Comparison of Scenarios for the Mexican Electricity System for 2050 Energy Transition Law Objectives—Pre COVID-19 Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This research intuitively forecasts the Mexican electricity system with several feasible scenario. 

the research idea is not a new but experimental setup is rigorous and interesting to readers. 

However, I recommend that the target journal should be changed in MDPI journals. like Energies or Sustainablilty. 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

Point 1: This research intuitively forecasts the Mexican electricity system with several feasible scenario. The research idea is not a new but experimental setup is rigorous and interesting to readers. However, I recommend that the target journal should be changed in MDPI journals like Energies or Sustainability. 

 

Response 1: We appreciate your recommendation, however, the authors had received a proposal to publish this work in this special issue because This Special Issue on "Thermal Process Engineering and Simulation" seeks high-quality simulated or experimentally evaluated papers focused on novel advances in technology that solve local problems that may eventually serve as a framework for similar thermal processes elsewhere.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript, at the present form needs major changes. Therefore,  in the following, I enlist some major issues that need to be incorporated by the authors.

·         The contribution is no more than a student paper. The Introduction should make a compelling case for why the study is useful along with a clear statement of its novelty or originality by providing relevant information.

·         Improve the literature review of the knowledge recently published in journals.

·         In order to make the proposed method understandable, authors need to add a graphical overview as Figure 1 is not properly defined.

·         The results should be extended because there are too many figures / graphs, but proper explanation is missing.

·         Authors need to add more key findings in conclusion and also limitations of this research.

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

 

Point 1: The contribution is no more than a student paper. The Introduction should make a compelling case for why the study is useful along with a clear statement of its novelty or originality by providing relevant information.

 

Response 1:

Introduction section was edited with actual references and the originality was resalted as follow from lines 189 to 194:

The analysis shows two average proposed consumption for the population based on the historic data and three probable population growth, that never were analyzed as base for evaluating the Energy Transition Law in 2050 as function of minimum operation cost.

 

Point 2: Improve the literature review of the knowledge recently published in journals.

 

Response 2: In lines 163 to 189  more cases published recently. They are the next:

Banacloche et al. evaluate the socio-economic and environmental impacts of green investments related to the deployment of renewable energy sources planned by the Government of Mexico and those proposed by IRENA. The objective is to achieve the country's commitments to the Paris Agreement for the period 2018-2030 in terms of value aggregate, employment, materials, land use, water, and CO₂eq emissions. They emphasize that Mexico's renewable energy policies on the road to Paris have less ambition than the IRENA proposal. While the country has the political will to enact climate policies, the government structure is weak and the capacity to implement and enforce them is lacking. The authors conclude by saying that to achieve the Paris Agreement, an increase in the deployment of renewable energy sources is a requirement [22].

Percino-Picazo et al. presented a comparative analysis of the energy reform that has been carried out in Mexico since 2013. They establish two periods to be evaluated, the reform progress period from 2013 to 2018 and the reform reversal period from 2018 to 2021. The research applies the textbook model for the restructuring of energy systems that has shown success stories in developing countries. They concluded by saying that the reform included practices that were well accepted by the wholesale electricity markets, however, after five years, when the reform was not mature enough, a counter-reform was initiated, which reveals the energy sector of the incumbent administration [23].

Buira et al. use the deep decarbonization methodology to develop two analytical scenarios of economic development, service demand, technology deployment, and GHG emissions for Mexico up to 2050. In the first scenario, they analyze the current policies, and in the second scenario the aligned decarbonization pathways to compliance with the Paris Agreement. With the first scenario, they conclude that Mexico's current climate change policy places the country on an inconsistent development path, emphasizing that it is important to invest in the electricity market to expand the generation capacity with renewable energies and quickly implement fleets of electric vehicles to meet the decarbonization goal [24].

 

Point 3: In order to make the proposed method understandable, authors need to add a graphical overview as Figure 1 is not properly defined.

 

Response 3: An edited Figure 1 was added where the variables are cited. See it at lines 259 to 260.

