1 / 9

Lake Superior Regulation Task Team Meeting # 10 September 20-21, 2010

Hydropower TWG Briefing. Lake Superior Regulation Task Team Meeting # 10 September 20-21, 2010. Coping Zone Progress. Detailed scope of work was issued to Peter Yee

royce
Download Presentation

Lake Superior Regulation Task Team Meeting # 10 September 20-21, 2010

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. Hydropower TWG Briefing Lake Superior Regulation Task Team Meeting #10 September 20-21, 2010 Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  2. Coping Zone Progress • Detailed scope of work was issued to Peter Yee • Preliminary spreadsheets capturing plant parameters and defining the three coping zones developed for the St. Marys River Plants, Niagara River plants, International Reach of the St. Lawrence plants, and Canadian reach plants. • Questionnaires sent to hydropower operators in late July to glean specific information for defining the coping zones for each plant. • Plant Parameters include: • Levels, outflows, frequency, duration, rate of change, seasonality • Headwater and tailwater elevations, operating head, elevations at specific gauges • Ice and meteorological conditions • Criteria/guidelines governing outflow regulation, peaking and ponding • Movement in/out of zones not likely caused by a single parameter alone Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  3. Coping Zone Progress • Five responses from operators have been received as of September 5th. • Revised spreadsheets are due by September 30th. • This will help to clarify when hydropower operators begin to experience gradual to more significant problems, actual/potential mitigation actions, and inform the modeling and information needed for planners to deal with more extreme hydrologies. • The final report, including documentation of the methods used and all data and information sources used to define the coping zones, is due on March 1st, 2011. Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  4. Electricity Price Forecasts Study • RFP issued on August 23rd; two proposals received by the deadline. • Evaluation of proposals/awarding of contract within two weeks. • Final report submitted no later than six weeks from the date of contract award. • Short-term (2-yr) and long-term (30-yr) price forecasts will enable modelers to evaluate changes to economic benefits from hydropower production at Sault Ste. Marie and Niagara Falls generating stations from alternative regulation plans. • Care is being taken to ensure accurate forecasts are obtained, as different prices could affect hydropower’s rank-order preference for alternative plans. • Study will also consider differential effects of alternative plans on GHG emissions, and how carbon taxes and cap-and-trade schemes could have different effects on electricity prices and the value of hydropower Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  5. Hydropower Performance Indicators Maximize Power Production Operate the turbines at the point of best efficiency to produce the most MW per unit of water. Flows that exceed this generate about the same amount of power, with an increased likelihood of damage to equipment. Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  6. Hydropower Performance Indicators Maximize Value of Power Production Plans that provide higher outflows during times when power is more valuable and in winter (flexibility for ice formation), and lower flows during the off-peak times and season will enable more power to be produced during the higher value periods. Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  7. Hydropower Performance Indicators Flow Stability A plan that minimizes month-to-month flow variations is preferable to one with large fluctuations both in terms of the amount and value of generation, as well as enabling maintenance to be scheduled, and losses from unplanned outages minimized. Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  8. Hydropower Performance Indicators Ice Cover Formation A properly formed ice cover allows flows to be maximized during the winter because flow friction and obstruction are minimized. A good regulatory policy would include rules that restrict operations to allow ice formation Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

  9. Contextual Narrative • Updated to address various points raised by Mark Dunning review and from comments of last study board meeting. • Latest update regarded as final version of hydropower section for the contextual narrative, assuming no adjustments needed from results of electricity price forecast and peaking and ponding studies. • A four page synopsis of the narrative has been written. Joint Lake Superior Regulation Task Team – Study Board Meeting #16 September 20-21, 2010

More Related