EASTERN AFRICA POWER POOL

(EAPP)

EAPP REGIONAL
POWER SYSTEM
MASTER PLAN

PLANNING GAP
ANALYSIS

December 2014
Published by:

EAPP, Eastern Africa Power Pool

Kirkos sub city, House No.513
P.O Box 100644
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Ea Energy Analyses
Frederiksholms Kanal 4, 3. th.
1220 Copenhagen K, Denmark

Energinet.dk
Tonne Kjærsvej 65
7000 Fredericia, Denmark

2 | Planning Gap Analysis

Contents

EAPP Planning Code ....................................................................................4

The challenge of two-level planning ............................................................6

Next Steps ..................................................................................................8

3 | Planning Gap Analysis

 EAPP Planning Code
The EAPP Planning Code specifies the minimum technical and design criteria,
principles and procedures which should be taken into account both by the
EAPP in their EAPP Interconnected Transmission System (ITS) planning activi-
ties, and the Member Utilities on a coordinated basis. The EAPP Planning Code
also specifies the planning data required to be exchanged by the Member Util-
ities and the EAPP Technical Sub-Committee on Planning (TSC-P) to enable the
EAPP ITS to be planned in accordance with the planning standards.

The EAPP Planning Code has not been officially adopted. It exists as a draft in
the 2011 Master Plan in the Appendix: Final Interconnection Code Report,
Module 2G, Interconnection Code Development (page 67-77 in the PDF file).

The key components in the EAPP Planning Code are as follows:

• Least-cost planning
• Regional perspective
Planning
principles • System reliability

• Data exchange
• Forecasting
Planning
processes • EAPP power system modelling

• Power Balance Statement

• Transmission System Capability Statement
Planning
deliverables • EAPP Master Plan

Planning principles Least-cost planning is a key principle guiding the activities of the EAPP to-
wards achieving a reduction in the power supply costs. Least-cost planning im-
plies evaluating both the investment costs, as well as operation and mainte-
nance costs and the price of supply interruptions throughout the lifetime of
the project. Is it part of the least-cost principle to include information about
how security of supply and environmental issues should be managed.

The planning principles mean that all components of the EAPP ITS (both na-
tionally and regionally) should be designed so that the demand for electricity
can be met reliably at the lowest cost.

4 | Planning Gap Analysis

 EAPP PC requirements Sub-tasks
Principles Least-cost Transmission System design
and (investment, O&M costs, supply inter-
application ruptions, environmental and other limi-
tations)
Coordination of any proposed develop-
ment of a National System / intercon-
nection with an External System to en-
sure the reliability and security of the
EAPP Interconnected Transmission Sys-
tem
Information submission to enable a TSO
to optimize the planning of its National
System including the use of available
transmission capacity on the EAPP Inter-
connected Transmission System
Reliability Meet the reliability criteria and perfor- Operation within normal capacity rat-
criteria mance requirements when designing de- ings, thermal loading and voltage limits
velopments, expansions and reinforce- under steady-state conditions as set out
ments in the CC
N-1 criteria for any line, transformer,
generating unit, transmission circuit, sec-
tion of busbar, transformer or reactive
compensation equipment
The Planning horizon: 10 years
Planning Power Balance Statement for the EAPP
Process Interconnected Transmission System
based on the individual TSOs’ Power Bal-
ance
Statements
Transmission System Capability State-
Various scenarios for interchanges, de-
ment for the EAPP Interconnected
mands and generation and sensitivity
Transmission System based on the indi-
analyses for hydrological conditions and
vidual TSO's Transmission Adequacy As-
fuel price variations
sessments
Consider the use of Remedial Action
Schemes (RAS)
Determine the form and content of the
Transmission System Capability State-
ment to be issued each year and publish
it on the EAPP website
System Carry out system analysis, including
Establish a set of common objectives for
Analyses steady-state and dynamic simulations of
the development and submission of sys-
the EAPP Interconnected Transmission
tem data (as set out in the Data Ex-
System in order to produce the EAPP
change Code) for EAPP power system
Transmission System Capability State-
modelling
ment
Identify the scope and specify the data The requirements and procedures to be
required for reliability analyses and the periodically reviewed, documented and
procedures for data reporting published at least every 5 years
Table 1. Summary of the EAPP Planning Code

5 | Planning Gap Analysis

The challenge of two-level planning
The EAPP regional and national planning both have interactions and have
some specific differences. Only the regional planning can fully integrate the
perspective of the entire area, e.g. the benefits and requirements for a suc-
cessful expansion of hydro generation and the needed transmissions capabil-
ity. Since the impact of demand and generation can spread to the entire re-
gion – and not only to the immediate neighbouring countries– is can be diffi-
cult to incorporate these considerations in the national plans of each individ-
ual country.

