Electricity - MESSAGE-GLOBIOM

From IAMC-Documentation
Jump to: navigation, search

Model Documentation - MESSAGE-GLOBIOM

Corresponding documentation
Previous versions
Model information
Model link
Institution International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Austria, http://data.ene.iiasa.ac.at/message-globiom/.
Solution concept General equilibrium (closed economy)
Solution method Optimization
Anticipation

MESSAGE covers a large number of electricity generation options utilizing a wide range of primary energy sources. For fossil-based electricity generation technologies, typically a number of different technologies with different efficiencies, environmental characteristics and costs is represented. For example, in the case of coal, MESSAGE distinguishes subcritical and supercritical pulverized coal (PC) power plants where the subcritical variant is available with and without flue gas desulpherization/denox and one internal gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant. The superciritical PC and IGCC plants are also available with carbon capture and storage (CCS) which also can be retrofitted to some of the existing PC power plants. Table 1 below shows the different power plant types represented in MESSAGE.

Four different nuclear power plant types are represented in MESSAGE-GLOBIOM, i.e. two light water reactor types, a fast breeder reactor and a high temperature reactor, but only the two light water types are included in the majority of scenarios being developed with MESSAGE in the recent past. In addition, MESSAGE includes a representation of the nuclear fuel cycle, including reprocessing and the plutonium fuel cycle, and keeps track of the amounts of nuclear waste being produced.

The conversion of five renewable energy sources to electricity is represented in MESSAGE-GLOBIOM (see Table 1). For wind power, both on- and offshore electricity generation are covered and for solar energy, photovoltaics (PV) and solar thermal (concentrating solar power, CSP) electricity generation are included in MESSAGE (see also sections on Non-biomass renewables of MESSAGE-GLOBIOM and Grid, pipelines and other infrastructure of MESSAGE-GLOBIOM).

Most thermal power plants offer the option of coupled heat production (CHP, see Table 1). This option is modeled as a passout turbine via a penalty on the electricity generation efficiency. In addition to the main electricity generation technologies described in this section, also the co-generation of electricity in conversion technologies primarily devoted to producing non-electric energy carriers (e.g., synthetic liquid fuels) is included in MESSAGE (see sections on Liquid fuels of MESSAGE-GLOBIOM and Gaesous fuels of MESSAGE-GLOBIOM).

Table 1: List of electricity generation technologies represented in MESSAGE-GLOBIOM by energy source
Energy source Technology CHP option
Coal subcritical PC power plant without desulphurization/denox yes
subcritical PC power plant with desulphurization/denox yes
supercritical PC power plant with desulphurization/denox yes
supercritical PC power plant with desulphurization/denox and CCS yes
IGCC power plant yes
IGCC power plant with CCS yes
Oil heavy fuel oil steam power plant yes
light fuel oil steam power plant yes
light fuel oil combined cycle power plant yes
Gas gas steam power plant yes
gas combustion turbine gas yes
combined cycle power plant yes
Nuclear nuclear light water reactor (Gen II) yes
nuclear light water reactor (Gen III+) yes
fast breeder reactor
high temperature reactor
Biomass biomass steam power plant yes
biomass IGCC power plant yes
biomass IGCC power plant with CCS yes
Hydro hydro power plant (2 cost categories) no
Wind onshore wind turbine no
offshore wind turbine no
Solar solar photovoltaics (PV) no
concentrating solar power (CSP)
Geothermal geothermal power plant yes

Technological change in MESSAGE is generally treated exogenously, although pioneering work on the endogenization of technological change in energy-engineering type models has been done with MESSAGE (Messner, 1997 1). The current cost and performance parameters, including conversion efficiencies and emission coefficients is generally derived from the relevant engineering literature. For the future alternative cost and performance projections are usually developed to cover a relatively wide range of uncertainties that influences model results to a good extent. As an example, Figure 1 and Figure 2 below provide an overview of costs ranges for a set of key energy conversion technologies (Fricko et al., 2016 2).

Figure 1: Cost indicators for thermoelectric power-plant investment (Fricko et al., 2016)
1

In Figure 1, the black ranges show historical cost ranges for 2005. Green, blue, and red ranges show cost ranges in 2100 for SSP1, SSP2, and SSP3, respectively (see descriptions of the SSP narratives in section ADD LINKS ONCE SSP INFO HAS BEEN ADDED). Global values are represented by solid ranges. Values in the global South are represented by dashed ranges. The diamonds show the costs in the “North America” region. CCS – Carbon Capture and Storage; IGCC – Integrated gasification combined cycles; ST – Steam turbine; CT – Combustion turbine; CCGT – Combined cycle gas turbine (Fricko et al., 2016 2).

Figure 2: Cost indicators for non-thermoelectric power-plant investment (Fricko et al., 2016)
1

In Figure 2, the black ranges show historical cost ranges for 2005. Green, blue, and red ranges show cost ranges in 2100 for SSP1, SSP2, and SSP3, respectively. Global values are represented by solid ranges. Values in the global South are represented by dashed ranges. The diamonds show the costs in the “North America” region. PV – Photovoltaic (Fricko et al., 2016 2).

References

  1. ^  | |  Sabine Messner (1997). Endogenized technological learning in an energy systems model. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 7 (3), 291--313.
  2. a b c  | |  Oliver Fricko, Petr Havlik, Joeri Rogelj, Zbigniew Klimont, Mykola Gusti, Nils Johnson, Peter Kolp, Manfred Strubegger, Hugo Valin, Markus Amann, Tatiana Ermolieva, Nicklas Forsell, Mario Herrero, Chris Heyes, Georg Kindermann, Volker Krey, David L McCollum, Michael Obersteiner, Shonali Pachauri, Shilpa Rao, Erwin Schmid, Wolfgang Schoepp, Keywan Riahi (2016). The marker quantification of the shared socioeconomic pathway 2: a middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century. Global Environmental Change, In press ().