BSTP OPF Final - Phase III 3.19.2012

BLACK SEA REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLANNING PROJECT:
PSSE/OPF Regional Model Construction Report

Black Sea Regional Transmission Planning Project Phase III
Balkans and Regional Energy Market Partnership Program

Cooperative Agreement EEE-A-00-02-00054-00

Monday, March 19, 2012
This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for
International Development. It was prepared by the United States Energy Association
as part of the Balkans and Regional Energy Market Partnership Program.
BLACK SEA REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLANNING
PROJECT: PSSE/OPF Regional Model Construction Report
Black Sea Regional Transmission Planning Project Phase III

Prepared for:
United States Energy Association and

United States Agency for International Development Office of Energy
and Infrastructure Bureau for Europe and Eurasia
Cooperative Agreement EEE-A-00-02-00054-00
This report was prepared by the United States Energy Association

as part of the Balkans and Regional Energy Market Partnership
Program.
United States Energy Association

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Suite 550, Mailbox 142
Washington, DC 20004
+1 202 312-1230 (USA)
This report is made possible by the support of the American people through the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of the
United States Energy Association and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the
United States Government.
CONTENTS
1.1 Electricity Production.............................................................................................................................................. 10
1.1.1 Power Plants ................................................................................................................................................ 10
1.1.2 Generation Cost Curves ............................................................................................................................... 24
1.1.3 Generic Generation cost curves................................................................................................................... 28
1.2 Prerequisites and Assumptions ............................................................................................................................. 34
1.2.1 Optimal Power Flow ..................................................................................................................................... 34
1.3 OPF Models Construction Procedure .................................................................................................................... 38
1.4 Training for OPF Model construction ..................................................................................................................... 39
1.5 Armenia .................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.5.1 General Information ........................................................................................................................................ 1
1.5.2 Transmission Network .................................................................................................................................... 2
1.5.3 Generation ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.5.4 Demand .......................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.5.5 Export Potential in 2015 and 2020 ................................................................................................................. 8
1.5.6 Analyses results and renewables balancing and control............................................................................... 8
1.5.7 Remarks and Comments................................................................................................................................ 9
1.6 Bulgaria .................................................................................................................................................................. 10
1.6.1 General Information ...................................................................................................................................... 10
1.6.2 Transmission Network .................................................................................................................................. 10
1.6.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 14
1.6.4 Demand ........................................................................................................................................................ 17
1.6.5 Export Potential in 2015 and 2020 ............................................................................................................... 18
1.6.6 Remarks and comments .............................................................................................................................. 19
1.7 Georgia ................................................................................................................................................................... 20
1.7.2 Transmission network .................................................................................................................................. 20
1.7.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 26
1.7.4 Demand ........................................................................................................................................................ 33
1.8 Moldova .................................................................................................................................................................. 39
1.8.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 43
1.8.4 Demand ........................................................................................................................................................ 44
1.9 Romania ................................................................................................................................................................. 46
1.9.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 51
1.9.4 Demand ........................................................................................................................................................ 55
1.10 Russia ................................................................................................................................................................ 58
1.10.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 66
1.10.4 Demand ........................................................................................................................................................ 72
1.10.6 References ................................................................................................................................................... 74
1.11 Turkey ................................................................................................................................................................ 75
1.11.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 81
1.11.4 Demand ........................................................................................................................................................ 86
1.11.5 Export Potential for 2015 and 2020 ............................................................................................................. 88
1.12 Ukraine .............................................................................................................................................................. 90
1.12.3 Generation .................................................................................................................................................... 95
1.12.4 Demand ...................................................................................................................................................... 100
1.12.5 Export Potential for 2015 and 2020 ........................................................................................................... 103
1.13 Equivalent Countries ....................................................................................................................................... 104
1.14 Black Sea Region ............................................................................................................................................ 104
1.15 Armenia ............................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.15.1 PSS/E OPF Transmission System Modeling ................................................................................................. 1
1.15.2 PSS/E OPF Generation Modeling.................................................................................................................. 3
1.16 Bulgaria ............................................................................................................................................................... 9
1.16.1 PSS/E OPF Transmission System Modeling ................................................................................................. 9
1.16.2 PSS/E OPF Generation Modeling................................................................................................................ 11
1.17 Georgia .............................................................................................................................................................. 19
1.17.1 PSS/E OPF Transmission System Modeling ............................................................................................... 19
1.18 Moldova ............................................................................................................................................................. 26
1.19 Romania ............................................................................................................................................................ 30
1.20 Russia ................................................................................................................................................................ 39
1.21 Turkey ................................................................................................................................................................ 44
1.22 Ukraine .............................................................................................................................................................. 53
1.23 2015 and 2020 Model Status .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.24 Synchronous Operation ...................................................................................................................................... 1
1.25 Georgia ................................................................................................................................................................ 2
1.25.1 Renewables development plan ...................................................................................................................... 2
ABBREVIATIONS
General
TSO - Transmission System Operator
TEN-E - Trans-European Energy Networks
CIGRÉ – International Council on Large Electric Systems
UCTE - Union for the Coordination of Transmission of Electricity
ENTSO/E – European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (former UCTE)
ACER - Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators
NRA - National Regulatory Authority or Agency
IEM - Internal Energy Market
REM - Regional Energy Market
LOLE - Loss of Load Expectation
SAF - System Adequacy Forecast
SoS - Security of Supply
VOLL - Value of Lost Load
ETS - Emission Trading System
EWIS - European Wind Integration Study
CENTREL - Association of TSOs of Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia
SEE - South East Europe
SECI - South East European Cooperation Initiative
BSTP - Black Sea Transmission Project
FIT - feed-in tariff
LF - Load flow
OPF - Optimal power flow
FGC, UNEG – Federal Grid Company, Unified National Electric Grid
IPS/UPS – Interregional Power System/Unified Power System
Transmission
AC - Alternating Current
DC - Direct Current
HV - High Voltage
MV - Medium Voltage
LV - Low Voltage
HVAC - High Voltage AC
HVDC - High Voltage DC
EMF - Electromagnetic Field
ED - Electricity Distribution
SS – Substation
OHL - Overhead Lines
UC - underground cable
SC - submarine cable
TR - Transformer
OLTC – On Load Tap Changer
PST - Phase Shifting Transformer
SCR – Short Circuit Ratio
ESCR – Effective Short Circuit Ratio
CCT – Critical Clearing Time
LCC - Line Commutated Converter
FACTS - Flexible AC Transmission System
VSC - Voltage Source Converter
STATCOM – Static Synchronous Compensator
NTC - Net Transfer Capacity
TTC - Total Transfer Capacity
RC - Remaining Capacity
RAC - Reliable Available Capacity
ABBREVIATIONS
v
Generation
HPP – Hydro Power Plant
PHPP – Pumping Hydro Power Plant
TPP – Thermal Power Plant
NPP - Nuclear Power Plant
CCGT - Combined cycle gas turbine
CCS - Carbon Capture and Storage
CHP - Combined Heat and Power Generation
RES - Renewable Energy Sources
NGC - Net Generation Capacity
VAR - Volt-Ampere-Reactive, reactive power
BTU - British Thermal Unit = 1055J = 0.293Wh = 252cal, mBTU = 1000000BTU
tcm - thousand cubic meter 1000m3
RGC – Regional Generation Company
TGC - Territorial Generation Company
WGC – Wholesale Generation Company
Countries
ISO Country Car
Austria AT AUT A
Albania AL ALB AL
Bosnia and Herzegovina BA BIH BiH
Bulgaria BG BUL BG
Croatia HR CRO CRO
Germany DE GER D
Greece GR GRE GR
Hungary HU HUN HU
Italy IT ITA I
FYR of Macedonia MK FYRM MAK
Montenegro ME MNE MNE
Romania RO ROM ROM
Serbia RS SRB SRB
Slovenia SI SLO SLO
Switzerland CH SUI CH
Turkey TR TUR TUR
Ukraine UA UKR UKR
Armenia AM ARM ARM
Georgia GE GEO GEO
Moldova MD MLD MLD
Russia RU RUS RUS
Azerbaijan AZ AZB AZB
Belorussia BY BLR BLR
Iran IR IRN IRN
ABBREVIATIONS
vi
I. Introduction
The BSTP was established by the United States Agency for International Development, the United States
Energy Association and the transmission system operators of the Black Sea region in 2004 to build
institutional capacity to develop and analyze the region’s first common transmission planning model.
Members of the project working group represent the transmission system operators (TSO) of Armenia,
Bulgaria, Georgia, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Ukraine and Turkey.
The Power System Simulator for Engineers (PSS/E) software was selected as the common planning software
platform for the project. The project supplied each TSO with the software and has provided ongoing training
in its use and application to build capacity in the region to construct national and regional models of the
Black Sea high voltage electric power transmission network.
The BSTP Working Group developed the first detailed national and regional load flow and dynamic models of
the high voltage network for the 2010, 2015 and 2020 planning horizons. These models are used to identify
bottlenecks to regional trade of electricity; model the impact of the transmission network on energy security
initiatives; determine the potential to integrate renewable energy resources; and identify network
investment requirements.
Phase III of the BSTP is currently underway. The objectives of this phase of the project are to:
• Integrate projected wind, solar and hydroelectric generating capacity forecasted and being
developed in Ukraine, Armenia, Georgia, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey into the regional models;
• Develop a cost based planning model of the Black Sea network using the Optimal Power Flow (OPF)
feature of PSS/E that will simulate economic dispatch of the Black Sea generation fleet;
• Using the OPF model and its economic dispatch determine the most likely trading patterns for 2015,
taking into account the integration of renewable energy generation capacity; and
• Test the transmission network using the OPF, load flow and dynamic models to determine its
capacity to support trade under the most likely economically based trading scenarios.
To date, the project has collected and compiled renewable energy generation forecasts for each country and
is publishing a complementary report titled, BSTP Renewable Energy Compendium Report. It provides
investors, regulators and policy makers with a summary of the renewable energy strategy for each country;
renewable energy feed-in tariffs and other fiscal incentives offered; and interconnection procedures for
renewable projects.
Data from the report is being used to populate the 2015 and 2020 OPF and load flow models to provide the
most accurate estimates of renewable energy generation capacity available in the region. The initial runs of
the economic dispatch model are set to be complete by September 2012. These will provide first results
indicating the ability of the network to support economically based trade of electricity. Based on the initial
results the model will be refined and additional analysis will be conducted based on subsequent model runs.
Development of the OPF model marks a significant achievement and milestone for the regional TSOs and the
BSTP. In previous phases of the BSTP, the models were used to evaluate system stability and reliability
when the maximum available power was pushed through interconnections in the simulated system. With
the development of the generic cost curves discussed in this report, regional planners are able to simulate
economic dispatch of the Black Sea generation fleet over the entire regional transmission network. With the
inclusion of projected renewable energy generation capacity taken from the Renewable Energy report that
complements this study, this model provides the most comprehensive simulation of the network available
today.
The addition of the OPF model to the suite of BSTP planning models gives regional planners a platform to
couple economic and efficiency parameters to reliability criteria for the first time. As such, it mirrors regional
planning efforts in North America and Europe, which have incorpated market based economic dispatch in
their planning models as their electricity markets matured over time.
7
The goal of this Report is to review the necessary technical data for the Black Sea countries and the region
as a whole used for the Regional Transmission Planning Project.
Figure 1.1 – Interconnection lines in Black Sea Region
Mazir
Gomelj
Poland
Shostka
Kurskaya
Kurskaya
Russia
Rzeszow Chernobil Chernigov
North Belgorod N.Voronzeska
Hmelnicka Ukrainskya Sumi
Czech republic Pivnichna Shebekino
Dobrotvjrska
Zakhidnoukrainska Ukraine Valujki
V.Kapushani Losevo
Slovakia Dnestrovska Zmievska
Levice
Mukachevo Pivdenukrainska
Gabcikovo Sajoszeged Donbas
Wien Balti Peremoga
Pivdena Shahti
Neusiedel God Kisavarda
Tiszaloek Kotovsk Novocherskaya
ustria Gyor
Albertirsa
Rosiori Amrosivka
Hungary Rabnita T15
Keinachtal Usatov
ch Heviz Sandorfalva CERS Moldova
Maribor
dlogCirkovce Arad
Vulcanesti N.Odeskaya
Slovenia Romania
Krsko Zerjavinec Subotica
ca
TumbriErnestinovo
MraclinMedjuric
hlinMeline Gradacac
S.Mitrovica
Isaccea
Arciz
Centralna
LEGEND:
Tuzla
Croatia Prijedor Ugljevik P. de Fier
Djerdap Tintareni Isalnita
750 kV
SCG Psou
BIH Vardiste
Visegrad Dobrudja
Sofia w. Black Sea
Nis
Trebinje Kozloduy Varna
Podgorica Kosovo B Bzibi Enguri
Bulgaria
500 kV
Plat Prizren
Perucica Blagoevgrad MaritsaEast Georgia
Vau Dejes Fierze Skoplje Batumi AZTP
Makedonia Hamitabat Gardabani
AlbaniaDubrovo
Galatina Zemlak Thessaloniki N.Santa Babaeski
Hopa
Kars
Gumri Alaverdi
Mukhareni 400 kV
Kardia Armenia Azerbajan
Igdir Babek
Greece
Kardia Turkey
D.Beyazit
Bazargan
330 kV
Hakkari Khoy
PS3
Birecik
Iran 220 kV
Halep
Kesek Iraq 150 kV
Chapter 2 presents characteristic power systems data for all analyzed countries.
Chapter 3 gives review of Load Flow Model development, model characteristics and base case scenarios.
Chapter 4 gives review of Dynamic Model development, model characteristics and main production features
for each system modeled.
Chapter 5 presents main Findings and Conclusions of this phase of Black Sea Project.
The Black Sea region operates in four synchronous parts (Figure 1.2)
Figure 1.2 – Black Sea region – synchronous operation 2010
Threes synchronous scenarios were developed for study. (see Chapter 2 of the SRIE Technical Report)
Section 2.1 presents each synchronous scenario and Table 2.1 presents the line diagrams for each scenario
8
in 2015 and 2020. It is important to realize that the power system of Armenia is presently isolated from all
of the power systems presented in Table 2.1 (Georgia, Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey) except for island
connections with Georgia and Turkey. During project year #1, only scenario #3 (synchronous operation of
the Power Systems of Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Russia by 2015) has been studied.
9
II. METHODOLOGY
In the previous phase of the project, the 2010 static and dynamic model developed by the TSOs revealed
certain system deficiencies and weak points. Currently the region has a surplus of energy, to further analyze
the capacity of the regional network to support enhanced trade and exchange of electricity while maintaining
security and reliability, and incorporating economical factors too, adequate regional Optimal Power Flow
model is necessary. So, upon realization of Load flow and Dynamic model upgrade of this regional model,
the OPF analysis has been performed.
1.1 Electricity Production
Electricity generation is the process of generating electric energy from other forms of energy. Electricity is
most often generated at a power station by electromechanical generators, primarily driven by heat engines
fueled by chemical combustion or nuclear fission, and by other means such as the kinetic energy of flowing
water and wind. There are many other technologies that can be and are used to generate electricity such as
solar photovoltaics and geothermal power.
Electricity is produced by using an electrical generator that converts mechanical power to electrical power
and energy. All generators are run by a turbine, and all turbines are driven by a fluid acting as an
intermediate energy carrier. This fluid is the primary energy source (water, steam, wind…). Depending on
the type of primary energy source, total produced electricity in the world looks is shown in Table 2.1 and
Figure 2.1 with an increase of other sources to reduce pollution and green gas emissions.
Table 2.1– Produced Electricity by Source (World total year 2008 data source IEA/OECD)
Source of Electricity (World total year 2008)

Natural
- Coal Oil Nuclear Hydro other Total
Gas
Electricity (TWh/year) 8,263 1,111 4,301 2,731 3,288 568 20,261
proportion 41% 5% 21% 13% 16% 3% 100%
other
Hydro 3%
16%
Coal
42%
Nuclear
13%
Natural Gas Oil

21% 5%
Coal Oil Natural Gas Nuclear Hydro other
Figure 2.1 - Produced Electricity by Source (World total year 2008 data source IEA/OECD)
1.1.1 Power Plants
In this subchapter small analysis of power plants and primary sources is done as main input to electricity
production by type, and also influence on overall pricing of electricity is explained.
Power plants are installations that produce electricity. Technology is differentiated based on the type of
prime mover (fluid that moves turbine that runs generator that converts mechanical energy into electricity).
Usually efficiency of conversion process from fuel to electricity is described through Heat rate of power plant
(for fossil fuel power plants). Figure 2.2 shows recorded dependency of electricity cost on technology used
for production.
Black Sea Region 10

18.0
16.0 Oil - Heavy
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0 Gas
4.0
Coal
2.0
Uranium
0.0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 2.2 – Electricity costs depending on Fuel ($/MWh)
Cost of production of electricity depends on numerous factors, including the power plant type and
technology. Costs of power plants can be divided into following categories:
• Overnight costs
Overnight cost is the cost of a construction project if no interest was incurred during construction, as if
the project was completed "overnight". An alternate definition is: the present value cost that would have
to be paid as a lump sum up front to completely pay for a construction project. The overnight cost is
frequently used when describing power plants. The unit of measure typically used when citing the
overnight cost of a power plant is $/kW. For example, the overnight cost of a nuclear plant might be
$1200/kW, so a 1000MW plant would have an overnight cost $1.2 billion.
• Capital costs
Capital costs are costs incurred on the purchase of land, buildings, construction and equipment to be
used in the production of goods or the rendering of services, in other words, the total cost needed to
bring a project to a commercially operable status. For example, the purchase of a new machine that will
increase production and last for years is a capital cost. Capital costs do not include labor costs except for
the labor used for construction. Unlike operating costs, capital costs are one-time expenses, although
payment may be spread out over many years in financial reports and tax returns. Capital costs are fixed
and are therefore independent of the level of output. A power plant's capital costs include the purchase
of the land the plant is built on, permitting and legal costs, the equipment needed to run the plant, the
cost of the plant's construction, the cost of financing and the cost of commissioning the plant incurred
prior to commercial operation of the plant. They do not include the cost of fuel and labor used to run the
plant or the labor and supplies needed for maintenance. These values are calculated based on Overnight
costs, payment period of 20years, and discount rate 10%.
• Operational and maintenance costs

Operational and maintenance costs include all costs that are a consequence of power plant operation
during operational life. They are usually divided into fixed and variable costs. Fixed costs do not
dependent on operation of the power plant regardless if the plant is running or not. These usually
include labor used to run the plant and supplies needed for maintenance.
• Variable Operational costs (fuel costs)

These costs include all costs related to production, such as fuel costs and fuel transportation costs.
Usually they are referred to as fuel costs.
• Overhead costs
Overhead cost or overhead expense refers to an ongoing expense of operating a business and it is
usually used to group expenses that are necessary to the continued functioning of the business but
Black Sea Region 11
cannot be immediately associated with the products/services being offered. Overhead expenses are all
costs on the income statement except for direct labor, direct materials & direct expenses. Overhead
expenses include accounting fees, advertising, depreciation, insurance, interest, legal fees, rent, repairs,
supplies, taxes, telephone bills, travel and utilities costs, rent etc...
• Decommissioning costs
These costs are all costs that occur after the power plant life time (dismantling, clearing the land, waste
disposal etc…). It is usually referred to nuclear facilities (decommissioning is the dismantling of a nuclear
power plant and decontamination of the site to a state no longer requiring protection from radiation for
the general public).
• Transmission costs
Are all costs connected to connection of the power plant to the transmission grid (connection lines,
substations etc…).
In this chapter all economical characteristics of power plants will be explained and compared between each
other. Costs by type of power plant are shown in
Table Table 2.2. All costs described in next subchapters are related to nominal operating point, or to values
when power plant is operated most efficiently. Influence of different operation is given through heat rate
and cost curves explained in later subchapters.
Black Sea Region 12

Table 2.2– Electricity production costs by source
LEVEL PRODU
TRANS
CAPA HEAT OVER O&M OVER DECO CO2 IZED CTION
EFF UTIL LIFE ENERGY CAPITAL MISSION
CITY RATE NIGHT HEAD MISSION EMIS. COST COST
FIXED VARIABLE FUEL
TYPE MW mBTU/MWh % % year GWh Ml$/MW $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh $/MWh
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
CONVENTIONAL
NUCLEAR 1000 10.4 40 90 40 7884.0 2.75 40.40 12.00 8.24 7.49 4.00 7.80 3.00 0.00 75.44 32.04
NUCLEAR 500 10.4 40 90 40 3942.0 2.75 40.40 20.00 8.24 7.49 4.00 5.20 3.00 0.00 80.84 37.44
COAL 1000 8.9 45 85 30 7446.0 1.70 26.40 8.00 39.34 30.26 4.00 3.60 12.00 93.34 63.34
COAL ADV 600 8.9 45 85 30 4467.6 2.00 31.10 11.00 34.80 30.26 3.50 3.60 10.50 94.50 59.80
COAL ADV CCS 1000 8.9 45 85 30 7446.0 2.30 35.80 12.00 36.31 30.26 3.50 3.60 5.00 96.21 56.81
HYDRO DAM 500 50 30 2190.0 2.20 58.20 3.50 7.10 5.70 0.00 74.50 10.60
HYDRO PENSTOCK 150 50 30 657.0 2.00 52.90 3.50 7.10 5.70 0.00 69.20 10.60
HYDRO RUN 150 50 30 657.0 1.20 31.70 3.10 7.10 5.70 0.00 47.60 10.20
GAS CCGT 786 7 58 85 25 5852.6 0.90 14.00 5.04 51.23 48.79 2.70 3.60 5.40 81.97 64.37
GAS CCGT NEW 786 6.75 58 85 25 5852.6 0.95 14.80 4.70 49.40 47.05 2.70 3.60 5.40 80.60 62.20
GAS CONV 160 10.8 40 85 25 1191.4 0.60 9.30 6.85 79.04 75.28 1.50 3.60 8.10 108.39 95.49
GAS CONV CHP 500 10.8 40 85 25 3723.0 0.93 14.50 5.51 79.04 75.28 1.50 3.60 8.10 112.25 94.15
GAS CONV CHP 50 10.8 40 85 25 372.3 1.20 18.70 7.25 79.04 75.28 1.50 3.60 8.10 118.19 95.89
GAS CONV CHP 10 10.8 40 85 25 74.5 1.25 19.40 8.33 79.04 75.28 1.50 3.60 8.10 119.97 96.97
RENEWABLES
SOLAR PV 5 45 21.7 20 9.5 6.00 365.50 6.40 13.00 384.90 6.40
SOLAR TH 100 45 31.2 20 273.3 5.00 211.90 21.80 10.40 244.10 21.80
GEOTHERMAL 50 34.6 85 30 372.3 1.70 26.40 22.90 3.50 4.80 57.60 26.40
BIOMASS 10 9.6 85 30 74.5 2.76 42.90 19.00 12.60 29.40 3.80 107.70 61.00
SMALL HYD. BASE 2 9.05 65 30 11.4 1.40 28.50 2.80 7.10 6.00 44.40 9.90
SMALL HYD. PEAK 1 10.07 65 30 5.7 1.65 33.60 2.80 7.10 6.00 49.50 9.90
WIND 50 30 20 131.4 2.00 75.50 11.70 6.10 8.40 101.70 17.80
WIND OFFSHORE 100 35 20 306.6 2.40 79.30 24.40 5.70 9.00 118.40 30.10
1 - Type of power plant 10 - Fixed O&M costs

2 - Capacity 11 - Variable O&M costs (includes fuel costs)
3 - Heat rate (nominal) 12 - Fuel costs
4 - Efficiency 13 - Overhead costs
5 - Utilization 14 - Decommissioning
6 - Life time 15 - Transmission costs
7 - Yearly Energy production 16 - CO2 emissions (rate 20$/ton of CO2)
8 - Overnight costs 17 - Leveled costs = 9+10+11+13+14+15+16
9 - Capital costs (20year loan, 10% discount rate) 18 - Production costs (related only to production) =10+11+13+14+16
Black Sea Region 13

Hydro Power Plants
Hydro power plants use water as the prime mover. The kinetic
energy of water running the blades of turbine is used (Turbine blades
are acted upon by flowing water). To utilize this source, hydro power
plants are built. Depending on the type of water usage, hydro power
plants can be divided into three groups:
Run of river
These power plants are built on large rivers, and use natural flow
and mass of water to produce electricity.
Reservoir or Storage
These power plants have high dams, so behind the dam large
reservoir lake is formed to utilize water and to store water.
Another type of hydro power plant is a pumping station. These

facilities are always reservoir type and have the ability to pump water
in the upper reservoir and store energy as water.
Figure 2.3 – Hydro power plants – dam cross section, turbine cross section, types of turbines
Depending on the height difference between upper and lower water level (water column length) Net head,
shows different type of turbines (Figure 2.3):
Pelton turbines (500m<Net Head )
Francis turbines (<Net Head)
Kaplan turbines (low Net Head and run of river)
Propeller (Bulb) turbines (run of river)
Water is treated as renewable source, and there is no price tag on it, but still these facilities have some
expenses:
Overnight costs for hydro power plants are quite large since there is a lot of infrastructure that needs to
be built for its operation (dam, inlet channels and penstock, machine building, outlets...). Depending on the
type of power plant, these costs vary from $1.2 mil/MW to $2.2mil/MW.
Capital costs are connected to overnight costs, and can range from $30-60/MWh. Large capital costs are
also influenced by the time needed to build one hydro power plant. This time period of about 4-5 years, has
associated costs such as land acquisition and land preparation.
Operational and maintenance costs depend on the type of hydro power plant and vary from $3.1-
3.5/MWh. They are low, since the operation of a hydro power plant requires less labor. The operation crew
Black Sea Region 14
is small and in smaller facilities there are none. Maintenance costs are not included in hydro plants since
they are depend on level of operation.
Variable Operational costs (fuel costs) are zero, but to utilize water there are some expenses that are
related to maintenance like clearing the derivation channels, reservoir, and penstocks. Also in this group is
labor and supply expenses needed for maintenance, since most parts are changed depending on the power
plant usage. These costs are usually around $7.1/MWh.
Overhead costs for hydro power plants are usually very low and can be neglected.
Decommissioning costs for hydro actually are zero, since these power plants are not decommissioned.
Transmission costs for hydro power plant highly depend on power plant location, and these plants are
usually in remote places relative to consumption areas. They average around $5.7/MWh.
Thermal Power Plants
Thermal power plants use steam as the prime mover of

the turbine. Steam turbines utilize a fuel (coal, natural
gas, petroleum, or uranium) to create heat which, when
applied to a boiler, transforms water into high pressure
superheated (above the temperature of boiling water)
steam. The steam is directed through a valve-controlled
nozzle over turbine blades, which spins the turbine to
drive a synchronous generator. Boiler can be different
construction depending on the how steam is generated
and which fossil fuel is used for water heating to steam:
- coal fired
- natural gas fired
- oil fired
Figure 2.4 – Thermal power plant
Figure 2.5 – Steam turbine (High Preasure+Intermediate pressure+Low pressure)
Black Sea Region 15

High pressure steam requires strong, bulky components (Figure 2.5). High temperatures require expensive
alloys made from nickel or cobalt, rather than inexpensive steel. These alloys limit practical steam
temperatures to 655 °C while the lower temperature of a steam plant is fixed by the boiling point of water.
With these limits, a steam plant has a fixed upper efficiency of 35 to 42% (higher the working temperatures
higher the efficiency rate). Described in Heat rate, typical for steam units is around 10mBTU/MWh, but for
the modern large coal fired units it goes up to 8.5-9.0 mBTU/MWhr. It has to be pointed out that smaller the
unit lower the efficiency, and also, if the unit is run on gas or oil heat rate increases up to 11mBTU/MWh,
and even higher for Combined Heating and Power units (for oil up to 15mBTU/MWh). This is because boiler
is more simplified, and also there is no special fuel preparation as it exists for coal. For this reason capital
costs are much lower than for equivalent coal fired power plant as well as some operational costs.
Overnight costs for thermal power plants depend on the type of fuel used, because different infrastructure
is needed. For coal fired power plants it ranges from $1.7mil/MW to $2.3mil/MW (costs of mines are not
included). For gas or oil fired prices range from $0.6-1.2mil/MW. Larger size plants are less costly than
smaller units.
Capital costs are connected to overnight costs and range from $26-36/MWh for coal fired units and $15-
20/MWh for oil and gas fired units depending on size.
Operational and maintenance costs depend on the type. For coal fired units fixed costs are from 8-
12$/MWh, and for oil and gas fired $5.5-8.3/MWh. Costs are higher for coal fired because of more
complicated storage and transport facilities, and more people are employed in coal fired plants than for oil or
gas.
Variable Operational costs (fuel costs) depend on the fuel used. Fuels used for thermal power plants
are coal, oil or gas. Coal is the main fuel used for electricity production. There are four types of coal (first
three are used for electricity production and also referred to as steam coal):
• Brown coal (Lignite) <18.5mBTU/ton
• Bituminous 18.5-24mBTU/ton
• Subbituminous 24-35mBTU/ton
• Anthracite >35mBTU/ton
Figure 2.6 – Coal prices $/ton for different types of coal in US (1stone = 0.91ton)
Present average prices are 155$/ton for sub-bituminous, 100$/ton of bituminous and 65$/ton of lignite, or
referenced to caloric heat value:
• Brown coal (Lignite) 3.5$/mBTU
• Bituminous 4.2$mBTU
• Subbituminous 4.4$mBTU
Overhead costs for coal fired units are $3.5-4/MWh, and for oil and gas $1.5/MWh.
Black Sea Region 16

Decommissioning costs for thermal power plants is neglected, since usually there are none. In the future
it will probably be taken into consideration. These facilities are usually modernized or converted into new
units, and these costs are included as capital costs for new units.
Transmission costs for a thermal power plant highly depend on the power plant location and size, but
they can be estimated at $3.6/MWh.
Black Sea Region 17

Nuclear Power Plants
Nuclear power plants are thermal power plants that use nuclear
reactor generated heat to produce steam. The nuclear reactor uses
Uranium as a fuel, and in process of nuclear fission, heat is produced
that heats water up to high temperature steam that the runs turbine.
There are two types of reactors in use today: BWR – boiled water
reactor and PWR – pressurized water reactor (Figure 2.7). In first
case water is run as a coolant through the system by using pumps,
and in second high pressure is used as moving force for coolant.
Also, nuclear units do not have re-heater and intermediate stage in
turbines (Figure 2.8)
BWR PWR
Figure 2.7 – Types of Nuclear reactors (BWR and PWR)
Figure 2.8– Cross section of Nuclear turbine (HP stage and three LP stages)
Since the nuclear plants work with smaller steam temperatures than fossil fuel run thermal power plants and
do not have re-heater, efficiency rate is a little bit lower 35-40%, and heat rate is usually at
10.5mBTU/MWh.
Control of these units is achieved in similar fashion as for thermal units run on fossil fuels. One control loop
is through steam valves, and second by controlling the nuclear reactor by using control rods to reduce
nuclear fission. These units are usually run as base load units to avoid using control rods, and in some cases
running the unit on lower rate than nominal can be risky (reducing the load of unit means increasing the
temperature and reduction of cooling efficiency).
Black Sea Region 18

Overnight costs for nuclear power plants are quite large since there are a lot of infrastructure that needs
to be built for its operation and they go in range from 2-4mil$/MW depending on the producer and type of
technology. Also, policy of country that wants to build these types of facilities is influencing dearly the costs.
Capital costs are connected to overnight costs, and range from 35-60$/MWh, and the investment can
contribute about 70-80% of the costs of electricity. But 40$/MWh can be taken as a reference.
Operational and maintenance costs depend on type of technology used, but because of high safety
measures they are higher than for similar size fossil fuel units. Included are costs related to labor, material &
supplies, contractor services, licensing fees, and miscellaneous costs such as employee expenses and
regulatory fees. On the other hand, labor costs are lower (less employees) but workers are more expensive
since they require special skills and education. These costs also highly depend on the size of the plant. For
smaller power plants (up to 800MW) costs are higher, but for large ones (more than 2000MW) they are
around 12$/MWh.
Variable Operational costs (fuel costs) for nuclear power plants are fuel related costs, and there are
two main factors: price of fuel and transportation, and waste disposal and transportation. Price of nuclear
fuel was quite stable for a long period, and usage of old uranium based decommissioned nuclear warheads
(mainly in Russia) contribute to this relatively low prices. For a typical 1,000 MWe BWR or PWR, the
approximate cost of fuel for one reload (replacing one third of the core) is about $40 million, based on an
18-month refueling cycle, or roughly 0.7$/mBTU. These costs increased for 10% for waste management (in
US it is 0.1$/MWh) gives total around 8$/MWh. These costs represent around 20-25% of total costs,
compared to fossil fuel plants at 80%.
Overhead costs for nuclear power plants can be high, and main reason being the additional safety
measures that are necessary for the facilities compared to fossil fuel ones which are around 4$/MWh.
Decommissioning costs for nuclear units can be significant. At the moment, they exist only for nuclear
units. Usual costs per plant are $300-500 million, and these include estimated radiological ($300 million),
used fuel ($100-150 million) and site restoration costs ($50 million).
Transmission costs for nuclear power plant depend on power plant location, and these plants are in
remote places (to consumption areas) for the safety reason. On the other hand, high utilization of these
facilities reduces transmission costs to $3/MWh.
Gas Turbine Power Plants

As a special group of thermal power plants are ones that
use gas turbines. Primary driving force is the exhaust
gas from burned mixture of air and gas in the
combustion chamber. These machines are actually Jet
engine technology fixed to the ground. Fuel (can be
either liquid or gas) mixed with compressed air is ignited
(Figure 2.10). The combustion increases the
temperature and volume of the gas flow, which when
directed through a valve-controlled nozzle over turbine
blades, spins the turbine which drives a synchronous
generator. A combustion turbine is also referred to as a
simple cycle gas turbine generator. They are relatively
inefficient with net heat rates at full load of over 15
mBTU/MWhr per kilowatt-hour (Figure 2.10). Consequently, simple cycle gas turbine generators are
relatively inefficient, combined with high natural gas prices, make the gas turbine expensive. Yet, they can
ramp up and down very quickly, so as a result, combustion turbines have mainly been used only for peaking
or standby service.
Combined cycle units are another type of gas fired plants that utilize both gas turbines and steam turbines
(Figure 2.9). A combined cycle power plant combines gas turbine (also called combustion turbine)
generator(s) with turbine exhaust waste heat boiler(s) (also called heat recovery steam generators or HRSG)
and steam turbine generator for the production of electric power. The waste heat from the combustion
turbine is fed into the boiler and steam from the boiler is used to run steam turbine. Both the combustion
turbine and the steam turbine produce electrical energy. Generally, the combustion turbine can be operated
with or without the boiler. The gas turbine exhausts relatively large quantities of gases at temperatures over
540 °C, In combined cycle operation, then, the exhaust gases from each gas turbine will be ducted to a
waste heat boiler. The heat in these gases, ordinarily exhausted to the atmosphere, generates high pressure
superheated steam. This steam will be piped to a steam turbine generator. The resulting combined cycle
heat rate is in the 8.5 to 10.5 mBTU/MWh range, significantly less than a simple cycle gas turbine generator.
Black Sea Region 19

Figure 2.9 - Single Gas Turbine with Single HRSG
This process is much more effective than standard usage of burned gas in the boiler to generate steam
described in previous section and these plants offer efficiencies of up to 60%. In addition to the good heat
rates, combined cycle units have flexibility to utilize different fuels. This flexibility, together with the fast
ramp rates of the combustion turbines and relatively low heat rates, has made the combined cycle unit the
unit of choice for a large percentage of recent new power plant installations.
HRSG
ST Generator
ST
GT
GT Generators
Transformers
Figure 2.10 – Multi-shaft system 2GT+ST and Gas Turbine
Figure 2.9Figure shows the simplest kind of combined cycle arrangement, where there is one combustion
turbine and one HRSG and corresponding steam turbine, but other combinations are possible:
Single shaft units (GT and ST are mounted on the same shaft and running one generator)
Multi shaft units (typically 2xGT+1xST but other arrangements are possible)
Figure 2.11 – Single shaft GT+ST+1generator and Multi-shaft system 2GT+ST
Black Sea Region 20

For large scale power generation, a typical set would be a 270 MW gas turbine coupled to a 130 MW steam
turbine giving 400 MW. A typical power station might comprise of between 1 and 6 such sets. Plant size is
important in the cost of the plant. The larger plant sizes benefit from economies of scale (lower initial cost
per kilowatt) and improved efficiency. Typical Combined cycle block sizes offered by three major
manufacturers (Alstom, General Electric and Siemens) are roughly in the range of 50 MW to 500 MW and
costs are about $600/kW.
Control of power is achieved through control fuel injection and not through flow of working fluid (water or
steam) like with classical fossil fuel fired units. This makes the units useful for fast control, and suitable for
ancillary services.
Overnight costs for CCGT are relatively low and goes in range from 0.85-0.95mil$/MW, which make these
facilities quite interesting from this point of view.
Capital costs are connected to overnight costs, so as explained here are they relatively low in range from
14-15$/MWh. Also, period of commissioning is up to three years. Due to these qualities, there is more
investment in the combined cycle units in the world.
Operational and maintenance costs depend on type of technology that is used, but compared to other
fossil fueled power plants they are considerably lower and vary from 5-7$/MWh. Main reason for this is
simple technology and low labor costs.
Variable Operational costs (fuel costs) are highly dependent on fuel costs, which price has changed a
lot in recent period (Figure 2.12). Heat rate of LNG as fuel is taken as 39mBTU/tcm. Recent price
development shows that average gas price is 8.2$/mBTU, although in recent history it achieved 10$/mBTU.
There is opinion that price of 12$/mBTU would make power production from gas totally without profit.
Projections are that natural gas prices will decline in the next few years, but so far they haven’t, largely as a
result of the increased power plant use and increased demand.
Figure 2.12 – LNG prices ($/mBTU) on different market hubs
It has to be pointed out that these facilities have relatively low carbon emission, so they become interesting
sources even from ecological point of view. So, despite the high price of natural gas as a fuel relative to
coal, the past 10 years have seen new combined cycle gas-fired plants far outpace new coal-fired plants,
with gas accounting for over 99% of new capacity in this time period. The reason for this has been that
natural-gas-fired combined cycle plants have:
- lower capital costs,
- higher fuel efficiency,
- shorter construction lead times, and
- lower emissions.
Black Sea Region 21

