Avista Corporation · NYSE:AVA
Avista — Technical Presentation (August 2020)
103 slides from Avista's technical presentation, Aug 6, 2020
Slide 1: 2021 Electric Integrated Resource Plan TAC Meeting No. 2 Agenda
2021 Electric Integrated Resource Plan Technical Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2 Agenda Thursday, August 6, 2020 Virtual Meeting- 9:00 AM PST Topic Time Staff Introductions & IRP Process Updates 9:00 Lyons Natural Gas & RNG Market Overview 9:30 Pardee Break 10:45 Natural Gas Price Forecast 11:00 Br
Slide 2: TAC Introductions and IRP Process Updates
2021 Electric and Natural Gas IRPs TAC Introductions and IRP Process Updates John Lyons, Ph.D. Second Technical Advisory Committee Meeting August 6, 2020
Slide 3: Updated Meeting Guidelines
Updated Meeting Guidelines • Gas and electric IRP teams working remotely, but still available by email and phone for questions and comments • Some processes are taking longer remotely • Virtual IRP meetings until back in the office and able to hold large group meetings • TAC presentations, notes, wo
Slide 4: Virtual TAC Meeting Reminders
Virtual TAC Meeting Reminders • Please mute mics unless speaking or asking a question • Use the Skype chat box to write questions or comments or let us know you would like to say something • Respect the pause • Please try not to speak over the presenter or a speaker who is voicing a question or thou
Slide 5: Integrated Resource Planning
Integrated Resource Planning • Required by Idaho, Oregon and Washington* every other year • Guides resource strategy over the next twenty + years • Current and projected load & resource position • Resource strategies under different future policies – Resource choices – Conservation measures and prog
Slide 6: Technical Advisory Committee
Technical Advisory Committee • The public process piece of the IRP – input on what to study, how to study, and review of assumptions and results • Wide range of participants involved in all or parts of the process – Ask questions – Help with soliciting new members • Open forum while balancing need t
Slide 7: 2020 Electric IRP Meetings – IPUC
2020 Electric IRP Meetings – IPUC • AVU-E-19-01 https://puc.idaho.gov/case/Details/3633 • Telephonic public hearing on August 5, 2020 • August 19, 2020 comment deadline, September 2, 2020 response • Overview of topics discussed at July 9, 2020 virtual public workshop: – Moving away from coal – Cost
Slide 8: 2021 Natural Gas IRP TAC Schedule
2021 Natural Gas IRP TAC Schedule • TAC 1: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 • TAC 2: Thursday, August 6, 2020 (Joint with Electric TAC) • TAC 3: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 • TAC 4: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 • TAC 5: February 2021 – TAC final review meeting if necessary • Natural Gas TAC agendas, prese
Slide 9: 2021 Electric IRP TAC Schedule
2021 Electric IRP TAC Schedule • TAC 1: Thursday, June 18, 2020 • TAC 2: Thursday, August 6, 2020 (Joint with Natural Gas TAC) • Economic and Load Forecast, August 2020 • TAC 3: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 • TAC 4: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 • TAC 5: Thursday, January 21, 2021 • Public Outreach Meet
Slide 10: Process Updates
Process Updates Economic and load forecast delay • Special meeting 1:00 – 3:30 pm PST on Tuesday, August 18 or Wednesday, August 19, 2020 to cover the forecasts AEG Conservation Potential Assessment and Demand Response Studies – delayed from TAC 2 • AEG has developed baseline assumptions, market pro
Slide 11: Today's TAC Agenda
