Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project TDV Economic Update Brian Horii and Snuller Price Energy & Environmental Economics,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Draft National TDV Values 3/20/09 Contact Information Snuller Price, Partner Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600.
Advertisements

ENERGY VALUE. Summary  Operational Value is a primary component in the Net Market Value (NMV) calculation used to rank competing resources in the RPS.
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Update Workshop March 14-15, 2006.
A Comparison of Measure Avoided Cost Calculations using Utility TOU Load Shapes and DEER Hourly Measure Savings 14 March 2006.
1 Illustrative Results Based on E3’s Avoided Cost Model Thursday, April 19, 2012 Marginal Generation Costs.
Time-of-Use and Critical Peak Pricing
A Two-Level Electricity Demand Model Hausman, Kinnucan, and Mcfadden.
NARUC 2015 Winter Meeting February 16, 2015 Combined Heat and Power and the Clean Power Plan Bruce Hedman Institute for Industrial Productivity.
October 8, 2013 Eric Fox and Mike Russo. AGENDA »Recent Sales and Customer Trends »Preliminary State Sales and Demand Forecast »Building a No DSM Forecast.
Automated Demand Response Pilot 2005/2004 Load Impact Results and Recommendations Final Report © 2005 Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) Research & Consulting.
Valuing Load Reduction in Restructured Markets Supply Cost Curve Regressions Market Price vs. Value of Load Reduction Photovoltaic Case Study William B.
1 COST OF SERVICE OBJECTIVES & METHODOLOGY Utah Cost of Service Taskforce May 23, 2005 Dave Taylor.
Energy and Environmental Economics 1 Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Workshops Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. October 3, 2005.
California Energy Commission Resource Adequacy Demand Forecast Coincidence Adjustments R Resource Adequacy Workshop January.
Electrical Billing and Rates MAE406 Energy Conservation in Industry Stephen Terry.
1 Managing Revenues in Regulated Industries Rate Design May 2008 Richard Soderman Director-Legislative Policy and Strategy.
February 23, 2006Karen Herter, LBL/CEC/UCB-ERG 1 /29 Temperature Effects on Residential Electric Price Response Karen Herter February 23, 2006.
How Energy Efficiency and Demand Response can Help Air Quality Presentation to the California Electricity and Air Quality Conference October 3, 2006 Mary.
2011 Long-Term Load Forecast Review ERCOT Calvin Opheim June 17, 2011.
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Workshops Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. October 3, 2005.
Overview – Non-coincident Peak Demand
1 Load Forecast and Scenarios David Bailey Customer Energy & Forecasting Manager Soyean Kim Rate Design Manager.
1 Quality Control Review of E3 Calculator Inputs Comparison to DEER Database Brian Horii Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. November 16, 2006.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future * NREL July 5, 2011 Tradeoffs and Synergies between CSP and PV at High Grid Penetration.
Electric / Gas / Water Eric Fox Oleg Moskatov Itron, Inc. April 17, 2008 VELCO Long-Term Demand Forecast Methodology Overview.
Farmers Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation 2006 Load Forecast Prepared by: East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Forecasting and Market Analysis Department.
Hybrid Cooling for Data Centers
ERCOT 2003 UFE ANALYSIS By William Boswell & Carl Raish AEIC Load Research Conference July 13, 2005.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council 6 th Plan Conservation Resource Supply Curve Workshop on Data & Assumption Overview of Council Resource Analysis.
Avoided Costs of Generation
Network Customer Meeting Access Metric Update November 16, 2006.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Proposed Combined-cycle Power Plant Capital Cost Assumptions Jeff King Northwest Power and Conservation.
Highlights of AESC 2011 Report Vermont Presentation August 22, | ©2011 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
Jenell Katheiser Doug Murray Long Term Study Scenarios and Generation Expansion Update January 22, 2013.
1 CPUC Avoided Cost Workshop Introduction and Overview.
