2010年-世界发展银行全球_Sri_Lanka___Environmental_Iissues_in_the_Power_Sector_255页_4mb

Summary of Sri Lanka: Environmental Issues in the Power Sector

Core Content

This report, prepared for the World Bank, evaluates the environmental and economic implications of various power generation technologies and policies in Sri Lanka, with a focus on the transition from hydro and oil-based generation to coal-fired power plants. The analysis is based on the Long-Term Generation Expansion Plan (LTGEP) and considers both the current and future environmental regulations, as well as the potential trade-offs between cost, emissions, and energy security.

Main Points

1. Power Sector Overview

• Historical Growth: Between 1990 and 2008, electricity sales tripled, from 2,394 GWh to 8,349 GWh.
• Access to Electricity: Households with access to electricity increased from 29% in 1990 to about 85% in 2009.
• Fuel Mix: Before the mid-1990s, hydropower dominated the electricity generation. However, due to the lack of new hydro potential, oil-fired plants became the main source, especially in the Western Province.
• Coal Development: Despite early plans, coal-fired power plants were not implemented until the end of 2010. The first coal-fired plant at Puttalam is expected to be commissioned by 2010, followed by Trincomalee in 2014. The Upper Kotmale hydropower project is also expected in 2011, reducing oil's dominance in the fuel mix.

2. Environmental Regulations and Standards

• Air Quality Standards: Introduced in 1994, tightened in 2008. These are less strict than WHO guidelines but still relevant.
• Emission Limits: Draft standards for coal-fired plants include 800 mg/Nm³ for SO₂, 650 mg/Nm³ for NOx, and 100 mg/Nm³ for particulate matter.
• FGD and Emissions: The Puttalam coal plant is required to use low-sulphur coal (under 0.65%), but FGD is not mandatory. However, CEB has voluntarily adopted FGD to allow flexibility in coal sourcing and to meet stricter standards.
• Damage Costs: Environmental damage costs are calculated, but they are not yet significant enough to affect the cost of power generation.

3. Technology Options Evaluated

• CCGT (Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine): Two variants (autodiesel and fuel oil) were considered. CCGT is more efficient and emits less CO₂ compared to oil-fired plants.
• Open Cycle Combustion Turbine (OCGT): Less efficient than CCGT, leading to higher emissions and costs.
• Supercritical Coal Technology: More efficient than conventional coal, resulting in lower emissions per kWh.
• LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas): Has lower SOx and particulate emissions, and when used in combined-cycle plants, results in lower CO₂ emissions.
• Petroleum Coke: A potential alternative to coal, but its use is still under consideration due to the early stage of the proposed refinery project.
• Pumped Storage: Helps increase thermal plant utilization and reduce cycling, thus improving efficiency.
• Demand-Side Management (DSM): Includes policies like banning incandescent bulbs and phasing out conventional lighting, which can reduce energy consumption and emissions.
• Non-Conventional Renewable Energy (NCRE): Includes small hydro, wind, biomass, and waste-based technologies. A policy to increase NCRE to 10% by 2015 was considered.

4. Policy Scenarios

• Sector Reform: Focuses on improving efficiency and reducing costs.
• Renewable Energy Targets: Aims to increase the share of NCRE in the energy mix.

5. Multi-Attribute Assessment

• Attributes Evaluated: Cost per kWh, CO₂ emissions, SO₂ emissions, energy security index, and average consumer tariff.
• Trade-off Analysis: Used to compare the environmental and economic impacts of different technologies and policies.
• Reference Case: Dominated by coal-fired generation, with 88% of new capacity expected to be coal-based by 2022.
• Environmental Impact: Increased coal use leads to a ten-fold rise in CO₂ emissions and a doubling of SO₂ emissions by 2028.

6. Implications for Decision Makers

• Cost vs. Environment: Coal offers the lowest cost but raises environmental concerns.
• Policy Trade-offs: The report does not recommend specific policies but provides a framework for assessing trade-offs between cost, emissions, and energy security.
• Future Outlook: The report highlights the need for careful consideration of environmental impacts as coal becomes a dominant fuel in the power sector.

Key Information

• Tariff Trends: In the reference case, retail tariffs are expected to fall from 12.2 cents/kWh in 2008 to less than 10 cents/kWh by 2015.
• CO₂ Emissions: By 2028, CO₂ emissions from coal would increase tenfold, reaching 1.3 tonnes per capita.
• SO₂ Emissions: Will double by 2028, but per kWh emissions will be halved due to increased electricity sales.
• FGD Use: Voluntary at Puttalam plant, but may be necessary to meet emission standards.
• Pumped Storage and DSM: Can improve efficiency and reduce emissions by managing demand and increasing thermal plant utilization.
• NCRE Development: Targeted to reach 10% of the energy mix by 2015, with associated cost and emission trade-offs.
• LNG Potential: Offers a cleaner alternative to oil, but its cost and supply chain are still under evaluation.

Conclusion

The report concludes that coal-fired power plants, compliant with environmental regulations, are the least-cost option for base-load generation. However, the environmental trade-offs must be carefully considered, especially in terms of SO₂ and GHG emissions. The multi-attribute analysis provides a framework for decision-makers to evaluate different technologies and policies based on their environmental and economic impacts. The study emphasizes the importance of balancing cost and sustainability in the power sector's future development.