2. CENTRAL AMERICAN DATA2.1 Power production statusAccord<strong>in</strong>g to CEPAL (2011), the annual electricity generation <strong>in</strong> the six Central American countriesraised to 40,386.3 GWh <strong>in</strong> 2010, 2.1% more than the energy registered <strong>in</strong> 2009. As Figure 1 shows,such energy was generated from the follow<strong>in</strong>g sources: hydraulic (54%), thermal (37%), <strong>geothermal</strong>(8%) and w<strong>in</strong>d (1%).Costa Rica has the largest <strong>in</strong>stalled capacity and is the largest producer <strong>in</strong> the region. Nicaragua is thesmallest. After hydro, <strong>geothermal</strong> is the primary renewable energy <strong>in</strong> the region. Costa Rica andNicaragua are the only countries with <strong>in</strong>stalled w<strong>in</strong>d <strong>power</strong>. As Figure 1 shows, at the end of 2010, the<strong>in</strong>stalled capacity for Central America was 11,212.1 MW, 53.8% from thermal (6,033.5 MW), 40%from hydro (4,489 MW), 4.5% from <strong>geothermal</strong> (506.8 MW) and 1.6% from w<strong>in</strong>d (182.6 MW).NET INJECTION BY SOURCE (2010)W<strong>in</strong>d518 GWh1%300025002000INSTALLED ELECTRICITY GENERATION CAPACITY (2010)W<strong>in</strong>d Thermal Geothermal HydroThermal14,197 GWh37%Hydro20,954 GWh54%MW150010005000Geothermal3,124 GWh8%CostaRicaEl SalvadorGuatemalaHondurasNicaraguaPanamáFIGURE 1: Central America. Net <strong>in</strong>jection by source <strong>in</strong> 2010; generation capacity by countryBased on the data presented <strong>in</strong> Figure 1, thermal makes up more than half of the <strong>in</strong>stalled capacity <strong>in</strong>most of the countries, not count<strong>in</strong>g Costa Rica. The strong dependency on hydrocarbons exposes theentire region to the impact of <strong>in</strong>creased <strong>in</strong>ternational prices for petroleum. Central America counts onthe high potential of hydroelectric and <strong>geothermal</strong> resources. In both cases, only a small percentagehas been exploited, 17% of the hydroelectric potential (22,000 MW) and 13% of the <strong>geothermal</strong>potential (4,000 MW).The Central American region has made important reforms regard<strong>in</strong>g electricity. S<strong>in</strong>ce the end of the1980s, electricity production under <strong>central</strong>ized control of the state´s companies was <strong>in</strong>tegrated <strong>in</strong>toliberalized markets, particularly with regard to generation activities. Guatemala, El Salvador,Nicaragua and Panama made profound changes <strong>in</strong> a relatively short period of time <strong>in</strong> their policiesregard<strong>in</strong>g generation, transmission and distribution. In Honduras and Costa Rica, changes were limited<strong>in</strong> form and only concerned generation. In the four countries that reconstructed their policies, thegeneration market operates well. In Honduras, a model of a s<strong>in</strong>gle buyer was created, and <strong>in</strong> CostaRica, private participation was opened for develop<strong>in</strong>g renewable energy resources of limited capacity(Grupo ICE, 2009).2.2 Power production status2.2.1 GuatemalaIn 1996, Guatemala’s Congress voted to reform the electric <strong>power</strong> market, allow<strong>in</strong>g the private sectorto participate <strong>in</strong> a number of <strong>projects</strong>. The reforms gave private companies unrestricted access to the<strong>power</strong> grid, distributors, and wholesale customers, provid<strong>in</strong>g a general unbundl<strong>in</strong>g of generation,transmission, and distribution. The AMM (Adm<strong>in</strong>istrador del Mercado Mayorista) is the wholesale3
market adm<strong>in</strong>istrator, which is a private entity responsible for dispatch<strong>in</strong>g and programm<strong>in</strong>g theoperation and coord<strong>in</strong>ation of the National Power Grid (CNEE, 2011).NET INJECTION BY SOURCE (2010)Imports362.3 GWh4.4%3,0002,500INSTALLED ELECTRICITY GENERATION CAPACITY (1990 - 2010)Hydro Geothermal ThermalThermal3,887.5 GWh47%Hydro3,767.0 GWh45.5%MW2,0001,5001,000500Geothermal259.3 GWh3.1%01990199520002004200520062007200820092010FIGURE 2: Guatemala: Net <strong>in</strong>jection by source <strong>in</strong> 2010;<strong>in</strong>stalled electricity generation capacity 1990-2010In 2010, the total <strong>in</strong>stalled capacity across all available resource types <strong>in</strong> Guatemala was 2,474.5 MWand peak demand was 1,467.9 