Today’s TAC Agenda 9:00 – Introductions & IRP Process Updates, Lyons 9:30 – Natural Gas & RNG Market Overview, Pardee 10:45 – Break 11:00 – Natural Gas Price Forecast, Brutocao 11:30 – Lunch 12:30 – Upstream Natural Gas Emissions, Pardee 1:30 – Break 1:45 – Regional Energy Policy Update, Lyons 2:15
Slide 12: Natural Gas Market Overview
Natural Gas Market Overview Tom Pardee, Natural Gas Planning Manager Second Technical Advisory Committee Meeting August 6, 2020
Slide 13: Units
Units Common Gas Units 1 Bcf 1 Dth 1 Therm kWh 302,062,888 293.001 29.300 MWh 302,063 0.293 0.029 2
Slide 14: Avista gas supply and pipeline map
NGTL System Avista Electric Territory Station 2 (Production and Gathering Systems) Avista Natural Gas Territory AECO Electric Power Plants Sumas Kingsgate Gas Transmission Network Northwest Pipeline Stanfield Receipt Point Jackson Prairie Storage (LDC Owned) Malin 2
Slide 15: Avista's Supply
Avista’s Supply • Natural Gas LDC Side – 10% contracted from US supply basins – 90% contracted from Canadian supply basins • Electric Side – 100% contracted from Canadian supply basins 2
Slide 16: US Demand
US Demand US Gas Demand % US Gas Demand 140 100% 90% 120 80% 100 70% 80 60% bcfd 50% % of Demand 60 40% 40 30% 20% 20 10% 0 0% 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 Residential C
Slide 17: US Supply
US Supply US Gas Supply 100% 140 90% 80% 120 70% 100 60% 50% 80 bcfd bcfd 40% 60 30% 20% 40 10% 20 0% 0 2010 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028 2031 2034 2037 2040 Rockies San Juan Gulf Coast Gulf of Mexico Permian Fort Worth Northeast West Coast Production Canadian Net Imports LNG Imports Alaska Mid-Con
Slide 18: Canadian Supply and Demand
Canadian Supply and Demand Canadian Gas Demand Canadian Supply 30 100% 25 98% 96% 20 bcfd 94% 15 bcfd 92% 10 90% 5 88% 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029 2032 2035 2038 0 2010 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028 2031 2034 2037 2040 WCSB Eastern Canada Residential Commercial Industrial Power LNG Exports Pi
Slide 19: North American LNG Export Terminals
North American LNG Export Terminals Approved, Not Yet Built U.S. Jurisdiction & Status @ FER - Approved, Under Construction © FERC Approved, Not Under Construction @ warn sus. coast Guard Export Terminals UNITED STATES APPROVED - UNDER CONSTRUCTION - FERC 1. Hackberry, LA: .71 Bofd (Sempra~Cameron L
Slide 20: North American LNG Exports
35 North American LNG Exports 30 25 20 Bcf per Day 15 10 5 - Cove Point Elba Island Sabine Pass Cameron Freeport Corpus Christi Golden Pass Calcasieu Pass Kenai Woodfibre LNG LNG ELA Generic LNG ETX Generic LNG WLA Generic Costa Azul LNG Canada LNG Western Canada Generic 9 *WM does not assume Jordan
Slide 21: North America Natural Gas Long-Term View
North America Natural Gas Long-Term View 2020 H1 Census Region Map West West Midwest Northeast Pacific Mountain West North East North Middle New England Central Central Atlantic Total Demand by Census Region 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 Bcf per Day 8.00 West South East South South Atlantic Central Centra
Slide 22: Power Generation and Transport demand
Power Generation and Transport demand Transport Power Generation 0.50 3.00 0.45 0.40 2.50 0.35 2.00 0.30 Bcf per Day Bcf per Day 0.25 1.50 0.20 0.15 1.00 0.10 0.50 0.05 - - Mountain Pacific Mountain Pacific 2 Source: Wood Mackenzie
Slide 23: West demand of Res-Com-Ind
Residential West demand of Res-Com-Ind 2.00 1.80 1.60 1.40 Bcf per Day 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 Industrial 0.40 3.50 0.20 3.00 - 2.50 Port of Kalama – NW Bcf per Day Pacific Mountain 2.00 1.50 Innovation Works 1.00 Commercial 1.20 0.50 - 1.00 0.80 Bcf per Day Source: Wood Mackenzie Pacific Mountain 0.60
