Skip to content

Upcoming Power Projects in Iceland

The following list explains what power projects are being considered in Iceland, according to the Icelandic Master Plan for Nature Protection and Energy Utilization. The projects have been cost analyzed (levelized cost of energy; LCOE), as described in a recent report published by the Icelandic Energy Industry Association (Samorka).

The projects are classified into three different groups (not all the possibilities have been officially cost-analyzed):

Utilization category: The project is likely to be developed if/when there is power demand and interest by the energy sector.

Projects on hold: More information and/or data is needed to decide if the project will be classified as Utilization or Protection.

Protection category: The project is unlikely to be developed, due to environmental issues.

The current classification is being reconsidered by the government  However, it is the Icelandic Parliament (Alþingi) that takes final decision regarding how each project is categorized. This means that over time, project(s) may be moved from one category to another, based on a political decision by the Parliament. The following classification is up to date as of August 2016. Note that in Samorka’s report on the LCOE, the cheapest option, Norðlingaölduveita, is said to be on hold. In fact this option is currently in the protection category.

 Project name Current  Type MW Annual LCOE
  classification GWh USD/MWh
1 Norðlingaölduveita* Protection Hydro n/a 670 22.50
2 Búlandsvirkjun On hold Hydro 150 1,057 25.00
3 Jökulsárveita/Blönduveita On hold Hydro n/a 100 25.00
4 Urriðafossvirkjun On hold Hydro 140 1,037 25.00
5 Þeistareykir I** and II Utilisation Geothermal 270 2,214 28.90
6 Hrafnabjargavirkjun* On hold Hydro 89 585 30.50
7 Villinganesvirkjun On hold Hydro 33 215 30.50
8 Skrokkölduvirkjun On hold Hydro 45 345 30.50
9 Hólmsárvirkjun* Protection Hydro 72 470 30.50
10 Bjarnarflag Utilisation Geothermal 90 756 35.20
11 Meitillinn Utilisation Geothermal 45 369 35.20
12 Sandfell Utilisation Geothermal 100 820 35.20
13 Sveifluháls Utilisation Geothermal 100 820 35.20
14 Austurengjar On hold Geothermal 100 820 35.20
15 Gjástykki On hold Geothermal 50 420 35.20
16 Trölladyngja On hold Geothermal 100 820 35.20
17 Bitra Protection Geothermal 135 1,100 35.20
18 Brennisteinsfjöll Protection Geothermal 90 711 35.20
19 Hvammsvirkjun Utilisation Hydro 93 270 38.80
20 Búðartunguvirkjun On hold Hydro 27 230 38.80
21 Hagavatnsvirkjun On hold Hydro 20 120 38.80
22 Holtavirkjun On hold Hydro 57 450 38.80
23 Hraunavirkjun* On hold Hydro 126 731 38.80
24 Selfossvirkjun On hold Hydro 35 258 38.80
25 Stóra-Laxárvirkjun Unclassified Hydro 35 200 38.80
26 Tungnaárlón On hold Hydro n/a 70 38.80
27 Bláfellsvirkjun Protection Hydro 89 516 38.80
28 Djúpárvirkjun Protection Hydro 86 499 38.80
29 Markarfljótsvirkjun Protection Hydro 121 702 38.80
30 Gráuhnúkar Utilisation Geothermal 45 369 44.80
31 Eldvörp Utilisation Geothermal 50 410 44.80
32 Hverahlíð Utilisation Geothermal 90 738 44.80
33 Krafla II Utilisation Geothermal 150 1,260 44.80
34 Stóra-Sandvík Utilisation Geothermal 50 410 44.80
35 Botnafjöll On hold Geothermal 90 711 44.80
36 Fremrinámar On hold Geothermal 100 840 44.80
37 Grashagi On hold Geothermal 90 711 44.80
38 Hágönguvirkjun On hold Geothermal 150 1,260 44.80
39 Innstidalur On hold Geothermal 45 369 44.80
40 Sandfell On hold Geothermal 90 711 44.80
41 Þverárdalur On hold Geothermal 90 738 44.80
42 Grændalur Protection Geothermal 120 984 44.80
43 Hverabotn Protection Geothermal 90 711 44.80
44 Kisubotnar Protection Geothermal 90 711 44.80
45 Neðri-Hveradalir Protection Geothermal 90 711 44.80
46 Þverfell Protection Geothermal 90 711 44.80
47 Blanda II Utilisation Hydro 31 194 49.70
48 Hvalárvirkjun Utilisation Hydro 55 320 49.70
49 Austurgilsvirkjun On hold Hydro 35 228 49.70
50 Blöndudalsvirkjun On hold Hydro 16 92 49.70
51 Brúarárvirkjun On hold Hydro 23 133 49.70
52 Hafrálónsárvirkjun efri On hold Hydro 15 87 49.70
53 Hafrálónsárvirkjun neðri On hold Hydro 78 452 49.70
54 Haukholtavirkjun On hold Hydro 17 99 49.70
55 Hestvatnsvirkjun On hold Hydro 34 197 49.70
56 Hofsárvirkjun On hold Hydro 39 226 49.70
57 Hverfisfljótsvirkjun On hold Hydro 42 243 49.70
58 Hvítá við Norðurreyki On hold Hydro 14 82 49.70
59 Kaldbaksvirkjun On hold Hydro 47 273 49.70
60 Kljáfossvirkjun On hold Hydro 16 93 49.70
61 Núpsárvirkjun On hold Hydro 71 412 49.70
62 Reyðarvatnsvirkjun On hold Hydro 14 82 49.70
63 Skatastaðavirkjun* On hold Hydro 156 1,090 49.70
64 Vatnsdalsárvirkjun On hold Hydro 28 162 49.70
65 Gýgarfossvirkjun Protection Hydro 22 128 49.70
66 Bakkahlaup On hold Geothermal 15 119 57.30
67 Hrúthálsavirkjun On hold Geothermal 20 160 57.30
68 Hveravallavirkjun On hold Geothermal 10 79 57.30
69 Reykjabólsvirkjun On hold Geothermal 10 79 57.30
70 Sandfellsvirkjun On hold Geothermal 10 79 57.30
71 Sköflungsvirkjun On hold Geothermal 90 711 57.30
72 Seyðishólavirkjun On hold Geothermal 10 79 57.30
73 Fljótshnjúksvirkjun On hold Hydro 58 405 60.50
74 Vörðufellsvirkjun On hold Hydro 58 174 60.50
75 Glámuvirkjun On hold Hydro 67 400 nyca
76 Arnardalsvirkjun* Protection Hydro 587 3,404 nyca
77 Bjallavirkjun Protection Hydro 46 310 nyca
78 Blöndulundur Unclassified Wind 200 705 nyca
79 Búrfellslundur Unclassified Wind 100 350 nyca

