Characteristics of Existing and Potential Hydropower Resources in the U.S. presented by Brennan T. Smith, PhD, PE Water Power Program Manager Group Leader, Energy-Water Ecosystem Engineering Environmental Sciences Division Energy and Environmental Sciences Directorate Oak Ridge National Laboratory March 20, 2013

2Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Energy-Water Assessment & Development Scale & Complexity Users & Uses Policy Analysis Research Programming Transmission Planning Environmental Planning Generation Planning Project Developers Site-Specific Feasibility Technology Deployment Project Developers Increasing Detail Decreasing Uncertainty Roles Modeling & Remote Sensing Site-Specific Assessment Clarity & Resolution Government Industry

3Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Electrons and water molecules do not stop at the border! U.S. hydropower exists within multiple climatic, legal, and systemic contexts: Wet / dry Snowpack / non-snowpack Water rights Variable renewables potential Non-hydropower baseload and asset mix Federal, state, municipal, and investor-owned assets Project and basin-scale authorities and roles State and federal environmental resource management

4Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Turbine Types Francis Pelton Kaplan Francis 51 GW 2,565 Units Kaplan 19 GW 720 Units Other 26 GW 1,501 Units Pelton 2.6 GW 330 Units

5Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Turbine/Generator Age What are the existing and future costs of aging hydropower infrastructure?

6Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Plant Installed Capacity (MW) Design Head (feet) Turbine Type Year of initial Commissioning / upgrade Current Annual Average Generation (MWh) Potential Annual Generation Increase (MWh) Potential Generation Increase (%) Preliminary Cost Est. for Recommended Upgrades * (10 6 $) Francis1925 / ,9004,6009.8% Francis1951 / ,90014,4004.2% Francis1964 / ,4009,6002.2% Propeller/ Francis 1962 /199377,3008,50011% Kaplan1919 / ,90024, % Francis1949 / , % Francis1945 / ,00027,60312% Francis1912 / ,90023,4176.4%13.8 Total 1,693,400120, % More Energy from Existing U.S. Hydropower Significant new energy can be obtained through upgrades and improved efficiency if constraints can be addressed. 7.1% average increase in generation for surveyed facilities (very site-specific) Results from the DOE Hydropower Advancement Project: Challenges/Issues Max energy <> max revenue Licensing amendment risks Competing water uses Reliability concerns Intensifying market dynamics Competition for capital

7Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Non-Powered Dam (NPD) potential exists in areas with less than ideal wind and solar resources Water availability, particularly for regulated rivers, is NOT correlated with wind and solar availability (combined firming of capacity) Primarily run-of-river rather than storage Wind Map: NREL 12.1 GW NPD potential nationwide 8.3 GW at the Top 100 NPDs Majority of environmental impact has already incurred with dam construction and operation for water control New Energy from New Powerhouses and Existing Dams

8Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy New Energy from New Development Status Map for US-DOE New Stream-reach Development Assessment February 2013 Where is the potential? Where is it feasible? What are its attributes? Nationwide results available October 2013 nhaap.ornl.gov

9Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Resource Attributes Example: Characteristics of Upper Colorado Basin Hydropower Potential Computed geophysical attributes are used to assess approximate cost and technology needs under multiple development scenarios

10Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Environmental Attributes of Hydropower Potential “not all sites are good, not all sites are bad” Based on provisional data

11Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Gigawatts of undeveloped hydropower potential exist in the U.S. – Significant incremental increases at existing assets ( ~7%) – 12.1 GW at non-powered dams – More at new development sites--results in 2013 Less than previous assessments, but realistic for deployment scenario planning New hydropower development is realistic – Not all sites are “bad” and not all sites are “good.” – Many impacts/feasibility metrics scoped with advanced geospatial processing & data – Multiple scenarios and metrics can inform sustainable development and policy Resource assessments are the first step – Additional effort on new cost models is underway – Does not replace site-specific measurement and due diligence – Non-energy (ancillary) value of hydropower assets should not be ignored Key Points

12Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Acknowledgments and Credits National Hydropower Asset Assessment Program Team Oak Ridge National Laboratory Boualem Hadjerioua, Ph.D., Hydropower Engineer Shih-Chieh Kao, Ph.D., Statistical Hydrologist Yaxing Wei, Ph.D., Geospatial Analyst Suresh K. SanthanaVannan, Informatics Specialist Harold A. Shanafield III, Database Management Maria G. Martinez, GIS Analyst Rocio Martinez, Ph.D., Resource Economist Henriette Jager, Ph.D., Fisheries Biologist Mark S. Bevelhimer, Ph.D., Fisheries Biologist Michael Starke, Ph.D., Power Systems Engineer Shelaine Hetrick, PMP, Operations Manager Support for this effort is provided by the U.S. Department of Energy Water Power Program: Jose Zayas, Wind and Water Power Program Manager Michael Reed, Water Power Team Leader Hoyt Battey, Market Acceleration Leader Rajesh Dham, P.E., Technology Development Leader