RESOURCE COST AND POTENTIAL 1. Background and Introduction Potential and costs were all updated in...
If you can't read please download the document
RESOURCE COST AND POTENTIAL 1. Background and Introduction Potential and costs were all updated in late 2013 by Black & Veatch Information from internal
Background and Introduction Potential and costs were all
updated in late 2013 by Black & Veatch Information from
internal sources, market data, and other literature (LBNL, DOE,
CEC) When possible, previously-vetted information from other Black
& Veatch stakeholder projects was used and updated: Renewable
Energy Transmission Initiative (2008-2010) Western Renewable Energy
Zones (2009, 2012-2013) SB1122 Biomass Feed-in Tariff (2013) NREL
Renewable Electricity Futures (2010) 2
Slide 3
Approach General Methodology Capital Cost Updates Costs are
all-in installed costs and include EPC + owners costs (soft costs)
Costs include costs through the interconnection to the T&D
system Costs are for 2013 projects cost forecast curves developed
for all technologies as well Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
Cost Updates O&M cost estimates include all other annual costs,
including land lease, insurance, and property tax (exclusion to be
updated) Resource potential and performance was updated for all
technologies compared to the RETI assessment Major methodology
changes made for wind and solar PV Small-scale bioenergy from SB
1122 analysis Minor updates to all other resources (Solar Thermal,
Geothermal, Biomass) Full detail for the approach can be see in the
PPT, RPS_CalcV6.0_ResourcePotentialandCost on the CPUC website
3
Slide 4
Summary of Changes to Solar PV Cost updated for systems from 1
to 20+ MW (ac rating) Fixed Tilt and Single Axis Tracking Black
& Veatch assumes little appreciable economies-of-scale after 20
MW. Therefore a single estimate is provided for systems that size
and larger. Smaller-scale rooftop systems also included (250 kWac)
Higher performance systems assumed Increased dc to ac ratio, also
known as inverter loading ratio (up to 1.4) Higher ac capacity
factors Capital costs include a $200/kW allowance for
interconnection costs (except for rooftop, where interconnection
costs are assumed to be minor and included in the system costs) 4
While overall trend is decreasing solar PV costs, higher
performance is achieved by increasing inverter loading ratio which
increases capital cost
Slide 5
Solar PV Performance Significantly Higher than Previously
Estimated (RETI 1B Max CF = 28%, now 35+%) 5 Fixed Tilt Tracking
Capacity Factor (ac) 5
Slide 6
Solar PV Capital Costs 6
Slide 7
Planned Solar Cost Updates Costs continue to decline; down
roughly 25% since the estimates were performed for v.6.0 Will use
market data and Black & Veatch design data to refresh current
costs and performance for v.6.1 Modify future cost curves and
evaluate as part of sensitivity cases Source: LBNL 7
Slide 8
Wind Performance Most high capacity factor sites in California
have been developed Black & Veatch re-assessed wind potential
in California applying newer low wind speed turbines as appropriate
Many new areas included, especially northern California 8 Similar
approach as RETI
Slide 9
Results 9 Apply exclusions and project size limitations LCOE
state- wind estimates NCF at identified utility scale project sites
9
Slide 10
Northern California Previously Identified CREZ (2008-2010) 10
Geothermal Wind
Slide 11
Northern California Current Potential Wind Projects 11
Previously Identified CREZ (2008-2010)
Slide 12
Capital Cost Assumptions BASE COSTS: Steeper terrain makes some
areas more expensive to develop. Modifiers based on slope were used
to account for terrain: Direct Costs calculated as: Base Turbine
Costs + (Slope Multiplier)*(BOP/erection + Switchyard) Owners cost
was assumed to be 15% of the direct costs 12 CategoryClass I,
80mClass II, 80mClass III, 100m Turbine ($/kW)9501,1001,250
BOP/erection ($/kW)400420475 Switchyard ($/kW)150 SlopeMultiplier
Less than 4 percent1.00 Between 4 percent and 8 percent1.16 Between
8 percent and 16 percent1.22 Greater than 16 percent1.55
Slide 13
Wind and Other Resource Updates Wind costs down roughly 5
percent since the v.6.0 estimates were performed Will use market
data and Black & Veatch design data to estimate current costs
and performance Updates to biomass, geothermal, and solar thermal
will largely reflect general escalation only Source: LBNL 13
Slide 14
Cost Sensitivities Cost inputs can be changed as desired in the
calculator to test sensitivities Version 6.1 of calculator could
have the functionality to more easily run alternatives if desired.