 

Notes:
* The project may be developed in a different way for less environmental impacts, resulting in lower generation.
** 45 MW station at Þeistareykir is already under construction, with the electricity sold (long-term contract).
n/a Projects involving new reservoir for current power stations (turbines may be added, but not necessarily).
nyca Projects that have not yet been officially cost-analyzed.

———————————————————————————-

The list above may change at any time and new projects not listed may be introduced and developed.

Planned 45 MW wind power project of Biokraft in Southern Iceland is not included on the list.

No planned power projects under 10 MW (mainly small hydro) are included on the list.

Cost estimates do not include transmission or connection cost.

The list is up to date @ August 2016.

The Wish-List of the Icelandic Energy Industry

Iceland may offer numerous new renewable energy projects where levelized cost of energy (LCOE) is very low. Or as low as 22.50 USD/MWh.

The weighted average cost (LCOE) for all new projects in Iceland needed to meet increased power demand until 2035, could be as low as 26.93 USD/MWh. This can be seen from a new report published by the Icelandic Energy Industry Association (Samorka). However, to realize such a low LCOE the Icelandic energy industry would have to be able to develop several projects that are currently not classified for development/utilization. When only taking into account projects already classified for utilization, the LCOE is substantially higher or 34.41 USD/MWh. Note that those figures are an estimation by contractors working for the Icelandic Energy Industry Association, and are based on cost-information from the Icelandic National Energy Agency (NEA).

