The cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power – the case of Sweden

Abstract

To achieve the goal of deep decarbonization of the electricity system, more and more variable renewable energy (VRE) is being adopted. However, there is no consensus among researchers on whether the goal can be accomplished without large cost escalation if nuclear power is excluded in the future electricity system. In Sweden, where nuclear power generated 41% of the annual electricity supply in 2014, the official goal is 100% renewable electricity production by 2040. Therefore, we investigate the cost of a future low-carbon electricity system without nuclear power for Sweden. We model the European electricity system with a focus on Sweden and run a techno-economic cost optimization model for capacity investment and dispatch of generation, transmission, storage and demand-response, under a CO2 emission constraint of 10 g/kWh. Our results show that there are no, or only minor, cost benefits to reinvest in nuclear power plants in Sweden once the old ones are decommissioned. This holds for a large range of assumptions on technology costs and possibilities for investment in additional transmission capacity. We contrast our results with the recent study that claims severe cost penalties for not allowing nuclear power in Sweden and discuss the implications of methodology choice.2 for electricity supply [4][5][6]. In the case of Sweden, the government has set a goal of 100% renewable power production for the electricity sector by 2040 [7]. Currently, nuclear power accounts for 41% of the annual electricity production [8], however the nuclear fleet is aging and decommissioning is planned in the coming decades for economic reasons. This has spurred a political discussion about replacing the old nuclear reactors with new ones. Nuclear power is facing an uncertain future in the transition towards a low-carbon electricity system in Europe due to the risk of radiation leakage, social acceptance, and high investment cost, among other factors. Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland have decided to phase out nuclear power, while Finland and France are building new nuclear power plants.The cost difference for decarbonizing the electricity system with and without nuclear power has been subject to recent debate in the scientific community [9][10][11][12]. Some studies show that excluding nuclear power increases the electricity system cost modestly [13][14][15], while others claim that the increase in cost is substantial [16,17]. Jägemann et al. [13] investigated the decarbonization pathways of the European electricity sector and found that the total electricity system cost, together with the cost of decarbonization, would increase by 11% if nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS) were excluded. Zappa et al. [14] evaluated the cost of a 100% renewable power system for Europe and found that the system cost would be 30% higher than a carbon-neutral electricity system which excludes nuclear and CCS. Pattupara and Kannan [15] analyzed the low-carbon electricity pathways in Switzerland and its neighboring countries and showed that t...

Economic analysis of the early market of centralized photovoltaic parks in Sweden

“…Looking at the O&M f [29,30,32], estimate costs that are a little bit lower, but in the same range as the result of this study, while [31] greatly overestimated the cost for running a PV park.…”

“…When it comes to the yield of PV parks, the only value that stands out is the 1 375 MWh/MW p assumption made in Ref. [31]. This is probably an overestimation as none of the investigated PV parks in this study come close to this value.…”

“…Comparing the result of this study to the assumed economic key parameters for centralized PV parks in some recent modelling studies of future Swedish power system [29e32], give quite large differences for some parameters, which can be seen in Table 4. The assumed lifetime varies from 25 years [31] to 40 years [32] which is the same deviation as the presumed lifetimes of the PV parks in this study. When it comes to the yield of PV parks, the only value that stands out is the 1 375 MWh/MW p assumption made in Ref.…”

“…This provided that the O&M costs and the CoC do not increase dramatically. This may lead to a rapid expansion of centralized PV power, which will go against the current predictions made by academics [31,32] and Swedish authorities [28,30].…”

“…Furthermore, the Swedish Energy Agency expects PV to contribute to about between 8.6 and 9.7 TWh of electricity production in 2050 in their different longterm scenarios, where a clear majority comes from decentralized rooftop installations [29]. An academic example is a techno-economic cost optimization study for 2045, where centralized PV power production was modelled to be only 1.8 TWh if the transmission interconnection to neighbouring countries was kept at the current level and 0 TWh if the model allowed new transmission interconnection [31].…”