Options include (1) scenarios, (2) sensitivities, and (3) Monte
Carlo. 14
Slide 15
Out of State Resources Out-of-state resources may be
competitive in certain instances All out-of-state of resource
estimates from updated Western Renewable Energy Zones Project
(WREZ) Wind Solar PV Solar Thermal Geothermal Hydro 15
Slide 16
Out of State Updates Calculator currently differentiates out of
state resources by performance but not cost Plan to apply new
analysis performed by Black & Veatch differentiating the
performance, capital cost, O&M cost, and LCOE throughout the US
in V6.1 Will not create new zone boundaries 16
Slide 17
17 SUPER CREZ IDENTIFICATION
Slide 18
Zone Identification From 2008-2010, Black & Veatch worked
with stakeholders to identify Competitive Renewable Energy Zones
(CREZ) as part of the Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative
(RETI) These zones were subsequently used in various different
processes by various stakeholders In 2013-2014, Black & Veatch
reassessed renewable resources to address significant improvements
in technology, particularly with wind and solar PV Resource
availability much more widespread Many new wind resources in
northern California Updated zone definitions are needed to reflect
the updated resource assessment 18
Slide 19
Updated Renewable Resource Assessment Wind, Biomass,
Geothermal, and Solar Thermal Project Locations Solar PV not shown,
but is available across the state (see next slide) For wind,
substantial shift north, into non- CREZ areas 19
Slide 20
Solar PV Resource (Tracking PV) Widespread and generally good
quality throughout California Most of resource is outside previous
CREZ boundaries 20
Slide 21
Principles For Updating Zone Boundaries New zones based on:
Legacy 2010 CREZ to the extent possible Locations of ~150 projects
which have been tagged to zones in the CPUCs 2012 RPS calculator
Project Development Status Reports CEC Renewable Energy Action Team
Expanded resource assessment (tried to not split newly identified
projects into two zones) Transmission topology Geographic
constraints County boundaries 21
Slide 22
Differences From Previous CREZs Previous CREZ identified the
best resources for large scale transmission development considering
technical, economic and environmental factors Very specific
boundaries, sometimes capturing specific project boundaries and
interconnection lines Purposefully made as small as possible
(shrink-wrapped) to minimize perceived environmental footprint
Current zones are intended to capture most of the resources in
California regardless of relative economic or environmental
considerations Not for siting or environmental assessment - used
for categorization and assigning transmission upgrade cost More
comprehensive coverage - puzzle pieces Boundaries less meaningful
No particular advantage to being in a zone 22
Slide 23
Legacy CREZ (Westlands Area) 23
Slide 24
2012 Utility Contracts Tagged To CREZ 24
Slide 25
2012 Utility Contracts Tagged To CREZ 25
Slide 26
New Super CREZ 26
Slide 27
New Super CREZ Boundaries All of these zones correspond with a
legacy zone name or a zone in the 2012 RPS calculator (Los Banos,
Central Valley North) No new zones identified by B&V, except
Sacramento River Valley Resources outsides zones summarized by
county 27
Slide 28
Super CREZ Environmental Exclusions Intent of the calculator is
to not prejudge permitting or provide opinion on preferred
development location Only removed stakeholder-vetted lands where
development is prohibited or practically impossible: RETI Category
1 WECC EDTF Category 4 Feinstein California Desert Protection Act
Environmental ranking and scoring would be the next step to
prioritize particular areas Future workshops will address
incorporation of environmental ranking and consideration of further
additional environmental screens Super CREZ resource potential
incorporates environmental exclusions even though the boundaries
are not drawn with this intent 28
Slide 29
2010 Monterey Area CREZ 29
Slide 30
Constraints, Resources and Infrastructure 30
Slide 31
New Monterey Area Renewable Resources 31
Slide 32
Monterey County Super CREZ 32
Slide 33
Super CREZ Transmission Super CREZ sizing and transmission
