Transcript Regional Transmission Development High Plains Express Project

Regional Transmission Development
High Plains Express Project
Jerry Vaninetti, Vice President
Trans-Elect Development Company, LLC
New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority
January 18, 2008 – Santa Fe, NM
Disclaimer: this map is for study purposes only and is
not meant to imply any specific project routing
High Plains Express
(HPX) Project
•
Initial Feasibility Studies
– Technical & Economic
– Synergies with other projects
•
Design
–
–
–
–
•
•
Conceptual routing
AC selected over DC
Two 500 kV lines; 1,200 miles
3,500 MW @ ~$5 billion
Stakeholder Process
Benefits
– Enables renewables
– Benefits to customers
– Improved regional reliability
•
Project Participants
– Xcel, Tri-State, WAPA, PRPA,
CSU, PNM, SRP & TransElect
– WIA, NM-EMNRD & CEDA
•
http://www.rmao.com/wtpp/HP
X_Studies.html
WYOMING
Regional
Transmission &
Renewable
Resource Map
WyomingColorado Intertie
Trans-Elect, WIA & WAPA
www.wyia.org/wci
Douglas
Wheatland
COLORADO
Denver
Wind
Resources
Wray
Brush
Eastern Plains
(EPTP)
Limon
High Plains Express
Solar
Resources
Xcel, Tri-State, SRP, WAPA,
PNM, CSU, PRPA & TransElect + States
www.rmao.com/wtpp/HPX_S
tudies.html
Colorado
Springs
Tri-State, Xcel &
WAPA
www.wapa.gov/trans
mission/eptp.htm
Burlington
Pueblo
Lamar
ARIZONA
Gladstone
TransWest
Express
APS, Pacificorp, WIA &
National Grid
ttps://transwest.azpsoa
sis.com
New Mexico Wind
Collector
PNM
www.oatioasis.com/PNM
Albuquerque
Phoenix
SunZia
Socorro
Tucson
IPP Developers
www.sunzia.net
NEW
MEXICO
The HPX Concept
3,500 MW
• Premise: Benefits for each state resulting from an interconnected
expansion of the region’s transmission grid
• Provide cost-effective options to meet load growth & an industrywide shift towards carbon-constrained power markets
??
Current In-State
Generation
11,000 MW
Current In-State
Generation
6,500 MW
Current In-State
Generation
24,900 MW
??
COLORADO
NEW MEXICO
ARIZONA
Solar
Wind - AZ
Wind - NM
Wind - CO
Wind - WY
$7 Gas CC
$40 GHG Tax
Coal - AZ
Coal - NM
Coal - CO
$30 GHG Tax
Coal - WY
Solar
Wind - NM
$20 GHG Tax
Wind - CO
Wind - WY
$7 Gas CC
Coal - NM
$10 GHG Tax
Coal - CO
Coal - WY
Solar
$150
Wind - CO
Wind - WY
$7 Gas CC
Coal - CO
Coal - WY
Power Delivery Costs ($/MWh)
(exclusive of PTCs)
$160
+ $1 Gas
$140
$130
$120
$110
$100
$90
$80
$70
$60
$50
$40
$30
$20
$10
$0
Loads & Resources (2005 – DOE)
CAPACITY (MW)
Coal
Oil & Gas
Nuclear
Hydroelectric
Renewables
TOTAL
Growth @ 2%/yr to 2020
RPS Requirements (UCS)
WYOMING
5,847
166
0
303
287
6,707
2,320
NA
COLORADO NEW MEXICO
4,928
3,957
4,706
2,031
0
0
652
82
238
410
11,087
6,480
3,835
2,241
2,396
1,282
ARIZONA
5,430
12,647
3,875
2,720
16
24,904
8,614
2,004
TOTAL
SHARE
20,162
41%
19,550
40%
3,875
8%
3,757
8%
951
2%
49,178
100%
17,009
35%
5,682
GENERATION (MWH)
Coal
Oil & Gas
Nuclear
Hydroelectric
Renewables
TOTAL
WYOMING
43,345,685
367,277
0
808,375
717,264
45,567,307
COLORADO NEW MEXICO
35,570,135
29,947,248
11,940,336
4,224,127
0
0
1,415,296
164,993
810,561
799,274
49,614,265
35,135,642
ARIZONA
40,143,310
28,936,475
25,807,446
6,410,064
73,995
101,478,655
TOTAL
SHARE
149,006,378
64%
45,468,215
20%
25,807,446
11%
8,798,728
4%
2,401,094
1%
231,795,869
100%
CAPACITY FACTOR
Coal
Oil & Gas
Nuclear
Hydroelectric
Renewables
AVERAGE
WYOMING
85%
25%
NA
30%
29%
78%
COLORADO NEW MEXICO
82%
86%
29%
24%
NA
NA
25%
23%
39%
22%
51%
62%
ARIZONA
84%
26%
76%
27%
53%
47%
TOTAL
84%
27%
76%
27%
29%
54%
LOADS
Megawatt Hours
% of Generation
WYOMING
14,137,727
31%
COLORADO NEW MEXICO
48,353,236
20,638,951
97%
59%
ARIZONA
69,390,686
68%
TOTAL
152,520,600
66%
The Wind Resource
(NREL Projections)
SE Wyoming
48% Capacity Factor
39% Hourly St. Dev.
