10-year study results colorado resource options and transmission expansion this slide deck contains...
TRANSCRIPT
10-Year Study Results
Colorado Resource Options and Transmission Expansion
This slide deck contains results from the 2012 TEPPC Study Program related to the Colorado Resource Option. The results for the associated transmission expansion projects follow immediately along with flow information on impacted WECC paths.
Renewable Options Under High Load CasesThe Basics
Study Concept
• Starting case: 2022 High Load (PC1-5)– Increase WECC annual energy demand 8%
• Results in additional 12,000 GWh of RPS resource requirements (per statutes)
• Model added 12,000 GWh in regions throughout WECC (w/ transmission)
Goal
• Compare different resource and transmission options• Total (capital and production) cost comparisons
– Will be shown at a later date
Add: 12,000 GWh to meet WECC RPS
Add transmission
Renewable Options Under
High Load Cases
Increase WECC-wide load 8%
1
2
3
For these regions
Increase WECC-wide load 8%1
2010 2022800,000
850,000
900,000
950,000
1,000,000
1,050,000
1,100,000
Western Interconnection Annual Energy (GWh)10-Year Study Comparison
Common Case LRS
An
nu
al E
ner
gy
(GW
h)
8%
8% increase to peak and energy
10%
10% decrease to energy
Higher Load = Additional RPS Energy
Calculate ratios of planned renewables in TEPPC 2022 Common Case • Do not include existing resources• Do not include DG• IRP and LRS data
Apply ratio to study build-out of 12,000 GWh• Concept: development trends are best representation of
what could be added to each state • More resources available than what is identified in WREZ• More granular information from CPUC/CAISO
Locate resources using WREZ peer-analysis tool
Extrapolation Method
Add 12,000 GWh to meet WECC RPS 2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
California Southwest Wyoming Montana Northwest Basin
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Colorado
Wind Solar PV Solar Thermal Small Hydro Geothermal Biomass RPS
Resource Option StudiesBreakdown of Incremental 12,000 GWh
Higher load and new resources =1- Check PRM2 - Add CTs (if needed)
Biom
ass R
PS
Geoth
ermal
Small H
ydro
RPS
Solar P
V
Solar C
SP0
Solar C
SP6
Win
d
Hydro
Pumped S
tora
ge
Coal
Nuclear
Combin
ed Cyc
le
Combust
ion T
urbin
e
Oth
er Ste
am
Oth
er
Negative B
us Load
Dispatc
hable D
SM
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Summer - Percentage of Installed Capacity Available to Serve Load at Time of Peak
AZ-NM-NV
AZ-NM
-NV
Basin
Alber
ta
Britis
h Colu
mbia
CA-North
CA-South
NWUS
RMPA
(6,000)
(4,000)
(2,000)
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
PC1-5 High Load Summer PRM GapM
W
PC1-5 High Load PRM Gap
1) Added CTs in 100 MW increments to make up this 11,426 MW PRM Gap
2) CT’s were adjusted in Renewable Options Under High Load studies
Installed Generation Capacity
Generation Type AZ-NM-NV Basin AlbertaBritish
Columbia CA-North CA-South NWUS RMPA WECCBiomass RPS 172 53 320 800 757 501 535 0 3,137Geothermal 35 785 0 20 1,480 2,443 58 0 4,820
Small Hydro RPS 3 53 0 0 827 592 284 0 1,759Solar PV 1,822 57 0 0 3,517 3,166 197 618 9,377
Solar CSP0 507 0 0 0 370 1,591 0 0 2,468Solar CSP6 299 110 0 0 0 0 0 133 541
Wind 1,960 3,597 4,507 969 3,119 5,460 12,053 3,344 35,009Hydro 3,924 2,342 998 18,046 7,886 1,401 30,902 1,313 66,811
Pumped Storage 146 0 0 0 1,212 1,414 0 524 3,296Coal 9,875 9,923 5,385 0 102 138 3,239 6,520 35,182
Nuclear 4,035 0 0 0 2,240 2,246 1,160 0 9,681Combined Cycle 17,177 2,263 6,670 240 12,007 13,804 7,154 3,586 62,900
Combustion Turbine 4,377 1,146 4,619 66 4,759 7,428 730 3,629 26,755Other Steam 1,476 346 78 17 954 2,999 451 562 6,883
Other 177 112 12 0 305 100 78 247 1,030Negative Bus Load 243 52 0 0 0 61 140 32 528Dispatchable DSM 1,148 1,239 66 0 1,579 2,954 285 326 7,597
Total 47,375 22,077 22,654 20,158 41,113 46,299 57,265 20,833 277,775
Additional resources change this number
AZ-NM
-NV
Basin
Alber
ta
Britis
h Colu
mbia
CA-North
CA-South
NWUS
RMPA
(6,000)
(4,000)
(2,000)
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
PRM Gap ComparisonPC21 vs. PC1-5
Summer PC21
Summer PC1-5
MW
3 fewer CTs needed in Basin
This makes sense:
3,000 MW wind × 10% = 300 MW to peak = 3 fewer CTs
WY-CO Intertie TransWest Express Zephyr A /B/C/DHigh Plains Express
Path 8 Upgrade MSTI + SWIP N
Selkirk – Bell – Ashe Nicola – Chief JoeSelkirk – Ashe DC
Selkirk – Buckley DC
SSPG East SSPG North SSPG South
High Plains Express
None
Centennial West
Transmission Expansion Projects
3 Add transmission
Now to the results…
1) Resource assumption overview2) Portfolio Case generation results
(versus PC1-5 High Load)3) Transmission projects overview4) Expansion case generation results
(versus PC1-5 High Load and Portfolio Case)
5) Path flow results - Reviewed duration plots for key WECC paths. Will show some that are interesting in this presentation.
+ 267+ 93+ 753
+ 3786
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Solar CSP6
Wind
Resource Additions 12,000 GWhColorado
Resource Assumptions
Wind Solar PV Solar Thermal Small Hydro Geothermal Biomass RPS
Conventional Hydro
Pumped Storage
Steam - Coal
Steam - Other
Nuclear
Combined Cycle
Combustion Turbine
Cogeneration
IC
Negative Bus Load
Biomass RPS
Geothermal
Small Hydro RPS
Solar
Wind
(10,000,000) (5,000,000) 0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000
Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1-5 High Load Case vs. 2022 PC25 Colorado
GWh
Production cost decreased $405 M (2.3%)
Dump energy increased 37 GWh (11%)
Emergency Energy decreased 0%
CO2 Emissions decreased 1.4%
AZ, NV, CA, CO
Alberta
Arizon
a
British
Colu
mbia
Califo
rnia
Colora
do
Idah
o
Mex
ico
Mon
tana
Nevad
a
New M
exico
Orego
n
South
Dak
ota
Texas
Utah
Was
hingt
on
Wyo
ming
-6,000,000
-4,000,000
-2,000,000
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1-5 High Load Case vs. 2022 PC25 Colorado
Hydro+PS Steam - Boiler Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine
Cogeneration Renewable Other
GWh
What is different?LoadsTransmissionResources
-15000
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
P46 West of Colorado River (WOR) Path Duration Plots
2010 PC1_5_HighLoad PC25_CO
Meg
awatt
sE->W
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
P36 TOT 3 Path Duration Plots
2010 PC1_5_HighLoad PC25_CO
Meg
awat
tsN->S
-8000
-6000
-4000
-2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Interstate COI plus PDCI Path Duration Plots
2010 PC1_5_HighLoad PC25_CO
Meg
awat
tsN->S
10-Year Study ResultsPC25 Colorado Resource OptionEC25-1 HPX
HPX
Conventional Hydro
Pumped Storage
Steam - Coal
Steam - Other
Nuclear
Combined Cycle
Combustion Turbine
Cogeneration
IC
Negative Bus Load
Biomass RPS
Geothermal
Small Hydro RPS
Solar
Wind
(15,000,000) (10,000,000) (5,000,000) 0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000
Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1-5 High Load Case vs. 2022 EC25-1 HPX (west)
GWh
Production cost decreased $438 M (2.5%)
Dump energy increased 25.7 GWh (7.7%)
Emergency Energy decreased 0%
CO2 Emissions decreased 1.4%
AZ, NV, CA, CO
Alberta
Arizon
a
British
Colu
mbia
Califo
rnia
Colora
do
Idah
o
Mex
ico
Mon
tana
Nevad
a
New M
exico
Orego
n
South
Dak
ota
Texas
Utah
Was
hingt
on
Wyo
ming
-6,000,000
-4,000,000
-2,000,000
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1-5 High Load Case vs. 2022 PC25 Colorado
Hydro+PS Steam - Boiler Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine
Cogeneration Renewable Other
GWh
What is different?LoadsTransmissionResources
Conventional Hydro
Pumped Storage
Steam - Coal
Steam - Other
Nuclear
Combined Cycle
Combustion Turbine
Cogeneration
IC
Negative Bus Load
Biomass RPS
Geothermal
Small Hydro RPS
Solar
Wind
(1,000,000) (800,000) (600,000) (400,000) (200,000) 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000
Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC25 Colorado vs. 2022 EC25-1 HPX (west)
GWh
CO,NV,WY
Production cost decreased $33 M (.1%)
Dump energy decreased 11.5GWh (3.1%)
Emergency Energy decreased 0%
CO2 Emissions decreased .1%
AZ,CA
Alberta
Arizon
a
British
Colu
mbia
Califo
rnia
Colora
do
Idah
o
Mex
ico
Mon
tana
Nevad
a
New M
exico
Orego
n
South
Dak
ota
Texas
Utah
Was
hingt
on
Wyo
ming
-1,500,000
-1,000,000
-500,000
0
500,000
1,000,000
Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC25 Colorado vs. 2022 EC25-1 HPX (west)
Hydro+PS Steam - Boiler Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine
Cogeneration Renewable Other
GWh
What is different?LoadsTransmissionResources
9 315 621 927 1233 1539 1845 2151 2457 2763 3069 3375 3681 3987 4293 4599 4905 5211 5517 5823 6129 6435 6741 7047 7353 7659 7965 8271 8577
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
High Plains Express (west circuit) Flow
HPX WY-CO HPX CO-NM HPX NM-AZ
9 315 621 927 1233 1539 1845 2151 2457 2763 3069 3375 3681 3987 4293 4599 4905 5211 5517 5823 6129 6435 6741 7047 7353 7659 7965 8271 8577
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
High Plains Express (west circuit) Duration
6,000 GWh
8,000 GWh
-15000
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
P46 West of Colorado River (WOR) Path Duration Plots
2010 PC1_5_HighLoad PC25_CO EC25_1_HPX
Meg
awatt
sE->W
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
P36 TOT 3 Path Duration Plots
2010 PC1_5_HighLoad PC25_CO EC25_1_HPX
Meg
awat
tsN->S
-8000
-6000
-4000
-2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Interstate COI plus PDCI Path Duration Plots
2010 PC1_5_HighLoad PC25_CO EC25_1_HPX
Meg
awat
tsN->S