Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Electricity supply security and the future role of renewable energy

sources in Brazil
Rodrigo Corrêa da Silva n, Ismael de Marchi Neto, Stephan Silva Seifert
Federal University of Technology Parana, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Laboratory for Energy and Thermal Sciences, Londrina, Brazil

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Hydropower is the backbone of the Brazilian electricity generation sector. Even though the use of this
Received 2 June 2015 resource is advantaged in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, last years' severe droughts have exposed
Received in revised form the country's huge dependency on hydroelectricity. Brazil's electricity supply system has shown to be
21 December 2015
vulnerable to electricity shortages and has demanded significant overhaul in order to address its chal-
Accepted 3 January 2016
Available online 21 January 2016
lenges. The present paper provides a comprehensive review of the current status of the Brazilian elec-
tricity sector and discusses diversification of electricity generation mix as a strategy to improve electricity
Keywords: supply security in the country. An overview of the main features of the energy sources applied in Brazil is
Brazil also presented through a review of the latest available generation data. The central section of this work is
Electricity supply security a discussion of the main causes of the current crisis and the future role of renewable energy sources in a
Renewable energy
10-year perspective.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
2. Structure of the electricity sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
2.1. Electricity regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330
2.2. Hydropower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
2.3. Wind energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
2.4. Solar energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
2.5. Biomass energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332
2.6. Nuclear energy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
2.7. Fossil fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
3. Scenario in 2014–2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
4. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
4.1. Security supply and main reasons for the crisis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
4.2. Future role of renewable energy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
4.2.1. Hydropower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337

Abbreviations: ANEEL, Brazilian Agency for Electric Energy (Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica); BRICS, Acronym for an association of five major emerging national
economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa; CCS, Carbon Capture and Storage; CCEE, Chamber of Electricity Energy Commercialization (Câmara de Comercia-
lização de Energia Elétrica); CNPE, National Energy Policy Council (Conselho Nacional de Política energética); CRESESB, Reference Centre for Solar and Wind Energy Sérgio de
Salvo Brito (Centro de Referência para Energia Solar e Eólica Sérgio Brito); EIA, Energy Information Administration; EPE, Company for Energy Research (Empresa de Pesquisa
Energética); GDP, Gross Domestic Product; IBGE, Brazilian Institute for Geography and Statistics (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística); INCT, National Institutes for
Science and Technology (Institutos Nacionais de Ciência e Tecnologia); INMETRO, National Institute of Metrology Standardization and Industrial Quality (Instituto Nacional
de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia); LCOE, Levelized Cost of Electricity; MME, Ministry of Mines and Energy (Ministério de Minas e Energia); OECD, Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development; ONS, Brazilian Operator for Elecricity System (Operador Nacional do Sistema Elétrico); PDE, Brazilian Energy Expansion Plan; PLD,
Settlement Price Differences (Preço da Liquidação das Diferenças); PROINFA, Program of Incentives for Alternative Electricity Sources (Programa de Incentivo às Fontes
Alternativas de Energia Elétrica); SIN, National Interconnected System (Sistema Interligado Nacional); UNFCCC, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change;
VCG, Variable costs of generation
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rodrigosilva@utfpr.edu.br (R. Corrêa da Silva).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.001
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341 329

4.2.2. Wind energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

4.2.3. Solar energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
4.2.4. Biomass energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
4.3. Future role of non-renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340

1. Introduction 2. Structure of the electricity sector

Brazil has a population of 204.03 million and covers an area of Brazil has been increasing its installed generating capacity and
8.51 million km² [1]. The country has a per capita income of nearly had 126.74 GW in 2013 as shown in Fig. 1. Overall, 53.07 GW has
US$ 11,208 a year and a total production of about US$ 2245.67 been installed since 2000, which represent an increase by 72%. In
billion in terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) [2]. In 2014, 2013, hydroelectric power plants accounted for 67.87% of the
Brazilian industry accounted for 26.4% of the domestic production, installed capacity, with increasing amounts coming from ther-
while agriculture accounted for an additional 5.5% and the service moelectric power plants (28.82%) and other forms of renewable
sector for 68.1% [3]. Most of the population is concentrated in energy such as wind and solar energy (1.74%). Nuclear sources
urban areas, particularly in large cities. The country's urbanization corresponded to 1.57% of the installed capacity [7].
rate is 84.36% but it can be as high as 96% in some regions, e.g., in Fig. 2 displays the installed electricity generation capacity by
state of São Paulo [4,5]. The country ranks 9th in the world in
region. Most of this electricity is generated in the Southeastern
terms of energy consumption and the 4th largest among the BRICS
region (33.30%), followed by the Southern (23.36%), Northeastern
[6].
(17.47%), Northern (13.31%), and Midwestern region (12.56%). Total
Total primary energy consumption in Brazil has increased 57%
electricity generated in 2013 was 570,025 GW h [7]. Public service
from 2000 to 2013 [7]. Largest share of total energy consumption
power plants accounted for 483,863 GW h, while independent
comes from oil and other liquid fuels (44%), followed by hydro-
electricity (35%), and natural gas (8%) [8]. Brazil holds leadership producers accounted for 86,162 GW h. Net imports of 39,867 GW h
position with regard to the use of renewable energy resources. On allowed a domestic electricity supply of 609,892 GW h. Final end-
the whole, around 42% of the primary energy mix comes from use consumption was 516,330 GW h, an increase by 3.6% com-
renewable resources, which contrasts significantly with the global pared with 2012. Industrial sector accounted for 210,083 GW h,
average of 13% and with the 8.1% average for OECD countries [7]. while the residential and commercial sectors accounted for
Brazil has one of the largest hydroelectric potential in the world 124,896 GW h and 84,338 GW h, respectively. The remaining
and this corresponds to more than two-thirds of the total installed consumption was divided among the public sector (41,288 GW h),
capacity in the country. The use of water resources brings many the energy sector (29,663 GW h), agriculture and livestock
advantages, but its prevalence makes it electrically dependent on (24,129 GW h), and transportation (1884 GW h).
hydrological conditions. Intensive drought in the last years has Almost 117,000 km of transmission line extensions inter-
damaged the main source of electricity generation and left reser- connect the country through a National Interconnected System
voirs dangerously low. Brazil has barely escaped forced electricity (SIN), reaching approximately 98.3% of coverage [9]. Few isolated
supply shortages in 2015 and the diversification in electricity systems (1.7%) that are not covered by the interconnected system
generation mix in order to increase the electricity supply security are located in the Northern part of the country, especially in the
has become an issue. In addition, many problems need to be Amazon region. Part of the transmission system is connected with
addressed, such as: how to further expand hydropower genera-
the systems of Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay. These inter-
tion, how to boost development of other renewable sources and
connections are used in case of excess of energy generation in one
optimize intermittent power generation, and the role of oil, nat-
country and a lack of energy supply in another, or to attend to
ural gas, and coal in a period when many countries seek to reduce
emergency cases.
the use of fossil fuels.
The objective of this work is to provide a diagnostic review on
the positional gap of electricity generation and the main causes for
the current crisis. Emphasis is also placed on a discussion of main
features of electricity generation sources and the expected role of
renewable and non-renewable energy as alternative sources for
the increase of electricity supply security in the near-future.
The methodology applied in this paper includes an in-depth
review of official reports and documents provided by the Brazilian
regulatory authorities. After a review on the structure of the Bra-
zilian electricity sector in Section 2, technical data on the supply of
electricity are presented in Section 3 in order to provide an over-
view of the current status of electricity generation in Brazil. Sec-
tion 4 includes a discussion of the main reasons for the current
crisis in the electricity sector. In addition, based on data available
in the Energy Expansion Plan for 2023, the future perspective of
the main generation sources of electricity and the impact in terms
of security of supply are discussed. The main conclusions of this
work are summarized in Section 5. Fig. 1. Share of energy sources in the electricity generation sector. Data from [7].
330 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341

supplementary energy to increase the system's reserve margin.

