Skip to content

Posts from the ‘United Kingdom’ Category

May 23

Joint statement from UK–Iceland Energy Task Force

In October 2015, the governments of UK and Iceland agreed to create a special Energy Task Force to look at the benefits of a subsea interconnector between the two countries. The project is referred to as IceLink.

Following their work, the energy task force issued a statement on 12th July 2016, stating that their work was concluded and they would leave the decision to continue the work of the energy task force with their respective governments. The text of the statement (unsigned) can also be seen on the website of the Icelandic government. The title of the statement is “Joint statement from UK – Iceland energy task force“, and it reads as follows.

————————————————

The idea of an electricity interconnector between the UK and Iceland has been explored on various occasions in recent years. At a meeting between Prime Minister David Cameron and Prime Minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson in Reykjavík on 28 October 2015 it was agreed to explore further the possibility of an interconnector with initial discussions between the two Governments which should be concluded within six months.

Subsequently, a UK – Iceland Energy Task Force was established to carry out the discussions. The Task Force agreed that the discussions should be an early stage exploration of the issues which will inform decisions by Ministers on the extent of further work. The proposed areas for discussion between the two Governments were identified as interconnector models, regulatory treatment, financing and general impact assessment.

The objective of the UK – Iceland Energy Task Force was to consider whether further investigation of an interconnector between the UK and Iceland might have merit through identifying common ground between the two parties. It was a mutual understanding between the parties that the Task Force should conclude its work in May 2016.

Over the course of recent months, the two parties exchanged information on work already conducted, or in progress, concerning a possible interconnector between Iceland and the UK. The UK gave presentations on the UK electricity system, UK energy policy, interconnector projects, interconnector regulatory approaches and renewable support mechanisms. Iceland presented an overview of the work streams being carried out in relation to an interconnector and an overview of the Icelandic energy sector and energy policy, along with other issues related to the concept of an interconnector.

A large part of the discussions within the Task Force was on project economics, regulatory treatment and general impact assessment. Iceland presented a recent Cost Benefit Analysis and Impact Assessment, that they had commissioned on their own behalf, on an interconnector between Iceland and the UK. The UK delegation provided valuable feedback and comments on this report.

The Task Force discussed the potential mutual economic benefit for both parties in the project and the eligibility of support schemes. The Task Force acknowledged that a renewable export business model, with an appropriate support mechanism, could provide a viable business case and be compatible with a competitive market for low carbon electricity production. The interconnector‘s project costs could also be subject to an element of competition.

The Task Force acknowledged that the UK – Iceland interconnector concept is in many aspects different from other interconnector projects and that revised regulatory models may need to be considered as part of a further phase of work.

The Task Force agreed that a decision on whether to undertake a second phase of work is outside the scope of the Task Force. However, if a decision is taken to continue with a second phase of work, this could include further government-to-government discussions and investigation into regulatory approaches, revised regulatory models and a possible joint cost-benefit analysis to better understand the project economics and assumptions.

The Task Force is of the opinion that the work conducted in the last six months achieves the mandate of the group and should provide valuable information in order to assist in any decision making on the next steps of the potential UK – Iceland interconnector.

————————————————

NB: Iceland had general elections in October 2016, and now the country has a new government. Since then, there have been no formal talks between the governments of Iceland and UK on the IceLink cable project. This is not surprising as it is unclear what will be the energy policy of the UK after the Brexit.

Mar 14

IEEFA presents IceLink to be operational in 2027

In a new report, the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) introduces IceLink HVDC electric cable between Iceland and Britain as becoming operational as soon as 2027. The IEEFA conducts research and analyses on financial and economic issues related to energy and the environment. The Institute’s mission is to accelerate the transition to a diverse, sustainable and profitable energy economy and to reduce dependence on coal and other non-renewable energy resources.

One of the core findings in this new report, titled Electricity-Grid Transition in the UK: As Coal-Fired Generation Recedes, Renewables and Reliable Generation Can Fill the Gap, is that the UK grid is coping well with a coal phase-out, but requires greater investment in reliable generation to back up renewable power than the country is currently making. The report also explains how the UK is currently encouraging new investment in interconnectors; subsea cables linking its grid to neighbouring countries. The authors of the report claim such investment to be overdue, given present interconnection stands at 4GW, or 5% of existing generating capacity; just half the 10% benchmark proposed by the European Commission.

