10.1007/s40095-020-00369-7

Spatio-temporal assessment and economic analysis of a grid-connected island province toward a 35% or greater domestic renewable energy portfolio: a case in Bohol, Philippines

  1. School of Engineering, University of San Carlos, Cebu City, PH Electrical Engineering Department, Bohol Island State University, Tagbilaran City, PH
  2. College of Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 639798, SG OceanPixel Pte Ltd, The NEST, NTU Innovation Centre, Singapore, 638075, SG

Published in Issue 2021-01-01

How to Cite

Pojadas, D. J., & Abundo, M. L. S. (2021). Spatio-temporal assessment and economic analysis of a grid-connected island province toward a 35% or greater domestic renewable energy portfolio: a case in Bohol, Philippines. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering, 12(2 (June 2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-020-00369-7

Abstract

Abstract The year 2020 marks the start of the implementation of the Renewable Portfolio Standards in the Philippines. To raise the country’s renewable energy (RE) share to 35% by 2030 (aspirational target), an annual minimum incremental RE of 1% has been imposed to all mandated participants. This local-level policy implementation has allowed the assessment of RE resource adequacy to be carried out on a smaller geographical scale (i.e., province level). The case for grid-connected island provinces, such as our study area, can be more interesting because of the opportunity to self-sustainable energy production. In this paper, we assess the adequacy of domestic RE resources of Bohol province to reach this target by estimating the technical potential of solar, wind, biomass, and hydropower using spatio-temporal datasets. Then, for every identified potential RE project, we calculate the busbar levelized cost. We also evaluate the province's base RE share to assess the extent to which the technical potential can improve its RE penetration in four distinct domestic and imported energy generation scenarios. With 20 different scenarios of additional RE capacity, we generate RE portfolios for the minimum target RE share (35%), as well as the 50% and maximum. The results revealed that, when the country’s RE penetration continues, Bohol’s hydropower potential is not enough to meet the 35% target. Seasonal renewables are also insufficient for a 50% target. In several scenarios, the province’s energy self-sustainability can be possible at reasonable costs when variable RE technologies are included in the portfolio.

Keywords

  • Renewable energy,
  • Philippines,
  • Spatio-temporal assessment,
  • Economic analysis,
  • Renewable portfolio standards,
  • LCOE