Demand for reserve energy is entirely determined by the gov-
ernment following its own criteria of supply security and energy
policy. Costs of these contracts are split among all consumers by
means of a system charge. Energy contracted in the regular energy
auctions is essential to meet demand, and therefore must be
backed up by a certain amount of firm generation (with a firm
energy settlement). On the other hand, reserve energy contracts
do not provide firm energy to the system and, therefore, may have
much more flexible terms.
Auctions for the purchase of new projects are held three years
(A3 auctions) or five years (A5 auctions) before the date of initial
electricity delivery. Auctions of energy from existing generation
takes place four months and one year (A1 auction) prior to start
delivering electricity. Official auction announcements are draft by
ANEEL, in compliance with the guidelines set by the Ministry of
Mines and Energy (MME), including the use of the lowest tariff
Fig. 2. Electricity generation capacity by region. Data from [7]. criteria to determine the winner of the auction. Each generation
company bidding in the auction takes up an electricity purchase
2.1. Electricity regulation and a sale agreement with each distribution company, according
to its estimated needs.
The Brazilian government plays an important role in the elec- An overview of the prices of electricity generation for several
tricity sector. The state controlled the electricity sector almost sources is indicated in Table 1. The price of energy is composed of
completely until the privatization process initiated in 1996. How-
fixed costs determined in auctions [11] and variable costs of gen-
ever, the process stalled only in 2000–2001 when severe drought
eration (VCG) [12]. The values of fixed costs indicated in Table 1
led to electricity shortages. Even though the electricity sector was
are based on average prices of energy auctions between 2005 and
privatized in the early 2000 s, the bulk of Brazil's major generation
assets remain under government control. A new model for the 2015; maximum and minimum values were also included. The
electricity sector was implemented in 2004, which provided for only exception is nuclear generation, for which the fixed costs are
in-depth changes in the energy trade between various sector set by ANEEL. The values of the average variable costs are con-
agents by establishing two markets for the negotiation of elec- sidered in the development of the monthly plan of operation of
tricity purchase agreements: the regulated market and the free the power plants by the Brazilian Operator for Electricity
market. The main goal of this section is to provide a brief overview System (ONS).
of the current electricity regulation and further information for There is also a short-term market which is managed by the
non-Portuguese readers is also found elsewhere [10]. Chamber of Electricity Energy Commercialization (CCEE). In this
Purchase of energy by distribution companies through public market, differences between the amount of energy that is physi-
energy auctions takes place in the regulated market. Distribution cally produced and consumed and the energy set out in the con-
companies sell the energy directly to end-users (captive con- tracts held by each participant (generators and consumers) are
sumers) while the rates are defined by the regulatory agency accounted for and settled. Average values of mothly Settlement
ANEEL (Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency). ANEEL is
Price Difference (PLD) by region are presented in Fig. 3 [13].
responsible for fixing electricity rates to promote fair prices for
both the public interest and the economic-financial balance of the
agents responsible for energy services. The rates fixed by ANEEL Table 1
take into account energy costs, transmission costs, distribution Costs of electricity generation for different sources. Data from [10] and [11].
costs, energy sector charges, and taxes. ANEEL is also responsible
Source Fixed costs (US$/MW h)a,b Variable costs Total price
for organizing auctions for the expansion of transmission lines and (US$/MW h) b,c (US$/MW h)
for the distribution of energy for public services. Average Min. Max.
In the free market, the purchase of energy occurs by non-
Hydro 34.45 19.07 50.62 – 34.45
regulated agents, such as free consumers and energy traders.
Small hydro 52.37 41.51 67.65 – 52.37
Trading occurs through free negotiations whereby prices and Wind 45.49 28.59 59.60 – 45.49
conditions are freely agreed on by the parties. Competition exists Nuclear 52.91d – – 7.08 59.99
between power generation concessionaires and permit holders, Coal 48.76 41.16 66.01 59.92 108.68
trading companies, and energy importers. Contract terms, amount Natural gas 54.92 33.74 91.00 79.78 134.70
Diesel 45.46 40.96 64.41 272.28 317.74
of energy, initial date for delivery electricity, and prices are also Fuel oil 45.46 40.96 64.41 178.20 223.66
freely negotiated between the parties. However, purchase of Sugarcane 51.98 43.59 68.87 68.97 120.94
electricity in the free market is exclusive for those end-users refuse
whose demand of electricity is higher or equal to 500 kW. Captive Wood 52.89 44.28 67.75 68.97 121.86
residues
consumers can only purchase electricity from distribution com- Biomass 53.32 33.47 91.00 68.97 122.29
panies and pay regulated rates. (others)
Two main types of energy auctions are foreseen by the Brazi- Solar 97.66 70.30 99.84 – 97.66
lian electricity sector: regular and reserve auctions. In the regular a
Data from 2005 to 2015 [10].
auction, an amount of energy declared by the distribution com- b
Dollar trading on May, 11st.2015 (US$1.00¼ R$3.06).
panies is contracted in order to meet demand growth in the c
Values from March 2015 [11].
regulated market. Reserve energy auctions are used to contract d
Do not exist auctions for nuclear power plants.
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
Fig. 3. Monthly short-term average prices from 2010 to 2015. Data from [12].
2.2. Hydropower
The Brazilian electricity sector is remarkably characterized by
large hydroelectric power plants with multi-year water-regulating
reservoirs [14]. Total installed capacity is 86.02 GW, divided among
201 units [15]. Since the potential water resources close to con-
sumption centers were exhausted, Brazil has been experiencing an
expansion of its electricity grid limits. Many hydroelectric power
plants are located far away from the main demand centers,
resulting in high transmission and distribution losses.
Brazil's hydropower potential is huge and has no parallel
worldwide, i.e., 260 GW in 2014 [7]. The largest Brazilian power
plant is the well-known Itaipu hydroelectric dam (14 GW) on the
Paraná River located in Southern region, which Brazil maintains
with Paraguay. Most notable recent project is the Belo Monte
hydroelectric dam (11.23 GW) in the Amazon basin, which, upon
completion will be third largest hydroelectric plant in the world.
Approximately 126 GW of the total remaining hydropower
potential will be technically feasible before 2030 [16].
Hydroelectric power plants have the lowest electricity gen-
eration cost. The average price in a conventional hydropower
auction is US$34.45/MW h1 [11]. The energy of the Madeira River
power plants in Amazon region took its toll when prices were set
at different auctions: US$25.77 (Santo Antônio, 3.15 GW),
US$23.32 (Jirau, 3.75 GW), and US$25.48 (Belo Monte, 11.23 GW)
on the Xingu River [11].
Investment costs for the implementation of hydroelectric
power plants are high (around US$1420/kW) and the average
construction time varies from four to five years [17]. Hydroelectric
power plants have a lifespan of 30 years, a period that can be
extended with the modernization and repowering of turbines and
generators.
More recently, small hydroelectric power plants have become
very common as an alternative to using large hydropower
resource, with almost no environmental impacts. Many of these
power plants are used to meet the energy demands of small urban
centers and rural areas [18]. Data available in the literature [19]
indicate the potential output of 25.9 GW. In general, small
hydroelectric power plants have an installed capacity limited to
30 MW and flood area must not exceed 13 km2 [20]. Construction
time is two years on average, with an estimated investment cost of
US$3125/kW [17]. The cost of energy is much higher than that
from a conventional hydroelectric plant due to lack of reservoir
and to the possibility of remaining idle during drought periods.
1
Dollar trading on May 11st, 2015 (US$1.00 ¼R$3.06)
331
There are 466 small hydroelectric power plants in operation,
corresponding to an installed capacity of around 4830 MW,
and another 34 units under construction, representing a total
capacity of 416 MW [15]. Average market price is estimated at
US$52.37/MW h as shown in Table 1.
2.3. Wind energy
Wind power has shown significant increases in installed
capacity in recent years, which has contributed to strengthening
its relative share. From 2006 to 2014, wind facilities grew by
approximately 300% annually [21] and currently represents 4.29%
of all installed capacity [15]. A total of 232 wind power plants are
currently installed in Brazil, ranging from 0.30 MW to 100 MW,
which amounts to an installed capacity of 4.98 GW. Almost 60% of
total installed capacity is in four states located in both Northeast
(Ceará and Rio Grande do Norte) and South (Santa Catarina and
Rio Grande do Sul). Presently, 128 wind power plants are still
under construction [15].
Contour maps of onshore average wind velocity (Fig. 4) show
velocities are much more intense during the winter and spring and
coincide with periods of low rainfall. Considering the average
annual rate of more than 6 m/s, it is estimated a potential of
approximately 143.5 GW in Brazil [22]. More than half of this
potential lies in the Northeast (about 75 GW), whereas the rest is
available in the Southeast (29.7 GW), South (22.8 GW), North
(12.8 GW), and Midwest (3.1 GW) [22]. A rough estimation of the
offshore potential is about 340 GW to be exploited along the
coastline of Northeastern and Southern regions, mainly [23]. Other
studies also point out an offshore potential of around 600 GW
[24–26], and [27].
Investment cost for a 30 MW wind farm is around US$2000/kW
[17]. During the A5 auction in 2014, the average selling price was
US$44.46/MW h. As shown in Table 1, historically, the average
market price is around US$45.49/MW h, including the A3 auctions
held in 2015. Average electricity cost from wind power has drop-
ped to less than electricity from coal (US$48.76/MW h), sugarcane
refuse (US$51.98/MW h), small hydroelectric power plants
(US$52.37/MW h), and natural gas (US$54.92). It is worth men-
tioning that investment costs should decrease with the expansion
of wind turbines production in Brazil, making wind energy even
more attractive.
2.4. Solar energy
Due to its location and territorial extension, Brazil receives
around 1000 MW h of solar energy along the year [28]. Fig. 5
displays average values of daily global irradiation along the year.
Highest and most stable rates along the year are obtained in the
Northeast, varying between 5 and 7 kW h/m². Despite its closest
location to the Equator line, the North of the country receives
lower incidence of solar radiation during the summer than the
South, whereas the opposite occurs during the winter. Solar
radiation incidence variations between winter and summer in the
South and Southeast are higher than in the North. The Midwest
region receives higher incidence of solar radiation during the dry
period (between July and September), when the rainfall is low and
the number of days with clear skies is higher [29].
Despite this huge potential, photovoltaic power plants account
for only 20 MW in the installed capacity [30]. Currently, there are
317 small facilities installed in Brazil and other two under con-
struction. As will be discussed in the next sections, low exploita-
tion of solar energy is due not only to high costs but also to current
energy policies. Lack of governmental incentives to increase the
production scale of photovoltaic panels, to reduce costs for mass
production is also pointed as one of the main reasons for the low
332 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
Fig. 4. Contour maps of average wind velocity during the (a) summer, (b) fall, (c) winter, and (d) spring. Adapted from [22].
participation of solar energy in the Brazilian electricity generation
mix [28]. During a reserve energy auction in 2014, the average sale
price was US$70.30/MW h. However, there was an increase in the
average price during the solar energy auctions to US$97.66/MW h
(as indicated in Table 1) due to the last auction reserve in 2015, in
which the price was approximately US$98.60/MW h.
Solar energy is used mainly to heat water at Brazil homes,
providing effective energy conservation and reducing the elec-
tricity consumption. Therefore, a significant portion of all elec-
tricity generated in Brazil is consumed in the form of heat. Around
20 billion kW h of the electricity in Brazil is used annually for
heating water for bathing [31], which could be supplied by solar
heaters that have several environmental and socioeconomic
advantages.
2.5. Biomass energy
The vast surface of Brazil, located in tropical regions, offers
appropriate conditions for the production and use of biomass
energy on a large scale. Biomass is an environmentally friendly
source and Brazil has a tradition and significant potential on bio-
mass production for electricity generation. In addition, combustion
technologies to convert biomass into electricity are fully commer-
cialized with proven operational performance. Recent data [15]
show the existence of 509 biomass-fired power plants, corre-
sponding to an installed capacity of 12.37 GW and a share of 9.70%.
Table 2 summarizes the sources of biomass applied to electricity
generation in Brazil. Among the main sources of biomass, sugarcane
refuse (bagasse and straw) offers one of the greatest potential as a
supplementary source of energy generated by hydroelectric power
plants. It is worth mentioning that Brazil's sugar industry plays a
key role in the overall energy mix as a producer of ethanol, which
has been consumed by a fleet of flex-fuel vehicles in Brazil and
contributed to a reduction in CO2 emissions [32]. Overall, Brazilian
capacity for generating biomass power is the world's second largest
after United States and accounts for around 25% of world’s total
ethanol fuel production [18].
An important segment of the ethanol business is electricity
generation using sugarcane refuse in cogeneration facilities in
order to meet the need for heat and mechanical power during
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341 333

