Draft Electric Resource Plan Technical Workshop. Technology Screening Analysis

Transcription

1 Draft Electric Resource Plan Technical Workshop Technology Screening Analysis June 15,

2 Resource Planning Process Overview Process Methodology Screening Analysis Determine Alternative Technologies Develop Screening Assumptions Levelized Cost Analysis Evaluate Technology Groups Next Resource Plan Alternative Planning Approaches Select Next Resource Plan Analysis of Resource Plans Alternative Resource Plans Select Preferred Technologies Energy Plan LIPA Energy Plan Other Energy Plan Inputs June 15,

3 Resource Planning Process Overview Determine Alternative Technologies Exhibit 8-1 Alternative Technologies Considered Supply Options Transmission Options Generic On-Island Combined Cycle Loss Reduction Generic LMS 100 CC NUSCO Upgrade 1 Caithness Combined-Cycle NUSCO Upgrade 2 Generic Off-Island Combined Cycle Neptune Cable (RB) Combined -Cycle CT LM6000 Neptune Cable (UDR) Simple-Cycle CT LM6000 PJM Cable II (RB) Generic Off-Island Coal PJM Cable II (UDR) Mobile Generating Units Neptune Cable w/marcus Hook Fuel Cell Stack Cross-Sound Cable Pratt & Whitney (Twin Pac) Hydro Inter-tie Reinforcements Generic Off-Island Nuclear Efficiency Options Renewable Options Clean Energy Initiative Landfill Waste-to-Energy** ELI Base Program Barrett 1,2, Convert to B20 Diesel ELI Advanced & Accelerated Program East, Convert to B20 Diesel AMI Resource Recovery Time-based Pricing Shoreham, Convert to Biodiesel Bio-Diesel Photovoltaic Roof On-Shore Wind Off-Shore Wind Off-Island Renewables Solar Pioneer Repowering Options Barrett Repowering Northport Repowering Port Repowering Shoreham Repowering Wading River Repowering Retirement Options Barrett Retirement Northport Retirement Port Retirement Shoreham Retirement Far Rockaway Retirement Glenwood Retirement Wading River Retirement Peaking CTs and Diesels June 15,

4 Develop Screening Assumptions Delivered Fuel Price Forecast consistent with Electric Resource Plan forecast Environmental Allowance Costs consistent with Electric Resource Plan forecast Spot market capacity and energy prices Resource specific assumptions, including Production Efficiency - Heat rate expressed as the ratio fuel input to electrical output Emissions rates Resource characteristics (e.g., capacity size, fixed costs) June 15,

5 Levelized Cost Analysis Levelized cost is a unitized cost calculated by discounting both an annual stream of costs ( then year dollars, that include the effect of inflation & escalation) and an annual stream of output ( then year output in MWh) using a discount rate representative of LIPA s cost of debt, including inflation Levelized energy ($/MWh) and capacity cost ($/kw-month) of alternatives in 2009$ June 15, 2009 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 4

6 Evaluation Technology Results The list of alternative technologies was broken down into five phases and sixteen groups Phases categorize resources by their physical location, whether the resource can be replicated and/or dispatched, and whether resource is new or existing The groupings represent similar types of technologies The 5 phase categories are: Phase 1 New replicable resource located on Long Island (e.g., 7FA generator, 501G generator) Phase 2 - New replicable resource located off Long Island (e.g., Upstate New York Combined Cycle) Phase 3 New limited resource located on Long Island (e.g., Efficiency Long Island ( ELI ), Automated Meter Initiative ( AMI )) Phase 4 Existing resource located on Long Island (e.g., Neptune Cable, Northport) Phase 5 Repowered resource located on Long Island (e.g., Barrett Repower) June 15, 2009 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 5

7 Phase 1 New Replicable Resource On-Island Group A : Conventional Gas Fired Technologies Existing Small CC (LM6000 Gas Turbine with Steam Turbine) Reference LMS100 Gas Turbines Reference 1x1 7FA Combined Cycle Power Plant Reference 1x1 501G Combined Cycle Power Plant Reference 2x1 7FA Combined Cycle Power Plant Group B : Conventional Gas Fired Peaking Technologies Emergency Diesels LM6000 SC Pratt & Whitney Simple Cycle June 15,

