The Role of Renewable Energy in CO2 Mitigation from Power Sector in Cambodia

Abstract

The power generation in Cambodia is dominated by hydropower and coal. In 2015, the shares of electricity generation generated from coal, hydro, oil and biomass were 48.1%, 47.40%, 3.65% and 0.85%, respectively. The government of Cambodia has set up the Power Development Plan (PDP) 2020 which mainly emphasizes the development of renewable energy and coal-based power. The drastically increasing share of coal-based electricity generation in the recent years is providing an alarming signal in terms of the increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the power sector. Recently, renewable energy and efficient technologies have played an important role in GHG emission’s reduction. The aim of this paper is to quantify the potentials of renewable energy and carbon dioxide (CO₂) mitigation options in the power sector of Cambodia. In this study, the Long-range Energy Planning (LEAP) model is used to analyze the electricity generation mix and CO₂ mitigation during 2015 to 2050. The BAU scenario is constructed in this study following the power development targets of PDP2020, and the share of renewable energy-based power generation is assumed to reach 44% by 2050. Three countermeasure (CM) scenarios of CO₂ mitigation (namely, CM1, CM2, and CM3) are modeled along with the Business as Usual (BAU) scenario. Two countermeasure scenarios, namely CM1 and CM2 considering an additional 5% of power generation based on solar PV and biomass-based technologies have been constructed in this study respectively. In the CM3 scenario, the CO₂ mitigation effects of replacing 50% of conventional coal-fired power plants with the efficient carbon capture storage (CCS) technology in coal power plants have been analyzed. The results demonstrate that in the BAU scenario, electricity supply and CO₂ emissions from the power sector will increase to 65.9TWh and 14,683.5kt-CO_2eq, respectively, in 2050. In countermeasures scenarios, CO₂ emissions in 2050 would be reduced by 45% in the CM3, 15% in CM1 and 12.47% in the CM2 scenario when compared to the BAU scenario.