HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 AB 2514 Energy StorageAction Item #16
Future Role of Energy Storage
AB 2514 within District
February 20, 2013
Background / History
• On September 29, 2010, the Governor signed Assembly Bill
(AB) 2514
— Aimed at encouraging electric utilities to access the appropriate
levels of energy storage that may be cost-effectively implemented
— AB 2514 requires POU's to determine if it is viable and cost-effective
to procure energy storage systems for their utility
2
Background / History (cont)
• The legislation defines energy storage systems as
technology capable of:
— Absorbing energy
— Storing it for a period of time
— Thereafter dispatching the energy
• In order to be viable, the energy storage system must be:
— Cost effective
— Either reduce emissions of greenhouse gases or
— Reduce demand for peak electrical generation and
— Defer or substitute for an investment in generation, transmission, or
distribution assets
— Or improve the reliable operation of the electrical transmission or
distribution grid
3
New Information
• "Electricity Energy Storage Technology Options —A white
paper written by the Electrical Power Research Institute
(EPRI)
— EPRI drew on information from technology assessments, market
analysis, application assessments and input from storage system
vendors and system integrators
— Provides an overview of application and technology options
including updated cost and performance estimates
0
New Information
• Outlined a framework for estimating the value of energy
storage systems in the following applications:
— Photovoltaic integration
— Wind power integration
— System applications
— Utility transmission and distribution (T&D) asset management
— Commercial and industrial (C&I) applications
— Distributed energy storage near end -user loads
— Residential applications
5
M
M-e
$0.40
M
Renewaible Integrationi/T mne Shifting
UUUUCUUU� IIIIIIII��II Ills
I QIIII l I Ip�II�II
miii a VVIIU� U��I�IIIIV�uIU�� V
Combined Cyclle
Gas Turbine
Iona T4taI Cost
New Information
• The paper finds that many of the energy storage options
discussed have not been validated and are not "grid -ready"
• The District looked at our geographic location, load shape,
type of customers and existing generation portfolio to do our
review of energy storage systems
7
New Information
Truckee Load January 2012
Monthly Load Factor = 74.1%
30,000
25,000
20,000
KW
15,000
10,000
5,000
8
0
New Information
Truckee Load July 2012
Monthly Load Factor = 77.1%
25,000
20,000
KW
15,000
10,000
5,000
9
0
New Information
• Energy storage systems are currently not acost-effective
viable source for the District at this time
— High monthly load factor
— Winter peaking
— Weekend and holiday peaking
— Cost of investment in carbon -free generation
Fiscal Impact
• There is no fiscal impact resulting from this action item
11
Recommendation
a) Find that energy storage systems are not currently viable
and cost effective for the District and the District is not
adopting procurement targets at this time
b) Direct staff to reevaluate this issue not less than every
three years as required by AB 2514
12