Page 1
Southwest Power PoolB&V Project 167501
ITP-20 Generating Resources Study22 August 2010
Southwest Power PoolB&V Project 167501
ITP-20 Generating Resources StudyB&V File No. 90.0000
22 August 2010
Attn:Charles Cates, Senior Engineer, Planning
Southwest Power Pool
Subject:Draft Final Report Submittal
Dear Charles Cates:
Black & Veatch is pleased to submit this Draft Final Report to Southwest Power Pool for the ITP-20 Generating Resources Study.
This report is being submitted for your review. After you have reviewed this draft, we’ll schedule a time to discuss. After we have received your comments, we will incorporate your feedback into the report and issue the Final.
We trust that this submittal meets your expectations and needs. Should you have any comments, please feel free to contact me at (913) 458-8843.
Very truly yours,
BLACK & VEATCH
Gary Wilmes
Senior Consultant
gjw
Enclosure[s]
cc:Mark Griffith
Southwest Power Pool
ITP-20 Generating Resources Study
Draft Final Report
B&V Project Number 167501
B&V File Number 90.0000
August 2010
Principal Investigators:
Gary Wilmes
Debashis Bose
Mark Griffith
Sam Scupham
BLACK & VEATCH STATEMENT
This report was prepared for Client by Black & Veatch Company (“B&V”) and is largely based on information not within the control of B&V. As such, B&V has not made an analysis, verified, or rendered an independent judgment of the validity of the information provided by others, and, therefore, B&V does not guarantee the accuracy thereof.
In conducting our analysis and in forming an opinion of the projection of future operations summarized in this report, B&V has made certain assumptions with respect to conditions, events, and circumstances that may occur in the future. The methodologies we utilize in performing the analysis and making these projections follow generally accepted industry practices. While we believe that such assumptions and methodologies as summarized in this report are reasonable and appropriate for the purpose for which they are used; depending upon conditions, events, and circumstances that actually occur but are unknown at this time, actual results may materially differ from those projected.
Use of this report, or any information contained therein, shall constitute the user’s waiver and release of B&V and Client from and against all claims and liability, including, but not limited to, any liability for special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages, in connection with such use. In addition, use of this report or any information contained therein shall constitute an agreement by the user to defend and indemnify B&V and Client from and against any claims and liability, including, but not limited to, liability for special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages, in connection with such use. To the fullest extent permitted by law, such waiver and release, and indemnification shall apply notwithstanding the negligence, strict liability, fault, or breach of warranty or contract of B&V or Client. The benefit of such releases, waivers or limitations of liability shall extend to B&V and Client’s related companies, and subcontractors, and the directors, officers, partners, employees, and agents of all released or indemnified parties. USE OF THIS REPORT SHALL CONSTITUTE AGREEMENT BY THE USER THAT ITS RIGHTS, IF ANY, IN RELATION TO THIS REPORT SHALL NOT EXCEED, OR BE IN ADDITION TO, THE RIGHTS OF THE CLIENT.”
Readers of this report are advised that any projected or forecasted financial, operating, growth, performance, or strategy merely reflects the reasonable judgment of B&V at the time of the preparation of such information and is based on a number of factors and circumstances beyond our control. Accordingly, B&V makes no assurances that the projections or forecasts will be consistent with actual results or performance. To better reflect more current trends and reduce to chance of forecast error, we recommend that periodic updates of the forecasts contained in this report be conducted so more recent historical trends can be recognized and taken into account.
Any use of this report, and the information therein, constitutes agreement that: (i) B&V makes no warranty, express or implied, relating to this report, (ii) the user accepts the sole risk of any such use, and (iii) the user waives any claim for damages of any kind against B&V.
Southwest Power PoolITP-20 Generating Resources Study / Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Executive Summary......
