Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 January 2013
2013 Industry Forecast Russian Power Revolution Californias Future: Distributed Generation Hunting Black Swans
Your search for expertise ends with us. We build better boilers.
Satised customers discover the power of our practical knowledge the ability to design and build boilers that operate efciently, safely and cleanly in a variety of industrial applications, including rening, petro-chemical and power generation. The know-how of our engineers and technicians combined with our expanded facilities and equipment, including a new membrane panel welding machine results in economic value and competitive advantage for you. Weve been designing and building boilers for people who know and care since 1996.
WWW.RENTECHBOILERS.COM
January 2013
ON THE COVER
The Electric Power Research Institute, which contributed the cover story, titles our cover illustration Tomorrows Power System. It depicts the shift from almost exclusively central station generation and one-way power flows to a system in which power users are also sometimes generators, and in which both energy and information flow in two directions. Courtesy: EPRI 2012, All rights reserved
20
30
SPECIAL REPORTS
2013 INDUSTRY FORECAST
44
POWER IN RUSSIA
www.powermag.com
FEATURES
ASSET MANAGEMENT
FUTURE POWER
50
Once again, California is serving as energy industry paradigm changer. This time the shift is from central-station generation to increasingly pervasive distributed generationin large part driven by the states renewable energy mandates. How California copes with the associated gear-grinding will be instructive for the rest of the U.S.
DEPARTMENTS
SPEAKING OF POWER
8 World Energy Outlook Foresees Distinct Generation Shift 9 Floating Solaron Water 10 THE BIG PICTURE: The Coal Pile
FOCUS ON O&M
14 Safety a Main Theme at Asian Coal Users Meeting 16 Controlling Fugitive Combustible Coal Dust
LEGAL & REGULATORY
16
Connect with POWER
If you like POWER magazine, follow us online (POWERmagazine) for timely industry news and comments. Become our fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Join the LinkedIn POWER magazine Group
2
The stories in this issue look ahead to the power industrys future. Online, associated with this issue (on our homepage, www.powermag.com, during the month of January or in our Archives any time), youll find these web exclusives that look back at how we got where we are today:
Navigant Announces Coal-Fired Generation Operational Excellence Awards Grading My 2012 Industry Projections (By Editor-in-Chief Bob Peltier) Too Dumb to Meter, Part 7 (The Atomic Earth-Blaster, Chariot Swings Down to Alaska, and Sedan Side Trip to Nevada chapters from Contributing Editor Kennedy Maize) Russias Power Profile (A detailed supplement to the special report in this issue, by Senior Writer Sonal Patel)
And remember to check our Whats New? segment on the homepage regularly for justposted news stories covering all fuels and technologies.
www.powermag.com
Visit POWER on the web: www.powermag.com Subscribe online at: www.submag.com/sub/pw POWER (ISSN 0032-5929) is published monthly by Access Intelligence, LLC, 4 Choke Cherry Road, Second Floor, Rockville, MD 20850. Periodicals Postage Paid at Rockville, MD 20850-4024 and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to POWER, P .O. Box 2182, Skokie, IL 60076. Email: powermag@halldata.com. Canadian Post 40612608. Return Undeliverable Canadian Addresses to: PitneyBowes, P .O. BOX 25542, London, ON N6C 6B2. Subscriptions: Available at no charge only for qualified executives and engineering and supervisory personnel in electric utilities, independent generating companies, consulting engineering firms, process industries, and other manufacturing industries. All others in the U.S. and U.S. possessions: $87 for one year, $131 for two years. In Canada: US$92 for one year, US$148 for two years. Outside U.S. and Canada: US$197 for one year, US$318 for two years (includes air mail delivery). Payment in full or credit card information is required to process your order. Subscription request must include subscriber name, title, and company name. For new or renewal orders, call 847-763-9509. Single copy price: $25. The publisher reserves the right to accept or reject any order. Allow four to twelve weeks for shipment of the first issue on subscriptions. Missing issues must be claimed within three months for the U.S. or within six months outside U.S. For customer service and address changes, call 847-7639509 or fax 832-242-1971 or e-mail powermag@halldata .com or write to POWER, P .O. Box 2182, Skokie, IL 60076. Please include account number, which appears above name on magazine mailing label or send entire label. Photocopy Permission: Where necessary, permission is granted by the copyright owner for those registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, www.copyright.com, to photocopy any article herein, for commercial use for the flat fee of $2.50 per copy of each article, or for classroom use for the flat fee of $1.00 per copy of each article. Send payment to the CCC. Copying for other than personal or internal reference use without the express permission of TradeFair Group Publications is prohibited. Requests for special permission or bulk orders should be addressed to the publisher at 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042. ISSN 0032-5929. Executive Offices of TradeFair Group Publications: 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042. Copyright 2013 by TradeFair Group Publications. All rights reserved.
ADVERTISING SALES
Sales Manager: Matthew Grant Southern & Eastern U.S./Eastern Canada/ Latin America: Matthew Grant, 713-343-1882, mattg@powermag.com Central & Western U.S./Western Canada: Dan Gentile, 512-918-8075, dang@powermag.com UK/Benelux/Scandinavia/Germany/ Switzerland/Austria/Eastern Europe: Petra Trautes, +49 69 5860 4760, ptrautes@accessintel.com Italy/France/Spain/Portugal: Ferruccio Silvera, +39 (0) 2 284 6716, ferruccio@silvera.it Japan: Katsuhiro Ishii, +81 3 5691 3335, amskatsu@dream.com India: Faredoon B. Kuka, 91 22 5570 3081/82, kuka@rmamedia.com South Korea: Peter Kwon, +82 2 416 2876, +82 2 2202 9351, peterhkwon@hanmail.net Thailand: Nartnittha Jirarayapong, +66 (0) 2 237-9471, +66 (0) 2 237 9478 Malaysia: Tony Tan, +60 3 706 4176, +60 3 706 4177 , nmedia@tm.net.my Classified Advertising Diane Hammes, 713-343-1885, dianeh@powermag.com POWER Buyers Guide Sales Diane Hammes, 713-343-1885, dianeh@powermag.com
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Audience Development Director: Sarah Garwood Fulfillment Manager: George Severine
CUSTOMER SERVICE
For subscriber service: Electronic and Paper Reprints: List Sales: All Other Customer Service: powermag@halldata.com, 800-542-2823 or 847-763-9509 Wrights Media, sales@wrightsmedia.com, 877-652-5295 Statlistics, Jen Felling, j.felling@statlistics.com, 203-778-8700 713-343-1887
BUSINESS OFFICE
TradeFair Group Publications, 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042 Vice President and Publisher: Brian K. Nessen, 713-343-1887 , briann@tradefairgroup.com Vice President, Energy and Engineering Events: David McKinnon
www.powermag.com
As a nationwide technical leader in ZLD system development, Don has 40 years of experience consulting with utilities on the water requirements for coal and other power plants. Tisha has led the installation of ZLD systems for clients facing regulatory challenges to their power plant water systems. They are two of our experienced professionals who can help you identify the water alternative that ts: Zero liquid discharge Customized wastewater treatment and water management Constructed wetlands Landll and pond management Bottom ash handling
www.burnsmcd.com/water-team
SPEAKING OF POWER
10. Kyoto 2 is DOA. The Kyoto Protocol expired on Dec. 31, 2012, and an extension (Kyoto 2) was formulated in late 2011 as an interim measure until a new treaty was negotiated, slated for 2015. COP18, which ended on Dec. 7, made no tangible progress. Few nations have backed Kyoto 2, and Russia, Japan, and Canada have rejected the measure unless China and India also accept binding targets. In 2013, China and India wont engage, and the European Union (EU) will stay at arms length until there is agreement for carryover of unused emissions allowances, which the many small member countries disagree with. 9. Coal Combustion Residuals, and Cooling Water Intake Structures Rules Go Live. Why would the administration go into low gear with these two regulations in 2012 and delay post-election into 2013 unless the rules were onerous? Expect coal ash to be reclassified as a special waste and new plants (plus some existing ones) to be forced to begin the move from once-through cooling to cooling towers. 8. Natural Gas Prices Rise. Expect the
6
average price of natural gas used for power generation to rise 20% and the amount of electricity produced by natural gas to drop by at least 10% in 2013, below 2012 levels. 7. Coal Use Rises, But No New Plants Are Built. As gas prices rise, the use of coal for power generation will follow suit, but at a lower rate. Expect coal-fired generation to rise 7% to 8% in 2013, over 2012 levels. Unfortunately, no new coal plants will begin construction in the U.S. in 2013. 6. The EU Embraces Coal. EU member countries will begin construction of several new supercritical coal-fired plants in 2013 in preference to gas-fired combined cycle plants. The price of natural gas imported from Russia into the EU is pegged to the price of oil, making indigenous coal a very attractive fuel, particularly when carbon allowance are at historic lows, and the EU has already reached its 2020 carbon dioxide reduction goals. 5. The EPA Fracks Gas. On the same day the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for the oil and natural gas industry (Aug. 16, 2012), a group of associations petitioned the EPA administrator for reconsideration of certain provisions (now pending). Also, the petitions of eight industry groups challenging the NSPS were combined and filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 15, 2012. The first hearing is set for Dec. 21, 2012. I predict that the EPA will make small adjustments in the rule to correct the most egregious errors, but the Court of Appeals will strike down the rule for many of the same reasons it did the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. 4. Demand Stays Flat. The Energy Information Administrations (EIAs) Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early Release Overview (AEO2013 Overview) predicts that demand for electricity will rise at a rate of 0.9% for 2013. In my opinion, the prospects for an economic stall in early 2013 are very high, thereby quenching the hope of an increase in
www.powermag.com
the GDP growth rate. Electricity demand will grow at the more pedestrian rate of 0.7%. 3. Electricity Costs Rise. The average domestic cost of electricity will reach a new milestone of 12 cents/kWh in 2013, an increase of about 2%, according to the EIA. 2. LNG Stays Home. The EIAs December 2012 release of its AEO2013 Overview predicts that a surplus of natural gas will be available for liquefied natural gas (LNG) export by 2016, and the volumes are double those predicted in last years report. With legislators calling on President Obama to declare a moratorium on gas exports and only a single new export terminal approved (Cheniere Energys facility in Sabine Pass, La.) to date, the infrastructure is unlikely to be in place by 2016 to export any significant additional quantities. Other than Cheniere Energy, dont expect approvals for additional export terminals in 2013, which will make the EIA predictions moot. 1. The Carbon Tax Dies. Perhaps the most disturbing concept under discussion by our congressional representatives on both sides of the aisle is the political viability of a carbon tax. Spurring on that discussion was the September 2012 study by the Congressional Research Service that suggested the U.S. budget deficit could be reduced 50% in 10 years if a $20 per metric ton carbon tax were enacted. The tax is represented by some as a way to fight climate change, although many legislators are more interested in the tax as a new revenue source, and others wish to use the revenues to stem the flow of federal budget red ink. Expect plenty of talk but little action, because a tax by any other name is still a tax. I dont expect everyone to agree with each of my predictions. If you have strong feelings, aye or nay, let me know at editor@ powermag.com. Dr. Robert Peltier, PE is POWERs editor-in-chief.