C LIMATE C ORPS B AY A REA 2012 T RAINING Day 3. C LIMATE C ORPS B AY A REA 2012 T RAINING Questions from yesterday Logistics for today.
Grayson Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation 2006 Load Forecast Prepared by: East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Forecasting and Market Analysis Department.
California Energy Commission California Energy Demand Preliminary Electricity Forecast July 7, 2015 Chris Kavalec Energy Assessments Division.
OVERVIEW OF ISSUES DR AND AMI HELP SOLVE Dr. Eric Woychik Executive Consultant, Strategy Integration, LLC APSC Workshop on DR and AMI.
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Workshops Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. October 4, 2005.
Energy Analysis Department Cost-Effectiveness Valuation Framework for Demand Response Resources: Guidelines and Suggestions Chuck Goldman Lawrence Berkeley.
“Demand Response: Completing the Link Between Wholesale and Retail Pricing” Paul Crumrine Director, Regulatory Strategies & Services Institute for Regulatory.
Rate Design Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) presented by Nick Phillips Brubaker &
Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Energy Analysis Review of Implications Jon McHugh, Sr. Project Mgr. The H ESCHONG M.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Draft Wholesale Power Price Forecasts Maury Galbraith Northwest Power and Conservation Council Generating.
Arthur Rosenfeld, California Energy Commission Gregory Rosenquist, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory C. Keith Rice, Oak Ridge National Laboratory ARI.
May 03, UFE ANALYSIS Old – New Model Comparison Compiled by the Load Profiling Group ERCOT Energy Analysis & Aggregation May 03, 2007.
September 21, 2005 ICF Consulting RGGI Electricity Sector Modeling Results Updated Reference, RGGI Package and Sensitivities.
California’s Proposed DR Cost-Effectiveness Framework January 30, 2008.
Kevin Hanson Doug Murray Jenell Katheiser Long Term Study Scenarios and Generation Expansion Update April, 2012.
Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) A Success Story… In Progress Ingmar Sterzing United States Association of Energy Economics (USAEE) Pittsburgh.
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Update Workshop March 14-15, 2006.
Blue Grass Energy Cooperative Corporation 2006 Load Forecast Prepared by: East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Forecasting and Market Analysis Department.
Long Term Study Scenarios and Generation Expansion Update October 12, 2012.
Licking Valley Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation 2006 Load Forecast Prepared by : East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Forecasting and Market Analysis.
The Impact of Retail Rate Structure on the Economics of Commercial Photovoltaic Systems in California Ryan Wiser, Andrew Mills, Galen Barbose & William.
California Energy Commission Retail Electric Rate Projections: Revised Cases 2015 Integrated Energy Policy Report California Energy Commission December.
1 Cross-Cutting Analytical Assumptions for the 6 th Power Plan July 1, 2008.
An Overview of Demand Response in California July 2011.
Cost of Service Studies April 14,  Used to reasonably allocate costs (revenue requirement) incurred by utility amongst customer classes  2 Types.
2015 California Statewide Critical Peak Pricing Evaluation DRMEC Spring 2016 Load Impact Evaluation Workshop San Francisco, California May, 2016 Prepared.
DRMEC Spring 2016 Load Impacts Evaluation Workshop San Francisco, California May 10, SDG&E Summer Saver Load Impact Evaluation.
CPUC Avoided Cost DRAFT Results CEWG Workshop May 31, 2016 Brian Horii, Senior Partner Snuller Price, Senior Partner Zach Ming, Consultant Kiran Chawla,
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Draft Wholesale Power Price Forecasts Maury Galbraith Generating Resource Advisory Committee Meeting.
California Energy Demand Electricity Forecast (CED 2014) Update: Method and Summary of Results November 5, 2014 Chris Kavalec Demand Analysis.
2018 VELCO IRP Forecast Preliminary results
Resource Adequacy Demand Forecast Coincidence Adjustments
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Update Workshop
Behavior Modification Report with Peak Reduction Component
Wholesale Electricity Costs
Presentation transcript:

