CPS Energy Water Use

Louisa Eclarinal, P.G.

December 18, 2013CATEE

Outline

1. CPS Energy Overview

2. Water Resources and Requirements

3. Water Supply Management and Strategies

– Historical –visionary shift from GW to reuse

– Fleet diversification to include renewables and demand efficiency

– Water conservation and drought management measures

4. Challenges 2

Overview

3

• Largest municipally-owned electric and gas utility in the U.S.• Oldest energy utility in Texas – Founded in 1860• 717,000 electric customers• 323,000 natural gas customers• 3,500 employees• Nearly $10B in assets with highest credit ratings among municipal

utilities is the U.S.• $250 million annual return to owner, the City of San Antonio

• Outstanding customer satisfaction track record• Lowest electric rates of all major cities in the U.S. – 2011 Residential

rates averaged about 9¢/kwh

J.D. Power Survey – Southern Region 2009 2010 2011 2012

Electric Residential Customers 1st 3rd 2nd 1st

Gas Residential Customers 1st 1st 1st 1st

Generation Capacity

• Leon Creek – 184 MW Net (Gas)

• V. H. Braunig/Arthur von Rosenberg/CT – 1549 MW Net (Gas)

• O. W. Sommers/J. T. Deely – 1670 MW Net (Gas & Coal)

• J.K. Spruce 1&2 – 1340 MW Net (Coal)

• Rio Nogales - 750 MW Net (Gas)-Guadalupe County

• STP 1&2 – 1080 MW Net (Nuclear)-Bay City

Total Generation Capacity – 6573 MW Net

4

Renewable Energy

Sweetwater 3 & 4 Wind

Covel Gardens Landfill Gas

Penascal Wind

Papalote Creek Wind

Cedro Hill Wind

Dos Rios & Somerset Solar

Blue Wing Solar

Desert Sky Wind

Los Vientos Wind

Commercial Operation

Wind 1059 MW

Solar 44.3 MW

Landfill Gas 9.6 MW

Total 1113 MW

Development / Construction

Landfill Gas 4 MW

Solar 400 MW

Total 404 MW

Gas22.4%

Coal36.2%

Nuclear24.5%

Demand Reduction

2.9%

Wind10.5%

Solar2.9%

Landfill Gas0.3% Purch Pwr

0.4%

Generation Portfolio

Projected Generation 2020

Traditional sources = 83.4% Renewable sources = 13.7%Demand Reduction = 2.9%

Traditional sources = 89.5% Renewable sources = 9.4%Demand Reduction = 1.1%

2012 Generation

CY 2012 Generation ~ 29.4 TWh CY 2020 Generation ~ 32.4 TWh

Gas19.3%

Coal43.8%

Nuclear25.2%

Demand Reduction

1.1%

Wind9.0%

Solar0.2%

Landfill Gas0.2%

Purch Pwr1.2%

Low & Non-emittive: 56% Low & Non-emittive: 68%

6

Withdrawal vs Consumption

Withdrawal Consumption

7

7% Domestic

1% Commercial

81% Irrigation

3% Livestock

4% Industrial

1% Mining

3% Ther-moelectric

Total 1995 US Fresh Water Consumption

13% Domestic

1% Com-mercial

39% Irrigation

1% Livestock6% Industrial

1% Mining

39% Ther-moelectric

Total 1995 US Fresh Water Withdrawal

Power Plant Water Usage

8

State of Texas:

• Vast majority of water in electric generation process is cycled through power plant for cooling and returned to reservoir

• 2% of statewide water use; an important but relatively small amount on a statewide basis

*Source: Texas Water Development Boardhttp://www2.twdb.texas.gov/ReportServerExt/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx?%2fWU%2fSumFinal_RegionReport&rs:Command=RenderRetrieved12/4/2013

Municipal28%

6% Manu-factur-

ingMining

1%Steam Electric 2%

Irrigation 61%

Live-stock2%

2011Texas Water Use Survey*

How Electricity is Made - Spruce

9

CPS Energy Water Supplies

CPS Energy: • Bexar County Plants: 16 power generating units located at 4 Bexar Co. sites• Braunig and Calaveras Power Stations 60% of total generating capacity

- Water Supplies• Edwards Aquifer GW permit-3046 acre-ft /yr (Leon Creek)• Surface water rights-99,000 acre ft/yr

Braunig -12,000 acre-ft surface water from San Antonio River Calaveras -27,000 acre-ft surface water from Calaveras Creek watershed 60,000 acre-ft surface water and treated sewage effluent from

the San Antonio River• SAWS reuse water contract 50,000 acre-ft /yr (Calaveras)• Potable Water (SAWS and East Central for Braunig and Calaveras)

