100 likes | 202 Views
Big Utilities Little Hydro. NWHA Annual Meeting 2011. Resource Drivers. Cost RES compliance Boardman closure Build vs. Buy. Hydro’s Role. Likely to be minor High cost (especially for greenfield sites) Small projects Typically not near our territory Long regulatory lead times.
E N D
Big UtilitiesLittle Hydro NWHA Annual Meeting 2011
Resource Drivers • Cost • RES compliance • Boardman closure • Build vs. Buy
Hydro’s Role • Likely to be minor • High cost (especially for greenfield sites) • Small projects • Typically not near our territory • Long regulatory lead times
Hydro’s Advantages • It isn’t wind • Known technology • Small enough so that RFP requirements don’t apply
What projects is PGE likely to pursue • Inside our existing hydro system • Aggressive efficiency and capacity upgrades • New projects • Strategic partnership opportunities • “Too good to pass up”
Capacity and Efficiency Upgrades • Runner Replacements • Project removal
Projects inside the PGE system • Timothy Lake • Harriet Lake • Faraday Diversion Dam
Strategic partnerships • Irrigation Districts
Too good to pass up • Bowman Dam • Approx 6 mw • Infrastructure largely in place • Could be operated remotely from existing project
Conclusion • Regulatory efficiencies would help • Not all hydro is created equal not all projects need the same level of scrutiny • Real drivers are size and location