1.0 Introduction......
1.1 Background......
1.2 Objective......
1.3 Modeling Approach and Assumptions......
1.3.1 Modeling Approach
1.3.2 Strategist Dimensional Limits......
1.4 Fuel Price Assumptions
1.5 Peak Load and NEL Assumptions
1.6 Wind Modeling Assumptions
1.7 Location of Wind Resources for ITP Futures......
2.0 Futures Descriptions......
3.0 Generic Prototypes......
3.1 Generating Unit Assumptions......
3.2 Plant Site Location and Infrastructure Assumptions......
3.3 Common EPC Capital Cost Assumptions......
3.3.1 Direct Cost Assumptions......
3.3.2 Indirect Cost Assumptions......
3.4 Fixed Charge Rate Calculation for the SPP Modeling......
3.5 Supply-Side Screening......
3.5.1 Screening Assumptions......
3.5.2 Candidate Expansion Unit Screening......
3.5.3 Wind Unit Screening......
3.5.4 Summary of Screening Results......
4.0 Expansion Plan Results......
4.1 Future 1 (Base Case or Business as Usual)
4.2 Future 2, the Renewable Energy Standard (RES) Future
4.3 Future 3, the CO2 Mandate Future
4.4 Future 4, the Combined RES and CO2 Mandate Future
5.0 Siting Generator Resources......
5.1 Siting Criteria......
5.1.1 Greenfield Siting......
5.1.2 Wind Siting......
5.2 Siting Results......
5.3 Generator Resource PowerBase Model Input......
List of Tables
Table ES-1. ITP Year 20 Futures...... ES-
Table 11. Main Load Serving Areas......
Table 12. Basin-Level Coal Prices
Table 13. Annual Average Natural Gas Prices for SPP Area
Table 14. Comparison of Henry Hub Annual Average Natural Gas Prices
Table 15. Annual Average Uranium Prices (Nominal $/MMBtu)
Table 16. Data Point Descriptions......
Table 21. ITP Year 20 Futures......
Table 31. Generating Unit Alternatives......
Table 32. Fixed Charge Rate Assumptions and Results......
Table 33. Levelized Cost Analysis for Candidate Expansion Units......
Table 34. Levelized Costs for 100 MW Nameplate Wind Farm (for IPP)......
Table 41. Future 1 Expansion Plan for NSPP
Table 42. Future 1 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Table 43. Future 2 Expansion Plan for NSPP
Table 44. Future 2 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Table 45. Future 3, the CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for NSPP
Table 46. Future 3, the CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for SSPP
Table 47. Future 4, the RES and CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for NSPP
Table 48. Future 4, the RES and CO2 Mandate Expansion Plan for SSPP
Table 51. Expansion plans siting for all Futures......
List of Figures
Figure ES1. Resource Plan Summary for the four futures...... ES-
Figure ES2. Annual CO2 Emissions in SPP for Different Scenarios (2011-2030) ES-
Figure 11. Annual Basin Coal Price Forecast (2011-2030)......
Figure 12. Monthly Natural Gas Price Forecast (2011-2030)......
Figure 13. Annual Average Natural Gas Price Forecast Comparison with EIA 2010 (2011-2030)
Figure 14. Annual Average Uranium Price Forecast (2011-2030)......
Figure 15. Peak Demand and NEL Forecast for SPP (2011-2030)......
Figure 16. Locations of Selected EWITS Data Points......
Figure 31. Candidate Expansion Units Screening Analysis......
Figure 32. Levelized Cost Range for Baseload Units......
Figure 33. Levelized Cost Range for Mid Merit (Intermediate) Units......
Figure 34. Levelized Cost Range for Peaking Units......
Figure 41. Resource Mix for New Resources Added in SPP......
Figure 42. Annual CO2 Emissions in SPP for Different Scenarios (2011-2030.