Slide 24: Wood Mackenzie Disclaimer
Wood Mackenzie Disclaimer • The foregoing [chart/graph/table/information] was obtained from the [North America Gas Service]™, a product of Wood Mackenzie.” • Any information disclosed pursuant to this agreement shall further include the following disclaimer: "The data and information provided by Woo
Slide 25: US Natural Gas Storage
Us Natural Gas Storage Historical Comparisons Stocks Year ago 5-year average billion cubic feet (Bcf) (07/24/19) (2015-19) 07/24/20 07/17/20 netchange implied flow Bef %change Bcf % change 70s 693 13 13 591 19.5 626 128 815 799 16 168 669 218 687 18.6 196 190 6 6 155 26.5 176 114 Pacific 313 314 2 2
Slide 26: Rig Counts
Rig Counts Canadian Rig Count History 700 600 500 400 # of Rigs 300 US Rig Count History 200 1,800 100 1,600 0 1,400 1,200 # of Rigs 1,000 OIL GAS MISC 800 600 400 200 0 Oil Gas Misc 15
Slide 27: Production and Drilling efficiency
Production and Drilling efficiency 2
Slide 28: Historic Cash prices
Historic Cash prices (Jan. 1997 – July 2020) $20.00 $18.00 $16.00 $14.00 $12.00 $10.00 $ per MMBtu $8.00 $6.00 $4.00 $2.00 $0.00 17
Slide 29: Upstream Emissions
Upstream Emissions Tom Pardee
Slide 30: Upstream Emissions
Upstream Emissions • Use based greenhouse gas emissions at the point of combustion and include upstream methane emissions • Link for Natural Gas Advisory Committee information on upstream methane: https://www.nwcouncil.org/energy/energy-advisory- committees/natural-gas-advisory-committee 2
Slide 31: Global Warming Potential
Global Warming Potential 5th Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Greenhouse Gas GWP – 100 Year GWP – 20 Year CO2 1 1 CH4 34 86 N2O 298 268 Global warming potential (GWP) factors for conversion 2 to CO2 equivalents (CO2e) https://www.c2es.org/content/ipcc-fifth-assessment-repo
Slide 32: Upstream Emissions Sources and Estimates
Upstream Emissions Sources and Estimates • Rockies emissions – The EPA estimates all leakage through a bottoms up analysis. It will estimate leaks based on equipment operated as designed and combines these values to determine an overall rate of 1%. The emissions and sinks study is published yearly a
Slide 33: WSU Natural Gas Methane Study
WSU Natural Gas Methane Study • Sponsored by EDF and utilities to estimate the leakage of distribution systems • National project and estimated a loss of 0.1 – 0.2 percent of the methane delivered nationwide • Western region contributes much less as compared to the East • “Out of 230 measurements, t
Slide 34: LDC Upstream Emissions
LDC Upstream Emissions Avista Specific Natural Gas Combustion Lbs. GHG/MMBtu Lbs. CO2e/Mmbtu CO2 116.88 116.88 CH4 0.0022 0.0748 N2O 0.0022 0.6556 Total Combustion 117.61 Upstream CH4 0.313406851 10.66 Total 128.27 Upstream Emissions Avista's Purchases Emissions Location 0.77 89.72% Canada 1.00 10.2
Slide 35: Electric Upstream Emissions
Electric Upstream Emissions Avista Specific Natural Gas Combustion Lbs. GHG/MMBtu Lbs. CO2e/Mmbtu CO2 116.88 116.88 CH4 0.0022 0.0748 N2O 0.0022 0.6556 Total Combustion 117.61 Upstream CH4 0.304065693 10.34 Total 127.95 Upstream Emissions Avista's Purchases Emissions Location 0.77 100.00% Canada 1.0
Slide 36: Renewable Natural Gas (RNG)
Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) 2
Slide 37: What is Renewable Natural Gas (RNG)?
What is Renewable Natural Gas (RNG)? Renewable Natural Gas = Natural Gas 2
Slide 38: Why does RNG matter?
