Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Resource Rich Colorado
Colorado’s National and Global Position
in the Energy Economy
Fourth Edition, December 2012
Resource Rich Colorado
This annual report analyzes Colorado’s broad energy industry cluster, in order to illustrate how
Colorado stacks up to the competition domestically, and how the U.S. stacks up to the
competition internationally.
Resource Rich Colorado
Acknowledgements
Competitive Analysis Committee Members
Chris Hansen, IHS, Committee Chair John Armstrong, Enserca LLC.
Beth Chacon, Xcel Energy Brian Payer, URS Corporation
Matthew T. Palmer, Encana Marketing (USA) Inc. Larry Holdren, Pure Brand Communications
Oil
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Do
lla
rs p
er
Ba
rre
l
Crude Oil Prices, 1999-2011 Colorado produced oil prices trend below the national average;
U.S. average price in 2011 was $94.88 per barrel
U.S. Crude Oil $/Barrel
Colorado Crude Oil $/Barrel
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, OK-WTI, Energy Information Administration
Colorado crude oil $88.26
Fig. 1
CO ranks 10th in production
39 million barrels
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
TX AK CA ND OK NM LA WY KS CO
Mil
lio
n B
arr
els
pe
r Y
ea
r Crude Oil Production by State, 2008-2011 Colorado ranks 10th in crude oil production; Colorado production
is on the rise
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Crude oil includes all liquid hydrocarbons at surface, including lease condensates Fig. 2
CO ranks 10th in reserves at
501 million barrels with a 6.59% annual
utilization rate
6.72%
5.91%
6.84%
5.99%
7.34% 7.05% 6.44%
12.64% 4.83%
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
TX AK CA ND OK NM WY LA UT CO
Mil
lio
n B
arr
els
Crude Oil Reserves & Utilization Rate Technology improvements contribute to growing reserves
Reserves 2009
Reserves 2010
Production 2010
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Utilization rate is the amount of reserves developed/produced annually; crude oil reserves include lease condensate
Fig. 3
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Saudi Arabia Russia U.S. Iran China Canada United Arab Emirates
Venezuela
Mil
lio
n B
arr
els
Oil Production Leaders, 2008-2011
U.S. ranks 3rd in production; domestic production on the rise
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), 2009-2012 Key World Energy Statistics Note: Includes crude oil, natural gas liquids, feedstocks, additives, and other hydrocarbons
Top eight producers represent over 50% of global production;
total global production for 2011 was 29.4 billion barrels. U.S. ranks 3rd in
global production with 2.54 billion barrels
Fig. 4
0
5
10
15
20
25
Mil
lio
n B
arr
els
pe
r D
ay
U.S. Crude Oil Production & Consumption, 1973-2011
The gap is narrowing, as domestic production has increased since 2009 and domestic consumption has decreased since 2006
U.S. Oil Consumption
U.S. Oil Production
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration; NPR in conjunction with Nelson Hsu
Latin America,
19.6%
Canada, 15.1%
Persian Gulf,
12.9%
Africa, 10.3%
Other, 3.1%
U.S., 38.8%
Where does the U.S. get its oil?
Fig. 8
Natural Gas
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Do
lla
rs p
er
Th
ou
san
d C
ub
ic F
ee
t Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, 1999-2011
The Colorado price trends below the national average to account for fuel transportation costs to markets outside the state
U.S. Natural Gas
Colorado Natural Gas
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration
CO price in 2011 was $3.75
Fig. 9
CO ranks 5th in production
1.5 (Tcf)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
TX WY LA OK CO NM AR PA UT AK
Tri
llio
n C
ub
ic F
ee
t (T
cf)
Natural Gas Production by State, 2007-2010
Colorado ranks 5th in production; production is increasing due to resource development technology improvements
2007
2008
2009
2010
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Top 10 producers including Colorado Fig. 10
CO ranks 5th in reserves at 25.37 (Tcf) with a
6.21% utilization rate
7.38%
6.02%
10.05% 7.05%
7.21% 8.52% 8.09%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
TX WY LA OK CO NM AR PA
Tri
llio
n C
ub
ic F
ee
t (T
cf)
Natural Gas Reserves & Utilization Rate
Technology is contributing to growing reserves nationwide
2009 Reserves
2010 Reserves
2010 Production
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Top eight states including Colorado; utilization rate is the amount of reserves developed/produced annually Fig. 11
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Russia U.S. Canada Qatar Iran Norway China Indonesia
Tri
llio
n C
ub
ic F
ee
t (T
cf)
Natural Gas Production Leaders, 2008-2011 U.S. is 2nd and growing; top 8 producers equal 61.6% of global production