Fig. 5. Contour maps of daily average solar irradiation during the (a) summer, (b) fall, (c) winter, and (d) spring. Adapted from [29].

excess of generated electricity of around 10 kW h per each ton of

Table 2 processed sugarcane. Presently, most productive units are able to
Biomass energy sources applied for electricity generation. Data from [14]. generate from 28 kW h to 72 kW h per each ton of processed
Source Number of power Installed capacity
sugarcane. In some cases the surplus of electricity can reach up to
plants (MW) 150 kW h per each ton of processed sugarcane.
During auctions between 2014 and 2015, 1779.10 MW of bioe-
Sugarcane refuse 390 10436.42 lectricity was contracted. The average price in the auction was US
Black liquor (pulp and paper 17 1978.14
industry)
$66.13/MW h (2014) and US$76.38/MW h (2015). Average price for
Wood residues 49 381.93 sugarcane refuse, wood residues, and other biomass sources was
Biomass (blast furnaces in 8 109.87 US$51.98/MW h, US$52.89/MW h and US$53.32/MW h, respec-
siderurgy) tively. Among the values shown in Table 1, the total cost of the
Biogas 22 74.39
electricity produced from biomass sources is the highest, behind
Napier grass 3 65.70
Charcoal 7 51.40 only oil derivatives (natural gas, fuel oil, and diesel).
Rice husks 11 39.53
Vegetable oil 2 4.35 2.6. Nuclear energy

The presence of substantial uranium reserves is one of the

ethanol processing [33]. Evolution of regulation of the electricity advantages to the use of nuclear energy for electricity generation as
sector allows injecting the surplus of generated electricity in the well as its contribution to a strategy to diversify the energy mix and
distribution grid. In 1980's, cogeneration facilities enabled an reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Despite nuclear power plants
334 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
bring reliability of the electricity generation sector, many countries
(e.g., Germany) do not maintain it as a future option [34]. Brazil
holds two operating thermonuclear power plants: the 640 MW
Angra 1 and the 1350 MW Angra 2. A third plant (Angra 3) with a
capacity for 1405 MW is currently being installed and will enter into
commercial operation by 2018; the construction started in 1984 and
for several reasons stopped for almost twenty years.
The Brazilian Government has the monopoly to operate nuclear
power plants in the country, which is undertaken by concessions
to the state-owned company Eletronuclear. Expansion of nuclear
generation is determined by a decision taken by the National
Energy Policy Council (CNPE). Nuclear power plants demand high
investment costs and construction time, i.e., about 10 years under
normal conditions. The investment cost for a 1400 MW nuclear
power plant is US$1700 per kW [17]. As indicated in Table 1, fixed
costs determined by ANEEL is US$52.91/MW h, while the variable
costs of generation is US$7.08/MW h, representing a lower total
cost of electricity production (US$59.99/MW h) in comparison to
fossil fuel power plants. Brazilian government plans to build new
nuclear power plants by 2030 [35].
2.7. Fossil fuels
Thermoelectric power plants fired by fossil fuels (natural gas,
oil derivatives, and coal) play an important role in the installed
electricity generation capacity (a share of about 18% in 2014) and
in the make-up of the demanded electricity. They have mostly
complementary participation and are requested whenever water
reservoirs are under critical conditions [14]. The National Elec-
tricity System Operator (ONS) decides on how much and when the
several thermoelectric power plants have to deliver electricity
through the interconnected grid. Fossil-fueled plants are dis-
patched in order of priority to ensure low electricity tariffs, low
system production costs, and to secure short-, medium-, and long-
term supply. Fuel-wise installed capacity is as follows [36]:
- Natural gas: 12.90 GW (142 power plants).
- Oil derivatives: 9.89 GW (2,143 power plants).
- Coal: 3.61 GW (23 power plants).
Thermoelectric power plants have several generation costs due
to the technology used, which always includes the cost of fuel. In
general, they are located close to large load centers, which lead to
lower transmission costs. The choice for type of fuel and technology
to be used in power plants follows economic criteria (generating
cost), security criteria (access to fuel), and environmental aspects
(emission of greenhouse gases and other pollutants).
Natural gas power plants operating with combined cycle
have the lowest investment cost of about US$600.00/kW [17] and
less environmental impact when compared to diesel, fuel oil, and
coal. Construction time is usually three years and power plants
have a lifespan of 30 years. The average cost in the auctions is
US$54.92/MW h and the variables costs of operation is around
US$79.78/MW h, totalizing an amount of US$134.70/MW h
(Table 1).
Thermoelectric power plants operating with oil derivatives
have a relatively fast construction time. The construction time is
even lower in the case of power plants operating with diesel
despite more expensive fuel costs. For example, a 480 MW power
plant has an installation cost of US$400.00/kW [17]. Prices per-
formed at the auctions, showed low costs of diesel and fuel oil (US
$45.46/MW h), when compared to natural gas and coal (Table 1).
However, because higher variable costs (US$272.28/MW h) elec-
tricity generated by diesel fuel is the most expensive
(US$317.74/MW h) compared to other sources.
Coal power plants have construction time of four years and a
lifespan of 20 years. Their variable cost is highly competitive compared
to thermoelectric power plants and investment cost is US$1300/kW
[17]. The average fixed costs for coal power plants determined in
auctions is US$48.76/MW h, while the variable costs for their gen-
eration is US$59.92/MW h. In turn, coal represents the lowest total
price for electricity among fossil fuels, i.e., US$108.68/MW h.
3. Scenario in 2014–2015
The remarkable predominance of hydroelectricity in Brazil is
combined with the unpredictable, inherent pattern of the tropical
rains that drive the flow of its rivers [37]. The operational planning
of an electricity system is conditioned to the randomness of the
hydrological resources, making thermoelectric power plants viable
only when the reservoirs are expected to be exhausted [14]. The
existence of dry hydrological periods compromises the ability to
meet the demand for electricity as in 2001 crisis when the country
submitted to rationing.
The distribution of electricity generation by source for 2011 and
2013 is depicted in Fig. 6 [7]. Both plots show clearly the strong
dependence of the Brazilian electricity sector on rain and the man-
agement of water reservoirs. Data also show that the share of
hydroelectricity in 2013 was much lower than 2011 due to the severe
drought that affected the country. Recent data [21] indicate that Brazil
generated 392,585 GW h of hydroelectricity in 2014, approximately
15% less than 2011 when reservoirs of hydroelectric dams were at
maximum levels and 450,237 GW h of electricity were generated. It is
important to keep in mind that the share of hydroelectricity genera-
tion is higher than the share of installed capacity since hydroelectric
power plants provide base load and, therefore, run longer periods than
thermoelectric power plants, which provide peak load.
In 2011, thermoelectric power plants produced 84,572 GW h of
electricity, or 14.9% of total electricity production. At the peak year
(2013), thermoelectricity’s contribution was 25.9%, when
157,964 GW h were generated. Natural gas contributed with 11.3%,
biomass with 7.6%, oil with 4.4%, while coal contributed with only
2.6%. Share of wind energy has increased substantially in the last
years and it was responsible for generating 6576 GW h in 2013,
around two and half times higher than in 2011.
As shown in Fig. 7, hydroelectricity production has been
decreasing since 2011 as a result of one of the country's most
severe droughts in history [21]. The most affected regions were the
Southeast, Midwest, and Northeast, where electricity generation is
largely dependent on hydroelectric power plants. Fig. 8 shows a
relationship between the reservoir's capacity of hydroelectric
dams in each region and the electricity generated by thermo-
electric power plants in the last five years [38]. As the reservoirs
levels in Southeast, Midwest, and Northeast decreased due to
drought, thermoelectric power plants entered into operation to
meet the base load. This clearly shows the importance of ther-
moelectric power plants to ensure the reliability level of the
electricity system as a whole, avoiding the risk of a supply short-
age from its main source of energy.
Brazil started 2015 with empty reservoirs at the hydroelectric
dams, with lower levels of those that motivated the rationing in
2001. Reservoirs typically fill up in summer (rainiest season), from
December to March, and are depleted during the dry period
between April and November. Nevertheless, rainfall patterns in
2014 and early 2015 were well below average values. As of January,
2015, many of the hydroelectric dams located in Southeast and
Midwest reached 16.84% of capacity, while in Northeast levels of
reservoirs reached 16.41% [38]. On January 19, 2015, a spike in
energy use, coupled with a transmission failure, forced the
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341 335