Why does RNG matter? Climate Change Solution • Natural gas plays critical role for meeting aggressive green house gas (GHG) reductions goals, RNG even more so! • Utilizes existing infrastructure • Advantages of RNG – “De-carbonizes” gas stream – Gives customers another renewable choice 2
Slide 39: Carbon Intensity
Carbon Intensity Fuel Pathway Carbon Intensity wae 26 Diese]* 102.01 Gasoline* 99.78 Fossil CNG? 78.37 Landfill CNG* 46.42 WWTP CNG* 19.34 MSW CNG* -22.93 Dairy CNG! -276.24 “California Code of Regulation Title 17, §95488, Table 6. Carbon intensity for WWTP is the average of two WWTP pathways. tCali
Slide 40: RFS and LCFS Effect on RNG Value
RFS and LCFS Effect on RNG Value RIN = renewable identification number Source: CARB Source: EPA 2
Slide 41: What are the challenges & barriers?
What are the challenges & barriers? • California RNG market ($30+/Dth v. $2/Dth) – Vehicle emission incentives shut-out other potential end users – Producers see the pot of gold in California • Financing for producers – RIN market is volatile – No forward pricing for RNG RINs in carbon market – Vehi
Slide 42: WA RNG Report (HB 2580)
Existing Projects Near Term Projects WA RNG Report (HB 2580) Medium Term Projects Dth 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 Cedar Hills Roosevelt South Landfills Wastewater Dairy Municipal Food Food Landfills Wastewater Dairy Municipal Landfill (King Landfill Treatment treatment digester
Slide 43: ID RNG NREL Estimates
ID RNG NREL Estimates Total Potential Annual Production = 32 Bcf Source - Anaerobic MMBtu per Year Landfills 3,712,221 Wastewater Treatment 6,196,531 Agriculture Manure 20,220,571 Source-Separated Organics (Solid Waste) 2,311,354 Total 32,440,676 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL Biofuels A
Slide 44: RNG $ per Dth/MMBtu
RNG $ per Dth/MMBtu ID - WA 2035 Premium Avista Owned and Operated Estimate ($ / Dth) RNG - Landfills $7 - $10 RNG - Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTP) $12 - $22 RNG - Agriculture Manure $28 - $53 RNG - Food Waste $29 - $53 Source: Promoting RNG in WA State 2
Slide 45: Natural Gas IRP
Natural Gas IRP A detailed level of RNG understanding and evaluation process will be included in the Natural Gas IRP TAC #3 meeting on September 30, 2020 2
Slide 46: Natural Gas Price Forecast
Natural Gas Price Forecast Michael Brutocao, Natural Gas Analyst Second Technical Advisory Committee Meeting August 6, 2020
Slide 47: Henry Hub Expected Price Methodology
Henry Hub Expected Price Methodology • Expected Henry Hub prices derived from a blend of forward market prices on the NYMEX (as of 6/30/2020) and forecasted prices from the 2020 Annual Energy Outlook (EIA) and two consultants 2020 – 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 – 2045 NYMEX 100% 75% 50% 25% - EIA/AEO -
Slide 48: Henry Hub Expected Price and Forecast Blending
Henry Hub Expected Price and Forecast Blending 3
Slide 49: Henry Hub Expected Price and Average Annual Forecasts
Henry Hub Expected Price and Average Annual Forecasts 4
Slide 50: Stochastic Price Forecasting Methodology
Stochastic Price Forecasting Methodology • Evaluate a set of potential future outcomes based on the probability of occurrence – Expected Price used as the input – At each period, random price adjustments follow a lognormal distribution based on the Expected Price • It is common practice to use logno
Slide 51: Sample Stochastic Price Draws
Sample Stochastic Price Draws 6
Slide 52: Stochastic Price Draws
Stochastic Price Draws $30.00 $25.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 w4ayzeyaqQ Aad $ $5.00 $0.00
Slide 53: Stochastic Prices (Results from 500 Draws)
Stochastic Prices (Results from 500 Draws) 8
Slide 54: Levelized Stochastic Prices (500 Draws)
Levelized Stochastic Prices (Results from 500 Draws) 9
Slide 55: Stochastic Prices (Results from 1000 Draws)
Stochastic Prices (Results from 1000 Draws) 10
Slide 56: Levelized Stochastic Prices (1000 Draws)
Levelized Stochastic Prices (Results from 1000 Draws) 11