Figure 2.13 – Gas price ($/tcm) influence to CCGT generation cost
Figure Figure 2.13 shows influence of price of gas on price of electricity produced in CCGT. The information
on current gas price for the generators in 2011 varies, from 297-360 $/tcm. According to the graph above,
this gas price returns the total generation cost of about 77-90 $/MWh.
Overhead costs for these type of power plants are relatively low around 2.7$/MWh, but they can go up to
4$/MWh depending on the regulations.
Decommissioning costs for these units are zero, usually old fossil fired units are replaced with these
ones, but there have been cases in which power plants have been dismantled but only to be replaced with
new more efficient units.
Transmission costs for these units are usually lower than for other types, because these facilities are build
close to consumption areas (which is one of major advantages) and in lot of cases they are used to replace
old fossil fired units, so transmission capacity already exist. These costs are estimated to 2.6$/MWh.
Renewables
Renewable energy sources RES are all sources that do not use conventional approach in generating
electricity (described before). Following types of RES can be differentiated:
Small hydro is the development of hydroelectric power on a scale serving a small community or industrial
plant. The definition of a small hydro project varies but a generating capacity of up to 10 megawatts (MW) is
generally accepted as the upper limit of what can be termed small hydro. These power plants are actually
very similar to large ones, only difference is their size.
Biomass, a renewable energy source, is biological material from living, or recently living organisms, such as
wood, waste, (hydrogen) gas, and alcohol fuels. Biomass is commonly plant matter grown to generate
electricity or produce heat. In this sense, living biomass can also be included, as plants can also generate
electricity while still alive. The most conventional way in which biomass is used, however, still relies on direct
incineration, and usage of similar technology as for thermal power plants. As a special form of Biomass is
usage of Biofuel which is a type of fuel which is in some way derived from biomass. The term covers solid
biomass, liquid fuels and various biogases. In both cases, technology to get electricity is as conventional
power plants, the only difference is how you get fuel.
Waste power is electricity gained through process of waste incineration and disposal. These are
conventional thermal power plants that use waste as fuel (construction of incinerator is different) and there
is preparation of waste as fuel that is different.
Solar power means usage of sun as energy source, directly through photovoltaic conversion (PV panels) or
usage of sun as the heat source: solar parabolic troughs and solar power towers concentrate sunlight to
heat a heat transfer fluid, which is then used to produce steam like in conventional thermal power plant.
Geothermal, power means usage of either steam under pressure that emerges from the ground and drives
a turbine or hot water evaporates a low boiling liquid to create vapor to drive a turbine. In other words
these are like conventional thermal power plants.
Black Sea Region 22
Tidal power, also called tidal energy, is a form of hydropower that converts the energy of tides into useful
forms of power - mainly electricity. Usually these facilities are constructed in ocean bays and demand special
type of turbines.
Wind power is electricity generated from kinetic energy of wind by using a wind turbine. Most wind turbines
generate electricity from naturally occurring wind. Solar updraft towers use wind that is artificially produced
inside the chimney by heating it with sunlight, and are more properly seen as forms of solar thermal energy.
Standard wind turbines are able to convert up to 59% of wind energy to power.
Costs of RES are relatively difficult to accommodate since they depend on lot of factors, and one of main is
policy in some country as well as subsidies.
Overnight costs for RES highly depend on type of technology that is used. Usage of Solar energy is most
expensive and also tidal, since they use special technology for electricity production. Other RES use
conventional technology which lowers their costs. Exception is wind power, but level of production of wind
turbine decreased the overall prices for wind equipment.
Capital costs are connected to overnight costs, but it has to be said that they are highly dependable on
state subsidies for RES (either through lower discount rates or special bank policies). In these analyses these
effects are neglected.
Operational and maintenance costs depend on type of technology used, but they tend to be quite high
since special technologies and labor is necessary for maintenance and operation. These costs are especially
high if there is large uncertainty in energy production, like for wind, because they include significant costs
for wind prediction.
Variable Operational costs (fuel costs) for all RES are treated as zero, although for some type of RES
there are fuel costs related to fuel used (waste, biomass…). These costs do not include eventual costs of
balancing the production (ancillary services).
Overhead costs for RES are quite dependant on state policy, but usually they can be neglected for most of
RES type.
Decommissioning costs for RES are treated as zero.
Transmission costs for RES are significantly high and depend on technology used. Usually these facilities
are in remote places where you have to build transmission capacity in other to utilize the power plant. In
other words, significant transmission related investments have to be made in other to utilize the source. For
some type, these costs are not that high (biomass, waste and even small hydro in some cases).
Black Sea Region 23

1.1.2 Generation Cost Curves
Generation costs are typically represented by one of the following four curves:
- input/output (I/O) curve
- fuel-cost curve
- heat-rate curve
- incremental cost curve
Input/output (I/O) curve

The cost of fuel input to a generation plant does not reflect the actual costs of producing electrical energy as
output from the plant because substantial losses occur during production. Some power plants have overall
efficiencies as low as 35%. Additionally, the plant efficiency varies as a function of the generation level Pg.
Figure 2.14 – Input/output (I/O) curve
By measuring the energy output to obtain Pg, MW output, over a given period of time, for example an hour,
and the energy input can be obtained by measuring the fuel used during the hour and then multiplied by the
coal energy content in MBTU/ton. The resulting plot demonstrates fuel input in MBTU/hr as a function of the
power output Pg in MW. This type of plot (Figure 2.14) is called an input-output curve, and it is denoted as
R.
Fuel-cost curve
If I/O is multiplied by the fuel cost, it is called a fuel-cost curve (Figure 2.15) The curve shows the cost for
the given production level Pg.
Figure 2.15 – Fuel-cost curve
In a fuel cost curve, if the fuel input is increased, the power output per unit fuel input begins to decrease.
The furnace, boiler and the steam pipes leak a larger percentage of input heat as temperatures increase
(energy losses are higher). This is characteristic for almost all processes, the rate of increase in output
decreases as the input increases, assuming other inputs are fixed.
Black Sea Region 24

Heat-rate curve
Since the heat rate (Energy Efficiency) depends on operating point, is represented as H=H(Pg). The heat-
rate curve is the I/O curve divided by MW. The heat rate H=H(Pg) is the amount of input energy required
to produce a MWhr, at the generation level Pg. Figure 2.16 indicates that there is less efficiency for low
generation levels and increases with generation, but at some optimum level it begins to diminish. Most
power plants are designed to have the optimum level close to the rated output.
Figure 2.16- Heat rate curve
Some typical heat rates for units at maximum output are (in MBTU/MWhrs) 9.5-10.5 for fossil-steam units
and nuclear units, 13.0-15.0 for combustion turbines, and 7.0-9.5 for combined cycle units. Future combined
cycle units may reach heat rates of 6.5-7.0. It is important to understand that the lower the heat rate, the
more efficient the unit.
Incremental cost curve

Figure 2.15 hows that the cost per hour increases with generation, a feature that one would expect since
higher generation levels require greater fuel intake per hour, but this increase is not linear as efficiency of
generation increases. This cannot be clearly seen from the curve, so the desired $/MWh characteristic, called
the incremental cost curve for the plant, is obtained by differentiating the fuel cost curve. In this curve it is
evident that the costs decrease as efficiency increases. Figure 2.17 shows an incremental cost curve derived
from the fuel cost curve shown on Figure 2. 15.
Figure 2.17– Incremental cost curve

Ci ( PGi ) = α i + β PGi + γ PGi2 $/hr (fuel-cost)
dCi ( PGi )
ICi ( PGi ) = = β + 2γ PGi $/MWh
dPGi
Black Sea Region 25

Smoothing cost curves
Generator cost curves are usually not smooth. In some cases the curves are discontinuous. The discontinuity
in the cost curve of Figure 2.18 occurs due to the multiple steam valves. There are 5 different steam valves
shown on the diagram. Large steam power plants are operated so that valves are opened sequentially, i.e.,
power production is increased by increasing the opening of only a single valve, and the next valve is not
opened until the previous one is fully opened. So the discontinuities of Figure 2.18 represent where each
valve is opened. The cost curve increases at a greater rate with power production just as a valve is opened.
The reason for this is that the so-called throttling losses due to gaseous friction around the valve edges are
greatest just as the valve is opened and taper off as the valve opening increases and the steam flow
smoothens.
Figure 2.18 – Cost curve for large steam power plant
The significance of this effect is that the actual cost curve function of a large steam plant is not continuous,
but even more important, it is non-convex. A simple way to handle these two issues is to approximate the
actual curve with a smooth, convex curve, similar to the dark line of Figure 2.18. This is done by using
adequately estimated piece-wise smooth functions.
There are three predominant approximations:

- piece-wise linear functions
- quadratic or cubic piece-wise functions
- polynomial functions
“Piece-wise linear” cost curve, means that whole curve is divided in linear sections (Linear relation
between cost and generation in MW), point by point (Figure 2.19). This approach is extremely good if we
are modeling Fuel cost curves.
Figure 2.19 – Piece-wise linear cost curve

Black Sea Region 26
Data are entered in coordinate pairs (x,y) which define segments of linear cost curve
- x: active power generation (MW)
- y: generator fuel cost ($/h)
Gen. fuel cost = [Fuel Cost Scale Coef.] x generator fuel cost [$/h]
“Piece-wise quadratic” cost curve, means that the incremental cost curve is represented with linear
sections. Since incremental cost curve is a derivate from fuel cost curve, a set of quadratic curves show the
fuel cost curve.
AREA
Figure 2.20 – Piece-wise quadratic cost curve
Data are entered in coordinate pairs (x,y)

- x: active power generation (MW)
- y: generator incremental fuel cost (€/MW)
- Integration constant – used to calculate final fuel cost (€/h)
Gen. fuel cost = [Fuel Cost Scale Coef.] x (Integ. Constant + AREA)
“Polynomial and Exponential” cost curve, means “fitting of polynomial function according to calculated
values for generation costs.
1300
1200
1100
1000
C ($/hr)
900
800
700
600
500
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
P (MW)
Figure 2.21 – Polynomial Curve Fit for Cost Rate Curve
Gen. fuel cost = [Fuel Cost Scale Coef.] x (Integ. Constant + A*Pgen + B*Pgen² + C*eD*Pgen)
Black Sea Region 27

1.1.3 Generic Generation cost curves
For each type of power plant, EKC has developed generic generation cost curves based on general
technological characteristics. These generic cost curves are implemented in the Regional model but adjusted
according to the available data and real power plant characteristics. For all power plants older than 20
years, transmission costs and capital costs are assumed to be zero, and for new power plants are fully
included.
Hydro Power Plants

Depending on the type of hydro power plant and hydraulic turbine used, there can be three types of cost
curves:
- high head long penstock (Pelton turbine)
- high head medium penstock (Francis turbine)
- low head no penstock (Kaplan turbine)
110%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
kaplan francis pelton
Figure 2.22 – typical efficiency rates for hydraulic turbines depending on power output (p.u.)
These three types of turbines have different efficiencies and therefore there are three types of cost curves.
Figure 2.23– Cost curve and table for HPP with Pelton turbine 160MW (curve HYP)
Black Sea Region 28

Figure 2.24– Cost curve and table for HPP with Kaplan turbine 160MW (curve HYK)
Figure 2.25 – Cost curve and table for HPP with Francis turbine 500MW (curve HYF)
Another important factor for hydro power plants is that variable costs depend on the operation point. If a
turbine is operated near the technical minimum it causes greater fatigue on the turbine blades, and
therefore the costs are higher. These regimes are avoided by modeling the technical minimum parameter for
hydro power plants.
Variable Costs for all three types of curves at nominal capacity is the same 7.1$/MWh, and fixed costs
according to the cost of labor (related to GDP value) and whether capital costs are taken into consideration
or not. Same approach is taken for all types of power plants.
Power plants on the same river-cascade should have similar curves and the same cost ratio, to avoid illogical
engagement (all downstream plants are engaged according to the engagement of the first one in the
cascade). It is not possible to model this effect in PSS/E OPF and the only way to follow this effect is by
defining the limits of engagement of a power plant and by using similar cost curves. Different costs between
these plants are achieved by changing the fuel cost coefficient.
Black Sea Region 29

Thermal power plants that use steam as the prime mover for a turbine, are grouped by size. Two models are
developed, 300 MW unit and 1000MW unit (the larger the unit better the efficiency). Based on these two
models other fuel type models (gas and oil) are derived.
Figure 2.26– Cost curve and table for 300MW coal fired unit (curve THC)
Figure 2.27 – Cost curve and table for 1000MW coal fired unit (curve THC)
Figure 2.28 – Cost curve and table for 300MW gas fired unit (curve THC)
Cost curves that correspond to real units are gained through scaling of these curves according to real
machine data (size of the unit, heat rate, fuel costs etc…).
Black Sea Region 30

Figure 2.29 shows a typical cost curve for Open cycle gas turbine units (OGT).
Figure 2.29 – Cost curve and table for OGT 200MW (curve OGT)
Combined cycle GT units (CCGT) use exhaust gases to heat up steam for ST units. One additional level of
complexity would have two GT (GT A and B) and one ST unit (2GT+ST). In this design, the following six
combinations are possible:
1. GT A alone
2. GT B alone
3. GT A and GT B together
4. GT A and ST
5. GT B and ST
6. GT A and B and ST
The modes with the ST are more efficient than the modes without the ST (since the ST utilizes GT exhaust
heat that is otherwise wasted), with the last mode listed being the most efficient. Each of these six
combinations will have their own unique cost-curve characteristic. Therefore, in performing economic
dispatch, shifting between these various cost curve characteristics is important. But there is another more
serious problem. Consider the transition between the combined cycle power plant operations just as the
HRSG is ramped up. Prior to the HRSG start-up, only the GT is generating, with a specified amount of fuel
per hour being consumed, as a function of the GT power generation level. After the HRSG start-up, the fuel
input remains almost constant, but the MW output of the two generation units has increased by the amount
of power produced by the steam turbine driven by the HRSG. A typical cost curve for this situation is shown
in Figure 2.30.
C ($/hr)
dC/dPG ($/MWhr)
PG (MW)
PG (MW)
Figure 2.30– Cost curve and Incremental cost curve for a combined cycle plant
An important feature of this curve is that it is not convex, which means its slope (i.e., its incremental cost)
does not monotonically increase with PG. and that is something that cannot be modeled in PSS/E. So for
these power plants equivalent curve is constructed, and this one takes into consideration that all units are
always operational (both GTs and ST) in Figure 2.31 (for GT+ST single and multi-shaft units) and Figure
2.32 (2GT+ST).
Black Sea Region 31
Figure 2.31 – Cost curve and table for CCGT 200MW GT+100MW ST (curve CC1)
Figure 2.32 – Cost curve and table for CCGT 2x200MW GT+100MW ST (curve CC2)
Cost curves that correspond to real units are gained through adequate scaling of these curves according to
real machine data (size of the unit, heat rate, fuel costs etc…).

Nuclear power plants are actually thermal power plants, but with one significant difference, they use nuclear
reactor generated heat to produce steam. A similar approach is taken, meaning the two models are
developed, 500 MW unit (to represent older units) and 1000MW unit (larger the unit better the efficiency).
Black Sea Region 32

Again, cost curves that correspond to real units are gained through adequate scaling of these curves
according to real machine data (size of the unit, heat rate, fuel costs etc…).
Renewables
Specific RES models are not developed, but depending on the real system situation adequate model is
derived based on classical models described before. Most commonly used ones are feed in tariff models
shown in Figure 2.35 for Wind power plant and Figure 2.36 for small hydro power plants.
Figure 2.35 – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants (curve WND)
Figure 2.36 – Cost curve and table for Small Hydro units (curve SHY)
Black Sea Region 33

These curves should be used for production costs calculation instead of generation engagement
optimization, since these units are engaged based on energy availability and not on economics, so in
optimization calculations they should be disabled (dispatch value should be set to zero).
1.2 Prerequisites and Assumptions

1.2.1 Optimal Power Flow
In previous phases of this project a PSS/E network model and the data base have been developed as a tool
for detailed transmission network analyses of technical nature. But PSS/E as a software package also has the
ability to do optimization, and in this phase of the BST project, the goal is to develop a database that
enables experts to develop a detailed economical and more cost wise analyses.
PSS/E program description
Professional software package PSS/E™ version 33.0.0 is used for all calculations performed in this project.
The PSS/E package is a set of computer programs and structured data files designed to handle the basic
functions of power system performance simulation work, namely:
Data handling, updating, and manipulation
• Power Flow
• Optimal Power Flow
• Fault Analysis
• Dynamic Simulations + Extended Term dynamic Simulations
• Open network Access and Price calculation
• Equivalent Construction
Since its introduction in 1976, the PSS/E tool has become the most comprehensive, technically advanced,
and widely used commercial program of its type. It is widely recognized as the most fully featured, time-
tested and best performing commercial product available in the market. The program employs the latest
technology and numerical algorithms to efficiently solve large and small networks.
PSS/E is comprised of the following modules:

• PSS/E Power Flow
• PSS/E Optimal Power Flow (PSS/E OPF)
• PSS/E Balanced or Unbalanced Fault Analysis
• PSS/E Dynamic Simulation
PSS/E Power Flow module is basic PSS/E program module and it is powerful and easy-to-use for basic
power flow network analysis (Figure 2.37) as well as short circuit and dynamic analyses. Besides analysis
tool this module is also used for data handling, updating, and manipulation.
Black Sea Region 34

Figure 2.37- PSS/E model Graphical interface
PSS/E Optimal Power Flow (PSS/E OPF) module is advanced PSS/E program module and it is main
purpose are advanced “constraint” analyses, deriving solutions by considering constraints and limitations
such as voltage limits, transmission line capacities and economical factors for generation engagement.
PSS/E Saved Case PSS/E Raw data OPF Raw data

- Load flow data - - Load flow data - file
OPF data PSSE.opt

editor
PSS/E Saved Case

- OPF and Load flow data -
Figure 2.38 PSS/E model – PSS/E OPF data organization
This enables you to perform so called “optimization” of network, or in more detail:

• System operation optimization
o Reduction of system operational costs
o Reduction of losses
o Feasibility of regimes (technical and economical)
• Optimization of system performance (transformer tap ratios, voltage profile, reactive power plant
engagement etc…)
• Series and Shunt compensation requirements
• Identification of load shed strategy to resolve system problems
• Limited economical aspect analyses
o Marginal price calculations
o System exchanges opportunities (export/import)
o Congestion related costs
Black Sea Region 35
Objective functions are expressions of cost in terms of the power system variables (example, the fuel cost
incurred to produce power is a function of the active power generation among participating machines). OPF
automatically adjusts the participating machines’ active power generation, within capability limits, to reduce
the total fuel cost or losses or other goal. Optimization is achieved through the minimization of the objective
function that can be to:
• Minimize fuel costs
• Minimize Active Power Slack Generation
• Minimize Reactive Power Slack Generation
• Minimize Active Power Loss ($/pu MW)
• Minimize Reactive Power Loss ($/pu Mvar)
• Minimize Adjustable Branch Reactance
• Minimize Adjustable Bus Shunts
• Minimize Adjustable Bus Loads
• Minimize Interface Flows
• Minimize Reactive Generation Reserve
OPF model data set can be divided into two main parts: transmission network and generation.
PSS/E OPF transmission system modeling
As it was said, PSS/E is formidable tool for transmission and distribution network analyses, and networks are
usually presented with buses and connection links-network elements (lines, cables, transformers, etc…). In a
way the whole PSS/E model represents the model of a transmission grid (Figure 2.39).
Figure 2.39- PSS/E model – transmission network and calculation parameters
The first part consists of data describing network limitations, according to respective country grid codes and
rules of engagement like voltage limits, line and transformer load ratings.
PSS/E OPF generation modeling
Generation in PSS/E is usually modeled as it is in reality (generator+step up transformer) to model

adequately all effects that can happen in machine. Figure 2.40 shows sheet in PSS/E with generator data.
Black Sea Region 36

Figure 2.40- PSS/E model – generation modeling
The other part of data is stored in OPF module of PSS/E as Active Power Dispatch Tables with the following
data:
• Generation Max
• Generation Min
• Fuel Cost scale coef, scaling of cost curve
• Cost curve type
• Cost table
• In service, defining that data are enabled
Figure 2.41- PSS/E model – generation modeling OPF
Most important data for optimization are generation cost tables. If the cost curve table coordinate value has
units of MBTU/hour, then the fuel cost scale coefficient should be entered with units of (cost units)/MBTU,
and final cost tables are product between these values and the associated Fuel cost (for specific unit defined
in dispatch tables) curve coordinate value produces a result that has cost units of (cost units)/hour (Figure
2.42).
Black Sea Region 37

1 2
Figure 2.42 PSS/E model – generation modeling cost curve
Biding values, as way to model market behavior (market behavior is usually different then cost curves):
• Minimum production level is usually offered at low price (just to cover expenses)
• Real market offer price is after minimum engagement, usually higher than costs, that includes
profits (profit based approach)
1.3 OPF Models Construction Procedure
OPF model data set can be divided into two parts: transmission network and generation. First part consists
of data describing network limitations, according to respective country grid codes and rules of engagement
such as voltage limits, line and transformer load ratings.
The second part deals with generation and all the machines connected to the high voltage network and
represented in Load flow model. Machines are represented individually with appropriate data sets that
consist of following parts:
Generation dispatching data
Generator reserve data
Generation cost curve
Model integrator, EKC, has prepared a questionnaire for OPF data collection that each project participant has
populated with the required data. With this data, the model integrator constructed a data base that is used
for the OPF model preparation. Based on the data provided, the model integrator has constructed generic
generator models.
For all new generator units and units for which data is not available, the model integrator has utilized
common parameters and/or production units of construction.
For this procedure, the model integrator has the following responsibilities:
Review the collected data and confirm that the format is according to the agreed numbering
systems for areas, zones and busses
Review and test the operation of respective isolated models for each system
Merge all the model data to form one regional model
Test the operation of the regional model
Prepare a regional model report that consists of:
o Summary data for the regional model
o Characteristics of the regional model
o OPF Data base
Distribute the verified and accepted regional model to all participants
Black Sea Region 38

The model integrator was responsible for the distribution of the OPF models for each corresponding country
for review and verification. Each project participant was responsible for updating the generic OPF models to
correspond to their system behavior and to return it to model integrator to be incorporated in the regional
model.
The Regional dynamic model and data base is prepared based on the Load flow model for Winter peak and
Summer peak regimes for the following years:
2010
2015
2020
The OPF Regional model consists of following parts:

Load flow model in PSS/E format (*.sav file)
OPF model data base (collected questionnaires)
OPF model in PSS/E format (*.rop file) that corresponds to Load flow file
The OPF model was developed in latest version of PSS/E v33. USAID and USEA provided the full PSS/E
program support for the project participants to complete this model.
1.4 Training for OPF Model construction
To develop the OPF model, it was necessary to increase the capacity of the working group members, which
required training in the use of the PSS/E software for OPF modeling and the construction of detailed
technical databases.
In scope of the project, EKC experts prepared and organized a four day training session on the use of the
PSS/E software for the development of national transmission models for OPF analyses. (Annex 7.1)
Following the training, the TSOs began a discussion on the parameters of the model, data collection and the
development of a common technical data base. This further advanced to the development of a common OPF
model.
One of the project goals is to establish a technical database necessary to support OPF modeling. It is
expected that draft national and regional models will be developed by the conclusion of this stage of the
Project and detailed analysis would be performed in the following project stages.
Black Sea Region 39

III. POWER SYSTEMS DATA
By Paul Gipe (Wind Works, 2010) the tariffs in some of countries differ between EURO 7.8 cent/kWh to
EURO 12 cent/kWh.
Country Tariff in EURO cent/kWh

Germany 9.2
Ontario, Canada 9.6
France 8.2
Spain 7.8
South Africa 11.8
Vermont, USA 9.2
Austria 10
Brazil 8
Czech Republic 12
Portugal 11
Belgium 10
Bulgaria 9
Croatia 9
Finland 8
Hungary 9
Slovakia 8
Slovenia 9
Switzerland 12
Ukraine 11
1
1.5 Armenia
1.5.1 General Information
The Republic of Armenia is located in

the north-east of the Armenian
Highland. The terrain is mostly
mountainous, with fast flowing rivers
and few forests. The climate is
highland continental, making the
country subject to hot summers and
cold winters. The land rises to 4090 m
above sea-level at Mount Aragats, and
no point is below 390 m.
Figure 3.1 – Armenia – Topography

Area: 29743 sq. km
Arable land: 71 %
Forest area: 12 %
Population (Million): 3.256 (2010)
GDP ppp (Billion $): 15.63

GDP ppp (per capita): 5074 (2009)
GDP composition per sector:

• agriculture: 19.8 % (2010)
• industry: 33.5 % (2010)
• services: 46.7 % (2010)
Per-Capita Electricity Cons. (kWh-gross):

• 2006 1612 KWh
• 2007 1733 KWh
• 2008 1578 KWh
• 2009 1551 KWh
• 2010 1600 KWh
Armenia
1
1.5.2 Transmission Network
Figure 3.2 shows the transmission system of Armenia, together with new planned network elements. The
power transmission network of Armenia consists of 220 kV and 110 kV lines. The main plan for an upgrade
is building a 400kV network through the country, from North (new interconnection with Georgia) to South.
Table 3.1 shows main data about Armenian transmission network.
Table 3.1 – Armenia - network overview

Lines Transformers
Length of the
Installed
Voltage level overhead lines Voltage level
capacities
and cables
(kV) (km) (kV/kV) (MVA)
220 1527 220/x 2715
110 3083 110/x 5700
total 4610 8415
Table 3.2 – Armenia - Interconnection overview

Countries Name From-To nodes Status Comment
Island, to be put
AM-GE Alaverdi 220 kV OHL 220 kV Alaverdi (AM)-Tbilisi (GE) Existing
synchr.
AM-GE Lalavar 110 OHL 110 kV Alaverdi 2 (AM)-Sadakhlo (GE) Existing Island
AM-GE Ahotsk 110 OHL 110 kV Ahotsk (AM)-Ninotsminda (GE) Existing Island
AM-TR Kars 220 kV OHL 220 kV Gymri (AM)-Kars (TR) Existing Island
AM-GE Marneuli 400 kV OHL 400 kV Hrazdan (AM)- Marneuli (GE) Planned By 2015
AM-TR New 400 kV AM-TR HVDC 400 kV ANPP (AM)-Horasan (TR) Idea By 2020
Table 3.1, Table 3.5 and Table 3.6 show planed network reinforcements and generation capacities in the
forthcoming period.
Armenia
2
Figure 3.2 – Armenia – transmission network geographical map
Armenia
3
Table 3.3 – Armenia - Planned network reinforcements
VOLTAGE number CAPACITY MATERIAL CROS LENGTH

LEVEL of OR SECTION DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2
circuits limited TRANSFORMER BR1 BR2 TOTAL COMMISSION
/units TYPE
kV/kV A or MVA A or MVA mm2 km km km
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
SS AM Hrazdan TPP 400/220 2 2x500 2x500 2015
OHL AM Hrazdan TPP IR Tavriz 400 2 2x1800 2x1900 ACSR 2x(2x500) 332 100 432 2015
OHL AM Hrazdan TPP GE Marneuli 400 1 1100 1400 ACSR 2x500 70 20 90 2014
SS AM Noravan 400/220 2 2x200 2015
OHL AM Noravan AM Hrazdan TPP 400 2 1445 ACSR 2x500 2015
OHL AM NPP Medzamor AM Hrazdan TPP 400 2 1445 ACSR 2x500 2015
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - cable, SK - submarine cable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...)
2 Country (ISO code)
3 Substation name
4 Installed voltage (for lines nominal voltage, for transformers ratio in voltages)
5 number of circuits/units
6 Conventional transmission capacity of elements for OHL in Amps, for transformers in MVA
7 Conventional transmission capacity limited by transformers or substations
8 Type of conductor or transformer (ACSR - Aluminum Cross section Steel Reinforced, or code of conductor, PS - phase shift transformer...)
9 Cross section (number of ropes in bundle x cross section/cross section of reinforcement rope)
10 Length till border of first state
11 Length till border of second state
12 Total length
13 Date of commissioning (estimate)
Armenia
4
1.5.3 Generation
Majority of the Armenian generation capacity, about 1650MW (53%), comes from thermal power plants that
run on imported natural gas. Hydro power plants make up 1020MW(33%) of installed capacity, and nuclear
440MW (14%).
Gyumri Vanadzor
Lake Sevan
Figure 3.3 – Armenia – Generation capacities and transmission network
TPP Hrazdan
Location: Armenia
Operator:
Configuration: 4 X 210 MW, 2 x
100MW, 2x 60MW
Operation:
T/G supplier: Kharkov, Electrosila
EPC:
Quick facts: Largest power plant in
Armenia, run on natural gas.
NPP Medzamor
Location: Armenia
Operator: Armenian Nuclear Power Plant CJSC
Configuration: 2 X 408 MW PWR
Operation: 1977-1980
Reactor supplier: Atomstroyexport
EPC: Atomstroyexport
Quick facts: The Armenian NPP has two VVER-
440/270 reactors. For safety reasons, the USSR
Ministers Council decided to shut the plant down and
Units 1 and 2 were shut down on 25 Feb 1989 and
18 Mar 1989, respectively. After the collapse of the
Soviet Union, Armenia’s energy situation worsened
and in Apr 1993, the Armenian government decided to re-start Unit-2. After reviews of recommendations from a
variety of international organizations and contractors including IAEA, WANO, Framatome, Bechtel, and
Rosenergoatom, a restart program was developed. On 5 Nov 1995, Unit-2 came back online.
Armenia
1
HPP Argel
Location: Kotayk
Operator: International Energy Corp CJSC
Configuration: 4 X 56 MW Francis
Operation: 1953
T/G supplier: LMZ
EPC: Armhydroenergyproject
Quick facts: This is a high-head plant a drop of
285m through the penstocks.
HPP Kanaker
Location: Yerevan
Operator: International Energy Corp CJSC
Configuration: 4 X 12.5 MW, 2 X 25
MW Francis
T/G supplier: LMZ
Quick facts: After more than 50 years of operation, Kanaker-5 was
taken offline in 1995 for rehabilitation followed by Unit-6 in 2000.
Tatev HPP
Location: Syunik
Operator: Vorotan Hydroelectric Plants CJSC
Configuration: 3 X 52 MW Pelton
Operation: 1953
T/G supplier: LMZ, Electrosila
Quick facts: This is the first power station in the
Vorotan cascade and is supplied by an 18km
tunnel. The design head is 552m, the highest in
Armenia. Average annual output is about 580 GWh
Generation capacities planned
Nuclear Power Plants: There is a plan to replace existing obsolete units in Medzamor NPP, or ANPP, with
1000MW PWR block. A new block is planned to be operational by 2017.
Hydro Power Plants: Hydro power is an important energy source in Armenia. Currently there are three
large hydro power stations planned to be constructed:
Megri (in south close to Armenian border) 140MW
Loriberd (in north close to Georgian border) 65MW
Snokh 75MW
By 2020, 275-300MW of new capacities in large hydro stations are planned to be developed through new
units and through reconstruction of old ones.
Thermal Power Plants: Thermal power plants are planned to be retrofitted, replacing aging equipment,
especially in obsolete CHP power plants in Hrazdan TPP and Yerevan TPP. On the other hand, old units will
not be decommissioned but kept in cold reserve (particularly 200MW units in Hrazdan), while old units in
Yerevan TPP would be dismantled and replaced by new Combined Cycle units run on imported natural gas.
Armenia
2
Renewables: Plans for 2015 and 2020 include significant levels of hydro power and an aggressive plan for
wind power development by 2020. The summary data is shown in the following table.
Table 3.4 – Armenia - Renewable generation

Renewable Spring 2015 2015 Spring 2020 2020
MW Million kWh/yr MW Million kWh/yr
Hydro Power 704 2,030 763 2,560
Wind Power 36 100 280 625
Total 740 2,130 1,043 3,185
This program results in 2,130 million kWh/yr of renewable energy in 2015 out of total generation in 2015 of
11,100 million kWh/yr. Renewables are planned to make up 19.2% of total generation. By 2020, the plan is
to produce 3,185 million kWh/yr of energy out of the total generation of 16,200 million kWh/yr, making
renewables 19.7% of total generation. Even though total generation that includes a new ANPP growth by
46% from 2015 to 2020, Armenia continues to produce nearly 20% of all generated power utilizing
renewable resources. There are also plans to install other type of renewable sources (biomass, solar etc.),
but size of these is for now negligible and these will not have large impact on the network.
Armenia
3
Table 3.5 – Armenia - Planned new generation units
VOLTAGE DATE OF
LEVEL CAPACITY COMMISSIONING
TYPE SUBSTATION1 kV kV MW MVA year
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
CCHP AM Yerevan TPP new unit 18 110 208 240 2009
TPP AM Hrarzdan TPP unit 5 15.75 220 440 510 2009
NPP AM NPP Medzamor 24 400 1000 1111 2017
HPP AM Shnoch 75 85 2017
HPP AM Megri 140 165 2017
HPP AM Loriberd 65 71 2017
SHPP AM 140 189 2010
WPP AM 200 220 2012
1 Type of plant (HPP - Hydropower plant, TPP - Thermal power plant, PSHPP - Pump Storage Hydro Power Plant, CCHP - Combined Cycle Heating Plant...)
2 Country
3 Substation name 7 Installed apparent power
4 Generator voltage level 8 Date of commissioning (estimate)
5 Network voltage level
6 Installed active power
Table 3.6– Armenia – Existing and Planned RES and connection to the network
Type Existing Epotential Location
Name in BS Requests Potential Pinst201 Pinst202
Plant/Identification name [wind/solar/biom /Planne [MWh/year [area, Connection point
RTSM [MW] [MW] 5 [MW] 0 [MW]
ass] d ] region]
SHPP region Aragatsotn 8AMNPPSH water Existing 2.9 2.9 18670 18.7 19.2 Aragatsotn substation Ashtarak110/35/10
SHPP region Armavir 8DALARSH water Existing 9 9 17500 10 10 Armavir substation Armavir 110/35/10
SHPP region Ararat 8ARARTSH water Existing 3.5 3.5 5340 3.5 8.6 Ararat substation Ararat 110/35/10
SHPP region Gegharkunik 8LICHKSH water Existing 1.1 1.1 4730 10.3 12.5 Gegharkunik substation Lick 110/35/10
SHPP region Lori 8VANDZSH water Existing 22.5 22.5 63520 28 34.6 Lori substation Vanadzor 110/35/10
SHPP region Kotaik 8ABOVYSH water Existing 6.4 6.4 17030 9.6 11.9 Kotaik substation Abovyan 110/35/10
SHPP region Ширак 8GYUMR5 water Existing 10.7 10.7 35720 14.9 15.9 Shirak substation Gyumri 110/35/10
SHPP region Siunik 8SHINUSH water Existing 23.2 23.2 79720 38.2 40.5 Siunik substation Shinuayr 110/35/10
SHPP region Vayots Dzor 8EXEGNSH water Existing 21.8 21.8 52340 30.6 38.5 Vayots Dzor substation Ehegnadzor 110/35/10
SHPP region Tavush 8HRAZDSH water Existing 7.1 7.1 17800 14.4 19.1 Tavush substation Hrazdan 110/35/10
Karaxach 8GYUMRW wind Planned 20 140 Shirak substation Gyumri 110/35/10
Zod 8LICHKW wind Planned 20 20 Gegharkunik substation Lick 110/35/10
Pushkin+East Pambak 8VANDZW wind Planned - 75 Lori substation Vanadzor 110/35/10
Fontan 8CHARNVW wind Planned - 75 Kotaik substation Charencavan 110/35/10
Megri 8AGARK2 water Planned 140 140 140 140 Siunik substationп/с Mergi 220/35/10
Snokh 8SHNOKHH water Planned 76 76 76 76 Lori substation Alaverdi 110/35/10
Loriberd 8LORIBH water Planned 60 60 60 60 Lori substationп/с Lori 110/35/10
Armenia
4
1.5.4 Demand
Demand behavior
Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 show demand behavior for characteristic winter and summer peak regimes and
participation of different types of consumption in total energy consumed.
1600 1600
1400 1400
1200 1200
export
1000 1000 export
import
import
[k W ]
[k W ]
800 HPP 800
HPP
Hrazdan TPP
Yerevan TPP
600 Yerevan TPP 600
Armenian NPP
Armenian NPP
400 400 Demand
Demand
200 200
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
[h] [h]
Winter peak 27.12.2010 Summer peak 08.07.2010
Figure 3.4 – Armenia – Daily demand curve for winter and summer peak 2010
8000
6000
4000
HPP
2000 TPP
NPP
Other
0 Households
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Industrial
Own demand
‐2000 Losses
Interchange
‐4000
‐6000
‐8000
Figure 3.5 – Armenia – Participation of different demand type in total energy in 2010
Armenia
5
Demand forecast
Figure 3.6 shows demand forecasts up to 2020. This forecast is done according to the type and relation of
GDP projections, and Figure 3.7 and Figure 3.8 show daily demand curves for characteristic regimes in 2015
and 2020. Based on the figures, if NPP Medzamor is reconstructed, Armenia will have large surplus of
electricity.
Figure 3.6 – Armenia – Demand Forecast
1600 1600
1400 1400
import import
1200 1200
import import
1000 export 1000 export
Wind
Wind
800 HPP 800
HPP
Hrazdan 5
600 600 Hrazdan 5
Yerevan CHP
Hrazdan TPP Yerevan CHP
400 400
Demand Hrazdan TPP
Demand
200 200
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Armenia
6
2200 2200
2000 2000
1800 1800
import import
1600 import 1600
import
1400 export 1400 export
Wind
1200 1200 Wind
HPP
1000 1000 HPP
Hrazdan 5
800 800 Hrazdan 5
Yerevan CHP
Hrazdan TPP Yerevan CHP
600 600
Demand Hrazdan TPP
400 400
Demand
200 200
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Tariff
Table 3.7 shows prices of electricity for end consumers, and Table 3.8 and Table 3.9 show prices for
electricity produced from different types of power plants. This data was taken into consideration for building
the OPF model for Armenia.
Table 3.7 – Armenia – tariffs for consumers
Price (including VAT)
Voltage
Day Night
kV
AMD/kWh $c/kWh AMD kWh $c/kWh
≥35 21 5.50 17 4.50
6(10) direct 25 6.60 17 4.50
6(10) not direct 30 7.90 17 4.50
0.38 30 7.90 20 5.30
Table 3.8– Armenia – tariffs for power plants

