2022 PC7 Drought Scenario Study Presentation (2011 Study Program)

2022 PC7 Drought Scenario Study Presentation (2011 Study Program)

Study Results Drought Scenario Study This slide deck contains results from the 2011 TEPPC Study Program. This study shows the impact in the interconection of increased thermal plant forced outages and decreased hydro caused by drought conditions. 2022 PC7 WGA Drought Study Central Question: What impact do changes in thermal plant operation and hydro generation availability have on transmission utilization, production cost, and the ability of the Western Interconnection to continue serving its load obligation? Change to starting input assumptions: o Loads Peak demand increased to reflect higher temperatures in drought year (inputs provided by NREL) o Transmission System None o Generation Low hydro (2001) data used; increased thermal plant forced outages modeled (inputs provided by Argonne National Laboratory) Results follow 2 Drought Condition Selected for Study 1977 western drought Selected due to severity and coincidence within multiple basins Defined by USGS HUC-2 Basin flows Presented by Chris Harto (ANL) on Nov 15 DWG call 3 F r a c tio n o f to ta l g e n e r a tio n lo s t (M W h b a s is ) Modeling of Hydro Generation F r a c tio n o f to ta l g e n e r a tio n lo s t (M W h b a s is ) Hydroelectric Generation : Same as TEPPC low flow hydro case (2001) Worst Case Loss of Generation 1977 Scenario 0.250 Thermo 0.200 Hydro 0.150 0.100 0.050 0.000 Worst Case Loss of Generation 2001 Scenario 0.250 Thermo 0.200 0.150 0.100 Hydro Differences: Slight overestimation of impact

to Pacific NW and CA Slight underestimation for Great Basin and Lower CO 0.050 0.000 4 Presented by Chris Harto on Nov 15 DWG call Impact of Drought on Thermal Plants At-risk thermal plants identified based on their dependence upon surface water for cooling Impacted plants identified in sub-basins where flow under drought was less than 50% of normal flow o List of impacted plants in WECC will not be reported since no plant-specific analysis of drought mitigation plans was conducted Impact to at-risk plants modeled as increased forced outage rates 5 Determining Increased Forced Outage Rates (Down Days) Based on estimate of lost generation Calculated using EIA data for impacted plants Lost generation proportional to the loss of flow relative to the minimum of the average basin flow or 2010 water demand Lost generation was allocated monthly based on deviation from normal flow in that month relative to other months 6 Overview of Lost Thermoelectric Generation Basin Lost Generation (MWh) at risk capacity under 50% historical flow (MW) 1,908 1,791 at risk with WECC equivalent found (MW) 1,837 1460* 0.96 147 12.2 0.82 133 11.1 Fraction of at risk capacity found in WECC database average down days day/month *Includes 407 MW of CA geothermal at risk

7 Lower Colorado California 6,470,000 4,670,000 Monthly Variability in Lost Generation Flow Ratio 8 Lower Colorado Lost Generation MWh Down Days Flow Ratio California Lost Generation MWh Down Days JAN 0.3649 1,097,515 24.9 0.2632 652,592 18.6 FEB 0.2935 1,220,901 27.7 0.2538 660,918 18.9 MAR 0.5556 767,967 17.4 0.2783 639,218 18.2 APR 0.6923

531,736 12.1 0.292 627,083 17.9 MAY 0.6667 575,975 13.1 0.3013 618,846 17.7 JUN 0.8182 314,168 7.1 0.4333 501,932 14.3 JUL 1.125 0 0.0 0.6183 338,076 9.6 AUG 0.931 119,239 2.7 0.6788 284,490 8.1 SEP 0.8571

246,945 5.6 0.6592 301,850 8.6 OCT 0.878 210,828 4.8 0.6438 315,490 9.0 NOV 0.4737 909,498 20.6 1.2627 0 0.0 DEC 0.6 691,239 15.7 1.0427 0 0.0 Modifying Forced Outage Rates Forced outage rates modified to reflect increased down days for all impacted plants within a basin All impacted plants assumed to be down the same number of days in a given month Overlap allowed with scheduled maintenance 9 Impact of Drought on Demand Developed by NREL Basis for demand changes: 99 California Energy Commission Study titled

High Temperatures & Electricity Demand: A n Assessment of Supply Adequacy in Califo rnia, Trends & Outlook 10 o Study provided an estimate for the change in peak demand for 17 areas in the WSCC for two high temperature scenarios (1-in-5 and 1-in-40 probability) Peak Load Adjustment Method 1. Match 17 WSCC areas to 2022 TEPPC load bubbles 2. Identify hottest month for each load area in 1977 (Drought year) 3. Increase peak demand for this month only by the 1-in-40 % change value reported for the WSCC area in the CEC study o Monthly energy was increased by of the peak demand change to preserve the demand shape 11 Peak Load Adjustments Summary 2022 PC1 WECC-Wide Coincident Peak Demand: 172,082 MW 2022 PC7 Adjusted Coincident Peak Demand: 176,080 MW (2.3% inc.) 12 TEPPC Area WSCC Area (Table I-10 in CEC 1999 Study) Water Resource Region (HUC 2) State AESO APS AVA BCTC BPA CFE CHPD DOPD EPE FAR EAST GCPD IID LDWP MAGIC VLY NEVP NWMT PACE_ID PACE_UT PACE_WY PACW PG&E BAY PG&E VLY