According to the report, interconnection can smooth variability in UK wind power by reaching into wider weather systems, and it can diversify generation. For example, the UK can receive electricity from hydropower stations in Norway and Iceland, where peak supply matches UK’s peak demand in winter. Also, inetrconnectors open access to various generation technologies elsewhere in continental Western Europe and to wind power in Ireland. In the UK, interconnection can lead to consumer savings of GBP 1 billion annually as a result of cheaper electricity imports, rather than having to build up all the necessary capacity within the UK.

The table at left is from the said report by IEEFA, explaining how potential electricity imports through interconnectors may offer UK an additional annual supply of 49 TWh by 2025 (if all projects proceed). This would be equivalent to more than a third of UK gas generation in 2016. One of the listed interconnector-projects is the IceLink cable, which would add close to 5 TWh. According to Natinal Grid, the IceLink is planned to be a 1,000 km long subsea cable with a capacity of 1,000 MM.

National Grid expects that the landing points for the cable will be in Northern Scotland and Southeastern Iceland. It will connect the electricity networks of Iceland and Great Britain, enabling electricity to flow in both directions and allowing electricity to be traded between the two countries.

As mentioned earlier, the IceLink-project is currently projected to be finished in 2027. According to National Grid it will make a positive contribution to European energy-policy objectives, helping Great Britain towards a minimum 10% interconnection target, facilitating renewables integration, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and resulting in socio-economic welfare benefits. More information about IceLink can be seen on the website of Icelandic national power company Landsvirkjun.

Mar 2

EU supports 1,400 MW NorthConnect HVDC cable

In mid February 2017 EU’s Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA) published a list of energy infrastructure projects that have been selected to receive financial support from the European Union. One of these projects, designated as a Project of Common Interest, is the NorthConnect HVDC subsea cable, to connect the electricity markets in Norway and Scotland.

hvdc-north-connect_norway-uk-route-illustrationThis decision by INEA makes the approximately 655 km NorthConnect project eligible to apply for funding from the Connecting Europe Facility, the EU’s funding support programme for infrastructure, receiving over EUR 10 million to support its development. The NorthConnect cable will have a capacity of 1,400 MW. As other subsea interconnectors with Norway, the NorthConnect is expected to further balance the grid between the relevant countries and allowing wider electricity trading across Europe. Thus, this new cable will not call for increased hydro power capacity in Norway, which generates close to 100% of all electricity by utilizing hydro power.

Onshore Wind Farm Farr, Scotland / Onshore-Windpark Farr, SchottScotland has been developing major wind capacity. When strong winds will generate high amounts of electricity; the NorthConnect interconnector makes it possible to export part of the generation to Norway. Meanwhile, the massive hydro reservoirs in Norway will become like gigantic green batteries being charged. When the winds in Scotland will be calmer, the Norwegian hydro power companies will turn on their turbines, making it possible to export electricity to Scotland. This should increase security of supply and stabilize electricity prices for consumers. In addition, the new interconnector will increase the use of renewable energy in Europe.

The NorthConnect power cable will be routed from Simadalen in Norway, across the North Sea to Long Haven Bay, just south of Peterhead in Scotland. On the Norwegian side of the link, the cable will follow the long Hardangerfjord in western Norway, until landing at Simadalen. The exact route across the North Sea has yet to be determined. The project is due to start construction in 2019, reaching completion in 2022.

statnett-hvdc-subsea-cables-balancing-gridIf everything goes as planned, NorthConnect will be the first subsea interconnector from Norway owned by power companies. So far all the subsea power cables from Norway have been owned by the relevant transmission system operators. Current owners of the NorthConnect project are the Swedish national energy firm Vattenfall and three Norwegian power companies; Agder Energi, E-CO and Lyse Produksjon. All these four companies are in public ownership; the Swedish state owns Vattenfall and the three Norwegian firms are owned by several Norwegian municipalities and the national power company Statkraft.