National Master Plans are more detailed. The grid can be represented in more
detail and results can in many cases be implemented directly based on the
analysis (e.g. if the national Master plan is developed by the grid owner).
Cross-border investments can be more complicated to realise, since more
stakeholders are involved and different regulation may complicate negoci-
antions (see Risk analyses memo).

If significant differences exist in terms of methods or data in the regional and

national plans, conflicting results can be obtained. E.g. if the weighting of en-
vironmental aspects, or the readiness to rely on imported fuels are different,
then the results are also likely to differ. If some countries exclude specific sup-
ply options, e.g. coal or nuclear, or prefer specific supply options, e.g. wind or
geothermal, this will affect the entire region. The optimal exchange of elec-
tricity (based on marginal costs), and the matching transmission capacity will
be influenced by such priorities.

The goal is not necessarily that all details must be identical on the regional
and the national levels. However, it should be a realistic ambition that all dif-
ferences should be known and understood – and that the transmission capaci-
ties would not become under-dimensioned (or over-dimensioned) because of
national priorities.

The recent national Master plans, e.g. from Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania
and Uganda, are all based on least-cost planning. At the highest level, these
are all in line with the EAPP Planning Code. However, differences exist. First of
all it is natural that the geographic scope and the level of detail is different.

6 | Planning Gap Analysis


Geographic scope
Planning model
Representation of grid,
System analyses (PSS/E or
PowerFactory)
Table 2. Typical / conceptual differences between National and regional Master Plans.
7 | Planning Gap Analysis
Typical National Master
plans
National (with limited
representation of neigh-
bouring countries)
One area
Both the transmission
and the distribution are
represented in detail
EAPP Master Plans
EAPP-wide, Regional
(with limited representa-
tion of individual coun-
tries)
12 countries, 14 areas
(DRC represented with
three areas)
Focus on transmission
level (220 kV or more),
distribution not included
 Next Steps
Adoption of the EAPP The Planning Code should be adopted by the relevant organs.
Planning Code

Power Balance State- As of 2014, EAPP has not yet issued a Power Balance Statement. This could be
ment done in 2015. To produce a Power Balance Statement several issues need to
be agreed upon:
 Definition of electricity demand covered. E.g. demand per calendar
year for the interconnected system (not including isolated systems).
Agree to create data for the development of demand for historical
years (e.g. the last ten years). This is helpful when prognoses are eval-
uated.
 Prognoses. Yearly values for each country’s expected development in
electricity demand.
 Agree on how hydrological years should be managed1. As a starting
point hydro (with reservoir) can always deliver the installed capacity
during peak load (e.g. a single hour). However, since hydro is energy
constrained hydro plants may not be able to deliver the needed ca-
pacity in a long period. A capacity factor for hydro could be defined.
 Define how the generation capacity per country should be described.
It could be decided to collect information about each individual power
plant. This would create the highest degree of transparency and
would ease the work when updating. Information about existing
plants could be reduced to:
o Type of plant and fuel
o Capacity (MW)
o Year of commission, year of end of service (if known)
o For hydro, solar and wind power: annual generation in normal
year
o For hydro with storage capability: Reservoir size

1
Time series indicate that wet and dry years can occur very differently across the region. When the total
regional precipitation is low (e.g. 10% percentile), some countries have above-average precipitation. There-
fore it might be too restrictive to apply the individual country’s ten years dry year to test the power bal-
ance. In the EAPP Master Plan 2014 a method has been developed, whereby a regional dry year is found –
based on the hydro capacity in each country. E.g. with the expected hydro capacity in 2020 the historical
year 2006 has been found to represent the regional dry year. The method can be further developed and
several dry years could be used in the test of the power balance. E.g. for 2020 the following four years are
all close to the regional 10% percentile: 1982, 2003, 1987 and 1984.

8 | Planning Gap Analysis

 For committed and candidate plants similar data could be collected
together with information about the expected year online and infor-
mation about the stage of planning. The stages of planning should be
clearly defined and easy to document. E.g.:
o Construction started
o Finance secured and construction expected to start in a spe-
cific year
o Specific candidate project, location and design determined
o General candidate project
 Maintain a list of cross-border transmission lines. Information about
type (AC/DC), voltage, capacity, start and end point, year of construc-
tion. Same applies for planned connection with additional information
similar to planned generation.

As a part of the current Master Plan, data on power plants and transmission
lines has been collected. This data could be the starting point for the first data
collection. Communication could take place with a simple Excel file formatted
to fit the purpose, e.g. like the files used in the current Master Plan.