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: International Energy Agency
U.S. ranks 2nd with 19.2% of
global production 22.99 (Tcf)
Fig. 12
Fig15
-
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Bil
lio
n C
ub
ic F
ee
t p
er
Da
y
U.S. Shale Gas Production by Major Resource Play
Technology has led to quickly expanding resource development
Eagle Ford (TX)
Woodford (OK)
Marcellus (OH, WV, PA, NY)
Haynesville (TX, LA)
Fayetteville (AR)
Barnett (TX)
Source: HPDI; Encana Corporation Fig. 16
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Tri
llio
n C
ub
ic F
ee
t (T
cf)
U.S. Natural Gas Production & Consumption Domestic production has increased steadily since 2006
Natural Gas Production
Natural Gas Consumption
Source: U.S Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Fig. 18
Coal
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
WY WV KY PA MT TX IN IL ND OH CO
Mil
lio
n S
ho
rt T
on
s U.S. Coal Production by State, 2008-2011
Colorado coal production recovering after low point in 2010
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Top 10 states plus Colorado; short ton equals 2,000 pounds
Colorado ranks 11th with 27 million short tons
Fig . 20
0.06%
1.16% 0.09%
0.78%
0.73% 0.52% 0.24%
0.44% 0.29% 0.43%
0.89%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
MT WY IL WV KY PA OH CO TX NM ND IN
Bil
lio
n S
ho
rt T
on
s U.S. Coal Reserves & Utilization Rate, 2010
Percent equals utilization rate of state reserves; coal reserves are massive, contributing to an extremely small utilization rate
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration; Note: Reserves are "Estimated Recoverable Reserves"; short ton equals 2,000 pounds; 2010 is most recent year for domestic coal reserves data
CO ranks 8th in reserves with 9.61 billion short tons
and has a 0.26% utilization rate
Fig. 21
U.S. ranks 2nd with 1.09 billion
short tons
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
China U.S. India Australia Indonesia Russia South Africa Germany Poland Kazakhstan
Bil
lio
n S
ho
rt T
on
s Global Coal Production Leaders, 2008-2011
U.S. production holding steady as resource diversity expands; China coal production is increasing rapidly to match growing demand
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Fig. 22
Power
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% o
f G
en
era
tio
n
Net Generation History by Resource, 1950-2012
Renewables
Hydro
Nuclear
Natural Gas
Oil
Coal
Source: U.S Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Fig. 34
Coal 30%
Gas 41%
Nuclear 9%
Oil 5%
Hydro 9%
Renewables 6%
U.S. Operating Nameplate Capacity by Resource 1.14 terawatts of installed capacity
Source: U.S. Department of Energy; Energy Information Administration
U.S. Nameplate Capacity vs. Net Generation, 2011 Available installed capacity versus utilized capacity
Coal 43%
Gas 24%
Nuclear 19%
Oil 1%
Hydro 8%
Renewables 5%
U.S. Net Generation by Resource 4,123 terawatt hours of total generation
Fig. 35
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Combined Cycle
Wind Geothermal Advanced Coal
Advanced Nuclear
Biomass Combustion Turbine
Solar PV
Do
lla
rs p
er
Me
ga
wa
tt H
ou
r Levelized Costs for Electric Generation Plants Assuming a plant start date of 2017, the total levelized cost measures
competitiveness of different generating technologies; levelized costs include transmission, fuel, operations and maintenance, and capital
Transmission Investment
Variable O&M (including fuel)
Fixed O&M
Levelized Capital Cost
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: 2017 is referenced due to the long lead time required for some technologies and projects; estimates expressed above will vary by region
Fig. 33
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Nuclear Coal Hydro Wind Natural Gas Oil
Av
era
ge
Ca
pa
city
Fa
cto
r (%
)
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration
Average U.S. Capacity Factor by Resource, 2011 The average capacity factor of a power plant is the ratio of actual output per year
compared to the output of operating at full nameplate capacity
Fig. 36
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
PA WY KY DC ND AL LA SC WV MS CO
Me
ga
wa
tt H
ou
rs
U.S. Per Capita Electricity Consumption, 2010 Colorado has a low electricity (MWh) consumption rate per person
CO ranks 37th with 10.5 MWh/person
U.S. average is 12.2 MWh/person
Source: U.S. Census; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Top 10 states plus Colorado
Fig. 38
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
HI AK NY CT VT NJ NH CA MI ME CO
Ce
nts
pe
r K
ilo
wa
tt H
ou
r
2011
2012
Source: U.S. Census; U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration Note: Top 10 states plus Colorado