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project TDV Economic Update Brian Horii and Snuller Price Energy & Environmental Economics, Inc. for Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Codes & Standards Program

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Agenda Methodology Overview Conceptual Framework Detail on TDV Derivation Electricity Natural Gas Propane

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Methodology Overview of TDV TDV Method the Same for All Energy, Sum of Commodity Costs Marginal T&D Costs Rate Adjustments Air Emissions Externalities “1992 Adder” Hourly Lifecycle values for each area, class, and energy type

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Commodity Costs Marginal T&D Costs Rate Adjustments Air Emissions “1992 Adder” Formulation Based on TDV Goals Include New Market Structure System Efficiency Utilization Improve Environment Don’t Relax Standards Cost ComponentTDV Goal Total TDV Value TDV values made with publicly available data.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project This is What it Looks Like! Example of Electric TDV Spreadsheet Down for 8760 Hours

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project How TDV Works in Evaluation $/kWh Monday Friday With flat energy costing a kW saved is valued the same for every hour of the day With TDV costing a kW saved during a high-cost peak hour is valued more highly than a kW saved during an off-peak hour Flat Energy Costing Time Dependent Energy Costing

Environment Building up the Electric TDVs $/kWh T&D PX Rate Adder 1. Start with the PX Commodity Costs 2. Add the marginal T&D delivery costs 3. Use flat adder to bring to rate levels 4. Add environmental externality of reduced air pollution 5. Add 1992 adder to bring to current standard levels Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project 1992 Adder

Building up Gas and Propane TDVs $/MMBtu Environmental Externality 1992 Adder (Nat. Gas Only) Commodity Cost January December Rate Adder 1. Start with the Gas Commodity Costs 2. Use flat adder to bring to rate levels 3. Add environmental externality of reduced air pollution 4. Add 1992 adder to bring to current standard levels Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Annualized Rate Components of Electric TDV Values Weighted Average Electric TDV for Shasta 34% 21% 8% 6% 31%

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Annualized Rate Components of Natural Gas TDV Values Weighted Average Gas TDV for Shasta 48% 38% 8% 6% No T&D Component for natural gas or propane

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Annualized Rate Components of Propane TDV Values Weighted Average Propane TDV for Shasta 49% 45% 6% No 1992 Adder for propane

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Electric TDV Summary

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Natural Gas TDV Summary TDV Values by Service Area

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Propane TDV Summary Statewide Propane Values

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Details of the Electric TDV Estimation

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Electric Costs Time Dependent Components Generation - Commodity Transmission and Distribution Emissions  Attributes - Level - Shape Fixed Components Rate Adder 1992 Adder

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Generation Market Price - Level Price based on the “all-in” cost of a combined cycle gas turbine Gas price forecast is the major driver Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Generation Market Price - Shapes Price[m,h] = All-in Cost * Monthly Price Ratio[m] * Typical Shape[m,h] Monthly Typical Shapes (normalized to average 1.0)

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Combining Level and Shape Yield the Hourly Prices Shapes mapped to 1997 chronology

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: T&D Marginal Cost - Levels Marginal costs will always be in flux. Use the most recent values available. SCE PTRD Proposal PG&E 1999 GRC Phase II Use full “ratemaking” marginal costs DSM marginal costs can be lower – Timeframe of impacts – Pervasiveness of impacts

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: T&D Cost - Shape Concept T&D systems are built for peak loads Peak load is driven largely by weather Peak Capacity Allocation Factors (PCAFs) are used to allocate the marginal costs to the high load hours – Used by PG&E and SCE Want price signals highest when load is highest in an area. PCAFs reflect this. – Allocate cost to hours in the peak period. The higher the relative load, the higher the allocated cost.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: PCAFs and Temperature Temperature Loads PCAFs Drives Load Information Missing or Difficult to Obtain in Many Areas Temperature PCAFs We used temperature as a proxy for load, and as the basis for allocating costs to hours of the year.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: PCAF / Load Relationship PCAFs focus on the highest load hours