8 Phase 1, Group A, Exhibit 8-4 Economic advantage of the GE 7FA and Siemens 501G technologies 7FA at <50% Capacity Factor 501G at >50% Capacity Factor Relative to likely dispatch in the L.I. market 501G tends to be more cost effective Environmental benefits with the 501G, followed by 7FA Consistently low emissions Existing small CC s Attractive option at Capacity Factors <20% $600 $500 h $400 W /M $ - t s o l C $300 ta o T d e liz e v e $200 L $100 $0 Reference 2x1 7FA Existing Small CC Reference 1x1 7FA Reference LMS100 Reference 501G Group A Capacity Factor % Levelized Cost Environmental Emissions ICAP MW Short Name Capacity $/kw-mo Energy $/MWh Capacity Factor Total $/MWh CO 2 lb/mwh NO x lb/mwh SO 2 lb/mwh 75 Existing Small CC $26.55 $ % $ Reference LMS100 $33.75 $ % $ Reference 1x1 7FA $28.46 $ % $ Reference 501G $33.63 $ % $ Reference 2x1 7FA $37.32 $ % $ June 15,

9 Phase 1, Group B, Exhibit 8-5 $1,000 Group B LM 6000 SC Lower operating costs within the Long Island Market Higher capital costs Higher operating efficiency Increases dispatch in Long Island market Decreases overall $/MWh cost Environmental metrics Pratt & Whitney has higher NO X emissions compared to technologies in Groups A & B h W /M $ - t s o C l ta o T d e liz e v e L $800 $600 $400 $200 $0 Emergency Diesels Pratt & Whitney SC Reference 2xLM6000 Phase 1 Selection Capacity Factor % Levelized Cost Environmental Emissions ICAP MW Short Name Capacity $/kw-mo Energy $/MWh Capacity Factor Total $/MWh CO 2 lb/mwh NO x lb/mwh SO 2 lb/mwh 44 Emergency Diesels $20.97 $ % $3, , Pratt & Whitney SC $29.64 $ % $ Reference 2xLM6000 SC $34.54 $ % $ June 15,

10 Phase 1 New Replicable Resource On-Island Exhibit 8-6 New Replicable Resource Located On Long Island $600 Phase 1 $550 Top performers in Groups A & B are used as a threshold going forward 501G and 7FA Levelized Total Cost - $/MWh $500 $450 $400 $350 $300 $250 Existing Small CC Pratt & Whitney SC Preferable technologies are identified for further study/modeling Lower cost than Phase 1 Selection Lower emissions than Phase 1 Selection Technologies above the threshold would not be considered preferable for further study $200 Reference 2x1 7FA $150 Reference 1x1 7FA $100 Reference 501G $50 $ Capacity Factor % June 15,

11 Alternative Technology Phases & Groups Phase 2 New Replicable Resource Off-Island Group C : Upstate NY New Nuclear, Coal, or CC with Transmission Costs Group D : PJM Cable II RB PJM Cable II UDR NUSCO Upgrade 1 NUSCO Upgrade 2 Group E : Merchant Upstate NY Cable with New Nuclear, Coal, CC, or Energy Group F : NYPA Upstate NY Cable with New Nuclear, Coal, CC, or Energy Group G : PJM Cable II with New Nuclear, Coal, or CC June 15,

12 Alternative Technologies Phase 2 Exhibit 8-12 New Replicable Resource Located Off Long Island Levelized Total Cost - $/MWh $600 $550 $500 $450 $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 Phase 1 Selection PJM Cable II with New CC PJM Cable II, RB Phase 2 Comparing Phase 2 elements against the Phase 1 Selection line (dotted red) Preferable technologies for further study include Upstate New York Combined Cycle NUSCO Upgrade 1 NUSCO Upgrade 1 & 2 Second PJM Cable $150 New Upstate NY CC $100 NUSCO Upgrade 1 PJM Cable II, UDR $50 NUSCO Upgrades 1 & 2 combined $ Capacity Factor % June 15,