CO ranks 18th with 12.23 cents/kWh
U.S. 2012 average 12.04 cents/kWh
Average Residential Retail Electric Price, 2011-2012 Colorado has the 18th most expensive residential retail electricity price
Fig. 40
Renewables
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
TX IA CA IL MN OR WA OK CO ND
Me
ga
wa
tts
Total Installed Wind Capacity, 2009-2011 Widespread growth in wind installations; Texas is leading the way
2009
2010
2011
Source: SNL Energy
CO ranks 9th 1,803 MW
Fig. 26
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
CA NJ AZ CO FL NV NY NM HI TX
Me
ga
wa
tts
Total Installed Solar Capacity, 2009-2011 Significant growth in solar installations; California is leading the way
2009
2010
2011
CO ranks 4th 151 MW
Source: Solar Electric Power Association Fig. 27
Energy Policies & Programs
0
5
10
15
20
25
CO
2 E
mis
sio
ns
pe
r C
ap
ita
(m
illi
on
me
tric
to
ns)
CO2 Emissions Per Capita, 1960-2008
United States
World
China
Source: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
U.S. CO2 emissions per capita have declined from a peak of 22.5 million metric tons in 1973 to 18.0 million
China accounted for 25% of the world's total CO2 emissions in 2008 (7.7 billion metric tons)
while the U.S. was the second largest CO2 emitter with 17% (5.3 billion metric tons)
Fig. 43
Energy Efficiency Policies, 2012 Colorado requires electricity sales and demand to be reduced by 5% of 2006 numbers
by 2018; natural gas savings requirements vary by utility
Source: Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE) Fig. 47
2.74 2.69
2.42
2.18
2.07 2.00 1.99
1.92 1.89 1.81
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
CO IL VA WA MD MA TX CA NY MN
LE
ED
-Ce
rtif
ied
Sp
ace
pe
r C
ap
ita
(sq
. ft.
) Square Footage of LEED-Certified Space, 2011
Colorado has highest amount of LEED-certified space per capita
Source: U.S. Green Building Council
Fig. 46
Renewable Energy Policies, 2012 Colorado has a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) of 30% by 2020 for
investor owned utilities and 10% by 2020 for rural cooperatives and large munis
Source: Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE) Fig. 48
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
NY CA CT HA MI NC IL IN WA FL CO
Ce
nts
pe
r G
all
on
State Gasoline Tax, 2012
Colorado ranks 33rd in the nation; well below the national average
Source: American Petroleum Institute Note: Top 10 states plus Colorado
Colorado 22.0 Cents per Gallon
National Average 27.3 Cents per Gallon
Fig. 50
Employment & Industry
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Gro
wth
Ra
te (
%)
Fossil Fuel - Number of Employees Growth Rate Brief downturn during economic recession; average annual direct
employment growth rate for Colorado fossil fuel sector is 3.6%, 2007-2012
United States
Colorado
Source: Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; Marketplace database, July-September, 2006-2010; Market Analysis Profile, 2011-2012
The fossil fuel subcluster directly employed 43,430
workers in Colorado in 2012
Fig. 54
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Gro
wth
Ra
te (
%)
Cleantech - Number of Employees Growth Rate Recession had minimal impact on Colorado cleantech employment growth;
average annual direct employment growth rate for Colorado cleantech sector is 7.0%, 2007-2012
United States
Colorado
Source: Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.; Marketplace database, July-September, 2006-2010; Market Analysis Profile, 2011-2012
The cleantech subcluster directly employed 21,950
workers in Colorado in 2012
Fig. 56
Energy Cluster Economic Impact
65,400 direct energy jobs
Supports an additional 212,000 indirect jobs
Total economic impact of Colorado’s energy cluster = $13.7 billion annually
STERLING RANCH
RAINWATER HARVESTING AND
DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Sterling Ranch
Briefing to
Joint Ag
Committee
3/20/2013
2/25/2013
STERLING RANCH – WHO WE ARE
21st Century Sustainable
Community
Energy, water, l i festyle
Recreation & open spaces
Wildlife corridors
Low impact development - 37%
open space
Community supported agriculture
Leading water sustainability
Demand reduction incorporated
into land plan
Rainwater harvesting
Storm water management
Water quality improvement
2
3/20/2013
COLORADO WATER CHALLENGE
57% gap in 2050 municipal & industrial
water supply for metro basin (SWSI 2010),
or about 60,000 to 90,000 acre -feet/year.
As the State concluded, the gap can be
reduced. New growth has an opportunity to
develop in new ways to reduce the gap.
Sterl ing Ranch PD Water Plan - commercial
implementat ion of innovative water
practices :
Water demand reduct ion integrated into land
p lan wi th look -back adjustments .
Homes wi l l use 1/3 of what Douglas County
h is tor ica l ly requi red.
