HomeMy WebLinkAbout17 Power Point Purchase Power Budget vs Actual FY19 Review
WORKSHOP ITEM #17FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals March 4, 2020
FY19 Forecast purchase power costs•Proposed resources•Future renewable resources•Diversified power supply plan•Conservation as first resource•Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) target,
State requirement•Mission statement and objectives•by Board on November 15, 2017Approved •FY18 & FY19 Budget included the Purchase Power Plan•BACKGROUND / HISTORY Purchase Power Budget
vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals
NEW INFORMATION 15.8%-$10,896,172 $12,937,523 Total Energy Purchases14.0%-$66.66$77.51)MWh($/2.1%-163,467 166,911 )MWhTotal Energy Consumption (% ChangeActualBudget Description FY19
Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals otal energy purchases about $2M or 16% under budgetT•budgetunder 14% , MWhper purchase power costs to $66.66 Reduced
•UAMPS performed better than budget across all projects•net gain to Districtinto market for generation UAMPS sold excess •usage eduction in energy R•and resource costs were less than
forecastedconsumption Energy •Summary Budget vs Actual FY19•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals Budgeted vs Actual purchase power cost for FY19•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals) for FY19MWhnergy (EBudgeted vs Actual Monthly •
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals 2019 peak load was 34.3 MW in December•2010 to 2019-Monthly Peak MW •
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals), Actual vs Budget 2005 to 2019MWhEnergy (•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals Actual Purchase Power Resources used for FY19•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals 2030–Resources (MWh) by Year 2014 •
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals 60% RPS; 2030thru 2028 •2027; 50% RPSthru 2025 •2024; 44% RPSthru 2021 •2017 thru 2020;
33% RPS•2014 thru 2016; 25% RPS•2011 thru 2013; 20% RPS•RPS compliance periods and targets•free resources by 2045-remaining 40% from carbon2030 and mandates the % by 60RPS to 2018,
SB100 increased In •In 2015, SB350 increased RPS to 50% by 2030•2 (2011) setting an RPS of 33% by 2020-Bill X1) requirements began with Senate Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals and District usepumping excludes water ” “retail salesdefinition of CEC •Energy Commission
(CEC)is based on retail energy sales as defined by the California RPS •REC amounts •Estimated RPS performance for FY19•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals starting in 2021 have not been determined by CARBallocations Allowance •Cap and Trade has been
extended to 2030 by AB398 (2017)•roject Butte Wind PIn FY20, $1,503,495 allocated to Horse •Allowance revenues offset purchase of renewable resources•CARB Cap and Trade Summary•
NEW INFORMATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals the Board at a future meetingMore work needs to done and staff proposes to bring a workshop
item to •during daylight hours with Red Mesa Solarfree -Preliminary analysis shows the District approaching 100% carbon•starting in 2022 with Red Mesa Solarfree -free today and will
be 75% carbon-Overall the District is 66% carbon•Very complex and varies by time of day and seasonally•Carbon performance of portfolio•
FISCAL IMPACT 14.0%-Difference$66.66 $77.51 Purchase Power Cost ($/MWh)15.8%-Difference($2,041,352)$ Over/(Under) Budget $10,896,172 $12,937,523 Total Power Purchase Cost($317,414)$0
UAMPS Operating Margin$16,453 $0 Miscellaneous Costs$1,160,001 $990,057 NV Energy-Transmission $10,037,133 $11,947,467 Total Energy SupplyActualBudgetPower Purchase Costs Actual for
FY19vs Summary Budget •ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs
RECOMMENDATION FY19 Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Purchase Power Budget vs Actuals Review report and provide comments to staff•
NEW INFORMATION Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19
NEW INFORMATION 2.1%-166,911163,46720192.1%-165,095161,54820180.6%163,421164,32420171.6%-163,778161,08420167.6%-164,729152,21020153.9%-164,713158,24520143.0%-163,082158,14920134.3%-162,000154,9762012
0.9%-162,000160,54420110.9%-160,000158,49420103.4%-163,220157,69520090.9%-161,604160,18920080.9%156,963158,38420074.7%150,168157,22820060.9%145,382146,6192005% DifferenceBudgetActualYear
Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 2.5%-Average difference over 15 years is +/•MWhs–vs. Budgeted Energy Purchases Actual •
NEW INFORMATION 3.1%156,71420192.9%-151,94420183.3%156,56220177.6%151,52720161.2%-140,81920153.3%-142,58420140.9%147,38920132.6%-146,01420121.6%149,97820110.5%147,64720101.0%-146,87520090.8%148,30520
082.0%147,09120075.8%144,2692006136,3392005Previous Year, %MWhEnergy Sales, YearChange from Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 2.6%-Average change
in sales over 15 years is +/•MWhs-Sales to Customers Energy •
NEW INFORMATION 2.5%160,6833,96920194.3%158,7906,84620183.1%161,5174,95520174.3%158,3246,79720165.9%149,6018,78220157.9%154,87412,29020144.5%154,2806,89120133.3%150,9964,98220124.1%156,4076,42920114.
4%154,4836,83620104.4%153,6776,80220095.0%156,1137,80820084.7%154,3427,25120075.8%153,2108,94120064.6%142,8526,5132005Delivered to SubsSubstationsLossesYearDelivered to Purchase Power
Budget vs ActualsFY19Purchase Power Budget vs ActualsFY19 Average loss per year is 4.5%•MWhs-System Losses Distribution •