Southwest Power Pool ITP-20 Generating Resources May 25, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 PG&E Model Thursday, April 19, 2012 Marginal Generation Costs.
Advertisements

Evaluating the Benefits of the SPP EHV Buildout Moving forward on policy for funding 765 KV Larry Holloway CAWG Meeting February 25, 2009.
Concentrating Solar Deployment Systems (CSDS) A New Model for Estimating U.S. Concentrating Solar Power Market Potential Nate Blair, Walter Short, Mark.
The Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of the Missouri Solar Rebate Erin Noble Nicholas School of the Environment Duke University Advisor: Randy Kramer.
Technical Conference Avoided Cost Modeling January 6, 2015.
California Energy Commission Retail Electric Rate Scenarios: Key Drivers and Structure 2015 Integrated Energy Policy Report California Energy Commission.
Capacity Valuation.
Emissions Due to Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging in High Wind Systems Allison Weis Roger Leuken Jeremy Michalek Paulina Jaramillo Carnegie Mellon.
SPP’s 2013 Energy Consumption and Capacity 2 12% annual capacity margin requirement CapacityConsumption Total Capacity 66 GW Total Peak Demand 49 GW.
Toward a Sustainable Future Name of Conference, Event, or Audience Date Presenter’s Name | ©2011 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All.
1.  Purpose  To present Staff’s Preliminary Findings on the 2012 Integrated Resource Plans of:  APS – Arizona Public Service Company  TEP – Tucson.
22 April 2010 EWEC 2010 Warsaw2 Jesper Munksgaard Ph.D., Senior Consultant Merit Order Effect of Wind Power – Impact on EU 2020 Electricity Prices.
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Effects of Alternative Scenarios on Sixth Power Plan Northwest Power and Conservation Council Whitefish, MT June.
Connecticut’s Energy Future Removing Barriers to Promote Energy Sustainability: Public Policy and Financing December 2, 2004 Legislative Office Building.
Potential Impacts of an Advanced Energy Portfolio Standard in Pennsylvania Ryan Pletka, P.E. Black & Veatch April 12, 2004 Supported by: Heinz Endowments.
LEVELIZED COST OF ENERGY. Summary Levelized costs are calculated as a proxy for the PPA price between a third-party developer and a utility LCOEs amortize.
Essentials of Accounting for Governmental and Not-for-Profit Organizations Chapter 3 Budgetary Accounting for the General and Special Revenue Funds McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
EE 369 POWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable.
ERCOT PUBLIC 3/25/ LTSA Scenario and Data Assumptions March 25, 2014.
Preliminary Analysis of the SEE Future Infrastructure Development Plan and REM Benefits.
September 9, 2003 Lee Jay Fingersh National Renewable Energy Laboratory Overview of Wind-H 2 Configuration & Control Model (WindSTORM)
Economic Analyses of FPL’s New Nuclear Projects: An Overview Dr. Steven Sim Senior Manager, Resource Assessment & Planning Florida Power & Light Company.
Generation Expansion Daniel Kirschen 1 © 2011 D. Kirschen and the University of Washington.
Energy Business Solutions Michigan IRP Working Group Meeting June 10, 2005.
Long Term Study Task Force Update to ETWG ERCOT Long-Term Study: Scenarios, New Software, and Emerging Technology Assumptions January 27, 2012.
Steve Paulone Facilitator Financial Management Decisions The financial manager is concerned with three primary categories of financial decisions:  1.Capital.
Long Term Study Scenarios and Generation Expansion Update December 7, 2012.
IPM Overview Elliot Lieberman U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C
Draft Avoided Cost Forecast and Marginal CO 2 Offset Value of Conservation Regional Technical Forum Maury Galbraith Northwest Power and Conservation Council.
Avoided Costs of Generation
Base Case Draft – For Comment Rocky Mountain States Sub-Regional Transmission Study December 9, 2003.
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 ERCOT 2007 Strategic Financial Plan & Budget Proposal _____________________ Board of Directors November 14, 2006.
Discussion of Resource Plans Michael Schilmoeller for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council Wednesday, June 10, 2009.
Update - RTOs and Capacity January 28, Purpose of Presentation Update the Commission on issues related to – (1) Ameren Missouri – potential Local.
California Energy Commission Staff Paper - April 12,20071 Estimating the Generation Resource Mix of Electricity Imports to California – Energy Commission.
HYDROPOWER. Objective: The student will be become familiar with the Corps policy for hydropower development. The student will be have a basic understanding.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Draft Wholesale Power Price Forecasts Maury Galbraith Northwest Power and Conservation Council Generating.
Potential Cost Savings in MISO from Demand Response MWDRI Steering Committee September 24, 2007.
Review of the Economic System Planning Criteria June 15 th, 2012 / RPG.
Proposed Generation Expansion Process For Review and Discussion March 1, 2011.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Proposed Wind Plant Capital Cost Assumption Jeff King Northwest Power and Conservation Council Portland,
The Power to Reduce CO 2 Emissions The Full Portfolio National Association of Utility Regulatory Commissioners Winter Committee Meetings Committee on Electricity.
Kevin Hanson Doug Murray Jenell Katheiser Long Term Study Scenarios and Generation Expansion Update April, 2012.
Wholesale Market Subcommittee Texas Interconnection Long-Term Study Update Warren P. Lasher April 8, 2011.
Allocation of CO 2 Emission Allowances in RGGI Dallas Burtraw, Karen Palmer, Danny Kahn Resources for the Future Presentation to RGGI Stakeholder Meeting.
1 Public Power Looking to Participate in New Coal Generation Public power communities are very concerned about affordable electricity and –Coal is the.
Selected Geothermal Resource Topics from a Utility Perspective Geothermal Power Generation Workshop May 11, 2003 Ken Dragoon PacifiCorp
© ABB Group August 23,2010 | Slide 1 MBPC Study – 1 st Load Pocket Preliminary Results for Discussion only Entergy Regional State Committee (ERSC) Southwest.
1 NAUSCA Summer Meeting Boston June 30, 3009 David W. Hadley Vice President State Regulatory Relations Midwest ISO.
Long Term Study Scenarios and Generation Expansion Update October 12, 2012.
1 Case study: Sofia District Heating Dr. Venkata R. Putti Team Leader, Carbon Finance Assist The World Bank Minsk / Belarus, March 2007.
Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study David Corbus - Project Manager Matt Schuerger (Consultant) National Wind Technology Center NREL Golden,
Rocky Mountain States Sub-Regional Transmission Study December 9, 2003 Generation Additions Strawman.
Electric Capacity Market Performance with Generation Investment and Renewables Cynthia Bothwell Benjamin Hobbs Johns Hopkins University Work Supported.
1  Power plant costs are key factors in energy market policy decisions Key assumptions in the EIA NEMS model Input factors to all energy economic models.
Economic Assessment of Implementing the 10/20 Goals and Energy Efficiency Recommendations – Preliminary Results Prepared for : WRAP, AP2 Forum Prepared.
Energy Business Solutions Michigan IRP Working Group Meeting July 25, 2005.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Interim Wholesale Electricity Price and Carbon Dioxide Production Forecasts Maury Galbraith Northwest.
The Iowa Stored Energy Plant A Project Review and Update May 2005 Bob Haug, Executive Director Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities.
Greg Brinkman Debbie Lew National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado USA Western Wind and Solar Integration Study: February TRC meeting – Transmission.
High Level Post Processing Cost Estimates MWG SSC Meeting September 26, 2011.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Draft Wholesale Power Price Forecasts Maury Galbraith Generating Resource Advisory Committee Meeting.
Contents Introduction Focus area Wind scenarios
TAS Quarterly Meeting November 2-3, 2016 Michael Bailey, P.E. WECC
City of Lebanon, Missouri Electric Department
TAS Quarterly Meeting November 2-3, 2016 Michael Bailey, P.E. WECC
Solar Energy Commercialization
Presentation transcript:

Southwest Power Pool ITP-20 Generating Resources May 25, 2010

February 10, 2010B&V - 2 Agenda Study Purpose and Scope Study Approach Resources Considered Base Case Results Questions

February 10, 2010B&V - 3 Study Purpose and Work Scope Phase I. Develop resource plans for each of four future scenarios, as defined by the SPP System Planning Committee, to be used in the ITP Year 20 EHV analysis. The resources will be selected using an optimal generation expansion model, Strategist, configured to provide resource planning solutions on a regional basis. The resource list will be generic prototype generators representing available future resources. Phase II. Spatially located the new resources within SPP with the aid of GIS databases showing locations of transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, railroads, waterways, substations, etc. Phase III. The new generators will be entered into a PowerBase database and connected to buses in the transmission system. The information entered into the PowerBase will be used by SPP in future studies.

February 10, 2010B&V - 4 Study Approach

February 10, 2010B&V - 5 Review of Study Approach  Used Powerbase data model provided by SPP.  Developed capital cost and performance estimates for future candidate units.  Developed Annual Levelized Fixed Charge Rates to apply to capital cost estimated to account for financing costs, insurance, taxes, etc  Updated data model based on feedback from stakeholders.  Developed renewable energy build-out scenario.  SPP footprint divided into two areas due to model limits.  Developed least cost generation expansion using Ventyx Strategist.

February 10, 2010B&V - 6 Topology Review SPP footprint broken down into two sub-regions because of Strategist dimension limits. Initial attempt was to model the entire SPP in one model with 2 zones. But, encountered Strategist dimension limit. SPP footprint modeled using two separate Strategist models for 2 sub-regions: SPP North (SPPN) and SPP South (SPPS) Approximate dividing line – Kansas-Oklahoma State line 200 MW of capacity flow from SPPS to SPPN was allowed until SPPS was not excess on capacity to meet their own load and reserve requirements.

February 10, 2010B&V - 7 SPP North (SPPN) Control Areas Greater Missouri Operations Company. Independence Power and Light Kansas City BPU KCP&L Westar Energy Sunflower Electric Power Corp. Lincoln Electric System NPPD OPPD City Utilities of Springfield, MO Empire District Electric Company. MKE MWE

February 10, 2010B&V - 8 SPP South (SPPS) Control Areas AEP West OG&E Western Farmers Electric Co-operative Southwestern Public Service Company Central Louisiana Electric Company City of Lafayette Louisiana Energy and Power Authority GRDA Southwestern Power Administration

February 10, 2010B&V - 9 Economic Inputs – Development of Fixed Charge Rate  Used a proprietary Black & Veatch model for development of FCR  Fixed Charge Rate (FCR) is used to estimate the annual capital carrying cost for new plants and for new capital improvements done on existing plants.  A levelized fixed charge rate is a single, uniform rate that is applied to a unit’s total installed capital cost to yield the revenue requirements needed to recover cost on a present value basis. FCR varies depending upon various economic and financial assumptions.  Black & Veatch model develops different FCR for IOU, and Municipal and Cooperative (M&C) utilities.  Blended FCR calculated for SPP to account for different types of LSE in SPP. Assumed an 80/20 mix of generating resources additions by IOUs/M&C.  Technology dependent unit lives were assumed for FCR calculations: peaking (20 years), combined cycle (25 years), coal/nuclear (30 Years), and wind (5 year tax life, assumes not M&C financed).

February 10, 2010B&V - 10 Fixed Charge Rate Assumptions for IOU Assumptions for Municipalities and Cooperatives D/E ratio of 55:45 7 percent cost of debt and 12 percent cost of equity 39 percent effective tax rate and 0.5 percent adder for insurance and property taxes 20 tax life 20 year FCR – % 25 year FCR – % Fully debt financed and tax exempted 5.5 percent bond financing rate 0.5 percent adder for insurance and property taxes 20 year debt life FCR – 8.87 % 25 year debt life FCR – 7.96 % Blended 20 year FCR and 25 year book life FCRs for SPP is 12.84% and 11.79% respectively.