1.1%
81.9% 0.5% 70.6% 11.3%
4.4%
2.7% 2.4% Biomass
Nuclear
6.6% 7.6% Natural Gas
Wind
1.4%
2.6% Hydro
2.5%
Oil Derivatives
4.4%
Coal

Fig. 6. Total electricity supply in (a) 2011 and (b) 2013. Adapted from [7].

Fig. 7. Electricity generation by region from 2011 to 2014. Data from [21].

national grid operator (ONS) to order utilities to cut electricity to
parts of major cities, including São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.
4. Discussion
4.1. Security supply and main reasons for the crisis
Brazil's electricity supply is more resilient than it was in 2001,
when the entire country was last forced to ration electricity.
Thermoelectric power plants now provide 28.82% of the mix for
electricity, two times higher than in 2000 (Fig. 1). In addition,
rationing has been partially avoided because new transmission
lines were built to interconnect the electricity grid from different
regions. Studies have been carried out in order to evaluate the
possibility of Brazil face electrical shortage in 2015 [39]. In an
optimistic scenario — considering no delay in the new plants start-
up schedule — rainfall must be more than 79% in the average long
run in the Southeast and Midwest; both regions being responsible
for 70% of total storage capacity. Thus, reservoir levels will exceed
10% in November 2015, which is the minimum level of security for
operating of the hydroelectric power plants. However, it has not
336
100
South
Southeast / Midwest
90
Northeast
Capacity of reservoirs (%)
North
80
70
60
50
40
30
2010 2011 2012
Fig. 8. Capacity of reservoirs and electricity generated from thermal power plants.
Data from [38].
occurred in 9% of years according to hydrological data. In a pes-
simistic scenario — including delays in the plants start-up —
necessary hydrology goes over 86% of the long-term average,
which did not occur in 26% of the years. For this reason, it is crucial
for new power plants to start-up as schedule, which corresponds
to the total capacity of 36.64 GW.
Another important factor for the reservoirs depletion between
2011 and 2013 was the imbalance between supply and demand.
Since 2009 installed capacity has expanded at a slower pace than
that of the demand. According to [40], demand for electricity
between 2009 and 2013 grew at a rate of 4.24% per year, while
installed capacity grew only 3.79%. Around 40% of installed capa-
city growth was sustained by wind farms, which grew 1.61 GW (an
increase by 266.61%) from 2009 to 2013, and by small hydro-
electric power plants, which grew 7.41 GW (an increase by 9.42%)
in the same period. On the other hand, peak demand reached an
all-time of 84.96 GW in February 2014 [41]. In addition to the
increase in the electricity consumption by the industrial sector, a
consumption by the residential and commercial sector has also
increased due to the intense usage of heat air-conditioners during
last years' hot summer.
Some structural issues have also contributed to the current
crisis. The construction of new transmission lines has been
repeatedly delayed, i.e., around 11,000 km, which represent 42.37%
of the projects under construction [42]. As a result, many power
plants — especially wind farms — stand idle unconnected to the
electricity grid. In addition, the risk of shortage is even higher
because many thermoelectric power plants that meet the demand
for electricity in the country are obsolete. Many facilities were
constructed in the 60's and 70's and are not devoted to the pro-
duction of base load supply. Since these power plants have been
used to meet the continuous demand for electricity in the last
years, they are constantly subjected to forced outages. Indeed,
most of old thermal power plants were never retrofitted and
operate at very low efficiencies, i.e., below 20%, which in turn,
drive electricity costs up and emit CO2 into atmosphere.
Another reason for the current electricity crisis is economic.
The Brazilian government pledged to slash energy tariffs by 20% in
2012 [43], when drought started reducing capacity of hydroelectric
dams (certainly, at that point, the government had no idea about
the dimension of the drought). To reach this reduction, the gov-
ernment offered to renew operating concessions that were due to
expire between 2015 and 2017 provided that companies reduced
tariffs for all consumption sectors. Not all companies agreed to
these terms and the resulting increase in demand for electricity
combined with a reduced hydroelectricity supply has forced sev-
eral distributors to contract high-priced electricity at the spot
market. As shown in Fig. 3, electricity prices reached US$268.90/
R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
140 MW h in 2014, which corresponds to approximately 10 times
higher the prices practiced between 2010 and 2012, when the
thermoelectric power plants (TWh)
120 reservoirs were at normal levels.
The continuous operation of low efficiency and high opera-
Electricity generated from
100 tional costs thermoelectric power plants — planned to be fired
only for short periods — in combination with high short-term
80 electricity prices made several impacts on the electricity finance
sector. The government authorized a series of electricity tariffs
increases, and, since early 2015, bills started to be charged based
60
on tariff flags (i.e., green, yellow, and red tariff flags). The idea is to
make consumers aware of the cost of electricity generation due to
40
the mix of energy sources and, consequently, motivate a reduction
in electricity consumption. In turn, a red flag indicates that the
20
2013 2014 former situation is getting worse and the supply of energy to meet
consumer demand occurs with higher generation costs, such as
the firing of a large number of thermoelectric power plants to
generate electricity, which is a more expensive than that gener-
ated by hydroelectric power plants. Initially, residential consumers
would pay US$8.62 for every 100 kW h of energy consumed under
the red flag. However, on February 6, 2015, ANEEL preliminarily
approved an increase of 83.33% for the red flag tariff, rising to
US$15.81 per each 100 kW h consumed. There is a widespread
belief among economic specialists the electricity rates will
increase 50–60% for the industry sector until the end of 2015 [44].
4.2. Future role of renewable energy
According to the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME), through
its 10-year Energy Expansion Plan (PDE 2023)2 [45], Brazil foresees
an increase in electricity consumption by around 5% per year, from
516,330 GW h at end of 2013 to 781,700 GW h in 2023. Installed
generating capacity will reach 195.88 GW, which means an
increase of approximately 55% compared to the end of 2013, when
installed capacity was 126.74 GW. Most of the electricity genera-
tion capacity expansion will occur in the North (20.14 GW) and
Northeast (30.50 MW). To interconnect the new power plants to
the demand centers, 24,517 km of new transmission lines must be
built until 2023. Estimated investment only in the electricity
generation sector is US$72.91 billion; 38.4% of total investment
will be used for the construction of large hydroelectric power
plants, 52.1% for the construction of power plants using other
renewable energy sources, while the remaining 9.5% will be used
for building thermal and nuclear power plants [45].
Evolution of installed capacity for several energy sources over
the period 2013–2023 is shown in Fig. 9 [45]. In a 10-year per-
spective there is great energy supply potential from renewable
sources, which are presented in two groups: the large hydro-
electric power plants and other renewable sources (wind, solar,
biomass, and small hydroelectric power plants). For other
renewable sources, there has been an average annual growth of
10.7% in installed capacity [45]. These sources will be crucial to
maintain a high share of renewable resources in the Brazilian
energy mix. Fig. 9 indicates an increase in the participation of
other renewable resources in the electricity generation, from 13%
at the end of 2013 to 24% at the end of 2023. The Northeast region
is planned to have the highest share in other renewable sources
expansion until 2023, where the wind power will play an impor-
tant role in electricity supply.
Previous study [18] highlighted the importance of renewable
energy sources within the Brazilian economic context and
2
Every year the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME) publishes the Brazilian
Energy Expansion Plan (PDE) that presents to the next 10 years, the results of
prospective studies on energy demand and supply, and the related projects such as
electricity generation power plants, transmission lines, oil refineries, oil exploita-
tion blocks, oil and gas pipelines, and bioenergy production facilities.
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
1.8%
69.0% 15.5%
59.7%
1.6%
7.9%
4.3%
Fig. 9. Projection of installed capacity by energy source from (a) 2013 to (b) 2023. Adapted from [45].
identified that an 1% increase of electricity consumption generated
