Overview of OPA and IPSP for PEO Mississauga Chapter Bing Young, Director, Transmission Integration

Transcription

1 September 6, 2007 Overview of OPA and IPSP for PEO Mississauga Chapter Bing Young, Director, Transmission Integration

2 Today s Presentation OPA Overview Development of the IPSP Highlights of the IPSP Next Steps 2

3 OPA s Role and Mandate The Ontario Power Authority (OPA) is a not-forprofit, non-share capital corporation created by Bill 100 in late 2004 OPA came into being in Jan 1, 2005 Some of the primary mandates of the OPA are: - Forecast adequacy and reliability of electricity resources for the medium and long term - Conduct independent planning for conservation, generation, and transmission - Develop integrated power system plans for Ontario - Engage in activities in support of the goal of ensuring adequate, reliable and secure electricity supply and resources in Ontario 3

4 4 OPA Organization

5 Ontario s Integrated Power System Plan Foundation in Electricity Act and its Regulations Shaped by three government policy priorities: Creation of a conservation culture Preference for renewable sources of energy Replacement of coal-fired generation 20-year rolling plan with 3-year update cycle 5

6 Legislative Framework Minister: Issue Directives (Schedule A, s31 - Part II.2: s25.27 and s32: s25.28) Capacity from alternatives, renewable and other energy sources Combinations of energy sources and generation technologies The phasing-out of coal-fired generation facilities Development and implementation of conservation measures, programs, targets on a system-wide basis or in particular service areas OPA: Develop Forecasts (Schedule A, s28: s25.2) Forecast electricity demand and resource adequacy for the medium and long term Conduct independent conservation, generation and transmission planning OPA - Prepare Integrated Power System Plan (Schedule A, s28: s25.2) Develop an integrated system plan for generation, transmission, and conservation OEB: Review (Schedule A, s28: s25.28) Review plan to ensure compliance with Minister s directions, economic efficiency, cost effectiveness Approve / refer back to OPA in timeline directed by Minister OPA - Ensure Resource Adequacy, Reliability (Schedule A, s28: s25.2) Develop and contract for new resources through a competitive procurement process OEB approves process Minister directs timelines contract costs recoverable Take steps to facilitate the provision of services relating to conservation, efficiency, load management, the use of cleaner energy sources (including alternatives and renewables) Take steps to ensure there is adequate transmission capacity 6

7 Developing the IPSP Minister s directive has established supply mix Focus is on implementation Consultation will be open, transparent and comprehensive and will build on previous discussions Shared understanding of challenges and priorities to enable better planning Regulatory review by the Ontario Energy Board Additional approvals required for projects as applicable Gasification 250 MW Conservation and Supply Contributions by 2025 Gas & Cogen 9,400 MW Renewables 15,700 MW Conservation 6,300 MW Nuclear 14,000 MW 7

8 Development of the IPSP Minister Minister requests requests Supply Supply Mix Mix Advice Advice OPA OPA delivers delivers Supply Supply Mix Mix Advice Advice Minister Minister issues issues Supply Supply Mix Mix directive directive OPA OPA releases releases IPSP IPSP discussion discussion papers papers OPA OPA files files IPSP IPSP with with Ontario Ontario Energy Energy Board Board May 2005 Dec Jan.-Feb. June Sept.- Nov Jan.-June June Aug. OPA OPA consultation consultation on on Supply Supply Mix Mix Advice Advice Ministry Ministry consultation consultation on on Supply Supply Mix Mix Advice Advice OPA OPA releases releases IPSP IPSP Scope Scope and and Overview Overview paper paper Consultation Consultation on on OPA OPA discussion discussion papers papers OPA OPA incorporates incorporates stakeholder stakeholder input input 8

9 Two years of policy development and consultation The IPSP is the product of over two years of consultation planning. It started with public consultations in the fall of 2005 and is now heading for regulatory review at the OEB. The Plan: Recommends infrastructure development, and procurement processes Engaged the public interest in electricity through open processes Becomes a reference to evaluate future options Enables implementation to achieve policy priorities Will be updated in three years Scope of OEB review: Compliance with supply mix directive Whether plan is economically prudent and cost effective 9

10 Consultations made a significant contribution to planning Development of planning criteria Integration of renewable resources Transmission options Considerations around refurbishment and new nuclear Conservation portfolio components Load forecast Consideration related to natural gas generation Hydroelectric generation scope and incorporation Scope for purchases from Manitoba, Quebec or Labrador Role of specific technologies such as pumped storage, fuel cells Consideration of externalities 10

11 Consultations raised issues for ongoing and future consideration Impact of climate change: on forecast, on Hydro resources Emission credits, cap and trade markets, carbon taxes Suggestions on sector development Specific technologies or options 11

12 The infrastructure plan shows how to implement policy priorities Maximize feasible cost effective conservation Maximize feasible cost effective renewables Meet remaining baseload needs through refurbishment and new build of nuclear capability Replace coal by cleaner committed and planned new resources, Plan transmission for reliability, incorporation of generation, and system efficiency 12

13 13 Conservation: 5000 MW, $10B

14 14 Planned Renewable Resources : 8,000 MW, $15 Billion

15 Replace Coal Effective MW Nuclear Reduction Coal Reduction Nuclear Gain Gas Reduction Gas Gain Renewables Gain Conservation Gain Demand + Reserve Growth Effective MW Effective MW Conservation Coal Reduction Renewables Nuclear Reduction Gas Gas Reduction Nuclear Demand + Reserve Growth