POWER January 2013
NUCLEAR GAS COAL RENEWABLES AIR QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEMS GENERATION SERVICES MAINTENANCE & MODIFICATIONS
www.shawgrp.com
CIRCLE 4 ON READER SERVICE CARD
59M112012D
nuclear vary considerably across countries: some continue to encourage public and private investment in new capacity, while others ban the use of nuclear energy or have introduced programmes to phase it out, the IEA says. But capital costs will also play an enormous role, as will carbon prices, and water scarcity, which can pose reliability risks for coal-fired and nuclear plants while also influencing the generation mix and generating costs. The Flight of Wind and Solar PV In 2035, the report forecasts, almost two-thirds of the capacity in operation today will still be generating power. Gas- and coalfired plants will make up the bulk of gross capacity additions, but wind capacity will also make its mark. About half of the projected 1,250 GW of gross wind capacity additions will be installed in OECD countries. The fledgling solar photovoltaic (PV) sector will also take off with a global capacity increase that is almost as big as that of hydropower and 2.5 times as large as the net increase in nuclear capacity, the IEA says (Figure 2). It notes, however, that power generated from new solar capacity will be considerably less than the increase in nuclear power generation, reflecting the much lower average availability (capacity factor) of these plants and the variable nature of their output. Some Regions to See Marked Change Certain recent events will distinctly shape future power plans for some countries. In the U.S., for example, the recent shale gas boom and environmental regulations geared toward coal and oil plants have put the nation on track to see a sharp increase in gas-fired generation to replace nearly 110 GW of retired coal capacity by 2035, the report estimates. Japan is still experiencing energy-related aftershocks from the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi incident, and a September-
About a third of new capacity additions through 2035 will replace retired generating facilities. More than 50% of new capacity additions will be from new gas plants and wind farms, and about 30% will come from coal and hydropower, the International Energy Agency forecasts. Courtesy: World Energy Outlook 2012 OECD/IEA 2012, figure 6.2, page 183 Retirements: 20122025 20262035 Capacity additions: 20122025 20262035 Net capacity change
Coal Gas
OECD
2010 2035
Non-OECD
2010 2035
World
21,140 TWh 36,640TWh 100% Other 600 300 0 300 GW 600 900 1,200 1,500
www.powermag.com
released Innovative Strategy for Energy and Environment aims to reduce reliance on nuclear power, which had in 2010 provided a quarter of all electricity generated in Japan. But even if no new nuclear plants are built through 2035 beyond the two reactors at Shimane-3 and Ohma that are already at an advanced stage of construction, and existing plants are subjected to shorter lifetimes, nuclear generation could recover a 20% share by 2020 (but could be slashed to 15% by 2035, its share picked up by renewables), the current Outlook suggests. The European Union (EU), which pioneered and continues to be at the forefront of renewable deployment, in 2011 drew away from gas-fired generation (which fell by 17%) and moved toward coal-fired generation (which increased by 11%), driven by higher gas prices and lowered carbon prices in the systemwide Emissions Trading System. The IEA forecasts that trend will continue in the short term even if carbon prices increase over the 20132020 period. The share of coal-fired generation will drop dramatically from 26% in 2010 to just 9% in 2035, the report says, citing higher carbon prices and a greater penetration of renewables. Gas-fired generation will also regain market share in the longer term as the share of nuclear power will decline (from 28% in 2010 to 22% in 2035) as more capacity is retired. One notable trend emerging globally concerns increased urgency to reform competitive electricity markets to buttress against increased price volatility associated with the surge of renewables and ensure that the risks of investing in other capacitysuch as flexible peaking plants, storage, interconnection or demand responseare correctly priced, the report says. With more interconnections established neighboring 3202 MetFab being 4c ad:Layout 1 between 1/19/10 3:28 PM markets Page 1
Boiler Lime or PAC Handling Systems Hoppers, Feeders, Piping, and Ductwork Wear Resistant Plate and Weld Overlay Wear Protection Fully Engineered and Shop Assembled Fan and
Pipe Skids For more information and a FREE 4/c brochure visit www.metalfabinc.com, e-mail: sales@metalfabinc.com, call 800-764-2999, in NJ 973-764-2000, or Fax: 973-764-0272.
P.O. Box 9, Prices Switch Road Vernon, NJ 07462
www.powermag.com
10. GERMANY
12,060 MW (10 plants) #4: 251.15 TWh
10.
9. POLAND 8. UKRAINE
12,086 MW (13 plants) #10: 133.42 TWh
9. 8. 7. 6. 5.
7. U.S.
20,236 MW (36 plants) #2: 1,890.06 TWh
6. S. AFRICA
22,633 MW (8 plants) #6: 232.20 TWh
5. VIETNAM
34,725 MW (30 plants) #34: 14.98 TWh
4. TURKEY
36,719 MW (49 plants) #17: 54.23 TWh
4.
3. RUSSIA
3.
48,000 MW (48 plants) #9: 156.76 TWh
2. INDIA
2.
Key developers: state-owned NTPC (47 plants), state-owned Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. (14 plants), JSW Group (12 plants), Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corp. (11 plants), Essar Energy (11 plants)
1. CHINA
557,938 MW (363 plants) #1: 2,891.66 TWh
1.
Key developers: state-owned Huaneng (66 plants), state-owned Guodian (55 plants), state-owned Datang (43 plants), state-owned Huadian (37 plants), stateowned China Power Investment (31 plants)
KEY Proposed coal plant capacity Global rank of total coal generation in 2009
10
www.powermag.com
First IR process photometer for continuous SO3 measurement in ppm ranges Elevated SO3 / H2SO4 concentrations in lue gas cause concerns from both an environmental and corrosion standpoint. Uncontrolled injection of control reagents wastes money. With the MCS03, real time control of your acid problem is a reality. Thanks to specially adapted IR spectral ranges and the hot/extractive system, effective control can be achieved.
SICK Process Automation Division United States - Houston | Minneapolis | 281-436-5100 Canada - Calgary | Toronto | 855-742-5583 www.sicknorthamerica.com | information@sick.com
CIRCLE 6 ON READER SERVICE CARD
3. Rocking solar.
A concept proposed by Norwegian foundation DNV calls for a hexagonal solar panel array that floats on the seas surface. DNV says a collection of these arrays, totaling 4,200 solar panels, could form a solar island the size of a large soccer stadium and be capable of generating 2 MW. Courtesy: DNV
from the lengthy spread mooring. DNV said that the island has also been optimized for solar capability and cabling efficiency. The solar arrays are divided into electrical zones feeding electricity produced into two main switches collecting the power for voltage step up at a central transformer (2 MVA 480/34.5 kV). From the offshore solar farms central island, 30-kV electrical transmission lines connect, tying other islands in
series to form a closed loop and continue to the electrical substation onshore for grid connection, said Kevin Smith, global segment director for DNV KEMAs Renewable Energy Services. The concept of a floating solar array is not new, though only a handful of developers seem to be involved so far. Israeli startup Solaris Synergy in February 2011, for example, installed a modular floating concentrating PV system at the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies Center for Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation north of the Israeli resort town of Eilat that connects to the Israel Electric Corp. grid. Solaris Synergy has also so far signed strategic partnership agreements with Mekorot (the Israeli national water company) and French power company EDF for deployment of their first operational pilot plants of 12 to 15 kW each. The company says it is focusing future efforts on water bodies associated with hydroelectric dams, pumped storage installations, and cooling ponds of electric power plantslocations that typically have existing power grid connections. The company claims that a massive market potential exists for the technology using these industrial water surfaces aloneenough to produce a total of 90 GW of solar power. Other players include French company Sky Earth, which has operated a pilot project in the south of France since February 2011 and is now developing 12-MW and 4-MW projects in that region. Associated drawbacks of floating solar plants have also already been established. Aside from cumbersome maintenance and repair, concerns have been voiced about solar energy concentration levels on a rocking platform. Then there are ecological and cost concerns. Sonal Patel is POWERs senior writer.
Sorb-N-Ject
Dry Sorbent Injection Solutions
Mitigation of Hg SO2 SO3 HCI HF Customized innovation based on proven technology Flexible design to meet your precise needs Reliable, automated operation and control Scalable installation to cover scope of any system On-site, self-contained testing systems Call 651-780-8600 today to begin an analysis of your mitigation needs.
www.nol-tec.com
Nol-Tec Systems, Inc. 425 Apollo Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55014 651.780.8600 sales@nol-tec.com
SERVICES: CLIENTELE: DetailedDesignEPCCM UtilitiesIPPsIndustry StudiesOwner&Bank UniversitiesOEMs Engineering Banks/Investors PROJECTS (New, Retrot & Modications): BiomassSolar(Thermal&PV)Simple&CombinedCycle WindFluidizedBed/PC/StokerBoilersBiofuelsMSW GasiicationLandillGasPyrolysisPlantImprovements AirPollutionControlCHP/CogenerationEnergySavings Engine-GeneratorsFacilities/Buildings&Systems
Chairman/CEO
Bob Bibb
President/COO
Lou Gonzales
VPEngineering
Dave Wiker
Mgr.Civil/Structural
Matt Helwig
Mgr.Bus.Develop.
Chris Bramhall
Nick Francoviglia
ChiefMech.Eng.