Nov 26

Surprising claims about IceLink in the Financial Times

The Financial Times (FT) has published an interesting article, titled City financier urges UK support for £3.5bn Icelandic power cable – Plan to send geothermal electricity 1,000 miles under the sea to north-east England. The article is written by Andrew Ward, Energy Editor at Financial Times.

edmund-truell-icelink-hvdc-cableAccording to the article, the City financier Edmund Truell has “plans to open a £200m cable factory in the north-east of England if the government backs his project to build a £3.5bn undersea cable connecting the UK to geothermal power from the hot springs of Iceland.”  Actually, the article draws up a somewhat surprising and/or imprecise picture of the project, as explained here:

IceLink is indeed an interesting project. But is doubtful that Mr Truell’s proposal is the “most detailed” plan on the cable to emerge, as stated in FT. So far, the most detailed official document on the project yet, is a recent report by Kvika Bank and Pöyry (the report was published last summer but is in Icelandic only). Numerous of the comments made by Mr. Truell do not align well with this report.

According to Mr. Truell’s comments to the FT, “Iceland could supply 1.2 gigawatts of baseload power”. From this comment it seems that Mr. Truell has somewhat unclear understanding about how the project is seen by the governments of Iceland and UK.

The plan is not really sending “geothermal electricity” to UK. Nor will the cable serve as access to base-load power, but rather be access to a flexible hydro power source. Readers should note that Iceland’s power system is mostly based on hydropower. The idea regarding the cable is mainly to utilize large hydro reservoirs to offer access to highly flexible renewable power source.

Of course part of the power would be from geothermal sources (and also from onshore wind power which is likely to be constructed in Iceland). But the main power source for the cable would/will be the hydropower. In fact Iceland’s main problems in the power sector now relate to too fast construction of geothermal power plants. As was recently explained here on the Icelandic Energy Portal.

Iceland-Europe-HVDC-Interconnector-Landsvirkjun-Map_Askja-Energy-PartnersIt is possible that the cable would have a capacity of 1,2 GW. However, it is somewhat imprecise that the cable would offer a “supply of 1,2 gigawatts”, as Mr. Truell says to the FT. What really matters is how much electricity would be sent through the cable. According to plans introduced in Iceland, the annual amount is likely to be close to 5,000 GWh (5 TWh). This is the important power figure, rather than the capacity of the cable (which has not yet been decided and might be somewhat lower than the claimed 1,200 MW).

The length of the cable might indeed become 1,000 miles, as Mr. Truell is quoted to say in FT. But according to plans presented in Iceland it is more likely that the length would be closer to 750 miles. In the end the length will of course greatly depend on where the cable will/would come on land in Great Britain. No such decision has been taken yet.

According to reports presented in Iceland, the cost of the cable is not expected to be 3.5 billion GBP, as says in the FT article, but rather close to 2.4 billion GBP (central scenario). Total cost of the whole project would of course be a lot higher figure, due to the cost of new power plants and new transmission lines within Iceland. According to the Icelandic ministry of Industries and Innovation the total cost of the whole project would be 5-6 billion GBP (ISK 800 billion).

According to Mr. Truell, UK would get the electricity from Iceland at about 80 GBP/MWh. This figure is probably 25% to low (when having in mind the cost of the transmission from Iceland to UK). According to Pöyry, likely price would probably not be lower than close to 100 GBP/MWh.

urridafoss-vrirkjunIn the article in FT, it says that Iceland has offered “surplus electricity” to aluminium smelters, and Mr Truell says there is “still plenty left for export”. In reality the situation is a bit more complex. Currently, there is very little surplus-electricity in the Icelandic power system. It is expected that IceLink would need close to 1,500 MW of new capacity.  To be able to supply the subsea interconnector with electricity, Iceland would need to build numerous new and quite expensive power plants. Such plants would harness hydro, geothermal and wind. Also Iceland would need to strengthen its transmission system. So the cable would mean huge new investment in the Icelandic power system and the project is only partly based on “surplus” electricity.

