Draft Results Capital Cost and Performance of New Entrant Peaking Unit

Similar documents
Preliminary Cost and Performance Data Peaking Unit and Combined Cycle Technologies

Assumptions and Input Data for Localized, Levelized Cost of Peaking Units

Independent Study to Establish Parameters of the ICAP Demand Curve for the New York Independent System Operator

CASE STUDY FOR RETROFIT OF TURBINE INLET COOLING IN BATAM, INDONESIA.

Turbine Inlet Cooling: An Energy Solution That s Good for the Environment, Rate Payers and Plant Owners

Turbine Inlet Cooling. A Valuable Tool to INCREASE Electric Energy Production

Progress Report Study Approach and Assumptions

Handout 1: Thermodynamic Resources in the 2016 IRP

Stakeholder Meeting Installed Capacity Demand Curves

Rankine-cycle Coal-fired Power Plant Resource Assessment

NEW YORK INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR

Absorption Refrigeration Cycle Turbine Inlet Conditioning. Luke Buntz ARCTIC Engineer Kiewit Power Engineers Co. ARCTIC

Beyond LCOE: The Value of CSP with Thermal Energy Storage

Combined Heat & Power (CHP) in New Jersey

Turbine Inlet Cooling : An Overview

PJM Cost of New Entry Combustion Turbines and Combined-Cycle Plants with June 1, 2022 Online Date

Turbine Inlet Air Chilling

Optimizing Clean Energy Systems with Thermal Energy Storage and/or Turbine Inlet Cooling

AMEC Report Revision 1: June 13, Thermal Generation Options Assessment

10.0 SUPPLY-SIDE OPTIONS

Net Revenue. Overview Net Revenue. Conclusion

Gas Turbine Inlet Air Cooling System

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS 2015 IRP RENEWABLES TECHNICAL CONFERENCE

NYISO 2015/2016 ICAP Demand Curve Reset

CAES2 2 nd Generation Compressed Air Energy Storage Technology Presented at SmartEnergy Canada Toronto, February 15, 2011

2015 Procurement Plan Thermal Resource Specifications

Client Name/Presentation Title

Big Batteries that Enhance Turbine Inlet Cooling Systems

Coffeyville Municipal Light & Power New Resource Feasibility Evaluation. September 10, 2013

Regulatory Commission s ( Commission ) Office of Energy Market Regulation issued on

Turbine Inlet Chilling & Generation Storage Best Practices. 8 Oct 14 Trey Sims Turnkey Sales Manager

Tim A. Hansen, P.E. Southern Research Institute NDIA E2S2 May 2012

Installing a New 6 MW CHP System In An Existing District Energy Plant. IDEA 2013 Campus Energy Conference

2011 IRP Public Input Meeting. December 15, Pacific Power Rocky Mountain Power PacifiCorp Energy

Hitachi H-25 & H-80 Gas Turbine. Bucharest, Apr.23, 2013

COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS

Net Revenue. Overview Net Revenue. Conclusion. Historical New Entrant CT and CC Revenue Adequacy

THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE OVERVIEW

Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants

The Future of CSP: Dispatchable Solar Power

Ronald L. Schoff Parsons Corporation George Booras Electric Power Research Institute

NYISO 2015/2016 ICAP Demand Curve Reset

Field Testing and Independent Review of Post-Combustion CO 2 Capture Technology

2011 IRP Public Input Meeting. August 4, Pacific Power Rocky Mountain Power PacifiCorp Energy

PJM Generator Verification Test Correction Calculations Temperature and Relative Humidity Correction Calculations and Example: Combustion Turbines

Gainesville Regional Utilities: Reciprocating Engine CHP

Paul M. Sotkiewicz, Ph.D. Chief Economist M. Gary Helm Senior Market Strategist PJM Interconnection October 20, 2011

WEBINAR #5: Best Practices for Wet Compression. Call In Number: or Access Code: #

The H-25/H-15 Gas Turbine A Product of Hitachi Quality

The Influence of Distributed Energy Resources on the Hourly Clearing Price of Electricity in a Restructured Market

The H-25/H-15 Gas Turbine A Product of Hitachi Quality

Resource Planning. EE 590 Iowa State University. October 22, 2008

Environment & Power Systems International. VOCGEN /CHP Feasibility Screening Data Form. Level 1 Feasibility Analysis

Electricity Cost Highlights of Avoided Energy Supply Costs in New England 2007 Final Report. Briefing to NSTAR. October 5, 2007

INTEGRATION OF A NEW CCGT PLANT AND AN EXISTING LNG TERMINAL AT BARCELONA PORT Abstract ID Number: 155

FlexEfficiency* 60 Portfolio

Cogeneration a.k.a. Combined Heat & Power (CHP) Overview

Low Emissions gas turbine solutions

In Depth Feasibility Studies Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) VAMC Chillicothe and Columbus, OH

Microturbine Combined Heat and Power Systems. September 14, 2017: AEE Northern Ohio Chapter. Presenter: Glenn Powers Operations Manager, GEM Energy