LCOE for Projects in Utilization Category is 34 USD/MWh

The Icelandic government has adopted a special Master Plan for Nature Protection and Energy Utilization, where possible new hydro- and geothermal power projects are classified into three categories. The categories are protection, on-hold, and utilization. Many of the possible new energy projects have not made it into the utilization category.

Iceland-New-Power-Projects-Utilization-Category_Askja-Energy-Partners_August-2016The table at left lists the lowest-cost hydro- and geothermal power projects planned by the Icelandic government to be realized, currently classified in utilization category. Some of these projects have substantial higher LCOE than the lowest-cost projects not categorized for utilization. Note that the list is not absolute; for example the Eldvörp project may be developed before the Gráuhnjúkar project.

As can be seen on the table, the weighted average LCOE for all projects already categorized for utilization, needed to meet increased domestic demand until 2035, is close to 34 USD/MWh. Which probably explains why Icelandic energy companies are now, according to sources within the industry, offering new long-term power contracts where the tariffs are as low as 34-35 USD/MWh (common unofficial starting tariff; the advertised tariff is 43 USD/MWh).

Different Classifications May Offer LCOE as Low as 27 USD/MWh

Being able to offer new power contracts with a starting price close to 34 USD/MWh, may be quite competitive having regard to the international power market. However, Icelandic energy firms are eager to be able to develop projects that have even lower LCOE. Thus, the industry hopes to have several low-cost projects re-classified by the Icelandic parliament (Alþingi).

Iceland-New-Power-Projects-Wish-List_Askja-Energy-Partners_-Twitter-August-2016To reach the lower LCOE of 26.93 USD/MWh, several projects need to be re-classified. Meaning low-cost projects that are now classified as protection or on-hold, would be re-classified as projects in utilization category. This is illustrated on the table at below.

If the energy industry will be able to convince the Icelandic government and parliament to move certain possible projects from the categories of protection and on-hold, to the utilization category, the levelized cost of new generation needed until 2035 may drop from approximately USD 34 USD/MWh to close to only 27 USD/MWh (meaning almost 20% lower cost). So, the projects listed on the table at left can be said to reflect the wish-list of the Icelandic energy industry (the industry hoping to have all these projects listed for utilization).

With IceLink LCOE Could be Somewhere Between 28-37 USD/MWh

The two tables above also illustrate how different selection of projects affect the LCOE when/if the IceLink subsea power cable between Iceland and United Kingdom (UK) will be realized. If power will be exported from Iceland to UK, Icelandic generation naturally needs to increase more than without IceLink (as we have explained earlier here at the Icelandic and Northern Energy Portal). Depending  on which projects will/would be developed with IceLink, the LCOE for new traditional hydro- and geothermal projects could be as low as 28.49 USD/MWh (note that the overall LCOE for all the generation needed for IceLink would be higher, as it is expected that close to 550 MW of wind power would also be developed in Iceland to fulfill the demand of the cable). To reach such a low target for LCOE, 28.49 USD/MWh, the Icelandic energy industry would have to have its wish-list, as shown on the second table, accepted by the Icelandic authorities.

Holmsa-Axlarfoss

Having regard to projects currently categorized for utilization in the Master Plan, the LCOE will be much higher (with IceLink) than the said 28.49 USD/MWh. The LCOE for new traditional hydro- and geothermal stations currently categorized for utilization and needed for IceLink, is expected to be 37.21 USD/MWh (as can be seen on the first table above). Which is close to 30% more than the low-cost options on the wish-list. Thus the Icelandic government and politicians now face difficult and controversial decisions how to balance the economics and environmental issues, when deciding if changes will be made to the Master Plan. It is expected that a new version of the Master Plan may be adopted by the Parliament (Alþingi) even before the end of this year (2016).

Almost 1,000 MW of New Large Hydro- and Geothermal Power Plants Until 2035

If IceLink subsea HVDC power cable will be constructed, it is expected that totally 954 MW of new traditional large hydro- and geothermal plants will be needed in Iceland. These power plants would be constructed during the next two decades.

