HomeMy WebLinkAbout18 Power Purchase ReviewJ A
\ & ■
To: Board of Directors
From: Joe Horvath
Date. June 06, 2018
Subject: Purchase Power Resource Review
1. WHY THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE BOARD
This workshop item provides the Board with a discussion of the District's existing
purchase power resources and new opportunities. It also includes a response to
several statements about electric resource pricing made during public comment for
the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) Carbon Free Power Project
(CFPP) item presented at the April 4, 2018 Board meeting.
2. HISTORY
The District's actual versus budgeted purchase power costs and energy consumption
for 2017 was presented for review and discussion at the March 7, 2018 Board
meeting. As part of that discussion, staff presented summary information for all of the
District's purchase power resources out to the year 2030. The District is well.
resourced to about year 2023. However, the District can consider and evaluate
favorable opportunities for smaller amounts of carbon -free or renewable power in
advance of this time frame. After 2023, the District has more options for adding larger
amounts of resources to the purchase power portfolio. One such option was the CFPP
project which was being considered for the potential to provide an attractive balance
of rates, renewables, and reliability.
The ('FPP small modular nuclear reactor item was presented for consideration at the
April 4, 2018 Board meeting. During the public comment period, several people made
statements concerning the pricing and availability of carbon -free RPS eligible
renewable resources including biomass and utility -scale solar generation. In
summary, the following comments were made:
1. Renewable resource pricing: Several individuals had copies of a recent all -source
solicitation report prepared by Xcel Energy (Public Service Company of Colorado, dba
Xcel Energy) dated December 28, 2017. Contained within the report was a table
depicting median bid prices by generation technology. The median bid for solar with
battery storage was $38.3/MWh, wind at $19.3/MWh, and solar at $31/MWh. More
than one individual claimed that solar and other renewables are much less expensive
than the UAMPS project under consideration.
2. Utility -scale solar generation: An individual prefaced her comments by saying that
she is employed by a utility -scale solar developer, Solar Frontier, and is very familiar
with pricing on utility -scale solar projects. She asserted that she would "probably be
fired" from her position if she provided a price in excess of $40/MWh.
3. Biomass Generation: It was asserted by Mr. Steve Frisch from Sierra Business
Council that power was available from the biomass generating facility located in
Loyalton, California for under $64/MWh.
3. NEW INFORMATION
Staff is investigating carbon -free and renewable resource options to diversify and
strengthen the District's power supply portfolio. Staff is actively working with the
UAMPS to study new power supply projects including heat recovery and utility -scale
solar. UAMPS is currently investigating a utility -scale solar project in Utah with
indicative pricing in the $40/MWh range. UAMPS is also investigating a heat recovery
project in Wyoming similar to the Veyo heat recovery project. These are not a formal
projects yet, and the investigations are in a very preliminary stage, and pricing is
subject to change. We will bring more information to the Board as it becomes
available in late 2018 or early 2019.
District staff was also intent in following up on the statements made during public
comment at the April 4, 2018 Board meeting as they implied viable and cost-effective
power supply opportunities. However, investigation by staff has revealed the following
information which contradicts the assertions made during public comment:
1. Renewable resource pricing: District staff obtained a full copy of the Xcel Energy all
source solicitation report referenced in the meeting. There is a table in the report
depicting median bid prices for energy by generation technology. Staff observed that
baseload resources, consisting almost entirely of natural gas fuel sources, were listed
but without energy costs. The table listed energy costs for renewable sources only.
The median bid for solar with battery storage was listed at $38.3/MWh, wind at
$19.3/MWh, and solar at $31/MWh.
However, contained within the report are the following qualifying statements made by
Xcel Energy:
"Pricing is provided on an "as bid" basis and does not include other costs such as
resource integration costs, additional transmission network upgrade costs for
interconnection or deliverability, or credits for items like quick -start capability; that is,
these are not based on "all in" costs. "
"Finally, the Company has not yet sufficiently evaluated all of the proposals
represented in Attachment A to determine if any contain any "fatal flaws" such that
they are unlikely to achieve their proposed in-service dates."
It is clear by these statements that Xcel Energy considers these prices to be indicative
or representative only, as they do not include other costs. Per their comments, actual
pricing will likely be higher than shown in this report. It should also be noted that Xcel
Energy is a massive utility with 3.3 million customers and a load of about 24,000 MW.
Xcel Energy greatly eclipses the customers and load of all UAMPS member utilities
combined. The economies of scale available to Xcel Energy may not be available to
UAMPS or the District.
2. Utility -scale solar generation: Staff followed up by phone and email with the
individual who made the public comments about utility -scale solar pricing. During the
phone conversation she admitted that she did not work in the business development
or marketing departments and was not responsible for pricing projects. She works in
the engineering department, but was somewhat familiar with pricing. When asked
about pricing and availability of solar power in the $30/MWh range (as she seemed to
indicate by her public comments) she responded by stating that there are no projects
available at this time. She directed staff to contact an individual in the business
development department for more information. Staff followed up with a communication
to the managing director of business development, but our effort remains
unanswered.
3. Biomass Generation: The Loyalton Biomass generation plant was built in the late
1980s and remained in commercial operation until the end of 2010 when it was shut
down. American Renewable Power (ARP) bought the facility and started seeking
customers for the plant's output, including approaching District staff in mid-2017 with
price estimates above $80/MWh. ARP restarted the plant for commercial operation in
late 2017 after a seven year break. On December 13, 2017 and February 2, 20181
power sales agreements (PSA) were signed by several larger public power utilities
including Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Imperial Irrigation District,
Sacramento Municipal Utility District and others with ARP for biomass energy from
this plant. These contracts have essentially subscribed the full capacity of the plant.
The Loyalton Biomass plant PSA terms include an energy price of $97.5/MWh, a
capacity of 1810W, and a delivery term of 5 years. It should be noted that $97.5/MWh
is well above market price for any energy resource, renewable or not. Purchases
made by some of the larger publically owned utilities were done to meet biomass
procurement requirements mandated by California SB 859. The statement made
during public comment that Loyalton Biomass energy is available for under $64/MWh
is simply not in accordance with the facts of recent contracts for $97.5/MWh and the
plant appearing to be fully subscribed for at least the next 5 years.
In summary, and based on staff's investigation, several of the statements made during
the public comment period were very misleading concerning pricing and availability of
renewable resources such as biomass and utility -scale solar generation. Also, it is
very important to note that wind and solar are intermittent resources only. A balanced
and diversified power supply portfolio must include baseload, flexible electric
resources to backstop intermittent generation.
4. FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this Workshop Item.
5. RECOMMENDATION
Provide input to staff.
Joe Horvath
Electric Utility Director
Michael D. Holley
General Manager