Mgr.Mechanical
Rob Schmitt
Roger Petersen
Bus.Dev.LA
In addition, the mill and the boiler were retuned to handle LCV coals in an effort to obtain optimal operation and system performance. The tuning involved adjusting the mill outlet temperature in accordance with a coal fuel ranking system. Under the system, bituminous coal with a calorific value between 7,800 and 6,380 kcal/kg was classified as A, highcaloric value subbituminous coal of between 6,380 and 5,800 kcal/kg was classified as B, lowcaloric value subbituminous coal of between 5,800 and 4,600 kcal/kg was classified as C, and lowercaloric value subbituminous coal of less than 4,600 kcal/kg was classified as D. (Note that 1 kcal = 3.97 Btu and 1 kg = 2.2 pounds.) Boiler control parameters were adjusted, depending on the classification of the coal being burned. For example, existing boiler control function curves had been set for highcaloric value coal (6,300 kcal/kg), but that practice resulted in an oversupply of combustion air when LCV coal was used. This had the dual effects of reducing boiler efficiency and increasing the coal flow. Lau said that Lamma station operators learned that, based on the tuning results, excess O2 could be trimmed 1% at full load and 0.5% at half load. This adjustment enhanced boiler efficiency and alleviated unit derating when LCV coal was burned. Lau reported several improvements to plant operations as a result of the modifications. First, plant output increased when two types of LCV coal labeled A and B were burned. Following new settings that placed the mill outlet temperature at 70C, excess O2 at 3.2%, and the induced draft fan blade opening at 83%/77%, electrical output using coal A rose some 28.3 MW from a base of 322.4 MW to 350.7 MW. Auxiliary power consumption dropped by 0.31%, and boiler efficiency rose 0.79%. New settings applied to coal B combustion resulted in an increase of 17.3 MW from a base of 348.6 MW, to 365.9 MW. Auxiliary power consumption dropped by 0.74% and boiler efficiency rose 0.53%. The improvement in boiler efficiency was attributed to reduc-
2. Korean coal connection. Sung-Won Ha (right), senior manager with Korea South-East Power Co., answered questions following his presentation at the second annual Asian Sub-Bituminous Coal Users Group conference, which was held in Hong Kong in early November. Source: POWER, David Wagman
1. Asian coal users confab. Delegates to the second annual Asian Sub-Bituminous Coal Users Group meeting in Hong Kong mingle prior to the start of a conference session. The meeting drew power generators from across Asia and North America to discuss the safe, efficient, and economic use of sub-bituminous coal by generating companies. Source: POWER, David Wagman
14
www.powermag.com
tion in excess air as well as uplifting of mill inlet temperature, Lau said. The latter would increase the hot primary airflow, thus lowering the flue gas temperature and dry flue gas loss. Sung-Won Ha, senior manager with Korea South-East Power Co. (KOSEP) at its 3,340-MW Yeongheung power plant, said that as the use of subbituminous coal has increased, boiler combustion environments have grown worse. It is very important that power plant companies develop a coal management program for operation and maintenance cost reduction and increased efficiency. He said that for economical coal purchases, three cost factors should be considered: fuel cost, the operational cost for coal supply and flue gas draft systems, and maintenance costs for equipment malfunctions and replacement. Economical coal management means coal selection and mixing to satisfy these three factors, he said. He said that around 40 coals arrived at the Yeongheung station during 2011 from sources that included the United States, Canada, Colombia, Russia, Indonesia, and Australia. A maximum of four different coals may be burned each day with caloric values that range from 3,760 to 6,600 kcal/kg, moisture content that ranges from 6% to 41% and sulfur content that varies between 0.1% and 1.2%. Use of the fuel led to several problems, including pulverized coal deposition on the coal pipe due to condensation, coal feeder outlet clogs also due to moisture, and excessive soot production. Broadly speaking, the plant faced challenges due to the variety of coals, their diverse characteristics, the frequency with which they were changed, and the possibility of receiving coal whose properties violated design parameters. To help mitigate the problems, manage the coal diversity, and help the plant achieve steadily tightening environmental restrictions, an
E-Coal Operation Management System (E-COMS) was devised. E-COMS focuses on coal sampling, coal unloading, coal handling, managing short-term and long-term coal stockpile trends, and coal yard inventory control. The approach considers at least 10 variablessuch as coal rank, coal blending, boiler efficiency, maintenance costs, and auxiliary loadand seeks a balance among optimized coal blending, predictive combustion, and economic value. In order to improve the accuracy for the program, we made use of operation data in real time, Ha said. With this predictive data, coal blending can be made economical and eco-friendly. He said E-COMS will be upgraded continuously so that it becomes even more of a more reliable and user-friendly program as it interfaces with other programs. Richard P. Storm, president of Innovative Combustion Technologies Inc., said the pulverizer mills in a coal-fired power plant condition coal for proper combustion and deliver all of the fuel to the boiler. Because of this, the pulverizers are among the most important group of auxiliary equipment that affect unit reliability, performance, and capacity, as well as the ability to generate power economically. The pulverizers also present a constant risk to safety, which is especially true when firing highmoisture content and highly reactive subbituminous coals. He said these coals are more prone to mill fires and puffs, largely due to the high heat required to dry subbituminous coal prior to combustion. The heat that is required is a product of the temperature and quantity of airflow at the mill inlet. Because subbituminous coal is 15% to 30% moisture, very hot mill inlet temperatures are required to dry the coal and achieve mill outlet temperature. In particular, temperatures can be hot under the yoke, but are quickly reduced once mixed with the coal moisture after passing through the
www.powermag.com
15
throat. The temperature below the yoke is close to many subbituminous coals auto-ignition temperatures, Storm said. As a result, coal spillage into the wind belt under the yoke is a common cause of mill fires. Rejected coal quickly dries and ignites in the high-temperature, oxygen-rich environment. Coal feed interruptions also are a potential source of fires, Storm said. In this case, raw coal supply is interrupted due to imprecise feeder control and stoppages above and below the feeder. With no supply of moist coal, the higher temperatures and airto-fuel ratios present under the yoke migrate upwards into the grinding zone. This is also a risk in the case of mill trips or shutdown. Accumulations of debris or coal anywhere in the pulverizer also will increase the chance of a mill fire because accumulation and settling in the pulverizer components allow coal to dry and may lead to spontaneous ignition. Storm said excessive airflow to the pulverizer provides an abundant source of air to combust ignition sources, including smoldering coal in the classifier, pulverizer, or raw coal under the yoke. Smoldering coal from the bunker reaches a point of deflagration as it travels through the feeder and moves into the mill. Smoldering coal, which has no access to oxygen in the tightly packed bunker, will suddenly be exposed to oxygen as it breaks apart in transit. That, coupled with a decrease in particle size, can compound the danger of a fire. Storm said fundamental precautionary methods to reduce the chance of a pulverizer puff include the following: Ensuring that pulverizer airflow is adequate to facilitate stable transport of coal without settling in the burner but not excessively high to provide an abundant source of air for combustion in the presence of an ignition source. Taking all measures to prevent coal from accumulating or settling in any of the pulverizer components. Ensuring that raw coal to the pulverizer remains uninterrupted and controllable. This can be done through precise feeder control and minimizing stoppages above and below the feeder. Ensuring that no hot smoldering or burning raw fuel is anywhere in the pulverizer system. It is imperative that raw coal spillage into the under bowl area be prevented.
on other concealed surfaces, producing more dust clouds and creating a domino effect that causes further explosions. Preventing Explosions by Using Appropriate Vacuum Cleaners Bill Bobbitt of Bobbitt Associates Environmental Systems, whos been working in the safety field for more than 25 years, said, I always tell my clients, it not a matter of if, but when. Conditions have to be perfect and that when can be 30 years from now, or it could be next week. But if you eliminate the fugitive dust, it cannot create a secondary dust explosion. The National Electrical Code (NEC) defines hazardous locations as those areas where fire or explosion hazards may exist due to flammable gases or vapors, flammable liquids, combustible dust, or ignitable fibers or flyings. Hazardous locations are classified in three ways by the NEC: type, condition, and nature. Class II locations are those areas made hazardous by the presence of combustible dust. Finely pulverized material, suspended in the atmosphere, can cause powerful explosions. The NEC also specifies that hazardous material may exist in several different kinds of conditions, which, for simplicity, can be described as normal conditions (Division 1) and abnormal conditions (Division 2). In the normal condition, the hazard would be expected to be present in everyday production operations or during frequent repair and maintenance activity. When the hazardous material is expected to be confined within closed containers or closed systems and will be present only through accidental rupture, breakage, or unusual faulty operation, the situation would be called abnormal. As the first line of defense in housekeeping routines to prevent catastrophic explosions caused by combustible dust and comply with regulatory agencies, plant personnel need to employ industrial vacuum cleaners that are built from the bottom up to be used in a variety of Class II, Division 2 areas (Figure 4). Redundantly grounded indus-
3. Explosive situation. Primary dust explosions occur when combustible dust such as coal dust is present, forms a dust cloud (in sufficient amounts) in an enclosed environment with an ignition source and oxygen. If any one of these elements is missing, there can be no explosion. Source: National Fire Protection Association
Ignition
For more information on the Asian Sub-bituminous Coal Users Group, visit www.asiansbcusers.org. More information on the Powder River Basin Coal Users Group may be found at www.prbcoals.com. David Wagman is executive editor of POWER.
Combustible dust
Oxygen in air
www.powermag.com
trial vacuum cleaners are designed to shield workers and property from catastrophic secondary coal dust explosions. Perils of Standard Shop-Type Vacuums Any time there is powder flowing in one direction through a plastic vacuum-cleaning hose, it can create a significant static electric charge. In addition, there may be static electricity buildup on individual dust particles. If a charged, ungrounded hose used to vacuum combustible dust were to contact an object that was grounded, the static electricity could then arc and trigger a violent explosion. This is why the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued numerous citations for plant personnel using standard vacuum cleaners where Class II, Division 2 equipment is required under the law. Bobbitt sees a number of standard shoptype vacuums in plants. There are so many problems with them. They themselves are hazards in an industrial environment, he said. First and foremost, they are not grounded or classified for Class II, Division 2 areas. In addition, they can shock workers and
5. Intrinsically safe systems. The VACU-MAX compressed airpowered vacuums meet regulatory requirements for grounding and bonding. Employing this type of industrial vacuum cleaner that is redundantly grounded eliminates the possibility of any kind of explosion from the vacuum. Courtesy: VAC-U-MAX
they clog easily. Not surprisingly, the workers dont want to use them, and if workers dont use them, fugitive dust continues to accumulate in the plant. Recently, Bobbitt discussed challenges with using Class II, Division 2 electric vacuums at a meeting of the Kansas City Power & Light (KCP&L) Coal Handling Group, where safety professionals from each of the KCP&L power stations came together to discuss proactive solutions to safety challenges. He described a recent incident in which he was shown five different expensive Class II, Division 2 electric vacuums sitting in a warehouse at a power plant not being used. Plant personnel told him that they did not want to utilize the equipment because after 20 minutes of use, the filters would bind. In addition, they were reluctant to use them because they continually had to lift the head from the vacuum cleaners and tap the cake off before they could achieve the appropriate suction levels. This same power plant, and its five sister facilities, now use a Class II, Division 2 air-powered VAC-U-MAX model with a pulse-cleaning system on the filters, that with the push of a button releases the dust from the filter and allows the user to resume cleaning, Bobbitt said. The VAC-U-MAX company developed the first air-operated industrial vacuum in 1954 and has been the pioneer in solving vacuum-related challenges in a wide range of manufacturing and industrial settings (Figures 5 and 6).
Advantages of Redundantly Grounded Industrial Vacuum Cleaners Employing an industrial vacuum cleaner that is redundantly grounded in five different ways eliminates the possibility of any kind of explosion from the vacuum, Bobbitt explained. Although VAC-U-MAX does produce electric vacuums designed for Class II, Division 2 environments, the most economical solution for cleaning combustible fugitive coal dust is the companys air-operated vacuums. This type of vacuum is safer in terms of grounding, and it also works more efficiently in the industrial environment. Beyond the fact that VAC-U-MAX air-operated vacuums use no electricity and have no moving parts, the first of the five ways that these vacuums are grounded begins with the air line that supplies compressed air to the units. Because most plants have compressed air lines made from iron that conduct electricity, the companys air-operated vacuums use static conductive high-pressure compressed air lines. In addition to the static conductive air lines, static conductive hoses, filters, and casters are employed to further reduce risk. Furthermore, a grounding lug and strap that travels from the vacuum head down to the 55-gallon drum is used to eliminate the potential for arcing. Bobbitt added that when you are dealing with explosive dust, you may need a Class II, Division 2 vacuum cleaner in a non-Class II, Division 2 area. You might have small quantities of explosive dust, and it might take a very hot and prolonged source of ignition, but with OSHAs Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program (NEP), facilities need to be very careful that they comply because there are a lot of questions as to what compliance means, he said. Housekeeping violations ranked second in citations under the NEP with respect to combustible dust related hazards, according to recent OSHA statistics. In addition, the agency issued citations for General Duty Clause violations involving the practice of blowing dust with an air compressor and not using electrical equipment that was designed for hazardous (classified) locations. In fact, in the Electric Services Industry Group from October 2010 through September 2011, the General Duty Clause violation category was one of the top 10 violation categories most frequently cited by OSHA. Although the regulations for combustible dust arent real clear, I find that a lot of companies are trying to get better at general housecleaning, Bobbitt said. Contributed by Doan Pendleton (info@ vac-u-max.com), vice president of marketing and sales at VAC-U-MAX.
17
www.powermag.com
Allison Davis
Kerry Shea
he California Air Resources Board (CARB) recently kicked off a new era in its cap-and-trade program designed to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) when it held its first GHG emissions allowance auction on November 14. While CARB pronounced the auction a success, the low price and lukewarm demand for allowances evidences market reticence to fully embrace the program. As a procedural matter, the auction was a success. It had no electronic glitches, and there was no evidence of tampering or interfering with the market. A brief analysis of the results, however, shows that the auction did not generate the enthusiasm that CARB expected.