MEMORANDUM. December 3, Power Committee. Jeff King, Senior Resource Analyst. Assessment of coal generating resource potential

North Anna Unit 3 Hybrid Cooling

Waste Energy Recovery in Natural Gas Pipelines

NOx CONTROL FOR IGCC FACILITIES STEAM vs. NITROGEN

Concentrating Solar Power: Current Cost and Future Directions

Chilled Water Plant Redesign

COGENERATION: Opportunities in Today s Power Markets

Western Region RFP Supplemental Information Required by Bidders in Connection with Proposal Submission Updated March 4, 2012

PJM Generator Verification Test Correction Calculations Temperature Correction Calculations and Example: Combustion Turbines

Annual sales - $16 Billion

Net Revenue. Overview Net Revenue. Net Revenue. Conclusion

in the NYISO s Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff ( Services Tariff ).

Gregory W. Stevens and Ronald K. Ishii, Alternative Energy Systems Consulting, Inc.

Installed Capacity Market

Preliminary Assumptions for On-Shore Wind Technologies. Gillian Charles GRAC October 2, 2014

Eska Creek Preliminary Feasibility Analysis

Summer 2017 Capacity Assessment

CHILLED WATER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE NEW MEXICO

Eagle Mountain Pumped Storage Project Draft License Application Exhibit D Project Costs and Financing

DATA ASSUMPTIONS AND DESCRIPTION OF STUDIES TO BE PERFORMED 2014 EGSL & ELL Integrated Resource Plans

Achieving Significant Carbon Emissions Reductions through New Market-based Incentives

4 Calculation of Demand Curve Parameters

2008 Long Term Acquisition Plan

Explanation of JCM Feasibility Study in Thailand & Applicable Low CO2 Emission Technology

In Depth Feasibility Studies Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) VA Hospitals in Columbus and Chillicothe, OH

Scenario Development and Analysis of Hydrogen as a Large-Scale Energy Storage Medium

Technology Characterization: Gas Turbines

Donna Pratt Manager, Demand Response Products New York Independent System Operator

The Use of Reflective and Permeable Pavements as a Potential Practice for Heat Island Mitigation and Stormwater Management

Energy Efficiency and Security: Still Important in a World With Low-cost Fuel. E360 Forum Chicago, IL October 5, 2017

Tim A. Hansen, P.E. Southern Research Institute NDIA E2S2 May 2012

Optimization of a Cogeneration System in the Automotive Industry

GASIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES 2003

Program Cost-benefit Analysis of 2003 New Jersey Clean Energy Council Energy Efficiency Programs. July 28, 2005

Benefits. Reduced transportation time and cost. Limited on-site inventory. Minimal installation time. Efficient commissioning

BIOMASS FEASIBILITY. By Fred L. Jones Cogen Designs, Inc. New Facility Essentially Power Only Flat Industrial Load Profile

CO 2 Capture: Impacts on IGCC Plant Performance in a High Elevation Application using Western Sub-Bituminous Coal

Waste Heat Recovery Research at the Idaho National Laboratory

Gas-fired efficiency in part-load and pulse operation

Combined Heat and Power (CHP): Applications of Distributed Power

Transcription:

Draft Results Capital Cost and Performance of New Entrant Peaking Unit Presentation to Christopher D. Ungate, Senior Consultant 1

Scope of New Entrant Peaking Unit Assumptions Peaking Unit Technology: Unit with technology that results in the lowest fixed costs and the highest variable costs among all other units technology that are economically viable. Examined LM6000 and LMS100 in detail, and provided ballpark estimates for Frame 7 (7FA) for comparative purposes Configuration Greenfield vs. brownfield (switchyard, site prep, bldgs, tanks) Number of units Emissions controls (SCRs, CO catalyst) Inlet air cooling (evaporative coolers, chillers) Dual fuel capability (gas or gas and oil) Fuel gas compression (local supply pressure) Siting: five sites (zones C, F, G, J, K) Materials and labor costs Site-related costs (insurance, taxes, land) 2

Scope of Cost and Performance Estimates EPC Capital Cost Non-EPC Costs (Owner s Cost, Financing, Working Capital and Inventories) Capacity and Heat Rate as a function of season and location Variable O&M Fixed O&M Availability Startup Fuel 3

Recommended Technology and Configuration LMS100 Greenfield site conditions Two units SCR for Zones G, J, K; no SCR for Zones C, F Inlet Air Evaporative Cooling (no inlet air chillers) Natural Gas only (no dual fuel capability) Fuel Gas Compressors (200 psig local supply pressure) 4

