1 / 12

Irrigation Hardware

Irrigation Hardware. Proposed Adoption of Deemed Savings Regional Technical Forum January 5 th , 2010. Pictures: ETO. Background. Deemed savings were originally approved by the RTF in September 2005. Scale of the Measures

shel
Download Presentation

Irrigation Hardware

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. Irrigation Hardware Proposed Adoption of Deemed Savings Regional Technical Forum January 5th, 2010

  2. Pictures: ETO

  3. Background • Deemed savings were originally approved by the RTF in September 2005. • Scale of the Measures • About 1 aMW and $1,000,000 in CRC credits were claimed in the 2007 and 2008. • Idaho Power claimed 1.87 aMW at a cost of $1.6 million in 2007 and 2008 for its “menu” option. • The RTF reviewed deemed savings in July 2009 • Original savings based on engineering estimates, but the RTF did not have the supporting calculations/information on the original savings estimates • RTF subcommittee established to: • Review/revise deemed savings estimates with documentation of assumptions • Recommend in-field studies/evaluations to true-up estimates

  4. Background: The Existing Measures

  5. 8 gpm 17 gpm 1.7 gpm 10 gpm Source: Utah State University

  6. The RTF Subcommittee • Meetings • October 19th, 2009 • November 4th, 2009 • December 16th, 2009 • December 21st, 2009 Members • Brad Miller (BPA) • Bruce Cody (RTF) • Dennis Merrick (IPC) • Danielle Gidding (BPA) • Hallie Gallinger (PacificCorp) • Jim Williams (RTF) • Mike Darrington (IPC) • Tom Osborn (BPA) • Quentin Nesbitt (IPC) • Dick Stroh (BPA) • Ted Light (ETO) • Adam Hadley (RTF) • Rick Rumsey (Rocky Mt Pwr) Summary of Recommendations • Revised deemed savings values • Documented engineering estimates • Input assumptions based on: • Available studies • Experience of the group • Based on literature review , technology, and experience of the group, the subcommittee believes the engineering calculations and savings estimates are appropriate • No specific field studies were identified • Revise Measure Costs

  7. Available Studies • Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey (2003), Volume 3, Special Studies, Part 1 • US Department of Agriculture • Issued November 2004. • An Evaluation of Wheelmove Irrigation Systems Nearing the End of Practical Life in the Uintah Basin of Utah • Robert Hill ,et al, Utah State University • May 8, 2007 • Evaluation of low pressure center pivots, stationary laterals, spray losses, and reservoir tillage • Dennis C. Kincaid (Kimberly , Idaho) • Leak Prevention • Dorrel C. Larsen, University of Idaho • January 1991 • Nozzle Management and Leak Prevention for Sprinkler Irrigators • D. C. Larsen and T. S. Longley (University of Idaho) • Feb 1981 • Irrigation Uniformity • Bradley A. King, Jeffrey C. Stark, and Dennis C. Kincaid (University of Idaho)

  8. Deemed Savings – Method and Major Assumptions

  9. Inputs – Continued

  10. Baseline Factor Assumption • Issue: These are mostly maintenance/repair measures so it’s difficult to determine a consistent baseline leakage level or application uniformity. • Some farmers are already performing this maintenance on their own in a timely manner • In this “market segment”, the baseline is a good components, so baseline leakage level would be near zero. • Other farmers are waiting to perform the maintenance • In this “market segment”, the baseline is a leaky system, savings would be 100% of estimate for the estimated life (5 years in most cases). • Many farmers in-between • Proposed Solution: Baseline Factor set at 75% • Assumes the program participants consist of • 25% - farmers who regularly maintain their system • 75% - farmers who have not maintained their systems on their own • This assumption is supported by irrigation equipment dealers reporting that sales have increased for listed measures included in utility programs

  11. Results

  12. What we need from the RTF: • A decision regarding the deemed savings, measure life, and costs: • Approve, Deny, Modify, Table, …? • Acknowledge that each utility should adjust savings estimates based on unique characteristics (i.e. pumping lift, hours of operation) of service territory

More Related