by renewable resources increases real GDP by 0.20%. Therefore, the
expansion of renewable energy projects does not only maintain
the high share of renewable sources but also enhances the econ-
omy of the country.
Economic viability of renewable energy technologies to tradi-
tional generation technologies including nuclear, coal-, and gas-
fired power plants was compared in a recent study [46]. The costs
to produce electricity of several technologies were compared using
the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE). The case study power
plants are mostly situated in Northeastern and Northern regions,
where the expansion of electricity sector will be concentrated.
Since the evaluated power plants entered into operation recently
or are still under project, the applied technologies are realistic for
future power plants within a 10-year perspective. The results show
clearly that projects applying wind and hydropower have lower
LCOE in comparison to non-renewable resources. At a 5% discount
rate, LCOE of hydroelectric projects range from US$27.41/MW h to
US$27.62/MW h, while the values for wind farms lie between
US$27.62/MW h and US$35.07/MW h. Fossil-fueled power plants
operating with natural gas have the lowest LCOE (i.e., US$61.14–
62.49/MW h), followed by imported-coal power plant (US$65.53/
MW h).
Interestingly, the wind farm projects became significantly more
competitive than the hydroelectric power plants when the costs
for transmission and for social and environmental externalities are
taken into account. At a 5% discount rate, the wind farm projects
have a LCOE at US$36.24–42.84/MW h, while the values for
hydroelectric power plants range from US$39.89/MW h to
US$48.36/MW h. A biomass power plant operating with sugarcane
refuse has a LCOE at US$76.82/MW h. Among the evaluated
renewable resources, solar photovoltaic (US$218.26–248.07/
MW h) and concentrating solar power plants (US$209.11/MW h)
are the most expensive technologies. The costs of electricity gen-
erated by solar energy are even higher than nuclear (US$66.83/
MW h) and fossil fuel power plants fired by natural gas (US$81.91–
83.91/MW h) and imported coal (US$118.87/MW h).
4.2.1. Hydropower
Large hydroelectric power plants will increase its generation
capacity from 86.02 GW to 116.88 GW until 2023 [45]. Despite the
increase in installed capacity by 30.86 GW, the participation of
hydroelectricity has inherent limits and is therefore projected to
decline as a fraction of the electricity generation mix. A reduction
by 9.3% in the share of electricity generation is expected by 2023.
One of the major hydropower issues today is the choice of plants
with large reservoirs or run-of-river power plants. The first allows
337
11.5%
14.5%
1.7% Biomass
Nuclear
7.1%
Thermal
1.8% Wind
Hydro
3.7%
Small Hydro
Solar
the accumulation of water, which in turn, act as energy stocks to
be used in times of drought. Run-of-river power plants generate
electricity using little or no accumulation of water.
More than 70% of the remaining hydroelectric potential is
found in the Amazon basin (Northern region), where the topo-
graphy is not favorable for the formation of large reservoirs.
Within the Amazon basin, Xingu sub-basin has 12.7% of the
country's inventoried potential [33]. Other sub-basins that have
considerable potential are those of the Tapajós, Rio Madeira, and
Rio Negro. New hydroelectricity needs are planned to come almost
exclusively from the North, where run-of-river power plants are
planned to be constructed with a limited capacity for energy sto-
rage. In addition, the Northern region poses important political
problems concerning the use of land for industrial purposes [16],
given its location in environmentally sensitive areas and distance
from the main load centers[47]. Therefore, exploitation of these
resources on Amazon basin is associated at a high environmental
cost and low energy capacity when compared to hydroelectric
power plants in operation [48]. The importance of this issue has
generated great debate in the country, considering the existence of
recent hydropower projects in the Amazon basin using run-of-
river power plants such as Jiraú (3.75 GW), Santo Antônio
(3.15 GW), Belo Monte (11.23 GW), and São Luiz do Tapajós
(6.13 GW). Due to its extreme remoteness, the Santo Antônio
power plant will have the largest transmission system in the
world, i.e., a length of 2400 km [49].
Considering the large hydroelectric participation in the
expansion plan of the generation sector, it is interesting to eval-
uate the hydrological seasonality. Fig. 10 shows the monthly var-
iation of the long term average hydro energy capacity factor in the
last 15 years for each region [50]. From the plots, hydrological
uncertainty indicated by the variation between the wet and dry
season is clear, particularly in the North. Despite some com-
plementation to the hydrological regimes of each region, the
construction of power plants with low regulatory capacity reser-
voirs will bring a small contribution to the improvement of elec-
tricity supply security. Even though the Belo Monte power plant
has a nominal capacity of 11.23 GW, it will produce in average only
4.46 GW throughout the year. In this scenario, the construction of
run-of-river power plants increases the challenge of managing the
electricity sector and the need for diversifying the sources of
electricity generation in order to improve supply security.
Small hydroelectric power plants will lose competitiveness in
the upcoming years despite their low flood area and small envir-
onmental impact in comparison to large hydroelectric power
plants. Since they have a mature technology and stable unit costs,
they will not remain competitive in the face of significant wind
338 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
120
110
Average capacity factor (%)
100
90
80
70
60
SE/MW
50 S
NE
40 N
30
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct
Fig. 10. Hydropower capacity factor. Data from [50].
energy cost-reductions; Table 1 indicates that in average the fixed
prices of wind energy is already lower than small hydroelectric
power plants. In addition, the viability of small facilities is more
complex due to environmental licensing (in some cases the
licensing period may last up to 5 years), construction price, and
the cost of land. Nevertheless, by 2023 the small hydroelectric
power plants will have an increase in installed capacity of around
2.0 GW, mainly concentrated in the Southern and Southeastern
regions, where most of the existing plants are located. It is worth
mentioning that this can lead to many problems and attention
should be given to the cumulative effects resulting from the
merger of several small facilities in the same basin.
4.2.2. Wind energy
Since the implementation of the Program of Incentives for
Alternative Electricity Sources (PROINFA) in 2004, wind generation
is the fastest growing source in the country. Around 95% of wind
projects in Brazil are financed by this program [33]. Evolution of
total electricity generated by wind energy in the last two years is
displayed in Fig. 11 [51]. By looking at the plots, the significant
expansion of wind power generation becomes clear. In addition,
average capacity values indicate that the potential of wind in Brazil
is more intense from July to December, coinciding with the
months of lower rainfall intensity.
As discussed previously, recent contracts have shown that wind
farms have reached more attractive prices. Increasing participation
of wind energy in the electricity generation mix was the result of a
combination of factors related to the external environment, tech-
nological development as well as government incentives through
tax and regulatory aspects. Many foreign wind turbines companies
opened subsidiaries in the country because of new loan conditions
established by government, which require at least 60% of com-
ponents made in Brazil [52]. Another important factor that makes
wind power attractive in Brazil is logistic. Since mostly wind farms
are installed along the cost, transportation of turbine blades and
tower by ship is cheaper and less difficult than transportation by
road. Despite its rapid installation and reduced environmental
impacts, lack of storage capacity and intermittent generation are
identified as the main problems for the further exploitation of
wind energy.
Onshore wind installed capacity expected by 2023 is 22.44 GW,
which represents about 11.5% of the electricity generation share
[45]. Mostly of expansion will be concentrated in the Northeast,
where the annual wind mean velocity is around 8 m/s [22]. A
previous study [52] showed that wind conditions in the Northeast
is steadier and has much more favorable conditions than in other
regions and countries. For example, the energy pattern factor
(defined as the ratio sum of cube of the wind speed to the cube of
the mean wind speed) varies between 1.2 and 1.4, whereas at
Nov Dec
Fig. 11. Total electricity generation by wind energy and average capacity factor.
Data from [51].
other sites in Europe and North America, the value ranges between