Electricity Power Electricity Power
AMD/kWh AMD/kW $/MWh $/MW
Armenian NPP 3.84 2590.35 10.10 68.17
Hrazdan TPP 27.16 427.25 71.48 11.24
For export 27.16 71.48 0.00
Yerevan TPP 25.77 484.53 67.82 12.75
For export 25.77 67.82 0.00
Vorotan Cascade of HPPs 0.96 178.81 2.53 4.71
Sevan-Hrazdan Cascade of HPPs 0.98 418.92 2.57 11.02
Hrazdan 5 43.00
Yerevan CHP 36.70
New NPP 100.00
High Voltage Network (for service) 0.71 1.87 0.00
For export 0.71 1.87 0.00
Power System Operator (for service) 92.65 2.44 0.00
For export 0.28 0.74 0.00
Settlement Center (for service) 10.92 0.29 0.00
For export 0.03 0.07 0.00
Armenia
7
Table 3.9 – Armenia – tariffs for RES (before taxes)
category AMD/KWh EURc/KWh USDc/KWh
I Small HPP on the rivers 19.28 3.60 5.07
II Small HPP on the irrigation system 12.85 2.40 3.38
III Small HPP on the drinking water 8.57 1.60 2.26
IV Wind Farm 33.76 6.31 8.88
V Biomass 36.93 6.90 9.72
Price of natural gas imported from Russia is 210$/tcm for large scale consumers like power plants including
transportation costs.
1.5.5 Export Potential in 2015 and 2020
From figures presented in the previous chapter, if NPP Medzamor is reconstructed Armenia will have large
surplus of electricity. Armenia forecasts that in the Winter Max, 705 MW will be available for export to
Georgia in mostly a synchronous mode and to Turkey in an island mode. In 2020 winter max, the power and
energy balance includes the addition of the new ANPP of 1050 MW and 280 MW of wind power. With the
addition of the 400 kV HVDC connection to Turkey, Armenia forecasts that 1,340 MW will be available for
export to Georgia in mostly a synchronous mode and to Turkey through the HVDC connection as well as the
Kars 220 kV island connection. It is important to emphasize that this export potential is a technical
maximum and does not include any economic or market considerations.
1.5.6 Analyses results and renewables balancing and control
Based on detailed analyses performed in other studies, and taking into consideration numerous scenarios
following conclusions can be drawn:
• Primary reserves for Armenia have been calculated assuming an emergency disconnection of the
largest UES Russia generator of 1200 MW is accepted as a design-based failure. The calculated
reserves are 15 MW in 2015 and 20 MW in 2020. These primary reserves are maintained by the
Hrazdan TPP.
• Secondary reserves for Armenia have been calculated for automated compensation of normative
irregular power flow fluctuations and are 30 MW in both 2015 and 2020. These secondary reserves
are maintained by the Tatev HPP.
• Tertiary reserves for Armenia have been calculated to meet the following three requirements:
(1) Manual compensation for the largest generator in Armenia that could fail in 2015 (Hrazdan
TPP 440 MW) and in 2020 (ANPP 1050 MW) in proportion to the total power in the
Transcaucasia region and secondary reserves calculated above. These calculations results in
2015 = 65 MW and in 2020 = 240 MW.
(2) Manual compensation of disconnections of power from wind power plants due to changes of
wind velocity according to monitoring data. These calculations results in 2015 = 30 MW and in
2020 = 230 MW.
(3) Manual compensation of simultaneous emergency disconnection of all wind power in
Armenia due to impermissible increase of wind velocity (considered with low probability). These
calculations results in 2015 = 40 MW and in 2020 = 280 MW.
Therefore, the highest levels of reserves are selected from these calculations so that the tertiary
reserves for 2015 = 65 MW (maintained by Hrazdan TPP) and for 2020 = 240 MW (maintained
by Shamb HPP, Spandaryan HPP, and Hrazdan TPP). These tertiary power reserve amounts meet all
three requirements in 2015 and the first two requirements in 2020. The lacking reserve in 2020,
which is 280-240=40 MW, can be compensated by the cold power reserve or the tertiary reserve
purchased on the regional market of system services.
• Cold Reserves are provided to restore the used tertiary reserves and to compensate for the
generator that is disconnected due to an emergency. In 2015 all needed cold reserves for Hrazdan
TPP No. 5 (440 MW) will come from various combinations of units at Hrazdan TPP. In 2020 all
needed cold reserve for the new ANPP (1,050 MW) will not be available so that some portion will be
purchased from the regional market.
Armenia
8
The table below summarizes these power reserve findings.
Table 3.10 – Calculated reserve levels

Reserve, MW W2015 W2020
AM primary reserve 15 OK 20 OK
AM secondary
30 OK 30 OK
reserve
280 MW required; -> 40 MW from
AM tertiary reserve 65 OK 240 cold reserve, or bought on regional
market
OK, for outage Hrazdan TPP NOK for outage ANPP, 1050 MW; -> use
AM cold reserve
g5, 440 MW old capacities, or regional reserve
1.5.7 Remarks and Comments
The interconnection to Georgia is on an existing 220 kV line that passes near the prospective wind plant
sites. Future increase in capacity with the construction of a new 400kV connection, will enable Armenia to
export power through the Georgian network and access to regulating power in Georgia, if there is a need for
that.
Steady state load flow and dynamic models for the region were reviewed by the BSTP group. One result was
the assessment of the maximum transfer capacity of synchronous interconnection between Armenia and
Georgia. Its analysis revealed that the net transfer capacity between the two countries if operated
synchronously amounts to 800 MW. This large transfer capacity can accommodate the balancing energy
demand between the two countries especially during winter months when winds are strongest and most
hydro resources are sequestered in ice and snow.
Armenia
9
1.6 Bulgaria
With a territory of 110,994 square

kilometers (42,855 sq. mi), Bulgaria
ranks as the 16th-largest country in
Europe. Several mountainous areas
define the landscape, most notably
the Stara Planina (Balkan) and Rodopi
mountain ranges, as well as the Rila
range, which includes the highest
peak in the Balkan region, Musala. In contrast, the Danubian plain in the north and the Upper Thracian Plain
in the south represent Bulgaria's lowest and most fertile regions. The 378-kilometer Black Sea coastline
covers the entire eastern bound of the country. Bulgaria's capital city and largest settlement is Sofia.
Area: 110994 sq. km

Arable land: 29.94 % (2005)
Forest area: 33 % (2005)
Population: 7,351,234 (2011)
GDP: purchasing power parity - $96.8 billion (2010 est.)

GDP per capita: purchasing power parity - $12850 (2010 est.)

• agriculture: 7.1 % (2009)
• industry: 35.2 % (2009)
• services: 57.7 % (2009)
Power transmission network of Bulgaria consists of 400 kV, 220 kV and 110 kV lines. Figure 3.9 shows the
map of Bulgarian network and Table 3.11 shows the main data about Bulgarian transmission network.
Interconnection lines between the Bulgarian EPS and neighboring countries are shown in Table 3.12
Table 3.11– Bulgaria - network overview

lines transformers
Length of
the
Voltage Voltage Installed
overhead
level level capacities
lines
and cables
400 2451 400/x -
220 2805 220/x -
110 9954 110/x -
total 15210 15888
Bulgaria
10
Figure 3.9 – Bulgaria - network map
Table 3.12 Bulgaria – interconnection lines

Nominal
Neighbor Neighbor Length, Parallel Cross Thermal
Voltage, Neighbor country Bulgarian S/S
S/S TSO km operation section rating, A
kV
400 kV Romania Dobrudzha Isaccea TEL 230,6 Yes 3 x ACO 400 2475
400 kV Romania Kozloduy Tintareni TEL 115,7 Yes 2 x ACO 500 1890
400 kV Romania Kozloduy Tintareni TEL 115,7 Yes 2 x ACO 500 1890
400 kV Serbia Sofia West Nis EMS 122,5 Yes 2 x ACO 500 1890
400 kV FYROM Chervena Mogila Stip MEPSO 150,1 Yes 2 x ACO 500 1890
400 kV Greece Blagoevgrad Thessaloniki HTSO 176,8 Yes 2 x AC 500 1890
400 kV Turkey Maritsa East 3 Hamitabat TEIAS 148,8 Yes 3 x ACO 400 2475
400 kV Turkey Maritsa East 3 Hamitabat TEIAS 158,8 Yes 2 x ACO 500 1890
110 kV Serbia Kula Zajecar EMS 20,2 No AC 185 510
110 kV Serbia Breznik Vrla EMS 64,1 No AC 185 510
110 kV FYROM Skakavitsa Kriva Palanka MEPSO 18,1 No ACO 400 825
110 kV FYROM Petrich Susica MEPSO 32,6 No ACO 400 825
400 kV Romania Varna Isaccea TEL 236,6 No 5 x ACO 300 2835
400 kV Greece Maritsa East Nea Santa HTSO 140,0 Project 3 x ACO 400 2475
Bulgaria
11
Table 3.13– Bulgaria - Planned network reinforcements for RES connection to the network
VOLTAGE Number CAPACITY MATERIAL LENGTH
CROSS
LEVEL Of limited OR BR1 BR2 TOTAL DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 STATUS
Circuits TRANSFORMER COMMISSIONING
kV/kV A or MVA A or MVA mm2 km km km
/units TYPE
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
OHL BG M.East GR Nea Santa 400 1 1890 - ACSR 2X500 - - - 2015 Project
OHL BG M.East1 BG M.East3 400 1 1890 - ACSR 2X500 - - - 2015
OHL BG M.East1 BG Burgas 400 1 1890 - ACSR 2X500 - - - 2015
OHL BG M.East1 BG Plovdiv 400 1 1645 - ACSR 2X500 - - - 2015
SS BG Belene 400/110 2 275 OTC 2015
OHL BG Belene BG Carevec 400 2 1645 - ACSR 2X400 - - - 2015
OHL BG Belene BG Mizia 400 2 1645 - ACSR 2X400 - - - 2015
SS BG Karlo 400 2015
OHL BG Carevec BG Karlo 400 2 1645 - ACSR 2X400 - - - 2015
OHL BG M.East3 BG Karlo 400 2 1645 - ACSR 2X400 - - - 2015
OHL BG HPP Aleko BG Plovdiv 220 1 1890 - ACSR 500 - - - 2015
OHL BG Karnobat BG Dobrudja 220 1 945 - ACSR 500 - - - 2015
SS BG Majak 110/20 2 2015 Project
OHL BG Majak BG Dobrich 2 58 2015 Project
OHL BG Majak BG Shabla 2 12 2015 Project
OHL BG Majak BG Kavarna 2 12 2015 Project
OHL BG Varna Sever BG Kavarna 1 50 2015 Project
OHL BG Varna Zapad BG Kavarna 1 55 2015 Project
OHL BG Dobrudja BG Dobrich 1 34 2015 Project
SS BG Svoboda 400/110 2 300 OTC 2020 Project
Varna(BG)–
OHL BG Svoboda BG 400 2 1890 - ACSR 2X500 10 2020 Project
Issacea(RO)
SS BG Vidno 400/110 2 300 OTC 2020 Project
OHL BG Svoboda BG Vidno 400 2 1890 - ACSR 2X500 115 2020 Project
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - kable, SK - submarine kable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...)
3 Substation name
12 Total length
14 Status of project (Idea, Feasibility study, Construction, Damaged, out of service, Decommissioned...)
*reconstruction in network connected to new RES installation
Bulgaria
12
Table 3.14 – Bulgaria - Planned new generation units
VOLTAGE DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 kV kV MW MVA year STATUS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
NPP BG Belene 24 400 2x1000 2x1111 2014 Project
CCGT BG TPP Varna New unit 1 ? 220 280 ? 2010 Project
TPP BG TPP Maritsa East1, U1 ? 400 300 ? 2010 Commissioning
TPP BG TPP Maritsa East1, U2 ? 400 300 ? 2011 Commissioning
TPP BG TPP Maritsa East4 ? 400 700 ? 2015 Project
HPP BG HPP Cankov Kamak, U1 ? 110 40 ? 2010 Commissioning
HPP BG HPP Cankov Kamak, U2 ? 110 40 ? 2010 Commissioning
HPP BG HPP Gorna Arda ? 110 174 ? 2016 Project
TPP BG TPP Ruse ? 110 100 ? 2011 Project
HPP BG HPP Nikopol ? 110 440 ? 2018 Project
HPP BG HPP Silistra ? 110 130 ? 2019 Project
CHPP BG GPP Haskovo ? 110 256 ? 2012 Project
CHPP BG GPP Mramor ? 110 250 ? 2012 Project
WPP BG Valtchi Dol ? 110 100 2011 connection point V_VDOL5
WPP BG Kavarna ? 110 150 2011 connection point VKAVAR5
WPP BG Baltchik ? 110 45 2015 connection point VBALTC5
WPP BG Widno ? 110 350 2015 connection point VVIDNO5
WPP BG Majak ? 110 360 2015 connection point VMAJAK5
WPP BG General Toshevo ? 110 50 2020 connection point VG_TOS5
WPP BG Svoboda(Krushari) ? 110 400 2020 connection point VSVOBO5
WPP BG Dobrich ? 110 50 2020 connection point VDOBRI5
WPP BG Borovo ? 110 70 2020 connection point VBOROV5
WPP BG Binkos ? 110 70 2020 connection point VBINKO5
WPP BG Rechica ? 110 50 2020 connection point VRECHI5
WPP BG Burgas ? 110 100 2020 connection point VBURGA52
WPP BG Trastenik ? 110 50 2020 connection point VTRAST51
WPP BG Guljanci ? 110 50 2020 connection point VGULJA5
WPP BG Jeravica ? 110 100 2020 connection point VJERAV5
WPP BG Martinovo ? 110 50 2020 connection point VMARTI5
WPP BG Berkovica ? 110 50 2020 connection point VBERKO5
SPP BG Carevec ? 110 20 2020 connection point VCAREV5
2 Country
3 Substation name
4 Generator voltage level
7 Installed apparent power
9 Status of the project (Idea, Feasibility study, Construction...)
Bulgaria
13
1.6.3 Generation
Installed generation capacity is about 5400 MW of thermal units, 2000 MW of nuclear units, and 2600 MW of
hydro units. Thermal power plants produce about 50 % of the total energy, nuclear units produce about 40
and hydro units cover 10 %.
Major production capacities are described in following paragraphs:
NPP Kozloduy
Location: Bulgaria
Operator: NEK
Configuration: 2 X 440 MW, 2 X 1,000 MW
PWR
Reactor supplier: AEE
Quick facts: Reactor Units 1&2 retired in
2006.
TPP Maritza East-2

Location: Bulgaria
Operator: Maritsa East-2 TPP plc
Configuration: 4 X 150, 2 X 210 MW, 2 X 215 MW
Fuel: lignite
Boiler supplier: Podoloski
T/G supplier: Kharkov, LMZ, Electrosila
Quick facts: This is the largest thermal power plant
Bulgaria and one of three power plants in the
Maritsa East complex in the southeastern part of
the country. The plant has a 512ha site near
Radetski Villare and Lake Ovcharitsa 60km from the town of Stara Zagora. Units 7&8 are scrubbed and Units 1-6
are in the midst of major rehabilitation and scrubber retrofits. The two 325m stacks are the tallest structures in
Bulgaria.
TPP Maritza East-3
Location: Bulgaria
Operator: Maritza East III Power Company AD
Configuration: 4 X 210 MW
Fuel: lignite
Boiler supplier: Podoloski
T/G supplier: LMZ
Bulgaria
14
CHAIRA PHPP
Location: Marica, Bulgaria
Operator: NEK
Configuration: 4 X 211 MW Francis,197MW pump
Operation:
T/G supplier: Toshiba
EPC:
Quick facts: 701m head
BELMEKEN PHPP
Operator: NEK
Configuration: 5 X 74.7 MW Pelton,2x52MW pump
Operation:
T/G supplier:
EPC:
Quick facts:
SESTRIMO
Operator: NEK
Configuration: 2 X 130MW Pelton
Operation:
T/G supplier:
EPC:
Quick facts:
MOMINA KLISURA
Operator: NEK
Configuration: 2 X 60MW Francis
Operation:
T/G supplier:
EPC:
Quick facts:
Bulgaria
15
Nuclear Power Plants: The NPP Belene, power plant that is a long time in construction, is expected that
at least one unit will be operational by 2015.
Hydro Power Plants: Hydro power is an important energy source for system regulation. Development
plans in this field are concentrated mainly in finishing projects that already started some time ago, and
refurbishment of old power plants. Most of refurbishment plans are already finalized in Batak and Arda
cascades.
Thermal Power Plants: Large number of thermal capacities in Bulgaria are old, and there many plans for
replacing these obsolete units with new ones, like the recent power plant Galabovo, Maritsa East 1 entered
operation replacing old units. There are similar plans for power plant Maritza East 3 and Varna. It is also
expected that construction of a new gas pipeline “south stream” will create opportunities for construction of
CCGT units, to replace the aging CHP plants.
Renewables: The promotion of renewable energy is a an important part of the National Energy Strategy. It
is anchored in the Bulgarian Energy Act, as well as in the Energy Efficiency Act. Chapter 11 of the Energy Act
covers the promotion of production of electricity from renewable energy sources and cogeneration. The
current national renewable energy sources target to be achieved by 2010 is 11% of electric energy
consumption, and 20% by 2020. (Table 3.15).
Table 3.15 – Bulgaria – Planned RES by 2020

Energy
installed produced
MW % GWh %
Gross consumption
2020 100.00% 42090 100.00%
HPP large 6.41% 2700 6.41%
Small HPP (private) 550 1.94% 815 1.94%
Wind PP 1800 8.55% 3600 8.55%
Solar PP 600 1.61% 676.2 1.61%
Biomass PP 160 1.52% 640 1.52%
Large scale hydro power is by now the main part of the renewable energy, but its technical and economic
potential is almost fully exploited. As a result, one goal is to increase the amount of energy generated from
non-hydroelectric sources. Table 3.16 shows the planned development of RES in 2010-2020 period, taking
into consideration ENTSO-E standards and network constraints.
Table 3.16 – Bulgaria – Planned RES 2010-2020 in MW

DEVEELOPMENT PLAN OF RENEWABLES –INSTALLED CAPACITY [MW]
Type /Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 SUM[MW]
HPP(no pumps) 2170 25 170 2365
WPP 488 312 300 300 200 100 100 1800
SOLAR 25 125 125 125 100 100 600
BIOMASS 5 30 30 30 30 20 10 5 160
SUM[MW] 2688 467 455 455 330 245 10 5 270 0 0 4925
Bulgaria
16
1.6.4 Demand
Demand Behavior
Demand Forecast
Figure 3.10 shows planed demand forecast and distribution of demand by type.
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Powerplants houseload and loses in network · Transport · Agricultural · Houseload · Industrial · Public utilities
Figure 3.10 – Bulgaria – Demand Forecast and distribution by type
Bulgaria
17
Tariff
This chapter shows the tariff system in Bulgaria. It is divided like in most of the countries by type of
consumption and voltage level (all prices are before taxes):
• prices of electricity on HV level (for large industrial consumers and distribution companies) are
around 72.24lev or approximately 37EUR/МWh (VAT is not included)/52.5$/MWh. The prices do not
include transmission fees are market driven.
• prices of electricity on MV and LV level (residential and commercial)
Table 3.17 – Bulgaria – tariffs for residential and commercial on MV and LV level (before taxes)
Type of $/MWh
measuring Time zones Voltage level
MV LV
peak 93.04 98.51
3 time Zones day 49.25 51.45
night 19.32 24.74
day 71.14 82.10
2 time Zones
night 19.16 27.37
NO time Zones 68.96 68.96
• Prices of electricity for residential customers (Low Voltage grid)
Type of
Time zones $/MWh
measuring
Day 58.12
2 time Zones
Night 26.16
NO time Zones 58.12
• Additional fees:
For green energy 0.22 c$/kWh
For transportation of energy 0.7 c$/kWh
For access to the grid 0.65 c$/kWh
In Bulgaria a feed in system for renewables production is implemented and Table 3.18 shows these tariffs
for different power producers, in local currency, in EUR and USD.
Table 3.18 – Bulgaria – tariffs for RES (before taxes)

kategory BGN/KWh EURc/KWh USDc/KWh
Prices of energy from Hydro PP with installed capacity less than 10 MW,
installed before19.06.2007 0.112 5.4 7.6
Prices of energy from Hydro PP with installed capacity less than 200 kW 0.223 10.75 15.13
I. Prices of energy from Hydro PP with installed capacity less than 10 MW 0.178 8.58 12.08
Prices of energy from Wind PP with installed capacity more than 800 кW with:
Less than 2250 full effective hours for year 0.189 9.7 13.7
II. More than 2250 full effective hours for year 0.172 8.8 12.5
Prices of energy from Wind PP with installed capacity less than 800 кW
III. with squirrel cage induction generator 0.145 7.4 10.5
Solar with installed capacity less than 5kW 0.76 36.64 51.57
IV. Solar with installed capacity more than 5kW: 0.699 33.7 47.43
The tariffs were approved on 30.03.2011 by State Energy and Water Regulatory Commission.
Bulgaria’s export potential largely depends on the NPP Belene project and installation of new thermal power
plants, some of which run on imported coal. If these projects are realized, Bulgaria will have large quantities
of power for export, if not, it will be balanced. There will be sufficient energy for domestic demand.
Bulgaria
18
1.6.6 Remarks and comments
Regarding the frequency control of the EPS, the following requirements to the WPP are foreseen:
1. WPP with installed capacity 50MVA and more is obliged to have joint control of the produced
active power with smooth change of active power according to the requirements of the system
operator of ESO.
2. WPP with installed capacity 50MVA and more is obliged to work with decreased active power
generation regardless of metrological conditions, when the system operator of ESO needs it.
For the 2020 time horizon, the technical potentials for control of the Bulgarian EPS with respect to the
existing and planned development of generation, show that providing quality control and security of EPS,
according to the ENTSO-E standard, is possible if the installed capacity of renewables does not exceed:
• WPP 1800MW
• Solar 600MW
• Biomass 160MW
ESO has a proposal for a renewables grid code, but has not yet been approved.
Bulgaria
19
1.7 Georgia
1.7.1 General
Information
Georgia is a sovereign
state in the Caucasus
region of Eurasia. Located
at the crossroads of
Western Asia and Eastern
Europe, it is bounded to
the west by the Black
Sea, to the north by
Russia, to the southwest
by Turkey, to the south by Armenia, and to the southeast by Azerbaijan.
Area: 69700 sq. km

Arable land: 29.94 % (2005)
Forest area: 33 % (2005)
Population: 7,351,234 (2011)


• industry: 35.2 % (2009)
• services: 57.7 % (2009)
Figure 3.11 – Georgia - regions
1.7.2 Transmission network
Figure 3.19 shows the transmission system of Georgia. The 500 kV East-West line represents the backbone
of Georgia's high voltage network. Together with 220 kV lines in parallel, 110kV and 35 kV in radial (spurs)
operation, it forms the Georgian transmission system. Table 3.19 shows main characteristics of the Georgian
network.
Georgia
20
Table 3.19 – Georgia - network overview
lines transformers
Length of
the
overhead
lines
and cables
500 573 500/220 5995
330 21 330/x 480
220 1536 220/x 7275
110 3925 110/x 4125
total 6055 3200
Table 3.20 – Georgia - Interconnection overview

Countries Name From-To nodes Status Comment
AM-GE Alaverdi 220 kV OHL 220 kV Alaverdi (AM)-Tbilisi (GE) Existing Island
AM-GE Lalavar 110 OHL 110 kV Alaverdi 2 (AM)-Sadakhlo (GE) Existing Island
AM-GE Ahotsk 110 OHL 110 kV Ahotsk (AM)-Ninotsminda (GE) Existing Island
GE-RU Kavkasioni – 500 kV OHL 500 kV Enguri (GE)-Centralna (RU) Existing
GE-RU Salkhino – 220 kV OHL 220 kV Bzibi (GE)-Psou (RU) Existing
GE-RU Java – 110 kV Existing
GE-RU Dariali – 110 kV Existing
GE-TR Ajara – 220 kV OHL 220 kV Batumi (GE)-Hopa (TR) Existing
GE-AZ Gardabani – 330 kV OHL 330 kV Mukharani (GE)-AZGRES (AZ) Existing
AM-GE Ksani 400 kV OHL 400 kV Hrazdan (AM)- Marneuli (GE) Planned
GE-AZ New 500 kV AZ-GE OHL 500 kV Tbilgresi (GE) - Azerbaijan Planned
GE-TR New 400 kV HVDC GE-TR HVDC 400 kV Akhaltsikhe (GE) – Borcka (TR) Planned By 2013
GE-TR New 220 kV HVDC GE-TR HVDC 220 kV Batumi (GE) – Hopa (TR) Planned By 2015
Planned network reinforcements
The main guideline is to reinforce the Georgia-Russia-Azerbaijan loop, close the 500 kV loop internally and to
build a new connection to Turkey to increase transfer capacity. Georgia’s development plan is divided into
three phases.
2013
An asynchronous interconnection between Georgia and Turkey is planned to be established via a line
commutated back to back (B2B) HVDC Substation located in the Akhaltsikhe region of Georgia. The second
end of the line will be tied to the substation located in the Borcka region of Turkey. Along with the
Akhaltsikhe substation, new 500 kV substations Jvari and Marneuli are also planned. Other projects include
the internal 500 kV lines connecting Akhaltsikhe B2B with 500 kV substations Zestafoni and Marneuli and
500 kV lines between substations Ksani -Marneuli, Gardabani - Marneuli and Enguri – Jvari. The
reinforcement of the 220 kV power grid’s western part of Georgia is also being considered (Figure 3.12).
2015
Another asynchronous interconnection between Georgia and Turkey is expected to be in service by 2015.
The connection will include a B2B substation, which will be located in the Adjara region of Georgia, near
Batumi. The second end of the tie line will be connected with a substation located in Muratli region of
Turkey. There are also plans to build a 500 kV portion at the Tskaltubo substation, with a 500/220 kV
autotransformer and 500 kV lines connecting with 500 kV substations Akhaltsikhe and Jvari. Additionally, the
existing 500 kV line Imereti, between 500 kV substations Enguri and Zestafoni, will be split and will enter
and exit from the Tskaltubo 500 kV substation (Figure 3.13).
2017.
The new power plants – Khudoni HPP, Namakhvani HPP Cascade, among others, with corresponding
substations and OHLs connecting with system are planned to come on line by 2017 (Figure 3.14)
Georgia
21
Figure 3.12 – Georgia - network map for 2013
Georgia
22
Georgia
23
Georgia
24
Table 3.21 – Georgia - Planned network reinforcements
VOLTAGE number CAPACITY MATERIAL LENGTH
CROSSECTION
LEVEL of limited OR BR1 BR2 TOTAL DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 STATUS
circuits A or TRANSFORMER COMMISSION
kV/kV A or MVA mm2 km km km
/units MVA TYPE
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
SS GE Qsani 500/400 1 3X267 LTC 2009 Feasibility study
OHL GE Qsani AM TPP Hrazdan 400 1 1100 1400 ACSR 2x300 80 90 170 2009 Feasibility study
OHL GE Mukharani AZ AZ TPP 330 1 283
SS GE Akhaltske 500/400 1
BB GE Akhaltske 400 1
OHL GE Akhaltske Marneuli 500 1
OHL GE Marneuli Gardabani 500 1
OHL GE Akhaltske Menji 500 1
OHL GE Menji Kudoni 500 1
OHL GE Akhaltske Zestaponi 500 1 71
OHL GE Akhaltske TR Borcka 400 1 130
OHL GE Gardabani AR Atarbeksan 330 1
OHL GE Enguri RU Centralna(Sochi) 500 1 450
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - kable, SK - submarine kable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...)
3 Substation name
12 Total length
Georgia
25
1.7.3 Generation
Georgia’s total nameplate generating capacity is about 5,000 MW. 2,088 MW are concentrated in three
thermal power plants, Gardabani, Tkvarchelli and the Tbilisi CHP plant. About 2,700 MW is in hydro and
about 5 MW are diesel units. The hydro-power capacity consists of 6 large storage plants, 17 large run-of-
river plants and the rest are small run-of -river plants. Assets in Abkhazia, which hosts about one-third of the
country’s generation capacity, will not be privatized until full Georgian jurisdiction is restored. Assets include
hydro-power plants, Vardinli cascade, the Sukhumi HPP, the country’s largest hydro-power plant at Inguri
(1,300 MW), and the Tkvarchelli thermal power station (220 MW).
RUSSIA
PSOU TO CENTRALNAIA
VOLTAGE DESTIGNATION
SOKHUMI
500 KV
VA
R
EN
DN
KHUDONI
GU
I
400 KV
LI
IR
OCHAMCHIRE
330 KV
ONI CASC
LAJANURI SORI CASC
ZU
220 KV
GD
IDI
NAMAKHVANI CASC
SADMELI CASC 154 KV
TSKALTUBO
DZEVRULA 110 KV
MENJI KUTAISI
SHAORI JINVALI
KHADORI
ZESTAFONI
KUTAISI CASC ZAHESI
KHASHURI DZEGVI
QSANI
GLDANI GURJAANI
LESA GORI
GLDANI
AKHALTSIKHE CHITAKHEVI RUSTAVI
KHRAMI‐1
TB NAVTLUGHI
ILI
LISI S I
BATUMI
KHRAMI‐2
MTKVARI KASC MARNEULI GARDABANI
KHOPHA FARAVANI
BORCHKHA
AGSTAFA
ALAVERDI
AZSRES
KARS
Figure 3.15 – Georgia – Generation capacities and transmission network
Georgia
26
HPP Enguri
Location: Abhazia
Operator: ?
Operation: 1984
T/G supplier: HTGZ/ Sibelektrojazhmash Kharkov,
Voith
Quick facts: With its installed capacity of 1300
MW/4430GWh, Enguri is the largest hydro-electric
scheme in Georgia. The Enguri hydro-electric station
including the 271.5 m high arch dam (the world's
highest arch dam). Pressure tunnel, 15 km long and
9,5 m, in diameter the and underground power station. Reconstruction is on the way, units 2, 3 (in 2006) and 4
are finished, and units 1 and 5 expected to be finalized by 2012, financed from 20mil$ EBRD loan.
HPP Vardinli
Configuration: 3X73.3 MW Kaplan
Operation: 1971
T/G supplier: Turboatom/Sibelektrojazhmash Kharkov
Quick facts This is a hydroelectric power plant with seasonal
regulation; its water reservoir is located nearby river
Eristskali north to the city of Gali, with 146 million cub. meter
of water reservoir. Its installed capacity is 220 (3X73,3) MW
and rated average annual capacity - 663 million kW/h. It was
put into operation in 1971. Water reservoir of Vardnili HPP is
located on the river Eristskali, at the end of Enguri HPP water diversion canal.
Georgia
27
TPP Gardabani - Tbilresi
Location: Georgia
Operator: Tbilsresi
Configuration: 1 X 130 MW, 5 X 142 MW
Fuel: natural gas
Boiler supplier: Taganrog
Quick facts: This is the largest thermal plant in Georgia but only
three units run regularly.
TPP Mtkvari
Location: Georgia
Operator: Telasi JSC
Fuel: natural gas, oil
Quick facts: Mtkvari power station (formerly Gardabani
9&10) has two 300-MW sets. This two supercritical sets
are the largest steam-electric units in Georgia. One set
was seriously damaged by accident in Dec 2001 and is
deactivated and the second operates at 200-220MW.
CCGT Gardabani Power
Location: Georgia
Operator: Energo-Pro Georgia
Configuration: 2 X 55 MW FT8 TwinPacs
Operation: 2006
Fuel: natural gas
T/G supplier: P&W, BRUSH
EPC: Capital Turbines
Quick facts: In Jan 2006, Georgia’s President opened
this gas turbine plant developed by Enegy Invest, an
obscure investment vehicle from Russia. The project
was completed with loans from United Georgian Bank
and Vneshtorgbank with two gas turbine ordered in
Sep 2005. The project was acquired by Energo-Pro in Dec 2010. The original plan was to convert the machines
to combined-cycle operation with 40MW steam unit.
1200.0
Georgia Net production - structure 2010 [GWh]
1000.0
Deregulated (Small) HPPs
Seasonal HPPs
800.0
Other Regulatory HPPs
Vardnilhesi HPP
600.0
Engurhesi HPP
400.0 Energy Invest
Tbilsresi
200.0
Mtkvari TPP
Gross consumption GWh

0.0
R
PR
N
G
AY
V
N
P
B
EC
JA
JU
SE
O
U
FE
JU
A
M
M
O
A
Figure 3.16 – Georgia – production structure 2010 monthly
Georgia
28
Hydro Power Plants: Hydro power sources in Georgia have the most potential and highest priority for
development. There are more than 27000 rivers In Georgia. Technical potential of hydro resources of the
country is up to 80-85 billion KWh, from which economically effective part amounts to 45-50 billion KWh.
Currently only 10-15 % of the existing resources are used. In the future, a significant amount of hydro
potential realization is anticipated (Table 3.22, Table 3.24), through construction of HPPs, with various
types, capacities and reservoirs.
Table 3.22 – Georgia – Annual Generation and Total capacities of HPPS entered in system
Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Capacity (MW) 6 90 39 587 654 267 1582
Annual
Generation 35 499 247 2362 2546 1340 5399
(mln KWh)
Enguri – Nescra cascade: Hydro energy resources of the river Enguri are estimated to reach 3530 MW
capacity with the power production potential amounting to 10.3 bln KWh. Out of the given amount 5.5 bln
KWh has already been realized through the operation of Enguri and Vardnili HPPs Cascade. In order to utilize
the remaining part of the economically feasible hydro energy potential, there is a proposal to construct the
Khudoni HPP – 700MW and Tobari HPP – 600MW, Khaishi HPP – 700MW, Fari HPP – 200MW, as well as
Nescra cascade 260MW on the river Nescra that flows into Enguri. There is an uncertainty whether or not all
the proposed plants will be built. Currently, only Khudoni, Tobari and Nescra cascade are contracted for
construction.
Figure 3.17– Georgia – Rioni cascade
Georgia
29
Figure 3.18 – Georgia – Mtkvari cascade
Rioni cascade: On the river Rioni : Namokhvani HPPs cascade of 450 MW (is made up of Joneti HPP - 100
MW, Namakhvani HPP - 250 MW and Tvishi HPP - 100 MW), Alpana HPP - 77 MW; These projects are
ongoing and should be finalized by 2015.
Mtkvari cascade: On the river Mtkvari: Aspindza HPP - 88 MW, Idumala HPP - 65 MW, Khertvisi HPP - 50
MW, Minadze HPP - 41 MW, Paravani HPP - 80 MW; as well as other small and medium-size HPPs, except
Paravani HPP, require investments. This projects will be finalized by 2020.
In total, projects adding up to 3225MW and 12.4TWh are under contracts and some have begun
construction.
Thermal Power Plants: Thermal power plants in Georgia are expected to replace aging equipment,
especially in obsolete CHP power plants in Gardabani-Tbilresi. The project estimates a construction of 300-
450 MW Coal TPP on the basis of units V, VI and VII and through the use of “Tbilsresi” infrastructure. It is
possible to install a Gas turbine Unit to of dismantled units I and II of “Tbilsresi”, which in a combined cycle
with the Unit III will generate 350-400 MW. After full scale implementation of the project it has the potential
to generate up to 800 MW at the “Tbilsresi”.
There are large coal deposits in Tkibuli and Vale region, and one of the plans is to build coal fired Tkibuli TPP
600MW and mine for exploitation of the coal. Nevertheless, all these projects are not on the top priority list
due to large investment costs, and high price of natural gas, and are unlikely to be realized before 2020.
Present capacities will be in operation until 2025.
Renewables: Georgia also plans to utilize ecologically pure energy resources - alternative, renewable, wind
and solar energies, geothermal waters, biogases and etc. Favorable conditions for wind power exist along
the Black Sea coast (Poti and Batumi areas), in Sabueti in central Georgia, in the suburbs of Tbilisi and in
over 160 meteorological sights in Georgia used for measuring wind velocity. Tacis estimates the total
economic potential of renewable energy is at 900 MW.
Georgia
30
Table 3.23 – Georgia – Generation units renewables according to priorities
Installed Energy Cost