Sharing of models To enhance the cooperation between member utilities model could be
shared. E.g. the current Balmorel model, used in the 2014 update of the Mas-
ter plan, is located on the EAPP server. It is technically possible for member
utilities to connect to the server. This could be used as a practical tool in rela-
tion to learning and understanding the model. Also, if more training in Bal-
morel will be arranged, the possibility of using the model between the training
sessions is important.

The EAPP-wide PSS/E transmission (220 kV and above) model can similarly be
used as a common model, with many users from member utilities.

ENTSO-E The analyses of the power balance could be inspired by the ENTSO-E proce-
dure. ENTSO-E covers 34 European countries. E.g. see the June 2014 version:
“Scenario Outlook & Adequacy Forecasts 2014-2030” and the “System Ade-
quacy Forecast 2010 – 2025”2. Here two scenarios are applied for the future:
A conservative and best estimate. The best estimate is based on information
from the individual TSOs. The conservative scenario is only taking into account
the generating capacity developments which are considered secure.

2 See: www.entsoe.eu/publications/system-development-reports/adequacy-forecasts/Pages/default.aspx

9 | Planning Gap Analysis

 The System Adequacy is described for each country and for six partly overlap-
ping regions. The report is updated yearly.

ENTSO-E also publish the Ten-Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP). This
can be compared to a Master plan, and is published every second year3.

Environment Least-cost planning takes place within certain boundaries. E.g. security of sup-
ply and environment must be respected. So, the least-cost is an economic op-
timisation within these boundaries. Therefore security of supply is described
with N-1-rules and similar restrictions. How to weight the environment is not
yet defined at the regional level.

Environmental consequences from electricity generation have many aspects.

Emissions from power plants, including SO2, NOx and CO2 (and other climate
gasses), are one type of consequences. Such emissions cross borders and may
cause e.g. acid rain in neighbouring countries. This can be seen as an example
of power generation externalities, where one party pays the direct costs of
power generation and benefits from the electricity generated, whilst another
party (potentially not a direct beneficiary of the power production) experi-
ences the negative effects and costs incurred by the acid rain, e.g. damages on
buildings and fishery resources. The cross-border nature of pollution makes it
highly relevant to coordinate the activities to reduce emissions.

EAPP member countries could agree on a common framework regarding emis-

sions. This could be a gradual process, starting with small initial steps, and be-
coming more ambitious over time. Inspiration can be derived from Europe,
where a combination of emission standards4 and economic instruments are
used. For the purpose of planning, a first step could be to agree on the eco-
nomic weight to be assigned to the emissions of SO2, NOx and CO2. E.g. the
price of CO2 in the EU is determined through an emission trading system (EU
ETS)5.

The EU also have binding targets on the share of renewable energy in each
member state. Meeting these targets would achieve both reduction of CO2
emissions, as well as decreased dependence on imported fuels.

3 See: www.entsoe.eu/major-projects/ten-year-network-development-plan/tyndp-2014/Pages/default.aspx
4
E.g.: EU Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council from 2010 on industrial
emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control): Control of emission of plants above 50 MW (ther-
mal)
5 See: ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/index_en.htm

10 | Planning Gap Analysis

 Table 3 show the assumptions used in the scenarios, ‘Main’, ‘CO2 price’ and
‘Renewable’, that have been tested in the current Master plan update (please
see Volume I: Main Report and Volume III: Results Report for more details).
These three scenarios lead to significantly different development pathways
both in terms of generation expansion, and in terms of the optimal capacity of
cross-border transmission lines. The CO2 price levels and renewable genera-
tion share targets should only be understood as examples. Both represent me-
dium- to high level of ambition. Three examples of less ambitious scenarios
are included in the table as illustrations. In the Main scenario (with no re-
quirements on the share renewable energy), the share of renewable energy
peaks at 35% in 2025, and is then decreasing to 25% towards 2040. This is due
to the growth in electricity demand, combined with the limited potential of
cheap renewable hydro.

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Scenario

Main and most
CO2 price, $/ton 0 0 0 0 0
scenarios
5 10 15 20 25 -
10 20 30 40 50 CO2 scenario
Renewable en- Renewable en-
30 35 40 45 50
ergy, % ergy scenario
30 32 36 38 40 -
30 32 33 33 33 -

Table 3. Examples of environmental requirements for CO2 price and Renewable.

Yearly cycle Since the Power Balance Statement is due every year, a standardised time line
could be developed, e.g.
 April 1: Agree on methods for the analyses
 May 1: Data request and data format sent from the EAPP to member
utilities
 July 1: Data sent to EAPP
 August 1: Data for all countries presented to the TSC-P
 September 1: Draft Power Balance Statement presented to the TSC-P
 September 30: Power Balance Statement and data published (this
date is given in the EAPP Draft Planning Code)

11 | Planning Gap Analysis