Portland General Electric Co · NYSE:POR
Portland General Electric — Corporate Update (September 2009)
42 slides from Portland General Electric's corporate update, Sep 25, 2009
Slide 1: Integrated Resource Plan 2009
Integrated Resource Plan 2009 Seventh Stakeholder Presentation & Discussion September 25, 2009
Slide 2: IRP Process
IRP Process • Draft submitted on September 4 • Comments due October 5 – Electronic - email to [email protected] – Hard Copy – mail to: ATTN: Integrated Resource Planning Public Comments Portland General Electric Co. 121 SW Salmon St. 3WTC 0306 Portland, OR 97204 – Comments will be incorporated with fi
Slide 3: Today's Topics
Today’s Topics Transmission • Input Assumption Updates • Scoring Grid Update • Final Proposed Action Plan 3
Slide 4: PGE Transmission
PGE Transmission • Situation Assessment • Regional Transmission Planning • Cascade Crossing Project • Treatment in the IRP 4
Slide 5: Transmission Situation Assessment
Transmission Situation Assessment • The Pacific Northwest transmission system is a vital component for meeting our customer’s requirements – Renewable resources are generally remote to PGE’s system • There have been no major transmission facility additions in the PNW in the last several years – Cong
Slide 6: Transmission Situation Assessment
Transmission Situation Assessment Inter-regional Interties (commercially traded) Intra-regional Cutplanes (monitored for operations) 6 From BPA: http://www.transmission.bpa.gov/Business/Operations/Intertie/PathMap_Dec04.pdf
Slide 7: PGE Transmission
PGE Transmission • Most of PGE’s generating resources are external to PGE’s transmission system – PGE contracts for 3,393 MW of transmission capacity from BPA • In 2007 PGE added the Port Westward Plant – Integrated at PGE’s Trojan Substation • In 2009 PGE re-terminated the Beaver Plant to Trojan Su
Slide 8: Regional Transmission Planning
Regional Transmission Planning • Regional / Sub-regional Transmission Planning efforts – PGE participates in or monitors: • Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Subcommittee (TEPPC) • Northern Tier Transmission Group (NTTG) • Transmission Coordination Work Group (TCWG) • ColumbiaGrid (PGE monitors
Slide 9: Cascade Crossing Transmission Project
Cascade Crossing Transmission Project • Description • Benefits • Schedule • Modeling Assumptions • Results • Recommendations • Issues to Consider 9
Slide 10: Cascade Crossing – Overview
Cascade Crossing – Overview Project Description: • 500 kV line: – Coyote Springs to Boardman to vicinity of Warm Springs to southern end of PGE’s system – ~ 200 miles • Target capacity: – 1500 MW (single-circuit) – 2200 MW (double-circuit) – assumed and under study • Potential generation interconnec
Slide 11: Cascade Crossing – Proposed Paths
Cascade Crossing – Proposed Paths 11
Slide 12: Cascade Crossing – Benefits
Cascade Crossing – Benefits • Allows direct connection of existing and new PGE resources – Additional transmission is required to deliver new generating resources needed to meet load – Availability and cost of BPA transmission is unknown • Opportunity to integrate potential future resources near the
Slide 13: Cascade Crossing Project – Schedule
Cascade Crossing Project – Schedule 13 13
Slide 14: Cascade Crossing Assumptions
Cascade Crossing Assumptions • Evaluated independently as a transmission option – Portfolios tested with and without Cascade Crossing • Assumes BPA transmission capacity is released • Single Circuit option – $613 Million, 1500 MWs (per studies) • Double Circuit option – $823 Million, 2200 MWs (assum