Concern that expanded CREZs may in some cases be too inclusive and
include areas with differing transmission conditions and costs
Discussed issue with CAISO; follow up on this issue will be
addressed in a wider discussion regarding process development for
updates to the RPS Calculator Cost updates Will be working with
CAISO to update both in-state and out-of-state transmission costs
33
Slide 34
TRANSMISSION COSTS 34
Slide 35
Transmission Cost in RPS Calculator The availability and cost
of transmission are primary components in the calculation used to
rank competing resources They reflect the cost to deliver new
renewable generation to California loads The methodology of
identifying available capacity and transmission costs in v.6.0 is
generally the same as previous version, additional updates planned
RPS Calculator Valuation Framework Levelized Cost of Energy
Transmission Cost Capacity Value Energy Value Net Resource Cost
Integration Cost* = + + + Curtailment Cost + 35
Slide 36
RPS Calculator in Transmission Planning RPS Calculator receives
information from and provides information to CAISO transmission
planning processes Transmission projects included in CAISO
Transmission Planning Process (TPP) are recovered through the
Transmission Access Charge (TAC) levied on all users of the
transmission system TAC costs are passed on to ratepayers
Generation projects accessing transmission lines in the TPP may
avoid additional delivery network upgrade (DNU) costs Since the
CAISO TPP is based on the CPUCs RPS Calculator portfolios, it is
critical the overall process shown here works CAISO GIDAP
Transmission Inputs Available Capacity [MW] Delivery Network
Upgrade (DNU) Costs [$/kW-yr] RPS Calculator RPS Portfolios
Commercial Projects [MW] Generic Projects [MW] CAISO TPP CPUC LTPP
Iterative - informs next cycle and other processes 36
Slide 37
Summary of Planned Updates to Transmission Cost Transmission
availability and cost estimates for all transmission upgrades will
be updated in v.6.1 of the RPS Calculator to reflect all available
CAISO study information Additional information on data sources
provided in this presentation The CPUC is considering stakeholder
process alignment to formalize a process for future transmission
cost updates. Also identified major resource areas for which new
transmission cost estimates may be needed (Sacramento River Valley)
37
Slide 38
Methodology Overview Transmission costs split in three
categories Interconnection Cost Delivery Network Upgrades (minor
and major upgrades) Out-of-state Transmission 38
Slide 39
Interconnection Cost Gen-tie line Substation New switching
station New breaker position at existing station 39
Slide 40
Interconnection Unit Cost Source interconnection cost estimates
based on the CAISO Participating Transmission Owner unit cost
estimates. Costs vary depending on interconnecting utility.
http://www.caiso.com/informed/Pages/StakeholderProcesses/Particip
atingTransmissionOwnerPerUnitCosts.aspx
http://www.caiso.com/informed/Pages/StakeholderProcesses/Particip
atingTransmissionOwnerPerUnitCosts.aspx 40
Slide 41
RPS calculator applies IOU unit costs to calculate the total
interconnection equipment costs (gen tie, line tap, bay expansion,
etc.) for each project Two substation options based on project
location: Project A is within reasonable gen-tie distance new
breaker position at existing substation Project B is not within
reasonable gen-tie distance, but can connect to the 115 kV line new
switching station Project A 20 MW Project B 20 MW Sub A 115 kV Sub
B 115 kV 115 kV Line Interconnection Cost Estimates 41
Slide 42
Interconnection Cost Updates Latest available version of unit
costs from annual CAISO Stakeholder process will be implemented in
Version 6.1 of the RPS Calculator. Additional environmental cost
categories that are not considered could be implemented through the
CAISOs annual process. 42
Slide 43
Delivery Network Upgrade (DNU) Costs DNU costs consist of minor
and major upgrades Three categories: Available transmission
capacity with no upgrades Available transmission capacity with
minor upgrades Available transmission capacity with major upgrades
Costs do not reflect any sunk costs (e.g., Tehachapi) 43
Slide 44
