UK, for example, continues to subsidize nuclear, while Germany and Switzerland want to leave this technology behind. It is a priori unclear, which way will turn out to be better. History of technology has a major lesson here. What we today perceive as ‘best’, i.e. the criteria we apply to assess technology are often a result of social processes (see above). And it is not even the ‘best’ that wins battles of competing technologies and finally becomes dominant but rather the one that has been supported early on by many different players.
Against this background, diversity is important. Dominant designs are like a double-edged sword. While they are desirable to lower costs quickly (e.g. as in the case of PV), they also create lock-ins and eliminate alternatives. Different countries pursuing different paths may seem inefficient at first sight, but it also is an opportunity to explore different options, maintain some diversity and to learn from the experience of others.
Interactions and complementarities
Energy supply is highly systemic. Different types of power plants fulfill different tasks in the system (e.g. base vs. peak load). For example, hydropower has traditionally a key role: In times of high demand it can be added flexibly to maintain stable supply. However, well-rehearsed roles change during transitions. Solar power, which – in the long run – benefits from the availability of flexible hydropower, currently creates one of the biggest problems for hydro – at least in some markets like Germany and Switzerland. As its production peaks around noon when demand is highest, it competes with the traditional peak load business of hydropower. In other words, technologies that are complementary at the sectoral level might compete at the technology level [3]. This is another challenge in the course of the energy transition. What makes it even more complex: modern batteries (stationary or in electric vehicles) are another emerging and competing technology in the markets for storage and peak load.
For policy making and firm strategy these changes are crucial. It is not only a question of whether to support or invest in specific technologies but also about their long-term interplay at the sector level. Shall we subsidize hydro as long as fossil or nuclear base load power plants are still operating? Shall we even expand hydro or build more interconnectors to Norway if solar power continues to increase?
What the future brings remains open. The energy transition fundamentally transforms the sector and established organizations, technologies and business models are acutely endangered. Many utilities nowadays eagerly try to get rid of their nuclear and coal generation assets. Whether this will help them to survive is unclear.
References
[1] Bloomberg, April 27, 2016. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-27/german-nuclear-operators-must-pay-26-4-billion-for-storage
[2] Kern, F., Smith, A., 2008. Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands. Energy Policy 36, 4093-4103. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142150800308X
[3] Markard, J., Hoffmann, V.H., 2016. Analysis of complementarities: Framework and examples from the energy transition. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, in press. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516301172
The original version of this blog piece was published at ETH’s website.
Events
Nov. 28, 2019: The role of power grid transformation in decarbonization via electrification
Time and place: Nov. 28, 2019 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM, Georg Sverdrups hus, stort møterom
This InGrid project seminar will share key insights from the project with a view to understanding current and future challenges Norway faces in further decarbonization via electrification.
Renewable energy transition was in both policy and research for many years about nurturing and analyzing the emergence of particular new sustainable technologies. With falling cost, rising performance and growing competitiveness and mass diffusion of key renewable energy technologies the energy transition is changing in character such that reliable and cost-efficient ‘system integration’ of these technologies become the key issue.
However, despite progress in leading renewable energy technologies, there is little overall progress in terms of reducing the world’s CO2 emissions and the world’s carbon budget for staying below 2 degrees warming is soon exhausted. This has led to calls for greatly accelerating decarbonization and energy transition processes. Decarbonization via electrification based on renewable electricity is a key strategy; particularly in Norway. At the same time, Norway is well-positioned to export renewable balancing power to support Europe’s energy transition via enhanced interconnector capacity. In fact, electrification and export initiatives may even compete for resources and legitimacy.
These three issues - renewables integration, electrification, and electricity export - put the role of grid transformation at center stage in the energy transition. The INGRID research project has produced research on the social-technical dynamics of power grid transformation by studying key actors, technologies, policies, and regulation. At this seminar, we wish to share key insights from the project with a view to understanding current and future challenges Norway faces in further decarbonization via electrification.
Purpose
- InGRID team shares key insights from the research project with broader audience
- Actors from public and private sectors share insights on lessons learned from electrification so far regarding the role of power grid transformation
- Together identify key challenges related to further electrification and the role of power grid transformation to inform future research and policy
Program
Part 1 (45 minutes):
InGRID insights
- Introduction, Allan Dahl Andersen, Assoc. Professor, TIK, UiO
- Next phase of the energy transition: A Norwegian perspective. Jochen Markard, ETH Zurich
- Insights on power grid transformation and implications for electrification, Allan Dahl Andersen, Assoc. Professor, TIK, UiO
- The politics of building interconnectors, Erlend Hermansen, CICERO
- Questions
Part 2 (60 minutes), Norwegian/English:
Stakeholder panel on experiences with and challenges for grid transformation and electrification in Norway
Panelists:
- Statens Vegvesen
- Energi Norge
- Elbilforeningen
- ENOVA
- ZERO
- BKK
Background
The background for the seminar is the end of one research project, InGRID (Integration of Power Transmission Grids), and the beginning of a new research project, PATHWAYS (Conflicting Transition Pathways for Deep Decarbonization). Both projects are funded by the EnergiX program, Research Council of Norway. The InGRID project has studied the role of power grid transformation in renewable energy transition with attention to integration of renewables, pace and scope of grid transformation, and the role of actor capabilities, policies and regulation. The PATHWAYS project will investigate technological, social, institutional and economic aspects of ‘deep decarbonization’, i.e. decarbonization beyond the power sector where renewable electrification is one important option. With this seminar, we aim to use insights from the InGRID project to start the PATHWAYS project under the title “The role of power grid transformation in decarbonization via electrification”. The InGRID project was affiliated with FME CENSES and PATHWAYS is affiliated with FME NTRANS.
