Energie : papiers de recherche moissonnés (26/07/2018)

Accounting for low solar resource days to size 100% solar microgrids power systems in Africa / N. Plain, B., Hingray & S Mathy. Renewable Energy, vol. 131, Feb. 2019, online July 2018, pp. 448-458 https://www.sciencedirect.com./science/article/pii/S0960148118308334

In many regions worldwide, the electrification of rural areas is expected to be partly achieved through micro power grids. Compliance with the COP21 conference requires that such systems mainly build on renewable energy sources. To deliver a high power and quality service may be difficult to be achieved, especially when micro-grids are based on variable renewable sources. We here explore the multiscale temporal variability of the local solar resource in Africa and its implication for the development of 100% solar systems. Using high resolution satellite data of global horizontal irradiance (GHI) for a 21-year period (1995-2015), we characterize the seasonality and temporal variability of the local resource. We focus on its low percentile values which give a first guess on the size of the solar panels surface required for the micro-grid to achieve a given quality service. We assess the characteristics and especially persistence of the low resource situations, for which the local demand would not be satisfied. We finally assess how the ability of electricity consumers for some day-to-day flexibility (e.g. via the postponement of part of one day as demand to the next), would help to achieve the design level of service quality with a smaller micro-grid system.

La transition énergétique face au tempo de l’horloge climatique / Christian de Perthuis et Boris Solier. Chaire économie du climat, Paris Dauphine, 19 juillet 2018, 32 p. (Informations et débats ; n°56) https://www.chaireeconomieduclimat.org/publications/la-transition-energetique-face-au-tempo-de-lhorloge-climatique/

A l’occasion du débat sur la « transition énergétique », la chaire Economie du Climat a publié en 2013 un Informations & Débats : « La transition énergétique, les ambiguïtés d’une notion à géométrie variable »i. Nous y mettions en garde contre la malléabilité d’un concept qui risquait de brouiller les enjeux climatiques.
Depuis lors, l’usage du terme s’est répandu, faisant même en France l’objet d’une loi votée en 2015, sans que la banalisation du concept en facilite nécessairement la compréhension. Ce nouvel Information & Débats vise à éclairer les enjeux de la transition énergétique en partant d’une approche historique. Il montre que les transformations à opérer pour se mettre en ligne avec les objectifs de l’Accord de Paris sont inédites par rapport aux
mécanismes des transitions passées :

  • Elles doivent s’opérer suivant le tempo de l’horloge climatique qui est réglée par l’évolution du stock de carbone présent en quantités croissantes dans l’atmosphère (« carbone d’en haut »), alors que les transitions historiques ont consisté à accroître la capacité des sociétés à extraire toujours plus de ressources fossiles (« carbone d’en bas ») pour empiler les sources d’énergie ;
  • Au mécanisme historique de l’empilement, il faut substituer un schéma dans lequel les sources décartonnées ne s’ajoutent plus aux sources existantes, mais prennent la place des énergies fossiles ;
  • Les gains d’efficacité énergétique ne doivent plus conduire, via la baisse des prix relatifs, à la hausse des consommations d’énergie par tête qui contribue puissamment à l’escalade des émissions.

En conclusion, nous proposons l’adoption d’une approche holistique de la transition énergétique, permettant de mieux raccorder les stratégies d’atténuation du
changement climatique à celles de lutte contre l’appauvrissement de la biodiversité.

Building New Gas Transportation Infrastructure in the EU – what are the rules of the game? / Katja Yafimava, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, July 2018, 191 p. (OIES Paper: NG 134) https://www.oxfordenergy.org/publications/building-new-gas-transportation-infrastructure-eu-rules-game/

Although the EU has called over the past decade for gas pipeline promoters to ‘respect EU rules’, these rules had either not been established or were not clear. It was not until March 2017 that a legally binding regulatory framework for the development of incremental (new) pipeline capacity was established, in the form of the Capacity Allocation Mechanisms Network Code (CAM NC). However, the CAM NC did not resolve all the problematic issues fully, as prior to its adoption many new pipelines had been developed under a patchwork of TEP exemptions, Open Season procedures, and Intergovernmental Agreements. In addition, the CAM NC left important regulatory specificities for the TSOs and NRAs to decide, thus enabling them to develop capacity allocation methods which differ across the EU. Thus, the problem of the regulatory treatment of incremental capacity – created under diverse frameworks with varying degrees of consistency – has not been fully resolved at the EU level and uncertainty remains in respect of its future treatment. This problem has been exacerbated by the ongoing politicization of the EU regulation, particularly in respect of all Russian pipelines but especially Nord Stream 2.
This paper concludes that those pipeline projects initiated prior to the CAM NC’s entry into force should proceed under the rules which were in place at the time of their initiation. Although the EC and the regulatory authorities might be tempted to request some changes in respect of their regulatory treatment – particularly where this differs from what would have been required under the CAM NC – this temptation should be resisted, as further changes would unnecessarily increase (already very significant) uncertainty and complexity. This complexity, together with the lack of clarity associated with the regulatory framework for incremental capacity, suggests that very few major new pipelines will be built in the EU in the future, apart from TAP and EUGAL and the Baltic Pipe, as well as those pipelines needed for connecting the second string of Turkish Stream with European markets. This is because it will be much easier for those wishing to bring additional gas to Europe to do so via LNG import terminals.

 


Vous aimerez aussi...