Delivery Network Upgrade (DNU) Cost Sources CAISO provides DNU
costs in the RPS Calculator for a subset of Super CREZ based on the
following two primary sources: Participating Transmission Owner
cost estimates from Interconnection Studies Investor Owned Utility
estimates for policy driven studies included in Transmission
Planning Process (TPP) CAISO will provide stakeholders references
to specific studies used to develop the DNU costs in the calculator
In general, TPP studies are available on the CAISO website and
interconnection studies can be accessed through the CAISO Market
Participant Portal For transmission projects for which CAISO does
not provide input, generic assumptions are used to calculate the
cost of a new conceptual transmission project 44
Slide 45
Available transmission capacity in 2020 on existing
transmission (no additional upgrades) Transmission Capacity (GW)
Round Mountain Sacramento River Valley Tehachapi Kramer Riverside
Imperial Eldorado Solano Carrizo Mountain Pass (GW) 3.8 GW 45
Slide 46
Available transmission capacity in 2020 on existing
transmission (no additional upgrades) Minor upgrades Tehachapi:
$0.1B Westlands : $1.5B Transmission Capacity (GW) Round Mountain
Sacramento River Valley Kramer Riverside Imperial Eldorado Solano
Carrizo Mountain Pass (GW) Westlands Tehachapi 46
Slide 47
Available transmission capacity in 2020 on existing
transmission (no additional upgrades) Minor upgrades Tehachapi:
$0.1B Westlands : $1.5B Major upgrades Kramer: $0.4B Imperial:
$0.9B Riverside 1: $1B Riverside 2: $1.8B Transmission Capacity
(GW) Round Mountain Sacramento River Valley Kramer Riverside
Imperial Eldorado Solano Carrizo Mountain Pass (GW) Westlands
Tehachapi 47
Slide 48
Conceptual Transmission Costs For SuperCREZs where CAISO does
not provide information on the cost or availability of new
transmission, costs of new high voltage transmission projects are
estimated based on unit cost information Costs for such conceptual
projects in v.6.0 are taken directly from v.5.0 Based on E3s
transmission costing model developed for the GHG Calculator Black
& Veatch will updated costs for conceptual projects in v.6.1
using the utilities PTO unit costs 48
Slide 49
DNU Cost Updates: Key Challenges Updated resources are assigned
to new Super CREZ because many resources are outside of the
original CREZ boundaries 49
Slide 50
DNU Cost Updates: Key Challenges Transmission Infrastructure in
Central California Some new Super CREZ are very large These Super
CREZ face common major transmission constraints CAISO has not yet
developed more granular cost estimates for constraints within these
zones May change as new information is developed 50
Slide 51
Delivery Network Upgrade (DNU) Costs Updates: Key Challenges
CAISO has not studied all areas and so transmission availability
and costs for minor and major upgrades in numerous areas have not
been established. Capacity limited to amount in queue Limited
number of minor upgrade solutions Minor upgrades are typically
classified as local network upgrades and are implemented to
mitigate local issues on the system Often accounted for in
interconnection studies and costs 51
Slide 52
Out of State Transmission Costs Largely based on previously
vetted initiatives: RETI 2B (2010) B&V work for WECC on
transmission costs (2012-2014) WREZ Generation and Transmission
Cost Model (2009-2013) Given the size and magnitude of new out of
state projects being proposed, assumes that no existing
transmission is available 52
Slide 53
Out of State Transmission Approach Out-of-state transmission
costs Delivered to gateway CREZs (e.g., Mountain Pass) Routing from
WREZ Generation and Transmission model Updated cost basis: 500 kV
single- circuit ac transmission, 1500 MW capacity, $2.0
million/mile (2015 dollars) In-state transmission costs: Added
CAISO DNU costs to OOS costs using same approach as California
projects When Energy Only is implemented into the calculator,
projects that do not require full deliverability, will not incur
DNU costs 53
Slide 54
Out of State Transmission Costs Update Transmission costs were
inflated at 1.5% from 2012 to 2013, and at 2.0% from 2013 to 2014.
Based on inflation values assumed for the 2014 WECC Transmission
Cost Calculator update.
