Thermal Energy Storage in Greater Copenhagen: A study of the role of calculative devices and social perceptions in facilitating the implementation of thermal energy storage in Greater Copenhagen
Authors
Bertelsen, Nis ; Reinert Petersen, Uni
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2017
Submitted on
2017-06-08
Pages
162
Abstract
Dette studie undersøger, hvorfor det er svært for aktører i Storkøbenhavns fjernvarmesystem at beslutte sig for at investere i Pit Thermal Energy Storage (PTES), en teknologi til at lagre varme i fjernvarmen. Problemet er et klassisk hønen-og-ægget-dilemma: Man vil kende fordelene, før man investerer, men de kan først ses tydeligt, når teknologien er taget i brug. Vi kombinerer to tilgange for at gøre beslutningen lettere. For det første undersøger vi, hvordan forskellige aktører værdisætter PTES, og hvilke typer gevinster de lægger vægt på. For det andet bruger vi teknisk-økonomisk energisystemmodellering – computersimuleringer, der samler tekniske og økonomiske forhold – til at beregne og synliggøre mulige effekter. Analysen viser, at aktørerne anvender flere forskellige værdirammer. Nogle overlapper, mens andre peger i forskellige retninger, hvilket skaber usikkerhed om, hvad PTES faktisk kan. Modellen kan bekræfte nogle af disse antagelser og afkræfte andre, og dermed reducere usikkerheden om forventede fordele. De beregnede fordele omfatter blandt andet øget produktion i kraftvarmeanlæg (CHP), mindre brug af naturgasfyrede kedler og lavere varmeudgifter for transmissionsselskaberne. På baggrund af de to analyser skitserer vi en mulig forretningsmodel, der beskriver, hvordan investeringerne kan deles mellem de aktører, som forventes at få gavn af teknologien.
This study explores why it is difficult for actors in the Greater Copenhagen district heating system to decide whether to invest in Pit Thermal Energy Storage (PTES), a technology for storing heat in district heating. The challenge is a classic catch‑22: investors want clear evidence of benefits before committing funds, but those benefits are only fully visible after implementation. We combine two approaches to make the decision more informed. First, we examine how different stakeholders value PTES and which types of gains they prioritize. Second, we use techno‑economic energy system modeling—computer simulations that integrate technical and economic factors—to calculate and make potential effects visible. The analysis identifies several valuation framings among stakeholders. Some overlap, while others diverge, creating uncertainty about what PTES can deliver. The model supports some framings and challenges others, thereby reducing uncertainty about the expected benefits. The modeled benefits include increased combined heat and power (CHP) production, reduced use of natural gas boilers, and lower heat costs for transmission companies. Based on these two analyses, we outline a potential business model that describes ways for the beneficiaries to share the investment.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Keywords
Documents