1 / 32

Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use Implications BLM National Lands Conference

Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use Implications BLM National Lands Conference. David Maul Chris Tooker California Energy Commission June 13, 2001. Topics. California’s Electricity System Overview Current Supply Activity Governor’s Executive Orders

fauve
Download Presentation

Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use Implications BLM National Lands Conference

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. Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use ImplicationsBLMNational Lands Conference David Maul Chris Tooker California Energy Commission June 13, 2001

  2. Topics • California’s Electricity System Overview • Current Supply Activity • Governor’s Executive Orders • Land Use Implications • Proposal to Work Together

  3. California Energy Commission • State licensing authority • 50 MW+ thermal power plants • Related facilities • Time certain process • Public process • Comprehensive review

  4. California’s Electric System • Over 1,200 electrical generators • Over 38,000 miles of transmission lines • Linked to western North America • 12.9 million customers • Average use - 624 gigawatt hours / day • Projected peak demand - 58,000 MW • 40% of western U.S. market

  5. The Interconnected Western Grid Page 1

  6. A Country in Transition Percentage changes in population from April 1, 1990 through July 1, 1999 Fastest-growing states Slowest-growing/shrinking states MAINE +2.0% WASH. +18.3% N.D. -0.8% MASS. ORE. W. VA. +2.6% +16.7% +0.7% N.Y. IDAHO +1.1% +24.3% R.I. -1.3% PA IOWA +0.9% NEV. +3.3% CONN. +50.6% UTAH -0.2% COLO. +23.6% +23.1% ARIZ. +30.4% GEORGIA TEXAS +20.2% +18.0% FLORIDA +16.8%

  7. Aging Facilities

  8. Non-Coincident Peak Demand Reserve Margins 1993 - 1998 Page 8

  9. California Summer 2001 Coincident Peak Demand Under Different Temperature Probabilities And A Functional Competitive Market (MW) Total Available Supply 61,184 MW Supply Less Expected Outages

  10. California Summer 2001 Coincident Peak Demand Under Different Temperature Probabilities And “Outages” Equal to Jan. 11, 2001 (MW) Total Available Supply 61,184 MW Supply Less Outages Reported by CAISO on Jan. 11, 2001

  11. Power Plants Off-Line • 1999: 1000 - 5000 MW • 2000: 2000 - 10,000 MW • 2001: 10,000 - 15,000 MW

  12. Options to Resolve Crisis • Conservation • operations • investment funds • Increased Generation • peakers • repowers/retool/rerates • baseload • new sites • Market • debt • market structure • correct market dysfunctions • Need balanced strategy

  13. Recent Actions - Supply • New natural gas generation: • 28 plants approved - 11.283 MW • 1,284 MW to be on-line by 7/1/01 • 17 plants in review - 7,335 MW • 46 applications within 3 months - 11,664 MW • New renewable generation • 217 MW on-line this summer • State (DWR) contracting for power

  14. Power Plants Approved by the CEC Since April, 1999

  15. Emergency Power Plants Approved by CEC

  16. Recent Actions - Process • Established 4-month process • Peakers • Established 6-month process • Clean projects • Prepared Developers Guide • Available on CEC Website at: • www.energy.ca.gov • Conducted Siting Process OII

  17. Governor’s Executive Orders • 6 Executive Orders • Issued February 8 • Focused on power plants • Planning • Siting • Permitting • Construction • Operation

  18. Governor’s EO’sLicensing • Maintained 12-month AFC • Maintained 6-month AFC • Reestablished 4-month AFC • Established 21-day emergency permit • Established 45-day amendment • Established 7-day amendment

  19. California Load/Resource Balance (ISO area with 7% Operating Reserve at Coincident Peak) 1 in 5 Year Peak Demand 1 in 2 Year Peak Demand Existing generation excludes 2,500 MW for outages

  20. Value ofEnergy Efficiency • Reduction in Expected Peak Demand • Jan 2001: -6.2% (-2,091 MW) • Feb 2001: -8.0% (-2,578 MW) • March 2001: -9.2% (-2,967 MW) • April 2001: -9.0% (-2,866 MW) • May 2001: -10.4% (-3,595 MW)

  21. Impact of Conservation If 10,000,000 households shut off two 100 Watt light bulbs at peak time, it will result in a demand saving of 2,000 MW = 4 Big Power Plants

  22. Future Forecast • June could be ugly • July/August are better • 2002 is much better • 2003 could be awash in power • Energy and air quality are now on the forefront of everyone’s minds

  23. Energy/Land UseImplications • Power plants • Water supply lines • Roads • Transmission lines • Natural gas pipelines

  24. Energy/Land UsePlanning Implications • Power plants • Difficult to forecast location • Complex issues normally resolved successfully in licensing case • Planning best handled from a private developer and land management perspective

  25. Energy/Land UsePlanning Implications • Transmission lines • Determine need for new facilities • CEC’s OII • WGA’s TL needs study • CEC/LLNL environmental constraints study • Determine land management constraints

  26. Energy/Land UsePlanning Implications • Natural gas pipelines • Determine need for new facilities • CEC’s Natural Gas White Paper • Industry proposals • CEC’s power plant gas demand forecast • Determine land management constraints

  27. Interstate Pipeline Proposals

  28. Intrastate Pipeline Proposals

  29. Energy/Land UsePlanning Proposal • Need to work together • Energy needs • Land management constraints • Propose to initiate process in Fall 2001

  30. Energy/Land UsePlanning Proposal • Objective: meet reasonable energy facility needs in a manner sensitive to safety, environmental, and land management constraints

  31. Questions?

More Related