 

 

Point 4: The results should be extended because there are too many figures/graphs, but proper explanation is missing.

 

Response 4: Comments with values and new detailed indicators were edited previously at each scenario.

 

See lines: 281 to 284:

 

The reference scenario or Stated Policies Scenario (STEP) is calculated with PRODESEN 2018-2032 government plans for the retirement and installation of power plants, it considers the data of the CONAPO population projections, and it also estimates the electricity consumption value per capita based on the information reported by SENER [7].

 

 

See lines: 291 to 293:

The accumulated investment cost, operation cost and maintenance cost for 2032 will be 167 041 million of dollars [7].

 

Lines 314  to 320:

With the Mexican Energy Reform [6], the market opening of the electricity sector made it possible to conclude contracts with individuals for the generation of electricity, which has been fundamental to diversifying the electricity generation matrix. Another important factor is that the prices of renewable energies have decreased significantly in recent years [7], and they have become competitive against conventional sources of electricity generation. The LEAP calculated total cost for operation, maintenance, and investment in 2050 is 552 914 million dollars (USD₂₀₁₇).

 

Lines 337 to 339:

 

Nuclear goes from 10.88 TWh in 2017 to 32.89 TWh in 2050 that represents a 3.02 factor of power increase without CO₂e emissions. The total cost for operation and investment for 2050 is 521 126 million dollars (USD₂₀₁₇).

 

Lines 356 to 358:

In this scenario, the growth population creates a bigger dependence of the electricity and the Natural Gas is the constant source of electricity generation, close to 314.15 TWh. LEAP calculated total cost in 2050 would be 878 082 million of dollars (USD₂₀₁₇).

 

Lines 373 to 374:

This scenario gets the goal for half generation with clean energy fuels with 67.68 Mt CO₂e with operation, maintenance, and investment cost of 580 439 million dollar (USD₂₀₁₇).

Lines 389 to 391:

The higher per capita electricity consumption leads to a non-desirable scenario because the CO₂e is almost twice compared to any other scenario. With highest cost of operation and investment of 996 988 million dollar (USD₂₀₁₇) for 2050

 

 

Point 5: Authors need to add more key findings in conclusion and also limitations of this research.

 

Response 5:

Conclusion section was edited, new data was added as follow:

Energy planning is a necessary tool to explore possible alternative scenarios to meet national and international objectives, both for the inclusion of renewable energies and the production of GHG emissions.

Lines 436 to 454:

The proposed model defines energy scenarios integrated by an optimal matrix of technologies for electricity generation, which meets the Mexican electricity demand. In each analysis scenario, it was possible to estimate the expected electricity energy demand and generation for the years from 2020 to 2050, by analyzing the behavior of population growth as an indicator of the evolution of electricity consumption.

In the evaluated scenarios, it is observed that the clean technology with the highest growth is wind energy, whose contributions were between 12.99% (Reference or STEP scenario) and 14.26% (CVF-4.0MWh) under the conditions of the population models with consumption of 2.0 MWh per capita and with 4.0 MWh per capita. Hydroelectric power plants remain in the second position of electricity generation, due to their long technical lifetime and their maximum availability compared to renewable energies. Solar PV and wind have had rapid growth in capacity additions during the period, helping Mexico achieve its long-term goals for electricity generation from clean energy sources. As for fossil technologies, combined cycles are those with important participation in the scenarios evaluated, their participation ranges from 49.09% to 50.55%. higher than the North America Zone: Canada 8.42% [32], USA 34.00% [33]. The Mexico value is bigger than calculated values for Global scenario at 2050, close to 15.25% [IEA,2022]. The technology that contributes the least is coal-fired power plants due to their high emission rates while in Global Scenarios it remains with 13.49 %.

Nuclear power plants represent from 4.79 % at higher electricity demand at 2050 and 11.15 % for the STEPS scenario due to the new operation of three projects proposed by PRODESEN [7], while hydroelectric plants diminish relative to their participation because of their exit from operation due to their technical lifetime.

