Alternative Futures — Scenarios for Business in Australia to the
Effects of Alternative Scenarios on Sixth Power Plan
description
Transcript of Effects of Alternative Scenarios on Sixth Power Plan
Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Effects of Alternative Scenarios on Sixth Power Plan
Northwest Power and Conservation Council
Whitefish, MT June 2009
2Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Scenarios• Base case• Low Conservation• High Conservation• Carbon Policy Explorations
– Suspend Carbon Policy– No RPS– $100/ton Carbon Cost– $20/ton Carbon Cost– Close Existing Coal Plants– Dam Removal
• Plug-In Electric Hybrid Vehicles (Remaining)• Climate Change (Remaining)
3Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Base Case Assumptions
• Forecasts of demand and fuel prices
• RPS renewables are acquired
• Carbon costs range from $0 to $100, grow over the planning period and reach average of $50 per ton by 2030
• Discretionary conservation limited to 160 average megawatts per year, phased in to 85% penetration maximum
4Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Limitations of Carbon Price Analysis
• Carbon pricing policy is modeled as a tax on carbon emissions from generation– The costs do not consider how the revenues might
come back to utilities or citizens
• Current cap and trade proposals would have different effects– Granting free carbon allowances to emitters will
reduce the cost impact to utilities
• Any actual costs of emissions themselves are not captured in the analysis, i.e. the benefits of the reductions are not counted
5Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Translating Costs to Rates and Bills
• Costs minimized in the Power Plan are not consumer rates or bills
• Not all costs are included, only future costs that are affected by the plan– Planning costs exclude existing capital costs
of power plants and T&D infrastructure
• Not all conservation costs are paid by utilities, plan counts all of them
6Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Low Conservation Case
• Purpose– To test the effect of acquiring conservation
more slowly than the base case
• Assumptions– Acquisition of discretionary conservation
limited to 100 MWa per year, instead of 160 MWa in the base case
– Lost-opportunity conservation developed more slowly
7Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Effects of Low Conservation Case
Base Low ConservationNPV Cost 105.6 114.3
NPV Risk 155.5 173.9
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 44.5
CO2 (Use) 26.8 33.9
Conservation 5,827 4,566
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
300 (Dec-15); 3600
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 52 (Dec-17); 208
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 1512 (Dec-17); 2268
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 162 (Dec-15); 162
8Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: Low Conservation Case
• Cost of the power system increases by 8%
• Carbon emissions increase by 11 to 26% depending on accounting
• Slightly increased reliance on renewable generation, and more natural gas CCCTs
• Conservation is reduced by over 20% compared to the base case
9Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
High Conservation Case
• Purpose– To test the effect of accelerated conservation
acquisition
• Assumptions– Limit on acquisition of discretionary
conservation increased to 220 MWa per year, instead of 160 MWa in the base case
– Same increase in ramp as the reduction in the low conservation case, (i.e. 60 MWa)
10Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Effects of High Discretionary Conservation Case
Base High ConservationNPV Cost 105.6 103.8
NPV Risk 155.5 152.1
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 39.7
CO2 (Use) 26.8 26.5
Conservation 5,827 5,849
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
1800 (Dec-15); 2100
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 52 (Dec-15); 195
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 378 (Dec-17); 378
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 162 (Dec-15); 162
11Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: High Conservation Case
• Relatively little effect on cost or carbon emissions (available discretionary conservation is just achieved sooner)
• Slightly increased reliance on renewable generation
• Fewer natural gas SCCTs optioned
12Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
No-Carbon-Policy Case
• Purpose– To provide a basis for answering questions
about the cost of reducing carbon emissions
• Assumptions– No renewable portfolio standards– No renewable energy credits– No exposure to future carbon cost uncertainty
13Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Effects of Suspended Carbon Policy
Base No PolicyNPV Cost 105.6 56.5
NPV Risk 155.5 84.8
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 65.1
CO2 (Use) 26.8 52.8
Conservation 5,827 5,432
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
0
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 52 (Dec-17); 52
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 1512 (Dec-19); 1890
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 648 (Dec-23); 648
14Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: Suspend Carbon Policy Case
• NPV cost of the power system reduced by almost half (47%)– Rates reduced by 12% to 25%
• Carbon emissions grow to 14% above 2005 level
• Little reliance on renewable generation, greater development of natural gas
• Conservation is only reduced by 7% from base case
15Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
$100 a Ton Carbon Cost
• Purpose– To consider how the resource strategy might
be change if a high carbon cost future were assured rather than just a liklihood
• Assumptions– A known $100 per ton carbon cost instead of
uncertain costs between $0 and $100– RPS goals assumed to be met– RECs are retained by utilities, i.e. wind costs
are not reduced by REC value
16Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
$100 CO2 Cost Case *
Base $100 CO2 CostNPV Cost 105.6 152.7
NPV Risk 155.5 193.2
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 29.6
