Entation in the adequacy constraint (Equation (14) is, having said that, for every single gas generation candidate has that determines a new provide expansion situation trickier. Eachprice hypothesis. The repa distinct with the adequacy constraint (Equation (14) is, the scope of this function generaresentation firm contribution for capacity, and it beyond on the other hand, trickier. Eachto define their calculation, which is carried out in Brazil by the Ministry of Power supported by of tion candidate has a distinct firm contribution for capacity, and it beyond the scope the energy Organizing Business. All the resources contribute in a single way the Ministry of Enthis perform to define their calculation, that is carried out in Brazil by or the other for firm capacity. The standard values for the Brazilian power method are described beneath: ergy supported by the Power Arranging Business. All of the sources contribute in one particular The firm capacity contribution of common values is defined in Table four. way or the other for firm capacity. Theeach candidate for the Brazilian energy system are We have an understanding of these constraints are exogenously defined and could be deemed as described beneath: rather arbitrary and determinant to influence the results. This really is true, nevertheless, our practical The firm capacity contribution of each and every candidate is defined in Table 4. work shows that program planners have had excellent interest for this kind of representation in the organizing models. Nevertheless, inn our runs, these constraints have been not binding. Figure 9 presents the total installed capacity of gas-fired TPPs applying pre-salt all-natural gas for a array of gas costs.Table 4. Firm Capacity Contribution of each and every candidate.TechnologyEnergies 2021, 14,Capacity MWWind one hundred Solar 100 BiomassFirm Capacity Contribution of every candidate. 100 Table 4. Open-cycle gas turbine 200 Close-cycle gas turbine (pre-salt) 500 Capacity Technologies MW500 Close-cycle gas turbine (LNG)De-rating Issue for Firm Capacity 16 of Available Capacity21 45 29 55 95 De-rating Element for Firm 95 Capacity 95 Available CapacityWind one hundred 45 We understand these constraints are exogenously defined and could be viewed as as Solar 100 29 rather arbitrary and determinant to influence the100 outcomes. This really is accurate, even so, our pracBiomass 55 tical work shows that program planners have had terrific interest for this type of representaOpen-cycle gas turbine 200 95 Close-cycle gas turbine (pre-salt) 500 95 tion inside the planning models. Even so, inn our runs, these constraints had been not binding. Close-cycle 9 presents the total installed capacity500 gas-fired TPPs applying pre-salt organic gas turbine (LNG) 95 Figure ofgas for a selection of gas prices.Figure 9. Additions of pre-salt energy N-Nitrosomorpholine web plants for a array of rates when reliability constraints are regarded as. Figure 9. Additions of pre-salt power plants for a array of rates when reliability constraints are viewed as.For this simulation, the breakeven value increases from three.9 to 4.6 USD/MMBTU. In For have at the very least 6 the of new projects increases from three.9 to 4.six USD/MMBTU. of order to this simulation, GW breakeven value (an equivalent consumption of 30 Mm3 In order togas perat least six GW gas new projects (an equivalent USD/MMBTU. For aMmof all-natural have day), natural of value must be decrease than four.0 consumption of 30 all-natural organic gas every day), all-natural gas price tag added capacity grows USD/MMBTU. For a organic gas price tag of three.5 USD/MMBTU, the have to be lower than 4.0 from three GW in only energy gas value ofanalysis to 7 GW inthe add.