Wide Participation But at a Low Price As a key part of Californias Global Warming Act, or AB 32, the cap-and-trade program relies on allowances as permission for entities to emit CO2 and other GHGs. The program sets a cap on total emissions that reduces yearly. Emitters must surrender one allowance per metric ton of CO2 (or CO2 equivalent). The program anticipates a secondary market in which emitters and others can buy and sell extra allowances. Those looking to trade in this secondary market will closely watch the allowance price from this and future quarterly auctions. The first auctions results indicate its success may be less than suggested by CARBs press release. First, the sale price for allowances was not as high as anticipated. While all of the available 2013 allowances (23,126,110) were sold, the sales price was $10.09, barely above the $10 minimum reserve price. Many expected the allowances to sell for $12 to $13 each. Second, the auction also included 2015 vintage allowances, of which only about 15% sold at the minimum reserve price of $10. These results indicate that market participants are taking seriously the obligation to obtain allowances but are uncertain of the programs future. The low prices and the minimal number of 2015 allowances purchased may indicate wariness. In essence, participants seem to be dipping their toes in the water, but they are not ready to take the plunge by purchasing large quantities of allowances. Challenges to the Cap-and-Trade Program Market participants cautious responses may be motivated by ongoing uncertainties caused by various court challenges to the cap-and-trade program. Todays prices for 2015 allowances may be inexpensive, but if the courts delay, narrow, or totally reject CARBs cap-and-trade program, todays bargain price could be tomorrows regulatory lemon. Most recently, the California Chamber of Commerce filed suit in state court to enjoin CARB from allocating to itself GHG allowances and then selling them through an auction process to raise revenue. This auction earned the state over $230 million. CARB has reserved for sale approximately 10% of GHG emission allowances. The Chamber asserted that CARB should allocate all
18
Environmental groups filed a state suit in 2012 challenging the use of offsets (GHG emissions reductions in certain areas that can be used as allowances) for compliance under the capand-trade program. Environmental groups also filed a complaint last year at the Environmental Protection Agency, asserting that CARBs AB 32 regulatory program violates the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 by not focusing on emissions reduction from specific local emission sources to the detriment of disadvantaged communities. An appeal is pending before the Ninth Circuit of an injunction issued against CARBs enforcement of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) regulations. So far, the LCFS litigation is the only challenge based on the Interstate Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution. The Ninth Circuit has suspended the injunction pending its decision. So although CARBs claimed success of its first auction can be construed as a positive first step in Californias GHG regulation through cap and trade, the auction results suggest reluctance by market participants, who remain unconvinced of its regulatory future. California must battle the lawsuits challenging the use of the auction proceeds, the application of offsets, and the viability of the program as a whole. The participation levels and prices associated with the next auction scheduled for February 2013 will provide more evidence as to market participants confidence that California will proceed with a robust cap-and-trade GHG regulation. Allison Davis (allisondavis@dwt.com) and Kerry Shea (kerryshea@dwt.com) are partners in Davis Wright Tremaines Energy Practice Group.
POWER January 2013
www.powermag.com
PENTAIR.COM
CIRCLE 10 ON READER SERVICE CARD
othing in human history has been more transformative than electricity. Thomas Edison patented the lightbulb in 1879. Just a half-century later, President Franklin Roosevelt declared electricity a necessity, not a luxury. And in 2012, the National Academy of Engineering named electrification the greatest engineering achievement of the 20th century. Since its inception, the electricity sector has developed many innovative technologies to improve affordability, reliability, safety, and environmental sustainability. Over the last six decades, even as the power grid has grown dramatically in size and complexity, the price of electricity has remained relatively flat. The average cost of electricity is roughly the same today as it was in the late 1960s, when adjusted for inflation. And the industry has reduced its overall emissions while increasing fossil generation by more than 160% since 1970. But the industry cannot rest on its laurels today in the face of so much uncertainty and so many challenges. It needs to continue to innovate, to adapt to the changing markets and demands of consumers. At the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), we foresee unprecedented change in the industry over the next 10 to 20 yearsmore change than in the previous 100 years. The drivers are familiar to industry observers:
the aggregate fossil fuel share of U.S. total energy use will fall from 83% in 2010 to 77% in 2035, while over the same period generation from renewable sources will grow by 77%, raising their share of total generation from 10% in 2010 to 15% in 2035. Technology challenges to reducing carbon dioxide, mercury, and other emissions. A recent EPRI summary report, Prism 2.0: The Value of Innovation in Environmental Controls, projects the U.S. electricity industry will spend $140 billion to $220 billion for emissions control retrofits, new capacity, and fuel plus operation and maintenance between 2010 and 2035, with more than half of the expenditures occurring by 2020.
focused on a no-regrets portfolio of technologies that would allow utilities to maintain a reliable, environmentally sound, and reasonably priced electricity supply even under the uncertainty of fluctuating natural gas prices, unpredictable electricity supply from grid resources, and potentially increasing environmental regulations (Figure 1). Today, these no regrets technologies fall into three broad categories:
EPRI is collaborating with its members, national labs, universities, and other stakeholders to address all of these challenges and continue to provide the power quality and affordability consumers expect. But the projected costs are high. Thats why EPRI is
Flexible resources and operations. This category includes the ability to cycle potentially all generation assets, including coal, fossil, nuclear, and renewable generation technologies. It also includes energy storage, demand response, and other technologies located on consumer premises. Employing flexible investment strategies for securing all assets, including an array of alternative supply and demand resources, is another piece of this vision. Fuel flexibility is another component, including the ability to mix fuels for some technologies (for example, biomass cofir-
1. Balance dispatchable generation with forecastable demand-side resources. The supply side of todays power system consists of baseload generation plus loadfollowing generation, plus or minus bulk energy storage (left side). All those sources must be continuously balanced to meet customer demand minus interruptible load demand response (right side). The cover photo illustrates a vision of a fully integrated electricity system, where supply and demand are not exclusively on opposite ends of the grid. Source: EPRI
The availability of natural gas and its increasing role in power generation. For some months in 2012, gas for the first time matched or exceeded coal for U.S. power generation. And according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2012, natural gasfired plants will account for 60% of U.S. capacity additions between 2011 and 2035. The expanding role of renewable generation. The EIA Outlook projects that
20 www.powermag.com
Consumer-focused technologies. We are seeing unprecedented changes in the ways consumers access and use information. Smart devices and the new controls they provide to consumers will profoundly impact industry and require fundamental changes in the way we provide services and interact with end users.
integration of variable generation by allowing the system to manage variability and uncertainty more efficiently and reliably. EPRI is developing processes, with a focus on tools and long-term algorithms, for considering flexibility in resource expansion. Tools will be provided that allow system planners to consider the flexibility needs of the system with high variable generation. They are being designed to enable better planning decisions to maximize the value of flexible resources on the grid. For example, this could lead to metrics to determine the flexibility needs and resources in a system, considering new and existing resources as well as the transmission network in a system. Changes in demand and increased deployment of renewable generation are forcing coal and combined cycle plants to provide system load-balancing service. Specific operational changes expected for coal and gas plants include two-shifting, high ramp rates, high unit turndown, and reserve shutdown (Figure 2). Guidelines for flexible operations that detail best practices for limiting damage from cycling are under development. Owners and operators of fossil power plants need to consider a range of strategies for managing the increasing need for flexible operation. The biggest challenge to mitigating the impacts of power plant cycling is the lack of available data on the impact
2. Equipment life extension. Cycling the typical combined cycle plant accelerates damage mechanisms such as creep fatigue, thermal fatigue, and corrosion, thereby increasing the rate of component life consumption. This wear and tear increases the overall costs of generation, including direct costs such as fuel, water treatment, and maintenance. EPRI is studying component and operational changes that will reduce the impact of cycling. Source: EPRI
Reduce NOx/CO emissions at low load, install inlet dampers, and isolation/ venting of fuel headers
Smart energy. Smart energy is more than just the smart gridan intelligent distribution system, connected at the consumer level in a way that enables seamless integration of resources. Smart energy also includes big data, sophisticated analytics to interpret and maximize the value of the tremendous volumes of new data. And it includes beneficial electrification, exploring better end uses of energy to improve efficiency beyond kilowatthours saved. Grid resilience. As Superstorm Sandy demonstrated last November, we have to be prepared for the unexpected. Improved resilience includes not only power generation resource and grid hardening but also new/improved recovery and consumer survival technologies.
Improved drains and attemperator sprays, new alloys for thinner walled headers, improved tubeto-header connections, and better-sealing stack damper
22
www.powermag.com
tions deserve recognition: one for concrete, one for underwater component inspection, and one for transmission line inspection (Figure 3).
Concrete Crawler Allows Real-Time Asset Condition Monitoring. Long-term
Pulverized coal boiler impacts. Improved plant layup practices. Selective catalytic reduction and flue gas desulfurization cycling impacts and mitigation. Designs for increased flexibility in advanced coal plants. Instrumentation and controls to address cycling and turndown. Preventive maintenance for combined cycle plants. Improving power plant operator situational awareness.
An upcoming EPRI report, Plant Operational Flexibility: Emerging Industry Needs and Research Priorities, will document key cycling challenges and R&D needs for the industry.
Long-Term Operations
The use of robotics to improve asset management is a key technology development area for EPRI. Three autonomous robotic applica-
operation of steam-electric power plants and hydropower facilities requires demonstration of the safety and reliability of concrete cooling, containment, and impoundment structures. Manual inspection is costly and time-consuming, and it exposes personnel to potentially hazardous working conditions. Inspection depth and accuracy are constrained by the capabilities of todays portable nondestructive evaluation (NDE) systems. Robots with the ability to climb and navigate irregular, vertical, and curved surfaces of large concrete structures are commercially available. In 2011, EPRI conceptualized a novel application of this technology: as a platform for automated inspection and advanced NDE of major concrete structures at power plants. This concrete crawler employs a commercially available robotic platform to climb the surface of large power industry structures. It applies on-board systems including simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) technology and advanced NDE instrumentation developed for concrete applicationsto conduct automated, highprecision inspections and to capture computer-encoded data and images for maintenance decision-making. The concrete crawler will support longterm operation of generating assets by enabling fast, safe, and in-depth inspection of structures such as cooling towers, hydroelectric dams, and nuclear reactor containments. It will obviate the need to use scaffolding or rappelling for routine structural evaluations, eliminating the associated setup challenges, time requirements, costs, and safety hazards.
Its payload of advanced NDE instrumentation will provide unprecedented abilities to examine the interior of concrete structures and locate and characterize voids, rebar corrosion, and other internal defects. Proof-of-concept testing of a concrete crawler with SLAM capabilities is planned for 2012/2013 at a host site. Follow-on enhancements to the navigation system are anticipated, and the crawlers desired NDE functionalities and requisite power supply, data collection and processing, communications, and other capabilities will be defined. A fully functional first-generation prototype will be constructed and evaluated in diverse industry settings during 2014, with further refinements and field tests leading to the development of specifications for a commercial inspection robot.
Submersible Mini-Robot Targets Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Internals.
