| 摘要 | ��
Research Purpose
Until the early 1980s, oil was the main fuel for power generation in Korea, But, two oil shocks drove Korea to minimize oil use and to diversify power generation fuels with nuclear, liquified natural gas(LNG) and coal. As a result, the latter three have been the main fuels for power generation since the second half of the 1980s.
But it is highly probable that power industry restructuring will affect the fuel mix of electricity generation. Restructuring will induce fierce competition between power generation companies. Therefore, each company will make best efforts to minimize its fuel cost. These efforts may be exhausting due to the high share of fuel cost (up to 70%) in total generation costs.
The purpose of this study is to analyse the possibility of fuel mix change in the power generation sector and that of heavy dependency on any one fuel after restructuring. We also took into consideration the problems of fuel supply expected after electricity market reform.
Summary
In the case of the United Kingdom (UK), the number of generation companies increased from 6 in 1989, the year before the restructuring, to 35 in 2002. This resulted mainly from the new entry of generation companies adopting combined cycle gas turbines (CCGTs).
The gas share in power generation increased sharply during the 1990s; from less than 1% in 1990 to around 34% in 2000. This rise of gas share was encouraged by low gas prices as well as the coupling of gas price with coal price.
In the United State (US), on the other hand, it is difficult to observe any changes of fuel mix after the deregulation of power industries. It comes from the facts that the period of deregulation in the US was much shorter than that in the UK and that US power industry structure has been mostly private unlike the case of UK.
The generation companies in the UK were owned by the governments before the restructuring, but they were privatized after the restructuring. Therefore, prior to power industry restructuring, coal was the first choice for the protection of the domestic coal industries in the UK, but it is not so after the restructuring. In the case of the US, most of the power companies are always private even though they cannot maintain vertical integration after the deregulation. As a result, there was no change of fuel choice behavior before and after the deregulation of power industries.
The profitability of each fuel was analysed under the CBP (Cost Based Pool) and TWBP (Two Way Bidding Pool) markets in order to see the trends of fuel mix in the future. In the CBP market the most profitable fuel is coal, followed by nuclear and LNG. Under the TWBP market the order of profitability does not change, while the profitability gaps between fuels are enlarged.
The trend of the fuel mix was estimated with WASP (Wein Automatic System Planning Package) model in spite of its limitations. The simulation period is from 2004 to 2050. The following six scenarios were proposed:
1) costmin : no restriction scenario,
2) coalprice : high coal price scenario ($60/ton),
3) fixnuke : scenario for no more nuclear plant construction except Woolgin 1 & 2,
4) CO2(24) : carbon taxation scenario ($24/t-CO2 ),
5) CO2(24)&fixnuke : CO2(24) + fixnuke scenario, and
6) gasprice : scenario for gas price down by 30%.
The results of simulation show that the share of coal reaches 60-70% in 2030, and continues to increase steadily after 2030 under the costmin, fixnuke and gasprice scenarios. But the share of nuclear is decreasing from 20-30% in 2015 to below 10% in 2050.
On the other hand, the share of coal is steadily decreasing to 24% in 2030 under the coalprice scenario, and is stable after 2030, while the nuclear share is increasing to 60% of peak in 2025, then decreasing thereafter. Under the CO2(24) scenario, the share of coal steadily decreasing to 10% in 2030, and is stable thereafter, while that of nuclear is increasing to 73% of peak in 2030, then decreasing 2050.
The share of LNG does not show big differences between the scenarios. It is expected to decrease to 10% in 2030 under all scenarios, then increasing a little to 15-20% in 2050. But under the CO2(24) scenario, the share of LNG will have a trend to decrease after 2040 to 12% in 2050, while it will show a similar trend with the other scenarios until 2040. This result comes from the low competitiveness of LNG vis-a-vis coal and nuclear even in the case of gas price dropping by 30%, imposition of carbon tax or coal price surge to $60/ton.
Research Results & Policy Suggestions
From the results of scenario analysis, we can conclude that the share of generating facilities for base-load needs to be kept at about 75% in order to minimize the whole generation cost, even in case of load factor decrease to 65% in 2050 from 77% in 2003. From this perspective, the optimal share of nuclear plus coal in 2003 is estimated at above 65%.
The government will continue to owen the nuclear generation company after the power industry restructuring, and make decision on the construction of nuclear power plants under social consent. Therefore, the other power generation companies can choose only between coal and LNG for the construction of new large power plants. In this situation, coal is expected to remain as a preferred fuel in the long term in spite of various restrictions.
Therefore, the share of nuclear generation will play a critical role in fuel mix of the power generation sector. If the share of nuclear is increasing, that of coal will be limited; otherwise the construction of coal-fired power plants will be expanded. It results from the low competitiveness of LNG vis-a-vis coal even under a carbon tax levy or high coal price.
As a result, it is important to arrive at a social consent as soon as possible on the role of nuclear in the power generation and the level of electricity price rise in the case that less nuclear is adopted in the future, The expansion of LNG share also needs to be encouraged to prevent excessive dependency on coal, especially for the case to depend less on nuclear. In addition, to cope with high dependency on coal, policy measures need to be taken to secure overseas coal through encouraged participation in coal mine development.
finally, this study assumed a perfectly competitive market in the power sector. Therefore, further study is needed for non-competitive markets, especially those under the circumstances whose decision is made on the framework for competition in the distribution sector.
186 pages, 33 refs., 67 figs., 40 tabs., Language: Korean |