An electric subsea HVDC cable between Iceland and the UK is indeed an interesting opportunity, such as to increase the amount of reliable and flexible renewable energy in UK’s power consumption. And it would be wise for the UK to make the project a priority. However, note that Iceland is not at all an endless source of green power. And the people of Iceland will hardly have much interest in such a project unless receiving strong economical gains from it. In addition the project would/will be a major environmental issue in Iceland, due to impacts from constructing new power plants and transmission lines. And to avoid misunderstanding about the project it is extremely important to have the facts right.

Nov 22

Facts or fiction about IceLink?

The IceLink subsea interconnector is a proposed power cable that would connect the power markets of Iceland and Great Britain (UK). On the website of Icelandic national power company Landsvirkjun, the rational for the IceLink cable is described. In this article we will fact-check this rationale:

Claim no.1:  IceLink lifts the isolation of the Icelandic electricity market and it assists Europe to achieve interconnection capacity targets amounting to 10% of installed capacity, and it opens up new markets for both Icelandic and UK suppliers.

  • Correct: The Icelandic power market is isolated. With IceLink, that would change.
  • Correct: IceLink would be part of Europe’s projects to achieve interconnection capacity targets.
  • Correct: IceLink do open up new markets for Icelandic and UK suppliers.

The EU Commission has set a target of 10% electricity interconnection by 2020. This means that all EU countries should construct electricity cables that allow at least 10% of the electricity produced by their power plants to be transported across its borders to its neighboring countries. However, IceLink will not be ready by 2020. Thus, it seems likely that the IceLink project would rather become a part of EU’s new energy policy and targets for 2030. In fact, this development or process has already started.

lv-hvdc-subsea-power-cables-mapThe EU Commission has already proposed to extend the interconnection target from 19% to 15% by 2030. The targets will be reached through the implementation of Projects of Common Interest. A new special expert group on electricity interconnection targets established by the EU Commission  had its first meeting in Brussels on 17th and 18th October 2016. It is yet to be seen what will become the new interconnection target for each of the EU member states, but so far the UK’s share is only less than 5%. In 2015 domestic installed capacity in GB was 91 GW, while total capacity of interconnectors between UK and other countries was 4 GW.

Regarding IceLink opening up new markets, it should be noted that the general power market in Iceland is very small compared to GB or UK. Thus, for suppliers in the UK the Icelandic power market is probably not very interesting. However, it might be positive for suppliers of wind energy in Scotland to have access to Iceland, as we will now explain:

Claim no.2:  Through bi-directional flows, IceLink could potentially reduce the cost of managing constraints between northern GB and the major consumption centres further south as energy is directed to Iceland at times of excess wind power generation in the north, stored in hydro reservoirs, and returned at times of lower wind output.

  • Correct: IceLink would open up the possibility to store for example Scottish wind power in Iceland’s reservoirs.
  • Correct: During time of low wind in Scotland, Icelandic hydropower stations could be utilized to bring  the wind power back to Scotland.

Claim no.3:  By providing flexible energy in near term spot markets and the balancing mechanism, IceLink can lower the cost of balancing, in particular in a system with a high penetration of intermittent generation.

  • Possibly: There is a possibility that IceLink would lower the cost of balancing electricity supply/demand. However, this of course depends on several factors, such as the British capacity market.

Claim no.4:  IceLink connects currently isolated Iceland´s renewable electricity system with the broader European system and offers a means to decrease Europe´s dependency on imported fossil fuels in a cost efficient way.

  • Correct, but not very relevant: IceLink is expected to offer the UK (and thus the European system) access to approx. 5,000 GWh annually. The current total annual electricity consumption in the UK is close to 335,000 GWh. Access to power generated in Iceland would thus only add a fraction to the current power supplied and consumed in the UK.

However, note that in 2015 the renewable power generation in the UK was close to 83 TW, so an addition of 5 TWh of renewable generation is substantial. This of course means that IceLink would in fact make UK (and Europe) a little bit less dependent on power from for example coal and natural gas (fossil fuels)

Claim no.5: IceLink increases diversity of power supply at both ends and enhances further deployment of renewables through coupling highly flexible hydro generation with that of intermittent wind and solar generation.