3. Robotic assistants. The concrete crawler (left) can climb structures and perform nondestructive tests, avoiding the need for a human to be present in a hazardous location or the necessity of erecting costly support structures. The submersible robotic vehicle (right) is being developed to inspect reactor vessels and spent fuel ponds. Courtesy: Climbing Machines; MIT
Remote-operated vehicles developed for marine applications have proven successful for the visual inspection of submerged components in nuclear reactor vessels and spent fuel pools, but commercially available technologies have several key limitations. EPRI is working with researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to create a purpose-built robot delivering a step-change improvement in the nuclear power industrys underwater inspection capabilities. The new robot is being designed to allow safe, reliable, and non-intrusive operation while providing high-fidelity visual inspection across a broad range of components, configurations, and locations. The initial prototype built and tested by MIT features a compact and appendage-free design, a high degree of maneuverability, and wireless operation. Its ovoid form measures about 4 inches by 6 inches, allowing it to nestle comfortably in the palm of a hand. Its innovative propulsion and navigation system applies centrifugal pumps, high-speed valves, and maneuvering jets for precisely controlled motion. The robots shape and umbilical-free operation are critical for successful in-plant applications. Many existing technologies employ propellers, rudders, and other appendages and attachments that limit access to some component locations and preclude certain types of motion. These appendages also may break off during collisions or snag on obstacles, creating the potential for contamination of carefully controlled reactor environments or other operational issues. In prototype testing, the omni-directional robot has demonstrated abilities to navigate through intricate and tight geometries and to conduct inspection-type passes over surfaces. Under joystick control, it can dive and rise,
23
www.powermag.com
transmission linesincluding towers, conductors, and insulators, as well as corridorsis a costly and challenging proposition. Utilities must meet increasingly stringent reliability and vegetation management standards, but many circuits are approaching the end of their design lifetimes and are located in remote and rugged environments. Fly-by and ground inspections have limitations, and some equipment is extremely difficult to inspect. The autonomous transmission line inspection robot integrates mobility, sensing, imaging, power harvesting, communications, and other innovations to generate the comprehensive, high-fidelity data required for condition-based maintenance. It is capable of crawling over conductor shield wires and carrying a payload to allow autonomous inspection of transmission corridor segments up to 80 miles long at least twice annually (Figure 4). In 2010, EPRI initiated conceptual development of the transmission line inspection robot, designed to run largely on power harvested from shield wires. Highdefinition cameras and LIDAR (light detection and ranging) sensors will assess component condition, identify trees that could pose a risk to wires, and measure conductor clearance by comparing images taken over time. Electromagnetic interference detectors will identify discharge
24
activity and other indicators of faulty equipment. The robot also will be equipped to collect data as it passes instrumentation deployed on towers and wires, such as EPRI-developed radio-frequency sensors for monitoring vibration, lightning strikes, wind-related damage, and corrosive conditions. Data processing, global positioning, and communications systems will analyze and deliver time- and location-stamped data and images to maintenance personnel. High-risk issues and potential problems that require further investigation or immediate action will be flagged, guiding condition-based intervention. A first-generation technology demonstration platform has been undergoing refinement on a test loop at EPRIs laboratory in Lenox, Mass., and individual subsystems have been advanced in the field and experimental settings. These activitiesconducted in close collaboration with a commercial vendor and member utilitieshave informed design and construction of a next-generation robot offering mobility, energy management, imaging, sensing, data management, analysis, alarming, and communications capabilities. A real-world demonstration on a line segment made robot-ready by a host utility is planned for this year. Field trial experiences will inform full-scale commercial demonstration on a 40-mile-long transmission circuit. The transmission line inspection robot is expected to revolutionize transmission asset management by expanding coverage and delivering actionable information while reducing or eliminating the need for helicopter overflights and ground patrols. On-board systems will collect, analyze, and deliver data to enhance compliance with reliability and vegetation manage-
ment standards and support just-in-time intervention. This technology is expected to improve inspection and monitoring capabilities and worker safety relative to hovering helicopters at cost savings expected to be at least 30%. More importantly, the robot will enable proactive, condition-based maintenance of high-value transmission assets, a smart grid capability supporting long-term operations and leading to significant cost reductions and reliability improvements.
Smart Energy
Residential consumption typically represents a significant portion of peak electric loads, but incorporating major end-use technologies such as space conditioning and water heating in demand-response (DR) programs has proven challenging for a variety of reasons. Consumer inconvenience and cost, the diversity of end uses and utility systems, and the incompatibilities between them are among the most significant barriers to DR participation. Building on years of work to advance interoperability standards across transmission and distribution systems, an EPRI-led initiative launched in 2008 engaged more than 100 product manufacturers, utilities, and other organizations in documenting the need and developing early specifications for a smart grid interface for residential loads. EPRI built the modular DR connector to specification, developed a plug-in communications module with DR capabilities, and integrated them with enduse device controls in coordination with selected manufacturers. Interoperability tests were conducted on space conditioning, water heating, and other modified products, and findings were submitted to the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) for standardization of a communications interface designed for smart grid integration of residential loads. As a port incorporated in end-use technologies, the modular DR connector is designed to facilitate a plug-and-play approach for direct information exchange and interoperability among utility communications systems and the wide array of consumer devices sold in retail outlets. It could enable low-cost engagement of residential consumers in load management programs across a range of end uses. Manufacturers may be able to add grid-interactive features and the communications port to their product lines without being constrained by compatibility concerns. DR-ready devices will be available off the shelf, enabling consumers to enroll simply by inserting a utility-compliant communiPOWER January 2013
4. High wire act. The inspection robot is capable of crawling over conductor shield wires and carrying a payload to allow autonomous inspection of transmission corridor segments up to 80 miles long at least twice annually. Courtesy: EPRI
www.powermag.com
www. RETECH2013.com
* A s o f O c t o b e r 2 0 1 2 , a c c o rd i n g t o E n e r g y I n f r a s t r u c t u re U p d a t e re p o r t f ro m t h e F e d e r a l E n e r g y R e g u l a t o r y C o m m i s s i o n s O ff i c e o f E n e r g y P ro j e c t s
(PV) and energy storage systems, inverters convert the DC energy output from the PV module or battery cell into AC energy. In addition, inverters ensure that power quality and safety regulations are followed. However, with the increase of distributed energy resources (DER) on the electric grid, especially on distribution circuits, it is expected that inverters will have a more active role in supporting grid stability. Power electronics incorporated in most inverters are capable of providing reactive power, which can be utilized for voltage regulation and volt-VAR optimization. The voltage fault ride-through capability of inverters allows PV plants to stay online during momentary grid disturbances. Communication-connected inverters, acting on utility commands, can change their operating mode (for example, power factor, active power generation, grid-tied vs. islanded) to match seasonal or load variation needs. Most of the commercial inverters today, especially the larger utility-scale units, can provide smart grid functionality. The challenge is to integrate hundreds of them from different manufacturers, each with proprietary communication protocols, in the same utility network and operate them
26
in a harmonized manner. Ongoing EPRI research is developing common functions and standard communication protocol mapping for smart inverters. Another key challenge is to coordinate the operation of these smart DER resources with existing distribution circuit resources like load-tap changing transformers, line regulators, or capacitor banks to optimize grid performance and reliability. Recently, EPRI, working with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), launched a new initiative specifically to address the need for utility enterprise integration of DER. Big Data Challenge. As electric utilities are implementing advanced distribution applications to improve distribution system efficiency, reliability, and performance, a vast amount of data is being generated from sensors, devices, and systems. Utilities are now responsible for data management and analytics to support distribution operations, planning, and asset management For example, going from one meter read per month to hourly reads (720 per month) is a 71,900% increase in kWh data, in addition to potential for volts and VAR data (Figure 5). When standardized analytical methods and tools are developed collaboratively, it helps reduce the total cost to procure, implement, and sustain advanced distribution applications. The development of common analytical methods that can be applied across the utility industry can accelerate the ability to process large data sets and translate them into actionable information for common distribution ap-
plications. EPRIs Distribution Modernization Demonstration is addressing these R&D challenges, identified by more than 1,400 industry and public advisors. The project will employ learning by doing in developing and demonstrating data management and analytics. It will explore new and existing distribution applications that have value to utility members for uses such as early identification of incipient faults, increased accuracy of outage location, and online validation of geographical information system (GIS) maps. It is expected to define the detailed functional requirements for each application, along with the associated data management and integration requirements. And it will demonstrate these applications in a practical approach, preserving legacy systems, as appropriate, while developing an architecture that leverages emerging standards such as the Common Information Model.
Electrification to Enhance Productivity. Businesses are facing intense eco-
nomic pressures to improve productivity, enhance quality, and lower costs to remain competitive. Utilities are seeking to add value for their customers and promote local economic development. And society seeks to curb emissions to improve quality of life while growing jobs and stimulating the economy. Electrification through the application of novel, efficient electrotechnologies can address all of these needs. Electricity offers inherent advantages of controllability, precision, versatility, and efficiency compared to fossil-fueled alternatives in many applications. However, a lack of familiarity and experience with emerging
5. Data explosion. The amount of data collected by utilities will continue to increase as
more advanced technologies are deployed. Fully taking advantage of this new data by turning it into actionable information with industry standard methods and tools is a significant challenge for utility companies. Source: EPRI
3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Workforce management Transmission sensors Substation automation Smart in-home devices
Distribution automation
www.powermag.com
Grid Resilience
EPRI is developing innovative technologies to enable grid damage prevention, recovery, and customer survivability during and after major emergencies. On average, U.S. electricity consumers can expect to lose power for more than 100 minutes annually due to outages from major storms. The majority of outages result from damage to the millions of miles of distribution lines. According to a 2008 Edison Electric Institute Reliability Report, 67% of electrical outage minutes were weather-related, typically due to wind, ice, or snow either directly affecting distribution assets or bringing vegetation into contact with utility lines, poles, and transformers. And restoring service after storms can be costly. A survey of 14 U.S. electric utilities identified 81 major storms between 1994 and 2004, costing those utilities more than $2.7 billion. These direct costs represent only a fraction of a regions wider economic losses resulting from extended outages.
January 2013 POWER
Leverage branded content from POWER magazine to create a more powerful and sophisticated statement about your product, service, or company in your next marketing campaign. Contact Wrights Media to nd out how we can customize your acknowledgements and recognitions to enhance your companys marketing strategies.
For more information, call Wrights Media at 877.652.5295 or visit our website at www.wrightsmedia.com
www.powermag.com
27
tion of these new technologies. It also seeks to gain experience and identify appropriate test methods that can be used to evaluate and specify nanocoatings for use on electrical insulators and conductors.
Recovery: Airborne Damage Assessment. EPRI recently completed pre-
New advances in material science have resulted in the development of a family of nanostructured polymer coatings that can be engineered to provide surfaces with specific desirable properties. These so-called nanocoatings have found application in the aerospace industry to keep surfaces ice free and in architecture to provide self-cleaning properties for windows. Nanocoatings can provide scratch, corrosion, and chemical resistance, as well as super hydrophobicity. The self-cleaning and super hydrophobicity properties are particularly attractive for application on insulators in contaminated environments, and coatings with icerepelling qualities may reduce the risk for flashovers in winter storms. Ice-repelling coatings also may have applications in conductors in areas where there is a risk for mechanical overload due to ice accretion in winter months. An EPRI project is working to develop performance requirements and potential degradation modes and determine if there are any fatal flaws that may prevent the applica-
liminary tests showing that both small piloted aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) or drones equipped with highresolution cameras, global positioning systems (GPS), and sensors can be valuable tools for damage assessment. UAVs equipped with EPRIs Airborne Damage Assessment Module (ADAM) can be small and light enough to be handled by a technician and can quickly survey devastated areas that are difficult to reach by roads blocked by downed trees or other obstacles. The use of ADAM-equipped aircraft could substantially reduce costs and cut response time by hours, if not days. It could also aid in assessing system conditions in normal situations. EPRI research will also assess the accuracy of the sensors and cameras to determine if it is sufficient to assess equipment such as insulators. EPRI is working with utilities to conduct test flights with manned and unmanned aircraft to clarify how the module should be configured and deployed to handle different terrains and weather conditions as well as meet other requirements. This project will also look at different cost models to determine the level of value for investment in ADAM and aircraft.
