FIFI PETERS: The subsequent two weeks are going to be dominated by an entire lot of conversations round local weather change and the Just Energy Transition popping out of COP27 [the 27th UN Climate Change conference] at the moment below method in Egypt. We know that the majority nations are taking steps to maneuver away from fossil fuels – like coal as the first power supply – and into renewable power, primarily wind and photo voltaic.
To talk about the function of fuel in the Just Energy Transition and expectations from COP 2017 at the moment below method, I’m joined by Wayne Glossop. He’s the facility techniques engineer and senior enterprise improvement supervisor at Wärtsilä. Wayne, thanks a lot in your time.
Let’s begin with COP, provided that it’s buzzing throughout all headlines or notifications coming in your telephone or wherever you get your notifications from, the airwaves in addition to tv. What are you looking for at that convention?
WAYNE GLOSSOP: Good night, Fifi. Thank you for the chance to be right here. COP is mostly a nice alternative for lots of the developed nations to come back, to step up and do good on the monetary commitments that they’ve been claiming for a few years till now, and truly assist out Africa and South Africa to transition to a 100% renewable power supplier, and assist Africa to display and be a pioneer on this new power revolution, if we are able to name it that.
As we all know, Africa is very well endowed with many renewable power sources – wind and photo voltaic. So we’re effectively positioned as a continent to leapfrog the normal power journey that many developed nations have taken in the previous and present that regardless that we’re only a 3% emissions contributor as a continent in the world, we are able to actually pioneer how this future power transition can appear to be for the world.
FIFI PETERS: You make the argument that in order to do this efficiently we have to take a look at fuel being a part of the equation. It’s a contentious problem for some, given the truth that fuel, whereas much less dangerous than the likes of coal, will not be as nice for the surroundings, in the arguments of some, as are wind and photo voltaic. So state your case for fuel in the principle findings of the examine you’ve accomplished on it.
WAYNE GLOSSOP: I feel you nailed it appropriately with fuel being a contentious problem. We noticed that contentious problem actually not getting resolved in the discussions on the market in the market. So as Wärtsilä we undertook to do an evaluation and we did it in a totally clear method, utilizing a public-participation course of.
We modelled your complete South African energy system, and we needed to try to discover out the truth. Do we want fuel, and in that case what does this fuel appear to be?
I feel the principle message is that the primary goal is that we must be maximising our renewable power, photo voltaic and wind, so far as doable. But to do this you want versatile applied sciences and there are two dominant versatile applied sciences that come out on a regular basis in the modelling for the least-cost power system – batteries, a whole lot of batteries, and fuel, fuel energy.
So we see that we want roughly 9 gigawatts of fuel energy over the subsequent 10 to 19 years.
This is actually counter-intuitive since you’re considering, effectively, to scale back our system prices and scale back the emissions of the South African energy system, we’re saying that we have to add what’s referred to as a comparatively costly fossil gas into the combination. But it seems that when you add this one key ingredient into the power combine, you come out with a cleaner and less expensive energy system.
The method that it does this, it supplies what we dub ‘flexible peaking capacity’ to the facility system, which is actually offering peaking assist to the system, together with renewable balancing – and there’s a whole lot of seasonal assist as effectively.
Then there’s an important secondary operate, which I feel lots of people are likely to not ignore, however don’t absolutely acknowledge. This is what we name a ‘system contingency’ operate.
In our modelling, we modelled a few eventualities the place issues don’t go in keeping with plan, the place we as a rustic don’t roll out sure programmes or we don’t get the coal availability we anticipate on the facility system …
And when issues go fallacious that is the place fuel performs an important function. So, for instance, if the Koeberg generator is down for an prolonged interval, six months, for no matter cause, fuel is the expertise that fills that hole for that six-month interval.
Under good situations it goes again to peaking kind of load-capacity components. But when issues go fallacious, which they have a tendency to do, as now we have all foreseen in the final couple of years and months in the facility system, fuel is filling that hole to offer power safety to our energy system.
FIFI PETERS: How totally different is the best state of affairs that you just’ve sketched out in your analysis that highlights the respective roles of all brokers in the Just Transition, wind, photo voltaic, batteries or fuel? How totally different is what you’ve sketched out as an excellent state of affairs from the present authorities plan on the desk?
WAYNE GLOSSOP: We modelled three eventualities. We modelled a deliberate world, which authorities outlined with the presidency in the IRP [Integrated Resource Plan], and we modelled a actuality verify, which is that some issues won’t occur on time, or they won’t occur in any respect. And then we modelled the right world, the place we simply let the mannequin do what it needs.
The plans are literally very well on observe for what we see in the right world. I feel it simply wants extra.
So we do see extra fuel, extra versatile applied sciences [being] wanted to assist a better renewable development.
There are a whole lot of good plans on the market to extend the quantity of renewable power, but when we don’t in parallel create or introduce the applied sciences that assist that development, we aren’t going to attain our goal of a least-cost system and least emissions.
What we discovered in the mannequin is that at this time coal and diesel are the first power balances for the facility system, so that you’ve obtained an especially soiled gas and an especially costly gas.
If we don’t change that with one thing less expensive and cleaner, like fuel, we’re going to proceed to depend on these two applied sciences as we develop the renewables base, and we aren’t going to see the emission financial savings we hope to see; we’re not going to see the price financial savings we hope to see that may be realised with a whole lot of renewables on our energy system.
FIFI PETERS: All proper. Thanks a lot for breaking that down for us, and fairly in order that. Wayne Glossop, the facility techniques engineer and senior enterprise improvement supervisor at Wärtsilä, has been stating the function and the case for fuel in efficiently reaching the Just Transition to net-zero carbon emissions.