  • Correct: Iceland and UK utilize different sources for their power generation. While UK is mainly dependent on natural gas, coal and nuclear energy for its power generation, Iceland utilizes hydro and geothermal for close to all its generation. Moreover, most of the generation in Iceland comes from hydro. IceLink will thus indeed increase diversity of the power supply, and Iceland’s flexible hydro power is perfect to balance supply and demand while solar and wind power fluctuates.

Claim no.6: IceLink delivers reliable and flexible energy into the GB system at times of thin supply margins.

  • Correct: IceLink could indeed deliver reliable and flexible energy into the GB/UK system at times of thin supply margins. To better understand the importance of access to flexible hydropower, based on large reservoirs, we would like to refer to our earlier article; IceLink offers flexibility rather than base load power.

Claim no.7: IceLink allows energy to flow to Iceland at times of low hydro generation potential, e.g. due to unusually low precipitation levels.

  • Correct: Every few years, the Icelandic reservoirs fill up quite late due to low precipitation or cold weather (resulting in low glacial melting). This decreases the efficiency of the Icelandic hydropower stations and adds a risk to the system. With IceLink this risk would become less.

Claim no.8: Iceland generation is 100% renewable. The interconnector would provide an export opportunity for the surplus energy in the renewable hydro system that is not currently harnessed due to economical and operational limitations.

  • Correct: The closed Icelandic electricity system is constructed in the manner of securing stable supply to heavy industries (especially to aluminum smelters, who need stable power supply 24/7 all year around). In years with unusually much precipitation or heavy glacial melting (warm periods), excess amounts of water runs into the reservoirs, resulting in overflow. Turbines could be added to harness this excess, but such development is costly and not economic unless having access to a market where power prices are higher than in Iceland. IceLink would create access to such a market.

Claim no.9: The UK has committed itself to ambitious reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. IceLink contributes with its lower cost of low carbon energy compared to domestic marginal alternatives and its flexibility contributes to reducing the cost of enabling the integration of UK intermittent renewables.

  • Correct: Even though the Icelandic geothermal,- hydro- and wind power sources are fairly limited when having regard to the enormous size of the British power market, it would make economic sense for the UK to buy Icelandic renewable power instead of for example more expensive British offshore wind power. For more on this subject, we refer to our earlier article; UK’s electricity strike prices positive for IceLink. And we can add that even though strike prices for new offshore wind power seems to be coming down quite fast, electricity from Iceland could be substantially cheaper than new offshore wind farms off the British coast.

Claim no.10: IceLink involves the deployment of relatively mature low carbon technologies. As such, it allows GB to reduce reliance on particular domestic technologies, thereby reducing exposure to lower than expected cost reduction trajectories.

  • Correct: Currently, almost all power generation in Iceland comes from mature geothermal- and hydro technology. In the coming years and decades the Icelandic power sector is likely to also start utilizing wind power on land – which is also a mature technology and less problematic than offshore wind power.

The conclusion is that most of the claims set forward by Landsvirkjun, regarding IceLink, are not only correct but also very relevant. However, it is possible that the project could be delayed by Britain’s decision to leave the European Union.

Jul 22

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.

Jul 17

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!

May 1

Viking Link ready in 2022?

We already have subsea HVDC power cables being constructed between Norway and the United Kingdom (UK) and between Norway and Germany. These cables will be 700 km and 570 km, respectively. And now one more major connector if this kind is planned in the area, between UK and Denmark. That cable is referred to as Viking Link, will be 650 km long.

HVDC-Viking-Link-Uk-Denmark-MapViking Link is expected to have a capacity of up to 1,400 MW. Recently, the Danish Transmission System Operator Energinet and the UK National Grid decided to launch a tendering process for the examination of the seabed between the two countries. Both companies have expressed their strong believe in the positive effects of such a power connection, which will open up possibilities to harness more wind energy at competitive prices. The successful tenderer will carry out geophysical surveys and sampling to pinpoint areas of environmental and archaeological interest and help identify the best route for the marine cables and suitable landing locations.