2.0 and 2.2.
As in other countries, offshore wind technology faces some
technical challenges associated with operating in corrosive envir-
onment and installation of equipment at various water depths
[53]. Probably, these are the reasons why offshore wind farms are
not included as an alternative to be exploited in a 10-year per-
spective. Since this technology will be much more attractive to
Brazil than to many other countries, further research and devel-
opment is still necessary to bring this emerging technology to the
market. Lack of consistent and reliable data has been also one of
the limiting factors on both onshore and offshore projects in Brazil.
4.2.3. Solar energy
Despite large areas with high solar irradiation in Brazil, solar
photovoltaic electricity is still incipient. In contrast with other
renewable energy sources that had specific support by govern-
ment incentives and policies, the penetration of the solar tech-
nology is lagging far behind [48]. Installed capacity is still very
small and includes only research projects, photovoltaic panels
installed at the World Cup stadiums, and small plants for dis-
tributed generation. In addition to the high costs involved, the
minimum nationalization level required for photovoltaic panels by
the federal government for funding made it difficult to exploit this
source through regulated market auctions.
Solar technologies are unlikely to become competitive without
proper government incentives. Future governmental programs
will rely on solar photovoltaic electricity as one of the main
renewable alternative and expect to reach an installed capacity of
3.50 GW by 2023, which in turn will represent about 1.8% of total
electricity generation mix [45]. Installation of solar power plants is
expected mainly in the Northeastern (80% of installed capacity)
and Southeastern regions (20% of installed capacity). The focus of
the expansion of solar energy in Brazil will be in distributed
generation, as it will be still difficult to compete with other
renewable resources in energy auctions. Specific auctions may be
carried out aiming at solar energy expansion, as occurred in 2014,
when 889.6 MW photovoltaic panels were contracted.
The supply of electricity through distributed generation from
small plants should expand. More consumers are expected to
generate electricity in their homes and inject a surplus in the
distribution grid. The electricity not consumed and injected into
the grid can generate electricity credits subject to deductions in
the electricity bills. However, it is still necessary to create a
favorable business environment for the companies. Among the
many problems faced by these companies is the certification
required from inverters of photovoltaic systems, issued by the
laboratories accredited by the National Institute of Metrology
Standardization and Industrial Quality (INMETRO). Presently, only
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
three laboratories at universities are currently eligible for the
certification of photovoltaic systems.
Concentrating solar power plants are not to be installed in
Brazil in 10-year's time; probably, because of higher electricity
costs in comparison to other renewable sources [46]. On the other
hand, some studies have pointed out that this technology could be
cost-effective in the arid area of Northeastern region [54]. How-
ever, the advantages of this technology combined with thermal
energy storage should be pointed out. They can serve as a com-
plement to intermittent renewable sources such as wind and
photovoltaic, in addition to its service capacity to meet the max-
imum demands of the interconnected system [55].
Another important future application of photovoltaic genera-
tion is in remote areas not connected to the interconnected sys-
tem. This is the case of remote places in Amazon region, where
almost all the electricity is generated by fossil fuel power plants
[48]. One of the advantages is that the photovoltaic panels could
also operate coupled to diesel engines in hybrid systems [56].
More recently, pilot projects have include the installation of pho-
tovoltaic panels floating on the surface of hydroelectric power
plant reservoirs. This alternative may be advantageous given that
it takes advantage of already installed transmission lines.
As discussed previously, solar energy for water heating is far
the most widespread application of solar energy in Brazil. The
local solar heating industry is well developed and able to supply a
growing market. However, there is still a need for more public
awareness in the advantages of this technology [54].
The comparatively high cost of producing electricity is one of
the main obstacles to the development of solar energy in Brazil,
particularly given the wind energy with major unexploited
potential and lower costs. Further growth of the solar energy still
depends strongly on policy-makers. A previous study [48] has
shown that the key issues to increase the participation of solar
energy lie on domestic efforts to promoting better incentives and
supportive programs. In order to develop domestic technologies,
investments are crucial on infrastructure, human resources, and
research and development [57].
4.2.4. Biomass energy
Biomass is another renewable source available to compose the
expansion of the supply of electricity generation. In this category
stands out sugarcane refuse as its main fuel through cogeneration
facilities. The sugar industry plays an important role in the
national energetic scenario, from liquid fuel production to con-
sumption by the transportation sector and the domestic supply of
electricity. By the end of 2023 the installed capacity for electricity
generation is expected to reach 13.98 GW, which represents an
increase by 41.7% in comparison to 2013 [45].
Greatest potential of sugarcane refuse (bagasse and straw) is
located in the Southeast and Midwest. Sugarcane harvest season —
from March or April through late October or November — coin-
cides with the dry season in both regions where the largest
hydroelectric capacity is concentrated. However, the use of
sugarcane biomass face seasonal variable challenges, which in turn
reduces the capacity of biomass power plants to operate as base
load throughout the year when compared to other conventional
thermal energy sources.
Biomass is the single renewable source able to generate both
electricity and produce liquid transportation fuels [53]. Due to an
anticipated increase in the use of sugarcane for ethanol produc-
tion, it is unlikely that, in future, sugarcane can be relied upon as a
major renewable source for Brazilian electricity generation. New
technologies currently being developed will allow the use of by-
products from the refining of biofuels to produce transportation
fuel, which will lead to a shift in the use of this energy source [16].
Thus, sugarcane refuse are expected to be used for the production
339
of lignocellulosic ethanol, also known as second generation bio-
fuels [58].
Another problem facing the sugar industry is that much of the
existing cogeneration plants use low pressure boilers and conse-
quently low efficiency systems. Initiatives are necessary in order to
renovation and modernization of cogeneration facilities. Further-
more, the localization of some plants are quite distant from the
points of electricity transmission.
4.3. Future role of non-renewable energy
According to Fig. 9, the participation of thermoelectric power
plants powered by fossil fuels will continue to vary from 13.4% to
15.6% between 2013 and 2023, as well as nuclear power plants,
which ranges from 1.6% to 1.7%. High-efficiency power plants fired
by fossil fuels could be used to meet some or all of a given region's
continuous energy demand, and produce energy at a constant rate
instead of operating only as a peaking power plant. However, fossil
fuel power plants should be applied with caution, considering that
Brazil has assumed the responsibility to reduce emissions levels of
greenhouse gases. Brazil is signatory to the United Nations Fra-
mework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); however, by
being classified as an economically development country, it is not
required to meet the goals of reducing greenhouse gases emissions
established in the Kyoto Protocol framework. Nevertheless, the
country has undertaken efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emis-
sions and established a voluntary target of reducing between 36.1%
and 38.9% of its total emissions of greenhouse gases projected for
2020, according to Law 12.187/09 [59]. Emissions from electricity
generation should not exceed 63 MtCO2 in 2020 [45].
The current international scenario has also affected the Brazi-
lian electricity sector in terms of a strategic planning for oil and
natural gas. Recent drop in the international crude oil price has
significant impacts on the Brazilian oil and gas industry and it
reflects into energy woes. Reduction in oil prices in the short run,
and the greater volatility of prices in the medium and long run