https://www.wecc.biz/Reliability/2014_TEPPC_Transmission_CapCost
_Report_B+V.pdf
https://www.wecc.biz/Reliability/2014_TEPPC_Transmission_CapCost
_Report_B+V.pdf Transmission costs were inflated at 2% from 2014 to
2015. Inflation cost was based on commodity prices, Consumer Price
Index, and ENR Construction Cost Index. 54
Slide 55
Out of State Transmission Costs Updates Original cost basis for
OOS lines assumed 500 kV ac lines for all lines High Voltage Direct
Current (HVDC) may be economically feasible for longer distance
lines 600 kV HVDC Cost Basis: +/- 600 kV bipole circuit 3000 MW
capacity $1.6 million / mile 600 kV HVDC converter station: $517
million DC line losses also likely lower 55
Slide 56
Out of State Transmission Costs Updates Example 725 Mile, 600
kV HV DC line to bring 3000 MW out of state resource to CA. Assumed
HVDC converter station required on each end. 600 kV DC500 kV Single
AC Base Cost per mile, $/mile$1,645,000$1,958,000 Distance,
miles725 Line cost, $$1,192,965,000$1,419,430,000 Converter
Stations / Substations Cost, $$1,033,830,000$195,784,000 Total
Cost, $$2,226,795,000$1,615,214,000 Capacity, MW30001500
$/kw$742$1,077 56
Slide 57
AC vs. DC Transmission Capital Costs ac dc Numerous other
factors influence the selection of line type 57
Slide 58
DISTRIBUTED GENERATION 58
Slide 59
Presentation Overview Introduction Resource Potential Update DG
Costs and Value Future RPS Calculator Inputs and DG Sizing 59
Slide 60
Role of DG Analysis in the RPS Calculator DG has seen near
exponential growth and reached over 3,000 MWac State incentives
under CSI and other programs have historically driven DG growth
However, in 2014, the majority of behind the meter PV installations
were completed without state incentives There is non-solar PV DG
(e.g. wind and bioenergy) state incentives, such as SB 1122,
driving additional development Growth of Behind the Meter DG in
California, 1998-2014 [1] [1] [1] Black & Veatch estimate based
on historical state incentive program data and Greentech Media
Research reports on installed PV capacity in 2012-2014 DG projects
included in the RPS Calculator demonstrate likely offsets in
transmission and generation investment required for scenarios of
high DG installation 60
Slide 61
DG Implementation in the RPS Calculator B&V High Resolution
GIS Analysis B&V Capital Cost Estimates E3/LDPV Cost Estimate
(will be revised by DRP) B&V Cost Estimate for SCE (will be
revised by DRP) DG Supply Curve DG Scenarios in RPS Calculator DG
Interconnection Cost Substation Level ($/kW) DG Cost/Value
Substation Level ($/kW) DG Capital Cost Parcel Level ($/kW)
Resource Potential Parcel Level (MW) + RPS Calculator Input (from
above sources) RPS Calculator Input (15% of peak load, in the
future may be revised by DRP) 61
Slide 62
RPS Calculator and the Distribution Resources Plan (DRP) RPS
Calculator will focus on impacts at the transmission level
Aggregates parcel, feeder and distribution resolution Impacts of DG
between Super CREZ DRP will focus on impacts at the feeder and
distribution substation level Impacts of DG within a Super CREZ
Resource valuation being examined in the DRP will be applied to the
RPS Calculator to extent they are consistent with Calculator
functionality Details of the DRPs DG valuation are currently
undetermined, but inputs will be anticipated in Version 6.1 of the
RPS calculator Much of DRP will be submitted to the Commission July
1, 2015 Prior to release of DRP submittals, information from Black
& Veatch updated resource assessment and E3s Local Distributed
PV study will be used in the Calculator 62
Slide 63
Refined Resource Assessment In September 2013, Black &
Veatch completed a Southern California DG Potential Study to
identify PV potential around key SCE 230 kV substations affected by
SONGS retirement New analysis techniques to identify potential
project size and cost of energy Included residential and
commercial/industrial rooftops First ever assessment of parking
lots Study identified significant PV in urban areas, especially for
high concentration DG (HCDG) connected to subtransmission system
20+ MW projects Expansion of this analysis begun for the entire
state; will take into consideration geographic and transmission
limits 63
Slide 64
AREA NEAR JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 64 Technical Potential Capacity,
MWdc 0.25 > 3 64
Slide 65
EXAMPLE DETAIL (1.1 MWDC ROOFTOP, 7 MWDC PARKING LOT, APPROX.