MW. Thermal had the largest <strong>in</strong>stalled capacity 62.3%,hydroelectric 35.8% and <strong>geothermal</strong> 2.0 %. Figure 2 shows that <strong>in</strong> terms of evolution, <strong>in</strong>stalledcapacity has almost tripled <strong>in</strong> the last 20 years (CEPAL, 2011). Figure 2 shows the yearly demand <strong>in</strong>2010 was 8,276.21 GWh, generated from 45.5% is hydro, 47% thermal, 3.1% <strong>geothermal</strong> and 4.4%from imports (AMM, 2011). In Guatemala, the largest share of net <strong>in</strong>jection (69.8%) came fromprivate hands (CEPAL, 2011).2.2.2 El SalvadorThe local Salvadoran electricity market was liberalized <strong>in</strong> 1998. Distribution was sold to foreign<strong>in</strong>vestors, as was thermal generation. The system operation was separated from CEL (ComisiónEjecutiva Hidroeléctrica del Río Lempa) and given to a private entity, the UT (Unidad deTransacciones S.A. de C.V.), which operates the Contracts Market and the System Regulat<strong>in</strong>g Market(MRS). The transmission company was spun off from CEL, as was <strong>geothermal</strong> generation.In 2010, the total <strong>in</strong>stalled capacity across all available resource types <strong>in</strong> El Salvador was 1,480.3 MWand peak demand was 948 MW. Thermal had the largest <strong>in</strong>stalled capacity of 53.7%,hydroelectric 32.3% and <strong>geothermal</strong> 14%. Figure 3 shows that the evolution of the <strong>in</strong>stalled capacityhas almost doubled <strong>in</strong> the last 20 years (SIGET, 2010). Yearly demand was 5,735.6 GWh, generatedfrom 37.5% thermal, 36.2% hydro, 24.8% <strong>geothermal</strong> and 1.5% from imports. In El Salvador, thelargest share of net <strong>in</strong>jection (63%) came from private hands (CEPAL, 2011).Thermal2,150.2 GWh37.5%NET INJECTION BY SOURCE (2010)Imports85.2 GWh1.5%Geothermal1,421.1 GWh24.8%Hydro2,079.1 GWh36.2%MWINSTALLED ELECTRICITY GENERATION CAPACITY (1990 - 2010)1,600Hydro Geothermal Thermal1,4001,2001,00080060040020001990199419961998200020022004200620082010FIGURE 3: El Salvador: Net <strong>in</strong>jection by source <strong>in</strong> 2010;<strong>in</strong>stalled electricity generation capacity 1990-20104
- Page 1 and 2: GEOTHERMAL TRAINING PROGRAMMEHot sp
- Page 3 and 4: This MSc thesis has also been publi
- Page 5 and 6: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSMy gratitude to the
- Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTSPage1. INTRODUCTIO
- Page 9 and 10: PageAPPENDIX A: FINANCIAL MODEL ...
- Page 12 and 13: 1. INTRODUCTIONRecent research on r
- Page 16 and 17: 2.2.3 HondurasThe Honduran electric
- Page 18 and 19: NET INJECTION BY SOURCE (2010)INSTA
- Page 20 and 21: income taxes for a period of 10 yea
- Page 22 and 23: annual temperature ranges from 17 t
- Page 24 and 25: egional reconnaissance in 1981ident
- Page 26 and 27: 4. GEOTHERMAL ELECTRICAL POWER ASSE
- Page 28 and 29: The net contribution of that power
- Page 30 and 31: Introducing , = , and , = ,
- Page 32 and 33: 9ProductionWellBoiler5Turbine~1046P
- Page 34 and 35: TABLE 3: Parameters and boundary co
- Page 36 and 37: eaches the maximum limit, and for h
- Page 38 and 39: 160180140160tc vap[i], th vap[i]120
- Page 40 and 41: average results, and combining them
- Page 42 and 43: The base cost ( ) can be calculate
- Page 44 and 45: calculation for another separator c
- Page 46 and 47: mass flow rate (kg/s) on the plant
- Page 48 and 49: Table 11 shows a summary of costs f
- Page 50 and 51: 5.6.4 Comparison of capital costs b
- Page 52 and 53: 6. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT
- Page 54 and 55: 6.2 Model structureThe financial fe
- Page 56 and 57: CCF = EBITDA − ∆Working Capital
- Page 58 and 59: Interest on loansFleischmann (2007)
- Page 60 and 61: IRR30%25%IRR CapitalIRR Equity20%Si
- Page 62 and 63: FIGURE 42: Allocation of funds for:
- Page 64 and 65:
340IRR Free Cash Flow to Equity [ %
- Page 66 and 67:
flash technology is between 0.3 and
- Page 68 and 69:
Energy Price Availability Factor O&
- Page 70 and 71:
FIGURE 50: Density and cumulative p
- Page 72 and 73:
In Chapter 6, Figure 44 illustrated
- Page 74 and 75:
The internal rate of return is offs
- Page 76 and 77:
Cengel, Y. and Tuner, R., 2005: Fun
- Page 78 and 79:
IEAb, 2011: Technology roadmap: Geo
- Page 80 and 81:
Salmon, J., Meurice, J., Wobus, N.,
- Page 82 and 83:
APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL MO
- Page 84 and 85:
APPENDIX C: INVESTMENT AND FINANCIN
- Page 86 and 87:
APPENDIX E: BALANCE SHEETBALANCE SH