Costs
Type capacity potential Ratio
(M$)
MW GWh ($/kW)
New building of SHHP 1,300 6,700 1,525 610
Rehabilitation of SHHP 130 700 520 36.4
Wood and wood
2,530 1,500 210
waste
Solar 18 2,500 1
Wind power 530 1,450 1,100 198
Other (biogas, waste) 2,054 1,500 129
Geothermal 100 700 700 14
Total 2,060 14,152 1,198
Georgia
31
Table 3.21 – Georgia – Planned HPPs
Name in BS Existing/p Prequests Ppotential Epotential Pinst2015 Pinst2020 Location
PLANT NAME Type Connection point
RTSM lanned [MW] [MW] [MWh/year] [MW] [MW] [area, region]
NESKRA 6NESKRH HPP planned 260 260 1200 260 Zemo Svaneti
KHUDONI 6KHUDOH1 HPP planned 700 700 1500 700 Zemo Svaneti
KHOBI-1 HPP planned 39 39 247 39 39 Zemo Svaneti
6KHOBIY
KHOBI-2 HPP planned 46 46 223 46 Zemo Svaneti
TSKHENISTSKALI 6TSKHEH HPP planned 130 130 400 130 Kvemo Svaneti
NOBULEVI HPP planned 25 25 107 25 Zemo Svaneti
TSKHIMRA HPP planned 32 32 160 32 Zemo Svaneti
6TEKHUY
ERJIA HPP planned 27 27 137 27 Zemo Svaneti
LECHEKHA HPP planned 21 21 119 21 Zemo Svaneti
TVISHI 6TVISHH1 HPP planned 100 100 404 100 Kvemo Svaneti
NAMAKHVANI 6NAMAKH1 HPP planned 250 250 928 250 Kvemo Svaneti
DZHONETI 6JONETH1 HPP planned 100 100 346 100 Kvemo Svaneti
ALPANA 6ALPANH1 HPP planned 80 80 357 80 Kvemo Svaneti
LUKHUNI-1 SHPP planned 11 11 66 11 Kvemo Svaneti
LUKHUNI-2 6LUKHUY SHPP planned 12 12 74 12 12 Kvemo Svaneti
LUKHUNI-3 SHPP planned 9 9 46 9 Kvemo Svaneti
SADMELI 6SADMEH1 HPP planned 90 90 467 90 Kvemo Svaneti
SORI 6SORI-H1 HPP planned 134 134 617 134 Kvemo Svaneti
ONI 6ONI-HH2 HPP planned 72 72 408 72 Kvemo Svaneti
UTSERA 6UTSERH2 HPP planned 170 170 486 170 Kvemo Svaneti
KHRAMI-3 HPP planned 25 25 150 25 Kvemo Kartli
KHRAMI-4 6KHRAM2 HPP planned 40 40 150 40 Kvemo Kartli
KHRAMI-5 HPP planned 25 25 150 25 Kvemo Kartli
CHOROKHI HPP planned 48 48 182 48 Ajara
CHOROKHI - 1 6CHOROHS HPP planned 24 24 152 24 Ajara
CHOROKHI - 2 HPP planned 24 24 152 24 Ajara
VAIO 6AJARAY2 HPP planned 40 40 196 40 Ajara
KHELVACHAURI 6CHOROY HPP planned 22 22 144 22 Ajara
ADJARISTSKALI - 1 HPP planned 26 26 112 26 Ajara
ADJARISTSKALI - 2 6AJARAG1 SHPP planned 13 13 67 13 Ajara
ADJARISTSKALI - 3 SHPP planned 6 6 34 6 Ajara
ASPINDZA 6ASP GG2 HPP planned 55 55 294 55 Samche Javakheti
FARAVANI 6FARAVG1 HPP planned 78 78 425 78 78 Samche Javakheti
MTKVARI 6MTKVAH HPP planned 46 46 200 46 Samche Javakheti
ARAKALI 6MINADG0 SHPP planned 10 10 63 10 Samche Javakheti
ABULI 6ASP GY4 SHPP planned 20 20 129 20 Samche Javakheti
KHERTVISI 6KHERTG2 HPP planned 81 81 420 81 Samche Javakheti
AKHALKALAKI 6AKHALY SHPP planned 15 15 85 15 Samche Javakheti
FARAVANI 6FARAVW Wind planned 50 50 0 5 50 Samche Javakheti
KHUNEVI SHPP planned 11 11 62 62
STEFANTSMINDA HPP planned 105 105 50 50
KIRNATI SHPP planned 14 14 96 96
ZOTI HPP planned 36 36 144 144
ZOMLETI 6CHOKHY HPP planned 31 31 147 147 Guria
BAKHVI SHPP planned 6 6 35 35 35 Guria
KVIRILI SHPP planned 5 5 22 22 Guria
KOROMKHETI HPP planned 21 21 113 113
NIALA HPP planned 90 90 362 362
Figure 3.44 – Georgia – Planned HPPs
Georgia
32
1.7.4 Demand
Demand Behavior
Figure 3.20 shows typical demand behavior for an average Winter and Summer day. It is expected that in
future demand will be similar.
1400
[MW] [WINTER]
1200 1200
[MW]
1000 1000
800 800
commertial
buildings and
600 600
houses commertial
industrial
buildings and houses
400 400 industrial
200 200
[H]
0 [H]
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Figure 3.20– Georgia – Daily demand of typical Winter and Summer days [2010 year]
These curves also present the distribution of demand on based on the type of consumption. The same
conclusion can be drawn that in future this distribution will remain the same. There are some estimates that
the industrial demand share will grow in the future more rapidly than other types of demand, in relation to
ambitions development plans for the Poti harbor and the industrial zone.
Demand forecast
Figure 3.21 shows the official demand forecast and generation development to cover this demand. Latest
energy projections take into consideration effects of a worldwide crisis and predict more pessimistic results,
especially concerning investments in new generation capacities (Figure 3.22).
22.5 BLN KWH 20.90

TPP 19.55 19.55
20 19.18
HPP 18.70
17.35 17.35
17.5 TOTAL GEN 16.98
CONUMPTION 15.29
15 EXPORT
11.92 13.09
12.5 12.61 13.58 13.65 13.80
11.32
10.04
9.46 9.48 9.52 11.55
10 10.05 9.78 9.72
9.37
9.52
8.75 8.46 8.48 8.52 7.10
7.5 7.57 6.57
8.70 8.83 5.96 5.90
5 3.73
1.95 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20
2.5
1.30 0.76 0.65 1.00
0.68 1.00 1.00 -0.52 0.60 YEAR
-0.26
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
-2.5
Georgia
33
Figure 3.21 – Georgia – Generation-Demand Forecast
Figure 3.22 – Georgia - Demand forecasts (TWh) - Energy balance for whole year pessimistic
Tariff
The tariffs for power producers in Georgia are set by the independent regulator, GNERC. According to the
document “Resolution 33” of the “Georgian National Energy and Water Regulatory Commission Decree on
the Electricity Tariffs”, on the electricity tariffs, the tariffs currently applied on the Georgian generation are
as follows:
Table 3.25 - Georgia - Generation tariffs
The average regulated generation tariff in Georgia is approximately 2.5 US Cent/kWh, although it fluctuates
widely between Vardnilli and Enguri HPP at 0.7 Cents to Energy Invest at 6.4 Cent/kWh. Average tariff
weighted by the kWh produced in 2010 is at the level of 1.5 US Cent/kWh.
The generation tariffs in Georgia are relatively low, but investors in new HPPs are allowed to negotiate the
rate of return on equity with GNERC before committing to a project, which should ensure acceptable returns,
especially if CDM credits are taken into account. GNERC is committed to facilitate private sector investment
in the sector. The low tariffs for HPPs partly reflect the fact that most of the assets were built over 30 years
ago and are fully depreciated.
Georgia
34
Power producers have two options when selling their electricity: Entering into a direct contract with a
customer or selling the electricity to the Electricity System Commercial Operator (ESCO). ESCO, is the
market maker in the electricity system in Georgia and is responsible for balancing supply and demand. ESCO
purchases electricity from the least-cost providers for the price set by the regulator GNERC. The price is
averaged on a monthly basis, and ESCO sells the electricity on to distribution companies and direct
customers, adding a small fee (currently 0.019 tetri/kWh i.e. about 0.01 US Cent/kWh).
Table 3.26 – Georgia - Monthly ESCO prices - sale to the distribution customers 2010
After amendments to the Electricity Market Rules in June 2007, ESCO guarantees the purchase of all
electricity from newly built HPPs. Increasing demand will increase the average electricity generation cost in
the system making it difficult to find customers that are interested in purchasing the electricity directly.
Building new HPPs will most likely increase the average cost of generating electricity even though the
government of Georgia would like to phase out expensive thermal power generation and replace it with
cheaper domestically generated hydro resources. The expected average generation cost for new hydro in
the first 7 years of operation would be in the range of 6-8 US c/kWh, falling to 2-3 US C after 7 years.
Additional amendments to the Electricity Market Rules were introduced in 2007, granting all HPPs with an
installed capacity of less than 10 MW the right to operate without a license. The small HPPs (so-called
“deregulated”) are also free to sell their electricity directly to a buyer and agree to a price for the electricity
bilaterally. In reality, the price of the electricity from the small HPPs is set by the average sales price from
ESCO. At present, the feed in tariff system is set on a 50$/MWh from these resources.
Figure 3.23 shows exchange structure of the Georgian system in 2010. Due to the large hydro production it
depends on the seasons. (Figure 3.16)
Georgia
35
Georgia - exchange structure 2010 [GWh]
300.0
275 With Turkey
250.0 252 With Armenia
With Azerbaijan
214 With Russia
200.0 207
Total
150.0 156
100.0
62 61
50.0
42
23 29
0.0 -1
-18
B
EC
P
N
PR
V
T
R
N
L
Y
FE
SE
C
JU
JU
O
U
A
JA
D
A
O
M
N
M
-50.0
-100.0
Figure 3.23 – Georgia – monthly exchanges 2010
It is expected that in the future this trend will continue until large hydro capacities like HPP Khudoni enter
operation in 2017. After this, Georgia will have large export capabilities. Official demand and generation
forecasts for 2020 are given on Figure 3.24 and Figure 3.25.
Figure 3.24 – Georgia - Demand forecasts (TWh) - Energy balance for Winter season (1 Nov –15 Apr)
Georgia
36
Figure 3.25 – Georgia - Demand forecasts (TWh) - Energy balance for Summer season(16 Apr –31 Oct)
Balance is presented for two characteristic seasons because this describes better behavior of Georgian
demand and generation. In terms of generation, that is mainly hydro and seasonally dependent, Georgia has
the ability to export large quantities of power during spring-summer seasons. Unlike this period during
winter months, it is forced to import power. Total annual energy balance is presented in Figue 3.26
Figure 3.26 – Georgia - Demand forecasts (TWh) - Energy balance for whole year
So in 2020 Georgia can be treated as export country, depending on the prices. On the other hand, in 2015,
Georgia can be treated as exporter in summer period only, which coincides with Turkeys peak consumption,
and there is opportunity to export electricity to Turkey.
Georgia has a large hydro capacity and potential. It also has excess power of installed capacity compared to
consumption, but high dependence on hydrology and seasons. This means that the country has low capacity
in base load power plants. Their strategy is to buy base load power from another system like Azerbaijan and
export peak power from Hydro into the regional system because peak power is more expensive than base
load. This approach requires more investments, and requires a regional market development to achieve
economical results.
Georgia
37
The ESCO determines the amount of electricity that it will purchase based on demand forecasts approved by
the Minister of Energy. According to the Electricity Market Rules, all wholesale purchasers of electricity are
required to possess reserve capacity no less than a certain percentage of their hourly demand. The
percentages are set out in the table below.
Table 3.27 Georgia - Reserve capacity requirements in Georgia 2006-2016
Period Percentage Source

2010-2012 10% 50% from local sources
2013-2015 10% Local sources only
2016-2019 15% Local sources only
Georgia
38
1.8 Moldova
Moldova is a landlocked country in

Eastern Europe, located between
Romania to the west and Ukraine to
the north, east and south.
Area: 33846 sq. km

Arable land: 54.52 % (2005)
Permanent crops: 8.81 % (2005)
Forest area: 9.9 % (2003)
Population: 4,320,490 (July 2007 est.)


• agriculture: 21.5 % (2006)
• industry: 22.0 % (2006)
• services: 56.5 % (2006)
GDP Real Growth Rate: 3 % (2007 est.)
Moldova has an extensive power transmission and distribution system, but much of the equipment is
obsolete and poorly maintained. The electricity grid operates in parallel with the Ukrainian electricity system;
connected by six high voltage electric lines of 330 kV, while a 400 kV overhead power line connects it to the
electricity systems of Romania and Bulgaria. Other three 110 kV overhead power lines provide an
interconnection with the Romanian electricity system in an „insular regime”. Strengthening links with the
Romanian electricity system remains a continuous effort for the Republic of Moldova.
Table 3.28 – Moldova - network overview
lines transformers
Length of
the
overhead
lines
and cables
400 214 400/330 500
330 532.4 330/x 2525
110 5231.1 110/x 3687
total 5977.5 6712
At the moment, the country’s electricity infrastructure can support the transit to the Balkan countries. The
existing intersystem ties with Ukraine, Bulgaria and Romania and could ensure electricity transit at a level of
4-5 TWh /year. However, there is a need to strengthen the network of 330 kV lines in the Odessa region
and in the northern part of the country: OHL 330 kV Novodnestrovsk (Ukraine), Balti (Moldova) and OHPL
400 kV Balti (Moldova), Suceava (Romania). Figure 3.27 presents the transmission grid of Moldova and
Table 3.28 shows the main characteristics of its network.
Planned network reinforcements
Table 3.29 and the corresponding figure show the planned network reinforcements.
Moldova
39
Figure 3.27– Moldova - network map
Moldova
40
Table 3.29 – Moldova - Planned network reinforcements
LEVEL Of limited OR CROSSECTION BR1 BR2 TOTAL
Circuits A or TRANSFORMER DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 kV/kV /units MVA A or MVA TYPE mm2 km km km COMMISSIONING
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
OHL MD Balti UA Dnestrovska HPP 330 1 1670 88 32 120 2015
OHL MD Balti MD Straseni 330 1 1380 102.8 102.8 2015
OHL MD Straseni MD Chisinau 330 1 1380 36.4 36.4 2015
OHL MD Balti MD Ribnita 330 1 1380 82.5 82.5 2015
OHL MD Straseni MD Ribnita 330 1 1380 75 75 2015
SS MD Balti 400/330 1 630 IPC 2015
OHL MD Balti RO Suceava 400 1 1750 55 2015
SS MD Chisinau 400/330 1 630 2020
OHL MD Chisinau RO Iasi 400 1 1750 2020
SS MD Moldovskaya 400/330 1 2X630 IPC 2015
SS MD Pahoarna 110/x 2 ?? 2020
OHL MD Pahoarna MD Floresti 110 1 2020
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - kable, SK - submarin kable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...)
3 Substation name
6 Conventional transmission capacity of elements for OHL in Amps, for transformers in MVA SS Ribnita
7 Conventional transmission capacity limited by transformers or substations SS Ribnitsa
9 Cross section (number of ropes in bundle x cross section/cross section of reinforcement rope) SS Suceava
12 Total length
SS Iasi
*In red are network reinforcements connected to RES
Moldova
41
Table 3.30 – Moldova - Planned new generation units
VOLTAGE DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 kV kV MW MVA year STATUS COMMENT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
CCHP MD Balti 15.75 400 3x150 3x176 2015 2x150MW gas,1x150MW steam
CCHP MD Burlaceni 15.75 400 3x150 3x176 2015 2x150MW gas,1x150MW steam
CCHP MD Chisinau 15.75 110 540 2015 reconstruction and extension of existing plant
WPP MD Pahoarna 20 110 84 90 2020
WPP MD Centru 20 110 140 150 2015
WPP MD Carpineni 20 110 42 45 2015
2 Country
3 Substation name
Moldova
42
1.8.3 Generation
The electricity system of the Republic of Moldova includes one large thermal power plant Moldovska GRES
that runs on Gas/Oil located in the Transnistrian region. Others include: three heat and power cogeneration
(CHP) units, two hydropower plants and 10 CHP plants within sugar factories also run on gas or fuel oil.
TPP Moldavskaya GRES

Location: Moldova
Operator: CERS Moldova
Fuel: coal, natural gas, oil
T/G supplier: LMZ, Kharkov
Quick facts: This power station in Tiraspol,
Transdneister region, has about 80% of Moldova's
installed generating capacity.
There are only two major hydroelectric power plants, in spite of the fairly large number of rivers in Moldova.
The largest of these is the Dubosari plant on the Dniester River. The power plant was built in 1954, and its
installed capacity is 48 MW. The other significant hydro power plant with the installed capacity of 16 MW is
located in Costesti, on the Prut river.
Generation Capacities Planned
Planned power plants in Moldova are shown in Table 3.30
Hydro Power Plants: There are no large hydro capacities planned in Moldova.
Thermal Power Plants: Planned thermal power plants in Moldova are the reconstruction of CHPP Chisianu
to include new Combined Cycle units run on imported natural gas. The rest are two IPP CCGT plants that are
planned to run on imported gas, and export electricity to Romania and the rest of the Europe. These plans
will be realized much later due to the world crisis that has jeopardized these projects.
Renewables: Moldova hopes to cover a large portion of the internal consumption with renewable sources
such as wind. Currently, the potential locations are under investigation, but no wind capacity is in operation.
The request for grid connection of wind power has reached 500 MW. This accounts for about 40% of peak
demand of a power plant. At moment there are three potential locations with 266MW installed capacity:
• Central wind farm with requested installed capacity of 140 MW
• Carpineni wind farm with requested installed capacity of 42 MW
• Pohoarna wind farm with requested installed capacity of 84 MW
Energy potential of these 3 wind farms is estimated at 699048 MWh per year. This amount is about 11%
from yearly consumption of Moldova.
Moldova
43
Figure 3.28 – Moldova – Locations of Wind power plants
1.8.4 Demand
Demand behavior
Figure 3.4 and 3.5 show demand behavior for characteristic winter and summer peak regimes and
participation of different types of consumption in total energy consumed.
1200 1200
1000 1000
800 800
600 600
400 400
200 200
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
residential house residential buildings industrial comercial agricultural residential house residential buildings industrial comercial agricultural
Winter peak 15.12.2010. Summer peak 16.6.2010

Figure 3.29 – Moldova – Daily demand curve for winter and summer peak 2010
Moldova
44
Demand forecast
Demand forecast is shown in Figure 3.30 as well as coverage of this diagram by domestic power production.
If new gas fired installations are built, Moldova will most likely export this power to western markets.
Wind
6.5 7.2 HydroPP

5.8 Fuel-burningPP
2010 2015 2020

2010 2015 2020
Demand forecast (GWh) Participation of generation in total generation
Figure 3.30– Moldova – Demand forecast and generation participation
Tariff
Renewable energy resources incentive schemes have not been set in Moldova. The country plans to
stimulate investments through a national incentive scheme that includes the following: Tax privileges and
tax crediting for physical persons and economic organizations, custom duties reduction in tax/tax-free and
total income-tax reduction for a 3-year period.
Currently most of the ancillary power imported from Ukraine. The MGRES power plant can be used to
balance renewables production on a day-ahead market. Another source would be from the Ukrainian energy
system on real-time market. Present balancing mechanisms for the wind intermittence are possible through
imports from Ukraine. This is a likely scenario for the future as well.
Moldova
45
1.9 Romania
Romania is a country located at

the crossroads of Central and
Southeastern Europe, north of
the Balkan Peninsula, on the
Lower Danube, within and
outside the Carpathian arch,
bordering on the Black Sea.
Romania shares a border with
Hungary and Serbia to the
west, Ukraine and Moldova to
the northeast, and Bulgaria to the south.
Area: 238391 sq. km

Arable land: 39.49% (2005)
Permanent crops: 1.92% (2005)
Forest area: 27 %
Population: 21,466,174 (2010 est.)


• agriculture: 12.4 % (2009)
• industry: 35.0 % (2009)
• services: 52.6 % (2009)
Romania has an extensive interconnected power transmission and distribution network with an overall length
of about 600,000 km, and a total transformer capacity of about 172,000 MVA. Main characteristics of
Romanian network are presented in Table 3.31 . The national grid operates on 750 kV, 400 kV, and 220 kV
for transmission and 20 kV, 10 kV, 6 kV, 1 kV and 0.4 kV for distribution.
Table 3.31– Romania - network overview
Transformer Substation
Transforme Nominal
Voltage Substati Length
rs Power
on
(T, AT) ( T,AT)
(kV) nr. nr. MVA (km)
750 1 2 1250 154,6
2 500
400 34 20 400 4740,3
25 250
2 400
220 42 1 100 4095,9
80 200
110 0 38
Total
Number of 77
Substation
Total Length
9028,8
(km)
Transformer
Substation 132 34.65
(T, AT)
Romania 46
Romania has strong interconnections with Ukraine and Bulgaria, substantial interconnections with the former
Yugoslavia, and weaker links to the Republic of Moldova and Hungary. The transmission network is
interconnected with neighboring countries by 750 kV (4,000 MWe capacity), 400 kV (2,500 MWe capacity),
and two 110 kV tie-lines with Ukraine; a 400 kV line with Hungary (currently operating at 220 kV, with a
planned capacity of 1,200 MWe); 750 kV (4,000 MWe capacity), 400 kV (2,500 MWe capacity), and 220 kV
(260 MWe capacity) lines to Bulgaria; and one 400 kV (1,200 MWe capacity) and two 110 kV lines with
Serbia; and two 110 kV lines with Moldova.
Planned Network Reinforcements
Present development plan is to increase border line capacities by diverting Dobrudja (Bulgaria)-Vulkanesti
(Moldova) line to the Isaccea (Romania) substation, rehabilitation of existing 750 kV line Isaccea (Romania)-
Pivdenoukrainskaya (Ukraine) with installation of Back-to-Back system, building 400 kV lines Oradea
(Romania) - Becescaba (Hungary) and Suceava (Romania)-Balti (Moldova) and to upgrade parts of
Romanian network from 220 kV to 400 kV. These lines are already built for 400 kV but currently operate at
220 kV level. The construction of the new 400 kV lines will increase transmission and reserve capacity of the
network. The goal is to close the 400kV ring in the Romanian network in addition to the Bucharest 400kV
ring to increase the security of supply of main consumption region.
The Dobrudja region has a vast wind potential and a large number of WPP applications, but not enough
transmission capacity to support it. To accommodate the connection of large wind parks in the Dobrudja
region, separate 400/110 kV substations are planned to evacuate all the power produced. This approach
can be costly but it proved to be more suitable then a connection to a local distribution network or to a
lower voltage network, from both the transmission capacity, regulation and control point of view. Table 3.32
shows the planned network reinforcements to support WPP integration in transmission network.
Romania 47
Figure 3.31 – Romania - network map
Romania
48
Table 3.32 – Romania - Planned network reinforcements for RES connection to the network
Numbe CAPACITY LENGTH
VOLTAGE r MATERIAL TOT
LEVEL Of limited OR CROSS BR1 BR2 AL DATE
Circuit TRANSFOR OF
TYP s A or A or MER COMMI
E SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 kV/kV /units MVA MVA TYPE mm2 km km km SSION STATUS COMMENT
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13
SS RO Resita 400/220 1 400 2 windings 2014
SS RO Resita 400/110 1 250 2 windings 2014
OHL RO Portile de Fier I RO Resita 400 1 1997 Ol-Al 3x300 117 2014 new 400kV OHL
SS RO Timisoara 400/220 1 400 2 windings 2014
OHL RO Timisoara RO Resita 400 1 1997 Ol-Al 3x300 73 2014 upgrade from 220 kV
OHL RO Timisoara RO Arad 400 1 1997 Ol-Al 3x300 55 2014 upgrade from 220 kV
OHL RO Timisoara RS Pancevo 400 1 1750 Ol-Al 3x300 100 2014
SS RO Suceava 400/110 2 250 2 windings 2010
OHL RO Suceava MD Balti 400 1 1750 Ol-Al 3x300 40 55 95 2019
SS RO Bacau 400/220 1 400 2 windings 2014
SS RO Roman 400/220 1 400 2 windings 2014
OHL RO Suceava RO Roman 400 1 1700 Ol-Al 3x300 100 2014 upgrade from 220 kV
OHL RO Roman RO Bacau 400 1 1700 Ol-Al 3x300 58.8 2014 upgrade from 220 kV
OHL RO Bacau RO Gutinas 400 1 1700 Ol-Al 3x300 55.3 2014 upgrade from 220 kV
SS RO Bistrica 400/110 1 250 2 windings 2020
OHL RO Suceava RO Bistrica 400 1 1700 Ol-Al 3x300 2020 upgrade from 220 kV
OHL RO Gadalin RO Bistrica 400 1 1700 Ol-Al 3x300 2020 upgrade from 220 kV
SS RO Rahmanu 400/110 2 250 2 windings 2014
to line Isaccea-
OHL RO Isaccea RO Rahmanu 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2014 Constr. Dobrudja
to line Isaccea-
OHL RO Medgidia RO Rahmanu 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2014 Constr Dobrudja
to line Isaccea-
OHL BG Dobrudja RO Medgidia 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2012 Constr Dobrudja
SS RO Tariverde 400/110 2 250 2 windings 2011 Constr
to line Tulcea-
OHL RO Tulcea west RO Tariverde 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2011 Constr Constanta
to line Tulcea-
OHL RO Constanta RO Tariverde 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2011 Constr Constanta
OHL RO Isaccea RO Medgidia 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2014 to line Isaccea-Varna
OHL BG Varna RO Medgidia 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 2014 to line Isaccea-Varna
OHL RO Constanta RO Medgidia 400 1 1800 Ol-Al 3x300 21 2014 new 400kV OHL
DC RO Constanta 400 600 MW 2020 DC Converter station
SK RO Constanta TR Pasakoy 400 1 600 MW 200 200 400 2020
SS RO Iasi 400/220 2020
OHL RO Iasi MD Chisinau 400 1 1750 Ol-Al 3x300 2020
SS BG Majak 110/20 2 2015 Project
Romania
49
OHL BG Majak BG Dobrich 2 58 2015 Project
OHL BG Majak BG Shabla 2 12 2015 Project
OHL BG Majak BG Kavarna 2 12 2015 Project
OHL BG Varna Sever BG Kavarna 1 50 2015 Project
OHL BG Varna Zapad BG Kavarna 1 55 2015 Project
OHL BG Dobrudja BG Dobrich 1 34 2015 Project
SS BG Svoboda 400/110 2 300 OTC 2020 Project
Varna(BG)–
OHL BG Svoboda BG 400 2 1890 - ACSR 2X500 10 2020 Project
Issacea(RO)
SS BG Vidno 400/110 2 300 OTC 2020 Project
OHL BG Svoboda BG Vidno 400 2 1890 - ACSR 2X500 115 2020 Project
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - cable, SK - submarine cable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...)
3 Substation name
12 Total length
*reconstruction in network connected to new RES installation
Table 3.33 – Romania – Planned new generation units

VOLTAGE DATE OF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
CCHP RO Brazi 20 400 2x305 4x288 2010 construction
CCHP RO Brazi 20 220 315 4x288 2010 construction
TPP RO Galati 24 400 800 2014 construction
TPP RO Braila 24 400 880 2016 construction
NPP RO Cernavoda 24 400 2x720 2x800 2016 construction
HPP RO Tarnita 15.75 400 4x256 4x288 2016 Project
2 Country
3 Substation name
Romania
50
1.9.3 Generation
Romania is in the process of modernizing and reconstructing of most of its generation capacities. About 55%
of the electricity is produced in coal fired thermal power plants. Hydro units produce 25% and Nuclear
facilities 15%. Independent producers and ever growing renewables make up 5% with tendency to grow
fast.
Figure 3.32 – Romania – Generation capacities and transmission network
NPP Cernavoda
Location: Romania
Operator: SN Nuclearelectrica SA
Configuration: 2 X 720 MW CANDU
Reactor supplier: AECL
T/G supplier: GE
EPC: AECL, Ansaldo
Quick facts: In Dec 1978, an agreement was signed
between AECL and Romenergo for the construction of
Unit-1, followed in Jul 1981 by the agreement for Unit-
2. Construction started on these two units in 1980 and
1982, respectively, while the civil works for three more
units were started in 1984-86. The original agreements covered the licensing of the CANDU-6 design, equipment
supply, and technical assistance. A consortium of Canadian equipment manufacturers and engineering
contractors was formed to oversee construction while a number of different government agencies were
responsible for project management. Completion of Cernavoda-1 was initially scheduled for 1985, however the
construction schedule slipped repeatedly as local industries failed to produce needed materiel, imports were
restricted, and foreign loans dried up. Finally, work was stopped completely in 1989 to fix large numbers of
defective pipe welds. Following a visit from an IAEA mission in 1991, a new consortium of AECL and Italy’s
Ansaldo was formed to finish Cernavoda-1. Criticality was achieved in Apr 1996, grid connection in Jul, and
commercial operation in Dec. Unit-2 went commercial on 5 Oct 2007.
Romania 51
TPP Rovinari
Location: Gorj, Romania
Operator: SC Complexul Energetic Rovinari SA
Fuel: subbituminous coal, natural gas, oil
T/G supplier: Skoda, Rateau, Alsthom, IMGB
Quick facts: Rovinari is in Gorj County on the Jiu River
near Târgu Jiu. Largest Thermal power plant in
Romania. Almost all machines are refurbished in
1990s and western build equipment is used now. 200-
MW sets have been decommissioned and a new 500-
MW group is planned.
TPP Turceni
Location: Gorj, Romania
Operator: SC Termoelectrica SA
Fuel: lignite
Boiler supplier: Babcock
T/G supplier: IMGB/Alstom
Quick facts: Although one set is deactivated,
this remains the largest thermal power plant in
Romania. The 1,293ha site is situated half-way
between the cities of Craiova and Targu Jiu in
southwest Romania. Turceni is essentially a
minemouth plant with lignite supplied by rail
from mines around 35km away, from Jilţ Coal Mine 1700kcal/kg and Tehomir underground mine 1900kcal/kg.
HPP Portile de Fier
Location: Romania
Operator: Hidroelectrica
Configuration: 6 X 171 MW Kaplan
Operation: 1972
T/G supplier: LMZ, Electrosila, Koncar
EPC:
Quick facts: Largest Hydroelectric power plant
in Romania, as joint project with Yugoslavia.
The plant is located in the Djerdap Gorge – the
Iron Gate - on the Danube River. A second
powerhouse has ten 26-MW LMZ bulb turbines
completed in the late 1980s. Power plant is totally refurbished and capacity is increased to 6x200MW.
HPP Sugag
Location: Sebes river, Romania
Configuration: 2 x 75 MW Francis
Operation: 1980s
T/G supplier: Resita
EPC:
Quick facts: The project was started and finished in the
1980s and it was made up by the construction of a double
arched concrete dam 78 m high which was equipped with
two vertical turbines, the Şugag Hydro Power Plant having
Romania 52
HPP Gilcegag
Location: Sebes river, Romania
Configuration: 2 x 75 MW Francis
Operation: 1980s
EPC:
Quick facts: The first and the greatest of reservoirs forming the cascade
developed on river Sebes course is reservoir Oaşa. Situated at the
foots of Sebeşului Mountains, it is a concentration of Sebeş river waters
and its main affluents i.e. Valea Mare and Curpătul, as well as of other
smaller water courses, through some secondary galleries. At the normal retension levels, Oaşa reservoir has a
water volume of 136 mil.cu.m., while the surface is of 454 hectars. The dam is a reinforced concrete facing rockfill
type and is 91 m high. The commissioning during the year of 1980 of the Gîlceag underground hydropower plant
resulted in a capitalization of Oaşa power potential storage. Equipped with two vertical Francis turbine driven
alternators, the hydropower plant has an installed power of 150 MW. Net Rated Head: 430 m, Installed discharge:
40 cu.m./s Project Energy: 260 GWh.
HPP Lotru
Location: Romania
Configuration: 3 X 170 MW Pelton
Operation: 1970
EPC:
Quick facts: The project was started and finished
in the 1970s and it was made up by the
construction of a rockfill with a clay core dam 140
m high and an underground power plant equipped
with three hydro units, having an installed capacity
of 510 MW. The Pelton type turbines operate
under a net head of about 800 m. A 220 kV
outdoor substation connects the plant to the Romanian electric grid. Together with HPP Bradisor it makes a
cascade.
Most of the thermal power plants are run on domestic open pit lignite that is around 7.5mBTU/ton, a low
grade coal. There is a higher quality domestic coal at 14.1mBTU/ton, and also some is imported from
Ukraine that reaches 23.8mBTU/ton. Lower grade coal is mixed with fuel oil to increase heat value in some
thermal power plants.
Romania uses more than half of its natural gas sources at 32mBTU/tcm, and imports the rest from Russia.
In most cases the gas is used as the primary fuel for CHP, although depending on the market prices and
availability of fuel, same facilities use fuel oil as well (37.7mBTU/ton).
Nuclear Power Plants: Romania plans to finish two more 700MW units in NPP Cerna Voda by 2014 and
2015 respectively. Construction started for the unit 5, but has been put on hold.
Hydro Power Plants: Hydro power is already very developed in Romania, and locations for large HPPs are
already used. Only large projects are reversible pumping stations PHPP Tarnita 1000MW and PHPP Olt (~400
MW). There is a large potential for developing small hydro power plants. There are many ongoing projects
for refurbishment and reconstruction of existing facilities.
Thermal Power Plants: Only development plans for thermal power plants are replacing the obsolete and
old units that run on gas or fuel oil with new more efficient ones. This is especially the case for CHP units in
Bucharest and Constanca. There are plans for installing large CCGT units in Iernut-Ludus 400MW and
Romania 53
Borzesti 400MW, and to build large coal fired units in Isalnita 500MW and in TPP Braila 800MW that will be
run on imported coal.
Renewables: One of the priorities for development of Romanian system is to increase the use of
ecologically pure energy resources - alternative, renewable, wind and solar energies, geothermal waters,
biogases and etc. Long term targets for Romania (according to the Law 220 / 2008) the generation on
renewable sources (subject of green certificates support scheme) should cover the following quantities per
year:
• 2011 – 10.00 %
• 2012 – 12.00 %
• 2013 – 14.00 %
• 2014 – 15.00 %
• 2015 - 16.00 %
• 2016 - 17.00 %
• 2017 - 18.00 %
• 2018 - 19.00 %
• 2019 - 19.50 %
• 2020 - 20.00 %
Figure 3.33 – Romania – Locations of the main wind power plants
Wind generation in Romania – significant aspects
Forecasts for installed power (according to our National Plan NREAP):

• 2015 – 3200 MW
• 2020 – 4000 MW
Romania 54
1.9.4 Demand
Demand Behavior
Figure 3.34 shows the demand behavior for typical winter and summer peak regimes and the different
generation types. Table 3.34 shows the distribution of demand by type in previous periods and forecasts.
16000 16000
14000 14000
12000 12000
10000 10000
8000 8000
6000 6000
4000 4000
2000 2000
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
nuclear coal gas hydro pumps export nuclear coal gas hydro pumps export
Winter peak 15.12.2010 Summer peak 20.07.2010
Figure 3.34 – Romania – Daily demand curve for winter and summer peak 2010
Table 3.34 – Romania – Distribution of demand by type and demand forecast

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2015 2020
Energy
consumption
gross TWh 53.02 54.14 55.22 50.64 53.66 60.0 68.0
demand MW 8151 8681 8589 8247 8464 9560 11020
pumping TWh 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.27 0.30 0.65
TWh 57.42 56.37 59.8 53.2 56.8 63.5 72.5
Generation MW 8846 9285 9406 8762 9248 10560 12520
TWh 4.25 2.09 4.43 2.47 2.92 3.20 3.86
export-import MW 695 604 817 515 784 1000 1500
Consumption TWh 46.5 47.6 48.0 44.2 46.2 52.4 60.0
% 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
agriculture % 0.98 1.13 1.16 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1
industry % 62.83 61.97 60.87 57.9 57.9 57.8 56.5
transport % 3.00 3.07 2.92 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1
service % 10.92 12.01 13.40 14.5 15.0 17.0 19.2
population % 22.27 21.82 21.66 23.5 23.0 21.0 20.2
Demand Forecast
Table 3.34 shows the distribution of demand and demand forecasts for 2015 and 2020 and Figure shows
the demand growth in the forthcoming period through 2020.
Romania 55
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
SCENARIU MEDIU SCENARIU MAXIM SCENARIU MINIM
Figure 3.35 – Romania – Demand Forecast
Tariff
Currently the electricity supply tariffs for commercial customers are 8.5cEUR/kWh or 12.15c$/kWh and for
households 8.56cEUR/kWh or 12.23c$/kWh, before taxes. The wholesale market in Romania is organized,
but prices vary significantly due to the wide diversity of fuel used for electricity production.
The financial support scheme for RES is in form of Green Certificates (2 Euro/MWh for wind, 6 Euro/MWh for
solar with a margin of 27÷55 euro/certificate). For the period 2005-2012, the annual maximum and
minimum value for Green Certificates trading is 24 Euro/certificate, respective 42 Euro/certificate, calculated
by the Romanian National Bank, on the last working day of the December of the previous year. This is
reflected on the prices of electricity. A large price increase is expected but will remain lower than the value
in other EU countries.
Gas prices in Romania are lower than market values than on majority of gas market Hubs, for electricity
production price is around 320$/tcm, or 8.2$/mBTU.
From previously shown tables and diagrams it can be concluded that Romania will have up to 1500MW
surplus power for export, mainly due to a large increase in RES installed capacity.
Currently balancing in the system is done by HPPs and TPPs, and NPPs do not participate in this process.
The new planned PSPP Tarnita 1000 MW should increase the control potential of the Romanian system and
resolve most of the difficulties in this field. In addition, the installation of the New Pump Storage HPP Olt
river (~400 MW) and modern gas and/or coal fired generation units in the future will enable larger
penetration of renewables in Romania.
Main principles of balancing:

- balancing market has been developed according to the Commercial Code,
- all the available capacity should be notified, there is a cap price,
Romania 56
- day ahead schedule, intra-day schedule, hourly based notification, the system allows
notifications at 15 min intervals,
- Scheduling Management System,
- BRP – balancing responsible parties (consumption/production responsible parties),
- According to the Commercial Code, WPPs must be part of BRP.
Romania 57
1.10 Russia
From northwest to southeast,

Russia shares borders with
Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania and Poland (both via
Kaliningrad Oblast), Belarus,
Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan,
Kazakhstan, the People's
Republic of China, Mongolia, and
North Korea. It also has maritime
borders with Japan by the Sea of Okhotsk, and the United States by the Bering Strait. At 17,075,400 square
kilometers, Russia is the largest country in the world, covering more than one eighth of the Earth's inhabited
land area. Russia is also the ninth most populous nation with 143 million people. It extends across the whole
of northern Asia and 40% of Europe, spanning nine time zones and incorporating a wide range of
environments and landforms. Russia has the world's largest reserves of mineral and energy resources. It has
the world's largest forest reserves and its lakes contain approximately one-quarter of the world's fresh
water.
Area: 17075400 sq. km

Arable land: 39.49% (2010)
Water: 13 %
Forest area: 27 %
Population: 142,905,200 (2010)
GDP: purchasing power parity - $2222 billion (2010 est.)


