110 likes | 271 Views
Eastern Interconnection Planning Analysis of 2030 Resources. Phase I Results from EIPC Study New England Electricity Restructuring Roundtable December 9, 2011 David Whiteley, Executive Director - EIPC. We have come a long way ….
E N D
Eastern Interconnection Planning Analysis of 2030 Resources Phase I Results from EIPC Study New England Electricity Restructuring Roundtable December 9, 2011 David Whiteley, Executive Director - EIPC
We have come a long way … • The stakeholder process is functioning in a robust and active manner • Consensus based • Active and intense dialog • It would be hard to find a way to improve the excellent working relationship between the EISPC and EIPC • Phase I analysis is complete • The final Phase I report will be finalized by December 16, 2011
Stakeholder Steering Committee Chair: Roy Thilly Vice Chair: Kevin Gunn Jon Norman, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure (Ontario) Brenda Harris, Occidental Ryan Kind, Missouri Office of the Public Counsel Sonny Popowsky, Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate Steve Gaw, Wind Coalition (SPP - Renewables) Michael Goggin, American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) Mark Volpe, Dynegy, Inc. (MISO - Non-Renewables) Mark Brownstein, Environmental Defense Fund Andy Oliver, Land Trust Alliance Beth Soholt, Wind on the Wires Herb Healy, EnerNOC, Inc. (ISO-NE, Canada - Demand-Side Resources) Chris Lyons, Constellation Energy (MISO - Non-DSM) Dennis Sobieski, Hess Corporation (PJM) Paul Malone, Nebraska Public Power District (SPP) Tim Noeldner, WPPI Energy (Co-op TDU) Maryam Sharif, New York Power Authority (NYISO) David Boyd, MN Doug Nazarian, MD Jim Volz, VT Lib Fleming, SC Kevin Gunn, MO Jon McKinney, WV Ed Finley, NC Eric Callisto, WI Garry Brown, NY Elana Wills, AR Will Kaul, Great River Energy (MISO) Stu Nachmias, Con Edison (NYISO) Paul Napoli, PSEG (PJM)
Resource Expansion Futures • “Business as Usual” • This Future assumes that present trends continue into the future based on historical indices • Federal Carbon Constraint: National Implementation • Federal Carbon Constraint: Regional Implementation • Aggressive Energy Efficiency, Demand Response, Distributed Generation and Smart Grid • National RPS: National Implementation (top down) • National RPS: State and Regional Implementation • Nuclear Resurgence • Combined Federal Climate and Energy Policy Future
Phase II – 3 Scenarios • “Business As Usual” No new policies or regulations on carbon, no new RPS, no new EPA regulations [F1S17] • “National RPS” Regionally Implemented 30% National RPS [F6S10] • “Combined Federal Climate and Energy Policy” National carbon constraint with 42% reduction in 2030 and 80% in 2050, 30% national RPS, increased Energy Efficiency/Demand Response/Distributed Generation/SmartGrid [F8S7]
2030 Energy Source: 3 Scenarios EI generation as a percent of demand, EI energy demand , and EI CO2 emissions are shown below for 2030
Phase II – Transmission Analysis Phase II will be conducted in 2012 The study year will be 2030 Transmission additions required to meet reliability standards Focus on 230kV and above Consider HVAC and HVDC solutions Include a production cost run for each resulting system Include an estimate of the costs for generation and transmission expansion in each scenario
This presentation was given at the 12.9.2011 New England Electricity Restructuring Roundtable, “Renewable Energy-Related Transmission for New Englanders: by Land and by Sea”convened and moderated by Raab Associates, Ltd.