Survivability: Using PEVs as a Power Source. Plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs),
as a gasoline-fueled generator to provide additional standby power. Automakers are interested in the concept, but the technologies require further development. Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. recently unveiled a system that enables the Nissan Leaf to connect with a residential distribution panel to supply residences with electricity from its lithium-ion batteries. The batteries can provide up to 24 kWh of electricity, sufficient to power a households critical needs for up to two days. EPRI is investigating potential uses for both gas-powered and electric automobiles as a power resource during extended outages (Figure 6).
New Materials for Safer Nuclear Fuel. Improved grid resilience includes
both all-electric and hybrid, could be used to supply energy to a home during an outage. Hybrid electric vehicles also could operate
6. Rolling electricity storage. EPRI is investigating how plug-in electric vehicles may be
used to supply electricity during a system outage or emergency. This graphic shows the evolution of battery storage technologies. Source: EPRI 2,000 ~2,000 Wh/kg Li-air
innovations in power generation. The 2011 accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan illustrated the operational and safety challenges associated with a loss of cooling capability, which can lead to a nuclear fuel meltdown. Current light water reactor fuel designs and materials have limitations that constrain their ability to maintain integrity under accident conditions. EPRI is investigating a variety of alternative fuel design concepts aimed at making fuel safer and increasing operational flexibility and reliability. While complete mitigation of fuel degradation in a severe accident may not be possible, improved materials that can withstand higher temperatures in these scenarios could give operators more time to act before significant damage occurs. Existing light water reactors rely on zirconium-based alloys for fuel cladding and channel materials. These alloys perform well under normal operating conditions, but when the temperature spikes during a loss-of-coolant accident, they can weaken, corrode, and generate hydrogen. The hydrogen buildup can reach combustible levels, where an explosion is possible, which is what happened at the Fukushima plant. The technologies EPRI has examined include: Cladding made from refractory metals, such as molybdenum and niobium Cladding and fuel channels made from silicon carbide Cladding made from iron-chromiumaluminum Fully ceramic micro-encapsulated fuel pellets
400
Lithium ion w/ Si nanowire 400 Lithium ion 110140 Nickel-metal hydride 5075 Now
100
Nickel-cadmium 3560
1960
2010
2020
2030
To date, EPRI has focused most of its efforts on molybdenum cladding and silicon carbide channels. Molybdenum alloys have a higher melting temperature than zirconium-based alloys, so they retain their
POWER January 2013
28
www.powermag.com
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Inspection & Work order assessment management Workforce deployment Switching orders Surveying Vegetation management Training
shape even at high temperatures. Molybdenum also exhibits high wear resistance, high dimensional stability, low thermal expansion, and high thermal conductivity. The metal is chemically stable up to 2,000 degrees Celsius. EPRI research suggests a duplex or triplex fabrication approach to make the cladding compatible with current light water reactor coolants. Duplex cladding would have a thin layer of zirconium or other alloy on the outside of the molybdenum tube, while triplex cladding would have thin layers on both the inside and outside. Such fabrication techniques are challenging, but the industry already has experience fabricating duplex and triplex zirconium cladding. As a ceramic material, silicon carbide has favorable high-temperature characteristics as a potential cladding material, but it also faces significant technical obstacles, such as fabrication. A more feasible goal may involve the use of silicon carbide to fabricate channels, the enclosures found between each fuel assembly in boiling water reactors. In 2008, EPRI began investigating the use of silicon carbide as a replacement for zirconium alloys to prevent channel deformation, a problem called bowing. By replacing zirconium in the channels with silicon carbide, less hydrogen would be produced in an accident, thereby increasing safety. Channels represent about 40% of the zirconium mass in a boiling water reactor core. EPRI has developed silicon carbide channels and has begun testing their viability. Implementing nuclear fuel cladding at commercial nuclear power plants will require an extensive testing and evaluation program involving the fuel vendors, nucleJanuary 2013 POWER
ar plant owners, research entities such as EPRI and the DOE, and other international organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Energy Agency. Given the resource commitment required and high-risk nature of this research, no single entity or group can succeed alone. Collaboration will be critical in conducting the necessary laboratory and field testing, and in assessing whether these new technologies are commercially viable.
The data visualization technology combines tablet and smart phone technologies, real-time data from the internal magnetometer, and 3-axis gyroscopic to stabilize and provide a more accurate compass when a user points the mobile device at a distribution pole or at transmission and distribution conductors. GPS and Common Information Model messages serve to locate and retrieve segmented GIS data from a utility GIS database, and the device renders the GIS data segments on screen as a map information overlay from the camera image. An example of this would be seeing a pole structure symbol through the camera while the screen displays the camera image with the one-line circuit drawing overlaid. EPRIs iCV Analyzer Application is a contact voltage detector app that is used in concert with a commercially available probe (antenna) and amplifier (wand) that allows users to identify metal objects that may have become inadvertently energized. The iCV Analyzer app can be downloaded from iTunes. There is now interest from commercial manufacturers to manufacture and sell the add-on wand device for contact voltage detection. E-mailing datasets, user site info, and GPS location features are included capabilities of this app. Utility companies are finding more and more ways to enhance their points of contact with consumers. Of the companies responding to a recent buildnetwork .com survey, 40% said smart devices have changed how they communicate/connect with their customers, and 24% said they have impacted their products and services and how they are delivered. EPRI recently surveyed a number of its utility members to find out how they are using mobile platforms, both internally to support transmission and distribution (T&D) operations and to provide services to end-use customers. Of the 24 companies that had responded as of this writing, twothirds currently are using mobile devices for utility operations (not including mobile terminals used by utility crews). The main uses are inspection and assessment, followed by work order management and workforce deployment (Figure 7). On the consumer side, 63% of the responding utilities are sending text messages to customers and 38% are connecting via downloadable apps. For both T&D and consumer purposes, cyber security concerns and support costs were listed among the top barriers.
Percentage
Arshad Mansoor is senior vice president, research & development for the Electric Power Research Institute.
29
North American shale gas was supposed to realign the generation fleet here and abroad (thanks to anticipated exports) far into the future. Turns out, thats not exactly how the near term is shaping up. Despite stagnant (and even putrid) economies and legislative bodies in the U.S. and EU, there promises to be sufficient market volatility to keep everyone alert.
By Dr. Robert Peltier, PE; David Wagman; Thomas W. Overton, JD; Kennedy Maize; and Charles Butcher
Courtesy: Tennessee Valley Authority
he prospects for the U.S. power generating industry in 2013 arent exciting, but they are intriguing. Though familiar challenges remaineconomic pain, regulatory rumbles, and legislative inactionthe natural gas and coal markets continue to defy year-ahead predictions, forcing everyone from generators to dispatchers to fuel suppliers to rethink their assumptions with now-predictable regularity. Before looking ahead to 2013, consider what has set the stage for the new year. Reading between the lines of the U.S. Energy Information Administrations (EIAs) Annual Energy Review 2012, there is much good news thoroughly mixed with much unmentioned bad news. Consider the following energy milestones that should be cause for celebration: The most hydroelectric power produced (in 2011) since 1999 (up 25% from a relatively dry 20072010).
The most renewable energy (wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass) ever produced. The most natural gas produced in history. Dramatic increases from state and private lands made 2010 the year with the lowest volume of natural gas imports since 1992, principally due to hydraulic fracturing. The trend continued in 2012. U.S. CO2 emissions are expected to stay below 2005 levels through 2035, principally due to coal-to-gas fuel switching and a moribund economy. The low price of natural gas has also moderated or flattened electricity price increases in many parts of the country. A federal court determined that the Environmental Protection Agencys (EPAs) Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) did not comply with the Clean Air Act. An EPA appeal is expected.
www.powermag.com
The only new hydroelectric projects permitted were upgrades of existing plants and minuscule hydrokinetic and run-ofriver projects. The last major hydroelectric plant built in the U.S. was almost 40 years ago, and none are planned for the future. In fact, many activist organizations are actively campaigning for removal of existing hydroelectric dams. The cost of renewable energy mandates was the primary cause of a 2.3% increase in the national average cost of residential electricity. The lowest amount of natural gas since 1993 was produced from public lands. The EPA is proposing additional gas well fracking rules that are predicted to drive
POWER January 2013
30
rosemont, IL
2013
may 14-16
Experience In-Depth Coverage of Key Industry Topics Such As:
Coal-to-Gas Switching & Its Impact on the Generation Mix Challenges of Cycling Baseload Coal Plants Environmental Rules, Regulations and Reactions Long-Term Planning in an Era of Low-Cost Gas
Plus - get exclusive updates from the POWER magazine Editorial Team!
presented by:
The contrasting successes and failures amply illustrate there is no safe, middle ground when it comes to selecting the technologies for producing electricity. The middle ground has become the equivalent of an energy policy no mans land, where Congress steps lightly, if at all. The nations patchwork energy policy has devolved into what is in practice a winner takes all contest between regulators and fuel developers, rather than a consensus strategy that guides development. The imperfect Energy Policy Act of 2005 (remember Corridors of National Interest, and when regulating natural gas wells was delegated to individual states?) would be impossible to pass today because it represented compromise. Despite the policy vacuum, developers of new gas fields have, through private investment, produced enormous quantities of low-priced natural gas thats now available from private and state lands. Siding with them are proponents of an energy independence scenario in which fossil fuels figure prominently. We learned the valuable lesson that fossil fuels are finite, but in terms of centuries not years. On the opposing side is the administration, often supported by environmental activist organizations, which has shown little support for expansion of the natural gas industry or domestic coal production but has for the past four years been preoccupied with distributing massive government subsidies for renewable technologies, continuing the decade-long trend of slowing the extraction of fossil fuels from public lands, and using the EPAs regulatory authority to attack coal-fired generation. There is little if any common ground between the belligerents. The rate of gross domestic product (GDP) growth isnt expected to return to 2007 levels for several more years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Worse yet, some economists are predicting a double-dip
32
1. New normal. Residential demand dropped in 2012 while other sectors showed small gains. The increase in demand for electricity is projected to be small in 2013. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), The U.S. does not return to the levels of energy demand growth experienced in the 20 years prior to the 20082009 recession, because of more moderate projected economic growth and population growth, coupled with increasing levels of energy efficiency. Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2012
Right Axis: Residential Comm. and trans. Industrial Direct use
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2010
www.powermag.com
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 2011 2012 2013
Forecast
0.5
A Question of Supply
Of course, new natural gasfired generation depends on market dynamics five and 10 years in the future, not just in 2013. Research firm Bentek Energy in a note published in November said it expects the North American gas market to undergo unprecedented changes over the next five years. For one thing, it expects traditional supply regions in the South to become net demand regions.
