Main findings and conclusions

6 MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Myanmar’s Renewable Energy Vision modelling update covers the capacity and generation and associated cost outlook for the Base case which corresponds to the NDC baseline to 2030 and is extrapolated to 2050. The IRS and ARS are ambitious renewable energy roadmaps over and above the conditional and unconditional targets set out in the NDC. The IRS and ARS represent generation sector development that is feasible in terms of maintaining a minimum representative level of dispatchable resources in the system, presenting competitive costs all the while achieving much higher renewable energy generation. The IRS and ARS also incorporate minimal hydro development and 100% electricity access facilitated by mini-grid technologies. Other main findings include:

z IRS relies on solar, biomass and BESS, with some gas generation in the mid-term before bringing on hydrogen longterm to meet growing demands. ARS leverages hydrogen generation earlier to achieve 100% RE by 2050. Hydrogen is a fast-emerging technology that can replace current baseload generation technologies. It should be thought of as a representative technology for this category of generation (low emissions, flexible and capable of running baseload).

z Storage is required to support high levels of solar penetration and to provide dispatchable capacity.

z Solar is cheap but intermittent; other RE generation types are considerably more expensive. This leads to higher direct costs. However, the Base case has significant fuel price risks due to exposure to global fuel price dynamics (significant LCOE range). In other words, higher renewable energy generation reduces Myanmar’s reliance on imported fuels and exposure to global fluctuations in fuel prices.

z There are significantly more emissions in the Base compared to the IRS and ARS. Grid intensity in the Base reaches 0.4 t-CO2e/MWh in 2050 compared to 0.1 t-CO2e/MWh in the IRS.

z The Base case has the lowest grid and off-grid LCOE based on the mid-point estimate. However, the IRS and ARS are much more compelling if the cost outlook for capex becomes more favourable (taking the lower range of the LCOE ranges provided).

A summary of the key results outlined above is reported in Table 9 below.

Table 9. Results Summary

BAU BAU IRS IRS ARS ARS

2030 2050 2030 2050 2030 2050

Grid demand 89,522GWh, 14,730MW, 14.2% pa Off-grid demand 2,640GWh 234,467GWh, 38,578MW, 7.9% pa

5,984GWh 83,851GWh, 13,796MW, 13.5% pa

3,960GWh 202,942GWh, 33,391MW, 7.4% pa

8,976GWh 79,605GWh, 13,098MW, 12.9% pa 175,605GWh, 28,893MW, 6.9% pa

6,600GWh 14,960GWh

Energy efficiency and DSM As per MOEE provided outlook (assume 20% by 2030). No DSM

Up to 10% by 2040 (in addition to BAU) Up to 20% by 2040 (in addition to BAU). DSM of up to 10% Coal / gas 13,095MW (57%) 33,401MW (69%) 11,971MW (43%) 8,496MW (12%) 3,316MW (23%) 0,000MW (0%)

Hydro 8,804MW (38%) 8,804MW (16%) 4,296MW (18%) 4,296MW (9%) 4,296MW (20%) 4,296MW (9%)

Solar and wind 2,231MW (5%) 20,241MW (15%) 11,502MW (22%) 20,317MW (22%) 10,670MW (25%) 25,180MW (25%)

Other technologies 0,000MW (0%) 0,000MW (0%) 3,210MW (6%) 8,424MW (52%) 3,860MW (21%) 4,562MW (62%)

RE gen share (includes Hydro) 5% (43%) 15% (31%) 33% (53%) 78% (87%) 53% (75%) 90% (100%)

Grid emissions intensity 0.44 t/CO2e 0.40 t/CO2e 0.29 t/CO2e 0.09 t/CO2e 0.18 t/CO2e 0.03 t/CO2e

Grid + off-grid capex 42-47 (US$ bn) 91-99 (US$ bn) 42-50 (US$ bn) 112-136 (US$ bn) 45-54 (US$ billions) 111-132 (US$ bn)

LCOE US$97-119/MWh US$80-120/MWh US$99-124/MWh US$87-120 /MWh US$101-123 /MWh US$88-113 /MWh