1 Portfolio Analysis Update Power Committee Discussion August 30, 2004.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Leaders in the design, implementation and operation of markets for electricity, gas and water. Portfolio Generation Investment Under Uncertainty Michael.
Advertisements

Will CO2 Change What We Do?
Steve Moorman Mgr Business Development, Advanced Technologies Babcock & Wilcox CO2 Emission Reduction from Coal Fired Plants FutureGen 2.0 CO2 Capture.
1 AEP Perspectives on Development and Commercialization of CCS Technology for Natural Gas Power Generation Matt Usher, P.E. Director – New Technology Development.
Technical Conference Avoided Cost Modeling January 6, 2015.
1 INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST Issues and Challenges August 10, 2006 Dan Seligman, Attorney-at-Law Columbia Research Corporation.
1 John J. Conti Acting Director Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting Prepared for the Energy Technology System Analysis Program (ETSAP) Florence,
Tenth Annual Midwest Energy Conference March 7, 2007 How Best Satisfy Midwest Electric Load Growth? Thomas R. Casten Chairman Recycled Energy Development.
1.  Purpose  To present Staff’s Preliminary Findings on the 2012 Integrated Resource Plans of:  APS – Arizona Public Service Company  TEP – Tucson.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Effects of Alternative Scenarios on Sixth Power Plan Northwest Power and Conservation Council Whitefish, MT June.
The Cost-Effectiveness Premium for Conservation Michael Schilmoeller Thursday May 19, 2011 SAAC.
Pasadena Water & Power 2009 Integrated Resource Plan Public Meeting #3 December 17, 2008.
Draft Fifth Pacific Northwest Electric Power and Conservation Plan.
Potential Impacts of an Advanced Energy Portfolio Standard in Pennsylvania Ryan Pletka, P.E. Black & Veatch April 12, 2004 Supported by: Heinz Endowments.
Financing new electricity supply in the UK market with carbon abatement constraints Keith Palmer 08 March 2006 AFG.
Economic Analyses of FPL’s New Nuclear Projects: An Overview Dr. Steven Sim Senior Manager, Resource Assessment & Planning Florida Power & Light Company.
Utah Schedule 37 Update June 25, Schedule 37 Background Schedule 37 – Published rates for standard power purchase agreements with qualifying facilities.
Energy Business Solutions Michigan IRP Working Group Meeting June 10, 2005.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Discussion of Proposed Generating Resource Action Items Jeff King Northwest Power and Conservation Council.
Regulatory Flexibility Committee Competitive Procurement September 18 th Joe Kerecman Director Government and Regulatory Affairs
August 17, 2006 ICF Consulting RGGI Preliminary Electricity Sector Modeling Results Phase III RGGI Reference and Package Scenario.
Draft Avoided Cost Forecast and Marginal CO 2 Offset Value of Conservation Regional Technical Forum Maury Galbraith Northwest Power and Conservation Council.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Regional Conservation Update: News From the Front January 24, 2007 Tom Eckman Northwest Power and Conservation.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Draft Plan Proposed Regional Conservation Targets for June 9, 2009.
Net Metering Technical Conference Docket No PacifiCorp Avoided Costs October 21, 2008 Presented by Becky Wilson Executive Staff Director Utah.
Liberalization of Electricity Market in Taiwan Su, Jin-sheng Energy Commission Ministry of Economic Affairs August 8, 2001.
Discussion of Resource Plans Michael Schilmoeller for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council Wednesday, June 10, 2009.
The Regulatory Assistance Project 177 Water St. Gardiner, Maine USA Tel: Fax: State Street, Suite 3 Montpelier, Vermont.
Long-Term Electricity Report 1 Susan Gray September 27, 2010.
COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION: TECHNICAL STUDY RESULTS Peninsula Clean Energy September 24,2015.
Preliminary Results with the Regional Portfolio Model Michael Schilmoeller for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council Generation Resource Advisory.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Slide 1 Accelerating Energy Efficiency To Reduce the PNW Power System's Carbon Footprint Tom Eckman Manager, Conservation.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Resource Development Parameters Jeff King Northwest Power and Conservation Council Generating Resources.