• agriculture: 12.4 % (2009)
• industry: 35.0 % (2009)
• services: 52.6 % (2009)
The power industry in Russia gradually developed overtime. First, by incorporating regional power systems,
working in parallel, and forming interregional electric power pools, which merged to form a single Power
Grid that covers a vast area. The entire transmission network is controlled by the Federal Grid Company of
Unified Energy System (JSC FGC UES) which operates the Unified National Electric Grid (UNEG). The
company operates 121096km of transmission lines and 797 substations with installed capacity over
300000MVA of different voltage levels 110-1150kV.
Russia
58
Figure 3.36 – Russia – network map
Russia
59
Siberia
North-West Volga
West Siberia
East
Center
Ural
South
Figure 3.37 – Russia – network map and control regions
Russia
60
To manage such large network, it is divided into regional control centers that correspond to the system
divisions. (Figure 3.37):
- North-West
- Center
- South
- Ural
- Volga
- West Siberia (Yakutia)
- Siberia
- East
Table 3.35 shows the characteristics of the network by control areas, and Figure 3.36 shows the entire
network while Figure 3.38 presents only the European part.
Table 3.35 – Russia - network overview
Lines
Center South Ural Siberia North-west West Siberia East Volga Total
Voltage km km km km km km km km km
1150kV 129.5 817.6 947.1
800kV 169.7 206 375.7
750kV 2270.2 799.13 3069.33
500kV 7490.3 2384 5153 7073.99 74 4543 3095 4007.53 33820.82
400kV 126.5 126.5
330kV 1835.07 2681 6458.03 10974.1
220kV 14913.97 4539.1 10145 17566.2 6448.57 8591 9502 8098.62 79804.46
110kV 249.5 108 233.2 356.46 408.06 2 1357.22
35kV 3 125.48 144.8 273.28
130475.2
Substations
Center South Ural Siberia North-west West Siberia East Volga Total
Voltage num num num num num num num num num
1150kV 2 2
800kV 0
750kV 6 2 2
500kV 24 6 19 16 18 8 13 80
400kV 1 1
330kV 14 17 32 49
220kV 135 43 76 87 50 64 64 73 457
110kV 9 3 8 9 7 27
35kV 1 2 1 3 6
618
624
Strategic objectives of UNEG development are accomplished by JSC FGC UES. The key development goals in
JSC FGC UES are as follows:
- develop electric grids;
- provide power plants capacity;
- arrange conditions for reliable power supply of consumers;
- cope with fixed assets ageing;
- develop centralized technological control for electric grids;
- create grid and technological infrastructure;
- join participants of wholesale market to the electric grid;
- bring UNEG technical level to world standards;
- raise operating performance through reduction of costs, unit costs incidental to operation and losses
in UNEG grids;
- implement unified strategy in area of investments and raising capital.
Russia
61
Figure 3.38 – Russia – network map (western part)
Development strategy for the Unified National Electric Grid (UNEG) for the decennial period is planned once
every five years. The primary document in strategy is the UNEG Development Concept, which identifies
fundamental problems in the grid development and conceptually outlines solutions for performance
improvement and sustainable development.
Table 3.36 and Figure 3.39 show the planned network reinforcements in the Northern Caucasus part of the
Russian grid.
Russia
62
Kizljar
Figure 3.39 – Russia – Planned network topology in Northern Caucasus
Russia
63
Table 3.36 – Russia – Planned network reinforcements
LEVEL Of limited OR CROSS BR1 BR2 TOTAL DATE OF
Circuits A or A or TRANSFORMER COMMISS
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 kV/kV /units MVA MVA TYPE mm2 km km km ION STATUS COMMENT
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 13
OHL RU Centralna(Sochi) GE Enguri 500 2015 450 km, single circuit
SS RU Rostov 500/220 2011 -
OHL RU Rostov Sati 30 500 2011 single circuit
OHL RU Rostov Frolovska 500 2011 single circuit
OHL RU Rostov R20 220 2011 single circuit
SS RU Krimskaya II 500/220 2015 -
OHL RU Krimskaya II Tihoreck 500 2015 single circuit
SS RU Senaya 220 2015 -
OHL RU Krimskaya II Senaya 220 2015 single circuit
OHL RU Krimskaya II Slavyansk 220 2015 single circuit
OHL RU Slavyansk Senaya 220 2015 single circuit
SS RU Nevinomysk 500/220 2010 -
OHL RU Nevinomysk Volgodonska 500 2010 single circuit
SS RU Mozdok 500/220 2012 -
OHL RU Nevinomysk Mozdok 500 2012 single circuit
SS RU Alagir 330/110 2015 -
OHL RU Nalcik Alagir 330 2015 single circuit
OHL RU V2 Alagir 330 2015 single circuit
on 330 kV Budenovsk-
SS RU Kizljar 330/110 2015
Chirjurt
SS RU Grozniy 330/110 2015 on 330 kV V2-Chirjurt
on 330 kV
SS RU Artem 330/110 2010
Mahachkala-Chirjurt
OHL RU Mozdok Artem 330 2010 single circuit
OHL RU HPP Irganskaya Artem 330 2010 single circuit
OHL RU Derbent Artem 330 2010 single circuit
OHL RU Derbent AZ Apsheron 330 2010 single circuit
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - kable, SK - submarin kable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...)
3 Substation name
12 Total length
Russia
64
Table 3.37 – Russia – Planned new generation units
VOLTAGE DATE OF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NPP RU Leningrad2 24 500 2x1150 2x1278 2010 CONSTR. old plant decommissioned
NPP RU Leningrad2 24 750 2x1150 2x1278 2011 CONSTR. old units decommissioned
NPP RU Novovoronez 24 500 2x1150 2x1278 2015 CONSTR.
NPP RU Kostromska 24 500 2x1150 2x1278 2020 CONSTR.
NPP RU Nizhegorodskaya 24 500 2x1150 2x1278 2020 CONSTR.
NPP RU Kaliningrad 24 500 2x1150 2x1278 2015 CONSTR.
NPP RU Kola2 24 500 1150 1278 2015 CONSTR.
NPP RU Seversk 24 500 2x1150 2x1278 2020 CONSTR.
HPP RU Boguchanskaya 330 3000 2020 Krasnoyarsk area
HPP RU Evenky 330 1000 2020 Krasnoyarsk area
HPP RU Motiginskaya 330 757 2020 Krasnoyarsk area
PHPP RU Leningrad 330 4x390 2015 Sankt-Petersburg area
PHPP RU Zagorsk-2 330 2x420 2015 Moscow region
PHPP RU Zelenchuk 330 1x140 2015 Karachay-Cherkessia
HPP RU Zaramagskaya 330 2010
HPP RU Cherkeskaya II 330 2010
NPP RU Volgodonskaya 24 500 1000 1111 2010 CONSTR. unit 2
CCGT RU Stavropol 15.75 500 2x400 2x440 2012 PLANNING
CCGT RU Nevinnomyssk 15.75 500 410 450 2010 CONSTR.
CCHP RU Sochi 10.5 110 80 90 2010 CONSTR.
CCHP RU Tuapce 15.75 110 150 170 2011 CONSTR.
CCHP RU Tuapce 15.75 110 180 200 2012 CONSTR.
CCHP RU Adler 15.75 110 2x180 2x200 2012 CONSTR.
CCHP RU Olimpic 15.75 110 2x180 2x200 2012 CONSTR.
2 Country
3 Substation name
6 Instaled active power
7 Instaled apparent power
Russia
65
1.10.3 Generation
Russia is one of the world's largest producers of energy, most of which

it obtains from oil, natural gas and coal. Out of the 203 GW of electric
generation capacity that it has, 21.2GW comes from Nuclear, 44GW
comes from hydroelectricity, and less than 1% from renewable
sources. In 2009, the Russian energy industry generated a total 992
TWh of electricity: Nuclear (16%), Hydro (16%) and Thermal (68%).
Figure 3.40 shows how production units are connected to the
transmission grid in the European part of the system. Power plants are
operated by JSC RAO “UES of Russia”. In order to address the
problems of electricity sector and improve its efficiency, the
government of Russia launched the power sector restructuring. The
reform began on March 26, 2003 when a set of laws were signed by the president. It took several years to
restructure 73 “Energos” of the RAO UES, a former monopoly, and approach the target configuration, to
form generation and supply companies that would become private and compete on the wholesale market.
The government retained control in all the network companies: the System Operator, nuclear
(Rosenergoatom) and the hydro generation companies (RusHydro5). In the process of restructuring RAO’s
thermal power plants, 6 Wholesale Generation Companies WGC (formed of large-scale plants) and 14
Territorial Generation Companies TGC (rest of the power plants of several adjacent “Energos”) were created
(Figure 3.40).

Nuclear power represents an important energy source in Russia. In 2005 nuclear energy supply in Russia
amounted to 149 TWh, which is 15.7 % of total Russian electricity output and 5.4 % of global nuclear
energy production. The total installed capacity of nuclear reactors is 21,244MW. All Russian civil reactors are
operated by Atomenergoprom, a holding company for the entire Russian civil nuclear industry, including
Energoatom, the nuclear fuel producer and supplier TVEL, the uranium trader Tekhsnabexport (Tenex) and
nuclear facilities constructor Atomstroyexport.
Russia
66
Figure 3.40 – Russia – Generation capacities and major transmission lines
Russia
67
NPP Novovoronezh
Location: Voronezh
Operator: Rosenergoatom
Configuration: 1 X 210 MW, 1 X 365 MW, 2 X 440
MW, 1 X 1,000 MW PWR
Operation: 2001
Reactor supplier: Mintyazhmash
T/G supplier: Kharkov
Quick facts: The first VVER reactor unit was built at this site as
well as the first 1,000-MW VVER.
NPP Kalinin
Location: Tver
Configuration: 3 X 1,000 MW PWR
T/G supplier: Kharkov, LMZ
Quick facts: Kalinin-3 is Russia's newest nuclear unit
and went into trial operation in Dec 2004. Kalinin-4 is
under construction for service in 2011.
NPP Kursk
Location: Kursk
T/G supplier: Kharkov, LMZ/ Electrosila
Quick facts:
NPP Smolensk
Location: Smolensk
Operator: Energoatom
Configuration: 3 X 1,000 MW RBMK
NPP Volgodonsk-1
Location:Rostov
Operator:Rosenergoatom
Configuration:1X1,031MWPWR
Operation:2001
Reactorsupplier:Mintyazhmash
T/Gsupplier:Kharkov,Electrosila
EPC:Rosenergatom,Atomprojekt
NPP Volgodonsk-2
Location:Rostov
Operator:Rosenergoatom
Configuration:1X1,000MWPWR
Operation:2009
Reactorsupplier:Mintyazhmash
T/Gsuppli er:Kharkov,Electrosila
EPC:NIIAEP
Russia
68
Rest of the power produced in Russia comes from conventional thermal power plants run on coal or
Combined Heating Power Plants mostly run on natural gas or oil (mazut).
CHPP Novocherkaska
Location: Rostov
Operator: OGK-6
Fuel: coal, natural gas, oil
EPC: SEP-Electric
Quick facts: The decision to build this plant was made
in 1952. The initial configuration was 3 X 100 MW,
then 4 X 150 MW, and then 3 X 200 MW. Finally, the
designers settled on building six 300-MW sets using supercritical technology, only the second such power station
in the Soviet Union. Construction got underway in Mar 1956 and commissioning of Unit-1 began in Dec 1964.
This took just over 6 months as final design and construction issues were resolved and Unit-1 went commercial
on 30 Jun 1965.
CHPP Surgut-1
Location: Khanty-Mansi AO
Operator: OGK-2
Fuel: natural gas
Quick facts: This plant was in the Top 100 for many
years.
CHPP Ryazan
Location: Ryazan
Operator: OGK-6
Fuel: natural gas, coal, oil
Boiler supplier: Podolski, Taganrog
Hydro Power Plants

Russia has 102 hydropower plants in operation with a capacity of over 100 MW. The total installed capacity
of HPP generator units in Russia today amounts to approximately 45 million kW (5th place in the world),
with an output in the order of 165 billion kWh/year (also 5th place) – while HPPs account for no more than
21% of Russia’s total electric power production (176 TWh). Hydropower is the key element in ensuring
reliability of the country’s Unified Energy System, possessing 90% of the capacity regulation reserves. Of all
the existing types of electric power stations, HPPs are the most maneuverable and capable, if necessary, of
substantially increasing their output in just a few minutes and thus covering peak loads. For thermal power
stations, this indicator means hours and for nuclear ones several days. Hydro generation, including pumped-
storage output in 2005 was 175 TWh, which represents 5.8% of world hydroelectricity generation. Russia
ranks as the fifth largest hydroelectricity producer in the world. At the end of 2005 installed hydroelectric
generating capacity was 45.7 GW.
Russia
69
HPP Chirkeyskaya
Location: Dagestan
Operator: Dagestan Regional Power
Generation Co
T/G supplier: Kharkov,
Electrovipryamitel
EPC: Hydropower Institute
Quick facts: This 232.5m dam on the Sulak River is the fifth tallest in
Russia and the CIS.
HPP Irganskaya
Location: Dagestan
Operator: Sulakenergo
T/G supplier: Kharkov, Elsib
EPC:Lenhydroproject, Chirkeygesstroy
Quick facts: This plant is on the the Avarskoie Koisu River, the main tributary of the Sulak River, at the head
of the Chirkey Reservoir. Construction got underway in 1987. The complex includes a 101m high, 313m long
earth-and-rock-fill dam, joined tunnel spillway, and two 7.5m diameter, 5km pressure tunnels to the power
house. Two more units are planned.
HPP Miatlyska
Location: Dagestan
Operator: Dagestan Regional Power Generation Co
Operation: 1986
T/G supplier: Kharkov, UETM
Quick facts: This is the third plant in the Sulak cascade and completes a
development program initiated in 1932. Construction on Miatly started in 1970 but was interrupted by a
landslide in 1977 which necessitated major redesign work.
HPP Chirut 1
Location: Dagestan
Operator: Dagestan Regional Power Generation Co
Operation: 1961
T/G supplier: Kharkov, UETM
Russia
70
HPP Volzhinskaya
Location: Volgograd
Operator: RusHydro
Operation: 1958-1962 Нижегородская ГЭС
Quick facts: Construction started in 1951 and the total construction work force peaked at about
25,000. The dam and powerhouse complex is 5km long.
HPP Zhigulevskaya
Location: Volgograd
Operator: Volzhskaya Lenin GES
Operation: 1955
Quick facts: This is one of the two large
hydro plants built on the Volga River in the
mid-1950s. Formerly known as Volzhskaya
Lenin.
HPP Nizhegorodskaya
Location: Nizhni Novgorod
Operator: RusHydro
Operation: 1959
Quick facts: Construction started
in 1948 and was completed in
1959. Complex consists of
concrete spillway dam, 7 earth-fill
dams and 3 dikes total 18.6 km long and up to 40 m high, power plant house, and two single-
chamber two-lane locks with an intermediate pond. Installed power is 520 MW, average annual
production is 1510 GWh. Power house has 8 generator units with Kaplan turbines, each 65 MW ЖИГУЛЕВСКА ГЕС
at 17 m head. The dam with total waterfront length of 13 km forms Gorky Reservoir.
ВОЛЖИНСКА ГЕС
Russia
71
Nuclear Power Plants: There are plans to increase the number of commercial reactors from 31 to 59,
including decommissioning of the old reactors and replacement with new ones.
Hydro Power Plants: Gross theoretical potential of the Russian hydro resource base is 2,295 TWh per
year, of which 852 TWh is regarded as economically feasible. Most of this potential is located in Siberia and
the Far East.
Thermal Power Plants: Thermal power plants that are planned in Russia are supposed to replace aging
equipment, especially in obsolete CHP power plants that would be dismantled and replaced by new
Combined Cycle units run on natural gas.
Renewables: One of the development priorities for Russia is to increase the use of ecologically pure energy
resources - alternative, renewable, wind and solar energies, geothermal waters, biogases and etc.
Low prices of natural gas compared to the high price of renewables makes this goal harder to implement.
1.10.4 Demand
Demand Behavior
Figure 3.41 shows the demand behavior for a typical winter and summer day (upper left corner) and typical
generation coverage for whole year month by month (upper right corner).
Figure 3.41– Russia – Demand behavior and generation coverage
Demand Forecast
Figure 3.42 shows demand forecasts for Russia’s consumption for different scenarios with the correlating
peak load. Table 3.38 shows the planned development for generation and coverage of peak load with
installed capacities up to 2020.
Russia
72
ГенСхема Consumption in Russia, GWh 1710
Целевой вариант
1426 1429
Рыночное ожидание
1197 1205
1285
980 977 1016 1121
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
303,7
252,7 281,0
244,9
237,9
229,1
221,8
210,4 213,7 239,1
203,0
219,8
227,6 233,0
GW
213,9
205,5 207,0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Figure 3.42 – Russia – Demand Forecast – Consumption TWh and Peak load in GW
Table 3.38 Russia – Generation development plan

Installed capacity / Years 2006 2010 2015 2020
Peak load 203.0 213.7 252.7 303.7
Total 210.8 243.8 297.5 347.4
1. Hydro 44.9 49.2 57.1 71.7
2. Nuclear 23.5 26.9 38.1 53.2
3. Total thermal power plants: 142.4 167.7 202.3 222.5
1) Total CHP plants 77.1 93.2 107.8 113.7
steam-turbine (gas-and-oil burning) 43.2 43 40.9 36.5
combined cycle and gas turbine 1.1 15.3 27.9 36
steam-turbine (hard fuels) 32.8 34.9 39 41.2
2) Condensing power plants 65.3 74.5 94.5 108.8
steam-turbine (gas-and-oil burning) 37.5 37.3 14.3 6.8
combined cycle and gas turbine 2.7 9.9 30.2 38.5
steam-turbine (hard fuels) 25.1 27.3 50 63.5
Tariff
Natural gas is the main fuel for Russian thermal power plants. Minimum regulated wholesale price for non-
household consumers in 2008 on average amounts to 48 €/tcm or 68.6$/tcm, while the upper price limits
are determined as minimum prices increase by a certain value. Average maximum value for whole 65
regions is around 109€/tcm or 155.7$/tcm. End-user prices also include payments for gas distribution and
supply/sales services, which are regulated and together add about 5–10 €/tcm to consumers’ bills. Average
export price of natural gas was around 232.5€/tcm or 330$/tcm. No new nuclear units were commissioned
since 2007, production of the “old” ones is capped by regulated tariff (4.68 €/MWh or 6.69$/MWh in 2009).
Hydro power plants pay taxes on water use 0.15÷0.4€/MWh, or 0.21÷0.57$/MWh depending on water
basin.
Russia utilizes a feed-in tariff system and calculates the RES energy tariff based on the average wholesale
generation tariff in the system. It adds a premium rate close to three times the average generation tariff
(GretaEnergy Int’l, 2009). As a result the current average generation tariff in the system is RUB 0.8/kWh the
premium rate is at RUB 2.5/kWh making the wind generation tariff RUB 3.3/kWh or EURO 8.1 cent/kWh.
Russia has yet to develop its first utility-scale wind power plant.
Russia
73
Table 3.39 – Russia – tariffs for RES (before taxes)
PREMIUM
VALID
kategory years EURc/KWh USDc/KWh
I. Small hydro (<25 MW) 10 6.45 9.23
II. Wind energy 10 12.21 17.44
III. Geothermal energy 10 10.17 14.53
IV. Biomass 7 12.8 7.89
V. Tidal energy 15 5.52 20.64
VI. Solar energy 15 47.39 67.70
VII. Other 10 8.50 12.14
Russia has a vast potential with the current energy supply and the future large surplus of electrical energy
that is forecasted and shown on Table 3.38. The country is also the main supplier of nuclear fuel and natural
gas for other countries.
1.10.6 References
[1] “Russian electricity market - Current state and perspectives”; Rinat Abdurafikov, VTT
2009.
Russia
74
1.11 Turkey
Turkey is a Eurasian country that

stretches across the Anatolian
peninsula in Western Asia and Thrace
in the Balkan region of southeastern
Europe. Turkey is bordered by eight
countries: Bulgaria to the northwest;
Greece to the west; Georgia to the
northeast; Georgia, Azerbaijan (the
exclave of Nakhchivan) and Iran to the east; and Iraq and Syria to the southeast. The Mediterranean Sea
and Cyprus are to the south; the Aegean Sea to the west; and the Black Sea is to the north. The Sea of
Marmara, the Bosporus and the Dardanelles (which together form the Turkish Straits) demarcate the
boundary between East Thrace and Anatolia; they also separate Europe and Asia. Turkey's location at the
crossroads of Europe and Asia makes it a country of significant geostrategic importance.
Area: 783 562 sq. km

Arable land: 35 %
Water: 1.3 %
Forest area: 27 %
Population (Million): 73.7 (2010)
GDP ppp (Billion $): 960.5 (2010 est.)

GDP ppp (per capita): $13464 (2010 est.)

• agriculture: 11.1 % (2007)
• industry: 29.7 % (2007)
• services: 60.1 % (2007)
Carbon intensity per capita (t); 3.3 (2004)
The Turkish Power Grid consists of lines of 400, 220, 150, 66 kV. Table 3.40 shows total length of
transmission lines by voltage levels and Table 3.41 shows the interconnection lines. Network of the 400 kV
system is shown in Figure 3.44 The Turkish generation and transmission system is managed by 9 regional
dispatching centers: Adapazarı, Çarşamba, Keban, İzmir, Gölbaşı, İkitelli, Erzurum, Çukurova and Kepez,
coordinated by the National Dispatching Center in Ankara (Gölbaşı). The power system of Turkey has a
service quality and reliability comparable to western European standards.
Table 3.40 – Turkey – network overview

lines transformers
Length of
the
Voltage Installed
Voltage level overhead
level capacities
lines
and cables
(kV) (km) (kV/kV) numb (MVA)
400 14622.9 400/x 184 35020
220 84.5 220/x 1 300
150 31932 154/x 1034 58015
66 508.5 66/x 54 637
400 cables 170.9
150 cables 22.3
total 47148 1272 93672
Turkey
75
Hydro and lignite are one of the primary energy resources for the country. Large loads are concentrated in
İstanbul, İzmir and Ankara. Most of the hydro resources and a large lignite fields are located in eastern
Turkey. This power has to be transmitted across the country via 400 kV lines. The location of the
generation and the long distances involved challenge the transmission grid during operation. Most of the
power produced by the large HPPs in the East and has to be transferred to the North-West and South-West
regions where the energy consumption is high at the maximum hydroelectric dispatch. Consequently, the
planned lines connecting the western and eastern parts of country has an adequate power carrying capacity
and stability margins. Concentrated small wind generations in one region are collected in one substation.
Table 3.41 – Turkey – Interconnection lines

Countries Type From-To nodes Status Comment
GE-TR 954 MCM, Rail - 28 km OHL 220 kV Batumi (GE)-Hopa (TR) Existing Island
AM-TR 2X954MCM,Cardinal-80.7km OHL 220 kV Gymri (AM)-Kars (TR) Existing Island
AZ-TR 2x477 MCM,Hawk-180 km OHL 154 kV Iğdır (Turkey)-Babek(Nahcivan) Existing Island
TR-IR 2x954 MCM, Cardinal - 28km 400 kV Baþkale (TR) - Khoy (IR) Existing Island
TR-IR 954 MCM, Cardinal - 40 km OHL 154kV Doðubeyazýt (TR)-Bazargan (IR) Existing Island
TR-GR 3x954 MCM, Cardinal-260km OHL 400kV Babaeski (TR) - Phillipi (GR) Existing
BG-TR 2x954 MCM, Rail - 136 km OHL 400kVBabaeski (TR) - Maritsa East (BG) Existing
BG-TR 3x954 MCM, Cardinal-150km OHL 400kV Hamitabat (TR)-Maritsa East (BG) Existing
TR-SY 2x954 MCM, Cardinal-124 km OHL 400kV HPP Birecik (TR) – Aleppo (SY) Existing Island
TR-IQ 2x954 MCM, Cardinal -28km OHL 400Kv PS.3 (TR) - Zakho (IQ) Existing Island
AM-TR New 400 kV HVDC AM-TR HVDC 400 kV ANPP (AM)-Horasan (TR) Idea By 2020
GE-TR New 400 kV HVDC GE-TR HVDC 400 kV Akhaltsikhe (GE) – Borcka (TR) Planned By 2013
GE-TR New 220 kV HVDC GE-TR HVDC 220 kV Batumi (GE) – Hopa (TR) Planned By 2015
TR-RO New 400 kV HVDC RO-TR HVDC 400 kV Constanca(RO)-Alibeykoy(TR) Planned By 2020
Development plans for the transmission network are steered towards accommodating the large generation
development plan that will enable a secure transfer of power from power plants to the consumption areas.
Figure 3.45 shows the planned network development in the 400kV transmission network. There is also a
plan to increase the interconnection capacities to neighboring countries. As Table 3.41 shows, four last lines
represent further planning activities in developing interconnection capacities. For the first one, there is an
interest from both sides, but no official documentation exists at this point. For the second one, there is an
agreement to the increase capacity from 700MW to 1050MW (3x350MW) by 2020, and for third one
feasibility studies showed that it is not economically feasible. This plan will most likely be replaced by a new
project to increase the capacity of the connection between Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. The idea is to
build a 400kV triangle between these countries using a double circuit 400kV line.
21 km 380 kV 3 Cardinal 55 km 380 kV 3 Cardinal
380/OG kV
Karaburun SS 380/OG Çeşme
HAVZA SS 380/154 kV
Uzundere SS
16,2 km 380 kV 2 Cardinal
380/OG 380/OG
125 MVA 150 MVA
31 km 154 kV 2x1272 MCM
154/OG URLA
OG OG HAVZA SS
Zeytineli-2 RES
10 km
~ 7 km
~ 49,5 MW
154/OG 154/OG 154/OG

Karaburun RES
12 km
~ 50 MVA 50 MVA 50 MVA

120 MW ~ Karadağ RES
14 km 16,25MW
Mordoğan RES 13,8
MW OG OG OG
17 km
10 km
~ Ovacık RES
~ Urla RES
18 MW 5 km ~ 15 MW
Mordoğan RES 30,75 Çeşme RES
26 km
MW 11 km
~
16 MW
10 km ~ Seferihisar RES
~ 14 MW
~ Alaçatı RES
9 km
Yaylaköy RES 15 MW 16 MW
9 km ~
Seferihisar RES
~ Germiyan RES 16 MW
4 km
10,8 MW
~ 11 km
~ Korkmaz RES 24
~ MW
13 km Urla RES
Sarpıncık RES 32 MW
13 MW 6 km ~Demircili RES
40 MW
SS TOTAL CAP: 211,55 MW SS TOTAL CAP: 139,55 MW SS TOTAL CAP: 109 MW
Figure 3.43 – Turkey – ÇEŞME REGION WIND PROJECTS: 460 MW

Turkey
76
Figure 3.44 – Turkey – network map
Turkey 77
BULGARİSTAN
KARADENİZ
DIMODICHEV
HABİPLER BATUM
BABAESKİ GÜRCİSTAN
HAMİTABAT ALİBEYKÖY AHALTSIKHE
İKİTELLİ
N
A.ALANI
AMASRA BOYABAT SAMSUN
A
HOPA
ST
Y.TEPE DGKÇ
D.PAŞA
İ
FILIPPI KAPTAN BEYKOZ PAŞAKÖY

AN
EREĞLİ BORASCO BORÇKA

Z.KÖY
N
OSMANCA ÇARŞAMBA GUMRI

YU
UNIMAR AMBARLI ÜMRANİYE ÇANKIRI DERİNER

ADA-GEBZE
İÇDAŞ TEPEÖREN ARKUN
KARABİGA ADAPAZARI BAĞLUM KALKANDERE YUSUFELİ KARS ERMENİSTAN
TİREBOLU
ÇAYIRHAN KAYABAŞI H.UĞURLU
GÖKÇEKAYA SİNCAN ORDU-2 İSPİR
İÇDAŞ K.KALE IĞDI
BURSA AKINCI
DGKÇ R
BALIKESİR GÖLBAŞ AĞRI
ÇAN TEMELLİ SİVAS
TUNÇBİLEK I BABEK
İÇANADOLU HORASAN
DEÇEKO KANGAL
DGKÇ ÖZLÜCE
SOMA SEYİTÖMER ERZURUM D.BEYAZIT
KAYSERİ
KEBAN VAN BAZARGAN
KOCATEPE ELBİSTAN KHOY

ALİAĞA
KARAKAYA İRAN
MANİSA
YEŞİLHİSAR
DİYARBAKIR ÇETİN
KONYA HİLVAN SİİRT
IŞIKLAR BATMAN
UZUNDERE DENİZLİ
YEDİGÖZE ATATÜRK ILISU
AYDIN ANDIRIN SİLOPİ TES
SEYDİŞEHİR KAVŞAK
V.ŞEHİR
YENİKÖY PS3
YATAĞAN ADANA G.ANTEP Ş.URFA CİZRE
OYMAPINAR BİRECİK
ERZİN KIZILTEPE ZAKHO
KEMERKÖY
ERMENEK KAYRAKTEPE
AKSA VARSAK MERSİN IRAK

İSKENDERUNİSDEMİR MUSUL
TEİAŞ-APK 2010
HATAY TS (PLANLANAN)
HALEP
TS (MEVCUT)
HES (PLANLANAN)
AKDENİZ SURİYE HES (MEVCUT)

TL (MEVCUT)
TL (PLANLANAN)
220 kV EİH
154 kV EİH
Figure 3.45– Turkey – 400kV network map
Turkey
78
Table 3.42 – Turkey – Planned network reinforcements
VOLTAGE Number CAPACITY MATERIAL OR LENGTH
CROSS DATE OF
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 LEVEL circuits limited TRANSFORMER BR1 BR2 TOTAL STATUS COMMENT
COMMISSION
kV/kV /units A or MVA A or MVA TYPE mm2 km km km
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
OHL TR HPP OYMAPINAR HPP ERMENEK 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 144 FINISHED
OHL TR MERSIN HPP ERMENEK 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 145 CONSTR
SS TR MERSIN 400/150 2x250 CONSTR
OHL TR GERCUZ-ILISU CIZRE-SINIR 400 2 ACSR 3BX954 30 100 130 PLANNINGPLANNING
OHL TR AGRI VAN 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 180 PLANNING
OHL TR BATMAN-SİİRT VAN 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 65 205 270 PLANNING
OHL TR VAN BASKALE 400 1 ACSR 3BX954 105 FINISHED Temporary 154kV
OHL TR HPP BOYABAT HPP ALTINKAYA 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 50 PLANNING
OHL TR SEYDISEHIR VARSAK 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 130 FINISHED
OHL TR TEMELLI AFYON2 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 214 FINISHED
OHL TR AFYON2 DENIZLI 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 180 FINISHED
OHL TR BURSA NGCCPP BURSA SAN 400 1 ACSR 2BX954 14 FINISHED
OHL TR ICDAS-BAND. NGCCPP BURSA NGCCPP 400 1 ACSR 3BX954 59 115 174 FINISHED
OHL TR SOMA MANISA 400 1 ACSR 3BX1272 50 CONSTR
SS TR KONYA 400/150 150 CONSTR CAPACITY ADD
SS TR AKDAM (KOZAN) 400/150 250 CONSTR
SS TR ESKISEHIR 400/150 2X250 CONSTR
SS TR CATALCA 400/150 2X250 PLANNING
SS TR KUCUKBAKKALKOY GIS 400/150 2X250 FINISHED
SS TR KUCUKBAKKALKOY GIS 400/33 2X125 FINISHED
C TR UMRANIYE KUCUKBAKKALKOY 400 2000mm2 6.3 FINISHED
SS TR VAN 400/150 2x250 CONSTR
SS TR UZUNDERE 400/33 125 PLANNING
SS TR YENIBOSNA GIS 400/150 2X250 FINISHED
SS TR YENIBOSNA GIS 400/33 2X125 FINISHED
C TR YENIBOSNA GIS DAVUTPASA 400 2000mm2 6.98 FINISHED
SS TR AFYON2 400/150 2X250 CONSTR CAPACITY ADD
SS TR VIRANSEHIR 400/150 250+150 CONSTR
SS TR DIYARBAKIR 400/33 125 CONSTR
SS TR USAK 400/150 250 PLANNING
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - kable, SK - submarin kable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...) 8 Type of conductor or transformer
2 Country (ISO code) 9 Cross section (number of ropes in bundle x cross section/cross section of reinforcement rope)
3 Substation name 10 Length till border of first state
4 Installed voltage (for lines nominal voltage, for transformers ratio in voltages) 11 Length till border of second state
5 number of circuits/units 12 Total length
6 Conventional transmission capacity of elements for OHL in Amps, for transformers in MVA 13 Date of commissioning (estimate)
7 Conventional transmission capacity limited by transformers or substations 14 Status of project (Idea, Feasibility study, Construction, Damaged, Decommissioned...)
Turkey
79
Table 3.43 – Turkey – Planned generation units
VOLTAGE DATE OF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
HPP TR Ermenek 400 320 2010 CONSTR
HPP TR OBRUK 400 4x50 2010 CONSTR
HPP TR Borçka 400 300 2010 FINISHED
HPP TR Deriner 400 670 2010 CONSTR In service end of 2011
TPP TR TEREN 400 2X600 2015 PLANNED Coal fired TPP
HPP TR TIREB 400 300 2015 PLANNED Equivalent of HPPs, most of them run of river type
HPP TR KALKANDERE 400 3X200 2015 PLANNED Equivalent of HPPs, most of them run of river type
HPP TR YUSUFELI 400 4x135 2015 PLANNED Equivalent of HPPs, most of them run of river type
CCGT TR TBANDRMA 400 1000 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP(Private company)
CCGT TR AMBARLI 400 2X270 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP. Extension of existing Ambarlı NGCCPP
CCGT TR AKSA ANTALIA 400 1000 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP(Private company)
TPP TR SUGOZU 400 700 2015 PLANNED Coal fired. Extension of existing Sugozu TPP
CCGT TR DENIZLI 400 1000 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP(Private company)
HPP TR BOYABAT 400 3X180 2015 PLANNED HPP(Private company)
TPP TR GALATA 400 2X135 2015 PLANNED TPP ( oil fired)
CCGT TR MAKINA 400 2X300 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP(Private company)
HPP TR ALKUMRU 400 3X80 2015 PLANNED HPP(Private company)
CCGT TR RASA 400 80 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP(Private company)
TPP TR SILOPITES 150 135 2015 PLANNED TPP ( oil fired)
HPP TR INCIR 150 122 2015 PLANNED HPP(Private company)
HPP TR AKDAM 400 300 2015 PLANNED Equivalent of HPPs, most of them run of river type
CCGT TR EGEMER 400 6X300 2015 PLANNED NGCCPP+ Coal fired(Private company)
WPP TR GELI 400 300 2015 PLANNED Equivalent of lots of WPPs in the region
WPP TR CAN 400 300 2015 PLANNED Equivalent of lots of WPPs in the region
TPP TR BASAT 400 2X150 2015 PLANNED Coal fired TPP
TPP TR ORTA 400 2X150 2015 PLANNED Coal fired TPP
TPP TR ATLAS 400 600 2015 PLANNED Coal fired TPP
TPP TR KARASU 400 2X600 2015 PLANNED Coal fired TPP
HPP TR ILISU 400 6x200 2015 PLANNED
NPP TR Akkuyu Bay 400 5x1100 2020 PLANNED
2 Country
3 Substation name
6 Instaled active power
7 Instaled apparent power
Turkey
80
1.11.3 Generation
Turkey has a unique power plant displacement. The main fuel source is imported natural gas, and the
largest installed capacities are run on gas fired CCGT power plants built next to large cities like Istanbul and
Ankara, where the majority of the demand is. Additionally, there are some thermal capacities run on coal,
vast hydro capacities in the east and Southeast of country, and new built hydro in the Northeast, distant
from the demand centers located mostly in the West.
Figure 3.46 – Turkey – Installed capacity MW/% and total generation by source
The installed capacity in Turkey is 50.004 MW: 32% hydro, 65% thermal and 3% RES, mainly wind. Yearly
generation in 2010 was at 210,286 GWh.
Renewable energy supply in Turkey is dominated by hydropower and biomass. More than two thirds of
renewable energy supply is biomass. It is mainly used in the residential sector for heating. The remaining
one-third of renewable energy supply is predominantly hydro-power. The contribution of wind and solar is
limited but expected to increase. The large potential for geothermal, wind and solar have not been
systematically developed until recently. In 2007, their combined share in TPES was only 1.5 % and in 2010 it
reached 3%.
TPP Afsin Elbistan