Slide 15: Cascade Crossing Assumptions
Cascade Crossing Assumptions • Analysis compares cost of project against BPA transmission service for 5 Cases and 3 resource portfolios – BPA rates increase at 4% (nominal) through 2025 – then either 2.5% (Case 1), 3.2% (Cases 2-4) or 3.5% (Case 5) – 10% increase in 2015 – BPA cost includes $65.5 mi
Slide 16: Cascade Crossing Assumptions - Cases
Cascade Crossing Assumptions - Cases • Case 1 & 2 – Partner with Idaho Power on 17 mile section between Coyote and Boardman – Higher BPA growth rate in Case 2 (3.2 % vs. 2.5 %) after 2025 • Case 3 – Partner with Idaho (as above) and with 3rd party for Coyote Springs substation upgrade • Case 4 &5 –
Slide 17: Cascade Crossing Assumptions - Portfolios
Cascade Crossing Assumptions - Portfolios • Diversified Thermal with Green – Preferred portfolio – Includes Boardman, Coyote Springs, new CCCT and 323 MWs (single circuit) or 723 MWs (double circuit) of new wind (ramped in over 4-6 years) • Diversified Green – Includes Boardman, Coyote Springs, and
Slide 18: Economic Results
Economic Results Single circuit – 1500 MW Capacity Net NPV (2009$) Portfolio Diversified Thermal w/ Diversified Green w/ on- Green Diversified Green peak Energy Target 1 ($76,386) ($89,762) ($62,519) 2 ($26,551) ($39,927) ($12,684) 3 $11,026 ($798) $25,104 4 $52,543 $32,963 $58,865 5 $73,635 $54,055
Slide 19: IRP Transmission Actions
IRP Transmission Actions • Request acknowledgement of Cascade Crossing – Double circuit (proposed) – Include in Action Plan, contingent on updated economic analysis, path rating and equity partnership – Economics improve if costs shared with Idaho Power, 3rd party and equity partnership – Single cir
Slide 20: Issues to Consider
Issues to Consider • Analysis compares Cascade Crossing to unknown BPA transmission rates and availability – West of McNary ATC made available from BPA’s new McNary - John Day 500 kV line may be insufficient to meet requests – Availability and timing of BPA option uncertain • EFSC looking to IRP for
Slide 21: Other Strategic Factors
Other Strategic Factors • Cascade Crossing improves reliability • Generation interconnection request for 500 MW of wind – If customer submits associated transmission service request then single circuit line may not be adequate to satisfy requests for service • Conductoring one line initially may req
Slide 22: Today's Topics
Today’s Topics • Transmission Input Assumption Updates • Scoring Grid Update • Final Proposed Action Plan 22
Slide 23: Updated Gas Prices
Input Assumption Updates Updated Gas Prices Average of AECO and Sumas August 2009 Real levelized 2009$ Aug.'09 Feb'09 Base Case $7.24 $7.20 High $11.28 $11.28 Low $5.22 $5.21 $/MMBTU Base Case High Low 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 23
Slide 24: Updated Coal Prices
Input Assumption Updates Updated Coal Prices Power River Basin Coal Pacific NW Delivery Nominal $ Base Case High Low $/Short Ton Real Levelized 2009$ Aug.'09 Feb'09 Base Case $48.99 $49.78 High $63.18 $62.62 Low $38.20 $39.33 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 24
Slide 25: EIA Case Study Results
EIA Case Study Results Real Levelized 2009$ EIA EPA Lieberman Lieberman Bingaman Waxman Waxman Warner (HR McCain (HR Specter (HR Markey (HR Markey (HR 2191) 280) 1766) 2454) 2454) Policy Case $ 37.78 $ 29.21 $ 16.75 $ 38.24 $ 19.02 Limited Alt $ 56.92 $ 37.38 $ 17.11 $ 43.78 Limited Alt w/ CCS $ 32.