For the UK, the main advantage of Viking Link would be in the access to more power, at the same time as that power will mostly be generated by harnessing renewable sources. For Denmark, the cable will open access to much larger market for Danish wind power. The plan is to take the final investment decision no later than in 2018. The cable could then become operational about four years later or 2022.

Jul 24

Subsea HVDC cable between Norway and the UK

A subsea high voltage direct current (HVDC) electric cable will be constructed between Norway and the United Kingdom; the NSN Link. This was reported earlier this year (2015). And earlier this month (July 2015), it was announced that contracts have been awarded to build the cable and the converter stations.

NSN-Link_UK-Norway-HVDC-Cable-MapThe NSN Link (or NSN Interconnector) will be the longest subsea electric cable so far. The cable will connect Blyth in Northumberland on the UK side and Kvilldal in Rogaland on the Norwegian side. Today, the record length of such a cable is the NorNed cable between Norway and the Netherlands. NorNed is 580 km long, but NSN Link will be 730 km long. Thus, this new cable will increase the world record length of approx. 25%.

According to ABB, even longer submarine cables of this kind are already both technically and financially possible. Therefore it seems increasingly more likely that an interconnector between Iceland and Europe is only a matter of time.

NSN-Link-UK-Norway-HVDC-CableAs the NSN Link will be twin cabling, the total length will be approximately 1,460 km of cable. The capacity will be 1,400 MW. Owners and operators of the cable will be the Norwegian Transmission Operator Statnett and UK National Grid. The NSN Link is expected to be in operation by 2021.

By the NSN Link, Norwegians can take advantage of their highly flexible hydropower to increase the efficiency of their utilization of this great natural and renewable resource. By taking advantage of the price differences in the Norwegian and British electricity markets, and the price fluctuations within each day and night, the cable offers positive possibilities to maximize profits in the Norwegian electricity production.

NSN-Link-UK-Norway-HVDC-Cable-More-EfficiencyThe cable will also create new revenues for British electricity companies, as there will for example be an incentive for Norway to buy and import electricity from wind power farms in UK at periods when electricity demand is low. This creates opportunity to save water in the Norwegian reservoirs, which then will be used for generating electricity and export it to the UK when power prices are high.

An electric cable between Iceland and the UK would create similar opportunities. Currently, the pros and cons of such a cable are being considered by the Icelandic Ministry for Industry and Innovation. A further governmental decision on the matter may be expected early next year (2016).

Mar 2

UK affirms interest in IceLink interconnector

HVDC-Letter-UK-to-Iceland_2015-01-29_17-55-03_GBG_January-2015Iceland’s Minister of Industry, Ms. Ragnheiður Elín Árnadóttir, recently received a letter from Mr. Matthew Hancock, UK’s Minister of State at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

In his letter, Mr. Hancock expresses his interest in an electric connector between Iceland and the United Kingdom (UK).  The letter is dated January 24th 2015 and reads as following:

Dear Ragnheiður Elín,

You met Michael Fallon in spring last year [2014] to discuss the possibility of an electricity interconnector between Iceland and the UK. I have taken over as Energy Minister and wanted to write following a meeting I had recently with one of the potential developers. I was very pleased to hear that a new Steering Committee is being set up to help you consider the impacts of such a major project. If it would be helpful, my officials stand ready to assist the work of this Committee, for example by providing information on the UK regulatory regime.

Studies we have commissioned indicate that an electricity interconnector between our two countries could provide economic benefits to us both and I am therefore interested in examining such a project further. The UK Government is considering options for sourcing low carbon, secure and affordable electricity post-2020 and an interconnector between our two countries might be one of the options we could examine in this process.

Matthew-Hancock_UK-Minister-Energy-Climate-Business-InnovationI would welcome your own views on the benefits of such a project and would of course, be very happy to discuss this with you if you have the opportunity to come to London at any time. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the next steps.

Then the letter ends with Mr. Hancock’s signature [“Matt”]. It will be interesting to see how this possible project will develop in the next months.

« Older Entries
%d bloggers like this: