Transcript Dam passage improvements

B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
Preliminary Analysis of Spill Test
February 4, 2014
O
N
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
Preliminary Analysis
• A Spill Test at 125% TDG from April 3 to June 20 for 24
hours a day has been submitted through a number of
venues including NOAA’s draft FCRPS Biological
Opinion, the federal Action Agencies draft 2014-2018
FCRPS Biological Opinion Implementation Plan and the
Northwest Power and Conservation Council Fish &
Wildlife Program Amendment process.
• At the request of constituents, we have conducted a
preliminary analysis of the more spill proposal as we
understand it. The proposal contains caveats in a
number of areas, but the details were not included.
N
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
Spill Test Would Reduce Average Annual
Federal Generation by 600 aMW
No BiOp Fish
Operations
~9,400
aMW per
year
About
1000
annual
aMW
Current Fish
Operations
Spill Test
Proposal
~8,400
aMW per
year
~7,800
aMW per
year
About
600
annual
aMW
For perspective: City of Seattle uses about 1,171 aMW per year
Columbia Generating Station (nuclear plant in Richland) produces about 1,030 aMW per year
Centralia Coal Plant produces about 1,200 aMW per year
3
Estimated annual average megawatts, based on an evaluation of the historical 80 year water supply record
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
Lost Generation Would be
Concentrated in the Spring
Current Fish
Operations
~10,000
aMW
produced
in Spring
Generation would be
reduced – on average
– every hour in the
spring by 2,500 MW
Spill Test
Proposal
~7,500
aMW
produced
in Spring
For perspective: It would take more than six typical 400 MW
combined cycle gas plants to produce the amount of energy
removed from the system in the spring. Energy efficiency
cannot replace this magnitude of power in the spring in the NW.
4
Estimated average megawatt hours, April 3 – June 20, based on an evaluation of the historical 80 year water supply record
N
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
10-Year Test – Would Reduce Value of
Hydro System by Over One Billion Dollars
 $100 million per year in lost firm power (450
aMW per year)
 $10 million per year in lost secondary power
sales (150 aMW per year)
5
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
Total Rate Effect: Almost 8% Increase
 Oregon’s spill proposal increases rates since it both
reduces secondary energy sales revenue that offset BPA’s
operating costs and and decreases the number of
megawatt hours BPA has to sell – which means BPA’s
cost per megawatt hour will be higher
 In addition, customers will also have to replace the lost
450 annual aMW of lost firm power they can no longer get
from the federal system
 The overall wholesale rate effect to BPA’s customer
utilities is estimated to be an increase of nearly 8 percent
6
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
Carbon Impacts of Replacement Energy
 CO2 production increase: ~ 1.9 million metric tons (MT)
 $55 million per year in social cost of carbon*
 This estimate is based on a study prepared by the
Northwest Power and Conservation Council in 2008
•
•
•
•
In the Pacific Northwest, hydro, wind, and other renewables are used before
combustion turbines and coal as they have lower costs to run.
For most of the year, natural gas fired power plants are the last resource
brought online to supply power instantaneously and to respond to decreases in
hydropower production
A typical combined cycle natural gas fired power plant emits 800 lbs. of C02 per
megawatt hour
A one megawatt hour decrease in hydropower results in 800 lbs. of CO2
production
 The equivalent of about 440,000 cars or 28,000 tanker
trucks of gasoline consumed
7
* Based on data from the May 2013 Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis – Under Executive Order
12866. Using $29.15 per metric ton of CO2 (the medium probability case)
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
Operations Impacts
 The flexibility of the federal
hydro system is used to
balance changes in
resources and loads on a
second by second basis.
 Proposed spill test would
significantly reduce the
flexibility of the FCRPS to
respond to changes in loads
or wind output.
8
O
N
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
Balancing Reserves
 The hydro system has limits on what it can provide and still comply with all hydraulic objectives
including current fish operations

Reduced flexibility could
severely reduce quantity of
balancing reserves that could be
provided by the hydro system.

With the addition of a large wind
fleet the need for balancing
reserves has increased
 With the spill proposal, new
resources likely would be
needed to provide balancing
services for both existing and
future variable renewable
resources which would likely
increase the cost to provide
these resources
9
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
Oversupply of Generation






Spilling to 125% TDG for 11 weeks may reduce the implementation of
oversupply management protocol (displacement of wind);
But the magnitude of more spill is on average 600 aMWs of hydropower,
while our experience with oversupply situations has resulted in
displacements of: 11 aMWs in 2011, 6 aMWs in 2012, and zero aMWs in 2013.
We forecast oversupply situations only in about 50% of the years; not every
year.
Increased spill would also reduce hydropower supply in the hours when the
federal power is needed to meet firm load requirements in the Northwest.
This potential reduction in oversupply may be offset by a change in
resource mix in the region. Thermal plants that normally shut down in the
spring may need to continue running to meet loads. This change may
contribute to oversupply because of minimum generation and run-time
requirements at the thermal plants.
Potential impacts to transmission interties may reduce access to markets
outside the BPA Balancing Authority
10
N
B
O
N
N
E
V
I
L
L
E
P
O
W
E
R
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
Transmission Impacts
Initial assessments identified the following likely impacts
of more spill:
• Reduced intertie transfer capacity
• Increased congestion on North of John Day and
North of Hanford transmission paths
• Would be a significant change from current
operating paradigm and may cause operating
issues that we do not currently face
11
O
N