Columbia River System Operations EIS PPC March Member Forum March 4, 2020 1
CRSO EIS governments 6 30+ entities Tribes, Federal agencies, and alternatives state and local 2
An approach to river management that balances multiple objectives & perspectives Flood Risk Management Cultural Water Supply Resources Environmental and Socioeconomic Resources Navigation & Hydropower Generation Recreation Fish & Wildlife 3
14 CRS Multiple Purpose Dams (projects) 4
CRS Operations Objectives 5
Range of Alternatives No Action MO1 MO2 MO3 MO4 Preferred Alternative 6
Preferred Alternative Structural Measures 1) Upgrade Spillway Weirs to Adjustable Weirs when they are due for replacement 2) Modify Lower Granite Trap 3) Modify Bonneville Ladder Serpentine Weir 4) Lamprey Passage Structures 5) Turbine Strainer Lamprey Exclusion 6) Bypass Screen Modifications for Lamprey 7) Lamprey Passage Ladder Modifications 8) Improved Fish Passage Turbines at John Day 9) No annual installation of fish screens at non-collector projects 7
Preferred Alternative Operational Measures (1 of 2) 1) Flex Spill to 125% in spring, per the Flex Spill Agreement 2) Summer, reduce spill mid-August to surface spill, per the Flex Spill Agreement 3) Early transport for fish 4) Larger MOP and MIP range (matches 2019 and 2020 operations), end MOP/MIP when summer spill is reduced or ends; John Day larger winter operating range; John Day April/May higher range to disrupt avian predator nesting 5) Allow contingency reserves to be carried within juvenile fish passage spill 6) Modified draft and refill at Libby (FRM measure) 7) Update system FRM calculations at Grand Coulee 8) Decrease Grand Coulee draft rate used in planning drawdown (0.8 ft/day) 8 9) Operational constraint for ongoing Grand Coulee maintenance
Preferred Alternative Operational Measures (2 of 2) 10) Lake Roosevelt additional water supply (45 kaf/yr) 11) Implement Sliding Scale summer draft at Libby and Hungry Horse 12) Cease installation of fish screens at non-collector projects — Ice Harbor, McNary, and John Day 13) Dworshak uses FCRC or VDL logic to draft slightly deeper for drawdown 14) Grand Coulee refills to 1283 by end of October (instead of end of September) 15) Zero Generation operations at night Oct 15-Feb 28, daytime mid-Dec to Feb 28 16) Operate turbines (LCOL and LSN) within and above 1% efficiency during fish passage season 9
Generation Impacts “FIRM” SYSTEM ENERGY (aMW) TOTAL CRS ENERGY SUPPLY (aMW) NAA= 7100 NAA = 8300 -300 -160 PA PA -130 -290 MO1 MO1 450 MO2 370 MO2 -1100 MO3 -730 MO3 -1300 MO4 -870 MO4 7000 7400 7800 8200 8600 9000 6200 6700 7200 10
Power Reliability Loss of Load Probability (LOLP) = Risk of Power Outages Council Target = LOLP 5.0% ~once every 20 years NAA = LOLP 6.6% NAA 6.6% PA 6.5% MO1 11.2% MO2 5.0% MO3 13.9% MO4 29.6% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 11
Replacement Resources MO1 (MW) MO2 (MW) Gas -440 Gas 560 OR OR Solar Solar -250 1200 + + Avoided build Demand Response -600 DR 600 DR + + Wind 0 -660 Wind -1000 1000 3000 5000 -1000 1000 3000 5000 MO3 (MW) MO4 (MW) Gas Gas 1120 3240 OR OR Solar Solar 2550 5000 + + DR DR 600 600 + + Wind Wind 1275 0 Battery -1000 1000 3000 5000 -1000 1000 3000 5000 12
Power Reliability Impact Costs (Base Case) RANGE OF ANNUAL REPLACEMENT COSTS (millions/year) To return LOLP (Risk of Power Outages) to NAA Level MO1 $160M $34M *Avoided build -$140M -$19M MO2 MO3 $230M $420M MO4 $200M $580M -$200M $M $200M $400M $600M $800M 13
BPA Transmission Reliability Impact Costs Transmission Infrastructure to return to LOLP (Risk of Blackout) at NAA Level ($millions/per year) MO1 $3.8M $3.9M MO2 No replacement resources, no increase in peak output MO3 $9.1M $13.0M MO4 $12.0M $19.0M $.0M $5.0M $10.0M $15.0M $20.0M 14
Bonneville Wholesale Power Rate Pressure Average BPA Wholesale Power Rate Pressure Potential Range of BPA Wholesale Power Rate (Base Analysis, Gas or Zero-Carbon) (including rate sensitivities) 0.40% PA PA 2.70% 2.70% MO1 6.00% MO1 6.00% 8.60% 14.40% MO2 MO2 1.90% -0.8% -0.7% MO3 MO3 9.60% 19.30% 4.10% 50.30% MO4 MO4 23.50% 25.30% 17.90% 40.80% -5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% -10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% Potential Range of BPA Wholesale Power Rate - Rate Sensitivities Potential BPA Wholesale Power Rate $/MWh – BASE CASE Least Cost Zero-Carbon PA $34.56 PA 0.4% to 2.7% MO1 $36.64 - $37.53 MO1 6.0% to 6.4% 9.5% to 14.4% MO2 $34.28 MO2 -0.7% to 1.9% MO3 $37.88 - $41.23 MO3 4.1% to 10.7% 13.7% to 50.3% 15 MO4 $42.70 - $43.32 MO4 17.9% to 25.7% 25.3% to 40.8%