Slide 26: EIA Case Study Results
EIA Case Study Results $250 Avg Lieb/Warner Avg Lieb/McCain $200 Avg Bing/Specter Proposed Case Average Waxman Markey EPA $150 Average Waxman Markey EIA $100 $50 $- 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 RL ($2009) Lieberman Warner (HR 2191) $ 47.73 Lieberman McCain (HR 280) $ 29.09 Bingaman Specte
Slide 27: Today's Topics
Today’s Topics • Transmission • Input Assumption Updates Scoring Grid Update • Final Proposed Action Plan 27
Slide 28: Scoring Grid Update
Scoring Grid Update • Additional Metrics – Deterministic: Average of Worst 4 outcomes – Stochastic: TailVar 90 • Changed Metric – HHI shown as two individual metrics • Technology • Fuel 28
Slide 29: Portfolio Scoring Grid
Portfolio Scoring Grid Weighted Scores & Ranked Results 3. Portfolio Evaluation Scoring: Screening Deterministic Stochastic Reliability & Diversity Total Weighted Scores (a) (b) (c) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p) (q) Within Meets Cost: Risk Risk Risk Risk: TailVar Risk: TailVar Risk: Ye
Slide 30: Portfolio Scoring Grid
D iv er sif G i ed D re iv en Th er w er m sif /O i ed n- al w pe ith Th a 0 15 30 45 60 75 er k G m En re al er e n w gy /G Ta re en r ge w t D /o iv Le er as sif e ie d Bo G re D ar en iv dm er sif a n M ie th ar d ro ke Th ug t er h m 2 01 al 4 w ith W in N d at Br ur Bo id a lG ar ge as dm to an
Slide 31: Scoring Grid Update – Change in Rankings
Scoring Grid Update Change in Rankings Rank Portfolio Current July 31 Meeting Diversified Thermal with Green 1 1 Green w/ On-peak Energy Target 2 3 Diversified Thermal w/ Green w/o Lease 3 2 Diversified Green 4 4 Market 5 5 Boardman through 2014 6 7 Diversified Thermal with Wind 7 6 Natural Gas 8 9
Slide 32: Today's Topics
Today’s Topics • Transmission • Input Assumption Updates • Scoring Grid Update Final Proposed Action Plan 32
Slide 33: Action Plan Objective
Action Plan Objective The primary goal of the IRP is to identify a resource action plan, that when considered with our existing portfolio, provides the best combination of expected cost and associated risks and uncertainties for the utility and its customers. 33
Slide 34: Preferred Portfolio
Preferred Portfolio • PGE’s Preferred Portfolio – “Diversified Thermal with Green” – Preferred portfolio invests in new emissions control upgrades for existing Boardman plant, and emphasizes incremental EE, Renewables and High-efficiency Natural Gas for new resource additions • Action Plan is based
Slide 35: Action Plan Highlights
Action Plan Highlights • All EE measures identified as achievable by ETO – meets nearly half of PGE’s load growth from now thru 2020. • New renewable resources to meet Oregon’s renewable energy standard requirements on or ahead of schedule. • Demand-side resources –that can reliably deliver short-te
Slide 36: Action Plan Highlights
Action Plan Highlights • Installation of major emissions control retrofits at Boardman to comply with rules adopted last spring by Oregon EQC – Enables continued operation of low-cost resource combined with aggressive reductions that reflect some of the most stringent standards in the country • Esti
Slide 37: Proposed Action Plan
Proposed Action Plan Key Proposed Resource Actions: • Issue RFP for 122 MWa renewables – Meets 2015 Oregon RPS compliance – Found reasonable by OPUC in 2007 IRP • 214 MWa of EE by 2015 • 450 MW High Efficiency Combined Cycle Gas Plant • Up to 200 MW of flexible gas capacity resources • Boardman Emis
Slide 38: Action Plan – Energy
Action Plan – Energy Energy MWa @ Normal Hydro Action Plan 2015* 2020 PGE system load at normal weather 2,624 2,886 Remove assumed 5-yr. opt-out load (28) (28) Existing PGE & contract resources (1,850) (1,652) Remove post 2008 cumulative embedded EE 128 187 PGE Resource Target 873 1,393 Resource Act
Slide 39: Action Plan – January Capacity
Action Plan – January Capacity January Capacity MW @ Normal Hydro Action Plan 2015* 2020 PGE system peak at normal weather 4,107 4,478 Operating Reserves (approximately 6% of generation) 205 204 Contingency Reserves (6% of Load) 245 267 Remove assumed 5-yr opt outs (w/contingency reserves) (31) (31)
Slide 40: Action Plan – August Capacity
Action Plan – August Capacity August Capacity MW @ Normal Hydro Action Plan 2015* 2020 PGE system peak at normal weather 3,778 4,239 Operating Reserves (approximately 6% of generation) 205 204 Contingency Reserves (6% of Load) 225 252 Remove assumed 5-yr opt outs (w/contingency reserves) (31) (31) E
Slide 41: IRP Remaining Schedule
IRP Remaining Schedule • Draft IRP Submitted – September 4th • Conduct Additional Stakeholder Meeting September 25th • Stakeholder comments due – October 5th • File Final IRP – November 5th File Draft IRP Stakeholder Staff Issues September 4 Comments October 5 Recommendations September October Novem
Slide 42: Thank You
Please call with questions, concerns, or any follow up. Thank You! 42
Portland General Electric — Corporate Update (September 2009) on 6ix