$120/MWH) 65 Technical Potential Capacity, MWdc 0.25 > 3 The
assessment found significantly more potential than previous studies
particularly by including potential for PV development on parking
lots 65
Slide 66
Resource Potential Comments Majority of respondents favored
updates to the PV resource potential Past assessments have been
limited Current model is constrained when exploring future policies
emphasizing high PV penetration Helps to inform DRP process
Identify potential for high concentration DG within Local Capacity
Requirements (LCR) areas Improves future siting 66
Slide 67
Updated Resource Assessment Approach Expanded version of the
Southern California assessment Use previously described approach to
quantify PV potential for: Commercial and industrial (C&I)
roofs Parking lots Residential parcels (average size assumed by zip
code) Gather parcel data and USGS aerial imagery data for large
metro areas in California Limit to areas within the CAISO (excludes
Los Angeles and Sacramento) Calculator will assume wholesale DG for
residential, commercial, and industrial locations No resource
updates planned for wind or bioenergy 67
Slide 68
Updated DG Resource Assessment: Study Area Utility-scale PV
resources located in orange-red areas in map Urbanized areas shown
in black 68
Slide 69
Updated DG Resource Assessment: Study Area Major metro areas
were focused upon to capture the majority of the potential Captures
11 largest municipalities (~20 million residents) and the majority
of the potential in the Bay Area, LA Metro (x-LADWP), and San Diego
For rooftop potential in other areas, the level of granularity was
not considered useful at Super CREZ level All areas also within LCR
zones, though not all LCR zones in analysis 69
Slide 70
Study Area Southern California Example 70
Slide 71
Study Area Orange County 71
Slide 72
Study Area Orange County Previously performed assessment
72
Slide 73
PV Potential will be Plotted Against Interconnection Maps
Published by Utilities 73
Slide 74
DG Capital Cost Updates LCOEs for DG resources are typically
higher than utility scale units: Solar: Based on Black & Veatch
large rooftop identification in 2009 and E3 Local Distributed PV
study in 2012 Wind : New 2013 assessment; 20 percent adder to large
scale costs for dis-economies of scale Bioenergy: Used SB 1122 cost
and resource assumptions Methodology and assumptions described in
California Renewable Energy Resource Potential and Cost Update
presentation 74
Slide 75
DG Capital Cost Updates Capital costs for solar DG resources
will be updated in a manner similar to utility-scale renewable
resources Solar: ~25% decline in capital cost Wind: ~5% decline in
capital cost Biomass: increase with general escalation 75
Slide 76
DG Value Calculator uses same methodology to value large and
small-scale resources Potential direct ratepayer benefits that
small-scale projects located near loads may provide: Reduced system
losses Avoided congestion costs Avoided need for generation in
capacity-constrained areas such as LCR areas Deferral/avoidance of
investments in transmission infrastructure Deferral/avoidance of
investments in distribution infrastructure Currently: RPS
Calculator does not assign transmission costs to small-scale
resources (other than interconnection costs) RPS Calculator thus
calculates trade-off between small-scale and
transmission-constrained renewables based solely on avoided
transmission costs 76
Slide 77
DG Value Comments Differing opinions on the value of DG.
Majority of the responses indicated that DG value was challenging
to quantify, very site specific, and the potential benefits may be
captured by utility-scale resource as well depending on the
location. The cost/benefit for DG is under extensive study in the
DRP process: DRP Study ElementsRPS Calculator Locational Net
Benefits Will use DRP values Previously based on LDPV study results
Barriers Will consider adding based on DRP findings Not presently
included in Calculator Capacity Assessment in Urban Areas Will use
DRP findings when available Interim approach will assume percent of
minimum load at subtransmission substation 77
Slide 78
Interconnection Cost Assumptions The DRP is expected to provide
improved information on the cost to interconnect DG in different
IOU service areas Until results from the DRP are available,
simplified approach to interconnection costs based on penetration
of substation capacity: Low cost interconnection limit to be 30% of
transmission and distribution substation capacity First 15% of
systems can be accommodated by existing distribution system with
minor upgrades Estimated cost $100/kW or less Second 15% (up to
30%) will require more extensive upgrades similar to those
identified in the Navigant study for SCE Estimated cost $300/kW or
less Individual and aggregated systems above 30% local penetration
will require additional upgrades (such as dedicated feeders).
Estimated cost $500/kW or less PV potential above 100% penetration
will be quantified as theoretical, but not technical potential
78
Slide 79
Future RPS Calculator Inputs and Parameters Input DG supply
curve generated from new resource potential site identification and
project capital costs Cost/Benefit Parameters will be defined based
on outcome of DRP Generation carve outs can be applied to account
for existing incentive programs (e.g. SB 1122) Substation load can
be adjusted to represent assumptions in behind the meter DG
installations 79
Slide 80
Creating DG Portfolios Present approach will be to limit DG
output based on percentage of peak load at urban transmission
substations Present assumption is 15% of peak load, but this will
be a controllable parameter in the calculator Estimate the value
that a high DG case would need to provide in order to favor DG
resources over utility scale projects 80