represents a major challenge for oil investments.
Even though natural gas production has grown by about 16.6%
in 2014, the domestic supply of natural gas has been largely
insufficient. Natural gas imports have grown steadily since 2010
[7], reflecting an increase in external dependence as a result of
natural gas-fueled power plants operation. The growth of the
natural gas market in 2014 was concentrated in the electricity
sector, which increased by 47.4% [60].
In regards to natural gas, uncertainties are even higher due to
the supply of natural gas from the pre-salt layer [61]. In addition to
the obstacles facing the feasibility of production in the pre-salt
layer, there is still much uncertainty about the amount of natural
gas that will be produced. Carbon pricing may also represent
increased costs for operating reserves and an impact on their
development. In addition, there is the possibility of more restric-
tive environmental regulations and, consequently, a public reac-
tion to its development. There are still difficulties in transporting
of natural gas because Brazilian state company Petrobras is the
owner of the pipelines and there is no guarantee of access to other
producers.
Currently, coal-fired power plants are responsible for just over
2.5% of the electricity generated in Brazil. Two main factors con-
tribute to the insignificant use of coal in electricity generation:
coal is found only in the South and its characteristics are not
favorable because the high ash content. The future of coal could be
promising if highly efficient and environmentally friendly tech-
nologies were applied in the new and existing coal-fired power
plants. Technical and economic feasibility of technologies such as
cofiring, fluidized bed combustion, in-situ gasification, and Carbon
Capture and Storage (CCS) should be evaluated.
340 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
5. Conclusion
Brazil's electricity supply consists primarily of renewable
resources of energy where the hydroelectricity will continue to
play an important role in a 10-year perspective. Nevertheless, the
Brazilian public is aware that only hydroelectric power plants
alone cannot guarantee the security of electricity supply. The risk
of Brazil experiencing yet another electricity crisis is manifest. The
extreme droughts that have hit the Southeast, Midwest, and
Northeast do not fully explain the severity of the crisis in 2014 and
2015. As discussed in this work, the crisis is also a direct result, to a
great extent, to delays in generation and transmission projects and
to inadequate energy policies.
Brazil still foresees considerable increases in electricity con-
sumption in the upcoming years and, therefore, it is necessary to
strike a balance among renewable sources in order to guarantee
electricity supply. Maximum capacity of hydroelectric generation
is close to being achieved in the next decades and the unexploited
resources on major river basis in the Amazon will have low reg-
ularization capacity due to required smaller size of reservoirs since
the power plants must operate as run-on-river plants.
Brazil has enormous potential to become a world leader in
clean energy, but, due to intermittent generation in the electricity
network, the role of wind, solar, and small hydroelectric power
plants must be carefully evaluated in a country where hydroelec-
tricity is already a key player. These segments are expected to be a
welcome complement to the Brazilian mix of electricity genera-
tion, but the characteristics of future investments mainly in solar
and wind energy make them likely to remain relatively as a
complementary source.
Thermoelectric power plants allow for better management of
water flow rated in major river basins in order to meet the elec-
tricity demand in dry seasons, conferring greater operational
flexibility and reliability to the entire national electricity system. A
greater share of thermal energy for generating a base load for the
interconnected grid should be considered and the issue is the
competition with the electricity generation through biomass, still
little explored in Brazil. The sugarcane industry could increase its
relevance in the energy mix by increasing the participation of the
electricity generated from the residues of sugarcane. This increase,
however, is not only due to the sugar and ethanol production,
which will provide a crescent supply of waste, but also to the
modernization of cogeneration plants. Nevertheless, attention
should be given to ensure electricity production from sugarcane
remains a competitive option, since emerging technologies allow
producing biofuels from sugarcane refuse.
A favorable policy environment and public awareness are
essential for the development of emerging renewable technologies
in order to make them more competitive in comparison to con-
ventional generation sources. In addition, a supporting strategy for
national manufacturers and investments in research and devel-
opment are crucial for achieving higher future targets in terms of
electricity supply security and environmental friendly
technologies.
References
[1] IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 〈Http://www.ibge.gov.br/
home/default.php〉; 2015.
[2] Gross Domestic Product Data. The World Bank, 〈http://data.worldbank.org/
indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD〉; 2014.
[3] Index Mundi. Brazil GDP-Composition by Sector, 〈Http://www.indexmundi.
com/brazil/gdp_composition_by_sector.html〉; 2014.
[4] IBGE. Característica da População. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística
(IBGE), 〈http://7a12.ibge.gov.br/vamos-Conhecer-O-Brasil/nosso-Povo/car
acteristicas-Da-Populacao〉; 2014.
[5] INCT. Observatório das Metrópoles-Censo 2010 São Paulo. Instituto Nacional
de Ciência e Tecnologia (INCT); 2014 /http://www.observatoriodasmetro
poles.net/download/Os_Estados_e_as_RMs_no_Censo_2010.pdfS.
[6] EIA. Annual Energy Outlook 2013. Energy Information Administration (EIA),
〈http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383%282013%29.pdf〉; 2013.
[7] EPE, MME. Balanço Energético Nacional 2014. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética
(EPE), Ministério de Minas e Energia (MME), 〈https://ben.epe.gov.br/down
loads/Relatorio_Final_BEN_2014.pdf〉; 2014.
[8] BP. BP Statistical review of world energy 2014 Brazil insights; 2014.
[9] ONS. Sistema Interligado Nacional. Operador Nacional do Sistema Elétrico
(ONS), 〈http://www.ons.org.br/conheca_sistema/o_que_e_sin.aspx〉; 2015.
[10] Gallo F, Lobianco E. Electricity regulation in Brazil: overview, 〈http://www.
camposmello.adv.br/export/sites/cma/en/news-resources/resources/2015/Elec
tricity-Regulation-in-Brazil-Overview.pdf〉; 2015 [accessed 10.10.15].
[11] EPE. Leilões, 〈http://www.epe.gov.br/leiloes/Paginas/default.aspx〉; Empresa de
Pesquisa Energética (EPE); n.d.
[12] ONS. Programa Mensal da Operação (PMO). Operador Nacional do Sistema
Elétrico (ONS), 〈http://www.ons.org.br/operacao/NTsumarioexecutivoPMO.
aspx〉; 2015.
[13] CCEE. Preços médios – PLD – Preço de Liquidação das Diferenças. Câmara de
Comercialização de Enegia Elétrica (CCEE), 〈Http://www.ccee.org.br/portal/
faces/pages_publico/o-Que-Fazemos/como_ccee_atua/precos/precos_medios?
_adf.ctrl-state¼ 163ou8wvk_30&_afrLoop ¼123440754582840#%40%3F_
afrLoop%3D123440754582840%26_adf.ctrl-state%3Dc3zj3jvaa_4〉; n.d.
[14] Fernandes E, de Oliveira JCS, de Oliveira PR, Alonso PSR. Natural-gas-powered
thermoelectricity as a reliability factor in the Brazilian electric sector. Energy
Policy 2008;36:999–1018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.10.008.
[15] ANEEL. Capacidade de Geração do Brasil. Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica
(ANEEL), 〈Http://www.aneel.gov.br/aplicacoes/capacidadebrasil/capacidadeb
rasil.cfm〉; 2014.
[16] Santos RLP, Rosa LP, Arouca MC, Ribeiro AED. The importance of nuclear
energy for the expansion of Brazil’s electricity grid. Energy Policy
2013;60:284–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.020.
[17] Energia Elétrica e Inovações Energéticas 2011, 〈http://fgvenergia.fgv.br/sites/
fgvenergia.fgv.br/files/estudo_15.pdf〉; [accessed 10.10.15].
[18] Pao H-T, Fu H-C. Renewable energy, non-renewable energy and economic
growth in Brazil. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;25:381–92. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.05.004.
[19] Pigatto R. Potencial e Perspectivas para Expansão de Fontes Alternativas,
〈http://www.zonaeletrica.com.br/downloads/ctee/forumce20080325/Ricardo_
Pigato_APMPE.pdf〉; 2008.
[20] ANEEL. Resolução normativa no. 673, de 4 de agosto de 2015, 〈http://www.
aneel.gov.br/cedoc/ren2015673.pdf〉; Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica
(ANEEL); 2015.
[21] ONS Geração de Energia. Operador Nacional do Sistema Elétrico (ONS),
〈Http://www.ons.org.br/historico/geracao_energia.aspx〉; 2014.
[22] CRESESB. Atlas do Potencial Eólico Brasileiro. Centro de Referência para
Energia Solar e Eólica Sérgio de Salvo Brito (CRESESB), 〈http://www.cresesb.