Figure 43. Future 1 Expansion Plan for NSPP
Figure 44. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology Type for Future 1 for NSPP
Figure 45. Future 1 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 46. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 1 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 47. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 1 Expansion Plan for SPP
Figure 48. Future 2 Expansion Plan for NSPP
Figure 49. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 2 for NSPP
Figure 410. Future 2 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 411. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology Type for Future 2 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 412. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology Type for Future 2 Expansion Plan for SPP
Figure 413. Future 3, the CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for NSPP
Figure 414. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology Type for Future 3 Expansion Plan for NSPP
Figure 415. Future 3, the CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 416. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 3 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 417. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology Type for Future 3, the CO2 Mandate, Expansion Plan for SPP
Figure 418. Future 4, the RES and CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for NSPP
Figure 419. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 4 Expansion Plan for NSPP
Figure 420. Future 4, the RES and CO2 Mandate Future, Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 421. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 4 Expansion Plan for SSPP
Figure 422. 2030 Resource Mix Additions by Technology for Future 4 Expansion Plan for SPP
Figure 51. Future 1 Expansion Plan Sitings......
Figure 52. Future 2 Expansion Plan Sitings......
Figure 53. Future 3 Expansion Plan Sitings......
Figure 54. Future 4 Expansion Plan Sitings......
22 August 2010TC-1Black & Veatch
Southwest Power PoolITP-20 Generating Resources Study / Futures Descriptions
Executive Summary
Black & Veatch completed four 20-year forecasts of generating resource additions to balance load and capacity reserves for zones throughout the Southwest Power Pool (SPP) based on four future scenarios designed by the SPP Economic Studies Working Group (ESWG), located the general siting areas for the new resources, and populated databases for further use by SPP staff to support SPP’s new transmission planning process. The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) has transitioned to a new transmission planning process, called the Integrated Transmission Plan (ITP). The ITP is composed of three phases, a 20 year assessment, a 10 year assessment, and a 4 year assessment. The 20 year assessment is focused on a long-term economic study, focused on developing an Extra High Voltage (EHV) transmission network. The existing generating resources within the SPP footprint are not adequate to meet the forecast loads in 2030. Therefore, sets of resources’ forecastswere developed to balance load and capacity. The forecast resource plans will be used in study of an Extra High Voltage (EHV) transmission network for the SPP ITP Year 20 Assessment process.
In order to ensure that the ITP Year 20 Assessment included evaluations of many different variables, four different futures (or scenarios) were evaluated. Each future represents a defined combination of possible future outcomes, including items such as regulatory policy, generator cost, fuel cost, demand growth, efficiency, among others. A resource forecast was developed for each future.
The objective of this studywas to develop several 20-year forecasts of load and resource balances throughout SPP. The study was divided into three phases as defined below.
- Phase I. Develop a resource expansion plan for each of four future scenarios to be used in the EHV analysis.The resources were selected using an optimal generation expansionmodel on a regional basis. The expansion plans were developed from a resource list of generic prototype generators representing available future resources.
- Phase II. The resources were spatially located within the SPP pricing areas with the aid of GIS databases showing locations of transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, railroads, waterways, substations, etc.
- Phase III. The generators were entered into a PowerBase database and connected to busses in the transmission system.SPP will use the information entered into the PowerBase for future transmission modeling by SPP.
The supply-side evaluations of generating resource alternatives were performed using the Strategist software (licensed from Ventyx), an optimal generation expansion and production cost model. The Strategist model was used to help determine the lowest cost resources for the 20-year timeframe, maintaining the capacity margins, renewable requirements, and other parameters for the given futures.
Four future scenarios (futures) were develop to account for uncertainties in forecasting future system conditions. The futures take into account multiple variables relevant to a transmission expansion planning that will evolve as economic, environmental, regulatory, and technological changes that affect the industry occur. Detailed assumptions of the Futures are given in the ITP-20 Futures document[1]. The futures analyzed are summarized in the table below.
Table ES-1. ITP Year 20 Futures
Future / Name / Renewable Energy Standard (RES) / Carbon MandateFuture 1 / Base Case / 7.8 GW of New Wind Resources / No
Future 2 / Renewable Energy Standard (RES) / 13.8 GW of New Wind Resources / No
Future 3 / Carbon Mandate / 7.8 GW of New Wind Resources / Yes
Future 4 / Carbon Mandate and RES / 13.8 GW of New Wind Resources / Yes
CO2 allowance costs considered from 2012 in the Futures with Carbon Mandate. Carbon allowance costs ranges from $14/ton in 2012 to $73/ton in 2030.