10

Historical Water Management Strategies

• Post 1950s Drought of Record: Visionary shift from Edwards GW to reuse water

• 1967 Ordinance 35228 “providing for use of city’s sewage effluent for cooling water purposes”

• Pioneer use of treated effluent for power plant cooling

• Secure supply with ACRD contract in late 90s-$2M/year

11

Braunig Lake Construction1964

12

Braunig Lake Power Station (2012)- 1966, 1968, 1970, 1999, 2010

13

Calaveras Lake Construction 1967

14

15

Calaveras Lake (2012) – 1972, 1974, 1977, 1978, 1992, 2010

15

Edwards Aquifer Water Use

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

CPS Energy Strategic Move to Reuse 1962-2012Total Edwards Aquifer Water Saved 983,365 acre-ft

(320 billion gallons)

Groundwater (Acre-FT) Reuse/SA River Diversion (Acre-FT)

16Dry years: 2005-2006, 2009, 2011

17

Growth in Edwards Aquifer Water Use (1940-2011)

1940

1942

1944

1946

1948

1950

1952

1954

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

CPS ENERGY EDWARDS USE CPS Lake Water/Reuse SA EDWARDS WATER USE REGIONAL EDWARDS USE Net Generation (Bexar County Plants)

Total Regional Edwards Water Use

City of SA Edwards Water Use

CPS Energy Edwards Use

Regional Edwards use consists of Bexar, Comal, Hays, Medina and Uvalde Counties

Tho

usan

ds (

acre

-fee

t)

CPS Energy Lake / Reuse Water

Water Management Strategies

• Strategic Water Resources Plan• SAWS Reuse Contract (Increased to

50K/year in 2011)• Renewables –increased to 15% of

capacity by 2020• Demand reduction- 771MW • Water Conservation• Drought Management

18

19

Water Demand Projection

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

2008 2010 2012 2015 2020 2025 2030

acre-feetgallons/MWhCPS Energy Water Intensity

Water Intensity Total Acre-Feet

Summit COD

JTDeely Retirment

Renewables and STEP Water Savings

20

2,500

7,500

12,500

17,500

22,500

27,500

Cumulative Historical Water Savings

CPS STEP (2005-2012)

CPS Renewables (2002-2012)

acr

e-f

eet

26,342

Water Conservation

• Re-circulate cooling water in reservoir for reuse

• Recycle all waste streams-99%

• Evaluate low water usage processes when considering capital investments (water efficient gas turbines instead of gas steam turbines)

• Investigate new water treatment technologies

• Increase power plant efficiency

• Encourage energy conservation and provide rebates to reduce growth in demand for generation

21

Drought Management

• Drought Management Plan updated

• Peak load demand reduction

• Strategic scheduling of river pumping operations and enhanced monitoring for optimal lake level management

• Increased communication and collaboration with San Antonio Water System, San Antonio River Authority and South Texas Water Master

• Participate in industry working groups to develop best practices for drought preparedness (e.g., ERCOT)

• Examine dispatching units based on water use or availability; moving water between power plant cooling reservoirs

• Monitor market conditions-may purchase wholesale power

22

23

Challenges

A. TAP Lawsuit

• Recent court ruling against TCEQ – Over-allocation of water rights in the basin caused

death of 23 whooping cranes

• TCEQ can’t issue new water rights

• 5th Court of Appeals granted stay – Additional arguments in August 2013

• Potential impact on existing SW rights

24

Challenges (cont.)

B. Endangered Species

• Proposed federal listing of 5 mussels species in Central TX River basin by USF&W

• UT Bureau of Economic Geology/Texas Comptroller’s Office Study (draft) on economic impact of listing – Would result in $107M losses for CPS Energy for non-

generation at Braunig and Calaveras due to potential higher flow requirement

• Mussel studies underway by SARA and USGS

• Potential reallocation of existing surface water rights

25

Challenges (cont.)

C. Regulatory• 316 b –Cooling Water Intake Structure final rule

in Jan 2014

• New Effluent Guidelines for Steam Electric

• Thermal Discharge Limits

• Potentially limit operations at Braunig and Calaveras

• Need to assess costs and benefits

Take Away

• Early pioneer in Edwards Aquifer water conservation efforts and reuse water, partnered with SAWS and its predecessors

• Diversification, shift to renewables, and emphasis on energy efficiency keep water demand consistently low and decrease water requirements

• Continuous review and improvement of plant operation efficiencies and water management strategies

• Continued close cooperation with SAWS and other agencies allow for better management of water supplies

• Enough water supplies for future expansion and during period of prolonged drought

• Proposed regulatory and environmental requirements create challenges and uncertainties

26

27

Questions