Economy & Energy

Year IX -No 64:

October - November 2007

ISSN 1518-2932

Patrocínios:

No 65 Em Português

SEARCH

MAIL

Data

DOWNLOAD

other e&e issues

 e&e No 65

Support:

 

Main Page

Capital Stock in Brazil and Capital Productivity  by IBGE

Comparative  Costs of Thermoelectric Plants  and Angra 3 Plant

Revisiting Methane Concentration in the Atmosphere

The Importance of Capital Productivity to Growth

http://ecen.com

e&e links

 

 

Text for Discussion:

Comparative Analysis between the Costs Corresponding to the Thermoelectric Plants that won the New Energy Auction of 10/16/07 and the Projected Costs for the Angra 3 Nuclear Plant

Sérgio Gonçalves Mathias and
Angelo Gustavo Correia Lima
[1]

1 - Objective

The objective of this article is to compare the costs for the Electrical System corresponding to the thermal power plants that have won the auction of new energy (A - 5) held in 10/16/07 and those of the Angra 3 nuclear power plant.

2 - Costs of Thermal Power Plants

The costs are those associated with the production and the acquisition of electric energy from thermal power plants that were involved in the new energy auction carried out by the Electric Energy Commercialization Chamber – CCEE, authorized by the National Electric Energy Agency – ANEEL to satisfy the electric energy demand foreseen by the distribution companies that are part of the National Interconnected System – SIN.

The commercialization of electric energy from thermal plants is carried out by contracts of electric energy availability in which the costs associated with hydrological risks that determine the dispatch level of the power plants are borne by the buying agents (the distribution companies that are part of SIN). Therefore, the costs of fuel purchase and costs due to eventual financial exposures in the CCEE short-term market are borne by the distribution companies and charged to the final consumers.

For the present comparison the costs considered were those corresponding to the annual fixed revenue (whose value is the price offered by the entrepreneur during the new energy auction) and the variable cost of operation and maintenance (in which the fuel cost is included).

The eventual costs corresponding to financial exposures in the CCEE short-term market were not considered in the present comparison due to the difficulty of anticipating the value of Liquidation of Differences Price – PLD and the fact that this Price is equally applicable to supply deviations of all thermal power plants.

For the Electric System the commercialization and production cost of electric energy from thermal power plants by energy unit
(R$ / MWh) is therefore given by the following formula:

 CT = (RF + EG x CVU) / EC   (1), where:

CT = Total cost for contracted energy(R$ / MWh)

 RF = Annual fixed revenue (R$ / year)

 CVU = Variable Unitary Cost (R$ / MWh)

 EC = Tendered energy (MWh / year)

 EG = Generated energy (MWh / year)

 According to the rules applicable to the electric energy auctions, the fuel cost necessary for plant generating at its declared inflexibility level, whenever applicable, should be included in the annual fixed revenue by the enterprise participating in the auction and the variable generation cost is applicable only to the variable generation portion above the declared inflexibility level.

3 - Costs of Angra 3

ELETRONUCLEAR has estimated the following data regarding the commercialization of energy from Angra 3:

Nominal Power: 1435 MW (considered a power upgrade relative to the original 1.350 MW power of the project)

Internal Consumption: 75 MW

Availability reduction due to outages for fuel recharge and maintenance: 160 MW average

Contracted energy: 1200 MW average

Projected tariff: 140 R$ / MWh

Fuel cost: 22 R$ / MWh (already included in the tariff)

Annual revenue corresponding to the contracted energy: R$ 1,471,680, 000.00 / year

It should be observed that the Angra 3 fuel cost is already considered in the tariff and therefore it is not an additional cost for the Electrical System whereas it is the case of energy availability contracts of new energy auctions applicable to thermal power plants.

4 - Results of New Energy Auction held in 10/16/07

Table I presents the results of the energy auction (A - 5) held in 10/16/07.

Table I - (A - 5) Auction held on 10/16/2007

  

Hydroelectric Power Plants

Seller

Power Plants

River

Submarket

Energy sold (MW) average

Bidding price (R$MWh)

Selling price (R$MWh)

Cemig GT

Funil

Grande

SE

43

125.90

125.90

Eletrosul

São Domingos

Verde

SE

36

126.00

126.57

Foz do Chapecó

Foz do Chapecó

Uruguai

S

259

125.49

131.49

Gefac

Serra do Facão

São Marcos

SE

121

115.00

131.49

Sesa

Estreito

Tocantins

N

256

126.00

126.57

Total/Average

715

123.95

129.14

 

Thermoelectric Power Plants

Seller

Power plant

Fuel

Submarket

Energy sold (MW) average

ICB (R$/MWh)

Fixed Revenue (R$/year)

Diferencial

Termomaranhão

Coal

N

315

128.95

220,677,302,63

Furnas

Santa Cruz Nova – Un. 1 e 2

Natural Gas

SE

351

129.34

180,599,281.78

MPX

MPX

Coal

NE

615

125.95

417,424,380.63

Suape II

Suape II

Fuel oil

NE

265

131,49

141,700,000.00

Thermes

Maracanau

Fuel oil

NE

51

130.95

27,209,796.68

 

 

 

 

1597

128.37

-

 

Total/Average

2,312

127.00

-

The Variable Generation Cost of the thermal power plants that participated in the auction were not made public by EPE. For the present analysis the average values considered were those of the NEWAVE program used in the EPE 2007 Expansion Decennial Plan for each fuel (gas, oil and coal) of the plants that won the auction. These values are shown in Table II.

Table II – Average values of fuel costs of thermal power plants that won the (A-5) auction held in 10/16/07

Fuel

Contracted energy

Fuel cost

(MWavg)

(R$ / MWh)

Gas

351

107.92

 Oil

316

419.92

Coal

930

87.36

 Source: EPE 2007-2016 Expansion Decennial Plan

5 – Comparison of Costs:

Figure I shows:

a)       the values corresponding to the costs of thermal power plants that won the auction of new energy held in 10/16/07 as a function of the “Utilization Factor” (Fu) defined here as the ratio between the generated energy (EG) and the  contracted energy (EC) for each plant, that is:

      Fu = EG / EC , where EG and EC are indicated in formula (1) presented in item 2;

b)       the values corresponding to the Angra 3 costs, also as a function of the Utilization Factor.

It should be observed that the Angra 3 cost is independent on the fuel cost because this cost is included in the foreseen tariff for Angra 3 as already explained in the previous item 3. Therefore the curve corresponding to the Angra 3 cost is represented by a segment of a straight line parallel to the horizontal axis.

 Comparison between the Angra 3 consts and the costs corresponding to the thermoeledtric plants that won the new energy auction of 10/16/2007, as a function to the Utilization Factor

(*) The fuel cost for Angra 3 is included in its tariff

Figure I: Comparison between the Angra 3 costs and those of the thermal power plants that won the (A - 5) auction held on 10/16/2007, as a function of the Utilization Factor.

6 - Conclusion:

Figure I of item 5 above indicates that the Angra 3 costs are lower than those of the thermal power plants that won the new energy auction held in 10/16/07, for Utilization Factors above the values indicated in what follows:

a)       19% for  oil plants;

b)       53% for coal plants; and

c)       65% for gas plants.


[1] ELETRONUCLEAR’s Commercialization Advisory Group

 

Graphic Edition/Edição Gráfica:
MAK
Editoração Eletrônic
a

Revised/Revisado:
Friday, 25 April 2008
.

Contador de visitas