Location: Kahramanmaras
Operator: Elektrik Uretim AS
Operation: 2006
Fuel: lignite
Boiler supplier: BBP
T/G supplier: MHI, Melco
EPC: BBP, MHI, Gama-Tekfen-Tokar JV, ENKA
Quick facts: The region around the plant site has lignite
reserves of as such as 3.4bn, about a third of Turkey’s
recoverable reserves. Further development on this site
is expected.
TPP Sugozu
Location: Adana
Operator: Iskenerun Enerji (Isken)
Operation: 2003
Fuel: hard coal
Boiler supplier: BBP
T/G supplier: Siemens
EPC: BBP, Siemens, Gama, Tefken
Quick facts: This €1.5bn power station near Iskenderun
was a flagship project for private power development
and has the largest individual generating units in
Turkey. It is run on imported hard coal. This is
offloaded in the world's largest floating trans-shipment facilities capable of handling 30,000 tons of coal per day.
Turkey 81
CCGT Baymina
Location: Ankara
Operator: Baymina Enerji AS
Configuration: 770-MW, 2+1 CCGT block with 9001FA+
Operation: 2004
Fuel: natural gas
HRSG supplier: CMI
T/G supplier: GE, Alstom
EPC: VA TECH, Yuksel
Quick facts: In Sep 2001, Tractebel acquired a
controlling interest in the $500mn plant. The new plant
connected to the main 380kV grid and is just 3km away
from the main gas pipeline to Ankara.
CCGT Izmir
Location: Izmir
Operator: InterGen Enerji Ltd Sirketi
Configuration: Two 700-MW 2+1 CCGT blocks
Operation: 2003
Fuel: natural gas
HRSG supplier: CMI
T/G supplier: GE/Alstom
EPC: Bechtel Enka
Quick facts: Turkish construction company Enka had won
the exclusive right to negotiate for 3x500-MW of CCGT
capacity one of the largest private-power development
schemes in the world. In Sep 2000 the partners signed
$1.5bn of loan agreements for the project. Gas turbine purchase amounted to about $900mn the largest order for
such equipment ever in Turkey and the largest single order for the 9FA+ machine to that date.
CCGT Bursa
Location: Bursa
Operator: InterGen Enerji Ltd Sirketi
Configuration: Two 700-MW 2+1 combined-cycle blocks with
9001FA+ gas turbines
Operation: 1999
Fuel: natural gas
HRSG supplier: CMI
T/G supplier: Mitsubishi
Quick facts: 1400MW CCGT Bursa plant was built by a
consortium led by Mitsubishi Corporation that included the
Itochu Corporation and ENKA a Turkish-based conglomerate.
The plant the biggest turnkey project in Turkey produces 10
billion kWh of electricity a year. Bursa CCGT plant consumes
about 1 700m3 of natural gas every year.
NPP Akkuyu
Location: Akkuyu
Operator:
Quick facts: Russian consortium led by Rosenergoatom won
the contract to build first Turkeys nuclear power plant for
US$ 20 bn. Turkish Electricity Trade and Contract
Corporation (TETAS) has guaranteed the purchase of 70%
power generated from the first two units and 30% from the third and fourth units over a 15-year power purchase
agreement. Electricity will be purchased at a price of 12.35 US cents per kWh and the remaining power will be
sold in the open market by the producer.
Turkey 82
HPPs on Eufrat
HPP Keban
Location: Elazig
Operator: EUAS
Configuration: 4 X 157.5 MW, 4 X 175 MW Francis
T/G supplier: Voest, Neyrpic, AEG
EPC: Ebasco , Sogea
Quick facts: The Keban Dam was the first of the
large dams to be built on the Euphrates River. It
created a reservoir extending 50km upriver and
100km uprive in the Murat River valley to the east.
The Murat joined the Euphrates about 7km north of
the dam.
HPP Karakaya
Location: Diyarbakir
Operator: EUAS
T/G supplier: Sulzer Escher Wyss, ABB
EPC: Electrowatt
Quick facts: Located 166 km downstream of the Keban Dam and
180 km upstream of the Atatürk Dam the 173 m high arch gravity
Karakaya Dam represents the second stage of the five dams
series developing the Euphrates middle reach.
HPP Ataturk
Location: Sanliurfa
Operator: EUAS
T/G supplier: SZEW, ABB
EPC: Dolsar, ATA Insaat
Quick facts: Ataturk Dam is the largest in a series
of 22 dams and 19 hydroelectric plants built on the
Euphrates and Tigris rivers as part of the GAP, a
massive irrigation and hydroelectricity scheme.
The dam is one of the world's largest earth-and-
rock fill dams measuring 184m high and 1,820m.
HPP Birecik
Location: Sanliurfa
Operator: EUAS
Operation: 1994
T/G supplier: Neyrpic, ACEC, Sulzer
EPC: Philip Holzman, TemelsuGama, Strabag
Quick facts:This was the first large Turkish hydroelectric
BOT project and it reached financial close in Nov 1995
about 7yrs from the time the
development process started. Construction on $1.64bn
plant began in Mar 1996. Ownership of Birecik is to be
transferred to the state in 2016.
Turkey 83
Figure 3.47 – Turkey – planed locations for wind power plants
Turkey
84
Turkey has limited domestic energy resources. Most of the generation expansion in last two decades has
come through a rapid growth in gas based generation using imported gas mainly from Russia.
As of December 2009, installed capacity, project generation and firm generation data for power plants
granted by license, under construction and expected to be in service are shown on Table 3.43. According to
TEIAS’s capacity projection for period 2010-2019, in 2009 the 4100.3 MW have been commissioned and
1156.4 MW decommissioned, which gave an increase of 2944 MW.
EREN TPP
1200 MW
Under Construction
Operation Year:
2011
DERINER HPP 630MW IN

Borasco 2012
Bandırma Natural Gas CCPP
Natural Gas CCPP 850 MW
1000 MW Operation
ICDAS
Under Construction Year:2011
TPP
600 MW Operation Year:2010
Under Construction
Operation Year:2011
DENIZLI NGCCPP:
890 MW 2014
EGEMER NGCCPP 890

AYAS TPP: 660 MW MW IN 2012
2012
Figure 3.48 – Turkey – Large power plants to be commissioned in next 5 years
Nuclear Power Plants: The Turkish government wants to have substantial nuclear power resources
operational in Turkey. It has begun negotiations with Russia’s Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation for
the construction of a nuclear power plant in the Akkuyu district in the southern province of Mersin. Plans
with Japan on the construction of another plant in the northern province of Sinop were suspended after the
unfolding of a nuclear crisis in Japan on March 11. Its goal is to have a minimum of 5% of electricity
production come from nuclear power plants by 2020. The latest year observed for Turkey is 2019. If in that
period 15000 GWh of nuclear electricity is added creating approximately 2000 MW, it would represent 5% of
total electricity production in Turkey.
Hydro Power Plants: Turkey is also pushing the agenda to maximize the country’s hydroelectric potential
and develop renewable energy production.
Thermal Power Plants: Turkey also anticipates further growth of the installed capacity of thermal power
plants run on natural gas Combined Cycle units, and coal fired power plants in the North and in the
Southeast parts of the country. The coal fired plants can be divided in two major groups. One runs on
domestic lignite and an another on imported coal. Regardless, coal fired power plants are on schedule based
on development plans. On the other hand, recent increase of natural gas and oil prices has caused many of
the CCGT projects to be suspended or delayed.
Renewables: Wind power represents the main renewable energy source in Turkey. First WPP was
commissioned in 1998. Present system available capacity for connecting wind generation reaches 8474 MW.
The current status of WPP is listed below:
• Number of the wind pp’s in operation: 1626 MW (39 pp’s)

• Current Licensed wind generation: 3483 MW
• Applications (Date: 1th November 2007) 78.000 MW (722 pp’s)
Turkey
85
1.11.4 Demand
Demand Behavior
Turkey’s yearly consumption in 2010 was at 209.4 GWh and peak load at 33,392 MW. Its consumption per
capita is below the world and EU average. Based the Turkish market trends, power consumption is expected
to have a steady high growth between 6.6–7.3% on average annually.
Summer peak Winter peak

29.25GW, 603.2MWh 28.4GW, 583.3MWh
In 2008, the peak load and the minimum load were 30517 MW and 10409 MW respectively. For 2009, the
peak load was 29870 MW and the minimum load 11123 MW. Yearly consumption in 2010 reached 209.4
TWh, with the peak load at 33,392 MW.
In 2007, 40% of the total electricity in Turkey was consumed by the industrial sector, 25% by residential,
and approximately 35% by the commercial and public sectors.
Demand Forecast
Gross electricity consumption (equal to gross generation + import – export) had reached 198.1 TWh with an
annual increase of 8.8% for the year 2008, and 194.1 TWh by an annual decrease of 2.0% in 2009. Net
consumption (internal consumption, grid losses and power theft included) was 161.9 TWh in 2008 and 156.9
TWh in 2009. Expected average growth rate for peak load and energy consumption is 7.5% per year.
PEAK LOAD ENERGY

Figure 3.49- Turkey – Demand Forecast
Turkey
86
Tariff
Since 1960, Turkey’s electricity demand has increased by an average of 8% annually. The growth has been
fuelled by a growing population and per capita economic growth. The demand growth has been particularly
rapid in recent years partly due to a booming economy but also because of a significant erosion of the real
tariff level to end users in Turkey.
Figure 3.50 – Turkey – Prices of electricity
On December 29, 2010, Turkey’s Parliament approved a new law for regulating the renewable energy
resources market in Turkey.
Table 3.44 – Turkey – tariffs for RES (before taxes)
EURc/KWh USDc/KWh
kategory Base Incentive Base incentive
I Small hydro 5.1 1.6 7.3 2.3
II Wind 5.1 2.6 7.3 3.7
III Geothermal 7.35 - 10.5 -
IV Solar 9.3 4.7 13.3 6.7
V Biomass (incl. LFG) 9.3 - 13.3 -
*Incentives apply only if Turkish built equipment is used
The established tariffs are valid for the PPs that come online between May 18, 2005 and December 31, 2015
are valid for 10 years. After December 31, 2015 a new tariff will be established by the Turkish Government
but will not exceed the previous one.
Incentive mechanisms for renewable generation include the following:

• 90 % discount in system usage tariff & 99% discount in license fees
• Extra incentives in the case of usage of domestic equipment
• Technical privileges such as ancillary services & market regulations
• Priority in system interconnection
• Land usage incentives
• For further details see Turkish Law #5346
Turkey
87
1.11.5 Export Potential for 2015 and 2020
The electricity market in Turkey is well developed. Imports and exports to and from countries are possible if
they fulfill the international requirements for interconnection. The exchange is subject to the available
capacity and the approval of EMRA. The eligible market participants are:
- Electricity Trading and Contracting Company (TETAŞ)
- Private sector wholesale companies
- Retail sale companies (import only)
- Distribution companies holding retail sale licenses (import only)
Based on the demand forecasts (low/high) and plans for new generation capacities (Scenario 1/2), Turkey
will not be self-sufficient in terms of production after 2016 or 2017. The Turkish Government attempts to
mitigate the shortage by promoting hydro, lignite, RES and mentioned nuclear projects. Nevertheless,
importing electricity in the future will become a strong option for Turkey.
Many steps have been taken to promote renewable energy sources and the results are satisfactory. On the
other hand, there are two main challenges regarding the integration of renewable power plants to the
national grid. Connecting more renewable energy is challenging the system operator because it makes the
load management more difficult due to the intermittency of the source. In this context, the amount of
intermittent sources being integrated to the system has to be limited in compliance with the capacity
projection of the system. Therefore, even though viable potential is much higher, available capacity for
licensing (wind and solar) is limited. In parallel with the commissioning of RES plants, the system operator
has double its efforts to always keep the system in balance.
Table 3.45 – Turkey – power plants participating in system balancing

Available
Installed Balancing
Plant Existing/ Capacity Capacity
Identification BSTP Code Type Planned (MW) (MW) Service Price
Ataturk 60885 Hydro Existing 8x300 400 Market Dependent
Karakaya 60894 Hydro Existing 6x300 300 Market Dependent
Altinkaya 60690 Hydro Existing 4x175 160 Market Dependent
H. Ugurlu 60693 Hydro Existing 4x125 60 Market Dependent
Adapazari 60155 CCGT Existing 770 30 Market Dependent
Gebze A 60177 CCGT Existing 760 30 Market Dependent
Gebze B 60177 CCGT Existing 760 30 Market Dependent
Ankara 60516 CCGT Existing 770 35 Market Dependent
Izmir A 60324 CCGT Existing 760 35 Market Dependent
Izmir B 60324 CCGT Existing 760 35 Market Dependent
The total 30 second reserve, also known as the primary reserve, of the ENTSO-E system including Turkey is
~3000 MW. Turkey as a control area provides ~300 MW of this reserve.
Following rules have to be implemented:

- Hourly integral of ACE should not exceed ±60 MWh
- Number of cases with ACE > ±175 MW (measured per 2 seconds, evaluated per 4 seconds) over an
hour should not exceed 10% of the cases in normal operation to prevent overloads in the electricity
transmission systems of the neighboring Balkan countries.
- The amount of sum of tie line flows due to inter area oscillations should not exceed 30 MW in
normal operation to prevent overloads due to inter area power oscillations through the ENTSO-E
countries.
Frequency stability of Turkish Electricity Transmission System has been drastically enhanced with the
ENTSO-E CESA Interconnection. There is an increased standard deviation of ACE due to intermittent
generation in short term (turbulent peaks/dips). Balancing and settlement market problems occur due to an
inadequate prediction of wind capacity in long term. To resolve this, possible solution include the following:
• Effective management of tertiary reserve (current market conditions do not encourage generation
curtailment)
Turkey
88
• Increased amount of secondary reserve under the influence of the AGC system (short term) for the
entire day
Special monitoring/control system requirements especially for wind power that consist of two main parts:
• WIND FORECAST SYSTEM
The wind forecast system has been developed by Turkish State Meteorological Service which
provides information regarding wind forecasts for different heights and for 48 hours with 4 km
solubility all around Turkey. The trial tests are continuously conducted to improve the system.
• WIND MONITORING SYSTEM
Specific monitoring system for wind generation is planned and the procedures are underway with a
consultant company (Figure 3.51)
Figure 3.51 – Turkey – WIND MONITORING SYSTEM
Turkey
89
1.12 Ukraine
Ukraine is a country in Eastern Europe.

It has an area of 603,628 km², making
it the largest contiguous country on the
European continent. Ukraine borders
the Russian Federation to the east and
northeast, Belarus to the northwest,
Poland, Slovakia and Hungary to the
west, Romania and Moldova to the
southwest, and the Black Sea and Sea
of Azov to the south and southeast, respectively.
Area: 603628 sq. km

Water: 7%
Arable land: 53.8 %
Permanent crops: 1.5 %
Forest area: 16.5 % (2005)
Population: 45,888,000 (2010 est.)


• industry: 31.7 % (2008)
• services: 58.9 % (2008)
Ukraine's transmission system consists of a 800 kV DC line, a basic infrastructure of 750 kV, single circuit AC
system that overlays an extensive 330 kV (single and double circuit) network, feeding into 220 kV and 110
kV systems, but also 500 kV and 400 kV AC systems in some parts of the country. Figure 3.53 shows the
transmission network of Ukraine and Table 3.46 gives an overview of Ukrainian transmission network.
Table 3.46 – Ukraine –network overview

lines transformers
Length of
the
overhead
lines
and cables
800 100
750 4120
400 710 400/x 24240
330 13330
220 4010 220/x 300
110 540 154/x 46979
35 550 66/x 678
total 23360 76963.6
Ukraine
90
Currently, the Southwest part of the Ukrainian system
called the Burstyn Island is part of the 220 kV network
that includes the Burstinskaya TPP, and is connected to
the Mukachevo substation, is separated from the main
Ukrainian system and operates in a synchronous and
parallel mode with the main grid of ENTSO-E. This was
done in order to export electricity from Ukraine to
Western Europe.
Figure 3.52 – Ukraine – Bustin island
Ukraine has an extensive development plan shown on Table 3.47. Large part of the network is aging and
needs to be reconstructed and increase its capacity. One of the major planned projects is a second 750 kV
back-bone from the South to the North of the country and the reconstruction of a 750 kV connection to
Poland.
Ukraine
91
Figure 3.53 – Ukraine – network map
Ukraine
92
Table 3.47 – Ukraine – Network reinforcements till 2015
VOLTAGE CAPACITY MATERIAL LENGTH
LEVEL number limited OR CROSS BR1 BR2 TOTAL
of TRANSFOR DATE OF
circuits A or MER COMMISS
TYPE SUBSTATION1 SUBSTATION2 kV/kV /units A or MVA MVA TYPE mm2 km km km IONING STATUS COMMENT
1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
OHL UA Novoodeska UA Artsyz 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 140 0 140 2010 Construction
OHL UA Adgalyk UA Usatovo 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 124 0 124 2009 finished second line
OHL UA Zarya UA Mirna 330 1 1380 A - ACSR 300*2 14 0 14 2008 finished second line
SS UA Simferopol 330 1 SVC 2011 project SVC
OHL UA Simferopol UA Sevastopol 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 70 0 70 2007 finished upgrade from 220kV
OHL UA Dgankoj UA Melitopol–Simferopol 330 1 1380 A - ACSR 400*2 16 0 16 2006 finished Connectors of Dgankoj SS to OHL Melitopol–Simferopol
OHL UA Zapadnokrymskaya UA Sevastopol 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 2012 feasibility upgrade from 220kV
OHL UA Zapadnokrymskaya UA Kahovska 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 2014 feasibility upgrade from 220kV
SS UA Kyivska 750/330 1 1000 MVA - PST - - - - 2009 finished
OHL UA Pivnichnoukrainska UA Kyivska 750 1 4000 A - ACSR 400*5 292 0 292 2015 Feasibility study
OHL UA Rivnenska NPP UA Kyivska 750 1 4000 A - ACSR 400*5 370 0 370 2009 finished
OHL UA Zahidnoukrainska UA Bogorodchani 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 111 0 111 2010 Construction
OHL UA Zahidnoukrainska UA 330 4 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 2013 Construction
OHL UA Zahidnoukrainska UA 110 8 - ACSR 2013 Construction
SS UA Drogobych 330/110 - - - - - 2010
OHL UA Zahidnoukrainska UA Drogobych 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 111 0 111 2010 Construction
OHL UA NPP Rivne BY Мikashevichi 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 2013 feasibility
Reconstruction 500 кV SS “Novodonbasskaya" with
construction 2 OHL 500 кV, АТ 500/220 кV and 5 OHL
SS UA Novodonbaska 500/220 - - - - - 2015 feasibility 220 кV
SS UA Primorska 750/330 1 1000 MVA - PST - - - - 2015 feasibility
OHL UA Pivdenoukrainskaya RO Isaccea 750 1 4000 A - ACSR 400*5 406 3 409 2015 Feasibility study Restoration. Voltage level to be defined
OHL UA Dnistrovska PSHPP UA Bar 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 95 0 95 2007 finished
OHL UA Dnistrovska PSHPP UA 750 1 4000 A - ACSR 400*5 2015 project To existing line Zapadnoukrainskaya – Vinnitsa
OHL UA K.Podolska UA Ternopil 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 150 0 150 2012 Feasibility study
OHL UA Lutsk Pivnichna UA Ternopil 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 180 0 180 2010 Feasibility study
OHL UA HPP Dnistrovska MD Balti 330 1 1670 A - ACSR 400*2 120 0 120 2012 Idea second line
SS UA Kahovska 750/330 2 1000 MVA - PST - - - - 2015 finished
OHL UA Zaporizka NPP UA Kahovska 750 1 4000 A - ACSR 400*5 190 0 190 2015 Feasibility study
SS UA Zaporizka NPP 750/330 1 1000 MVA - PST - - - - 2015 finished second transformer
SS UA Dnieprovska 750/330 1 1000 MVA - PST - - - - 2012 finished third transformer
1 Type of project (OHL - overhead line, K - kable, SK - submarin kable, SS - substation, BB - back to back system...) 8 Type of conductor or transformer
2 Country (ISO code) 9 Cross section (number of ropes in bundle x cross section/cross section of reinforcement rope)
3 Substation name 10 Length till border of first state
4 Installed voltage (for lines nominal voltage, for transformers ratio in voltages) 11 Length till border of second state
5 number of circuits/units 12 Total length
6 Conventional transmission capacity of elements for OHL in Amps, for transformers in MVA 13 Date of commissioning (estimate)
7 Conventional transmission capacity limited by transformers or substations 14 Status of project (Idea, Feasibility study, Construction, Damaged, Decommissioned...)
Ukraine
93
Figure 3.54 – Ukraine – Generation capacities and transmission network
Ukraine
94
1.12.3 Generation
Most of the Ukrainian generation capacities are aging thermal power plants run on brown coal 27225MW
(52%), nuclear power plants 13835MW (26%), CHPP run mainly on imported gas 6360MW (12%), and
hydro power plants with 5089MW (10%).
TPP Burstinska
Location: Ukraine
Operator:
EPC:
Quick facts: Power plant is located in western Ukraine, and
presently is operated connected to European grid to realize
export from Ukraine.
TPP Pridneprovska
Location: Ukraine
Operator:
Configuration: 4X150, 4x 300 MW
EPC:
Quick facts:
TPP Starobeshivska
Location: Ukraine
Operator:
Configuration: 10X200
EPC:
Quick facts:
TPP Trypilska
Location: Ukraine
Operator: Centrenergo
Fuel: natural gas, coal, fuel oil
Ukraine
95
NPP Khmelnitska
Location: Ukraine
EPC: EnergoProekt Kyiv
Quick facts: This plant is in Slavutsky district near the
Goryn River in western Ukraine. In 1981, construction got
underway and the first unit was put online in late 1987.
Sites for three more units were cleared and construction
on Unit-2 began in 1983 with plans to finish it in 1991. In 1990, however, construction was stopped as part of a
moratorium on new plant construction adopted by Verkhovna Rada. After the moratorium was lifted, construction
proceeded very slowly and was finally completed in Aug 2004. Units 3&4 are planned for completion by 2020.
NPP Pivdenoukrainska
Location: Ukraine
EPC: EnergoProekt Kharkov
Quick facts: The South-Ukraine power complex is located on
the South Bun river in Mykolaiv region and consists of the
NPP, a small conventional hydroelectric plant, and a pumped-
storage plant. Construction of the nuclear plant and satellite
town of Yuzhno-Ukrainsk started in 1975 and Unit-1 was connected in Dec 1982 after 72 months of construction.
The 25-MW Olexandrivska hydro plant was finally completed in 1999 after years of delay and the first 150-MW
unit at the Tashlyk pumpedstorage plant in late 2006.
NPP Rivnenska
Location: Ukraine
Configuration: 2 X 400 MW, 2 X 1,000 PWR
EPC: EnergoProekt Kyiv
Quick facts: Design of Rivne began in 1971 and this was the
first nuclear power plant with the VVER-440, B-213 reactors.
Construction started in 1973. The construction of Unit-4 started
in 1984 with plans for completion in 1991 but construction was suspended in that year and did not resume until
1993. Engineering assistance was provided by EDF and Fortum and Unit-4 was put online in Oct 2004.
NPP Zaporoshka
Location: Ukraine
Ukraine
96
HPPs Dnieper cascade
The Dnieper Cascade is one of the largest hydro systems in the world. It consist of seven hydro and pumping stations with a total installed capacity over 4000MW.
Dnieper is a slow and vast river and all the plants are small with Kaplan turbine run units.
Ukraine
97
Table 3.48 – Ukraine – New production units
VOLTAGE DATE OF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PSHPP UA Dnistrovska 15.75 330 360/390 420 2008 in operation unit 1
PSHPP UA Dnistrovska 15.75 330 360/390 420 2009 Construction unit 2
PSHPP UA Dnistrovska 15.75 330 360/390 420 2010 Construction unit 3
PSHPP UA Dnistrovska 15.75 330 4x360/4x390 420 2010-2012 Construction units 4-7
CCHP UA Kyivska 6 20 330 300 353 2008 Construction
PSHPP UA Tashlykska 15.75 330 2x151/2x233 307 2008 in operation units 1 and 2
PSHPP UA Tashlykska 15.75 330 2x151/2x233 307 2009 Construction units 3 and 4
NPP UA Khmelinskaya 24 750 2x1000 2020 PLANNED
TPP UA Dobrotvirska 15.75 220 3x225 2020 PLANNED
PSHPP UA Kanev 15.75 330 4x250/4x280 4x280 2030 PLANNED
WPP UA Bakhchisarayskaya 35 110 67x3 200 2012 Construction 67x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Pervomayskaya 35 330 67x3 400 2015 planned 134x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Holmogorskaya 33 110 67x3 200 2015 planned 67x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Turgenevskaya 33 110 67x3 200 2015 planned 67x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Nova-Eco I (west Crimea) 33 330 67x3 200 2015 planned 67x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Nova-Eco II (east Crimea) 33 220 33x3 100 2015 planned 33x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Batiskaya 33 330 33x3 200 2015 planned 67x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Odesskaya 33 220 33x3 100 2015 planned 33x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Ochakovskaya 33 220 33x3 100 2015 planned 33x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
WPP UA Trikhatskaya 33 220 100x3 300 2015 planned 100x3MW units VESTAS on 0.65kV
SPV UA Crimea 110 70 2012 Construction
SPV UA Crimea 110 100 2013 Construction
SPV UA Crimea 110 230 2015 planned
SPV UA Mainland Ukraine 110 200 2015 planned
1 Type of plant (HPP - Hydropower plant, TPP - Thermal power plant, PSHPP - Pump Storage Hydro Power
Plant, CCHP - Combined Cycle Heating Plant...)
2 Country
Khmelnitskaya
3 Substation name Dobrotvir TPP
NPP Kyiv
4 Generator voltage level CHTPP-6
5 Network voltage level Кanev
6 Instaled active power PSHPP
7 Instaled apparent power Dnestrovskaya
PSHPP
8 Date of commissioning (estimate) Tashlyk
9 Status of the project (Idea, Feasibility study, Construction...) PSHPP
Figure 3.55 – Ukraine – new generation capacities
Ukraine
98
Ukraine had an ambitious development program with an emphasis on nuclear facilities, but because of the
economic crisis and other political issues these plans were reduced, and many investments are either
canceled or postponed.
Nuclear Power Plants: Ukraine has planned to increase the capacity of the NPP Khmelnitska with
2x1000MW PWR blocks. New blocks are planned to be operational by 2017 (Table 3.48) The construction of
the Crimea NPP in Schelkino began in 1976 and was stopped in 1989. Engineering work was essentially
complete, but after the Chernobyl accident, seismic concerns of the Crimea site resurfaced and work was
stopped. Unit-1 was said to be 80% complete and Unit-2 18% finished. The formal cancellation was
announced in June of 2000. Part of the site may be reused for a new 800MW CCGT power station.
Hydro Power Plants: Hydro power is an important energy source in Ukraine from an energy and system
control points of view. Currently, Ukraine lacks effective regulation of power and energy. As a result, the
main development plans are in direction of constructing reversible hydro capacities or pumping stations
Dnistrovska and Tashlinska, and in the long term, the Kanevska PHPP. Additionally, the reconstruction and
modernization of large existing HPPs is in the process (Table 3.48)
Thermal Power Plants: The Dobrotvirska, run on domestic coal, is the only new thermal power plant
planned in Ukraine (Table 3.48) Potentially existing capacities will be modernized and reconstructed. The
district heating power plants (CHPs) that are run on imported gas are included in the development plans.
They could be replaced by new Combined Cycle units run on imported natural gas.
Renewables: The Crimean region of Ukraine has a high potential for renewable energy resources such as
solar and wind production (Table 3.48). Relatively large scale renewables penetration in the Ukrainian
system is expected in the forthcoming period. Construction of a 400MW solar power plant in Crimea has
begun, and an additional 200MW are planned on the mainland of Ukraine. Wind power is the main
renewable source that will be used, with more than 1300MW planned capacities in Crimean peninsula alone.
Baltskaya WPP
200 MW , 330 kV
Trikhatskaya WPP
300 MW, 330 kV
Odesskaya WPP
100 MW , 220 kV
Ochakovskaya WPP
100 MW, 220 kV
Pervomayskaya WPP
WPP Nova -Eko 400 MW, 330 kV
200 MW, 330 kV WPP Nova -Eko
Turgenevskaya WPP 100 MW, 220 kV
200 MW , 220 kV
Kholmogorskaya WPP
200 MW , 220 kV
Simferopol
Bakhchisarayskaya WPP
200 MW, 110 kV
Figure 3.56 – Ukraine – Planned wind projects in Crimea
Ukraine
99
1.12.4 Demand
Demand Behavior
The following two diagrams show the wind demand behavior in the Ukrainian system for two characteristic
regimes. They also present how this demand is covered by the production units.
31000
30500
30000
29500
29000
28500
28000 production Pump
634 MW
27500
27000
26500
26000
25500 Regulated
production HPP
25000 2427 MW
24500
24000
23500
23000 Regulated
production large
22500 TPP 4153 МW
22000
21500
21000
20500 Regulated
prodcution TPP
20000
441 МW
19500
19000
18500
18000 Base produciton
HPP 237 MW
17500
17000
16500
16000
МВт
15500 Base production

15000 large TPP 8819
МW
14500
14000
13500
13000 Base prodcution
12500 TPP 1101 МW
12000
11500
11000
10000 small TPP 1817
МW
9500
9000
8500
8000 production NPP
7500 11404 MW
7000
6500
6000
5500 Demand Pmin
5000 = 21886 МW;
Pmax = 29368
4500
МW
4000
3500
3000 pumping Pump -
2500 785 MW
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Figure 3.57 – Ukraine – Balance of Ukraine for winter peak day 15.12.2010.
Ukraine
100
31000
30500
30000
29500
29000
28500
28000 production Pump
527 MW
27500
27000
26500
26000
25500 Regulated
production HPP
25000 2139 MW
24500
24000
23500
23000 Regulated
production large
22500 TPP 2488 МW
22000
21500
21000
20500 Regulated
prodcution TPP
20000
13 МW
19500
19000
18500
18000 Base produciton
HPP 276 MW
17500
17000
16500
16000
МВт
15500 Base production

15000 large TPP 6349
МW
14500
14000
13500
12500 TPP 369 МW
12000
11500
11000
10000 small TPP 912
МW
9500
9000
8500
8000 production NPP
7500 9309 MW
7000
6500
6000
5500 Demand Pmin
5000 = 16363 МW;
Pmax = 21150
4500
МW
4000
3500
3000 pumping Pump -
2500 785 MW
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Figure 3.58 – Ukraine – Balance of Ukraine for summer peak day 16.06.2010.
Ukraine
101
Demand Forecast
Table 3.49 and Figure 3.59 show forecasted demand and distribution of demand by type, the generation
level, and distribution of production by type, for an average winter and summer day. Based on the forecast,
Ukraine plans to export up to 2.5TWh. The primary fuel for the majority of the production comes from
Russia. Due to the nature of the production facilities, Ukraine has a large deficit in the control reserve.
Because of this factor, most of the new planned generation units are PHPP stations.
Table 3.49 – Ukraine – Demand and generation Forecast

2015 2020
Winter Summer Winter summer
Demand GWh 700 530 775 590
378.0 286.2 348.8 265.5
industry
54.00% 54.00% 45.00% 45.00%
245.0 185.5 310.0 236.0
households
35.00% 35.00% 40.00% 40.00%
77.0 58.3 116.3 88.5
other
11.00% 11.00% 15.00% 15.00%
export 24 22 24 22
Total energy demand GWh 724 552 799 612
410 280 443 309
ТPP
56.6% 50.7% 55.4% 50.5%
28 33 28 33
HPP+PHPP
3.9% 6.0% 3.5% 5.4%
276 230 312 255
NPP
38.1% 41.7% 39.0% 41.7%
10 9 16 15
RES (WPP+SHPP)
1.38% 1.63% 2.00% 2.45%
Figure 3.59 – Ukraine – Demand forecast
Tariff
This chapter outlines the tariff system and prices in Ukraine. Table 3.50 shows the wholesale customer
prices, and Table 3.51 shows the prices of electricity paid to producers. Table 3.52 presents the tariffs for
Ukraine
102
RES, which are also used for the construction of the OPF model. All these have been used for generation
curves and tables construction.
Table 3.50 – Ukraine – wholesale prices (before taxes)
tariffs (without tax)
kategory UAHkp/KWh EURc/KWh USDc/KWh
average 42.87 3.74 5.41
I regulated 41.27 3.60 5.21
II non-regulated 53.61 4.67 6.77
Table 3.51 – Ukraine – tariffs for Power producers (before taxes)

I Nuclear 18.51 1.61 2.34
II Thermal (coal) 69.00 6.02 8.71
III Thermal CHP (gas) 83.00 7.24 10.48
IV Hydro 10.29 0.90 1.30
Table 3.52 – Ukraine – tariffs for RES (before taxes)

I Small hydro 88.08 7.68 11.12
II Wind >2000kW 128.47 11.20 16.22
Wind >600kW 85.64 7.47 10.81
Wind <600kW 73.41 6.40 9.27
III Solar PV >100kW 506.46 44.16 63.95
Solar PV <100kW 484.44 42.24 61.17
Solar PV large 528.48 46.07 66.73
IV Biomass (incl. LFG) 140.70 12.27 17.77
1.12.5 Export Potential for 2015 and 2020
As mentioned in Chapter 3.8.3, Ukraine has a large potential for electricity exports, reaching 2.5TWh a year.
Coupled with relatively lower prices that other regions, this plan is feasible.
Ukraine
103
1.13 Equivalent Countries
Parts of the model have been estimated based on the level of load flow. Realistic parts of the model include
power plants modeled in detail. Portions of the model with less detail have been estimated based on a
general power plant model.
EST
LAT
LIT
BLR
POL
RUS
UKR
SVK
HUN MLD
ROM Modeled
SCG Black Sea
BUL GEO
MKD
ARM AZB Equivalented
GRE TUR
Figure 3.60- Modeled and equivaleted parts of the system
1.14 Black Sea Region
Black Sea regional model has following characteristics:

BSR plants: 1008units 209.3GW
BSR Wind plants: 32units 99.5GW
BSR equivalented plants: 40units 7.1GW
Total: 1080units 315.9GW
Outside plants: 40units 18.9GW
Outside equivalented plants: 81units 18.7GW
Total: 103units 37.7GW
______________________________________________________________
MODEL: 1183units 353.6GW
Table 3.61 – Black Sea –Dynamic model summary
Black Sea Region 104