IceLink-Kvika-Poyry_New-Power-Stations_Askja-Energy-Partners-Twitter-_July-2016According to the Icelandic Master Plan for Nature Protection and Energy Utilization, the Icelandic government would most likely fulfill the increased demand by permitting the development of twelve new large hydro- and geothermal projects (as listed on the table at left). These are two hydropower projects and ten geothermal projects (or nine projects if Þeistareykir I and II would be defined as one project).

The ten geothermal projects are Þeistareykir I and Þeystareykir II in NE-Iceland, Bjarnarflag and Krafla II in NE-Iceland (Krafla I was constructed almost 40 years ago), Gráuhnúkar and Meitillinn in the Hengill geothermal area in SW-Iceland, Eldvörp and Stóra-Sandvík on the Reykjanes peninsula in SW-Iceland, and Sandfell and Sveifluháls in the Krýsuvík area in SW-Iceland. The two hydropower projects would be Blanda II in NE-Iceand and Hvammsvirkjun in Þjórsá in S-Iceland.

Eldvorp-Geothermal-Area-IcelandAll these twelve projects are already defined in utilization-category in the Master Plan for Nature Protection and Energy Utilization. However, some of these projects are somewhat costly to develop when compared to all possible energy projects in Iceland (which means there are several cheaper options available, although today they are not classified as utilization-projects, by either classified as protected or on hold).

Recently, the Icelandic Energy Industry Organization and some of the power companies in Iceland started pushing for changes of the Master Plan, to have the Icelandic government and the parliament (Alþingi) to include several other lower-cost projects in the utilization-category (we will soon explain the cost-issues further, here at the Independent Icelandic and Northern Energy Portal). As several of the cheapest options for harnessing more hydro- or geothermal power are in environmentally sensitive areas, there will without doubt be strong opposition against major changes of the Master Plan.

IceLink-Kvika-Poyry_Increase-in-Power-Generation_2015-2035_Askja-Energy-Partners-Table-Portal_July-2016If/when the IceLink project will go through, the total Icelandic power generation will have to increase enormously. Most of the new generation, or 7,400 GWh of the total increase of 12,800 GWh in annual production. would be added as exported power to the UK. In this same period (2015-2035) Icelandic general consumption of electricity is expected to increase by 1,700 GWh and power consumption by heavy industries in Iceland is expected to increase by 3,700 GWh. In total, Icelandic electricity generation would thus increase 68 percent in the period 2015-2035. For more on this subject, we refer to the table at left, and our earlier post from last July 22nd.

UK-Iceland Power Cable Needs 1,459 MW of New Capacity

A subsea HVDC power cable between Iceland and the United Kingdom (UK) would call for proportionally extreme increase in Iceland’s generation capacity. According to a new report by Kvika Bank and Pöyry, Iceland needs to build new power capacity of 2,137 MW to supply both the cable and the domestic demand. The figure for the necessary new capacity for the cable only is expected to be 1.459 MW (as shown on the table below). The rest of the new capacity is to meet expected increase in domestic demand for electricity (until 2035).

IceLink-Kvika-Poyry_New-Capacity_Askja-Energy-Partners-Twitter_July-2016The cable is normally referred to as IceLink. The report by Kvika and Pöyry (available in Icelandic only) claims that high proportion of the needed new capacity for IceLink can be met with wind power (today Iceland has very small wind power industry, as new geothermal- and hydropower projects have been the least costly way to generate electricity in Iceland). The authors of the report expect that 550 MW of new wind power would be constructed to meet demand by the cable.

The second largest increase in Icelandic power capacity would be in the form of hydropower refurbishments (which would probably mostly be new turbines in current hydropower stations). This figure is expected to be 448 MW. However, the report does not explain in a clear manner how these refurbishments would be carried out. From the report it is also somewhat unclear why it is believed that 550 MW of new wind power will be a good opportunity for the business case – instead of for example somewhat less wind power and somewhat more hydropower.

Iceland-Small-Hydro-Power-Bruarvirkjun-Project_9-MWSubstantial part of the expected new Icelandic capacity until 2035 would come from new small hydropower stations. Such new small hydropower stations, each with a capacity less than 10 MW, would in total be close to 150 MW. This would probably mean dozens of new small running-river hydropower projects in Iceland. Such projects tend to be more costly than the traditional large Icelandic hydropower projects. However, high strike price for the electricity make such expensive projects financially viable, according to the report.

