Showing posts with label Waterbury. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Waterbury. Show all posts

Waterbury hydro need and economics

Friday, February 26, 2016

A recent order issuing a new hydropower license to Green Mountain Power Corporation's Waterbury Hydroelectric Project sheds insight into the project's operations and economics.

The Waterbury project is located at a dam built in 1938, and licensed for hydropower development since 1954.  After a 16-year relicensing process, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a new license for the project in February 2016, authorizing 5.52 megawatts of generating capacity.  That relicensing process illustrates how the Commission considers the need for power from the project, as well as project economics, when considering whether to relicense a hydropower project.

By regulation, the Commission's process for reviewing a license application includes an evaluation of the "need of the applicant over the short and long term for the electricity generated by the project or projects to serve its customers."  In the Waterbury project's relicensing case, this consideration of the applicant's "need for power" involved observations about the project's expected output as well as the regional power market.  The order notes historic average generation from the Waterbury Project of 17,562 MWh annually, but observes that under the new license average annual generation will be reduced to 14,767 MWh.

The order then states, "Electricity generated from the Waterbury Project will help supply the power needs in northern Vermont."  It also cites a 10-year forecast by electric reliability organization North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) showing summer peak demand in the region is expected to increase at an average rate of 0.84 percent per year between 2014 and 2023.  Based on this, the order concludes that "the project's power will help meet the regional need for power."

The Commission's process for determining whether to issue a new license for an existing hydroelectric project also includes consideration of public interest factors, such as the economic benefits of project power.  A 1995 decision established the Commission’s approach to evaluating the economics of hydropower projects.  Under that approach, the Commission uses current costs to compare the costs of the project and likely alternative power with no forecasts concerning potential future inflation, escalation, or deflation beyond the license issuance date.  The Commission has described the basic purpose of this economic analysis as to provide a general estimate of the potential power benefits and the costs of a project, and of reasonable alternatives to project power, "to support an informed decision concerning what is in the public interest with respect to a proposed license."

For the Waterbury project, as ultimately licensed with mandatory conditions and staff measures, the Commission concluded that:
  • the levelized annual cost of operating the project is $711,735, or $48.20/MWh
  • the proposed project would generate an average of 14,767 MWh of energy annually.
  • average generation is multiplied by the alternative power cost of $44.12/MWh, for a total value of the project’s power is $651,520, in 2015 dollars.
Therefore, the Commission concluded that in the first year of operation, the project would cost $60,215, or $4.08/MWh, more than the likely alternative cost of power.  As the order notes, "Although staff’s analysis shows that the project as licensed herein would cost more to operate than the estimated cost of alternative power, it is the applicant who must decide whether to accept this license and any financial risk that entails."

The Commission did note that its consideration of public interest factors also considers that "hydroelectric projects offer unique operational benefits to the electric utility system", including ancillary services like stability and rapid response.  The order also notes that while staff did not explicitly account for the effects inflation may have on the future cost of electricity, hydropower generation is relatively insensitive to inflation compared to fossil fueled generators -- illustrating why "project economics is only one of the many public interest factors the Commission considers in determining whether or not, and under what conditions, to issue a license."

FERC relicenses Waterbury hydro project

Thursday, February 25, 2016

More than 16 years after Green Mountain Power Corporation applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for a new license to continue operation and maintenance of its Waterbury Hydroelectric Project on the Little River in Vermont, the Commission has issued a new license for the project.

Waterbury dam and reservoir were built by the United States in 1938 to reduce flooding in the Winooski Valley, but are owned by the State of Vermont and operated by Green Mountain Power.  The Commission issued the original license for the project in 1954, effective September 1, 1951, for a period of 50 years.

That original license expired on August 31, 2001.  Two years before that date, Green Mountain Power applied for a new license to continue operation and maintenance of the project.  But relicensing a FERC-licensed hydropower project can be an involved process.  Environmental, conservation, and recreation-oriented groups intervened in the application case.  As the relicensing case progressed, the original license expired, after which Green Mountain Power operated the project under annual licenses pending the disposition of its license application.

Over time, the applicant revised its proposal, in part to propose a change to run-of-river operation as contemplated by the project's Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation water quality certification. Ultimately, on February 19, 2016, the Commission issued an order issuing a new license for the Waterbury Project for a period of 40 years.

In setting the 40-year license term for the Waterbury project's new license, the Commission noted its discretion under Section 15(e) of the Federal Power Act to issue new licenses for a term that the Commission determines to be in the public interest, but not less than 30 years or more than 50 years.  The order also notes the Commission's general policy "to establish 30-year terms for projects with little or no redevelopment, new construction, new capacity, or environmental mitigation and enhancement measures; 40-year terms for projects with a moderate amount of such activities; and 50-year terms for projects with extensive measures."

The Waterbury project relicensing case illustrates one potential path for what happens when a license expires for an existing FERC-licensed hydropower project.  According to the Commission, as of February 11, 2016, over 50 projects were pending relicensing, with an increase expected in applications for new licenses over the coming years.

Vermont, Quebec announce electric vehicle corridor

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Will a newly announced electric vehicle charging corridor in Vermont and Quebec lead to more electric vehicles in the region?

Solar panels on the roof of the Farm Barn at Shelburne Farms, in Shelburne, Vermont.

Electric vehicles are receiving increased interest, as drivers and policymakers look for ways to reduce the use of gasoline in the transportation sector.  For pure plug-in cars, the vehicle's range and the logistics of recharging the vehicle's battery are critically important.  Electric vehicle manufacturers try to address range anxiety through technological advances, while policymakers focus on ensuring that drivers have access to conveniently-spaced recharging infrastructure.

Today Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin and Quebec Premier Pauline Marois unveiled the first sites of the Vermont-Québec Electric Charging Corridor.  The 138-mile corridor will eventually connect Burlington, Vermont to Montreal, Quebec, using existing highways including I-89 and Canadian routes A-10, 104 and 133.  The plan calls for over the development of over 20 charging stations along the way.  Some stations are already in place, including charging stations in Sharon, Montpelier, South Burlington and Waterbury.

How quickly charging stations can recharge batteries depends on the technology used.  According to the U.S. Department of Energy's Plug-In Electric Vehicle Handbook, light-duty vehicle charging stations can be broken into three categories.  Level 1 stations offer 2 to 5 miles of added driving range per hour of charging.  Level 2 stations provide 10 to 20 miles of added range per hour of charge.  Much more expensive Level 3 or "DC fast charging" stations can add 60 to 80 miles of range in 20 minutes of charging.

Level 2 stations are proposed for the Vermont-Quebec corridor.  These stations will allow electric vehicle drivers to top off their batteries at the stations, and possibly to fully recharge their batteries overnight.  While the charge rate is still significantly slower than refilling a conventional vehicle's tank with gasoline, Vermont and Quebec hope that the cost and environmental benefits of electric vehicles will drive their greater adoption.