1 / 73

Strategic Fleet Study: 2009 Power Supply and Fuels System Planning Overview

This document presents a comprehensive update to the Strategic Fleet Study focused on power supply and fuels system planning as of April 6, 2009. It elaborates on various case descriptions related to asset retirements and replacements, highlighting key assumptions such as demand-side management (DSM) strategies, the transition to coal units, and the integration of renewables. The references include trends in capacity retirements, updates to business plans, and detailed financial implications, while also addressing CO2 emissions and economic drivers affecting the overall energy landscape.

sherri
Télécharger la présentation

Strategic Fleet Study: 2009 Power Supply and Fuels System Planning Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Strategic Fleet Study (2) PowerSupply& Fuels System Planning April 6, 2009 update CONFIDENTIAL

  2. Review

  3. 3/23 Case Descriptions • Reference Case: Aug08 Business Plan • 2022: JOF 1-10 retirement (1080 MWs) Replace with Coal unit (SCPC) onsite • Assumes full DSM, no additional renewables • Base Case: Apr09 preliminary Business Plan (also with High Gas) • 2022 JOF 2010 retirement (1080 MWs) Replace with SCPC onsite • Assumes full DSM, and a medium level of renewables • Case A1: JSF retires in 2012 • Case B1: JSF retires in 2014 (also with High Gas) • Asset shutdowns - MWs are summer capacity (2866 MWs) • 2010: WCF 1-6 (636 MWs) With transmission upgrades • 2012/2014: JSF 1-4 (704 MWs) Replace with CC onsite • 2014: JOF 5-10 (728 MWs) • 2016: JOF 1-4 (352 MWs) Replace with CC onsite • 2018: COF 5 (446 MWs) With transmission upgrades • All new cases assume full DSM and renewables to meet Bingaman Bill • Assume 4 gas IPP plant acquisitions in 2009/2010 (3549 MWs)

  4. 3/23 Case Descriptions - Detail

  5. 3/23 Summaries: Aug08, Apr09, A1, B1, Apr09 HG, B1 HG

  6. New Cases

  7. 4/6 Case Descriptions • Reference Case: Aug08 Business Plan • 2022 JOF 1-10 retirement (1080 MWs) Replace with Coal unit (SCPC) onsite • Assumes full DSM, no additional renewables • Base Case: Apr09 R2 (potential acquisitions are not available) • Alternative Base Case: Apr 09 R2A (potential acquisitions are optimally picked as needed) • All Apr09 R2 base cases assume the following: • 2022 JOF 1-10 retirement (1080 MWs); replace with coal unit (SCPC) onsite • Assume dollars only for DSM, additional renewables, and EPU (no MWs, Gwh); Tapoco not available after 6/2010 • C1: lower acquisition costs and 2 BLN units fixed C2: higher acquisition costs and 2 BLN units fixed • D1: lower acquisition costs and 2 BLN units float D2: higher acquisition costs and 2 BLN units float • All R2 sensitivity cases assume the following: • 2012 JSF 1-4 (704 MWs) Replace with CC onsite • 2014 WCF1-6 (636 MWs) Requires transmission upgrade • 2015 JOF 5-10 (728 MWs) • 2016 JOF 1-4 (352 MWs) Replace with CC onsite • 2018 COF 5 (446 MWs) Requires transmission upgrade • Assume dollars only for DSM, additional renewables, and EPU (no MWs, Gwh) • Tapoco not available after 6/2010 • Assume 4 IPP plant acquistions are optimally picked as needed • TVA pays the Bingaman Bill requirements in lieu of renewable generation

  8. 4/6 Case Descriptions - Detail 2,900 MWs 3,500 MWs

  9. Cost Drivers : Nuclear, DSM, Renewables

  10. Renewables Blue line represents March load forecast without DSM Red line represents dollars • Higher level of renewables were removed from the plan, as was DSM. • Alternative compliance payments were calculated w/escalation ($30/Mwh to $54 in 2028) • Cumulative costs under this alternative approaches $9 billion.

  11. Summaries:Aug08, Apr09, Apr09 r2AHG, Apr 09 r2, Apr09 r2A, C1, C2, C1HG,D1, D2 11 . Without Bingaman Bill Impacts

  12. Summaries:Aug08, Apr09, Apr09 r2AHG, Apr 09 r2, Apr09 r2A, C1, C2, C1HG,D1, D2 . With Bingaman Bill Impacts

  13. Deltas: Apr09, Apr09 r2, Apr09 r2A,C1, C2, D1, D2vs. Aug 08

  14. Deltas: Aug08, Apr09 r2, Apr09 r2A,C1, C2, D1, D2vs. Apr09

  15. Deltas: Aug08, Apr09, Apr09 r2A,C1, C2, D1, D2vs. Apr09 r2

  16. Deltas: Aug08, Apr09, Apr09 r2,C1, C2, D1, D2vs. Apr09 r2A

  17. Asset Acquisitions – Acquisition Price, Transmission, and Transportation • Firm Transportation Capacity is needed in quantities that would in some cases require pipeline expansion projects • In some cases, one CC could be supplied but not two or more without expansion projects • Decatur was chosen before Batesville and received a lower demand charge because of pipeline scarcity • Gas supply, storage, and transportation diversification all represent potential value • Acquisition prices are escalated at TVA inflation

  18. TVA Load Forecast- March 2009 vs. January 2009 Summer Peak System Energy March 2009 w/o DSM March 2009 w/o DSM March 2009 w DSM March 2009 w DSM January 2009 w DSM January 2009 w DSM Key Forecast Inputs/Drivers Weather Assumptions: Jan09 and Mar09 forecasts assume normal weather Economic Drivers: The near term economic outlook is reduced for the same period in the January forecast. Prices: Retail Electric rates include the updated FCA. Natural Gas Prices are unchanged between plans. Changes in Large Customers: Direct served customers loads are reduced in FY09-FY11. March 2009 planning assumptions are shown with and without DSM energy or Peak impacts. DSM Programs: Annual Peak and Energy Impacts are unchanged. DSM Impacts including Losses (distribution & transmission) 2009 includes 5 months of actual energy.

  19. 3/23 CO2 Emission – by Case

  20. 4/6 CO2 Emission – by Case

  21. 4/6 Coal and Gas average fuel Cost

  22. 3/23 Case Descriptions - Detail $Billions

  23. 4/6 Case Descriptions - Detail $Billions 2,900 MWs 3,500 MWs

  24. Backup Info

  25. Details: Aug08 and Apr09

  26. Details: A1 and B1

  27. Details: Apr 09 r2 and Apr 09 r2A

  28. Details: C1, C2

  29. Details: D1, D2

  30. Details: Apr09 r2A HG, C1 HG

  31. MW Sheets for Each Case

  32. Aug08 MW

  33. Apr09 MW

  34. A1 MW

  35. B1 MW

  36. Apr 09 R2 MW

  37. Apr 09 R2A MW

  38. Apr 09 C1 MW

  39. Apr 09 D1 MW

  40. Apr 09 C2 MW

  41. Apr 09 D2 MW

  42. Apr 09 R2A_High Gas MW

  43. Apr 09 C1_High Gas MW

  44. Apr 09 R2A_High Acq Costs MW

  45. Capacity Expansion $’s for Each Case

  46. Aug08 $

  47. Apr09 $

  48. A1 $

  49. B1 $

  50. Apr 09 R2 $

More Related