According to the report, 276 MW of new traditional hydro- and geothermal power will be needed to meet demand from the cable. Most of this capacity will be in geothermal (245 MW).

IceLink-Kvika-Poyry_New-Capacity-and-Generation_Askja-Energy-Partners-Twitter-_July-2016-2When also taking increased domestic power demand into account, the total new traditional hydro- and geothermal capacity needed by 2035 is expected to be 954 MW; 124 MW in traditional large hydropower and 830 MW in traditional geothermal power. Today, Iceland has 665 MW of geothermal power (and 1,986 MW of hydropower). So the expected increase in utilization of Icelandic geothermal power is quite enormous. It should be noted that figures on traditional hydro- and geothermal power projects in the report are based on the Icelandic Master Plan for Nature Protection and Energy Utilization.

According to the report, considerable part of the new Icelandic power capacity to be developed is to meet expected increased demand from heavy industries in Iceland. Today, heavy industries in Iceland (which are mostly aluminum smelters) consume close to 80% of all electricity generated in the country. According to the report by Kvika Bank and Pöyry on IceLink, all the three aluminum smelters in Iceland will continue their operations in the coming years and decades. And the authors of the report expect that in the coming years and decades power demand of heavy industries in Iceland will increase. It is noteworthy that such assumptions could change dramatically, if for example one of the aluminum smelters in Iceland would close down.

Iceland-Geothermal-Theistareykir-areaFinally we should mention that if/when IceLink will be constructed, it is expected that the total increased power capacity in Iceland will be around 77% (increase from beginning of 2016). The increase in generation will be somewhat more or close to 68%. According to the above mentioned report, all the projects to meet this increase will be developed in the next 15-20 years. We will soon be revisiting this subject, explaining in more details what power projects will be needed to meet this high increase. Obviously such an increase will/would make Iceland’s position as the world’s largest electricity producer even more pronounced.

Cost of IceLink Power Cable: 2.8 billion EUR

According to a new report by Kvika Bank and Pöyry, prepared for the Icelandic Ministry of industries and Innovation, a subsea power cable between Iceland and the United Kingdom (UK) will cost EUR 2.8 billion (USD 3.1 billion).

HVDC-Icelink_Cost_Feb-2016-3This central cost scenario includes the 1,200 km long cable with a capacity of 1,000 MW, and the converter stations at both ends of the cable. When adding the onshore transmission installations needed in Iceland for connecting the cable to the power system, the total cost (central scenario) will be close to EUR 3.5 billion (USD 3.9 billion).

The report and additional material on the IceLink-interconnector can be downloaded from the Ministry’s website (the report is in Icelandic only). Note that all cost figures quoted in this article refer to the report’s central export scenario (there are several other scenarios, including a smaller cable of 800 MW).

To realize the project, it will be necessary for the British government to make a commitment of a minimum strike price of approximately 96-99 GBP/MWh (close to 130 USD/MWh).

HVDC-Icelink_strike-prices_Feb-2016-2Such a strike price would be quite similar to the strike price for new nuclear energy in the UK (as explained on the website of the UK government). And it would be substantially lower than recently agreed strike prices for new offshore wind power.

Now it has to be seen if the UK government wishes to pay GBP 115-120 for megawatt-hour of offshore wind power generated in British waters, or pay GBP 96-99 GBP for Icelandic renewable energy.

It should be noted that most of Iceland’s generation is and will be produced by hydropower and geothermal power (wind power in Iceland will increase but still be fairly small share of the total generation). This offers IceLink the possibility of much more flexibility than new British offshore wind power does. We, here at Askja Energy Partners, will soon be explaining further how the Icelandic power for IceLink will be generated.  Stay tuned!

Iceland is the Greenest Energy Country in Europe

EU-EFTA-Renewable-Share-in-Gross-Energy-Consmuption_Askja-Energy-Partners-2016Probably not many of our readers are aware of the interesting fact that apart from the Scandinavian countries, Latvia is the greenest energy country in the European Union (EU). Only Sweden and Finland have a larger share of green energy in their gross energy consumption. However, the two greenest energy countries in Europe are Iceland and Norway (who are not members of the EU, but members of the European Free Trade Association; EFTA).

