تولید برق و برنامه ریزی شبکه های برون مرزی برای بازار یکپارچه برق ASEAN: یک مدل برنامه ریزی خطی پویا

The central question raised in this study is how to meet the growing power demand in ASEAN countries in the next two decades. Uneven distribution of energy resources and uneven paces of economic development among ASEAN countries complicate the question. The ASEAN Power Grid (APG) that interconnects all ASEAN countries and enables cross-border power trade could potentially provide cost-saving solutions. This study builds a dynamic linear programming model and simulates optimal development paths of power generation capacities in ASEAN countries. Scenarios are built around the assumptions about the power trade policy regimes. It is found that more open power trade regime encourages development of renewable sources of power generation, and accrues more savings in the total cost of meeting the growing future power demand from 2010 to 2030.

Electricity demand in the ASEAN region is projected to grow 6.1–7.2% per annum. At such speeds, according to the Institute of Energy Economics Japan (IEEJ) [1], it would arrive at 3–4 times of current level by 2030. Comparing to the Asia Pacific region as a whole for which the electricity demand grows at 3.4% per annum, as Asian Development Bank (ADB) [2] predicts, ASEAN's demand for electricity is growing especially fast, thanks to the exceptionally high economic growth prospect of the region. Meeting such high growing demand will be extremely challenging although ASEAN countries are considered rich in energy resources. ASEAN Center for Energy [3] and ASEAN Ministers Meeting [4] estimated that the ten member countries of ASEAN have 22 billion barrels of oil reserve, 227 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserve, 46 billion tons of coal reserve, 234 GW of hydropower potential and 20 GW of geothermal capacity. However, the distribution of the resources is unbalanced. Most of the hydropower resource is located within the Greater Mekong Subregion that includes Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Viet Nam, as well as Yunnan and Guangxi Provinces in southern China. Coal resource concentrates in Indonesia and Malaysia. Most of the gas and oil reserves are in Malaysia and Indonesia. Apart from uneven energy resource endowment, Atchatavivan [5] argued that the unbalanced level of economic development among the ASEAN countries adds to the difficulty in utilizing these resources to meet the fast-growing electricity demand. In vision of the above situation, an ASEAN Power Grid (APG) that links the energy resource-rich and the energy resource-poor countries could potentially play an important role in reducing the overall cost to the region to meet its growing electricity demand. The ASEAN 2020 Vision adopted in 1997 by the heads of state at the 2nd ASEAN Informal Summit held in Kuala Lumpur envisioned an energy-interconnected Southeast Asia through the APG and the Trans-ASEAN Gas Pipeline (TAGP) Projects, as reported by the ASEAN Secretariat [6]. A working group was established in 2000 to undertake an ASEAN Interconnection Master Plan Study (AIMS), completed in 2003. Based upon an optimization study, eleven potential power grid interconnection projects were selected for potential implementation through 2020. The Heads of ASEAN Power Utilities/Authorities (HAPUA), a specialist organization under the ASEAN Center for Energy (ACE), monitors the implementation of the APG. The quantitative analysis of regional power market integration in ASEAN has not been studied extensively, and a few existing studies have focused on the institutional and policy aspects of regional development in relation with energy cooperation. The policy and institutional barriers to the formation of the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) energy cooperation is discussed by Yu [7] and an update on the progress of GMS power market integration is provided by the Economic Consulting Associates [8]. Adopting the Purdue Electricity Trade Model – a cost minimization model for energy resource planning, Yu et al. [9] assesses the potential of hydropower development and free power trade between China and ASEAN countries. Using an energy-engineering model, Watcharejyothin and Shrestha [10] analyze the power development planning of Lao PDR and Thailand and explore the power trade opportunities between the two countries, focusing on hydropower. In sum, a systematic analysis on the planning of power development and the economic benefits with an integrated ASEAN power market has not been conducted. This study serves to quantify the economic benefits of the APG, as well as to propose an optimized development plan of power generation capacity in the region, based on the APG. Accordingly the purposes of this study are on the one hand to justify the investments on the APG, and on the other hand to identify the priorities in developing new power generation capacity and transmission lines to meet the growing demand over time. For these purposes, a dynamic linear programming model is built to simulate the demand and supply of electricity in the ASEAN region in the next few decades. The following section presents more details about our methodology.

The central question raised in this study is how to meet the growing power demand in ASEAN countries in the next two decades. The region is known to be rich in energy resources on the one hand, and experiencing fast economic growth which drives power demand on the other. Uneven distribution of energy resources and uneven pace of economic development among ASEAN countries complicates the question. This study applies a dynamic linear programming model to simulate the optimal development paths of power generation capacities in the ASEAN region, assuming that the APG is in place. The model is based on Turvey and Anderson [11] and Chang and Tay [12] with the further development of many innovations. First, the model is extended from a single country model into a model of multiple countries with cross-border power trade. Second, the model incorporates the costs and losses of power transmission between countries. Third, the cost of carbon emissions from power generation activities is also taken into consideration in this model. Therefore, this model is based on the concept of levelized social cost of electricity. Three scenarios are simulated to examine the impact of power trade policy regimes in the region. The first scenario assumes that no power trade is allowed. The second scenario assumes that 20% of a country's power demand could be met by power trade. And the third scenario assumes that 50% of a country's power demand could be met by power trade. The simulation results lead us to several interesting observations. First, in the scenarios that open power trade, the APG enables active cross-border power trade between countries rich in resources and countries with high demand. Second, with 50% power trade, the total cost to meet the growing electricity demand during 2010–2030 is reduced by around 3.9% as compared to the no power trade scenario. In absolute terms, this saving is equivalent to USD 29 billion. With 20% of demand allowed to be met by power trade, the total cost to meet the growing electricity demand during 2010–2030 decreases by 3% as compared to the no power trade scenario. In absolute terms, the savings amount to USD 20.9 billion. The savings are net gains after all costs related to the APG have been paid off. Third, in the 20% power trade scenario, the three countries which are rich in hydropower resource dominate the power export market in the region. In the 50% power trade scenario, Thailand notably replaces Cambodia as the third most important exporter. This is because of the geographical position of Thailand, which links northern ASEAN countries to the southeastern ASEAN countries through the Malaysia peninsular. The problem of where to build power generation capacity and to export power does not only depend on the costs of power generation in the country, but also on the geographical location of the country which best saves transmission costs and transmission losses. Fourth, opening power trade in the ASEAN countries would encourage the development of power generation from renewable sources, especially hydro, geothermal, and wind. Based on the above, the following policy implications could be drawn. • Hydropower appears to be fully utilized when full-scale power trade across the region is allowed and produce the lowest cost option of power mix to meet the electricity demand in the region. This strengthens the necessity of integration of power infrastructure in the region such as the development of APG. • Renewable energy for power generation appears to be utilized more under the scenarios with open power trade. Power trade policy regime is therefore important in this respect. • Considering the energy security concern among the high import-dependency countries, the 50% power trade scenario seems to be more realistic in the region than a free power trade scenario. And this power trade policy regime better supports the development of indigenous renewable energy in the region. • The simulation results also provide references to the time sequence of power generation capacity development and cross-border power grid development in the region.