2. Electricity demand rises. This chart illustrates U.S. electricity demand growth based on a three-year moving average. Electricity demand (including retail sales and direct use) growth has slowed in each decade since the 1950s, from a 9.8% annual rate of growth from 1949 to 1959 to only 0.7% per year in the first decade of the 21st century, the same as the predicted annual growth of electricity demand from 2012 through 2035, according to the EIAs base case scenario. Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2012
Trendline 12 10 8 3-year moving average History 2010 Projections
6 4 2 0 2 1950
1970
1990
2010
2020
2035
www.powermag.com
3. Coal remains king. Despite the dire predictions of coals demise, coal-fired plants continue to provide the largest share of electricity, and will continue to do so through 2035 (the last year of the EIA analysis). Shown is electricity generated by fuel in 2010, and projections for 2020 and 2035. Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2012
2010 2,000 2020 2035
1,500
Billion kWh
1,000
500
Coal
Natural gas
Nuclear
Renewables
4. Down but not out. Additions to the coal fleet are small in the coming years; new generating capacity will consist mostly of natural gasfired plants. A construction boom in the early 2000s saw capacity additions averaging 35 GW a year from 2000 to 2005, much higher than had been seen before. Since then, average annual builds have dropped to 17 GW per year. According to EIA projections, between 2011 and 2035, a total of 235 GW will be constructed, with relatively high annual additions in 2011 and 2012 of an average of 24 GW; about 40% are renewable plants. After 2012, the added capacity drops below 9 GW each year until 2025. Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2012
Other/renewables 60 Natural gas/oil History Nuclear 2010 Hydropower Coal Projections
40
GW
20 0 1985
1995
www.powermag.com
2010
2025
2035
Poor investment track record. The failing or bankrupt financial status of many renewables-related companies after receiving economic stimulus funds shows that the government did a poor job in picking marketable technologies. Taxpayers did not get their moneys worth. Source: Institute for Energy Research
Company A123 Systems Abound Solar Amonix Babcock & Brown Beacon Power BrightSource Energy Ecotality Inc. Ener1 Evergreen Solar First Solar Fisker Automotive Mountain Plaza Inc. Nevada Geothermal Raser Technologies Solar Trust for Americaa Solyndra Inc. SpectraWatt SunPower U.S. Geothermal Junk (BB) Junk (BB-) Speculative (BB+) Junk (CCC+) Junk (B) Rating at time of investment Taxpayer exposure (millions) $249.00 $400.00 $21.60 $178.00 $43.00 $1,600.00 $126.00 $118.50 $5.30 $3,100.00 $529.00 $0.42 $98.50 $33.00 $2,100.00 $535.00 $0.54 $1,200.00 $97.00 Status today Bankrupt Bankrupt Bankrupt Bankrupt Bankrupt Distress Distress Bankrupt Bankrupt Distress Distress Bankrupt Failing Bankrupt Bankrupt Bankrupt Bankrupt Distress Distress
5. Stable portfolio. The amount of renewable generation available each year is most dependent on the rainfall that produces hydroelectric power. Rainfall was down in 2010 but rebounded in 2011. Average hydroelectric generation is predicted in 2013. The EIA reference case, shown in this chart, assumes the federal production tax credit expired on December 31, 2012. Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2012
Solar 10 Forecast 9 8 7 Geothermal Other biomass Wind power Liquid biofuels Wood biomass Hydropower
6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
and the Obama administration seem to view renewables as sacred icons. Much of the administrations direct largess to renewables in the form of loans and grants, including large amounts of economic stimulus funds provided in 2009, unfortunately has gone into financial black holes, not green power (see table). The government has demonstrated that it is, in the words of former Obama economic advisor Lawrence Summers, a crappy venture capitalist. Thanks to governments other, and thoroughly bipartisan, offerings on the green altarin the forms of production tax credits, cash grants in advance of tax credits (the Treasurys infamous 1603 program), and state purchase mandates and market incentiveswind and solar have held their own in the generating mix in recent years, increasing generation market share from a barely noticeable 0.5% in 2005 to a still small but growing 2.4% in 2010. Almost all of that has been wind, which grew from 0.44% to 2.3% in that period (Figure 5). According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), the lobbying group for wind power, wind installations in 2012 were on pace to almost match 2011s performance, when 6,816 MW of new nameplate capacity went online. For the first half of 2012, said AWEA, 2,869 MW of wind went online. By contrast, the wind industry put up 10,000 MW of new capacity in 2009. AWEAs figures show that another 10,312 MW of wind was in the construction pipeline at mid-year 2012, attempting to get built before production tax credits expired at the end of 2012. Not all of the wind projects AWEA lists as under construction are likely to be completed. A recent headline in the Yakima HeraldRepublic in eastern Washington, where wind has been a booming business, captures the prospects for wind in the year ahead: Economic uncertainty puts the brakes on Northwest wind power industry. The article notes that at least seven wind projects are up in the air in Kittias and Klickitat Counties, facing a shortage of electric transmission to markets in California and competition from low-cost natural gas. The wind industry began a strong lobbying campaign in mid-2012 aimed at restoring the production tax credit. AWEA has been working with the Boston-based advocacy group Ceres to push the production credit. Ceres last fall arranged for a business group, Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy, to write congressional leaders urging extension of the tax credit. That effort failed, but wind supporters hope to bring the topic up again during the coming debate over federal fis35
Quadrillion Btu
www.powermag.com
the range of $90/W, solar is now available at $1/W (PV panels only). That, he predicts, will drive the solar market around the globe in the years ahead. But solar in 2013 will remain a barely perceptible portion of the U.S. electric generating mix, according to the EIA.
curve without creating risks of long-term forward commitments. Brattle also pointed to several risks with the proposal. First, the firm said it suspects that investors will start responding right away in anticipation of a capacity payment upon delivery. The danger in setting a 2015/16 price floor in early 2013 is that it will strongly mitigate the risk of capacity shortfall in 2015. Second, multiple administrative rules would need to be created related to load forecast, reserve margin requirement, demand curve shape, and resource adequacy qualification rules. Ongoing litigation over parameters and rules can create market uncertainty, the consultants said. Third, sticker shock could result and lead consumers to blame the new capacity product. This could be mitigated somewhat by high load growth and a three-year forward period, which likely would produce what economists refer to as an elastic supply curve. Sticker shock also could be eased by demand response programs, which would be allowed to enter and exit at a range of prices. A second market reform option under consideration by regulators is an energy-only market in which price caps are raised, reserve requirements are raised, and demand response is implemented. A concern is whether or not sufficient demand response growth will occur to maintain the target reserve margin. The Brattle Group said that by 2015, a significant shortfall could occur relative to the current 13.75% reserve margin target. By 2016 and beyond, more than 3,500 MW of additional demand response may be needed in ERCOT to meet the target.
Dr. Robert Peltier, PE is editor-inchief, David Wagman is executive editor, Kennedy Maize is a contributing editor, and Charles Butcher is European reporter for POWER.
CIRCLE 12 ON READER SERVICE CARD 38 www.powermag.com
www.energyocean.com
21366
Courtesy: TVA
he U.S. coal-fired power generation industry is facing formidable obstacles to growthsomething it has long taken for granted. Most frequently cited is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgating regulations that require expensive capital improvements that make the economics of continued operation of existing plants problematic and make the building of new plants unlikely for the foreseeable future. Another formidable opponent is historically low natural gas prices that have pushed coal-fired generation lower in dispatch order in some regions. As a consequence of those low gas prices, reduced coal plant operating hours and unit cycling drive up the cost of electricity production from coalhitting it where it has historically been strong. In response, some coal-based utilities are searching for that operating sweet spot that is a mix of coal- and gas-fired plants (in unique proportions), while others have decided to permanently make the switch from coal to gas.
40
plants in its eastern sector approaching 70%, and with the recent increases in forward natural gas prices, the ability for more coal-to-gas switching is minimal.
Pricing Model) auction scheduled for this coming May. Independent power producers arent immune to unpredictable natural gas prices. Jack A. Fusco, CEO and president of Calpine, said that 2013 gas futures prices suggest some continued coal-to-gas switching in the East, but probably none at all in Texas. As a result, the strong showing by the companys natural gasfired generating assets in 2012 seems unlikely to be repeated this year.
GWh/day
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2. Coal consumption rises. Domestic coal consumption used for power generation is expected to rebound in 2013, regaining almost half of the production lost in 2012. Source: EIA Short Term Energy Outlook, November 2012
Right axis: Electric power Retail and general industry Coke plants 180 150 120 90 60 30 0 30 60 90 120 150 2010 2011 2012 2013
110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
decline in natural gas consumption in the electric power sector for 2013. Even so, power sector consumption this year is still expected to be about 1.8 Bcf/d higher than in 2011. And new fossil-fired power generation assetswhere they are being proposed at allare almost exclusively designed to burn natural gas. Each utility with significant coal-fired generation is looking for the most economic generation balance between coal and gas. For example, Michigan-based CMS Energy said that with seven of its coal plants mothballed in 2015 or 2016, and with MISO possibly increasing its reserve capacity requirement to 18%, the utilitys capacity shortfall could be as high as 1,500 MW. Its
January 2013 POWER
CEO, John G. Russell, said that natural gas likely will be the fuel of choice for the new capacity and that the company will decide this year whether or not to move forward on an $800 million capital investment for new capacity. FirstEnergy also said it entered into a nonbinding memorandum of understanding with American Municipal Power (AMP) to develop 873 MW of peaking capacity at its Eastlake plant in Ohio. AMP would provide all of the construction financing and own 75%. FirstEnergy would buy the remaining 25% and would manage the project and operate the units. The facility would be operational in early 2016, and FirstEnergy would be bid into the 20162017 PJM-RPM (Reliability
www.powermag.com
The availability and low price of natural gas enticed many U.S. utilities to fuel switch on a grand scale in 2012. Increased demand has put upward pressure on prices, moving coal back to the top of the dispatch order in some regions. Expect the price momentum to shift often in 2013.
By Thomas W. Overton, JD
Courtesy: iStockphoto
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
2010
www.powermag.com
2011
2012
2013
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3
42
n unexpected boom in gas production as a result of advances in hydraulic fracturing, combined with an unusually mild 20112012 winter, sent gas inventories spiraling to record high levels. The traditional withdrawal season ended two weeks early, with storage levels touching bottom at an all-time high of 2,369 Bcf. The result was a crash in gas prices, which spent most of April 2012 below $2.00/MMBtu. Henry Hub spot prices finally hit a floor of $1.82/MMBtu on April 20. Awash in a sea of cheap gaswhich was now substantially cheaper on a MWh basis than coalplant owners across the country threw standard dispatch plans out the window and pushed open the throttles on their gas turbines. Coal-fired generation collapsed, while gas-fired power surged. In May, for the first time ever, gas power reached parity with coal power at about 32% each. Coal plants that had long been dispatched first as the core of baseload capacity saw themselves sidelined as peakers or idled altogether. Meanwhile, many combined cycle plants that had seen capacity factors around 30% were running at 80% or higher.
The $4 threshold is more than just psychological, as it represents the general point at whichwith the higher transport costs for coal factored incoal regains a cost advantage over gas. The EIA projects gas power burn to fall 11.2% during 2013, and some industry sources report that the gas-to-coal switchback has already begun. The drop in power burn is not expected to reduce pressure on gas prices, however, as residential, commercial, and industrial demand is projected to surge, leaving overall demand essentially unchanged for 2013.
1. Give and take. Natural gas consumption for electric power generation is expected to fall this year, giving up some of the gains achieved in 2012, when historically low prices drove coalto-gas switching across much of the Eastern Interconnect. Source: EIA, Short-Term Energy Outlook, November 2012.