On the graph above you can see the share of renewable energy (percentage) in gross final energy consumption of each country within the EU and EFTA (the bars show the top-20 countries).

Iceland and Norway are clearly the leaders, with 77% and 69% renewable energy share respectively (in gross energy consumption). Having in  mind that no country in the world generates as much green power per capita as Iceland, it is not surprising that Iceland has the highest share of renewable energy in the gross energy consumption of all the states within EU and EFTA (with regard to energy consumption, Iceland is actually the greenest of all countries in the world).

Have in mind that the average share of renewable energy in the gross energy consumption of all the countries within the EU is currently close to 16%. And EU has the official and binding goal of increasing this share to 20% no later than 2020.

Europe-Renewable-Share-in-Gross-Energy-Consmuption_Askja-Energy-Partners-2016It is also worth noting that there are European countries outside of EU and EFTA that have very high share of renewable energy in their gross consumption mix (as can be seen on the graph at left). This especially applies to Albania (31%) and Montenegro (37%), which puts these countries in 6th and 8th place respectively (on the European list).

It is also interesting how extremely low the share of renewable energy is in Russia’s gross energy consumption (even hough Russia is the world’s fifth largest hydropower producing country). Also note how low the share of renewable energy is in countries like the UK and Holland. They need to do much better! Finally, note that not all European countries are included on the graph (countries that are not included in the data published by Eurostat, apart from Russia).

Main sources:
Eurostat – Information about consumption of energy
Eurostat – Share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption
Eurostat – Energy from renewable sources (table 1).

European countries not included on the list above:
Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Lichtenstein, Moldova, Monaco, San Marino, Ukraine, and the Vatican.

Oil Prices Must Rise… Some Day

In last February we published an article explaining that the then very low oil price (31-32 USD/barrel) were not sustainable. In the article we focused on why oil prices will soon need to be approaching 60 USD/barrel and then head towards approximately 80-90 USD/barrel.

Oil-Supply-Demand-IEA__2016-2017_June-2016Now, only five months later, the price of oil is close to 50 USD/barrel. This does not mean that higher oil price is here to stay, nor does it mean that a price close to 80-90 USD/barrel is just around the corner. The world is still experiencing quite higher crude oil supply than consumption (demand), which can also be described as over-supply of crude oil. This means that oil price may stay quite low for some time (and even become lower than it currently is). But looking a bit further ahead, the price of oil will need to be approaching 60 USD/barrel and then head towards 80-90 USD/barrel. Else, there will not be enough oil for the world.

The graph above is from IEA’s June report, predicting that oil supply and demand is heading fast towards balance, supply to be outstripped by demand in the second half of 2017. Although this prediction by the IEA may be somewhat optimistic, i.e. it may take longer time for reaching balance in the oil market, it is obvious that in the long run the over-supply will vain. And then we will eventually again experience substantially higher price for crude oil than we have today.

Oil_Global-Liquids-Supply-Cost-Curve-Explained_Askja-Energy-Partners_June-2016To explain this further, we have updated our chart (at left) explaining the cost of future’s oil production. The graph shows where the world’s oil will come from in 2025 and at what cost.

In 2025 very substantial amount of the world’s oil will come from currently producing oil fields. However, due to decline in those oil fields and due to growing oil consumption, we will also need oil from new fields (which have already been discovered and are being developed). And to be able to bring those fields in production, we will need quite high oil price.

Large share of the oil consumed in 2025 will be coming to the market even if the oil price will only be in the range of 60-80 USD/barrel. But if we are hoping to avoid oil supply crisis, the oil price needs to become even higher. Like close to 90 USD.

To ensure all this oil will be brought up from the ground, we will need substantially higher oil price than we have today. Thus, it is likely that within the next decade we will see the price of oil approach 90 USD/barrel (in present USD value).

Bogle-Vanguard-Nobody-knows-nothingOf course the oil price may in some periods become higher and sometimes it will be lower. And keep in mind that it is impossible to predict with any precision how oil consumption (oil demand) will develop in the world (the same applies to prediction for renewable energy growth). No one knows what the price of the black gold will be at a certain point of time in the future (remember the wise advice Jack Bogle received early in his carrier!). However, if the world economy is going to keep on growing, like we are used to, we will need crude oil.  And a lot of it. A decade from now it is unlikely we will have all that oil unless we are willing and able to cover a production cost of at least approximately 90 USD/barrel.