References

  1. Department of Energy: Providing rules and guidelines governing the establishment of the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Taguig City, Philippines, (2017)
  2. Department of Energy, “2019 Power Statistics,” 2020. [Online].
  3. https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/energy_statistics/2019_power_statistic_03_gross_generation_per_plant_Type_per_grid.pdf
  4. . Accessed 30 Jun 2020
  5. BEDAG-TWG: “Bohol Island Power Development Plan 2016–2045,” Bohol Provincial Planning and Development Office, Tagbilaran City, Philippines (2018)
  6. Department of Energy, “2019 Power Statistics,” 2020. [Online].
  7. https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/energy_statistics/2019_power_statistic_09_monthly_system_peak_demand_per_visayas_sub_grid.pdf
  8. . Accessed 30 Jun 2020
  9. Van Dael et al. (2012) Determining potential locations for biomass valorization using a macro screening approach (pp. 175-186)
  10. Baseer et al. (2017) GIS-based site suitability analysis for wind farm development in Saudi Arabia (pp. 1166-1176)
  11. Jangid (2016) Potential zones identification for harvesting wind energy resources in desert region of India—A multi criteria evaluation approach using remote sensing and GIS (pp. 1-10)
  12. Höfer et al. (2016) Wind farm siting using a spatial Analytic Hierarchy Process approach: a case study of the Städteregion Aachen (pp. 222-243)
  13. Tegou et al. (2010) Environmental management framework for wind farm siting: Methodology and case study (pp. 2134-2147)
  14. Uyan (2013) GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey (pp. 11-17)
  15. Ali et al. (2019) GIS based site suitability assessment for wind and solar farms in Songkhla, Thailand (pp. 1360-1372)
  16. Watson and Hudson (2015) Landscape and Urban Planning Regional Scale wind farm and solar farm suitability assessment using GIS-assisted multi-criteria evaluation (pp. 20-31)
  17. Vasileiou et al. (2017) GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis for site selection of hybrid offshore wind and wave energy systems in Greece (pp. 745-757)
  18. Konstantinos et al. (2019) A Decision Support System methodology for selecting wind farm installation locations using AHP and TOPSIS: Case study in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace region, Greece (pp. 232-246)
  19. Atici et al. (2015) A GIS-based Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis approach for wind power plant site selection (pp. 86-96)
  20. M. Tavana, F. J. SantosArteaga, S. Mohammadi, and M. Alimohammadi, “A fuzzy multi-criteria spatial decision support system for solar farm location planning,”
  21. Energy Strateg. Rev.
  22. , vol. 18, pp. 93–105, 2017.
  23. Shorabeh et al. (2019) A risk-based multi-criteria spatial decision analysis for solar power plant site selection in different climates: A case study in Iran (pp. 958-973)
  24. Noorollahi et al. (2016) Multi-criteria decision support system for wind farm site selection using GIS (pp. 38-50)
  25. Ayodele et al. (2018) A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria (pp. 1853-1869)
  26. Sánchez-lozano et al. (2016) GIS-based onshore wind farm site selection using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making methods. Evaluating the case of Southeastern Spain (pp. 86-102)
  27. Villacreses et al. (2017) Wind farms suitability location using geographical information system (GIS), based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods: The case of continental Ecuador (pp. 275-286)
  28. Vafaeipour et al. (2014) Assessment of regions priority for implementation of solar projects in Iran: New application of a hybrid multi-criteria decision making approach (pp. 653-663)
  29. Perpiña Castillo et al. (2016) “An assessment of the regional potential for solar power generation in EU-28 (pp. 86-99)
  30. Mahdy and Bahaj (2018) Multi criteria decision analysis for offshore wind energy potential in Egypt (pp. 278-289)
  31. Mensour et al. (2019) A geographical information system-based multi-criteria method for the evaluation of solar farms locations: a case study in Souss-Massa area, southern Morocco (pp. 900-919)
  32. Gavériaux et al. (2019) Annals of GIS GIS-based multi-criteria analysis for offshore wind turbine deployment in Hong Kong 25(3) (pp. 207-218)
  33. Ghasemi et al. (2019) Theoretical and technical potential evaluation of solar power generation in Iran (pp. 1250-1261)
  34. Dhunny et al. (2019) Identification of optimal wind, solar and hybrid wind-solar farming sites using fuzzy logic modelling
  35. Doorga et al. (2019) Multi-criteria GIS-based modelling technique for identifying potential solar farm sites: a case study in Mauritius (pp. 1201-1219)
  36. Asakereh et al. (2017) A GIS-based Fuzzy-AHP method for the evaluation of solar farms locations: case study in Khuzestan province, Iran (pp. 342-353)
  37. Farthing et al. (2016) Utility-Scale Solar PV in South Carolina: Analysis of Suitable Lands and Geographical Potential 1(2) (pp. 1-15)
  38. Deshmukh et al. (2019) Geospatial and techno-economic analysis of wind and solar resources in India (pp. 947-960)
  39. Pantusa and Tomasicchio (2019) Large-scale offshore wind production in the Mediterranean Sea 6(1) (pp. 1-20)
  40. Schallenberg-Rodríguez and Montesdeoca (2018) Spatial planning to estimate the offshore wind energy potential in coastal regions and islands. Practical case: The Canary Islands (pp. 91-103)
  41. Kim et al. (2016) Offshore wind farm site selection study around Jeju Island, South Korea (pp. 619-628)
  42. Anwarzai and Nagasaka (2017) Utility-scale implementable potential of wind and solar energies for Afghanistan using GIS multi-criteria decision analysis (pp. 150-160)
