1 / 18

22 June 2011 I Caroline Dieckhoener

Future role of transit countries and their impact on European security of natural gas supplies. 22 June 2011 I Caroline Dieckhoener. Agenda . Motivation. Methodology. Results . Conclusion. Background and motivation. Back- ground. Decreasing European production

xarles
Download Presentation

22 June 2011 I Caroline Dieckhoener

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Future roleoftransit countries andtheirimpact on European securityofnatural gas supplies 22 June 2011 I Caroline Dieckhoener

  2. Agenda Motivation Methodology Results Conclusion

  3. Background andmotivation • Back- • ground • Decreasing European production • Increasingimportdependency • European securityofsupplypolicy • Security of gas imports • Diversificationofsupplysources • Diversificationofsupplyroutes • Transit countries andtheirimpact on securityofsupply • Severalmajorpipelineprojectsareplanned (Nord Stream, Nabucco, etc.) • Lessimportanceofformertransitpipelines? • Effects on European securityofsupply?

  4. Agenda Motivation Methodology Results Conclusion

  5. Methodology: TIGER-model

  6. Scenarios Study comprisestwoparts (fourscenariosforeachpart): • Gas flowscenariosfor 2020 – utilizationofroutes • (S0) Simulation for 2008 • (S1) Nord Stream • (S1H) Nord Stream andhighdemand • (S2) Nord Stream plus Nabucco • Security ofsupplyscenarios Nord Stream disruptionmodeled • withand • withouttransitroutes (SK, CZ)

  7. Agenda Motivation Methodology Results Conclusion

  8. Absolute changeofannual gas flowsbetween S1H and S0

  9. I. Country-specific in- andoutflows Czech Republic Slovakia Intermediate results: Low utilizationof route throughSlovakiaandespecially Czech Republic

  10. Security ofsupply in an efficientlyregulatedtransportmarket Whatif TSOs decidetoclose-down routes? Suppliers regulated Transmission systemoperators Consumers Regulator‘sdecision: Shut-down ortransporttariffsthatreflect SOS premium?

  11. Howtoanalyzeshort-termsecurityofsupplyeffects? • Start withworst-casescenario • Scenario-basedanalysis • Overviewofimpactof SOS eventsandlevelofrisks • Cost-benefitanalysis MC ofsupplyrisk = MC ofsupplysecurity (MC demandreduction = MC of additional infrastructure, accountingforprobabilityofdisruption)

  12. Scenarios Study comprisestwoparts (fourscenariosforeachpart): • Gas flowscenariosfor 2020 – utilizationofroutes • (S0) Simulation for 2008 • (S1) Nord Stream • (S1H) Nord Stream andhighdemand • (S2) Nord Stream plus Nabucco • Security ofsupplyscenarios Nord Stream disruptionmodeled • withand • withouttransitroutes (SK, CZ)

  13. (A) Nord Stream disruption – shutdownoftransitroutes – Peak day in 2020 Average European marginal supplycostchanges on peakdayweightedbydemand: 5.04% Security ofsupplyeffectsare regional

  14. Marginal supplycosts - Examples

  15. Agenda Motivation Methodology Results Conclusion

  16. Conclusion Low utilizationofformertransitroutes (SK and CZ) → shut-down? • Ifsecurityofsupplyrisks not coveredby private sector Security ofsupplyeffectsofworstcase (Nord Stream disruption)? • Marginal supplycostincreases in EU-27 onlybetween 5 to 6% on average • But risksvarysignificantlybetweentheregions in Europe • Further research: Analyzingcostsandbenefitsof SOS • Regional approach?

  17. References European Commission (2001): Green Paper: Towards a European strategy for the security of energy supply, Luxembourg.  European Parliament (2008): Security aspects of the South Stream Project. Briefing Paper Policy Department External Policies, Brussels.  EWI (2010). Model-based Analysis of Infrastructure Projects and Market Integration in Europe with Special Focus on Security of Supply Scenarios. Cologne/Germany, available at: http://www.energy-regulators.eu/portal/page/portal/EER_HOME/ EER_PUBLICATIONS/CEER_ERGEG_PAPERS/Gas/2010/EWI_Study_17062010.pdf. Lise, W., Hobbs, B. F. and van Oostvorn, F. (2008): Natural gas corridors between the EU and its main suppliers: Simulation results with the dynamic GASTALE model. Energy Policy, Vol. 36, No 6, 1890-1906.  Lochner, S. and D. Bothe (2007). FromRussiawith gas – analysisofthe Nord Stream pipelinesimpact on the European transmissionsystemwiththe TIGER-model. EWI Working Paper No. 0702, Institute ofEnergy Economics at University of Cologne Remme, U., Blesl, M. and Fahl, U. (2008): Future European gas supply in the resource triangle of the Former Soviet Union, the Middle East and Northern Africa. Energy Policy, Vol. 26, No 6, 1622-1641. Von Hirschhausen, C., Meinhart, B. and Pavel, F. (2005): Transporting Russian Gas to Western Europe – A Simulation Analysis. Energy Journal, Vol. 26, No 2, 49-68.

  18. Thankyouforyourattention. Do youhaveanyquestionsorsuggestions? Caroline Dieckhöner Institute ofEnergy Economics atthe University of Cologne (EWI) Alte Wagenfabrik Vogelsanger Str. 321 50827 Cologne, Germany Tel. +49 – 221 27729 312 E-mail: caroline.dieckhoener@uni-koeln.de

More Related