Max capacity 11% of time
>10,000 MW potential
Arizona
30% Capacity Factor
30% Hourly St. Dev.
Max capacity 2% of time
~1,000 MW potential
NE Colorado
41% Capacity Factor
40% Hourly St. Dev.
Max Capacity 15% of time
>10,000 MW potential
SE Colorado
43% Capacity Factor
28% Hourly St. Dev.
Max capacity 2% of time
>10,000 MW potential
New Mexico
40% Capacity Factor
33% Hourly St. Dev.
Max capacity 15% of time
>10,000 MW potential
Load vs. Wind Availability: Monthly
100%
90%
LOAD
80%
SOLAR
70%
AZ-WIND
60%
50%
NM-WIND
40%
CO-WIND
30%
WY-WIND
20%
88:12 Blend
Wind/Solar
10%
0%
JAN
FEB
MAR APR MAY
DISPATCHABLES
NEEDED TO FIRM LOAD
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
WIND OUTPUT
Actual Situation
• New Mexico 200
MW Wind Farm
(PNM)
• Severe mismatch
between wind
output & load
LOAD
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
Higher Transmission Utilization = Lower
Delivered Energy Costs
$25
NM-AZ @ $5.00/kW-mo
Wind-Alone
not Overbuilt
WY-CO @ $3.25/kW-mo
$20
$/MWh
CO-NM @ $4.00/kW-mo
Renewables
Blend of Overbuilt
Wind + Solar
Balanced Resource
Mix including both
Renwables &
Dispatchables
$15
$10
$5
$30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Transmission Utilization (Capacity Factor%)
80%
90%
HPX Economic Feasibility
1.60
Wind-First: 75%
Renewables & 25% Fossil
vs. Gas
BENEFIT/COST RATIO
1.40
Wind-First: 75%
Renewables & 25% Fossil
vs. Fossil & RPS
1.20
1.00
100% Renewables vs.
Fossil
0.80
72% Fossil & 28%
Renewables vs. Gas
0.60
100% Fossil vs. Fossil &
RPS
0.40
0.20
52% Wind & 48% Fossil
vs. Gas
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
CO2 TAX ($/TON)
$30
$35
$40
Values on “energy” basis
Project Milestone Schedule
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
•Feasibility Studies
•Report
•Project Scope Development
•Development Agreements
•Business Structures
•Detailed Studies
•System, Siting, Economics
•WECC Planning Processes
•Stakeholder Input
•Route Selection
•Regulatory Approvals
•Detailed Engineering
•Finalize Business Structure
•Public Policy Support
•Stakeholder Input
•Arrange Financing
•Right of Way Acquisition
•EPC Contractors
•Construction
2016
2017
Next Steps
• Phase I
– Finalize Feasibility Report (1Q-08)
• Phase II – 2008
– Project Ownership & Management
• Current vs. future utility participants
• Advisory role for State Transmission Authorities
– Regulatory & Public Policy
• Demonstration of Benefits to Stakeholders
• Coordination with WGA Initiatives directed at HPX
– Detailed Technical & Feasibility Studies
• Wind-first, firmed by dispatchable resources
• Sequenced development/added lines into Arizona
– Cost Recovery & Allocations
• Assured vs. merchant components
– Siting & Route Selection Process
• Land use planning, impact avoidance, wildlife/vegetation & permitting
Value of HPX to New Mexico
• HPX would meet RETA’s 30% renewable energy “test”
• Reduced reliance on fossil generating resources
• Enhanced performance of New Mexico renewables by
blending (“firming” wind with wind & solar)
– Ability to export a better & more cost-effective renewable product
• Reduced isolation from regional power supply
alternatives and markets (market expansion)
• Improved transmission reliability via AC interconnections
• Flexibility to accommodate future, but uncertain power
supply & delivery requirements