PGN PNM PSC PSE SCE SCL SDGE SMUD SPP SRP TEP TIDC TPWR TREAS VLY WACM WALC WAUW Alberta Arizona Northwest BCHA Northwest CFE Northwest Northwest NewMexico ID-SPP Northwest IID LADWP ID-SPP SoNevada Wyoming ID-SPP Utah Wyoming Northwest CSF CNorth Northwest NewMexico Colorado Northwest CSCE Northwest CSDGE CNorth CNorth Arizona Arizona CNorth Northwest ID-SPP Colorado Arizona Wyoming Pacific Northwest Lower Colorado Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest California Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest Texas-Gulf Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest

California California Pacific Northwest Great Basin Missouri Pacific Northwest Great Basin Missouri Pacific Northwest California California Pacific Northwest Rio Grande Upper Colorado Pacific Northwest California Pacific Northwest California California Great Basin Lower Colorado Lower Colorado California Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest Upper Colorado Lower Colorado Missouri MT AZ WA WA OR CA WA WA TX ID WA CA CA ID NV MT ID UT WY OR CA CA OR NM CO WA CA WA CA CA NV AZ AZ CA WA ID CO AZ MT

Hottest Month in 1977 JUL JUL AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG JUL JUL AUG JUL JUL AUG AUG AUG AUG JUL JUL AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG JUL JUL JUL AUG AUG AUG JUL JUL JUL Change in Peak to Apply to PROMOD (from the "1-in40 Probability" Scenario of the 1999 CEC Study) 0.50% 5.30% 1.10% 0.80% 1.10% 1.30% 1.10% 1.10% 4.50% 0.70% 1.10% 8.80% 6.90% 0.70% 9.00% 0.20% 0.70% 0.20% 0.20% 1.10% 0.00% 9.60% 1.10%

4.50% 1.80% 1.10% 8.80% 1.10% 0.70% 9.60% 9.60% 5.30% 5.30% 9.60% 1.10% 0.70% 1.80% 5.30% 0.20% 2022 WGA Drought Changes in Total Annual Generation vs. Common Case Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1 Common Case vs. 2022 PC7 WGA Drought Conventional Hydro Pumped Storage Steam - Coal Steam - Other Nuclear Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine Cogeneration IC Only an increase in areas with emergency in the Common Case (CFE, AESO) Negative Bus Load Biomass RPS Geothermal Small Hydro RPS Other Results (see TEPPC Glossary for definitions) Solar Wind GWh(40,000,000) (20,000,000) 0 Dump Energy (MWh) Emergency Energy (MWh) CO2 Emissions (MMetricTons) 20,000,000 CO2 Adder ($/metric ton) PC1 397,104 2,676 359 40,000,000 0.000 GWh PC7 298,827 3,063

373 Difference (98,277) 386 14 -24.748% 14.436% 3.936% 0.000 Variable Production Cost (thermal units excl DSM) 13 Low Hydro Results CO2 Adder (Total M$) Other Variable Costs (M$) 0 14,851 0 16,262 0 1,411 0.000% 9.502% Total Var. Prod. Cost (M$) 14,851 16,262 1,411 9.502% 2022 WGA Drought Changes in Total Annual Generation vs. Low Hydro Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1-2 Low Hydro Sensitivity vs. 2022 PC7 WGA Drought Conventional Hydro Pumped Storage Steam - Coal Steam - Other Nuclear Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine Cogeneration IC Negative Bus Load Biomass RPS Geothermal Small Hydro RPS Other Results (see TEPPC Glossary for definitions) Solar Wind GWh (4,000,000)

(2,000,000) 0 Dump Energy (MWh) Emergency Energy (MWh) CO2 Emissions (MMetricTons) 2,000,000 4,000,000 CO2 Adder ($/metric ton) PC1-2 315,155 2,825 374 6,000,000 GWh 0.000 PC7 298,827 3,063 373 Difference (16,327) 237 (1) -5.181% 8.403% -0.170% 0.000 Variable Production Cost (thermal units excl DSM) 14 CO2 Adder (Total M$) Other Variable Costs (M$) 0 16,064 0 16,262 0 198 0.000% 1.233% Total Var. Prod. Cost (M$) 16,064 16,262 198 1.233%

