1. Simulating Transformative Resources in the Electric Power Industry: Andrew Ford Professor, School of the Environment Washington State University February 11, 2014

3. Case Studies of Conservation & Energy Storage

4. Electric Power in the 1970s Power companies deal with the energy crisis, and the financial challenge of building new power plants

5. Building Bigger and Bigger Plans was no longer the answer.

6. The Golden Years: 1960s

7. The Difficult Years: 1970s

8. Business Week, May 28, 1979

9. Business Week, May 23, 1983 new plants are forcing rate increases- further cutting the growth in demand

10. The Death Spiral

11. The Death Spiral in Context

12. Questions? Next: how did the electric utility companies simulate the death spiral?

13. Start with a Demand Model

14. Now Calculate Capacity Additions

15. Now Add a Model of Costs 300+ modelers! Can’t someone simulate the Death Spiral? Not just 3 models, but 33 models.... with ~ ten staff each

16. OK, let’s build a single model (a Corporate Model) Workshop by EPRI: only 1 of 12 models did the spiral Workshop for Dept. of Energy: only 1 of 13 models did the spiral Absent system dynamics, managers had to simulate the spiral in their head

17. Conclusions from my own “Spiral Study” Waiting for regulators to raise rates won’t necessarily solve the financial problems The IOUs could improve their situation by building smaller, shorter-lead time plants And by slowing the growth in electricity demand through efficiency programs

18. The 1980s: A Move to Small Scale and Conservation Programs for Many Utilities Conservation : a transformative resource then, often the best resource today

19. 2 nd Case: Storage Some promoters say storage is the Holy Grail for Renewables

20. Storage proposals are exploding. But does storage have significant value? A dozen or more modes of value can be described, but are seldom quantified The few attempts to quantify value usually show value at less than half the cost Our focus: the value of fuel-free, compressed air storage in the Ontario Power System

21. View of the Long-term Model

22. A Combination of Models

23. Wind in the Long-term Model

24. Wind in the Short-term Model Exports & Curtailments on a windy Thursday

25. Short-term model shows Curtailments Major Curtailments on a windy Thursday

26. Key Stock in the Short-term Model

27. Short-term Model shows Storage used for “Load Leveling”

28. Questions?

29. Back to the Long Term Model: OPA: Ontario Power Authority Cash Flows

30. Value of Load Leveling and CT Displacement

31. $2.1 Billion is less than half the cost! The team (& the agencies) agree with this finding Indeed, this finding built confidence in the model. So, where is the value of storage?

33. Integrating the Wind with GCAES wind is too low; run generators wind is too high; run the pumps

34. January 2028 Result: 90% Wind Integration run generators run the pumps

35. What is the $/MWh value of performing wind integration?

36. The Value of Wind-Integration viewed in the long-term model $ 5.1 billion Select Middle Curve

37. $7 billion: Value that meets or exceeds the cost!

38. Future Plans in Ontario Long-Term Model: Key stakeholders have shown great interest in continuing to help expand and improve the model Short-Term Model: The operations model will be expanded to continue exploring ways to use storage Storage Demo: The Ministry of Energy will include storage in the acquisition process, starting with 50 MW by 2014.

39. Advice for the Practice of Applied System Dynamics

40. Thank You.