16 Restore Nuclear Capability: 10,000 MW, $27 Billion Case 1A: Pickering B Refurbished Installed MW Existing Committed Planned Case 1B: Pickering B Not Refurbished Installed MW Existing Committed Planned 16

17 17 Coal to 2014

18 18 Planned Natural Gas: 2,200 MW - $3 Billion

19 19 Flexibility Options Purchases/Interconnections

20 Link with Transmission $4B Little Jackfish & East Nipigon Sudbury North Thunder Bay Area THUNDER BAY East Lake Superior Sudbury West SUDBURY North / South Manitoulin Legend Enabling Renewable Development Enabling Coal Phase Out Pickering B Refurbishment Flexibility Regional Reliability and Service Needs WINDSOR Bruce Peninsula Northern York RegionOshawa Southwest GTA Milton TORONTO Goderich KWCG Southwest Ontario Reactive Power 20

21 Connecting Renewables Little Jackfish & East Nipigon Sudbury North East Lake Superior Sudbury West SUDBURY North / South OTTAWA Manitoulin Bruce Peninsula Goderich TORONTO Legend Transmission Development Recommended WINDSOR 21

22 Reliability Projects Oshawa Kitchener-Waterloo- Cambridge-Guelph Milton Toronto Windsor-Essex 22

23 Toronto Reliability Central & Downtown Toronto THUNDER BAY Conservation, Distributed Generation and Transmission options being examined Transmission will be primarily be underwater or underground Development work recommended SUDBURY TORONTO WINDSOR 23

24 Annual changes in resources and resource requirements (effective MW) Effective MW Existing Nuclear Committed Nuclear Planned Nuclear Existing Gas/Oil Committed Gas Planned Gas Existing Renewables Committed Renewables Planned Renewables Committed Conservation Planned Conservation Existing Coal Unspecified Required Resources

25 Current commitments meet requirements to 2012, plans essential for period post ,000 45,000 40,000 40,000 35,000 35,000 Effective MW 30,000 25,000 20,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 15,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 5, Existing Committed Planned Interconnection Required Resources - 25

26 Energy Production (Percent of Total) 100% 90% 80% 70% 12% 14% 14% 12% 13% 11% 11% 8% 7% 7% 7% 8% 9% 17% 17% 16% 12% 9% 8% 8% 10% 10% 10% 11% 12% 12% 2% 3% 5% 7% 7% 8% 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 14% 14% 10% 15% 13% 9% 10% 10% 9% 100% 90% 80% 70% % of TWh 60% 50% 40% 22% 24% 24% 25% 25% 25% 25% 28% 30% 30% 30% 31% 33% 32% 31% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 49% 47% 45% 47% 49% 49% 48% 49% 44% 44% 44% 43% 43% 44% 47% 49% 49% 49% 48% 47% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% Nuclear Renewables Conservation Gas Coal 26

27 Environmental Indicators Follow coal phase-out (large decrease) Greenhouse gases (CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O) Air contaminant emissions (NO x, SO 2, particulates, mercury) Ash solid wastes Follow nuclear production (steady) Flow-through water use Radioactivity Used nuclear fuel Affected by transmission and renewables (increase) Land use 27

28 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 35.0 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Megatonnes) Range of Results for Scenarios Case A Case B 28

29 Scenarios to Test Flexibility Pickering B refurbishment or not Northern Resources or North-South transmission developed or not Higher load growth Higher conservation contribution 29

30 Cost of Planned Resources : $60 Billion Gas Nuclear 5% 45% 2007 $ Billions Wind 10% Conservation 10.2 Transmission 4.0 Transmission 7% Hydro 14% Biomass 2% Conservation 17% Nuclear 26.5 Gas 3.6 Wind 6.0 Hydro 8.4 Biomass 1.0 Total

31 Average Unit Costs ($/MWh) $140 $120 $ $/MWh $80 $60 $40. $20 $ Generation Conservation Transmission Wholesale Charges Debt Retirement Charge Distribution 31

32 Plan Highlights 1. Conservation is a cornerstone of this Plan. Extensive programs in the short term Standards (right now) are key for the longer term Evaluation, Measurement and Verification (EM&V) will be critical to future programs and plans 2. Decisions around Pickering B in 2008 will impact scope for nuclear new build and transmission requirements. 3. Natural gas will provide the flexibility and insurance in the mid to longer term. 4. Renewables, particularly hydro, will require extensive transmission. 5. Restoring nuclear by refurbishment/new build is key to providing baseload energy. 32

33 Plan Highlights (cont d) 6. Transmission development work required now to enable future options. 7. Environmental indicators will improve on most measures. 8. Cost to customers will be affected by : Gas prices Nuclear costs Success of conservation Regulatory decisions 9. Efficient review and approvals processes around infrastructure implementation are necessary for this plan to work. 10. Policy development will support plan implementation. 33

34 The Plan identifies infrastructure priorities for Ontario to focus on The Plan highlights the next set of infrastructure priorities to be determined in lead-up to next IPSP: Conservation implementation: evaluation, measurement and verification, capability building, standards. Renewable Implementation: feasibility and coordination with transmission New nuclear Purchases from other provinces Gas options for flexibility Service reliability 34

35 Next Steps IPSP application is now filed with the OEB OEB Procedural Orders and filing of Interventions Technical Conferences Interrogatories from Board staff and Intervenors Oral Hearings OEB issues IPSP Decision 35

36 36 Questions?