February 10, 2010B&V - 11 Additional FCR Calculations  Calculated a single FCR for renewable resources assuming 5 year tax life and 20 year book life.  Assumed all investors are taxable due to preferential depreciation status  11.53%  Calculated a blended FCR for coal and nuclear resources assuming 20 year tax life and 30 year book life.  11.51% TechnologyTax Life (years) Book Life (years) Blended FCR (%) Combustion Turbine Combined Cycle Coal and Nuclear Wind (not blended)

February 10, 2010B&V - 12 Generating Resources Considered

February 10, 2010B&V - 13 Cost & Operating Assumptions for Conventional Alternatives

February 10, 2010B&V - 14 Different Conventional Prototypes Modeled in Strategist 2x1 Generic Combined Cycle with maximum capacity of about 600 MW 800 MW Supercritical Pulverized Coal Unit without CCS 1100 MW Nuclear Unit Baseload Resources Generic frame CT with maximum capacity of about 200 MW Peaking Resources In addition, wind resources for meeting RPS requirements were added.

February 10, 2010B&V - 15 Addition of Wind Resources Wind Resource addition based on the Futures for Integrated Transmission Planning Process year 20 Assessment, Revision 3. Business as Usual (Base case) wind additions assumes no RES requirements (as per Appendix 1 of the aforementioned document) 42,000 GWh of renewable generation is achieved by 2020 for the whole SPP area At 40 percent capacity factor, this equates to about 11.9 GW of nameplate capacity Capacity value (Firm Capacity) of wind resources is assumed to be 5 percent of the name plate capacity. Wind resources capital cost assumed to be $2,150/kw (2010 dollars) Operating costs of wind resources assumed to be $51/kw-year. All new wind resources to meet RPS are expected to be online by 2020.

February 10, 2010B&V - 16 Wind Resources (Total New plus Existing) by Year

February 10, 2010B&V - 17 Other Key Assumptions Model run for 20 years ( , inclusive) No potential CO 2 taxes considered for the base case Coal PRB price forecast – No change to Ventyx forecast. NG price forecast – HH forecast from Ventyx. Basis differentials updated base on SPP stakeholder feedback. Uranium prices – Ventyx forecast updated based on stakeholder feedback. Units are allowed to be added in intervals of 2/3 years, with the intervals increasing from 2 years to 4 years as we move further out into the study period. 200 MW of capacity is allowed to flow from SPPS to SPPN from as SPPS has excess capacity at this time.

February 10, 2010B&V - 18 EWITS and WWSIS data Mesoscale modeled data Modeled years are 2004, 2005, 2006 Used year 2005 profile because that year was judged as the best representative year. 10 minute data translated into 8760 hourly observations Information presented in capacity factor (%) units Profiles scaled accordingly to incorporate additional capacity factor information from actual project data Wind Profile Data Collection Methodology

February 10, 2010B&V - 19 Base Case Results

February 10, 2010B&V - 20 Reserve Margin with No New Units – NPPN (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 21 Reserve Margin with No New Units – SPPN (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 22 Reserve Margin with No New Units – Whole SPP (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 23 Expansion Plan – NPPN (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 24 Expansion Plan – SPPN (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 25 CO2 Emissions Intensity – SPPN and SSPP (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 26 Reserve Margin with New Units – (Preliminary)

February 10, 2010B&V - 27 Base Case Results Observations SPP North requires capacity additions early: 2014 SPP South requires capacity late: 2024 As wind resources are added in SPPN between , new baseload resources not justified. Lower capital cost intermediate and peaking units are added in this period. Baseload resources are added in SPPN after 2020 when energy needs increase but additional wind resources are not added in the model. SPP South needs intermediate and new baseload resources for the base case in the later half of the study period. As no carbon legislation is assumed in the base case, coal units are selected in the later half of the study.