  43. Kim et al. (2018) Site selection for offshore wind farms in the southwest coast of South Korea (pp. 151-162)
  44. Polo et al. (2015) Solar resources and power potential mapping in Vietnam using satellite-derived and GIS-based information (pp. 348-358)
  45. Mentis et al. (2016) A geospatial assessment of the techno-economic wind power potential in India using geographical restrictions (pp. 77-88)
  46. Manomaiphiboon et al. (2017) Wind energy potential analysis for Thailand: Uncertainty from wind maps and sensitivity to turbine technology 14(6) (pp. 528-539)
  47. Wong (2016) Estimation of Hong Kong’s solar energy potential using GIS and remote sensing technologies (pp. 325-335)
  48. Kusre et al. (2010) Assessment of hydropower potential using GIS and hydrological modeling technique in Kopili River basin in Assam (India) (pp. 298-309)
  49. Bódis et al. (2014) Could Europe have more mini hydro sites? A suitability analysis based on continentally harmonized geographical and hydrological data (pp. 794-808)
  50. Pandey et al. (2015) Assessment of hydropower potential using spatial technology and SWAT modelling in the Mat River, southern Mizoram, India 60(10) (pp. 1651-1665)
  51. Tarife et al. (2017) Application of geographic information system (GIS) in hydropower resource assessment: a case study in Misamis Occidental, Philippines 8(7) (pp. 507-511)
  52. Garegnani et al. (2018) GIS-based approach for assessing the energy potential and the financial feasibility of run-off-river hydropower in Alpine valleys (pp. 709-723)
  53. Beccali et al. (2009) Assessment of bioenergy potential in Sicily: A GIS-based support methodology (pp. 79-87)
  54. Grilli et al. (2017) Cost-benefit analysis with GIS: an open source module for the forest bioenergy sector (pp. 175-179)
  55. Teixeira (2018) Forest biomass power plant installation scenarios (pp. 35-47)
  56. Lopez, A., Roberts, B., Heimiller, D., Blair, N., Porro, G.: U.S. renewable energy technical potentials: a GIS-based analysis. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2012). Available:
  57. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51946.pdf
  58. . Accessed 2 Dec 2020
  59. Deng (2015) Quantifying a realistic, worldwide wind and solar electricity supply (pp. 239-252)
  60. Nagababu et al. (2017) Estimation of technical and economic potential of offshore wind along the coast of India (pp. 79-91)
  61. Hong and Möller (2020) Offshore wind energy potential in China: Under technical, spatial and economic constraints (pp. 4482-4491)
  62. Soulouknga et al. (2020) Evaluation of the cost of producing wind-generated electricity in Chad 11(2) (pp. 275-287)
  63. Ohunakin et al. (2013) Economic analysis of wind energy conversion systems using levelized cost of electricity and present value cost methods in Nigeria 4(2) (pp. 2-9)
  64. Ram et al. (2018) A comparative analysis of electricity generation costs from renewable, fossil fuel and nuclear sources in G20 countries for the period 2015–2030 (pp. 687-704)
  65. Maclaurin, G., et al.: The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model: a geospatial platform for technical potential and supply curve modeling. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2019). Available:
  66. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/73067.pdf
  67. . Accessed 2 Dec 2020
  68. Wu, G.C., Deshmukh, R., Ndhlukula, K., Radojicic, T., Reilly, J.: Renewable energy zones for the Africa clean energy corridor. International Renewable Energy Agency and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL report number 187271 (2015). Available:
  69. https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2015/IRENA-LBNL_Africa-RE-_CEC_2015.pdf
  70. . Accessed 2 Dec 2020
  71. The World Bank: “Solar resource data: Solargis. (2019)
  72. Ramachandra et al. (2005) Decision support system to assess regional biomass energy Potential 1(4) (pp. 407-428)
  73. Manzano-Agugliaro et al. (2017) An overview of research and energy evolution for small hydropower in Europe (pp. 476-489)
  74. IRENA: Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2017.
  75. International Renewable Energy Agency
  76. (2018)
  77. New England States Committee on Electricity: Renewable Resource Supply Curve Report (2012)
  78. NREL: 2019 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) (2019)
  79. Mills et al. (2011) Exploration of resource and transmission expansion decisions in the Western Renewable Energy Zone initiative 39(3) (pp. 1732-1745)
  80. Department of Energy, “2019 Power Statistics,” 2020. [Online]. Available:
  81. https://www.doe.gov.ph/sites/default/files/pdf/energy_statistics/2019_power_statistic_04_gross_generation_per_plant_Type_per_visayas_sub_grid.pdf
  82. . Accessed: 2 Jul 2020.
  83. Unknown (2017) Taguig City
  84. Pojadas and Abundo (2020) Datasets for spatial analysis of potential inland renewable portfolio for Bohol, Philippines https://doi.org/10.17632/92xb8tnr9x.2
  85. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation (2012)
  86. AL Badwawi et al. (2015) A review of hybrid solar PV and wind energy system 3(3) (pp. 127-138)
  87. USAID and the Department of Energy:“Greening the grid: Solar and Wind Grid Integration Study for the Luzon-Visayas System of the Philippines (2018)
  88. Notton (2018) Intermittent and stochastic character of renewable energy sources: Consequences, cost of intermittence and benefit of forecasting (pp. 96-105)
  89. Jurasz et al. (2020) A review on the complementarity of renewable energy sources: concept, metrics, application and future research directions (pp. 703-724)