Slide 57: Prices by Gas Hub (Henry Hub Expected Price + Basis)
Prices by Gas Hub (Henry Hub Expected Price + Basis) 12
Slide 58: Levelized Prices 2022-2041
Levelized Prices 2022-2041 13
Slide 59: Levelized Prices 2022-2045
Levelized Prices 2022-2045 14
Slide 60: Regional Energy Policy Update
2021 Electric IRP Regional Energy Policy Update John Lyons, Ph.D. Second Technical Advisory Committee Meeting August 6, 2020
Slide 61: Production and Investment Tax Credits
Production and Investment Tax Credits • Production tax credit $15/MWh adjusted for inflation ($25/MWh for 2019) for 10 years for wind construction started by 12/31/20 • Investment tax credit for new solar construction drops from 30% in 2019 – 26% in 2020 – 22% in 2021 – 10% from 2022 onward • Will b
Slide 62: State and Provincial Policies
State and Provincial Policies State/Province No Coal RPS Clean Energy/Carbon Goal Alberta Yes Yes Yes Arizona No Yes No British Columbia Yes Yes Yes California Yes Yes Yes Colorado No Yes Yes Idaho No No No Montana No Yes No Nevada No Yes Goal New Mexico No Yes No Oregon Yes Yes Yes Utah No Goal No
Slide 63: Washington
Washington • Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA) SB 5116: – No coal serving Washington customers by end of 2025 – Greenhouse gas neutral by 2030, up to 20% alternative compliance – 2% cost cap over four-year compliance period – 100% non-emitting by January 1, 2045 – Social cost of carbon for new
Slide 64: Washington
Washington • HB 1257: Clean Buildings for Washington Act – Develop energy performance standards for commercial buildings over 50,000 square feet (2020 – 2028) “… to maximize reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from the building sector” – By 2022, natural gas utilities must identify and acquire al
Slide 65: Oregon
Oregon Executive Order 20-04 • New GHG reduction goal – 45% below 1990 levels by 2035 – 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 • Directs 16 Oregon agencies to “exercise any and all authority and discretion” to reach GHG reduction goals and “prioritize and expedite” action on GHG reductions “to the full exten
Slide 66: Natural Gas & Electric Coordinated Scenario
2021 Electric and Natural Gas IRPs Natural Gas & Electric Coordinated Scenario James Gall/Tom Pardee Second Technical Advisory Committee Meeting August 6, 2020
Slide 67: Scenario Goal
Scenario Goal • Understand impact to electric resource planning if customers switch from natural gas to electric service • Scenario Proposal: – By 2030: 50% of Washington Residential & Commercial customers – By 2045: 80% of Washington Residential & Commercial customers • Potential Scenarios: – Hybri
Slide 68: Converting Natural Gas Load to Electric Load
Converting Natural Gas Load to Electric Load Electric Electric Natural Gas End Use Efficiency Temperature Service (therms) (kWh) Provider 3
Slide 69: WA Res/Com Natural Gas Load Forecast
4 MDth 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 WA Res/Com Natural Gas Load Forecast
Slide 70: Customer Penetration Forecast
5 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 0.0% 2020 2020 2021 2021 2022 2022 2023 2023 2024 2024 2025 2025 2026 2026 2027 2027 2028 2028 2029 2029 2030 2030 2031 2031 2032 2032 2033 2033 2034 2034 2035 2035 2036 2036 2037 2037 2038 % Natural Gas Customer Reduction (WA Only) 2038 2039 2
Slide 71: End Use Efficiency
End Use Efficiency Efficiency @ 5 Degrees End Use @ 5 Degrees 160% Process, 5.0% 140% Water Heat, 10.0% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% Space Heat, 20% 85.0% 0% Water Heat Space Heat Process End Use @ 35 Degrees Efficiency @ 35 Degrees 160% Process, 10.0% 140% 120% Water Heat, 100% 30.0% 80% 60% Space Heat, 6
Slide 72: Energy Conversion Factor kWh per Dth
Energy Conversion Factor Use 300 temperature point 250 estimates for 200 conversion kWh per Dth efficiency 150 y = -3E-06x4 + 0.0007x3 - 0.0438x2 - 0.7097x + 259.49 100 R² = 0.9775 Curve fit to smooth out steps 50 0 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Degree F 7