13 Alternative Technology Phases & Groups Phase 3 New Limited Resource On-Island Group H : Energy Efficiency Technologies CEI ELI Base ELI Advance Automated Meter Initiative Group I : Wind and Solar Technologies Off-shore Long Island Wind Farm On-Long Island Wind Turbine Long Island Solar Roof PJM II New Wind Upstate NY New Wind Merchant Upstate NY Cable with New Wind NYPA Upstate NY Cable with New Wind PJM Cable II with New Wind Group J : Other Renewable Technologies Landfill Gas On-Island Fuel Cell Refuse East Hampton Biofuel Barrett Steam Biofuel New CT Biofuel Shoreham CT Biofuel June 15,

14 Alternative Technologies Phase 3 Levelized Total Cost - $/MWh Exhibit 8-16 New Limited Resource Located On and Off L.I. $600 $550 $500 $450 $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 Reference Landfill Gas Refuse (ARF) On-Island Solar Roof Phase 3 PJM Cable II with New Wind Phase 1 Selection Capacity Factor % Comparing Phase 2 elements against the Phase 1 Selection line (dotted red) Preferable technologies for further study include Advanced Metering Infrastruture Clean Energy Initiative, ELI Base, ELI Advanced Low in cost with zero emissions Solar Roof, Solar Pioneer Limited option, zero emissions Shoreham CT on Biofuel Landfill Gas Lowest cost resource in the Phase due to capital costs and fuel costs On-Island Wind Turbine Upstate New York Wind PJM Wind Offshore Wind June 15,

15 Alternative Technology Phases & Groups Phase 4 Existing Resource On-Island Group K : Transmission Interconnection Neptune RB Neptune UDR Cross-Sound Cable RB Cross-Sound Cable UDR Group L : Steam Unit Barrett Northport Port Jefferson Far Rockaway Glenwood Caithness Group M : Larger Combustion Turbines Barrett Holtsville Wading River Group N : Smaller Combustion Turbines Shoreham East Hampton Glenwood Southampton Southold West Babylon 4 Northport Port Jefferson 2xLM6000 FTU Group O : Diesel Generators East Hampton Montauk June 15,

16 Alternative Technologies Phase 4 Levelized Total Cost - $/MWh $600 $550 $500 $450 $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 Exhibit 8-22 Existing Resources Located on Long Island Phase 4 Neptune Cable, RB Phase 1 Selection Barrett Steam Glenwood Steam Far Rockaway Steam CSC, RB Northport Steam Neptune Cable, UDR Neptune Cable, RB Newest resources are cost effective against the Phase 1 technologies at higher capacity factors than older units in the Long Island fleet Both Cross-Sound and Neptune Cables are low cost resources Caithness is a low cost resource comparable to new state-of-the-art alternatives. At lower capacity factors the older units are more cost effective than the Phase 1 selection units. Exceptions are the smaller older combustion turbine units at Northport, Southold and Southampton. Operational consideration may require continued operation to maintain reliability. $100 $50 CSC, UDR $ Capacity Factor % June 15,

17 Alternative Technology Phases & Groups Phase 5 Repowered Resource On-Island Group P : Wading River Repower Incremental Conventional, Incremental G Frame Barrett Repower Incremental G Frame (1x1), Incremental F Frame (2x1) Port Jefferson Repower Incremental Shoreham Repower Incremental Northport Repower Incremental June 15,

