CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use Implications...

CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION

Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply

and Land Use Implications

BLMNational Lands

ConferenceDavid Maul

Chris TookerCalifornia Energy Commission

June 13, 2001


Topics

• California’s Electricity System Overview

• Current Supply Activity

• Governor’s Executive Orders• Land Use Implications• Proposal to Work Together


California Energy Commission

• State licensing authority• 50 MW+ thermal power plants• Related facilities• Time certain process• Public process• Comprehensive review


California’s Electric System• Over 1,200 electrical generators• Over 38,000 miles of transmission

lines• Linked to western North America• 12.9 million customers• Average use - 624 gigawatt hours / day• Projected peak demand - 58,000 MW• 40% of western U.S. market


The Interconnected Western Grid

Northwest

Utah

Arizona

ColoradoID-SPP

BC Hydro Alberta

New Mexico

Wyoming

Southern Nevada

Palo Verde

Page 1


Peak Load and Capacity Growth in California

462 615 621 672

53,335

54,658

52,195

50,189

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

1996 1997 1998 1999

Year

MW

Cumulative Capacity Additions since 1995 Actual Peak Load Since 1995


WASH.+18.3%

ORE.+16.7%

IDAHO+24.3%

NEV.+50.6% UTAH

+23.6% COLO.+23.1%

ARIZ.

+30.4%

TEXAS

+18.0%

FLORIDA+16.8%

GEORGIA+20.2%

N.D.-0.8%

IOWA+3.3%

W. VA.+0.7%

MAINE+2.0%

MASS.+2.6%

R.I.-1.3%

CONN.-0.2%

N.Y.+1.1%

PA+0.9%

Slowest-growing/shrinking statesFastest-growing states

A Country in TransitionPercentage changes in population from April 1, 1990 through July 1, 1999


Aging FacilitiesPowerPlants

(#)

PowerPlants

(%)

Capacity(MW)

Capacity(%)

Total 971 53,000

Facility Age

Over 40 128 13.2 17,200 32.1

Over 30 181 18.6 26,000 48.6


Non-Coincident Peak Demand Reserve Margins1993 - 1998


California Summer 2001 Coincident Peak DemandUnder Different Temperature Probabilities

And A Functional Competitive Market(MW)

Total Available Supply61,184 MW

Supply LessExpected Outages


California Summer 2001 Coincident Peak DemandUnder Different Temperature Probabilities

And “Outages” Equal to Jan. 11, 2001(MW)

Total Available Supply61,184 MW

Supply LessOutages Reported by CAISO

on Jan. 11, 2001


Power Plants Off-Line

• 1999: 1000 - 5000 MW• 2000: 2000 - 10,000 MW• 2001: 10,000 - 15,000 MW


Options to Resolve Crisis• Conservation

– operations– investment funds

• Increased Generation– peakers– repowers/retool/rerates– baseload– new sites

• Market– debt– market structure– correct market dysfunctions

• Need balanced strategy


Recent Actions - Supply• New natural gas generation:

– 28 plants approved - 11.283 MW– 1,284 MW to be on-line by 7/1/01– 17 plants in review - 7,335 MW– 46 applications within 3 months - 11,664 MW

• New renewable generation– 217 MW on-line this summer

• State (DWR) contracting for power


Power Plants Approved by the CECSince April, 1999

PROJECT / OWNER Size(MW)

Location(County) Status

Sutter Power 500 Sutter Expected On-Line Date July 1, 2000

Los Medanos 559 Contra Costa Expected On-Line Date July 1, 2000

La Paloma 1,048 Kern Under Construction 65% Complete

Delta Energy 880 Contra Costa Under Construction 40% Complete

High Desert 720 San Bernardino Under Construction 1% Complete

Moss Landing 1,060 Monterey Under Construction 15% Commplete

Sunrise 320 Kern Expected On-Line Date August 1, 2001

Huntington Beach 450 Orange Under Construction

Blythe 520 Riverside Under Construction 1% Complete

Pastoria 750 Kern Financing

Midway-Sunset 500 Kern Financing

Mountainview 1,056 San Bernardino Financing

Otay Mesa 510 San Diego Financing

Three Mountain 500 Shasta Financing

Contra Costa 530 Contra Costa Financing

Elk Hills 500 Kern Financing

Total New CapacityApproved 10,403


Emergency Power Plants Approved by CEC

Project / Owner (MW) Location(County) Status

United Golden Gate (51) San Mateo No site controlHanford SPPE (99) Kings Being modified

Wildflower Larkspur 90 San Diego Under ConstructionWildflower Indigo 135 Riverside Under ConstructionAlliance Century 40 San Bernardino Under ConstructionAlliance Drews 40 San Bernardino Under Construction

