Lithuanian Energy Security Level Assessment

1. 34th IAEE International Conference „Institutions, Efficiency and Evolving Energy Technologies“ 19-23 June 2011 Stockholm, Sweden Lithuanian Energy Security Level Assessment J.Augutis, R.Krikštolaitis, L.Martišauskas, S.Pečiulytė, R.Urbonas VYTAUTAS MAGNUS UNIVERSITY Department of Mathematics and Statistics LITHUANIAN ENERGY INSTITUTE Laboratory of Nuclear Installation Safety

2. Outline • Introduction • Method of energy security level assessment: • System of indicators • Energy security evaluation scale • Results • Conclusions

3. Introduction (1) The International Energy Agency describes conception “energy supply security” as a reliable possibility to obtain proper energy quantity for reasonable price. The description of energy security according to the World Energy Council is the following: it is the protection of citizens, society, economics and state against threats, arising to reliable fuel and energy supply.

4. Introduction (2) • Approaches used for assessing security of energy supply: • geopolitical assessment of scenarios, • economical modelling, • expert risk assessment, • analysis of primary energy sources, • development of security indicators system.

5. 2009 situationof energy security of supply • oil 91,8 % • nuclear fuel 100 % • natural gas 100 % • coal and peat 90,8 %

6. Lithuanian case (1) • Prior to 2010 Lithuania was a nuclear power energy producing country. About 75% of the total Lithuanian electricity production consisted of nuclear power energy. • Due to the accession of the Republic of Lithuania to the EU, Lithuania committed to shutdown the first Ignalina NPP unit in 2004 and the second unit in 2009. • In 2010 Lithuania was producing ~40% of electricity by thermal power plants or from other sources and ~60%was importing.

7. Lithuanian case (2) As electricity production in the LPP increases gas consumption and, consequently, the dependence on it, it is obvious that this factor in its turn decreases the level of energy security. On the other hand, Lithuania can purchase a considerable amount of energy in the free energy market. Shutdown of NPP will enhance a more rapid development of renewable energy sources in Lithuania.

8. Assessment of energy security level • One of the ways to assess energy security level is to use security indicators. Security indicator is a special index which gives numerical values to important issues for security of energy sector. • Each indicator is described by presenting factual, threshold pre-critical and critical state values. • As indicators are measured by different units, their values are normalized, e.g. indicator values are transformed in 0-100% scale. • Threshold values indicate when the analysed system changes to pre-critical and critical states.

9. Energysecurity evaluation scale In order to identify the state of the system each indicator should be evaluated in points. Evaluation scale for each indicator is constructed for this purpose.

10. Systemofindicators(1) • For the assessment of the energy security level of Lithuania in different scenarios, a system of 67 energy security indicators was created. • The main aim of separate indicator is to describe the energy system by different technical, economic or socio-political elements which may impact energy security level. Therefore, all indicators were divided into three indicator blocks: technical block, economic block and socio-political block.

11. Systemofindicators(2) • The next step is to distribute indicators through groups. • The groups of technical and economic indicator blocks were distinguished according to the type of fuel used in the energy system. • Gas • Coal • Oil • Nuclear • Biofuel • + • Electricity • Heat

12. Systemofindicators(3) • The socio-political block was divided into two groups: • Geopolitical • Socio-political • The aim of the geopolitical indicators is to assess the internationally announced political ratings of the state and foreign countries, the energy resources are supplied from and through by transit. • The aim of socio-political indicators is to present the implementation of the assumed international obligations and EU directives on the part of the assessed country, and the ratio of energy consumption to GDP.

13. Energy security level calculation • The state of security of energy supply is evaluated taking into account the weights of blocks, groups and indicators as well as the evaluation of indicators according to the formula: • Each indicator weight in the group (sijk), the weight of the group in the block (sij) and block weight (si), (here i=1,…,n, j=1,…,m, k=1,…,l) is calculated or determined by expert assessment method.

14. Scenarios (1) • In 2010 the Government of the Republic of Lithuania endorsed the National Energy (Energy Independence) Strategy by Resolution No. 1426 on October 6, 2010. • According to Strategy a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal, electricity network between Lithuania and Sweden NORDBALT, etc. are going to be built. • In consideration of these facts 4 scenarios were simulated for the energy security level assessment.

15. Scenarios (2) • 2007 – Lithuanian energy system status in 2007 when Ignalina NPP second unit was normally operating. • 2010 – Lithuanian energy system status in 2010. • “NORDBALT” – electricity network between Lithuania and Sweden will be included in addition to the situation of 2010. • “LNG” – liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal will be built in Lithuania in addition to the situation of 2010.

16. Calculation results

17. Energy security level

18. Indicators that decrease ES level “Ratio of the capacity of the largest supplier of oil and its products to annual consumption” (X132) “Ratio of accumulated oil product reserves to average annual consumption” (X133) “Average ratio of average heat power units lifetime to their technical resource time” (X172) “Ratio of the amount of electricity which can be produced using fuel imported only from one supplier to the total amount of produced electricity” (X214) “Positive societal assessment concerning the development of nuclear power in the country” (X325).

19. Indicators that increase ES level “Share of maximum installed part of one technology in the total production of electricity” (X113) “Ratio of total gas pipeline capacity to maximum gas consumption” (X121) “Ratio of the electricity kWh average cost to open market average electricity kWh cost” (X212) “Ratio of gas amount purchased in the gas market to average annual gas consumption” (X221) “Ratio of the 1000 cubic meters of gas purchase cost to EU countries average gas purchase cost” (X222) “Possibility for consumers to choose a gas supplier” (X223) “Possibility for consumers to choose a gas supplier” (X224) “Average expenses for energy per inhabitant in comparison with average annual income” (X321) “Degree of undertaking the commitment with regard to renewable in the total final consumption” (X322) “Degree of following the requirements of Kyoto Protocol regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emission” (X323).

20. Conclusions (1) The simulation result showed that the shutdown of Ignalina NPP is not unambiguous for Lithuanian energy security level. It is natural that a part of energy security indicators worsened after the shutdown. This is related to the higher volumes of gas import and the increase of electricity prices.

21. Conclusions (2) However, the shutdown of Ignalina NPP has a positive influence on Lithuanian energy security. First of all, it created prerequisites for the formation of free electricity market and wider choice of power producers for consumers. The fact that after the shutdown of Ignalina NPP competition among electricity producers became possible, leading to an increased motivation to introduce renewable energy sources, may also be positively assessed.

22. Conclusions (3) The aggregation of all the positive and negative consequences lead to the conclusion that the shutdown of Ignalina NPP did not significantly change the Lithuanian energy security level. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal and electricity network between Lithuania and Sweden NordBaltwould increase the energy security level of Lithuania.

23. Thank you for your attention! Linas Martišauskas linasm@mail.lei.lt