Slide 73: WA Res/Com Natural Gas Load Forecast
WA Res/Com Natural Gas Load Forecast 4,500 Total WA MDth Total WA MDth (after fuel swithing) 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 MDth 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 8
Slide 74: Electric Peak Estimation Methodology
Electric Peak Estimation Methodology • Natural gas is typically daily nominations, while electric is instantaneous. – Hourly flow metering is available for some areas • Sampled large gate-station hourly instantaneous natural gas flow data • Use sample data to estimate hourly natural gas load from 20
Slide 75: Peak to Energy Load Factor
Estimated Load Factors (2015-19) 6 Average High Low 5 Peak to Energy Load Factor 4 3 2 1 - 10
Slide 76: Hourly Electric Load History
Hourly Electric Load History 2015-2019 Control Area Load + WA LDC as Electric 5,000 CA Load + NG Control Area Load 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 Megawatts 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 - 11
Slide 77: Eastern Washington Electric Service Providers
Eastern Washington Electric Service Providers EIA reported retail sales for 2018 Scenario assumes Avista will receive 75 percent of electric conversions Inland Power & Light Company 11% Modern Electric Water Company 3% Vera Irrigation District #15 3% City of Cheney - (WA) 2% Electric Kootenai Av ist
Slide 78: Annual Conversion Load Forecast
Annual Conversion Load Forecast 1,000 Annual Avg Peak 900 800 700 600 aMW / MW 500 400 300 200 100 - 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2020 IRP Forecast for 2030 absent fuel conversion: Peak: 1,762 MW 13
Slide 79: 2030 Monthly Load Forecast
2030 Monthly Load Forecast 450 Energy Peak 400 350 300 amW / MW 250 200 150 100 50 - Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 14
Slide 80: Scenario Analysis- Conversion Rates
Scenario Analysis- Conversion Rates 300 250 200 kWh per Dth 150 100 Current Technology Hybrid Future 50 High Efficiency Future 0 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Degree F 15
Slide 81: Scenario Analysis- Electric Energy
Scenario Analysis- Electric Energy 1000 900 Current Technology Hybrid Future 800 High Efficiency Future Average Megawatts 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 16
Slide 82: Scenario Analysis: Electric December Peak Load
Scenario Analysis: Electric December Peak Load 1000 900 Current Technology Hybrid Future 800 High Efficiency Future 700 Megawatts 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 17
Slide 83: Scenario Analysis: Natural Gas Demand
Scenario Analysis: Natural Gas Demand 4,500 Base LDC WA Forecast Hybrid Future Current Technology/High Efficiency Future 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 MDth 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 - 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2
Slide 84: Next Steps
Next Steps • Input into PRiSM model to determine resource selection and cost – Estimate cost meeting CETA requirements – Estimate cost using least cost methodology – Estimate emissions savings – Estimate $/tonne • Conduct electric resource adequacy study if time permits 19
Slide 85: Washington Vulnerable Populations & Highly Impacted Communities
2021 Electric IRP Washington Vulnerable Populations & Highly Impacted Communities James Gall, IRP Manager Second Technical Advisory Committee Meeting August 6, 2020
Slide 86: Identifying Communities or "Customers"
Identifying Communities or “Customers” Highly Impacted Vulnerable Communities Populations – Cumulative Impact Analysis – Use Washington State Health – Tribal lands Disparities map • Spokane • What is disproportionate on a scale of 1 to 10? • Colville • Avista proposes areas with a – Locations should
Slide 87: Environmental Health Disparities Map
Environmental Health Disparities Map https://fortress.wa.gov/doh/wtn/wtnibl/ Department of Health data is divided up by Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) Code 3
Slide 88: Environmental Health Scoring
