Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan GRIP 2017

14-day average demand remains lower than the design case demand, gas supply to Finland via Balticconnector is sufficient to maintain the 14-day average demand level but not the design-case level (1-day demand) in the Blue Transition case. The remaining flexibility is above zero, meaning sufficient supply compared to the demand, for the design case (1-day demand) and 14-days demand case in the Green scenario. Based on the analysis, in order for Balticconnector to provide Finland with sufficient remaining flexibility for the Blue Transition and Green scenar- ios by 2025, all PCI projects in the BEMIP region (especially GIPL and projects in the Baltic States) will have to be commissioned. Disrupted Rate The disrupted rate to Finland is mainly relevant in the disruption case where supplies to Finland and the Baltic States are disrupted, being at almost 100% in all cases regardless of the demand scenario (Green or Blue) and infrastructure scenario. An exception is in the case when all infrastructure projects (especially GIPL, Baltic- connector and other projects in the Baltic States) are commissioned in 2020 and 2025. This would mean that all PCI projects will have to be commissioned in the Baltic states in order to have a noteworthy positive impact on Finland. In other words, the implementation of only the GIPL or PCI projects in the Baltic States would not benefit Finland. In the infrastructure scenario where all PCI projects are commissioned in the BEMIP GRIP region, the positive impact to the disruption rate in Finland is full for 2025 and almost full in 2020 in the 14-day disruption case of both the Green and Blue transi- tion scenarios but not in the demand case. Thus, implementing all PCI projects in the BEMIP GRIP region would not be sufficient to increase capacity to Finland in a peak demand scenario. Security of supply in Latvia is guaranteed by Inčukalns UGS, and it is a key element for the security of supply of the entire East-Baltic region. However, in order to provide this guarantee, a certain level of the remaining gas in the storage shall be maintained. This would greatly influence the modelling results. BEMIP GRIP 2017 modelling does not include this kind of analysis, but it clearly shows that by implementing PCIs, including enhancement of Inčukalns UGS, remaining flexibility for Latvia and also for Estonia and Lithuania would increase while the disruption rate would decrease. It shall also be noted that due to expiration of the leasing agreement for the floating unit of Klaipėda LNG terminal in 2024, for modelling purposes it is assumed that there will be no gas supplied through Klaipėda LNG terminal starting from 2025, which also has negative impact on gas supply security for the region, including for Latvia. Even if all gas supply routes are cut off, Latvia alone would not experience any winter gas shortages in cases of Russian or Belarus gas supply disruptions under the condition that sufficient volumes of gas are injected into storage. Since cooperative approach was used for modelling purposes, the lack of the Klaipėda LNG terminal would also result in a lack of gas in the region, especially in cases of gas supply disruption from Russia. In cases of Russian gas supply disruptions, which is the most challenging case for the whole region, GRIP modelling results indicate that the remaining flexibility for Latvia is currently 0% under the Blue Transition scenario for FID projects +GIPL and imple- mentation of GIPL increases it to only 29%. However, construction of the regional PCIs, which also includes enhancement of Inčukalns UGS, improves the remaining flexibility for Latvia to an acceptable level of 68–77%. The Green scenario produces

6.4 Latvia

BEMIP Gas Regional Investment Plan 2017 |

107