The RES Wind capacities include 4 GW of existing wind capacity.
Figure ES-1 shows the results of the resource plans for the four futures. In Futures1 and Future 2, futures without carbon mandates, coal capacity was determined to be part of the lowest cost resource mix along with gas fueled combined cycle technology and natural gas fueled simple cycle combustion turbines. Wind built out was a substantial part of the resource build-outs for all futures analyzed. When CO2 mandates were considered, CO2allowance costs result in only natural gas fueled generator additions. Although nuclear units were considered as generating resource addition alternatives for the generating resource build-out, nuclear capacity was not a component of any of the resulting resource expansion plans for any of the futures analyzed.
Figure ES1. Resource Plan Summary for the four futures.
Figure ES2. Annual CO2 Emissions in SPP for Different Scenarios (2011-2030)
Figure ES-2 shown above shows the annual CO2 emissions for the four different futures. All futures have a similar emissions pattern until 2020. Future 1 (Base Case) and Future 2 have more CO2 emissions than the other two futures. This occurs because Future 3and Future 4 assume CO2 emission allowance costs whereas Future 1 and Future 2 do not. Response to the higher costs of coal fueled generation in the carbon mandates futures is a decrease in generation from coal fueled units, leading to lower CO2 emissions. Expansion plans for Futures 1 and 2 include super-critical pulverized coal (SCPC) unit additions, whereas Future 3 and Future 4 do not. Beyond 2020, a combination of factors is causing the CO2 emissions across the futures to vary. The assumption of either a RES or CO2 mandate drive down the CO2 emissions. The RES and CO2 mandate futures show a similar reduction in CO2 emissions, with, as expected, a combination of the two having the greatest impact on future CO2 emissions.
After the sets of resources for each scenario were approved by the ESWG, Black & Veatch spatially sited the resources, which was Phase II of the engagement. A physical spatial location for each generator was selected based upon the siting parameters developed in collaboration with the ESWG and SPP staff. The siting effort included incorporation of the renewable requirements, and other futures parameters, as well as physical siting criteria to determine the proper location for each resource. The conventional generation was sited at existing brownfield sites and the wind capacity was sited in regions of SPP with good wind resource potential. This siting effort was conducted as a screening level exercise to identify site areas that generally comply with the approved criteria and is not intended to provide or replace a full scope power plant siting study.
After the resource siting was approved by the ESWG, Black & Veatch conducted Phase III of the engagement, which consisted of populating the SPP database with the resource additions at the approved sites so they could be interconnected in the transmission network model at the appropriate locations.
22 August 2010ES-1Black & Veatch
Southwest Power PoolITP-20 Generating Resources Study / Futures Descriptions
1.0 Introduction
Southwest Power Pool (SPP) retained Black & Veatch to develop a resource planning and economic model dataset required by SPP to conduct the ITP Year 20 Assessment. For this engagement, Black & Veatch completed four 20-year forecasts of load and resource balances for zones throughout SPP based on four future scenarios designed by SPP, located the general siting areas for the new resources, and populated databases for further use by SPP staff. The forecast resource plans will be used in study of an envisioned Extra High Voltage (EHV) transmission network for the SPP ITP Year 20 Assessment process.
1.1 Background
SPP has transitioned to a new transmission planning process, called the Integrated Transmission Plan (ITP). The ITP is composed of three phases, a 20 year assessment, a 10 year assessment, and a 4 year assessment. The 20 year assessment is focused on a long-term economic study, focused on developing an Extra High Voltage (EHV) transmission network. In preparation for this study, a 20 year out (2030) economic model was developed. To develop this model, load and energy was forecasted to the study timeframe. The existing generating resources within the SPP footprint are not adequate to meet the forecast loads in 2030. Therefore, a set of resources forecast was developed in order to balance the load and generation.
In order to ensure that the ITP Year 20 Assessment includes evaluations of many different variables, four different futures (or scenarios) were evaluated. Each future represents a defined combination of possible future outcomes, including items such as regulatory policy, generator cost, fuel cost, demand growth, efficiency, among others. A resource forecast was developed for each future.