GENS: GENROU GENSAL CGEN1 CIMTR3
671 443 6 40
STABS: STAB1 IEEEST IEE2ST PSS2A

18 290 11 61
PSS2B PSS3B
6 13
EXSYS: IEEET1 SEXS EXST1 ESAC1A

27 67 87 30
ESAC4A ESDC1A ESST1A ESST2A

174 36 298 37
ESST3A ESAC6A ESST4B BUDCZT

1 8 80 14
URST5T CELIN ST6B ST5B

136 27 8 54
GOVS: TGOV1 GAST HYGOV IEESGO

301 55 149 30
IEEEG1 IEEEG3 GASTWD WSIEG1

87 195 12 212
WSHYGP URCSCT GGOV1

86 3 15
TLCS: LCFB1
20
LOADS: IEELAR IEELOW

1 17
Black Sea Region 105

IV. OPF MODELING (BY COUNTRY)
1.15 Armenia
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Armenia is
constructed and below are the characteristics.
1.15.1 PSS/E OPF Transmission System Modeling
The transmission network is presented with buses and connection links-network elements (lines, cables,
transformers, etc…) and its OPF model consists of data describing network limitations, according to the
respective country grid codes and rules of engagement (voltage limits, line and transformer load ratings).
The transmission system model of Armenia is given in Figure 4.1
Armenia
1
Figure 4.1 Armenia – transmission network model 2020
Armenia
2
1.15.2 PSS/E OPF Generation Modeling
The generation OPF model consists of tables and cost curves. Table 4.1 shows the main characteristics of
the Armenian generation OPF model.
Table 4.1 – Armenia – Generation units OPF model
Plant heat rate Bus Mbase Pmax Pmin cost
Power plant type Fuel Turbine (mBTU/MWh) Num Bus Name Id (MVA) (MW) (MW) ($/MWh) curve
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 80001 8HRAZDT1 1 258.8 220.0 130.0 74.47 806
Hrazdan CHP Gas Steam 80005 8HRAZDT5 7 75.0 60.0 12.0 74.47 803
CHP Gas Steam 80006 8HRAZDT6 8 75.0 60.0 12.0 74.47 803
CHP Gas Steam 80022 8HRAZDT7 5 117.5 100.0 35.0 74.47 803
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 80044 8HRAZDS1 1 376.0 320.0 88.0 70.97 815
CHP Gas GT 7.4 80049 8HRAZDG1 1 195.0 165.0 88.0 70.97 816
HPP Hydro Pelton 80009 8TATEVH1 1 65.5 52.4 20.0 4.87 801
Tatev HPP Hydro Pelton 80010 8TATEVH2 2 65.5 52.4 20.0 4.87 801
HPP Hydro Pelton 80011 8TATEVH3 3 65.5 52.4 20.0 4.87 801
HPP Hydro Francis 80012 8SHAMBH1 1 107.0 85.5 20.0 4.87 802
Shamb
HPP Hydro Francis 80013 8SHAMBH2 2 107.0 85.5 20.0 4.87 802
HPP Hydro Francis 80007 8SPANDH1 1 47.5 38.0 10.0 4.87 803
Spandaryan
HPP Hydro Francis 80008 8SPANDH2 2 47.5 38.0 10.0 4.87 803
HPP Hydro Francis 80036 8SEVANH1 1 21.3 17.0 5.0 4.87 802
Sevan
HPP Hydro Francis 80037 8SEVANH2 2 21.3 17.0 5.0 4.87 802
HPP Hydro Francis 80034 8HRZ_HH1 1 51.0 40.8 10.0 4.87 802
Hrazdan
HPP Hydro Francis 80035 8HRZ_HH2 2 51.0 40.8 10.0 4.87 802
HPP Hydro Francis 80017 8ARGELH1 1 66.0 56.0 20.0 4.87 802
Argel
HPP Hydro Francis 80021 8ARZNIH1 1 29.4 23.5 5.0 4.87 802
Arzni HPP Hydro Francis 80021 8ARZNIH1 2 29.4 23.5 5.0 4.87 802
HPP Hydro Francis 80021 8ARZNIH1 3 29.4 23.5 5.0 4.87 802
HPP Hydro Francis 80038 8KANAKH1 1 16.5 12.5 5.0 4.87 802
Kanaker
HPP Hydro Francis 80025 8YERVNH1 1 27.5 22.0 5.0 4.87 802
Yerevan
HPP Hydro Francis 80026 8YERVNH2 2 27.5 22.0 5.0 4.87 802
Dzora HPP Hydro Francis 81039 8DZORA5 EQ 28.2 23.8 0.0 4.87 802
HPP Hydro Kaplan 80081 8MEGRIH1 1 82.5 70.0 20.0 4.87 804
Meghri
HPP Hydro Kaplan 80082 8MEGRIH2 2 82.5 70.0 20.0 4.87 804
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 80047 8AMNPPG1 1 259.0 204.0 180.0 18.79 805
Medzamor
Medzamor NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 80047 8AMNPPG1 1 1111.0 1000.0 600.0 65.09 805
CHP Gas CCGT 7.4 80045 8YER_TG1 1 258.0 218.5 72.0 70.97 802
Yerevan
CHP Gas CCGT 7.4 80046 8YER_TG2 2 258.0 218.5 72.0 70.97 802
SHPP Hydro 80110 8AMNPPSH Y 30.0 24.0 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80111 8DALARSH Y 23.5 20.0 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80112 8SHINUSH Y 61.6 52.4 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80113 8HRAZDSH Y 23.5 20.0 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80114 8LICHKSH Y 37.5 30.0 0.0 5.07 820
Small hydro
SHPP Hydro 80207 8ARARTSH Y 5.0 4.0 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80307 8EXEGNSH Y 61.6 52.4 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80402 8VANDZSH Y 71.2 57.0 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80502 8ABOVYSH Y 15.0 12.0 0.0 5.07 820
SHPP Hydro 80602 8GYUMRSH Y 23.5 20.0 0.0 5.07 820
WPP Wind 80117 8GYUMRW W 20.0 20.0 0.0 8.88 819
Wind power WPP Wind 80118 8HRAZDW W 10.0 10.0 0.0 8.88 819
WPP Wind 80209 8LICHKW W 20.0 20.0 0.0 8.88 819
Armenia
3
Hydro Power Plants
Hydro power plants in Armenia are an important source of energy. In Chapter 3.1.3, two main cascades can
are described. The Vorotan cascade has three power plants. The HPP Tatev has pelton turbines (High head,
long penstock) and its cost curve is presented in Figure 4.2 This curve is presented in Chapter 2.1.3 and
adjusted according to the tariff policy explained in chapter 3.1.4. The same approach was used for the other
two power plants, HPPs Shamb and Spandaryan, with difference in the turbine type (Francis).
Figure 4.2 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for HPP Tatev (curve 801)
Figure 4.3 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for HPP Shamb (curve 802)
All units on the Sevan-Hrazdan cascade are equipped with Francis turbines and have the same tariffs, that
are higher than for the Vorotan cascade, so the cost curves are adjusted based on the costs (Figure ).
Figure 4.4– Armenia – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Sevan-Hrazdan cascade (curve 809)
Armenia
4
Figure 4.5 shows the cost curve of the newly built HPP Meghri on Aras river.
Figure 4.5– Armenia – Cost curve and table for HPP Meghri (curve 804)

All thermal power plants in Armenia are run on imported natural gas, and price for this gas is $210/tcm, or
$5.34/mBTU, which is lower than prices on some market hubs (Figure 2.12). This price is implemented in
generic curves. The tariffs of these power plants are known and included, generating the curves presented
in Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7
Figure 4.6 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for TPP Hrazdan units 1-4 (curve 806)
Figure 4.7 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for TPP Hrazdan unit 5 in independent mode (curve 815)
The TPP Hrazdan unit 5 has a standard steam unit run on natural gas. Part of the steam comes from the
new GT unit in the power plant allowing it to operate as an independent unit or in a combined cycle mode.
Armenia
5
As a result, two curves are presented, one for an independent mode (Figure 4.7) and one when both units
are operational (equivalented as one and curve on (Figure 4.8).
Figure 4.8 Armenia – Cost curve and table for TPP Hrazdan unit 5 in combined cycle mode (curve 817)

Armenia has one gas turbine unit installed and its cost curve, when operated independently from unit 5, is
shown on Figure 4.9 Price of engagement is based on the price of imported gas and basic characteristics of
similar units.
Figure 4.9 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for new OGT Hrazdan unit in independent mode (curve 816)
There are plans to replace the existing CHP Yerevan units with more modern CCGT units, like in the regional
model. Figure 4.10 shows the cost curves for these type of units, adjusted according to the price of imported
gas for Armenia, and taking investment and capital costs into consideration.
Armenia
6
Figure 4.10 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for new CCGT Yerevan units 1-2 (curve 814)

The Armenian system consists of one nuclear power plant, NPP Metsamor, with two out of four 204MW
operational units. Figure 4.11 represents the cost curves for these units, adjusted according to real tariffs.
Figure 4.11 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for NPP Metsamor 200MW units (curve 805)
There are plans to replace the old Metsamor units with a 1000MW one. A typical cost curve for this unit is
presented in Figure 4.12, including capital costs as well.
Figure 4.12 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for new NPP Metsamor 1000MW unit (curve 805)
Renewables
Renewable power plants are modeled as shown in Figure 4.13 for WPP and Figure 4.14 for SHPP, adjusted
to represent the feed in tariff system in Armenia.
Armenia
7
Figure 4.13 – Armenia – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants (curve 819)
Figure 4.14– Armenia – Cost curve and table for Small Hydro units (curve 820)
The cost curves should be used to calculate production costs, and not for generation engagement
optimization, since these units are engaged based on energy availability and not on economics. Therefore,
for optimization calculations they should be disabled by setting the dispatch value to zero.
Armenia
8
1.16 Bulgaria
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Bulgaria is
constructed and below are the characteristics
transformers, etc…) and its OPF model consists of data describing network limitations, according to
Transmission system model of Bulgaria is given in Figure 4.15
Bulgaria
9
Figure 4.15 Bulgaria – transmission network model
Bulgaria
10
The generation OPF model consists of tables and cost curves. Table 4.2 shows the main characteristics of
the Bulgarian generation OPF model.
Table 4.2 – Bulgaria – Generation units OPF model
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 13401 VNBEL_N1 N1 1111.0 1015.8 600.0 39.87 102
Belene
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 13402 VNBEL_N2 N2 1111.0 1015.8 600.0 39.87 102
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 13404 VNKOZ_N9 N9 1111.0 1015.8 600.0 68.15 101
Kozloduy
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 13405 VNKOZ_N0 N0 1111.0 1015.8 600.0 68.15 101
HPP Hydro Francis Maritza 13305 VHCH12H H1 235.0 214.0 0.0 4.87 105
Chaira
HPP Hydro Francis Maritza 13200 VBELM_H5 H5 83.0 74.7 0.0 4.87 107
HPP Hydro Pelton Maritza 13201 VBEL12H H1 83.0 74.7 0.0 4.87 106
Belmeken HPP Hydro Pelton Maritza 13201 VBEL12H H2 83.0 74.7 0.0 4.87 106
HPP Hydro Pelton Maritza 13303 VHSES.H1 H1 145.0 130.6 0.0 4.87 108
Sestrimo
HPP Hydro Pelton Maritza 13304 VHSES.H2 H2 145.0 130.6 0.0 4.87 108
HPP Hydro Francis Maritza 13308 VHMKL.H1 H1 67.0 60.0 0.0 4.87 109
M.Klisura
HPP Hydro Francis Maritza 13309 VHMKL.H2 H2 67.0 60.0 0.0 4.87 109
Batak HPP Hydro Pelton Batak 13805 VHB123H H 50.0 40.0 0.0 4.87 110
Peshtera HPP Hydro Pelton Batak 13800 VHPE12H H 180.0 300.0 0.0 4.87 111
Aleko HPP Hydro Francis Batak 13813 VHALEKH3 H 93.0 64.8 0.0 4.87 112
Teshel HPP Hydro Francis Vasha 13811 VHTESHH H 70.6 60.0 0.0 4.87 113
Devin HPP Hydro Francis Vasha 13809 VDEVINH1 H 98.0 80.0 0.0 4.87 114
Orphey HPP Hydro Francis Vasha 13803 VHO123H H 150.0 120.0 0.0 4.87 115
Kricim HPP Hydro Francis Vasha 13807 VHKRI.H1 H 96.0 81.6 0.0 4.87 116
Kardzali HPP Hydro Francis Arda 13819 VHKA12H H 125.0 106.4 0.0 24.98 117
Studen Klanec HPP Hydro Francis Arda 13821 VHSK12H H 84.0 60.0 0.0 24.98 118
Ivajlovgrad HPP Hydro Francis Arda 13823 VHIW.GH H 127.1 108.0 0.0 24.98 119
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13600 VTVARNT1 T1 247.0 210.0 140.0 66.14 120
Varna
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13703 VTMI2_T1 T1 176.5 157.3 100.0 58.86 123
Maritza East 2
Maritza East 3
Maritza3 TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13812 VTMAR3T3 T3 150.0 120.0 70.0 74.47 806
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13906 VTMI1 T5 T5 400.0 340.0 190.0 83.89 125
Galabovo TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13907 VTMI1 T6 T6 400.0 340.0 190.0 83.89 125
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13908 VTMI1 T7 T7 400.0 340.0 190.0 83.89 125
Devin TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13606 VTDEV.G3 I1 138.0 110.0 60.0 70.97 126
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13501 VTRUSEG3 T3 138.0 110.0 60.0 70.97 126
Ruse
Republika TPP Coal Steam 10.8 13306 VTREP.G5 D5 68.0 54.4 0.0 70.97 126
Sofia CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13205 VTSF_GG6 D6 75.0 60.0 0.0 70.97 128
Bulgaria
11
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13206 VTSF.IG5 D5 82.5 66.0 0.0 70.97 128
Sofia Istok
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13208 VTSF.IG3 D3 40.0 30.4 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13210 VTKREMG4 I4 75.0 60.0 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13505 VTSV12G I1 75.0 60.0 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13505 VTSV12G I2 75.0 60.0 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13715 VTBR34G I3 75.0 65.8 0.0 70.97 128
Industrial
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13715 VTBR34G I4 75.0 65.8 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13716 VTBR.GG5 I5 75.0 65.8 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13717 VTBR.GG6 I6 75.0 65.8 0.0 70.97 128
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 13900 VT_PLEG I1 75.0 60.0 0.0 70.97 128
Berkovica WPP Wind 12639 VBERKO5 W 52.6 50.0 0.0 125.00 103
Borovo WPP Wind 12675 VBOROV5 W 73.7 70.0 0.0 125.00 103
Valci dol WPP Wind 12714 V_VDOL5 W 573.6 545.0 0.0 125.00 103
Dobrich WPP Wind 12716 VDOBRI5 W 52.6 50.0 0.0 125.00 103
Gen.Toshevo WPP Wind 12717 VG_TOS5 W 52.6 50.0 0.0 125.00 103
Shabla WPP Wind 12718 VSHABL5 W 73.7 70.0 0.0 125.00 103
Kavarna WPP Wind 12719 VKAVAR5 W 157.8 150.0 0.0 125.00 103
Baltchik WPP Wind 12720 VBALTC5 W 47.3 45.0 0.0 125.00 103
Velitchokovo WPP Wind 12749 VVELIC5 W 52.6 50.0 0.0 125.00 103
Binkos WPP Wind 12796 VBINKO5 W 63.1 60.0 0.0 125.00 103
Rechica WPP Wind 12797 VRECHI5 W 52.6 50.0 0.0 125.00 103
Burgas WPP Wind 12834 VBURGA52 W 63.1 60.0 0.0 125.00 103
Trastenik WPP Wind 12964 VTRAST51 W 52.6 50.0 0.0 125.00 103
Guljanci WPP Wind 12965 VGULJA5 W 42.1 40.0 0.0 125.00 103
Vidno WPP Wind 12983 VVIDNO5 W 558.1 530.0 0.0 125.00 103
Svoboda WPP Wind 12984 VSVOBO5 W 631.5 600.0 0.0 125.00 103
Majakovo WPP Wind 12985 VMAJAK5 W 378.6 360.0 0.0 125.00 103
Jeravica WPP Wind 13903 VJERAV5 W 105.2 100.0 0.0 125.00 103
Martinovo WPP Wind 13904 VMARTI5 W 42.1 40.0 0.0 125.00 103
Carevec SPP Solar 12653 VCAREV5 W 21.0 20.0 0.0 474.30 104
Hydro Power Plants

The first power plant modeled is the pumping station in Chaira. The same diagram shape is used for other
pumping stations in the Bulgarian system. Since the power plant is relatively new (operational from 1999)
full capital costs were taken into consideration. Unlike other hydro power plants, this one does not have fuel
costs since the water is pumped. The costs are estimated at half price of HV level (low tariff since pumping
is usually done during the night) multiplied with the conversion factor (usually for pumping of 1MWh
consumed it is 0.7MWh produced). The cost curve is given in Figure 4.16 The same approach is taken for
other pumping stations, but with adjusted capital costs based on their age.
Figure 4.16– Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for PHPP Chaira (curve 105)
Bulgaria
12
Figure 4.17 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for PHPP Belmeken (curve 106)
For standard hydro power plant units, the cost curve is based on the turbine type. For power plants on the
same cascade, the same price of output power is used. Eventual capital costs for one power plant are
divided equally on all power plants in a cascade, making the output price relatively the same, leaving the
turbine type the only difference. There are four cascades in the Bulgaria: Maritza, Batak, Arda and Vasha.
Figure 4.18– Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Maritza cascade Francis (curve 107)
Figure 4.19 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Maritza cascade pelton (curve 108)
Bulgaria
13
Figure 4.20– Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Batak cascade (curve 111)
Figure 4.21 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Vasha cascade (curve 115)
Figure 4.22– Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Arda cascade (curve 119)

Most of the thermal power plants in Bulgaria are run on domestic open pit coal, but TPP Varna is operated
on imported coal from Ukraine. This plant price of coal is equal to that of Ukraine $95/ton or $4.5/mBTU,
and for the remaining power plants it is 20% lower at $75/ton or $3.6/mBTU, due to lower transportation
costs. The prices are implemented in generic curves presented below.
Bulgaria
14
Figure 4.23 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for TPP Varna (curve 120)
Figure 4.24 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for TPP Maritza East 3 (curve 121)
Figure 4.25 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for TPP Maritza East 2 (curve 124)
For the newly built blocks and units in the TPP Maritsa East 1-Galabovo, and the TPP Maritza East 3, capital
costs were taken into consideration.
Bulgaria
15
Figure 4.26-Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for TPP Galabovo (curve 806)
Figure 4.27 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for TPP Maritza East 3 400MW units (curve 122)
Figure 4.28 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for CHP units run on fuel oil and industrial plants (curve 128)
Industrial TPPs and CHP units run on fuel oil or gas are represented with the same cost curve.
Currently, Bulgaria has a nuclear power station, NPP Kozloduy, with plans to refurbish it and increase its
capacity. This is taken into consideration by implementing 30% of the capital costs for new units. The
second power plant is the NPP Belene that has yet to be built. In this case, full capital costs were taken into
consideration.
Bulgaria
16
Figure 4.29 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for NPP Kozloduy 1000MW units (curve 101)
Figure 4.30 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for new NPP Belene 1000MW unit (curve 102)
Renewables
Renewable power plants are modeled and shown in Figure 4.31 WPP takes into account the wind tariff of
$125/MWh. Figure 4.32 shows the Solar PP with a tariff of $474.3/MWh.
Figure 4.31 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants (curve 103)
Bulgaria
17
Figure 4.32 – Bulgaria – Cost curve and table for Solar units (curve 104)
Bulgaria
18
1.17 Georgia
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 , the OPF model of
Georgia is constructed and presented with the following characteristics.
transformers, etc…) and its OPF model consists of data describing network limitations, according to
respective country grid codes and rules of engagement (voltage limits, line and transformer load rating). The
transmission system model of Georgia is shown in Figure 4.33
Georgia
19
Figure 4.33- Georgia – transmission network model
Georgia
20
Generation OPF model consists of tables and cost curves. Table 4.3 shows the main characteristics of
Georgian Generation OPF model.
Table 4.3 – Georgia – Generation units OPF model
HPP Hydro Francis 20001 6HENHUH1 1 306.0 260.0 100.0 25.51 201
Enguri HPP Hydro Francis 20003 6HENHUH3 3 306.0 260.0 100.0 25.51 201
HPP Hydro Kaplan 20011 6VARDNH1 1 86.3 73.3 30.0 23.83 202
Vardinli HPP Hydro Kaplan 20012 6VARDNH2 2 86.3 73.3 30.0 23.83 202
HPP Hydro Kaplan 20013 6VARDNH3 3 86.3 73.3 30.0 23.83 202
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 20023 6GARDAT9 9 376.5 320.0 200.0 56.33 202
Mtkvari
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 20024 6GARDATA 10 376.5 320.0 200.0 56.33 202
Tbilresi TPP Gas Steam 10.8 20027 6GARDAT3 3 176.5 150.0 90.0 62.25 203
Gardabani TPP Gas CCGT 6.8 20181 6AIR GG1 GS 194.1 159.6 46.0 61.30 201
Dzevurla HPP Hydro Francis 20031 6DZEVRH1 E 100.0 80.0 5.0 22.00 215
Lajanuri HPP Hydro Kaplan 20041 6HLAJAH1 E 138.0 111.6 10.0 21.50 206
Shaori HPP Hydro Francis 20051 6SHAORH1 E 48.0 38.4 5.0 23.00 214
HPP Hydro Kaplan 20061 6VARTSH1 E 57.0 46.0 10.0 17.50 209
Vartsikhe
HPP Hydro Kaplan 20062 6VARTSH3 E 171.0 138.0 10.0 17.50 209
Khrami1 HPP Hydro Pelton 20071 6KHRM1H1 E 141.0 112.8 15.0 13.40 204
Khrami2 HPP Hydro Francis 20074 6KHRM2H1 E 137.0 120.0 33.0 21.40 205
Khrami3 HPP Hydro Francis 20188 6KHRAMY E 100.0 90.0 33.0 21.40 205
Jhinvali HPP Hydro Kaplan 20081 6JHINVH1 E 162.4 130.0 12.0 12.54 213
Gumati1 HPP Hydro Kaplan 20091 6GUMATH1 E 83.5 66.8 4.0 20.50 207
Gumati2 HPP Hydro Kaplan 20095 6GUMATH5 E 28.5 22.8 4.0 20.50 207
Rioni HPP Hydro Kaplan 20103 6RIONIH3 E 60.0 48.0 8.0 20.50 208
HPP Hydro Francis 20121 6KHUDOH1 1 250.0 215.0 60.0 52.50 203
Khudoni HPP Hydro Francis 20122 6KHUDOH2 2 250.0 215.0 60.0 52.50 203
HPP Hydro Francis 20123 6KHUDOH3 3 250.0 215.0 60.0 52.50 203
Khaisi HPP Hydro Francis 20131 6KHAISG1 1 270.0 260.0 100.0
Tobari HPP Hydro Francis 20134 6TOBARG2 1 270.0 200.0 50.0
Fari HPP Hydro Francis 20136 6FARI-G1 1 270.0 200.0 50.0
Sadmeli HPP Hydro Kaplan 20141 6SADMEH1 E 112.0 90.0 0.0 44.20 210
Sori HPP Hydro Kaplan 20146 6SORI-H1 E 60.0 134.0 20.0 44.20 210
Oni HPP Hydro Kaplan 20150 6ONI-GH2 E 93.0 79.2 10.0 44.20 210
Utsera HPP Hydro Kaplan 20153 6UTSERH2 E 200.0 170.0 5.0 44.20 211
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 20191 6TKIBUT1 1 253.0 215.0 130.0 73.73 204
Tkibuli TPP Coal Steam 10.8 20192 6TKIBUT2 2 253.0 215.0 130.0 73.73 204
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 20193 6TKIBUT3 3 253.0 215.0 130.0 73.73 204
Tvishi HPP Hydro Francis 20194 6TVISHH1 E 125.0 100.0 10.0 41.64 207
HPP Hydro Francis 20196 6NAMAKH1 1 147.0 125.0 25.0 41.64 212
Namakhvani
HPP Hydro Francis 20197 6NAMAKH2 2 147.0 125.0 25.0 41.64 212
Joneti HPP Hydro Francis 20198 6JONETH1 E 125.0 100.0 10.0 41.64 207
Alpana HPP Hydro Francis 20201 6ALPANH1 E 100.0 80.0 10.0 41.64 207
Neskra HPP Hydro Francis 20204 6NESKRH H 290.0 260.0 0.0 25.51 201
Tskhenikali HPP Hydro Francis 20205 6TSKHEH H 145.0 130.0 0.0 44.20 210
Hydro Power Plants

Hydro power plants in Georgia are an important source of energy. The largest HPP is Enguri, with a high
head and Francis turbines. Its cost curve is presented in Figure 4.34 The curve is presented in Chapter 2.1.3
and adjusted by including the capital costs, since the plant was recently reconstructed with a $20 million
loan from EBRD. HPP Vardinli is shown on Figure 4.34 with Kaplan turbines no capital costs since it is more
than 40 years old.
Georgia
21
Figure 4.34 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPP Enguri (curve 201)
Figure 4.35 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPP Vardinli (curve 202)
Figure 4.36 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPP Khudoni (curve 203)
The cost curve for the new HPP Khudoni (Figure 4.36) is modeled with full estimated capital costs. The
Nescra cascade has the same curve as HPP Enguri.
The power plants on the Rioni cascade are similar by type, and cost per MWh. Therefore, all power plants:
Utsera, Oni, Sori, Sadmeli, Tskheniskali, Lajanuri, Tvishi, Namakhvani, Joneti, Alpana, Gumati, Rioni and
Vartsike are presented in a similar way. Newly planned power plants on the Kura river cascade have the
same curve shape without taking capital costs into consideration. If these plans are realized, all Khrami
power plants should divide the capital costs to have the same price per MWh.
Georgia
22
Figure 4.37– Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPPs Rioni cascade (curve 208)
Figure 4.38– Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPPs Kura cascade (curve 204)
Figure 4.39 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPPs SH-TKI cascade (curve 214)
Georgia
23
Figure 4.40 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for HPP Jhinvali (curve 213)
All curves are adjusted according to the tariffs presented in Table , and for power plants that are
reconstructed or are new, capital costs are taken into consideration according to the investment information.

All thermal power plants in Georgia are run on imported natural gas, and the price of gas is $220/tcm, or
$5.6/mBTU, which is lower than prices on some market hubs (Figure 2.12). This price is implemented in
generic curves, and since tariffs for these power plants are known, remaining costs adjusted accordingly,
generating the following curves.
Figure 4.41– Georgia – Cost curve and table for TPP Mtkvari (curve 202)
Georgia
24
The TPP Tkibuli is a planned power plant run on domestic coal. Since this plant is new full capital costs are
taken into consideration.
Figure 4.42 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for TPP Tkibuli (curve 204)

Georgia has one gas turbine block installed comprising of two GT units that will be converted into a
combined cycle power plant. Its cost curve is shown in Figure 4.43. Price of engagement is set according to
the price of imported gas and general characteristics of similar units.
Figure 4.43 – Georgia – Cost curve and table for new CCGT Gardabani (curve 201)
Renewables
Most of renewable power plants in Georgia are small hydro, which are usually modeled as negative load.
Therefore, they do not have a cost curve. Another renewable source is a 50 MW wind power plant Paravani,
which is also modeled as negative load. No information on feed in tariffs was available, as a result, these
plants could not be included in the OPF model with cost curves.
Georgia
25
1.18 Moldova
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Moldova is
constructed its main characteristics are described below.
The transmission network is usually presented with buses and connection links-network elements (lines,
cables, transformers, etc…) and its OPF model consists of data describing network limitations, according to
respective country grid codes and rules of engagement (voltage limits, line and transformer load rating). The
transmission system model of Moldova is given in Figure 2.39..
Figure 4.44- Moldova – transmission network model
Romania 26
Moldova’s Generation OPF model.
Table 4.4 – Moldova– Generation units OPF model
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 30150 5MGRESG1 1 235.3 200.0 100.0 49.20 301
Moldovska GRES
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 30108 5MGRESG8 8 247.0 210.0 100.0 75.42 301
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 30109 5MGRESG9 9 247.0 210.0 100.0 75.42 301
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 30111 5MGRESGA 10 247.0 210.0 100.0 75.42 301
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 30140 5MGRESGB 11 247.0 210.0 100.0 75.42 301
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 30141 5MGRESGC 12 247.0 210.0 100.0 75.42 301
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 30197 5MGRE3G2 G2 75.0 60.0 12.0 75.42 304
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 30198 5MGRE3G1 G1 75.0 60.0 12.0 75.42 304
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 38001 5KSPP2G1 1 125.0 100.0 25.0 75.42 303
Kishinev CHP CHP Gas Steam 10.8 38002 5KSPP2G2 2 125.0 100.0 25.0 75.42 303
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 38003 5KSPP2G3 3 125.0 100.0 25.0 75.42 303
Kishinev CHP Gas CCGT 7.5 38333 5KSPP2G4 4 235.3 200.0 50.0 60.12 305
HPP Hydro Kaplan 38010 5DHPP1G 3 15.0 12.0 5.0 4.87 302
Dubosari
Hydro Power Plants

The Dubosary HPP is the only plant modeled in the generation of the Moldovan model. The other plant is
modeled as negative load.
Figure 4.45– Moldova – Cost curve and table for HPP Dubosari (curve 302)
Thermal power plant Moldovska GRES is the only large production facility in Moldova. Since it is owned by a
Russian company, and run on imported fuel, mainly natural gas imported from Russia, it is modeled
according to the lower gas prices (prices that can be implied for Russian customers). The other important
production facilities are the CHP plants in Moldovska GRES and CHP Kishinev.
Romania 27
Figure 4.46 – Moldova – Cost curve and table for TPP Moldovskaya GRES units 1-7 (curve 305)
Figure 4.47 – Moldova – Cost curve and table for TPP Moldovskaya GRES units 8-12 (curve 301)
Figure 4.48 – Moldova – Cost curve and table for CHP Moldovskaya GRES G1-2 (curve 304)
Romania 28
Figure 4.49 – Moldova – Cost curve and table for CHP Kishinev G1-3 (curve 303)

There are plans to replace aging CHP Kishinev with a modern CCGT units run on imported natural gas.
These units will produce electricity for export.
Figure 4.50 – Moldova – Cost curve and table for new CCGT Kishinev (curve 305)
Renewables
The only renewables modeled in Moldova, are planned WPPs. A similar model to the Armenian one is used,
since the countries have similar policies and price ranges. These models are used only for an estimate of
production costs, and not for optimal engagement of production units.
Figure 4.51– Moldova – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants
Romania 29
1.19 Romania
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Romania is
constructed and its main characteristics are outlined below.
The transmission system model of Romania is given in Figure 4.52.
Romania 30
Romanian Generation OPF model.
Table 4.5 – Romania – Generation units OPF model
HPP Hydro Kaplan Danube 49189 RP.D.FH1 1 216.0 194.4 80.0 22.73 401
Portile de Fier
PDF2 HPP Hydro Kaplan Danube 49199 RGRUIAH6 1 318.5 314 27.5 22.73 402
HPP Hydro Pelton Lotru 49232 RLOTRUH1 1 185.0 170.0 20.0 23.56 404
Lotru HPP Hydro Pelton Lotru 49233 RLOTRUH2 1 185.0 170.0 20.0 23.56 404
HPP Hydro Pelton Lotru 49234 RLOTRUH3 1 185.0 170.0 20.0 23.56 404
Arefu HPP Hydro Francis Arges 49125 RAREFUH1 1 244.0 220.0 35.0 22.82 403
HPP Hydro Francis Sebes 49172 RSUGAGH1 1 85.0 76.5 50.0 22.82 405
Sugag
HPP Hydro Francis Sebes 49173 RSUGAGH2 1 85.0 76.5 50.0 22.82 405
HPP Hydro Francis Sebes 49170 RGALCEH1 1 90.0 81.0 50.0 22.82 405
Galcegag
HPP Hydro Francis Sebes 49171 RGALCEH2 1 90.0 81.0 50.0 22.82 405
HPP Hydro Francis S.Cald 49471 RTARNIH1 1 284.0 256.0 180.0 69.29 406
Tarnita
Mariselu HPP Hydro Francis S.Cald 49164 RMARISH1 1 246.0 220.5 60.0 7.34 407
HPP Hydro Francis Riul Mare 49162 RRETEZH1 1 185.0 167.5 65.0 7.34 408
Retezat
HPP Hydro Francis Riul Mare 49163 RRETEZH2 1 185.0 167.5 65.0 7.34 408
Ruieni HPP Hydro Francis Bistra 49183 RRUIENH1 H 154.0 140.0 35.0 44.79 409
HPP Hydro Francis Bistrica 49209 RSTEJAH 1 120.0 96.0 40.0 7.24 411
Stejaru
HPP Hydro Francis Bistrica 49207 RSTEJAH5 H 108.0 97.0 28.0 7.24 411
hydro <50MW HPP Hydro Francis H 165.0 150.0 0.0 22.74 410
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 49218 RCERNAN1 1 800.0 705.6 500.0 71.00 401
Cerna Voda
TPP Coal Steam 8.9 49110 RTURCEG1 1 388.0 330.0 174.0 74.31 402
Turceni
TPP Coal Steam 8.9 49121 RROVING3 3 388.0 330.0 174.0 74.31 402
Rovinari TPP Coal Steam 8.9 49119 RROVING5 5 388.0 330.0 174.0 74.31 402
TPP Coal Steam 8.9 49184 RISALNG7 7 370.0 315.0 135.0 74.31 402
Isalnita
TPP Coal Steam 8.9 49185 RISALNG8 8 370.0 315.0 135.0 74.31 402
TPP Coal Steam 8.9 49167 RMINTIT1 1 247.0 210.0 80.0 62.10 403
Mintia-Deva
Stuparei TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49140 RSTUPAT1 1 225.0 180.0 40.0 62.10 404
Oradea I TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49174 RORAD T4 1 225.0 180.0 40.0 62.10 404
Oradea II TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49175 RORAD2T1 1 225.0 180.0 40.0 62.10 404
Romania 31
Brasov TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49235 RBRASOT1 1 150.0 120.0 40.0 62.10 404
TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49251 RDROBEG4 1 225.0 180.0 40.0 62.10 404
Drobeta
TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49253 RDROBEG1 1 225.0 180.0 40.0 62.10 404
Arad CHP Coal Steam 10.4 49181 RARAD G1 1 75.0 60.0 30.0 52.77 405
Bacau CHP Coal Steam 10.4 49212 RBACAUG1 1 75.0 60.0 36.0 52.77 405
Ghizdaru CHP Coal Steam 10.4 49156 RGHIZDG1 1 75.0 51.0 30.0 52.77 405
FAI2 TPP Coal Steam 10.4 49214 RFAI 2G1 1 150.0 120.0 40.0 62.10 404
Petrom CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 49478 ROMVBZG1 1 1084.0 925.0 310.0 83.40 406
Grozavesti CHP Gas CCGT 6.7 49147 RGROZAG2 1 107.0 79.0 40.0 86.04 407
Progresu CHP Gas CCGT 6.7 49149 RPROGRG1 1 263.0 219.8 40.0 86.04 407
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49226 RPALASG1 1 75.0 58.0 30.0 92.23 405
Palas
CHP Gas CCGT 6.7 49226 RPALASG1 1 107.0 79.0 40.0 86.04 407
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49224 RBARBOG3 1 141.5 120.0 37.0 92.23 405
Barbosi
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49221 RBARBOG5 1 141.5 120.0 37.0 92.23 405
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49217 RFAI 1G3 1 75.0 60.0 40.0 92.23 405
FAI1
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49216 RFAI 1G4 1 75.0 60.0 40.0 92.23 405
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49139 RBUC.SG1 1 75.0 60.0 33.0 92.23 405
Bucharesti Sud CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49318 RBUC.SG4 1 117.5 100.0 50.0 92.23 405
CHP Gas CCGT 6.7 49461 RBUC.STG 1 181.0 162.0 80.0 86.04 407
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49155 RBUC.VG1 1 170.0 136.0 65.0 92.23 405
Buchasresti Vest CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49154 RBUC.VG2 1 170.0 136.0 65.0 92.23 405
CHP Gas CCGT 6.7 49431 RBUC.VG3 1 258.4 215.8 40.0 86.04 407
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49310 RSMARDG4 1 75.0 60.0 25.0 92.23 405
Smardan
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49225 RSMARDG6 1 141.5 120.0 37.0 92.23 405
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49219 RBRAILG1 1 247.0 210.0 130.0 95.98 409
Braila-Lacu sarat CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49220 RBRAILG2 1 247.0 210.0 130.0 95.98 409
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 49299 RBRAILG3 1 247.0 210.0 130.0 95.98 409
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48019 RTULCE1A W 66.3 63.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48254 RTULCE5A W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48254 RTULCE5A W1 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
Valea Nucarilor WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48254 RTULCE5A W2 42.1 40.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48255 RTULCE5B W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48255 RTULCE5B W1 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48255 RTULCE5B W2 42.1 40.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48275 RBASAR5B W 80.0 75.0 0.0 86.17 410
Basarabi
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48276 RBASAR5C W 80.0 75.0 0.0 86.17 410
Medgida Nord WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48278 RMEDGI51 W 42.1 40.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48279 RMEDGI52 W 42.1 40.0 0.0 86.17 410
Medgida Sud
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48854 RMEDGI54 W 42.1 40.0 0.0 86.17 410
Rahmanu WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 49567 RRAHMA5 W 631.6 600.0 0.0 86.17 410
Tariverde WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 49568 RTARIV5 W 631.6 600.0 0.0 86.17 410
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48120 RTATAR51 W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
Tataru
WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48274 RTATAR53 W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
Falci WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48209 RFALCI5 W 31.6 30.0 0.0 86.17 410
Smirdan WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48228 RSMIRD5B W 61.0 58.0 0.0 86.17 410
Neptun WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48272 RNEPTU5 W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
Mihailov WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 48870 RMIHAI53 W 49.5 47.0 0.0 86.17 410
Stupi WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 49569 RSTUPI5 W 286.3 272.0 0.0 86.17 410
Vacaru WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 49570 RVACAR5 W 210.5 200.0 0.0 86.17 410
Miron WPP Wind Type4 Dobrogea 49572 RMIRON5 W 131.6 125.0 0.0 86.17 410
Insur WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48286 RINSUR5 W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
Liesti WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48220 RLIEST5 W 94.7 90.0 0.0 86.17 410
Bacau WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48147 RBACAU5 W 55.8 53.0 0.0 86.17 410
Adjurdi WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48151 RADJUD5 W 80.0 76.0 0.0 86.17 410
Romania 32
Muntenu WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48132 RMUNTE51 W 80.0 76.0 0.0 86.17 410
Negresti WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48133 RNEGRE51 W 18.9 18.0 0.0 86.17 410
Urlea WPP Wind Type4 Moldova 48308 RURLEA5 W 26.3 25.0 0.0 86.17 410
Moldova WPP Wind Type4 Banat 48722 RMOLDO5A W 25.2 24.0 0.0 86.17 410
Socol WPP Wind Type4 Banat 49571 RSOCOL5 W 315.8 300.0 0.0 86.17 410
Hydro Power Plants
Romania has a large number of hydro power plants which have an important role for energy generation and
system regulation and control. The largest HPP in Romania is the Portile de Fier on Danube river. Together
with PDF2, they use Kaplan turbines (vertical ones in first case and horizontal bulb ones in PDF2). Since both
power plants were recently modernized and refurbished, 50% of the capital costs were taken into
consideration for the cost curves. The HPP Lotru has an important role in terms of control. It has pelton
turbines, that have been refurbished recently, and these capital costs were taken into consideration.
Figure 4.53 Romania – Cost curve and table for HPP Portile de Fier (curve 401)
Figure 4.54 – Romania – Cost curve and table for HPP Lotru (curve 402)
Romania 33
Figure 4.55 – Romania – Cost curve and table for HPP Sugag and Galcegag (curve 405)
Figure 4.56 – Romania – Cost curve and table for HPP Retezat (curve 408)
The curve for HPPs Sugag and Galcegag, on the Sebes river, are shown on Figure 4.55. These power plants
use Francis turbines. The same curve applies to the HPP Retezat with largest units installed. PHPP Tarnita is
an important development project, especially for its future role in control of a large wind power in feed as
well as the nuclear power plants’ operation during the off-peak period. Unlike other hydro power plants,
these have fuel costs, since water is pumped. Here costs are estimated at half price on the HV level (low
tariff since pumping is usually done during night) multiplied with conversion factor (for pumping for 1MWh
consumed it is 0.76MWh produced). The cost curve is made according to the price of energy for pumping
$39.15/MWh. Also, since power plant is new, full capital costs are assumed.
Figure 4.57 – Romania – Cost curve and table for PHPP Tarnita (curve 406)
Romania 34
Figure 4.58 – Romania – Cost curve and table for Small HPPs (curve 410)
Smaller HPPs with a capacity less than 50MW, are modeled by using the cost curve on Figure 4.58 Most of
these plants are modeled as a negative load in feed.

