Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan GRIP 2017

6.1 Denmark and Sweden

Remaining Flexibility Denmark is Sweden’s supplier of gas. Until 2022, Denmark will only be indirectly connected to the other BEMIP GRIP countries (via Germany). In 2022, Baltic Pipe between Denmark and Poland is planned to be commissioned. Baltic Pipe is one of the PCI projects in the third infrastructure scenario (Low+PCI projects in the BEMIP GRIP countries). The impact of Baltic Pipe can be seen in the simulation results for both Denmark and Sweden for 2025: Blue Transition scenario: \\ For Denmark the remaining flexibility increases from 7% to 16% in “Design Case” and from 18% to 28% in demand case “2W” (constant high demand in two weeks). For Sweden the remaining flexibility increases from 6% to 33% in “Design Case” and from 12% to 42% in demand case “2W”. Green scenario: \\ For Denmerk the remaining flexibility increases from 31% to 43% in “Design Case” and from 43% to 58% in demand case “2W”. For Sweden the remain- ing flexibility increases from 21% to 48% in “Design Case” and from 21% to 51% in demand case “2W”.

Disruption rate The disruption rate is zero for Denmark and Sweden in all cases. This follows from the fact that the remaining flexibility in all simulation cases is positive.

6.2 Estonia

Remaining Flexibility New infrastructure greatly improves the gas supply security in different gas disrup- tion scenarios. This is illustrated by the increase in remaining flexibility in scenarios with more of the PCI list projects implemented. The analysis of disruption scenarios emphasises the value of infrastructure in extreme supply situations. In most cases of supply disruption between Belarus and Lithuania, the remaining flexibility for Estonia remains in the range of 55% to 100%. For this disruption case, the only instances where the remaining flexibility is lower in the range of 0% to 38%, is for the Low+GIPL scenario in 2025. This is because the model assumes that the Klaipėda LNG terminal will stop operating in 2024 since the current lease contract for the floating terminal will elapse in this year. This implies that GIPL alone cannot provide enough flexibility for Estonia as an alternative supply source during high-gas demand periods. To increase flexibility for Estonia, interconnectors like Balticconnector and potentially LNG terminals are needed in addition to GIPL.

BEMIP Gas Regional Investment Plan 2017 |

105