Ding Yongbin, Li Mingquan, Abdulla Ahmed, Shan Rui, Liu Ziyi
School of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China.
Laboratory for Low-carbon Intelligent Governance, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China.
iScience. 2023 May 26;26(7):106967. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.106967. eCollection 2023 Jul 21.
As countries pursue power system decarbonization, a well-intentioned strategy being pursued in jurisdictions like China is the strict integration target, often in the form of a curtailment cap. The effects of these curtailment caps have not been systematically studied. Here, we evaluate the effects of these caps on the decarbonization of one provincial power system using a capacity expansion model. Results reveal that curtailment caps yield deleterious effects that do not align with the stated goals of these policies. Capping curtailment significantly increases storage capacity (+43% with a 5% curtailment cap) and reduces renewable capacity (-17%). Even with the increase in flexible storage capacity, the policy still jeopardizes power system reliability by increasing occurrences of over or under generation. It also suppresses power generation from hydropower and reduces energy storage utilization while increasing fossil fuel utilization. Capping curtailment increases economic costs (+6% with a 5% curtailment cap) and CO emissions (+7%).
随着各国推进电力系统脱碳，中国等司法管辖区正在推行一项意图良好的策略，即设定严格的消纳目标，通常采用消纳上限的形式。这些消纳上限的影响尚未得到系统研究。在此，我们使用容量扩展模型评估这些上限对一个省级电力系统脱碳的影响。结果显示，消纳上限会产生有害影响，与这些政策的既定目标不符。设定消纳上限会显著增加储能容量（5%的消纳上限会使储能容量增加43%）并减少可再生能源容量（减少17%）。即使灵活储能容量有所增加，该政策仍会因发电过剩或不足情况的增加而危及电力系统可靠性。它还会抑制水电发电量，降低储能利用率，同时增加化石燃料利用率。设定消纳上限会增加经济成本（5%的消纳上限会使成本增加6%）和碳排放（增加7%）。