Romanian thermal power plants can be divided into two major groups: ones run on domestic coal (lignite,
and subbituminous) and ones run on domestic fuel oil or natural gas. The first group consists of larger
power plants in Romania like Turceni, Rovinari, Isalnita, and Mintia-Deva.
Figure 4.59 – Romania – Cost curve and table for TPP Turceni, Rovinari, Isalnita (curve 402)
Figure 4.60 – Romania – Cost curve and table for TPP Mintia (curve 403)
Romania 35
Also included in the first group are the smaller CHP units run on coal. Other CHP units are run on natural
gas or fuel oil. Most of this equipment is old, and will be shut down or replaced with gas fired CCGT units.
Figure 4.61 – Romania – Cost curve and table for CHPs run on coal (curve 404)
Figure 4.62 – Romania – Cost curve and table for CHPs run on gas (curve 408)

Petrom in an oil refinery near Brazi, is the only gas turbine power plant installed in Romania. The country
has ambitious plans to replace most its existing CHP units run on gas or oil with CCGT systems.
Figure 4.63 – Romania – Cost curve and table for new CCGT Petrom in Brazi (curve 406)
Romania 36
Figure 4.64 – Romania – Cost curve and table for new CCGT CHP (curve 407)

Romania has a nuclear power station Cerna Voda with two operational units and two more in construction.
All units assume the same cost curve that takes into consideration capital costs, since these units are
relatively new (less than 20 years old).
Figure 4.65 – Romania – Cost curve and table for NPP Cerna Voda (curve 401)
Renewables
Renewable power plants are modeled in Figure 4.66 for WPP and adjusted to represent the tariff system in
Romania. Since Romania has a Green Certificate system in place, it is difficult to represent market behavior,
therefore, the price is calculated according to the costs (capital costs included).
Figure 4.66 – Romania – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants (curve 410)
Romania 37
Romania 38
1.20 Russia
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Russia is
constructed and here are main characteristics.
The transmission system model of Russia is given in Figure 4.67 and Figure 4.68.
Roslavl Mikhailov
Talashkino
SmolNPS
Vitebsk
Tambov
RiazGRES
Krichev
Novobriansk Elec Borino
Lipeck
OEMK
Belorusskaia KurNPS Metall St.Oskol

Balashov
NvNPS
??
??
.?
Satar Archeda
Lebedi Frolovo
Gubkin Volga
??
Uznaja
??
Zalivs
?.
Kurskaja
?
? ??
? ?.?
Andrean
Belgorod Liski Kotelnik VgHPS
Uznaja Trubnaja
Shebekino Veshens S.n.NPS
Shostka Donbasskaja
Valuiki
VdNPS
SumiSev Pobeda Shahti Budennovsk
Losevo
Harz Uznaja NChGRES ChirUrt
Tihoreck Mahachkala
? ??????. StGRES Psou Derbent
ZmTEC
? ??????
SevUkr Sisoevo V-2

LuTEC
Centralnaja
??
??
??
Yashma
??
Bzibi
??
StBGRES Amvros T-15 InguriHPS
Figure 4.67– Russia – network map (modeled part in Black Sea regional model)
Russia
39
Russian Generation OPF model.
Table 4.6 – Russia – Generation units OPF model
North Caucasus
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 59001 4VDAESN1 1 1111.0 1000.0 300.0 69.33 5901
Volgodonska
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 59021 4STGRSG1 1 353.0 300.0 150.0 60.22 5903
Stavropol
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 59031 4NCHGRG1 1 353.0 264.0 200.0 60.22 5903
Novocherkask
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 59041 4NEVGRG1 1 176.5 150.0 80.0 60.23 5904
Nevinomiis CHP Gas Steam 10.8 59044 4NEVGRG4 4 176.5 150.0 80.0 60.23 5904
TPP Coal Steam 10.2 59051 4KTEC G1 1 176.5 150.0 100.0 69.51 5905
Kropotkin
Centralna
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51451 4NVAESN9 9 259.0 220.0 66.0 30.59 5001
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51452 4NVAESN0 10 259.0 220.0 66.0 30.59 5001
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51453 4NVAESNA 11 259.0 220.0 66.0 30.59 5001
Novovoronezh
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51454 4NVAESNB 12 259.0 220.0 66.0 30.59 5001
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51455 4NVAESNC 13 588.0 500.0 150.0 30.59 5001
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51456 4NVAESND 14 588.0 500.0 150.0 30.59 5001
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51561 4S AESN1 1 588.0 500.0 150.0 30.53 5001
Smolensk
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51461 4K AESN1 1 588.0 500.0 250.0 30.53 5001
Kursk
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 51465 4KAES2N1 5 588.0 500.0 300.0 30.53 5001
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 51400 4RGRESG4 4 353.0 300.0 150.0 60.22 5002
Ryazan
Russia
40
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 51440 4SMGREG1 1 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.22 5002
Smolensk CHP Gas Steam 10.8 51441 4SMGREG2 2 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.22 5002
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 51442 4SMGREG3 3 247.0 210.0 100.0 60.22 5002
Volga 3 CHP Gas Steam 10.8 51410 4TEC-3G1 G 375.0 300.0 30.0 60.22 5002
Volga 1 CHP Gas Steam 10.8 51414 4VTEC-G6 G 726.5 588.8 318.8 63.50 5003
Hydro Power Plants
There is large number of hydro power plants in Russia, but in this model they are not modeled for OPF
analyses. The power plants are mainly used for domestic consumption, and since the model is made for
export analysis, only thermal and nuclear units were taken into consideration.
Russian thermal power plants are mostly run on natural gas, and are usually providers of heat and electricity
(CHP). Production of electricity on natural gas is cheaper than coal. As a result, there is no incentive in
building new coal fired power plants, as long as prices of natural gas in Russia remain low. Price of gas
taken into consideration for these cost curves is $160/tcm.
Figure 4.69 – Russia – Cost curve and table for TPP 300MW gas fired unit (curve 5002)
Figure 4.70 – Russia – Cost curve and table for TPP 800MW gas fired unit (curve 5003)
Russia
41
Figure 4.71 – Russia – Cost curve and table for CHPs run on coal (curve 404)
So far there is only few power plants with gas turbine unit installed in Russian system, but it is expected that
in future all obsolete gas fired units will be replaced with these more efficient ones. So far only units
installed are near Sankt Petersburg and Kaliningrad.
Russia has 31 operational nuclear reactors. For all the 500 MW units, a similar cost curve is used without
implementing capital costs, since these units are more than 20 years old. For 1000 MW units, capital costs
were taken into consideration, since these units are relatively new (less than 20 years old).
Figure 4.73– Russia – Cost curve and table for NPP Smolensk 500MW (curve 5001)
Russia
42
Figure 4.74 – Russia – Cost curve and table for NPP Volgodonsk 1000MW (curve 5901)
Figure 4.75– Russia – Cost curve and table for NPP Volgodonsk 1200MW (curve 5902)
Renewables
Since renewable power plants are modeled as negative load and not as generation units, no generation cost
curves are used.
Russia
43
1.21 Turkey
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Turkey is
constructed and its main characteristics are described below.
The transmission system model of Turkey is given in Figure 4.76.
Turkey
44
Generation OPF model consists of tables and cost curves. Table 4.7 shows the main characteristics of Turkey
Generation OPF model.
Table 4.7 – Turkey – Generation units OPF model
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69131 TELBS1T1 1 382.5 344.3 156.0 79.48 601
Elbistan
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69241 TELBSCT1 1 403.0 342.5 156.0 84.35 602
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69245 TELBSDT1 1 403.0 342.5 156.0 84.35 602
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69121 TSUGOZT1 1 733.5 660.0 185.0 90.70 603
Sugozu
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69122 TSUGOZT2 2 733.5 660.0 185.0 90.70 603
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69112 TSEYITT1 1 180.0 153.0 34.0 64.77 604
Seyitomer
Orhaneli TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69138 TORHANT 1 247.0 210.0 14.0 55.53 605
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69142 TYATAGT1 1 247.0 210.0 20.0 55.53 605
Yatagan TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69143 TYATAGT2 2 247.0 210.0 20.0 55.53 605
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69144 TYATAGT3 3 247.0 210.0 20.0 55.53 605
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69145 TYENIKT1 1 247.0 210.0 51.0 55.53 605
Yenikoy
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69146 TYENIKT2 2 247.0 210.0 51.0 55.53 605
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69123 TCAYIRT1 1 188.0 159.8 37.0 91.18 606
Cayirhan
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69135 TKANGAT1 1 188.0 159.8 37.0 91.18 606
Kangali TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69136 TKANGAT2 2 188.0 159.8 37.0 91.18 606
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69137 TKANGAT3 3 188.0 159.8 37.0 91.18 606
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69226 TCATALT1 1 189.0 159.8 37.0 95.6 609
Catalgezi
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69227 TCATALT2 2 189.0 159.8 37.0 95.6 609
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69116 TCANTST1 1 177.8 160.0 81.0 91.18 606
Can
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69117 TCANTST2 2 177.8 160.0 81.0 91.18 606
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69147 TSOMABT1 1 194.1 165.0 12.0 64.77 607
Soma
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69139 TKEMERT1 1 247.0 210.0 51.0 64.77 607
Kemerkoy TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69141 TKEMERT3 3 247.0 210.0 51.0 64.77 607
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69140 TKEMERT2 2 270.6 230.0 43.0 64.77 607
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69119 TTUNCBT4 4 188.0 159.8 43.0 64.77 607
Tuncilbek TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69118 TTUNCBT5 5 188.0 159.8 43.0 64.77 607
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69120 TTUNCBT3 3 82.0 65.6 21.0 64.77 607
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69278 TEREN T1 1 189.0 159.8 120.0 95.60 609
Eren TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69279 TEREN T2 2 706.0 600.0 300.0 90.70 603
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69280 TEREN T3 3 706.0 600.0 300.0 90.70 603
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 69251 TNAKKYN1 1 1333.0 1200.0 600.0 88.60 608
Akkuyu
Turkey
45
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 69288 TSINOPN1 1 889.0 800.0 50.0 88.60 608
Sinop
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 69289 TSINOPN2 2 889.0 800.0 50.0 88.60 608
Dicle HPP Hydro Francis Tigris 69160 TDICLEH1 H 130.0 110.5 46.0 30.75 634
Batman HPP Hydro Francis Tigris 69157 TBATMAH1 H 226.5 192.5 105.0 71.49 635
Ilisu HPP Hydro Francis Tigris 69257 TILISUH1 1 222.0 200.0 30.0 71.49 636
HPP Hydro Francis Tigris 69257 TILISUH1 2 222.0 200.0 30.0 71.49 636
Ozluce HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69202 TOZLUCH1 H 200.0 170.0 106.0 30.75 627
Uzuncere HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69218 TUZUNCH1 H 93.6 70.7 36.0 30.75 601
Keban HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69095 TKEBANH1 1 175.0 157.5 78.0 30.75 602
HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69096 TKEBANH2 2 175.0 157.5 78.0 30.75 602
Karakaya HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69089 TKARAKH1 1 315.0 300.0 98.0 30.75 604
HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69090 TKARAKH2 2 315.0 300.0 98.0 30.75 604
Ataturk HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69081 TATATUH1 1 315.0 300.0 97.0 30.75 605
HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69082 TATATUH2 2 315.0 300.0 97.0 30.75 605
Birecik HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69077 TBIRECH1 1 140.0 115.0 80.0 30.75 606
HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69077 TBIRECH1 2 140.0 115.0 80.0 30.75 606
Karkamas HPP Hydro Francis Eufrat 69103 TKARKMH1 H 208.8 187.8 72.0 30.75 607
Oymapinar HPP Hydro Francis Mangavati 69065 TOYMAPH1 1 150.0 135.0 20.0 30.81 608
HPP Hydro Francis Mangavati 69066 TOYMAPH2 2 150.0 135.0 20.0 30.81 608
Kilickaya HPP Hydro Francis Yeslirmak 69155 TKILICH1 H 134.0 120.6 56.0 30.75 609
Kokluce HPP Hydro Francis Yeslirmak 69110 TKOKLUH1 H 100.0 90.0 44.0 30.75 610
Hasan Ugurlu HPP Hydro Francis Yeslirmak 69106 TH.UGUH1 1 145.0 130.5 43.0 30.75 611
HPP Hydro Francis Yeslirmak 69106 TH.UGUH1 2 145.0 130.5 43.0 30.75 611
Suat Ugurlu HPP Hydro Francis Yeslirmak 69108 TS.UGUH1 H 76.5 69.0 38.0 30.81 612
Alpaslan HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69206 TALPS1H1 H 180.0 160.0 76.0 30.75 618
Yamula HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69217 TYAMULH1 H 125.0 100.0 40.0 30.75 613
Hirfanli HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69198 THIRFAH1 H 184.0 147.2 112.0 30.75 614
Kesikopru HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69239 TKESKOH1 H 109.0 87.2 26.6 30.75 615
Obruk HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69194 TOBRUKH1 H 250.0 200.0 80.0 30.75 616
Altinkaya HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69061 TALTINH1 1 195.0 175.0 83.0 30.75 617
HPP Hydro Francis Kizilirmak 69062 TALTINH2 2 195.0 175.0 83.0 30.75 617
Sariyar HPP Hydro Francis Sakaryar 69210 TSARIYH1 H 177.8 160.0 76.0 30.75 619
Gokcekaya HPP Hydro Francis Sakaryar 69214 TGOKCEH1 1 103.1 92.8 46.0 30.75 620
HPP Hydro Francis Sakaryar 69215 TGOKCEH2 2 103.1 92.8 46.0 30.75 620
HPP Hydro Francis Sakaryar 69216 TGOKCEH3 3 103.1 92.8 46.0 30.75 620
Turkey
46
Menzelet HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69176 TMENZEH1 H 132.0 118.8 56.0 30.75 621
Sir HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69173 TSIR H1 1 105.0 94.5 36.0 30.75 622
HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69174 TSIR H2 2 105.0 94.5 36.0 30.75 622
HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69175 TSIR H3 3 105.0 94.5 36.0 30.75 622
Berke HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69170 TBERKEH1 1 187.5 168.8 127.5 30.75 623
HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69171 TBERKEH2 2 187.5 168.8 127.5 30.75 623
HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69172 TBERKEH3 3 187.5 168.8 127.5 30.75 623
Aslantas HPP Hydro Francis Ceyhan 69167 TASLANH1 H 168.0 134.4 48.0 30.75 624
Ermenek HPP Hydro Francis Goksu 69162 TERMENH1 1 168.0 151.2 70.0 42.39 625
HPP Hydro Francis Goksu 69163 TERMENH2 2 168.0 151.2 70.0 42.39 625
Gezende HPP Hydro Francis Goksu 69164 TGEZENH1 H 187.5 159.4 114.0 42.39 626
Torul HPP Hydro Francis Harsit 69204 TTORULH1 H 121.5 103.2 50.0 71.49 627
Kartun HPP Hydro Francis Harsit 69221 TKARTUH1 H 92.0 78.2 32.0 71.49 628
Catalan HPP Hydro Francis Seyhan 69223 TCATALH1 H 195.0 165.8 99.0 71.49 629
Yusufelly HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69261 TYUSUFH1 1 150.0 135.0 43.0 71.49 630
HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69262 TYUSUFH2 2 150.0 135.0 43.0 71.49 630
Deriner HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69073 TDERINH1 1 186.0 167.5 70.0 71.49 631
HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69074 TDERINH2 2 186.0 167.5 70.0 71.49 631
Borcka HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69071 TBORCKH1 1 167.0 150.0 60.0 71.49 632
HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69072 TBORCKH2 2 167.0 150.0 60.0 71.49 632
Muratli HPP Hydro Francis Coruh 69069 TMURATH1 H 147.0 117.6 50.0 71.49 633
Unimar CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69001 TUNIMRG1 CC 632.0 505.6 18.0 91.31 611
Hamidabat CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69004 THAMIG1 CC 1168.1 934.5 435.0 91.31 612
CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69014 THAMIGB CC 389.4 311.5 145.0 91.31 613
Gebze CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69016 TGEBZAG1 CC 944.5 802.8 90.0 91.31 614
CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69019 TGEBZBG1 CC 944.5 802.8 90.0 91.31 614
Trakiya CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69022 TTRAKYG1 CC 588.0 499.7 199.0 91.31 615
Ambarli CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69025 TAMBARG1 CC 563.0 450.4 135.0 91.31 616
CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69028 TAMBA2G1 CC 563.0 450.4 135.0 91.31 616
CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69031 TAMBA2G3 CC 563.0 450.4 135.0 91.31 616
Bursa CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69043 TBURSAG2 CC 841.8 715.5 182.5 91.31 617
CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69045 TBURSAG3 CC 841.8 715.5 182.5 91.31 617
Adapazari CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69048 TADAPAG1 CC 944.5 802.8 90.0 91.31 614
Aliaga CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69051 TALIAGG1 CC 944.5 802.8 90.0 91.31 614
CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69054 TALIAGG3 CC 944.5 802.8 90.0 91.31 614
Temel CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69188 TTEMELG2 CC 998.0 817.4 299.0 91.31 618
Bandirma CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69265 TBANDRG1 CC 1110.0 1000.0 321.3 91.31 619
Denizli CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69178 TDENIZG1 CC 998.0 847.0 90.0 91.31 619
AEI CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69292 TAEI__G1 CC 1030.0 875.0 362.7 91.31 619
Aksa CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69295 TAKSA_G1 CC 1086.0 900.0 351.9 91.31 619
Tufanbey CCGT Gas CCGT 6.7 69228 TTUFANG1 CC 567.0 480.0 111.0 91.31 615
Sugozu2 TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69290 TAYAS2G 1 941.0 850.0 300.0 90.70 620
Gerze TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69282 TGERZET1 1 647.0 550.0 270.0 90.70 603
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 69283 TGERZET2 2 647.0 550.0 270.0 90.70 603
Turkey
47
Hydro Power Plants
Hydro power plants in Turkey are an important source of energy. The largest HPPs are located on the
Euphrates river and use Francis turbines. Recently, most of these machines have been refurbished and
reconstructed in scope of a project that connects Turkey to ENTSO-E, because they represent main plants
used for system control. Other power plants used for control are HPP Hasan Ugurlu and HPP Altinkaya.
Figure 4.77 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for HPP Ataturk Euphrat cascade (curve 605)
Figure 4.78 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for HPP Hasan Ugurlu (curve 611)
Figure 4.79 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for HPP Altinkaya (curve 617)
Currently there are many new HPP in the construction phase, and for these, full capital costs were taken into
consideration when deriving cost curves.
Turkey
48
Figure 4.80 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for HPP Ermenek (curve 625)
Figure 4.81 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for HPP Borcka (curve 632)
Thermal power plants in Turkey can be divided into three groups based on the fuel intake: TPPs run on
domestic coal, imported coal and fuel oil. The domestic coal price of $75/ton or $3.6/mBTU is calculated,
and imported coal (which is higher grade) 20% higher price $90/ton or $4/mBTU is calculated to cover
transportation costs. Most of the power plants are new (less than 20 years old) and therefore include capital
costs. TPP Sugozu is one of the newest coal fired power plants in Turkey, and it is used as reference for all
new coal fired power plants in Turkey.
Figure 4.82 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for TPP Elbistan (curve 601)
Turkey
49
Figure 4.83– Turkey – Cost curve and table for TPP Sugozu (curve 603)
Some of older constructed power plants like TPP Ambarli in Istanbul and TPP Colak are run on fuel oil (or
natural gas). In the TPP Colak case there is second set run on imported coal.
Figure 4.84 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for oil fired TPP Colak (curve 610)

Almost all new thermal power plants built are CCGT and are built on the principal of BOT, build-operate-
transfer, so after a certain period, 15-20 years, all these units will be transferred to the Turkish state. These
power plants are useful as base power units, and some are used for system control. Usually, these are units
are owned by EUAS, but IPPs participate as well. Since they are all fairly new, all curves include capital costs
with the price of gas set as $350/tcm or $8.9/mBTU.
Figure 4.85 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for new CCGT Ada Pazari-Gebze (curve 614)
Turkey
50
There are no nuclear power stations in Turkey at the moment, but two major projects are planned: NPP
Akkuyu 4800MW and NPP Sinop 1600MW. NPP Akkuyu is based on Russian technology, and second on
South Korean. The same cost curve is used for both, and it includes capital costs at $4.15mil per MW of
installed power.
Figure 4.86 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for NPP Akkuyu 1200MW units (curve 608)
Renewables
Renewable power plants are modeled as shown in Figure 4.87 for WPP and Figure for SHPP, adjusted to
represent the feed in tariff system in Turkey.
Figure 4.87 – Turkey – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants (curve 621)
Figure 4.88 Turkey – Cost curve and table for Small Hydro units (curve 622)
Turkey
51
Turkey
52
1.22 Ukraine
According to the data provided and generic cost curves described in Chapter 2.1.3 OPF model of Ukraine is
constructed and its main characteristics are outlined below.
The transmission system model of Ukraine is given in Figure 4.89.
Ukraine
53
Ukrainian Generation OPF model.
Table 4.8 Ukraine – Generation units OPF model
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79521 UJUAZSN1 1 1111 1000.0 600.0 22.30 701
Juzna NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79522 UJUAZSN2 2 1111 1000.0 600.0 22.30 701
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79523 UJUAZSN3 3 1111 1000.0 600.0 22.30 701
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79311 UZAEC_N1 1 1111 1000.0 600.0 22.30 701
Zaporozhje
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79901 URAEC_N1 1 259 220.0 150.0 23.50 702
Rivne
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79808 UHAEC_N2 2 1111 1000.0 600.0 22.30 701
Khmelnick
NPP Uranium Steam 10.4 79809 UHAEC_N1 1 1111 1000.0 600.0 22.30 701
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 79701 UKTEC5G1 1 141.2 120.0 25.0 103.80 723
Kiev 5
Kiev 6 CHP Gas Steam 10.8 79712 UKTEC6G2 2 376.5 320.0 100.0 102.40 722
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 79231 UZALJUG1 1 125 110.0 25.0 112.6 716
Zaporozhje CHP Gas Steam 10.8 79232 UZALJUG2 2 125 110.0 25.0 112.6 716
CHP Gas Steam 10.8 79233 UZALJUG3 3 376.5 320.0 100.0 102.40 722
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79911 UBUTECT1 1 235.3 200.0 100.0 62.74 703
Burstin
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79919 UBUTECT9 9 247 210.0 100.0 62.74 703
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79920 UBUTECTA 10 247 210.0 100.0 62.74 703
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79921 UBUTECTB 11 235.3 200.0 100.0 62.74 703
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79922 UBUTECTC 12 235.3 200.0 100.0 62.74 703
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79925 UDTEC_T5 E 352.5 300.0 50.0 60.10 704
Dobrotvir TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79927 UDTEC_T7 7 167.5 150.0 0.0 60.10 705
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79928 UDTEC_T8 8 167.5 150.0 0.0 60.10 705
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79108 ULUTECT8 8 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79109 ULUTECT9 9 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79110 ULUTECTA 10 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79111 ULUTECTB 11 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
Luganska
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79112 ULUTECTC 12 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79113 ULUTECTD 13 235.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79114 ULUTECTE 14 253.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79115 ULUTECTF 15 253.3 200.0 100.0 60.20 706
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79143 UKUTECT3 3 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 708
Kurakovska TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79146 UKUTECT6 6 235.3 210.0 100.0 63.10 708
Ukraine
54
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79125 USBTEC45 4 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 707
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79125 USBTEC45 5 247 210.0 130.0 63.10 707
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79126 USBTECT6 6 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 707
Starobeshevo
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79130 USBTECTA 10 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 707
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79131 USBTECTB 11 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 707
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79132 USBTECTC 12 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 707
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79133 USBTECTD 13 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.10 707
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79200 UZMTZSGA 10 353 300.0 180.0 65.16 711
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79201 UZMTZSG1 1 235.3 200.0 130.0 65.16 711
Zmiievo TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79203 UZMTZSG3 3 235.3 200.0 100.0 65.16 711
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79181 UUGTECT1 1 353 300.0 180.0 61.20 712
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79207 UZMTZSG7 7 353 300.0 180.0 65.16 712
Uglegirska
TPP Gas Steam 10.8 79185 UUGTECT5 5 889 800.0 500.0 112.60 713
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79301 UZATECT1 1 353 300.0 180.0 61.30 715
Zaporozhje TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79304 UZATECT4 4 353 300.0 180.0 61.30 715
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79321 UKRTECT1 1 353 300.0 180.0 61.35 717
Krivorozhje
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79330 UKRTECTA 10 353 300.0 180.0 61.35 717
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79337 UPDTECT7 7 187.5 150.0 75.0 63.70 718
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79340 UPDTECTA 10 235.3 200.0 100.0 63.70 718
Pridnieprovska
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79341 UPDTECTB 11 353 300.0 180.0 63.70 719
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79342 UPDTECTC 12 353 300.0 180.0 63.70 719
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79343 UPDTECTD 13 353 300.0 180.0 63.70 719
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79344 UPDTECTE 14 353 300.0 180.0 63.70 719
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79721 UTPTECT1 1 353 300.0 180.0 64.40 720
Trupilsk
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79821 ULDTECT1 1 353 300.0 180.0 61.15 721
Ladigin
Slovyanska TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79159 USLTECT7 7 889 800.0 500.0 61.80 710
Ukraine
55
TPP Coal Steam 10.8 79171 UZUTECT1 1 353 300.0 180.0 63.10 709
Zuevska
Hydro Power Plants
Hydro power plants in Ukraine are divided into the Dnieper and the Dniestr cascades. The Dnieper cascade
has small head run-of-river power plants with similar cost curves, adjusted to reflect their capacity. For
hydro power plants that are pumping stations, price of electricity is calculated based on a low electricity tariff
wholesale price, and 0.7 conversion factor (from 1MWh of power consumed in pumping mode, 0.7MWh is
gained in generation mode).
Figure 4.90 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for HPP Kiev (curve 702)
Figure 4.91 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for PHPP Kiev (curve 701)
The Diestr cascade HPPs utilize Francis turbines, and two, the Tashlyk and Dniestr, are pumping stations.
When construction is complete, it will be the largest pumping station in the world. Cost curves for the two
include capital costs since they are new.
Ukraine
56
Figure 4.92 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for HPPs on Sevan-Hrazdan cascade (curve 809)
Figure 4.93 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for PHPP Dniestr (curve 804)

Most of the power plants in Ukraine are thermal power plants that use domestic coal with different grades
and quality. In some units natural gas is used. The gas prices are not reflected in the models since the gas
price for these units is not usually used (only in case of power shortages, as reserve). For each power plant
a different cost curve is made, based on the available data of coal quality, usage of natural gas in power
production, and unit size. The units are old, and some of them are in a reconstruction phase, therefore, the
capital costs were not included. Price of coal for power plants in Ukraine is around $93.2/ton, or $4.5/mBTU,
which is high but lower than prices on some market hubs. Ukraine also is exports coal. This price is
implemented in generic curves, and since tariffs for these power plants are known, remaining costs are
adjusted accordingly generating the following curves:
Ukraine
57
Figure 4.94 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for TPP 200MW units (curve 703)
Figure 4.95 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for TPP 300MW unit (curve 709)
Figure 4.96 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for TPP 800MW unit (curve 710)
Figure 4.97 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for TPP 800MW gas fired units (curve 713)
CHP or combined heat and power plants in Ukraine are run on imported gas from Russia, and price of this
gas is $384.3/tcm.
Ukraine
58
Figure 4.98 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for CHP 300MW units (curve 722)
Figure 4.99 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for CHP 120MW units (curve 723)

Ukraine has many nuclear power plants. Most are 1000MW PWR units, and the NPP Rivne has 220MW units,
which are also the oldest. Figure 4.100 and Figure 4.101 represents the cost curves for these types of units,
adjusted according to real tariffs. Since all these power plants are more than 20 years old, no capital costs
have been implemented into the curves.
Figure 4.100 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for 1000MW units (curve 701)
Ukraine
59
Figure 4.101 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for 220MW units (curve 702)
Renewables
Renewable power plants are modeled as shown in Figure . WPP power plants are adjusted to represent the
feed in tariff system in Ukraine.
Figure 4.102 – Ukraine – Cost curve and table for Wind power plants (curve 819)
Ukraine
60
V. FINDINGS
1.23 2015 and 2020 Model Status
The national and regional models, using 2015 and 2020 data, were built and tested under static load flow
and dynamic stability conditions. The Project team has a high degree of confidence in the 2015 model data.
There is a high level of certainty that lines, generation and loads included in this model are a good estimate
of conditions that will exist in 2015. However, this level of certainty does not extend to the 2020 model for
two important reasons:
• In the current world economic situation, it is difficult to accept the very optimistic forecast of new
system expansions and load growth presented in the 2020 models. Many of the 2020 assumptions
were developed before the world economic crises occurred and for many of the participants, this
was a first look at the 2020 planning horizon.
• The impact of renewable energy supplies in the Black Sea Region by 2020 has not been adequately
quantified in the 2020 models. The growth of renewable forms of generation in one location, that
could supplement new conventional generation in another, is an important issue to be addressed in
the process of finalizing the 2020 regional models.
As has been stated in the Conclusions section of this report, the project team has a high degree of
confidence in the 2015 model data due to a high level of certainty that lines, generation and loads included
in this model are a good estimate of conditions that will exist in 2015. However, this level of certainty does
not extend to the 2020 model because renewable energy sources are not adequately modeled (see
“Integrating Renewable Energy into National and Regional Network Models” discussed above) and because
estimates of growth in lines, conventional generation and loads are thought to be inconsistent with current
world economic forecasts.
The next step for the BSTP should be to revisit national modeling data estimates for 2020, taking into
account current economic forecasts for the region and the estimates of renewable generation with an
emphasis on wind, including the amount of such generation and its location. It is probable that the amount
and location of wind generation will significantly alter the need for other sources of generation and will
change the required system network configuration.
1.24 Synchronous Operation
The Black Sea region currently operates in three synchronous parts (Figure 1.2) By 2015 it is expected that
Turkey will be officially accepted as full member of ENTSO-E and will be in parallel and synchronous
operation. By 2015, Black Sea region will operate in two synchronous groups.
West (Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey)
East (Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, Georgia, Georgia, Azerbaijan)
The final BSTP report data and results have been determined using the 2015 model and assume that two
synchronous zones will exist in 2015 and will consist of ENTSO-E (Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey) and the
IPS/UPS (Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Georgia and Azerbaijan). Two additional scenarios should be
investigated for 2015:
• 3 synchronous zones consisting of ENTSO-E (including Turkey), Ukraine and Moldova (in an ENTSO-
E testing mode) and IPS/UPS.
• 2 synchronous zones consisting of ENTSO-E that includes Turkey, Ukraine and Moldova and the
IPS/UPS.
Annex 1
Once the 2020 model is updated as described above, the 2020 regional model should be used to examine
two possible scenarios:
• 2 synchronous zones consisting of ENTSO-E that includes Turkey, Ukraine and Moldova and the
IPS/UPS.
• 2 synchronous zones consisting of ENTSO-E (including Turkey) and IPS/UPS (including Ukraine &
Moldova).
1.25 Georgia
1.25.1 Renewables development plan
Table 7.1– Georgia – Generation units renewables according to priorities
Small hydro
Annex 2
RUSSIA
PSOU TO CENTRALNAIA
VOLTAGE DESTIGNATION
SOKHUMI
500 KV
VA
R
EN
DN
KHUDONI
GU
I
400 KV
LI
RI
OCHAMCHIRE
330 KV
ONI CASC
LAJANURI
ZU
SORI CASC 220 KV
GD
IDI
NAMAKHVANI CASC
SADMELI CASC 154 KV
TSKALTUBO
DZEVRULA 110 KV
MENJI KUTAISI
SHAORI JINVALI
KHADORI
ZESTAFONI
KUTAISI CASC ZAHESI
KHASHURI DZEGVI
QSANI
GLDANI GURJAANI
LESA GORI
GLDANI
AKHALTSIKHE CHITAKHEVI RUSTAVI
KHRAMI‐1
TB NAVTLUGHI
ILI
LISI S I
BATUMI
KHRAMI‐2
MTKVARI KASC MARNEULI GARDABANI
KHOPHA FARAVANI
BORCHKHA
AGSTAFA
ALAVERDI
AZSRES
KARS
Figure 7.1 – Georgia - network ma
Black Sea Region 3

Black Sea Region 4

BSTP OPF Final - Phase III 3.19.2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BSTP OPF Final - Phase III 3.19.2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BSTP OPF Final - Phase III 3.19.2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BLACK SEA REGIONAL TRANSMISSION PLANNING PROJECT:

PSSE/OPF Regional Model Construction Report

Balkans and Regional Energy Market Partnership Program

Black Sea Regional Transmission Planning Project Phase III

United States Energy Association and

Cooperative Agreement EEE-A-00-02-00054-00

This report was prepared by the United States Energy Association

United States Energy Association

Figure 1.1 – Interconnection lines in Black Sea Region

Figure 1.2 – Black Sea region – synchronous operation 2010

1.1 Electricity Production

Source of Electricity (World total year 2008)

Natural Gas Oil

Coal Oil Natural Gas Nuclear Hydro other

1.1.1 Power Plants

Black Sea Region 10

16.0 Oil - Heavy

• Operational and maintenance costs

• Variable Operational costs (fuel costs)

Black Sea Region 12

1 - Type of power plant 10 - Fixed O&M costs

Black Sea Region 13

Another type of hydro power plant is a pumping station. These

Thermal Power Plants

Thermal power plants use steam as the prime mover of

Figure 2.4 – Thermal power plant

Figure 2.5 – Steam turbine (High Preasure+Intermediate pressure+Low pressure)

Black Sea Region 15

Black Sea Region 16

Black Sea Region 17

Black Sea Region 18

Gas Turbine Power Plants

Black Sea Region 19

Figure 2.10 – Multi-shaft system 2GT+ST and Gas Turbine

Figure 2.11 – Single shaft GT+ST+1generator and Multi-shaft system 2GT+ST

Black Sea Region 20

Figure 2.12 – LNG prices ($/mBTU) on different market hubs

Black Sea Region 21

Black Sea Region 23

Input/output (I/O) curve

Figure 2.14 – Input/output (I/O) curve

Figure 2.15 – Fuel-cost curve

Black Sea Region 24

Figure 2.16- Heat rate curve

Incremental cost curve

Figure 2.17– Incremental cost curve

Black Sea Region 25

Figure 2.18 – Cost curve for large steam power plant

There are three predominant approximations:

Figure 2.19 – Piece-wise linear cost curve

Figure 2.20 – Piece-wise quadratic cost curve

Data are entered in coordinate pairs (x,y)

Figure 2.21 – Polynomial Curve Fit for Cost Rate Curve

Black Sea Region 27

Hydro Power Plants

kaplan francis pelton

Black Sea Region 28

Black Sea Region 29