Calpine King City 50 Monterey Under ConstructionGWF Hanford 99 Kings Under ConstructionCalpine Gilroy 135 Santa Clara Under Construction

Pegasus Energy 180 San Bernardino FinancingCalpeak Escondido 49 San Diego FinancingRamco Chula Vista 62 San Diego Financing

Total 880


Recent Actions - Process

• Established 4-month process– Peakers

• Established 6-month process– Clean projects

• Prepared Developers Guide– Available on CEC Website at:– www.energy.ca.gov

• Conducted Siting Process OII


Governor’s Executive Orders

• 6 Executive Orders• Issued February 8• Focused on power plants

– Planning– Siting– Permitting– Construction– Operation


Governor’s EO’sLicensing

• Maintained 12-month AFC• Maintained 6-month AFC• Reestablished 4-month AFC• Established 21-day emergency

permit• Established 45-day amendment• Established 7-day amendment


1 in 5 Year Peak Demand1 in 2 Year Peak Demand

California Load/Resource Balance(ISO area with 7% Operating Reserve at Coincident Peak)

Existing generation excludes2,500 MW for outages


Value ofEnergy Efficiency

• Reduction in Expected Peak Demand– Jan 2001: -6.2% (-2,091 MW)– Feb 2001: -8.0% (-2,578 MW)– March 2001: -9.2% (-2,967 MW)– April 2001: -9.0% (-2,866 MW)– May 2001: -10.4% (-3,595 MW)


Impact of Conservation

it will result in a demand saving

of 2,000 MW = 4 Big Power Plants

If 10,000,000 households

shut off two 100 Watt light bulbs at peak time,


Future Forecast

• June could be ugly• July/August are better• 2002 is much better• 2003 could be awash in power• Energy and air quality are now on the

forefront of everyone’s minds


Energy/Land UseImplications

• Power plants– Water supply lines– Roads

• Transmission lines• Natural gas pipelines


Energy/Land UsePlanning Implications

• Power plants– Difficult to forecast location– Complex issues normally resolved

successfully in licensing case– Planning best handled from a private

developer and land management perspective



• Transmission lines• Determine need for new facilities

– CEC’s OII– WGA’s TL needs study– CEC/LLNL environmental constraints

study• Determine land management

constraints



• Natural gas pipelines• Determine need for new facilities

– CEC’s Natural Gas White Paper– Industry proposals– CEC’s power plant gas demand forecast

• Determine land management constraints


Interstate Pipeline ProposalsName

New /expansion

Capacity(MMcfd)

On-line Date

Rocky Mountain Supply RegionKern River Gas Transmission Expansion

Expansion135900

July 1, 2001May 2003

Ruby Pipeline New 750 Late 2003Western Canadian Supply Region

PG&E-GTN Pipeline ExpansionExpansionExpansion

42169

1,000

November 2001Summer 2002

Within Next 10 YearsTuscarora Gas Transmission Company PipelineExpansion 96 Early 2003

Southwestern Supply RegionQuestar Southern Trails Pipeline• To California Border• In California to Long Beach

NewNew

90126

Spring 2002Undetermined

El Paso Plains-All American Pipeline New 230 Late August 2001Transwestern Pipeline Expansion 150 Winter 2001North Baja Pipeline New 500 September 2002Otay Mesa Generating Company Pipeline New 110 September 2002Sonoran Pipeline• Phase I to CA Border• Phase II in CA to Bay Area

NewNew

7501,500

Summer 2003Undetermined


Intrastate Pipeline ProposalsName of Pipeline New /

ExpansionCapacity(MMcfd)

On-line Date

PG&E Intrastate Pipeline -Redwood Path (Line 400-401) fromMalin -Baja Path (Line 300) from Topock

ExpansionExpansion

400200

UndeterminedUndetermined

SoCal Gas Intrastate Pipeline -Kramer Junction -Wheeler Ridge (from Kern/Mojaveand PG&E) -North Needles (from Transwestern) -Line 85 (California Production) - Line 6900 from SoCal Gas to SDG&E

ExpansionExpansionExpansionExpansionExpansion

20085504070

December 2001December 2001December 2001December 2001

July 2001

SDG&E Intrastate Pipeline Various proposals under

consideration in a CPUC proceedingExpansion 140 - 220 Undetermined


Energy/Land UsePlanning Proposal

• Need to work together– Energy needs– Land management constraints

• Propose to initiate process in Fall 2001


Energy/Land UsePlanning Proposal

• Objective: meet reasonable energy facility needs in a manner sensitive to safety, environmental, and land management constraints


Questions?

CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use Implications...

Documents

Transcript of CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Outlook for California’s Electricity Supply and Land Use Implications...