Regarding the analysis of emissions, the LVF-2.0 MWh scenario is successful that presents a greater reduction in emissions with 67.68 Mt de CO₂e approaching the scenario proposed in the GCCL, while the CVF-4.0 MWh is the one that presents the highest emissions with 157.05 Mt de CO₂e in 2050 because of the growth of constant population and per capita high electricity consumption.

Regarding to cost of operation, maintenance, and investment the scenarios go from 521 126 to 996 988 million of dollar (USD₂₀₁₇), so the goal for society is to efficiently use the electricity close to 2 MWh and reduce the population growth. Nevertheless, the highest scenario cost leads to the minimal CO₂e the population directly affects this.

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1.     The abstract should be rewritten by including more detail on the existing challenges and the proposed solutions.

2.     In the Introduction section the structure of paragraphs needs improvement. It is suggested to confine data and paragraphs with similar data together. The repetition of data should be avoided.

3.     Few latest scenarios about GHG emissions and Renewable Energy Resources development should be included in the literature review. Details can be found from the Investigation and analysis of effective approaches, opportunities, bottlenecks, and future potential capabilities for the digitalization of energy systems and sustainable development goals.

4.     From 2020 to 2050, the impact of COVID-19 cannot be ignored. It can be included the progress, impact analysis, challenges, and new perceptions for electric power and energy sectors in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic

5.     Quality of figures and tables is not good for publishing. Details included in Figs and Tables should be verified.

6.     The acronyms/symbols used in the whole paper should be checked and described properly.

7.     The conclusions should be rewritten by including more details and future directions.

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

 

Point 1: The abstract should be rewritten by including more detail on the existing challenges and the proposed solutions.

 

Response 1: Part of the Abstract was edited for emphasis in the challenges and probably solution, as follow:

This problem has made it essential to design plans and policies that contribute to GHG mitigation. The General Law on Climate Change, whose objective is to determine the guidelines towards a low-carbon economy, has established a goal of reducing emissions by 50% by 2050 concerning the baseline from 2000 year and proposes to produce 50% of electricity with clean energy by 2050 following the Mexican Energy Transition Law. For this reason, the challenge is to design and develop an environmentally sustainable energy model for the National Electric System (NES). Different scenarios are defined and evaluated considering six probable growing electricity demands, as well as mature technologies considering the potential of potential renewable resources in Mexico, fossil fuel reserves, efficiencies of each technology, investment costs, operation costs, and maintenance costs along with the price of the fuels. The results showed that it is possible to reduce about 50% of the emissions from the electricity sector in 2050 considering a scenario of low population growth and a yearly per capita consumption of 2.0 MWh, as well as a diversification of the electricity generation matrix.

 

 

Point 2: In the Introduction section the structure of paragraphs needs improvement. It is suggested to confine data and paragraphs with similar data together. The repetition of data should be avoided.

 

 

Response 2:

The introduction section is edited as a time from pass time to present time format. There is apparently repeated data because the indicators are the same, but each analysed work show the effort for solve the low carbon economy since 2001. New information was added as follow:

Banacloche et al. evaluate the socio-economic and environmental impacts of green investments related to the deployment of renewable energy sources planned by the Government of Mexico and those proposed by IRENA. The objective is to achieve the country's commitments to the Paris Agreement for the period 2018-2030 in terms of value aggregate, employment, materials, land use, water, and CO₂eq emissions. They emphasize that Mexico's renewable energy policies on the road to Paris have less ambition than the IRENA proposal. While the country has the political will to enact climate policies, the government structure is weak and the capacity to implement and enforce them is lacking. The authors conclude by saying that to achieve the Paris Agreement, an increase in the deployment of renewable energy sources is a requirement [22].