cepel.br/publicacoes/download/atlas_eolico/Atlas%20do%20Potencial%
20Eolico%20Brasileiro.pdf〉; 2001.
[23] CERPCH. Proventos estima 340 GW eólicos offshore exploráveis no Brasil. Cent
Nac Referência Em Pequenas Centrais Hidrelétricas 2012, 〈http://www.cerpch.
unifei.edu.br/noticias/proventos-estima-340gw-eolicos-offshore-exploraveis-
no-brasil.html〉; [accessed April 16, 2015].
[24] Ortiz GP, Kampel M. Potencial de energia eólica offshore na margem do Brasil.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), 〈http://urlib.net/rep/
8JMKD3MGP7W/3A2ULFS?languagebutton¼ pt-BR〉; 2011.
[25] Pimenta F, Kempton W, Garvine R. Combining meteorological stations and
satellite data to evaluate the offshore wind power resource of Southeastern
Brazil. Renew Energy 2008;33:2375–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2008.01.012.
[26] de Oliveira Filho O, Araújo A, Asibor A, Rohatgi J. Meeting peak load demand
by an offshore wind farm in Brazil. Wind Eng 2013;37:549–56. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1260/0309-524X.37.5.549.
[27] Queiroz Oliveira OD, Araujo AM, Ramos Medeiros AL, Pereira Silva H, Rohatgi
JS, Asibor AI. A preliminary approach of the technical feasibility of offshore
wind projects along the Brazilian coast. IEEE Lat Am Trans (Rev IEEE Am Lat)
2013;11:706–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TLA.2013.6533958.
[28] Silveira JL, Tuna CE, Lamas W, de Q. The need of subsidy for the imple-
mentation of photovoltaic solar energy as supporting of decentralized elec-
trical power generation in Brazil. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;20:133–41.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.054.
[29] Pereira EB, Martins FR, Abreu SL, de, Rüther R. Atlas Brasileiro de Energia Solar.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE); 2006. 〈Http://www.ccst.inpe.
br/wp-Content/themes/ccst-2.0/pdf/atlas_solar-Reduced.pdf〉 /http://ftp.cptec.
inpe.br/labren/publ/livros/brazil_solar_atlas_R1.pdfS.
[30] EPE, MME. Análise da Inserção da Geração Solar na Matriz Elétrica Brasileira.
Empresa de Pesquisa Energética (EPE), Ministério de Minas e Energia (MME),
〈http://www.epe.gov.br/geracao/documents/estudos_23/nt_energiasolar_
2012.pdf〉; 2012.
[31] Mogawer T, Souza TM de. Sistema solar de aquecimento de água para resi-
dências populares. In Procedings of the 5th Encontro de Energia no Meio
Rural. Campinas; 2004.
[32] Moreira JR, Pacca SA, Parente V. The future of oil and bioethanol in
Brazil. Energy Policy 2014;65:7–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2013.09.055.
 R. Corrêa da Silva et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 328–341
[33] Pereira MG, Camacho CF, Freitas MAV, da Silva NF. The renewable energy
market in Brazil: current status and potential. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2012;16:3786–802. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.03.024.
[34] Frondel M, Sommer S, Vance C. The burden of Germany’s energy transition: an
empirical analysis of distributional effects. Econ Anal Policy 2015;45(1):189–
99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2015.01.004.
[35] EPE, MME. Plano Nacional de Energia 2030 (Geração Termonuclear). Empresa
de Pesquisa Energética (EPE), Ministério de Minas e Energia (MME), 〈http://
www.epe.gov.br/PNE/20080512_7.pdf〉; 2007.
[36] ANEEL. BIG – Banco de Informações de Geração. Agência Nacional de Energia
Elétrica (ANEEL), 〈http://www.aneel.gov.br/aplicacoes/capacidadebrasil/Oper
acaoCapacidadeBrasil.cfm〉, 2015 .
[37] Pinto CP, Walter A. The potential contribution of thermo power plants in the
Brazilian electric sector. Energy 2011;36:3667–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2010.08.034.
[38] ONS. Histórico da Operação – Energia Armazenada. Operador Nacional do
Sistema Elétrico (ONS), 〈Http://www.ons.org.br/historico/energia_armaze
nada.aspx〉; 2015.
[39] Infopetro. Setor de energia no Brasil: o balanço de 2014. Blog Infopetro 2014,
〈https://infopetro.wordpress.com/2014/12/08/setor-de-energia-no-brasil-o-
balanco-de-2014/〉; [accessed 02.02.15].
[40] COPAM, EPE. Resenha Mensal do Mercado de Energia Elétrica-Dezembro
2014. Comissão Permanente de Análise e Acompanhamento do Mercado de
Energia Elétrica (COPAM), Empresa de Pesquisa Energética (EPE), 〈http://
www.epe.gov.br/ResenhaMensal/Resenha%20Mensal%20do%20 Mercado%
20de%20Energia%20El%C3%A9trica%20-%20Dezembro%202014.pdf〉; 2015.
[41] ONS. Histórico da Operação-Carga Própria de Energia. Operador Nacional do
Sistema Elétrico (ONS), 〈Http://www.ons.org.br/historico/carga_propria_de_
energia.aspx〉; 2015.
[42] ANEEL. Nota Técnica no. 144/2014-SFE/ANEEL. Agência Nacional de Energia
Elétrica (ANEEL), 〈http://www.aneel.gov.br/arquivos/PDF/Nota_Tecnica__n_
144_2014-SFE_de_22 _9_14.pdf〉; 2014.
[43] ANEEL. ANEEL anuncia redução das tarifas de energia elétrica. Agência
Nacional de Energia Elétrica (ANEEL), 〈http://www.aneel.gov.br/aplicacoes/
noticias/Output_Noticias.cfm?Identidade ¼ 6426&id_area¼ 90〉; 2013.
[44] FIRJAM. Perspectiva do Custo da Energia Elétrica para a Indústria no Brasil em
2014 e 2015. Federação das Indústrias do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FIRJAM),
〈http://www.firjan.org.br/lumis/portal/file/fileDownload.jsp? fileId ¼ 2C908
CEC45F062B601461B962A1352C5〉; 2014.
[45] EPE, MME. Plano Decenal de Expansão de Energia 2023. Empresa de Pesquisa
Energética (EPE), Ministério de Minas e Energia (MME), 〈http://www.epe.gov.
br/Estudos/Documents/PDE2023_ConsultaPublica.pdf〉; 2014.
[46] de Jong P, Kiperstok A, Torres EA. Economic and environmental analysis of
electricity generation technologies in Brazil. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;52:725–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.064.
[47] Pereira Jr. AO, Pereira AS, La Rovere EL, Barata MM de L, Villar S de C, Pires SH.
Strategies to promote renewable energy in Brazil. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2011;15:681–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.027.
341
[48] Martins FR, Pereira EB. Enhancing information for solar and wind energy
technology deployment in Brazil. Energy Policy 2011;39:4378–90. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.04.058.
[49] Santo Antônio Energia n.d., 〈http://www.santoantonioenergia.com.br/〉;
[accessed 21.10.15].
[50] ONS. Energia natural afluente. Operador Nacional do Sistema Elétrico (ONS),
〈Http://www.ons.org.br/historico/energia_natural_afluente.aspx〉; 2015.
[51] ONS. Boletim Mensal de Geração Eólica. Operador Nacional do Sistema Elétrico
(ONS), 〈http://www.ons.org.br/download/resultados_operacao/boletim_men
sal_geracao_eolica/Boletim_Eolica_fev_2015.pdf〉; 2015.
[52] Juárez AA, Araújo AM, Rohatgi JS, de Oliveira Filho ODQ. Development of the
wind power in Brazil: political, social and technical issues. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2014;39:828–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.086.
[53] Osmani A, Zhang J, Gonela V, Awudu I. Electricity generation from renewables
in the United States: resource potential, current usage, technical status,
challenges, strategies, policies, and future directions. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2013;24:454–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.011.
[54] Martins FR, Pereira EB, Silva SAB, Abreu SL, Colle S. Solar energy scenarios in
Brazil, Part one: resource assessment. Energy Policy 2008;36:2853–64. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.014.
[55] Martins FR, Abreu SL, Pereira EB. Scenarios for solar thermal energy applica-
tions in Brazil. Energy Policy 2012;48:640–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2012.05.082.
[56] Silva SB, de Oliveira MAG, Severino MM. Economic evaluation and optimiza-
tion of a photovoltaic-fuel cell-batteries hybrid system for use in the Brazilian
Amazon. Energy Policy 2010;38:6713–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enpol.2010.06.041.
[57] Cavaliero CKN, Da Silva EP. Electricity generation:: regulatory mechanisms to
incentive renewable alternative energy sources in Brazil. Energy Policy
2005;33:1745–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.02.012.
[58] Moraes BS, Zaiat M, Bonomi A. Anaerobic digestion of vinasse from sugarcane
ethanol production in Brazil: challenges and perspectives. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2015;44:888–903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.023.
[59] Silva LIL da, Machado N, Lobão E, Silva PB, Adams LIL. Lei no. 12.187/09 2009.
[60] Ambiente Energia. Consumo e geração de energia de janeiro de 2015 já se
igualam ao mesmo mês de 2014. Ambiente Energ 2015, 〈https://www.
ambienteenergia.com.br/index.php/2015/02/consumo-e-geracao-de-energia-
de-janeiro-de-2015-ja-se-igualam-ao-mesmo-mes-de-2014/25360〉; [acces-
sed 13.02.15].
[61] Infopetro. A transformação do panorama global do petróleo e do gás e os
impactos sobre o Brasil. Blog Infopetro 2014. 〈https://infopetro.wordpress.
com/2014/11/24/a-transformacao-do-panorama-global-do-petroleo-e-do-gas-
e-os-impactos-sobre-o-brasil/〉; [accessed February 02.02.15].