The unknowns are many and the oil markets are extremely sensitive to all kinds of events. We don’t know how the economy in Asia will grow in the coming decade. And we don’t know if we are soon to experience enormous growth in new types of vehicles, using electricity instead of fossil fuels.

BNEF-EV-Sales-Prediction-2016If the 2020’s will be the decade of the electric car, as Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) now predicts, oil demand may become a lot slower than the oil companies are assuming. Which could result in continued over-supply of oil. So it is to be seen how growing production – and lower costs – of EV’s, will affect investment decisions by the oil companies. Stay tuned!

Iceland is Green Leader in Power Production

For the last ten years, Iceland has been the world’s largest electricity producer per capita. The Icelandic generation is much higher (per capita) than in any other country. Norway comes in second place, generating close to half of the electricity per capita of that of Iceland. The Icelandic annual generation is close to 54 MWh per capita, while Norway generates close to 26 MWh per capita.

Iceland-Green-Power-Electricity-Production-Per-Capita-Comparison-2015_Askja-Energy-Partners-2016Other countries on the top-ten list of the world’s largest electricity producers per capita are Canada, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Finland, Sweden, United States of America (USA), Qatar and Bahrain.

Most of the countries on the top-ten list of the world’s highest electricity producing countries per capita generate most or all their electricity from fossil fuels (gas and coal). However, both Iceland and Norway produce close to 100% of their electricity from renewable sources (both countries draw from hydroelectric power, but Iceland has a unique energy source in its geothermal power).

Canada, Finland and Sweden all have extensive hydropower sources and utilize them for electricity generation. Thus, they might be described as semi renewable electric producers (thus marked with light green color on the graph, whereas Iceland and Norway are marked with dark green).

Electricity Statistics Update 2015

The Icelandic National Energy Authority (NEA) has published statistics regarding the electricity industry in 2015. You can access the publication in Icelandic on NEA’s website (link to the pdf-file). Here are some of the key numbers:

————————————————————————————————————————————————————– 

TOTAL ELECTRICITY GENERATION:          18,798 GWh (2015)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————– 

ELECTRICITY GENERATION SHARE BY SOURCE:

Hydro Power 13,780 GWh          73%
Geothermal Power     5,003 GWh         27%
Other 15 GWh            0%
Total 18,798 GWh        100%

NB: Electricity generated by wind power and fossil fuels was to small amount to be measured as a percentage on the scale of this table. This is the third year the NEA publishes data for generated wind power in Iceland. It was 15 GWh (4 GWh by fossil fuels and 11 GWh by wind), which was less than 0.001% of all electricity generated in Iceland in 2015. 

————————————————————————————————————————————————————– 

ELECTRICITY POWER CAPACITY:  

Hydro Power  1,986 MW
Geothermal Power     665 MW
Wind Power         3 MW
Fossil Fuels     117 MW
Total Power Capacity 2,771 MW

————————————————————————————————————————————————————– 

ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION SHARE:

Energy Intensive Industries 77%
General Consumption     18%
Other (losses)     5%
Total 100%

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

You will find more Icelandic energy data in our special data-section.

Low Aluminum Price Resulted in Lower Power Tariffs

Power tariffs to aluminum smelters in Iceland are among the lowest in the world.

Power-Tariffs-to-Aluminum-Smelters-in-World-China-and-Iceland-2016Due to low aluminum price in 2015, electricity price to aluminum smelters declined in most parts of the world during 2015. The world average smelter power tariff fell by 12% in 2015, according to CRU Group. This drop can primarily be attributed to a 15% drop in China’s average power tariff. The average power tariff in the World excluding China also fell in 2015, decreasing by 8.2%.

The average power tariff to smelters in Iceland also declined in 2015, although the decline was less than in some other areas of the world. The result was that during 2015, the average electricity price from Icelandic power company Landsvirkjun to the aluminum smelters in Iceland, was approximately 2/3 of the world average tariff to such smelters.