Regional water supply so lut ions wi th
conjunct ive use.
State ’s 1 st Rainwater Har vest ing P i lot (not
inc luded in water p lan unt i l proven) .
Reduce Demands
Improve Water Quality
Manage Supplies
3 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management
“Conservation”
Retroactive
May not be permanent (e.g. watering restrictions)
Affects budgets and may require higher rates
Demand Reduction
Essential for new projects
Prospective for new systems and projects
Produces permanent water savings
Built into financing
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 4
DEMAND MANAGEMENT
VERSUS CONSERVATION
Capturing natural precipitation – rain, snow, hail – and putting to beneficial use on the land it historically fell on.
Must be done in a manner that does not injure existing water rights.
Used effectively in many other states.
Was used in Colorado for centuries.
Should improve stream water quality by retaining nutrients and pollutants and keeping them out of the streams.
Should result in lower water and stormwater costs to homeowners.
Local application of rainwater saves significant water and energy costs compared to other renewable options in South Metro area.
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 5
RAINWATER HARVESTING
STERLING RANCH TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATION CENTER
Rainwater
harvesting
Waterwise
landscaping &
edible gardens
designed by DBG
Irrigation
technology
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 6
Water Demand Management when incorporated into Land
Planning Dramatically Reduces Consumption at the Home
50% or more reduction over traditional lawn
Has a Colorado aesthetic that is pleasing to home builders and buyers
Can reduce the homeowner’s cost of water even if water prices are high
Rainwater Harvesting
A materially important water source when used with water demand
management
Reliable water source relative to other renewable water supplies
Produces significant water even during drought conditions
Improves water quality
Is very cost efficient when used with stormwater management
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 7
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
TECHNOLOGY SITE LAYOUT
exempt well permit
allows for rainwater
harvesting
Sterling Ranch
weather
station
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 8
Traditional,
25 gallons
Moderate Conservation,
16 gallons
Waterwise,
7 gallons
DEMAND MANAGEMENT EXAMPLES
9
2012 DEMO SITE RESULTS
Record heat, temps 2-4°F above avg.
Summer precip 40% below avg.
Landscape stressed, came back by end
of season; plants and shrubs handled
prolonged heat better than irr igated
tur f.
Overall water use ~12.5 gal/ft 2
~30% less than Sterl ing Ranch Water
Plan value, and
>50% less than usage for a typical
landscape.
Another year of data with 2013.
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 10
~9,600 gallons captured during 2012 water
year (Nov to Oct, 14.9 inches).
85% of average annual precipitation.
Volume = ~1/3 rd demand of 1,500 sq-ft of irrigated
area of a typical Sterling Ranch waterwise home.
~1/3 rd of volume captured during the non -
irr igation season.
Cisterns fi l led and spilled in the spring.
Hail storms may be a challenge with cistern
capture.
No problems with quality of captured water.
2012 RAINWATER CAPTURE
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 11
BEYOND INDIVIDUAL CISTERNS
Underground Storage in Denver Metro Area source:
Precast Concepts
Alternative to Cisterns – Regional Collection
Regional systems make rainwater harvesting
economically viable.
Can be integrated into an enhanced storm
drainage system:
Increase long-term storage capacity
Pond liners to reduce seepage losses
Reduce nutrient stream loading
Targeted regional precipitation col lection
system could have captured ~480 acre -feet in
2012
About 1/4 of the annual outdoor demand at
build-out.
Current models show regional col lection could
save thousands of dol lars per ac -f t over
potable supply for i rr igation. More data to
refine.
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 12
PROGRESS TOWARD
OBTAINING A WATER RIGHT
Quantifying pre-development
return flows from precipitation to
create a plan that protects
existing water r ights:
Weather station (ET and
precipitation) installed March 2010;
Surface water runoff monitoring
started in June 2011;
Groundwater monitoring wells
installed September 2011.
Data wil l support a water court
application for an augmentation
plan.
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 13
Surface water monitoring
station on Upper Sterling Gulch.
Additional trail cameras to
document real-time runoff from
site at Titan Road.
No runoff from site at Titan
Road in 2011 or 2012.
RUNOFF UNDER NATURAL CONDITIONS
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 14
Develop and analyze rainwater harvesting data under the existing
law and prepare for an augmentation plan.
One more year of data from the technology demonstration site on
both rainwater and demand management.
More research into the impact of rainwater harvesting on stream
water quality.
Study the operational integration of rainwater harvesting into
stormwater management.
Planning full scale development using both Demand Management
and Rainwater Harvesting at Sterl ing Ranch.
NEXT STEPS
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 15
DISCUSSION
3/20/2013 Sterling Ranch, RWH & Demand Management 16