Why the LMS100? The LMS100 has lower capital cost (on a $/kw basis) than the LM6000 And the LMS100 s lower operating cost (heat rate) give it an economic advantage as well Heat Rate (Btu/kWh) Capacity (MW) K - Long Island Overnight Capital Cost ($/kw) - 2007$s J - NYC Hudson Valley F - Capital C - Central LM6000 9,700 92 1,376 1,411 1,192 996 985 LMS100 9,100 200 1,089 1,113 961 829 820 Overnight Capital Costs include EPC costs, Owner s costs, Financing costs, Working Capital and Inventories. Financing Costs to be revised by NERA; currently based on 50/50 D/E 7%/12% 20 year term. 5

Why the LMS100? The 7FA simple cycle without an SCR is not economically viable in Zones H, J, and K: >678 hours of operation w/o SCR annually (8% CF) exceeds threshold for Lowest Achievable Emissions Rate (LAER), requiring an SCR NERA modeling shows over 2500 annual operating hours In Zones C and F, both the LMS100 and 7FA would have operating hours restrictions: NOx emissions w/o SCR (lbs/hr) Annual hours @ 100 tons limit Max CF 7FA 74 2,712 31% LMS100 101 1,975 23% 6

Why the LMS100? Preliminary results show that the LMS100 and 7FA, both without an SCR, have comparable annual net costs. LMS100 is best choice because of operating flexibility, lower cost to retrofit with an SCR, and lower total dollar cost to enter market. Zone F - Capital Zone C - Central LMS100 7FA LMS100 7FA Heat Rate (Btu/kWh) 9,100 10,700 9,100 10,700 Capacity (MWs) 200 340 200 340 Overnight Capital Cost ($/kw) 829 559 820 552 Levelized Cost ($/kw-yr) @ 13% levelized rate (real) 107.39 72.33 106.22 71.55 Fixed O&M ($/kw-yr) 6.35 6.20 6.37 6.20 Total Annual Cost ($/kw-yr) 113.74 78.53 112.59 77.75 Annual Revenues ($/kw-yr) @ target reserve margin 53.22 14.81 53.22 14.81 Net Annual Cost ($/kw-yr) @ 13% levelized rate (real) 60.52 63.72 59.37 62.94 Net Annual Cost ($/kw-yr) @ 15% levelized rate (real) 77.52 76.19 75.17 74.26 7

105,000 LMS100 Capacity and Heat Rate Curves LMS100: Net kw vs Ambient Temperature Average Degradation, 60% Relative Humidity Net Capacity, kw 100,000 95,000 90,000 Without Evaporative Cooling With Evaporative Cooling Evaporative cooling is limited to ambient temperature of 50 o F and above to avoid compressor icing. 85,000 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 12,000 Ambient Temperature, o F LMS100 Net Capacity vs Net Heat Rate Average Degradation Capacity and heat rate vary with environmental conditions (air temperature, humidity, and elevation) Seasonal estimates for capacity and heat rate is a reasonable representation of variation in performance Net Heat Rate, Btu/kWh (HHV) 11,500 11,000 10,500 10,000 9,500 9,000 8,500 59F Ambient 90F Ambient 25F Ambient 8,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 Net Capacity, kw 8

Load Zone LMS100 Capacity and Heat Rate Table Weather Basis Elev. (Feet) Season Ambient Temp. o F Relative Humidity Net kw Net Btu/kWh (HHV) C - Central Syracuse 421 Summer 79.7 67.7 97,278 9,140 Winter 3 17.3 73.7 98,541 8,937 Spring-Fall 59.0 60.0 100,203 9,028 ICAP 90.0 70.0 92,806 9,252 F - Capital Albany 275 Summer 80.7 67.2 97,518 9,147 Winter 3 15.3 70.7 98,264 8,946 Spring-Fall 59.0 60.0 99,926 9,036 ICAP 90.0 70.0 93,370 9,251 G - Hudson Valley Poughkeepsie 165 Summer 82.3 77.7 96,115 9,191 Winter 3 19.3 74.0 98,148 8,957 Spring-Fall 59.0 60.0 99,717 9,043 ICAP 90.0 70.0 93,795 9,250 J - New York City New York City 20 Summer 83.0 64.3 97,954 9,159 Winter 3 28.0 61.7 98,221 8,993 Spring-Fall 59.0 60.0 99,445 9,052 ICAP 90.0 70.0 94,360 9,248 K - Long Island Long Island 16 Summer 80.7 69.3 98,307 9,151 Winter 3 28.0 66.2 98,222 8,993 Spring-Fall 59.0 60.0 99,436 9,052 ICAP 90.0 70.0 94,376 9,248 Notes 1. Includes Water Injection NOx Control (25 ppm) and Inlet Evaporative Cooling 2. Includes Average Degradation 3. Evaporative Cooler off below an ambient temperature of 50 o F and above to avoid compressor icing 9

LMS100 Other Performance Assumptions Load Zone Variable O&M ($/MWh) Fixed O&M ($/kw-yr) C - Central 3.98 6.37 F - Capital 3.97 6.35 G - Hudson Valley 4.91 6.45 J - New York City 4.87 7.22 K - Long Island 4.86 7.19 Availability: 95% Startup Fuel (20 minute start): 135 MMBtu per unit 10