Environmental Health Scoring From WA Department of Health Circle areas match definition of vulnerable population, although access to food & health care, higher rates of hospitalization are not expressively included but are an indication of poverty 4
Slide 89: Selected Vulnerable Populations
Selected Vulnerable Populations Kettle Falls CT Kettle Falls “Large” Resource Legend Natural Gas Biomass Hydro Wind Little Falls Data is shown Long Lake Solar Nine Mile Northeast by combined Post Falls score Monroe St Upper Falls Boulder Park Palouse Adams Neilson Rattlesnake Flat 5
Slide 90: Spokane Area "Avista" Vulnerable Populations
Resource Legend Spokane Area “Avista” Vulnerable Natural Gas Biomass/Other Populations Hydro Wind Solar Northeast Data is shown Boulder Park by combined Upriver (QF) score BP Community Solar Upper Falls Monroe Street Waste-to-Energy (QF) 6
Slide 91: IRP Metrics (From Last TAC Meeting)
IRP Metrics (From Last TAC Meeting) Metric IRP Relationship Energy Usage per Customer • Expected change taking into account selected energy efficiency then compare to remaining population. • EE includes low income programs and TRC based analysis which includes non-economic benefits. Cost per Custome
Slide 92: IRP Metrics (From Last TAC Meeting)
IRP Metrics (From Last TAC Meeting) Metric IRP Relationship Reliability • Calculate baseline for each distribution feeder and • SAIFI: System Average Interruption match with communities Frequency Index • MAIFI: Momentary Average Interruption • Estimate benefits for area with potential IRP Frequency
Slide 93: Energy Use Analysis Results
Energy Use Analysis Results • Uses five years of customer billing data • Median income over the same period is used to estimate affordability • Separated electric only vs electric/gas customers – Future enhancement include single/multi family homes, and manufactured homes 9
Slide 94: Energy/Cost Analysis
Energy/Cost Analysis Electric Only Customers Area Fuel Type Energy Use Avg Bill Income % Income Vulnerable Population Areas Electric 998 KWh $98 $42,730 2.8% Other Areas Electric 1,010 KWh $100 $58,834 2.0% Note: Mean energy use is statistically significantly different when removing energy use data
Slide 95: Vulnerable Populations
Vulnerable Populations Electric Only Customers- Energy % of Income Spokane Area 11
Slide 96: Vulnerable Populations
Vulnerable Populations Gas/Electric Only Customers- Energy % of Income Spokane Area 12
Slide 97: Reliability Data- CAIDI
Reliability Data- CAIDI Measure of resilience- minutes of outages per event Excludes Major Event Days (MED) 13
Slide 98: Reliability Data- CEMI
Reliability Data- CEMI Measure of reliability- Events per Customer 14
Slide 99: Vulnerable Area vs Non Vulnerable Areas
Vulnerable Area vs Non Vulnerable Areas CAIDI CEMI 250 200 Minutes per Event 150 100 Vulnerable Areas Non-Vulnerable Areas 50 0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5 yr Avg Note: 5 yr Average differences are statistically significantly different 15
Slide 100: CAIDI- By Feeder Type
CAIDI- By Feeder Type Note: Avista has no vulnerable areas with urban feeders 16
Slide 101: CEMI- By Feeder Type
CEMI- By Feeder Type Mixed Feeders Rural Feeders 5.0 5.0 Vulnerable Areas Vulnerable Areas Non-Vulnerable Areas Non-Vulnerable Areas 4.0 4.0 Events Events 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5 yr Avg 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5 yr Avg Suburban Feeders 5.0 Vulnerable Areas Non-Vul
Slide 102: Avista's Washington Power Plant Air Emissions
Avista’s Washington Power Plant Air Emissions Washington SO2 Emissions Washington NOx Emissions 0.030 3.0 0.025 2.5 0.020 2.0 lbs/MWh lbs/MWh 0.015 1.5 0.010 1.0 0.005 0.5 - - 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Washington Hg Emissions Washington VOC Emissions 0.00005 0.300 0.00005 0.0
Slide 103: TAC Input
TAC Input • What other metrics can we provide in an IRP to show vulnerable populations and highly impacted communities are not harmed by the transition to clean energy 19