18 Phase 5, Group P, Exhibit 8-23 Small differences between options requires more detailed analysis $400 $350 Shoreham, Repower Group P 501G turbine technology is more cost effective and produces lower emissions than F-based technologies Hybrid repowering of Wading River is more expensive, less efficient, and operates at a lower capacity factor than other options h W $300 /M $ $250 - t s o C l ta $200 o T d e liz e $150 v e L $100 $50 Wading River Repower Hybrid Barrett Repower, 501G Port Jefferson, Repower Northport Steam, Repower Barrett Repower, 2x1 7FA Wading River Repower $0 Capacity Factor % Levelized Cost Environmental Emissions ICAP MW Short Name Capacity $/kw-mo Energy $/MWh Capacity Factor June 15, Total $/MWh CO 2 lb/mwh NO x lb/mwh SO 2 lb/mwh 127 Wading River Repower 501G $91.69 $ % $ Wading River Repower - Hybrid $83.78 $ % $ Barrett Repower, 1x1 501G $69.27 $ % $ Port Jefferson, Repower 1x1 7FB $55.04 $ % $ Barrett Repower, 2x1 7FA $57.33 $ % $ Shoreham, Repower 501G $41.81 $ % $ Northport Steam, Repower 3x1 7FB $33.07 $ % $

19 Short List The guiding principal for selection was whether the technology was among the best performing in its group or phase, was under active consideration as an alternative or was under consideration for policy decisions. Exhibit 8-24 shows the selected technologies. Exhibit 8-24 Short List of Technologies Used in Alternative Plans Supply Options Generic On-Island Combined Cycle Mobile Generating Units Fuel Cell Stack Generic Off-Island Nuclear Efficiency Options Clean Energy Initiative ELI Base Program ELI Advanced & Accelerated Program AMI Repowering Options Barrett Repowering Northport Repowering Port Jefferson Repowering Transmission Options Loss Reduction NUSCO Upgrade 1 and 2 (Combined) Neptune Cable (UDR) PJM Cable II (UDR) Renewable Options Off-Shore Wind Off-Island Renewables Photovoltaic Roof Solar Pioneer Retirement Options Barrett Retirement Northport Retirement Port Retirement Far Rockaway Retirement Glenwood Retirement June 15,

20 End of Presentation Discussion Target Completion Time 1:55 pm Discussion on Technology Screening Analysis Process Check Next Up Opening Remarks Overview of Workshop Format Overview of Electric Resource Plan Break Review of Modeling System and Assumptions Energy Efficiency Need Analysis Lunch Technology Screening Alternative Plan Analysis Break Action Plan Policy Input Input on Workshop Approach June 15, 2009 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 19

21 Inputs Power Project Development Database Model Developed by Shaw Consultants International, Inc. Reference power plant cost and performance projections for numerous generation options Capital cost estimates and project schedules benefit from the current major projects information available through the Shaw Power Group recent vendor quotes and project return costs Plant performance input from original equipment manufacturers Labor costs confirmed by construction surveys and/or national database Interrelated parametric calculations in Excel spreadsheet of capital costs, operation and maintenance costs, plant performance and reliability, and environmental impacts Format provides consistency in comparing plant technologies and documents the assumptions/bases for calculations Recent cost and performance data provides reliable results June 15,

22 Inputs Used Power Project Development Database Models Capital cost estimate Project schedule Plant performance (full and part load) Availability (planned and forced outages) Fixed and variable O&M (non-fuel) Environmental emissions EPC Cash Flow Curves Plant Description Plant configuration Structured by same cost estimate accounts Definition of systems/components June 15,

23 Cost Estimate Breakdown 1. Capital a.) Direct b.) Indirect c.) Engineering d.) Owners Engineering e.) Owners Overheads f.) Interest During Construction g.) Escalation 2. Fixed O&M ($/yr) a.) Management, Engineering and Administrative b.) Operations Labor c.) Maintenance Labor d.) Maintenance Materials & Supplies 3. Variable O&M ($/MWh) a.) At min and max outputs b.) Maintenance Materials (variable portion) c.) Water d.) Reagents, (e.g. lime, limestone, NH3, activated carbon) e.) Waste Disposal (e.g. landfill operation, trucking, etc.) f.) Waste water treatment June 15,

24 Sample Power Project Model Output Capital Cost Schedule June 15,

25 Sample Power Project Model Output Performance Availability June 15,

26 Sample Power Project Model Output Fixed O&M Variable O&M June 15,

27 Sample Power Project Model Output Variable O&M Environmental June 15,