CO2 (Use) 26.8 20.0
Conservation 5,827 5,847
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
1500 (Dec-13); 3000
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 840 (Dec-15); 840
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 1512 (Dec-17); 2268
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 None
* Run on a previous base case
17Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: $100 Per Ton CO2 Cost *
• Power system cost increased by 45%
• Carbon emissions reduced by 25% from the base case
• Small effects on conservation or renewable generation
• Six times more natural gas CCCTs optioned, no SCCTs optioned
• Base load coal being displaced
18Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
No Renewable Portfolio Standards
• Purpose– To assess the role of RPS policies relative to
carbon pricing strategies
• Assumptions– RPS requirements eliminated– Wind credited with REC value– Region still faces base case carbon price
uncertainty
19Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
No RPS Case
Base No RPS CaseNPV Cost 105.6 101.4
NPV Risk 155.5 153.8
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 43.7
CO2 (Use) 26.8 30.3
Conservation 5,827 5,935
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
700 (Dec-13); 4800 *
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 13 (Dec-13); 208
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 378 (Dec-15); 378
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 162 (Dec-13); 648
* Includes all wind because of no RPS assumption
20Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: No RPS Case
• Small reduction in cost
• Small increase in carbon emissions
• Slightly increased conservation
• Renewable generation is difficult to compare, but appears that about the same amount of wind is developed
• Natural gas resources are optioned a little earlier, with slightly more SCCTs
21Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Retire Coal Plants Early
• Purpose– To compare the cost and effectiveness of a
coal retirement strategy to carbon pricing risk of the base case
• Assumptions– Existing coal plants are phased out beginning
in 2012 through 2020– RPS and carbon cost uncertainty remain in
place
22Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Retire Coal Plants Early Case
Base Retire CoalNPV Cost 105.6 143.8
NPV Risk 155.5 201.9
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 18.4
CO2 (Use) 26.8 12.1
Conservation 5,827 5,710
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
2000 (Dec-13); 4000
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 840 (Dec-13); 840
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 4536 (Dec-17); 6804
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 None
* Numbers based on immediate closure assumption and old base case
23Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: Retire Coal Plants Early
• Comparison is difficult until new case finishes
• Significant and more certain carbon emission reductions
• Higher cost to replace coal plants
• Large increase in CCCTs to replace coal generation
24Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Dam Removal Case
• Purpose– To test the value of preserving existing carbon
free electricity resources
• Assumptions– Lower Snake River dams are removed in
about 10 years– Model determines how to meet energy and
capacity needs
25Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Dam Removal Case
Base Dam RemovalNPV Cost 105.6 112.5
NPV Risk 155.5 168.5
CO2 (Gen) 40.1 43.6
CO2 (Use) 26.8 33.1
Conservation 5,827 5,923
Wind (above RPS) 1200 (Dec-15); 3000
900 (Dec-15); 3000
Geothermal 52 (Dec-17); 169 52 (Dec-15); 208
Natural Gas CCCT 378 (Dec-17); 378 378 (Dec-13); 1134
Natural Gas SCCT 162 (Dec-15); 324 162 (Dec-15); 324
26Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings: Dam Removal Case
• Cost of power system increases 7%
• Three times as many natural gas CCCTs are optioned
• Small increase in carbon emissions
• Little effect on conservation or renewable generation
27Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Sensitivity of the Base Case to Varying Carbon Costs
• Purpose:– To test the sensitivity of the base case
resource plan to changing carbon costs (without uncertainties in all variables)
• Assumptions:– Operate the RPM without uncertainty to test
power system response to changing carbon costs
28Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Effect of Carbon Priceon Emissions
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Carbon Price in $/Ton
Mill
ion
To
ns
/Ye
ar
29Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings on Carbon Emissions
• Base case reduces carbon emissions below 1990 levels by 2030
• Without carbon policy, emissions would continue to grow, although more slowly
• RPS is consistent with least risk plan in the face of carbon cost uncertainty
• High ($100) carbon cost would reduce emissions to 2/3 of 1990 levels by 2030
30Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings on Carbon Emissions –Continued
• Retiring the existing regional coal plants would reduce carbon emissions to 40% of 1990 levels by 2030, at lower cost to the power system than carbon penalties (although penalties would include some compensating revenues to the region)
• Removing 1,200 MWa of hydropower capability would increase both cost and carbon emissions
31Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Findings on Conservation
• Lower conservation acquisition would increase both cost and carbon emissions
• Faster conservation acquisition would have relatively little effect on total conservation– Less conservation available at high cost end
of the potential– Discretionary conservation is achieved more
quickly, but total is still limited
32Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Additional Cases to Add
• Impacts of potential climate change
• Effects of Plug-in hybrid vehicles
• Lower known CO2 costs ($20)
• Revisions to – $100 carbon price– Coal plant retirement
33Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil
Changes in LR Plan Cost & Emissions
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60B
illio
n 2
00
6$
an
d M
illio
n t
py
Cost
Emissions