On thermal power plants
Overview Of Thermal Power’s Current Global Market Conditions
The
past few years have been a difficult period for the thermal power
generation industry. In 2017, only 20 GW of new capacity were added
to the entire US grid: that was 10 GW of natural gas, 6 GW of wind
and 4 GW of solar. In
the 1999 global market bubble, only one customer, Duke Energy,
ordered 104 GE gas turbines in one year, which by the capacity
standards of the era comes to almost 10 GW, i.e. one customer bought
from one supplier GTCC orders equal to all the GTCC capacity added in
the US last year. No wonder GE is in trouble, and so are Siemens and
MHPS, with global capacity to produce turbines at over triple the
actual numbers being built and sold.
Last
month’s "ElectrifyEurope" 2018 conference in Wien
Austria, (Powergen Europe) was emblematic of the current global state
of power business. Neither GE, nor Siemens, nor Ansaldo had a booth.
At the registration, the traditional long lines were missing, and, at
the end of the show there were many hundreds of unclaimed badges
still at registration. The energy show was dead. Major global EPC
firms are exiting Power business, PB did exit, and Fluor has stated
they will no longer bid fixed-price EPC contracts for Power Plants,
which means an effective exit; and there are hints that Bechtel may
also exit soon. The following recent reports from the US’ EIA helps
to explain the US situation. The electricity consumption growth rate
in the US was in the 5% range in 1990, down to 2% in the ’92/’93
recession, up to about 3% in the ’94-’99 bubble, but dropping to
less than 1% with the 2000 crash; rebounding to 1.5% then into
negative territory with the 2008 crash. Since then, it has oscillated
around zero despite the recovery, presumably due to increasing energy
efficiency in illumination, lights, TV’s, home appliances, etc. The
EIA thinks it will rebound then stay in the 1 % range for a few
decades.
The
next recent report shows the mix of “fuels” used to generate
electricity, up to 2017 it is fact, and beyond it is “group think”,
(or common wisdom). The group think says that by 2050 about 37% of US
electricity will be generated from natural gas; about 31% from
renewables, 21% from coal, and 11% from nuclear and other –
implying that natural gas GTCC is very far from being dead yet.
Our
own instinct is that coal will be much lower by 2050, and renewables
are unlikely to exceed 25% because batteries are unlikely to prove
economical on a mega scale, hydro storages are limited, so it seems
that natural gas will be in the 50-60% range by 2050. As such, we
remain sanguine about our business for the long term.The fuel mix
well into the future is one side of the coin. The other is plant
ageing, rehabilitaion, repowering and replacement of the existing
equipment in operation. There are other business opportunities, such
as Pumped hydro, off-shore wind, compressed-air energy storage,
battery storage in industrial facilities, efficient small power
plants, hydrogen from coal with carbon capture, carbon capture for
fossil fired power plants. There are many project opportunities to
compensate for lack of 1000-MW thermal power plant projects (except
in the Far East). Problem is lack of regulatory framework and firm
revenue stream, which renders projects not "bankable".
The
US coal and nuclear plants are very old, mostly built in the 1960’s
– 1980’s. GTCC’s have a shorter service life than coal or
nuclear, and the ones built before 2000 are at or past their useful
life. Thus, even with zero electricity demand growth, there will have
to be a wave of new capacity within the next ten years, another
reason to remain optimistic for the longer term.
Although
all the above observations are focused on the USA, the situation in
Europe is very similar, and even worse. In Asia things are much
better, but the big picture still has many similarities, except for
the time shift due to Asia being in a major growth phase, similar to
the West a few decades ago.
What
does all this mean for the market professionals?
(1)
We’ve seen a steady decline in business for the past three years,
and this decline will continue or even get worse for another year or
two;
(2)
There should be a significant rebound in business at some point, and
our guess is that this will be by 2020;
(3)
We shall weather this decline due to our conservative approach and
stable income revenue model;
(4)
This decline should weed out weaker players, with their Ponzi-scheme
revenue model that lacks required annual income to turn their
business,
(5)
Irrespective of our own views, we have to serve the market, and right
now the market’s group-think is renewables and batteries,
So
we have to play catch-up as quickly as we can in this area because we
were all late in acknowledging this trend, but so were GE, Siemens,
MHPS and the other OEM’s.
---
Haluk
Direskeneli, is a graduate of METU Mechanical Engineering department
(1973). He worked in public, private enterprises, USA Turkish JV
companies (B&W, CSWI, AEP), in fabrication, basic and detail
design, marketing, sales and project management of thermal power
plants. He is currently working as freelance consultant/ energy
analyst with thermal power plants basic/ detail design software
expertise for private engineering companies, investors, universities
and research institutions. He is a member of ODTÜ Alumni and Chamber
of Turkish Mechanical Engineers Energy Working Group.
Prinkipo,
22 June 2018
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home