The Council’s Regional Portfolio Model Michael Schilmoeller for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council Generation Resource Advisory Committee Thursday,
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Action Plan Summary.
Combined Heat and Power Workshop Report and Next Steps Power Committee Briefing 7/15/03.
MISO Northwest Exploratory Study Presented to National Wind Coordinating Committee Participants in study – MISO, Various utilities in Minnesota, North.
September 21, 2005 ICF Consulting RGGI Electricity Sector Modeling Results Updated Reference, RGGI Package and Sensitivities.
Resource Adequacy Steering Committee Meeting October 4, 2011.
Geothermal Energy Portfolio from a Utility Perspective Marilynn Semro Seattle City Light May 11, 2005 How do you know what you need and is Geothermal “it”?
Selected Geothermal Resource Topics from a Utility Perspective Geothermal Power Generation Workshop May 11, 2003 Ken Dragoon PacifiCorp
Northwest Power and Conservation Council A Look At The Council’s Conservation Planning Methodology and Assumptions A Look At The Council’s Conservation.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Overview of Draft Sixth Power Plan Council Meeting Whitefish, MT June 9-11, 2009.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council The Northwest Forecast – Energy Efficiency Dominates Resource Development Tom Eckman Manager, Conservation Resources.
Winter Power Supply Adequacy/Reliability Analysis Power Committee Briefing October 17, 2001.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council The Role of Energy Efficiency in Could (and Should) Play in Montana’s Future Insights from the 5 th Northwest.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council The Role of Energy Efficiency in the Northwest Power and Conservation Plan Tom Eckman Manager, Conservation Resources.
Rocky Mountain States Sub-Regional Transmission Study December 9, 2003 Generation Additions Strawman.
1 Proposed Input Assumptions to RTF Cost-Effectiveness Determinations February 2, 2010.
Southern California Edison The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station April 14, 2011.
On/Off Operation of Carbon Capture Systems in the Dynamic Electric Grid On/Off Operation of Carbon Capture Systems in the Dynamic Electric Grid Rochelle.
To Buy or To Build Is it really one or the other? APPA New Generation Workshop Portland, Oregon August 1, 2007.
Business Case NPRR 351 Floyd Trefny Amtec Consulting Brenda Crockett Champion Energy Services.
Impacts of Environmental Regulations in the ERCOT Region Dana Lazarus Planning Analyst, ERCOT January 26, 2016.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Interim Wholesale Electricity Price and Carbon Dioxide Production Forecasts Maury Galbraith Northwest.
Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Assessment for 2011 and 2013 Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Meeting July 21, 2008.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Conservation Resources in the (Draft) 5 th Northwest Power Plan Tom Eckman Manager, Conservation Resources Northwest.
SERC Reliability Corporation 1 SERC RELIABILITY CORPORATION MID-AMERICA RELIABILITY CONFERENCE June 21, 2006 COLUMBUS, OHIO.
6 th Zimbabwe Mining and Infrastructure Indaba 8-10 October 2014 Harare, Zimbabwe.
California Energy Action Plan December 7, 2004 Energy Report: 2004 and 2005 Overview December 7, 2004.
Slide 1 Overview of Conservation in the Pacific Northwest Energy Efficiency Options in the Northwest Post-2011Meeting March 4, 2008.
1 Canadian Clean Power Coalition: Delivering Results for Over a Decade 3) Fuel Cell Repowering Results.
Pasadena Water & Power Integrated Resource Planning “IRP” April 18, 2016 Leesa Nayudu, Resource Planning Manager.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council The Role of Electric Energy Efficiency in Reducing PNW Carbon Emissions Tom Eckman Manager, Conservation Resources.
2017 Integrated Resource Plan
Demand Response in the 7th Power Plan
Idaho Power 2017 Integrated Resource Plan
CSP Grid Value of Energy Storage and LCOE Implications 26 August 2013
Key Findings and Resource Strategy
Sixth Power Plan Setting Conservation Targets and Implementation Strategies Jill Steiner, Snohomish Public Utility District Northwest Power and Conservation.
Presentation transcript:

1 Portfolio Analysis Update Power Committee Discussion August 30, 2004

2 What needs to happen today IF we are to make schedule Decide on a base plan Identify (limited) additional sensitivities

3 Agenda Review of major changes Treatment of IPPs Gas Prices CO2 emissions penalties Coal prices/Transmission Conservation Discussion of new “Base Case” IPP Treatment Conservation levels Selection of Plan Sensitivities CO2 Next steps

4 Treatment of IPPs About 3000 aMW not currently committed long-term to regional load (mostly gas but includes 1100 aMW coal) Previous assumption – IPPs in region; don’t have firm TX access out Capital costs sunk Plants dispatch at operating cost (if needed) Region’s consumers get benefit of plants (Difference between market price and plant’s operating cost when they operate)

5 IPPs (cont.) Revised assumption – IPPs still in region; don’t have firm TX access out Capital costs sunk Plants dispatch at market price when needed OWNERS get benefit of plants (Difference between market price and plant’s operating cost when they operate) Model may decide to build other plants to avoid costs of market purchases Reality – some combination of purchase of IPP generation (or L.T. contracts) and new builds.

6 Revised gas prices

7 CO2 Penalties Phased in No penalty in 33% of futures Mean values less than values in utility IRPs

8 Coal prices/MT Transmission Reviewed our data Met with representatives of developer Conclusion – current data is an adequate representation of MT coal using unallocated TX capacity at embedded cost rates (up to 400 MW) Much controversy within transmission community re cost of transmission upgrades – NTAC study not available until the winter

9 Conservation assumptions Revised supply curve for “discretionary” conservation Added industrial conservation inadvertently left out (350 costs between 1-2 cents/kWhr) Bundled measures to reflect implementation realities – you don’t get to do only the cheapest stuff first (costs up to 4.8 cents/kWhr, avg 2.1 cents/kWhr) Extended phase-in (how long before you can actually achieve potential potential) for lost opportunity conservation 12 yrs instead of 6

10 Effect of treatment of IPPs Resource Development Previous (Benefits to region) Revised (Benefits to owners) Coal-fired genNo coal400 MW Coal CCCT and SCCTNoneLimited SCCT CCCT late in period WindLots in low risk plans, CY09 Lots in low risk plans, CY11 ConservationAbout the same

11 Current assumptions re IPPs increase cost and risk to region Because benefits go to owners not consumers Region can secure some of the benefits by Purchasing/contracting LT with IPPs; or Building something Both appear to be happening But at a cost Difference in cost indication of value But lots of other factors enter into decision Benefits to owners Benefits to Region

12 Recommendation Use assumption of IPPs not owned by regional entities as base Careful discussion of the situation Don’t want to tilt playing field unfairly one direction or the other

13 Conservation Alternatives Three alternatives Option 1  Discret. – 10MW/Qrtr  LO – 20 year phase in Option 2  Discret. – 20MW/Qrtr  LO – 12 yr phase in Option 3  Discret. – 30MW/Qrtr  LO – 12 Yr phase in Significantly reduced cost and risk for more aggressive conservation Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

14 Different levels of conservation, different Portfolios Option 1 Option 2 L22 Aggressive Conservation Option 3

15 Conservation Development Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

16 Recommendation Option 3 conservation because Substantial long-term benefit We’ve done that much in the past We have new capabilities that we didn’t have then Many of region’s largest utilities are acquiring at about that level Need additional discussion in action plan addressing barriers

17 A B C D Choosing “A Plan” Least Cost – Conservation + market Plan Conservation, wind+market Plan Conservation, wind, coal+ market Least risk – Conservation, wind, coal, CCCT, SCCT + market Note: This and subsequent charts Assume Option 3 Conservation

18 Comparison of Build outs A B C D

19 The Action Plan doesn’t change a lot For the five year Action Plan Conservation Confirm/Develop Demand Response Capability Limited commercial scale wind ( MW yr) PLUS -- If plan chosen includes coal, pre- construction activities, including transmission

20 Comparative Adequacy

21 Retail Price Volatility DCBADCBA DCBADCBA

22 CO2 Sensitivity Test PacifiCorp assumptions – in process

23 Additional Sensitivities Additional carbon cost scenarios? No demand response – to establish DR’s value No improvement in wind cost Substitute Integrated Coal Gasification (IGC) for pulverized coal technology Alberta Oil Sands cogeneration DSI support Other?

24

25 DSI Support Model incorporates no support ($ or embedded cost rates) for DSIs Level of operation = f(market price, Al price), plants retired if out of operation 5 consecutive years

26 But Bonneville considering some level of support Assuming market prices = $40/MW-hr Support$1600 $/ton Al$1500 $/ton Al 0885 MW Al load0 MW Al load 100 $7/MW-hr $7/MW-hr $15/ MW-hr Still subject to variation in price of electricity and aluminum We can model some assumption about support