2022 WGA Drought Changes in Generation by State vs. Common Case Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1 Common Case vs. 2022 PC7 WGA Drought GWh Hydro+PS Cogeneration Steam - Boiler Renewable Combined Cycle Other Combustion Turbine 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 -5,000,000 -10,000,000 -15,000,000 -20,000,000 r be l A 15 ta a a ia do bi on rn a r z m o i u lo lif Ar ol Co Ca C sh iti r B Low Hydro Results a Id ho M o

ic x e M o a nt na va e N da w Ne M o ic x e O g re on ut o S h ot ak D a s xa e T a Ut h gt in h as W on y W om g

in 2022 WGA Drought Changes in Generation by State vs. Low Hydro Annual Energy Difference: 2022 PC1-2 Low Hydro Sensitivity vs. 2022 PC7 WGA Drought GWh Hydro+PS Cogeneration Steam - Boiler Renewable Combined Cycle Other Combustion Turbine 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 -1,000,000 -2,000,000 Result of increased forced outages applied to plants in the California water basin -3,000,000 -4,000,000 be Al rta o iz Ar Br 16 na sh iti um ol C a bi a C o lif rn ia ra lo o C do

Id ah o M o ic ex M t on an Result of increased forced outages applied to plants in the Lower Colorado water basin a va Ne da w Ne M o ic ex O g re on ut So h ot ak D a s xa e T ah Ut g in h as W to

n y W om in g 2022 WGA Drought Changes in Region to Region Transfers Region to Region Transfers - aMW 2022 2022 PC1-2 2022 PC7 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 -500 NV M -1000 N AZ 17 To _S Ca si Ba n To NV M N AZ si Ba n To _N Ca si Ba n To _S

Ca _N Ca To _S Ca a ad n Ca To US W N US W N To si Ba n US W N To _N Ca US W N To _S Ca PA M R To NV M N AZ PA RM To n si Ba 2022 WGA Drought Changes in Transmission Utilization Most Heavily Utilized Paths Increases in U90 Relative to Common >5% Case Indicated in Red P01 Alberta-British Columbia

P03 Northwest-British Columbia P08 Montana to Northwest P11 West of Crossover P10 West of Colstrip Most Heavily Utilized Paths P29 Intermountain-Gonder P60 Inyo-Control P26 NorthernSouthern California P45 SDG&E-CFE P08 Montana to Northwest P03 Northwest-British Columbia P29 Intermountain-Gonder 230 kV P47 Southern New Mexico (NM1) P27 IPP DC Line P26 Northern-Southern California P01 Alberta-British Columbia P11 West of Crossover P10 West of Colstrip P47 Southern New Mexico P45 SDG&E-CFE 18 U75 43.54% 67.18% 52.68% 46.63% 44.46% 29.32% 16.60% 68.11% 56.47% U90 35.30% 34.59% 32.47% 23.50% 22.07% 17.91% 13.47% 5.38% 0.00% U99 30.87% 16.27% 20.78% 12.59% 8.95% 12.21% 11.77% 0.00% 0.00% Questions or thoughts on this study?

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • The Relationship Between Non-Suicidal Self-Injury and ...

    The Relationship Between Non-Suicidal Self-Injury and ...

    I think self-harm is a very interesting topic, is poorly understood and is often misunderstood. Important for practice, how to react to patients who self-harm. Important theoretically, why for some people does self-harm feel like a good thing to do?...
  • Final exam review starts  Today! Make sure your

    Final exam review starts Today! Make sure your

    Actual Texture:Actual Texture is texture that you can see with your eyes and you could actually feel it with your fingers.Actual texture has a surface quality that may be described as rough, smooth, bumpy, squishy, or spiky etc. In the...
  • 2012-2013 Assessment Report

    2012-2013 Assessment Report

    SED Enrollment(2013-2014). Based on data provided by the Office of Institutional Research across three semesters: Summer 2013. Fall 2013. Spring 2014
  • Blueprints, Frameworks, and Security Models

    Blueprints, Frameworks, and Security Models

    Security architecture models illustrate InfoSec implementations and can help organizations make quick improvements through adaptation. One of the most widely referenced security models is "ISO/IEC 27001: 2005 Information Technology - Code of Practice for InfoSec Management" Designed to give recommendations...
  • Family Beliefs, Rituals and Rules

    Family Beliefs, Rituals and Rules

    Recognizing rituals and ritual like activities Big R Little r Ritualized behavior Similarities between rituals and routines The may have a similar appearance Involve more than one family member, Involve overt behavior, Repetition of form and content, There is continuity...
  • Is Jesus your Master?

    Is Jesus your Master?

    Our greatest battle to fight in lifeā€¦it is the battle of self. Poem: Myself. I have to live with myself, and so. I want to be fit for myself to know. I want to be able as the days go...
  • Lisa J. Mails Library

    Lisa J. Mails Library

    PAU ABB CLE. What about these? ... Keep a notebook of all the new words you've learned, or of phrases that you liked. ... Read the book before you see the movie! Draw a picture of your favorite part of...
  • Local Resource Competition (LRC) & Enhancement (LRE) Fisher

    Local Resource Competition (LRC) & Enhancement (LRE) Fisher

    -LRE, LRC, env effects & T&W may all be present in some cases -how, when & why do LRE and LRC interact with env effects and T&W What can be learned from brood and popn level SRs -comparative approach /...