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Temperatures Drive the Peaks Milpitas illustrates the strong correlation of weekday temp with peak loads. Sunday

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Results of Load & Temperature Correlation Peak period is all weekday hours with temperatures within 15 degrees of the highest observed temperature in the area (weekday only). This 15 degree span defines the hours that could drive peak demand, and thus drive the need for capacity expansion. This definition is independent of climate zone. This definition is spot-on with PCAFs in the summer

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Sample Summer PCAF Results Similarly good correlation was obtained for all summer peaking areas: San Jose Bakersfield

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Same Principles Apply to the Winter - w/ Refinements Same 15 degree bandwidth Only consider 7am to 9pm

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Winter PCAF Timing Winter Areas Current areas peak in the evening. Do we need to worry about a morning peak?

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Hourly Costs Hourly Cost is the T&D capacity cost (from the utilities) times the temperature weight. Temp weight is the total PCAF for each degree F, divided by the number of hours that are at that degree F. Temp h = temperature category for that hour. (nearest whole degree) TotalPCAF[Temp h ] = total % of capacity cost allocated to that temp category NumberofHours = # of hours that fall into that temp category in the year CapacityCost = T&D marginal capacity cost in $/kW-yr a = Area, h = hour

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The T&D Component: Winter PCAF Problems Assigning costs to the winter (in summer peaking areas) doubles the T&D costs for the area Favors measures that save in summer and winter --- bit issue? Spreading actual costs over summer and winter would undervalue summer reductions

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Environmental Adder: Emissions A realistic valuation of NOx emissions is on the order of $ ,300/ton, centered on $ /ton.. A reasonable, albeit very tentative and highly uncertain, range of values for CO 2 emissions is about $5-13/ton-CO 2. Thus, the $9/ton-CO 2 value used in both the 1994 and 1998 CEC valuations appears to be reasonable. E3 concludes that a realistic valuation of environmental externalities should be closer to the CEC ER94 valuations, but perhaps at the lower end of this range. For common electric generation plants in California, this level of externality valuation corresponds to a total emission cost, or energy adder, of about $10/MWh.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Environmental Adder: Emission Cost Estimates Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Rate Adder Example for Fresno Commercial Building Flat adder to adjust marginal cost up to retail rate levels. Shape still represents underlying social marginal costs.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project 1992 Adder: Comparison of Electric Rate Forecasts Current rate forecast is much lower than existing. Adder up to existing levels removes any IOU rate differentials

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Electric TDV Summary

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Details of the Natural Gas Estimation

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Monthly Natural Gas Shape Monthly, not hourly variation for natural gas.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Long Run Forecast Long run residential natural gas rate forecast

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Environmental Adder: Externality for Natural Gas Natural Gas Externalities ton-CO2/MMBtu lb NOx/MMBtu.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Rate Adder Example for Commercial Fresno Customer Flat adder to adjust marginal cost up to retail rate levels. No T&D component in marginal cost, assumption is flat allocation across hours.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project 1992 Adder: Comparison of Gas Forecasts

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Natural Gas TDV Summary TDV Values by Service Area

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Details of the Propane Estimation

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Long Run Trend for Propane EIA Crude Oil Forecast Used Going Forward

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project The Commodity Component: Monthly Shape of Propane Based on EIA Historical California Propane Prices

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Environmental Adder: Propane Externalities Propane Externalities 0.07 ton-CO2/MMBtu lb NOx/MMBtu

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Rate Adder Example for Commercial Customer Flat adder to adjust marginal cost up to retail rate levels. No T&D component in marginal cost, assumption is flat allocation across hours.

Copyrighted © 2000 PG&E All Rights Reserved CASE Initiative Project Propane TDV Summary Statewide Propane Values