• Ingen resultater fundet

6.2 Redispatch and reinforcements per area

6.2.2 Poland

Going back to Table 6-1 showing change in social welfare costs, we see that the increase in redispatch costs due to offshore wind power is modest for the Nordic countries in 2030.

Therefore, the reduction in redispatch costs after upgrading grid elements in 2030 does not outweigh the cost of the upgrades, and we do not include any additional reinforcements before 2030.

In 2050, we find that in the low offshore wind scenarios, redispatch costs are reduced in the Nordic system. In the high scenarios, we find that grid upgrades reduce redispatch costs by more than the associated grid investment costs in the GC and GPC scenarios. As the CBA should only analyse the effects of offshore wind power deployment, we have only included upgrades in the 2050 ambitious GC and GPC scenarios, as shown in Table 6-1. The suggested grid upgrades however make sense from a broader system perspective and could be considered even in the low scenario.

Figure 6-4 Utilisation of the Nordic grid in the Ambitious GPC scenario in 2050 without (left) and with (right) internal grid upgrades. The circled area indicates where the grid has been reinforced.

In the circled area in Figure 6-4, we observe that increased capacity near the offshore connection points allows more power to flow into Sweden, increasing the utilization of other lines in the internal grid. The proposed reinforcements affect the grid utilisation pattern. While some lines are still heavily utilised, total redispatch costs are reduced significantly.

In Poland, we observe increased grid costs with offshore deployment in all scenarios. However, higher levels of cooperation generally exhibit significantly lower redispatch costs in the Polish grid, as the additional import capacity associated with hubs reduces congestions around existing interconnectors. For 2030, the ambition level has only a minor impact. Towards 2050, a higher ambition level leads to lower redispatch costs. Targeted investments in north-south connections can efficiently address the congestions created by offshore deployment. Table 6-2 summarises the quantitative findings for redispatch costs in Poland.

Table 6-2 Change of social welfare cost due to redispatch and grid reinforcements in Poland without (initial) and after internal grid reinforcements, in MEUR. Results marked in bold are used in the CBA.

Year Grid Low Ambitious



Initial 152.45 130.54 104.46 164.02 106.06 114.2

Reinforced - - - - - -

2050 Initial 555.46 270.65 414.14 414.55 276.78 268.42 Reinforced 526.15 236.32 219.58 295.64 51.34 1.37

Initial grid and redispatch costs without upgrades

Total electricity demand in Poland almost doubles from 2020 to 2050 in all scenarios. Between 2020 and 2030 the demand increases by a factor of 1.3, and between 2030 and 2050 it increases by a factor of 1.5. Although about 10 percent of this demand is either flexible or can be covered by fuel switching in 2050, the substantial increase in electricity demand will require comprehensive upgrades of the Polish internal power grid. To accommodate some of these needs, we have assumed additional grid investments in Poland before 2050 in our base case scenario. The assumptions are elaborated in the methodology section, Section 6.1.

Figure 6-5 Utilisation of internal grid in Poland under different scenarios in 2050, Base Case (left) vs.

Ambitious – Grid & policy cooperation (right), with base case grid configuration.

In 2030, the Polish grid can cope with the offshore wind power development in all scenarios without additional challenges. In 2050, however, the Polish grid is highly utilised prior to any buildout of offshore wind capacity (base case scenario) even with the assumed grid reinforcements, see the left panel (a) in Figure 6-5. In the scenarios with offshore buildout the grid capacity utilization is increased further in the north where the offshore wind capacity is connected to shore.

The situation depicted in the right panel (b) in Figure 6-5 is consistent for all the offshore wind power scenarios in 2050. The results suggest that internal grid reinforcements are necessary in all scenarios, even without offshore wind deployment.

However, we also find that increased cooperation and increased offshore wind power ambition reduce redispatch costs compared to the scenario with low ambition and national policies, and prior to any grid upgrades.

Proposed upgrades and redispatch costs after reinforcements

Figure 6-6 shows the suggested grid upgrades in Poland. The upgrades increase the capacity between offshore wind generation and offshore hubs in the north and the demand in the south of Poland.

Figure 6-6 Suggested internal grid upgrades in Poland in 2030 and 2050

See Table 6-2 for a comparison of social welfare costs with and without grid reinforcements. In 2030, the proposed grid reinforcements in Poland are found to be inefficient as the savings in redispatch costs do not offset the investment cost of the reinforcements, and we have therefore not included upgrades in 2030 in the CBA.

In 2050, however, the analysis suggests that upgrades that increase grid capacity from north to south are net beneficial in all offshore wind power scenarios. Figure 6-7 shows how the flows in the grid change as we introduce the internal grid upgrades, and that the utilisation of some of the most congested grid elements are reduced.

Figure 6-7 Utilisation of the Polish grid in the Ambitious GPC scenario in 2050 with (left) and without (right) internal grid upgrades. Circled areas highlight where the utilisation of grid elements is decreased after upgrades.

The grid upgrades are designed to handle the increased utilisation due to offshore wind power development and offshore interconnectors. Independent from the offshore development, the

Line 2030


2050 [MW]

Length [km]

Gdansk -


0 650 110

Dunowo -


0 2000 360

Zarnowiec - Grudziadz

0 1500 150

Grudziadz - Milosna

0 1500 250

Zarnowiec - Gdansk

0 1238 70

internal grid is highly utilised both before and after the grid upgrades, as shown in the base case scenario in Figure 6-7 (left panel).