Percino-Picazo et al. presented a comparative analysis of the energy reform that has been carried out in Mexico since 2013. They establish two periods to be evaluated, the reform progress period from 2013 to 2018 and the reform reversal period from 2018 to 2021. The research applies the textbook model for the restructuring of energy systems that has shown success stories in developing countries. They concluded by saying that the reform included practices that were well accepted by the wholesale electricity markets, however, after five years, when the reform was not mature enough, a counter-reform was initiated, which reveals the energy sector of the incumbent administration [23].

Buira et al. use the deep decarbonization methodology to develop two analytical scenarios of economic development, service demand, technology deployment, and GHG emissions for Mexico up to 2050. In the first scenario, they analyze the current policies, and in the second scenario the aligned decarbonization pathways to compliance with the Paris Agreement. With the first scenario, they conclude that Mexico's current climate change policy places the country on an inconsistent development path, emphasizing that it is important to invest in the electricity market to expand the generation capacity with renewable energies and quickly implement fleets of electric vehicles to meet the decarbonization goal [24]. This work shows with specialized software (Low Emission Analysis Platform) LEAP, the calculation of six scenarios from data from 2013 to 2017 for the Mexican Electricity Sector. The analysis shows two average proposed consumption for the population based on the historic data and three probable population growth, that never were analyzed as base for evaluation of the Energy Transition Law in 2050 as function of minimum operation cost.

 

Point 3: Few latest scenarios about GHG emissions and Renewable Energy Resources development should be included in the literature review. Details can be found from the Investigation and analysis of effective approaches, opportunities, bottlenecks, and future potential capabilities for the digitalization of energy systems and sustainable development goals.

 

Response 3:

New references were added in the introduction section to detail how technologies have the opportunity to be accepted in the electricity market. The edited manuscript has references from 12 to 24 for Mexican energy system analysis which are in the introduction section in lines 103 to 189. These works take into account the mature technologies for electricity generation as well as this manuscript. The digitalization technique is not included in this manuscript. A second manuscript would consider it. Thank you for your observation.

 

Point 4: From 2020 to 2050, the impact of COVID-19 cannot be ignored. It can be included the progress, impact analysis, challenges, and new perceptions for electric power and energy sectors in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

Response 4: It is the first part of two works with historical data, for scenarios comparison; the next work will show the deviations due to the pandemic and the Ukraine crisis. The title has changed to : Comparison of scenarios for the Mexican electricity system for 2050 Energy Transition Law objectives - PreCovid19 analysis. Thank you for the specific point of view.

 

 

Point 5: Quality of figures and tables is not good for publishing. Details included in Figs and Tables should be verified.

 

Response 5: The figures were changed to JPG format and in the tables, the format proposed in the journal template was used.

 

Now, they look in this way:

 

Table 1. Historical population in the middle of the year for Mexico. Source: [26].

Year	Total population [Million of people]
2013	117.69
2014	119.22
2015	120.65
2016	122.04
2017	123.39

 

Table 2. Mid-year population projections for Mexico. Source: [26].

Year	Total population [millions of people]
2020	127.19
2025	132.84
2030	137.64
2035	141.59
2040	144.68
2045	146.87
2050	148.13

 

Table 3. Total consumption and per capita consumption of electricity. Source: Own elaboration with data from [7] and [26].

Year	Total consumption [GWh]	Per capita consumption [kWh/p]
2013	222,829.39	1,893.39
2014	228,634.56	1,917.81
2015	237,199.41	1,965.96
2016	248,191.95	2,033.71
2017	258,971.03	2,098.83

 

 

Figure 1. Schematic representation of NES-50.

Figure 2. Projections of electricity demand to the year 2050. Source: Own elaboration with data from [30].

 

Figure 3. Evolution of installed capacity, 2018-2032.Source: Own elaboration with information from [7].

Figure 4. Reference Scenario. Electricity generation by technology. Source: Own elaboration with data from [7] and [26].

 

Figure 5. LVF-2.0 MWh scenario. Electricity generation by technology. Source: Own elaboration with data from [7] and [29].

Figure 6. LVF-4.0 MWh scenario. Electricity generation by technology. Source: Own elaboration with data from [7] and [29].