Annualized Transmission Rate Pressure Transmission Rate Pressure relative to NAA PA 0.09% MO1 0.62% 0.74% MO2 0.11% MO3 1.50% 1.30% MO4 1.60% 1.90% 0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 16
Retail Rate Effects: Weighted Average & Range Change relative to NAA (MO1-MO4) for whole region, with larger impact to customers receiving BPA-supplied power MO1 (%) MO2 (%) 20.00% 20.00% 15.00% 15.00% +0.71% +0.75% +1.03% -0.39% -0.48% -0.58% 10.00% 10.00% 5.90% 5.20% 3.40% 5.00% 5.00% 0.46% 0.46% 0.57% 0.00% 0.00% -0.48% -0.62% -1.10% -1.30% -2.00% -2.40% -5.00% -5.00% Residential Commercial Industrial Residential Commercial Industrial 20.00% MO3 (%) MO4 (%) 18.00% 20.00% +3.6% +4.1% +5.2% 15.00% 13.00% 15.00% 13.00% 11.00% 10.00% 9.10% 10.00% 8.10% +2.9% +4.1% +3.0% 5.00% 5.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.04% 0.05% 0.62% 0.07% 0.13% -5.00% -5.00% Residential Commercial Industrial 17
Retail Rate Effects: Weighted Average & Range Change relative to NAA (PA) for whole region, with larger impact to customers receiving BPA-supplied power PA (%) 20.00% 15.00% +0.33% +0.36% +0.47% 10.00% 5.00% 1.90% 1.30% 1.10% 0.00% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% -5.00% 18
Regional Economic Productivity Effects Change in Outputs (millions/year) and Employment -440 jobs PA -$68M MO1 +560 jobs MO2 $82M -4900 jobs MO3 -$740M -4100jobs MO4 -$630M -$800M -$600M -$400M -$200M $M $200M 19
Share of Households Experiencing >5% increase in rates Relative to NAA, Highest across portfolios PA 0.00% MO1 0.00% MO2 0.00% MO3 21.00% MO4 26.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 20
Share of Businesses Experiencing >5% increase in rates Relative to NAA, Highest across portfolios PA 0.00% MO1 0.50% MO2 0.00% MO3 15.00% MO4 37.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 21
Regional Cost of Carbon Compliance (millions/year) PA -$47M $9M MO1 -$16M $88M MO2 -$37M -$194M MO3 $34M $623M MO4 $10M $561M -$300M -$100M $100M $300M $500M $700M 22
CRSO Analysis of Fish Impacts – Methods and Models Used for Analysis Species/ESU/DPS Analysis Methods Upper Columbia River Spring-Run Chinook Salmon COMPASS, NWFSC Life Cycle Model (Wenatchee Population), TDG Tool, CEM, Qualitative Upper Columbia River Steelhead COMPASS , TDG Tool, CEM, Qualitative Upper Columbia River Coho Salmon UC Spring Chinook surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Columbia River Sockeye Salmon UC Spring Chinook surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Upper Columbia Summer/Fall Chinook Salmon CEM, Qualitative Middle Columbia Spring-Run Chinook salmon UC Spring Chinook surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Middle Columbia Steelhead UC Spring Chinook surrogate, CEM, Qualitative COMPASS, CSS cohort model, NWFSC Life Cycle Model (Upper Salmon, South Fork Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon Salmon, and Middle Fork Salmon MPGs), CSS Life Cycle Model (Grande Ronde/Imnaha MPG) TDG Tool, CEM, Qualitative COMPASS, CSS cohort model, CSS Life Cycle Model (Grand Ronde/Imnaha MPG), TDG Snake River Steelhead Tool , CEM, Qualitative Snake River Coho Salmon Snake River Spring Chinook Salmon Surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Snake River Sockeye Salmon Snake River Spring Chinook Surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon CEM, Qualitative Lower Columbia Spring Chinook Salmon Snake River Spring/Summer-Run Chinook Salmon Surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Lower Columbia Steelhead Snake River Steelhead Surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon Snake River Spring Run Chinook Salmon Surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Chum Salmon Snake River Spring Run Chinook Salmon Surrogate, CEM, Qualitative Pacific Eulachon CEM, Qualitative Green Sturgeon CEM, Qualitative Pacific Lamprey CEM, Qualitative 23 American Shad Qualitative
Columbia River System – Areas of quantitative model coverage CSS and NOAA use various combinations of hatchery and natural origin fish Both models use fish tagged specifically for study purpose as well as other studies 24
Life Cycle Model Analysis Comparative Survival Study NMFS - Life Cycle Model Primary Metrics Used in CRSO Analysis • In-River Survival • Powerhouse Encounter Rates • Travel Time (fish and water) • Transportation Rates • 25 Smolt to Adult Return Rates
Recommend
More recommend