 

Figure 7. CVF-2.0 MWh scenario. Electricity generation by technology. Source: Own elaboration with data from [7] and [29].

 

Figure 8. CVF-4.0 MWh scenario. Electricity generation by technology. Source: Own elaboration with data from [7] and [29].

 

Figure 9. Capacity projections to 2050. Source: Own elaboration with data from [30].

 

Figure 10. Projections of electricity generation to 2050. Source: Own elaboration with data from [30].

 

Figure 11. GHG mitigation in the NSS to 2050. Fuente: Own elaboration with data from [30].

 

 

 

 

Point 6: The acronyms/symbols used in the whole paper should be checked and described properly.

 

Response 6: The authors verified the acronyms used in the document. All Acronyms were defined previously at the text where used it. Lines 40 to 47 where edited (i.e.):

Against this background, within the framework of the Conference of the Parties (COP 21), held in Paris in 2015, several countries committed to significantly reducing their GHG emissions to a level of not increasing the planet's temperature above 2°C [3]. In addition, the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) call on countries to adopt urgent measures to combat climate change and its effects. Ensuring access to affordable, secure, sustainable, and modern energy is part of the SDGs and essential to eradicate poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity [4].

 

 

Point 7: The conclusions should be rewritten by including more details and future directions.

 

Response 7: The conclusion section was edited and now includes the main key points and conditions to achieve the Paris Agreement, as follow:

Conclusions

Energy planning is a necessary tool to explore possible alternative scenarios to meet national and international objectives, both for the inclusion of renewable energies and the production of GHG emissions.

The proposed model defines energy scenarios integrated by an optimal matrix of technologies for electricity generation, which meets the Mexican electricity demand. In each analysis scenario, it was possible to estimate the expected electricity energy demand and generation for the years from 2020 to 2050, by analyzing the behavior of population growth as an indicator of the evolution of electricity consumption.

In the evaluated scenarios, it is observed that the clean technology with the highest growth is wind energy, whose contributions were between 12.99% (Reference scenario) and 14.26% (CVF-4.0MWh) under the conditions of the population models with consumption of 2.0 MWh per capita and with 4.0 MWh per capita. Hydroelectric power plants remain in the second position of electricity generation, due to their long technical lifetime and their maximum availability compared to renewable energies. Solar PV and wind have had rapid growth in capacity additions during the period, helping Mexico achieve its long-term goals for electricity generation from clean energy sources. As for fossil technologies, combined cycles are those with important participation in the scenarios evaluated, their participation ranges from 49.09% to 50.55% is higher than the North America Zone: Canada 8.42% [32], USA 34.00% [33]. The Mexico value is bigger than calculated values for Global scenario at 2050, close to 15.25%[IEA,2022]. The technology that contributes the least is coal-fired power plants due to their high emission rates while in Global Scenarios remains with 13.49 %.

Nuclear power plants represent from 4.79 % at higher electricity demand at 2050 and 11.15 % for the STEPS scenario due to the new operation of three projects proposed by PRODESEN [7], while hydroelectric plants diminish relative to their participation because of their exit from operation due to their technical lifetime.

Regarding the analysis of emissions, the LVF-2.0 MWh scenario is successful that presents a greater reduction in emissions with 67.68 Mt de CO₂e approaching the scenario proposed in the GCCL, while the CVF-4.0 MWh is the one that presents the highest emissions with 157.05 Mt de CO₂e in 2050 because of the growth of constant population and per capita high electricity consumption.

Regarding to cost of operation, maintenance, and investment the scenarios go from 521 126 to 996 988 million of dollar (USD₂₀₁₇), so the goal for society is to use efficiently the electricity close to 2 MWh and reduce the population growth. Nevertheless, the highest scenario cost leads to the minimal CO₂e the population directly affects this.

(See attachment document)

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

As authors have revised the manuscript so now it can be accepted im present form.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

I have no further comments.

 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.