Electric power Residential and commercial Industrial Other
$/MMBtu
Heating demand as a result of more normal winter weather, combined with growth in industrial consumption, should make up for the decreased power burn (Figure 2). Between early, thus far, sustained colder-than-normal temperatures and nuclear outrages and maintenance, gas market analyst Jay Levine told POWER in November, natural gas continues to remain buoyant and stronger than many anticipated. The fracking rush, like most booms, badly overshot its target in 20112012, leaving thousands of drilled but uncompleted gas wells waiting for a resurgence in prices. Gas at $2/MMBtu is a moneyloser for the drillers, but should prices begin edging above $4/MMBtu, returns on investment become attractive enough that it is likely some of these wells will return to production. In addition, the shale oil boom continues unabated, with associated gas accounting for an increasing percentage of the current production. While a shocking amount of this gas is being flared because of a lack of gathering infrastructurein North Dakota, almost 30% of it was flared last yearthis will change as several key pipelines in shale fields come online. Likewise, continued strong demand for natural gas liquids has kept production levels high despite a big drop in the gas rig count. Finally, despite the record power burn, gas inventories remain at record levels, having ended the 2012 injection season just below 4,000 Bcfan unthinkable amount not so long ago.
final rule on emissions from fracked wells. While the rule is fairly clear, the level of enforcement, and the commensurate costs, are not. Estimates have ranged from essentially negligible to hundreds of thousands of dollars per well. If the higher estimates prove correct, this could put a brake on future production. Another set of rules covering the entire fracking process on federal lands is currently pending from the Bureau of Land Management. With the final form uncertain, the impact is as well, but these too are likely to increase production costs to some degree. The other major political uncertainty concerns liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In mid-2012, shortly after Chenieres Sabine Pass export project received Department of Energy (DOE) approval, the Obama administration put all other applications on hold until after the November elections, ostensibly to allow further study of the effects on the domestic energy market. LNG exports are facing substantial opposition from a variety of quarters, creating some odd bedfellows: Environmental groups such as the Sierra Club are joining forces with petrochemical companies and several natural gas advocacy groups in an attempt to block exports. With upwards of 20 Bcf/day of proposed projects currently awaiting DOE approval or in the process of application, a few observers have taken a sky is falling view of the market, seeing huge amounts of domestic gas heading overseas. More levelheaded analysts have noted that, no matter the political outcome, the U.S. is unlikely to see much beyond 6 Bcf/day of exports, particularly given the cost to build LNG export facilities.
www.powermag.com
Thomas W. Overton, JD is POWERs gas technology editor. Follow Tom on Twitter @thomas_overton.
43
POWER IN RUSSIA
n recent years, while Europe and the U.S. grappled with the problem of securing future environmentally sound energy supplies, the booming economies of China, India, and Brazil stole the global power spotlight with frenzied activity to expand their power infrastructures to meet exploding demand. Meanwhile, the Russian Federation shares the predicaments of all these regions. Comprising much of eastern Europe and northern Asia, its 17.1 million square kilometers (km) make the Russian Federation the worlds largest country in total area, and within that diverse enormity in the northern and middle latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, it harbors the worlds largest natural gas reserves, the second-largest coal reserves, and the eighth-largest oil reserves. Russias population of 143.2 million pales in comparison with Chinas 1.3 billion. Even Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nigeria have more citizens. But with the ninth-largest economy in the world by nominal value, it is home to the fourth-largest electricity market globally (after the U.S., China, and Japan), a massive network that includes 118,045 km of transmission lines, and more than 600 power plants with a capacity of over 5 MW each. Russias power story, always molded by the countrys political condition, formally began just after the genesis of the Soviet socialist republic in 1918 and grew after the countrys brutal civil war that culminated in Russias union with five other republics to form the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Communism is Soviet power plus electrification of the whole country was iconic revolutionary Vladimir Illyich Lenins famous formula. It was first declared in 1920 as the newly formed State Electrification Commission (or GOELRO, as it is abbreviated in Russian) presented the first 10-year plan to electrify the country via construction of a network of regional thermal, hydropower power, and combined heat and power stations to the Eighth Congress of Soviets in Moscow (see sidebar Illyichs Lamp). Fulfilled by 1931, the GOELRO plan which became a prototype for subsequent five-year planskicked off rapid progress for
44
Russias electricity sector over the first half of the 20th century. Local, regional, and interregional electricity networks were unified into the Soviet energy system, and major interconnections were established with socialist Central and Eastern European countries. In the late 1920s, the success of the central statesponsored electrification plan reportedly prompted Joseph Stalin to abandon Lenins New Economic Policy, which advocated some private enterprise, in favor of a highly centralized command economy,
implemented through a series of five-year plans. By 1935, dominated by a vertically integrated, state-controlled monopoly, production of electricity had increased by a factor of nearly 7, compared to the 1913 level (instead of a factor of 4.5, as planned), from 2 billion kWh to 13.5 billion kWh, and the Soviet Union had already established industries to furnish power plants with domestically engineered power equipment. After World War II, the Soviet Union became the second-largest electricity generator in
Illyich s Lamp
Vladimir Illyich Lenin, who led the Soviet Union until his death in 1924, championed a countrywide electrification campaign proposed by the State Electrification Commission (GOELRO) in 1920. He supervised the plan himself and frequently intoned that it would be critical to transforming Russia from a small-peasant basis into a large-scale industrial basis. It would, literally, bring enlightenment to the proletariat, he claimed. The plan arguably laid the foundation for industrialization in Russia during the 1920s and 1930s. It became such a basic part of daily domestic life in Russia that a phrase that translates as Illyichs lamp was adopted as the colloquial name for household incandescent lightbulbs whose sockets were suspended from the ceiling by a wire. Among Lenins last letters are correspondence with engineer P.A. Kozmin in which the feasibility of using wind turbines for the electrification of villages is discussed.
1. Communism is Electrification. The first plan approved by the Congress of Soviets in 1920 for the electrification of Russia by the State Electrification Commission (GOELRO) was lauded by revolutionary leaders of the young union as integral to communism and key to transforming Russia into an industrial powerhouse. Propaganda posters like the left one that reads The Soviets and electrification make up the base of the new world (from 1924) and the right one titled The Red Leaders (from 1955)frequently cited or referred to Lenins famous formula: Communism is Soviet power plus electrification for the whole country. Source: Russian Archives Online
www.powermag.com
POWER IN RUSSIA
the world, behind the U.S., and in the 1950s, it pioneered the worlds very first nuclear power plant (the 5-MWe Obninsk reactor) and then two commercial-scale nuclear power plants. It also began building what was then the worlds largest hydroelectric plant, in Krasnoyasrsk. By the 1960s, as power output soared to 290 billion kWh, national electrification had reached 80%. Yet, even as economic growth slowed and power output increased from 741 billion kWh in 1970 to 1,728 billion kWh in 1990 (or about 17% of global generation), capacity failed to keep pace with the gargantuan needs of the Soviet Unions energy-hungry industry. The 1970s were marked by an ambitious Soviet program to expand nuclear power, and the country had already put into operation 25 reactors by 1986, the year that the Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine punctured Russiasand the worldsenthusiasm for nuclear energy expansion. The sector saw an even more climactic turning point in 1992, in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union, as some republics declared independence from the union, and eventual bankruptcy, as a weakened central government saw profits from state-owned enterprises evaporate after mass, rapid privatization. During this chapter of the industrys history, the Ministry of Electric Power was dissolved, and the Unified Energy System (RAO-UES) which had been established in 1956 as the Soviet Unions single energy distributorwas reborn as a state-controlled holding company that assumed control of 72 vertically integrated local power companies (oblenergos) accounting for 70% of Russias electricity generation. The remaining share was divided between another state monopoly, Rosatom, responsible for nuclear power, and a few small, independent power companies. Blocks of UESs shares (the entity still owns practically all of the nations transmission and distribution networks) were then sold to workers (numbering 600,000 at the time) and the public and, later, to domestic and foreign investors, leaving the government with a 53% controlling stake. As the country sank into a severe post-Soviet depression, while electricity prices were continually suppressed by the government to subsidize its highenergy intensity industries, economic reforms created an acute shortage of funds and stalled a number of power projects. UES was effectively crippled, running at a deficit of $1 billion on annual revenues of $7 billion, unable to invest in new capacity, grid improvements, or plant modernization efforts. Russias once-bright electricity future dimmed. annual gross domestic product (GDP) rate of 6% over the next decade. Soaring electricity consumption soon highlighted the countrys dilapidated power infrastructure. Due to neglect and outright theft, transmission and distribution losses in some regions, notably in North Caucasus, were reportedly more than 30%. Conceding that the state alone could not bear the costs required to maintain and upgrade its power infrastructure, the Russian government finally agreed to a proposal by newly installed UES head Anatoly Chubais, who had previously led privatization efforts of state properties as a minister in Boris Yeltsins administration in 1991, in the immediate aftermath of the Soviet collapse. Chubais argued that, if unreformed, the Russian power sector would not support future economic development, and that if the stillmassive UES were reformed, it would need to be designed to attract private investment. After much discussion and scrutiny of dozens of models presented between 1999 and 2000, the Russian Duma (consisting of its parliament and upper house) in 2001 finally approved a reform plan that called for an unbundling of the incumbent monopoly, creating an independent regulator, privatizing generation, and liberalizing electricity prices. In March 2003, the Duma set the legal basis for the reform while approving an Energy Strategy spanning from 2003 to 2020 (though a newer, adjusted one was later adopted in 2009) that provided state consensus on the countrys energy future. And, despite a few hiccups, reform has sped ahead, fired by broad-based political support. Dispatching Administration), a 100% stateowned open joint-stock company, has been set up to ensure the dispatch of electricity and stable functioning of the nations unified grid. The wholesale market is supervised by the Market Council, a noncommercial partnership that is governed by a supervisory board comprising representative market participants, the Russian government, and other market infrastructure bodies. Russia has also begun the formation of a competitive wholesale market, and prices in the power market have been gradually liberalized in recent years. About 80% of electric power is traded at nonregulated market prices. While the portion of state-regulated prices is expected to diminish, as required by the reforms, some state control is expected to continue throughout Russia (with the exception of certain geographically isolated regions, including the Russian Far East, Kaliningrad, and the Arkhangelsk regions) until at least 2014. Participants in the wholesale market also trade in capacity (on the basis of up to 10-year capacity supply contracts concluded at competitive prices), obligating generating companies to maintain a certain level of generating capacity and sometimes involving obligations to maintain or repair existing generation facilities as well as to build new ones.
Russia Transformed
In 2008, UESs holdings were unbundled: Generation, transmission, and distribution are today structurally divided and managed by companies with diversified ownership. Generation is produced by 14 territorial power and heating companies (indicated by the Russian abbreviation TGK) and seven wholesale power-generating companies (OGK). An antimonopoly service prohibits a single private owner from controlling more than 20% of generating capacity in one of eight defined regional zones. The state retains 100% interest in nuclearthrough the State Atomic Energy Corp. (Rosatom)as well as most hydropower and major transmission facilities. Among the sectors major players are Gazpromwhich evolved from dissolution of the Soviet-era Ministry of Gas Industry and continues to be 50.1% owned by the Russian governmentand a handful of foreign companies, including E.ON, Enel, RWE, and Fortum. The Ministry of Industry and Energy has primary responsibility for the power sector, while the System Operator (or Centralized
www.powermag.com
A Revolutionary Reform
Then in 1998, Russias slumbering economy awoke and began growing at an unprecedented
January 2013 POWER
POWER IN RUSSIA
erating companies and territorial generation companies is to modernize their existing power plants and build new ones using advanced technologies. Hydropower. Russia harbors 9% of the worlds freshwater resources, and as a result, an immense hydropower potential. Yet, as the government acknowledges, only 20% of this potential is currently utilized, by 102 hydropower facilities, each of more than 100 MW, and one pumped storage plant (Figure 4). The largest of the countrys 46-GW hydropower fleet was for a long time the SayanoShushenskaya power plant in Khakassia, but that plant suffered a devastating explosion in August 2009 that killed 75 people and put several units out of service (Figure 5). (See Investigating the Sayano-Shushenskaya Hydro Power Plant Disaster, in the December 2010 issue of POWER, available in the archives at www.powermag.com.) The federation continues to hold a 60% stake in RusHydro, owner of 35.3 GW of generation capacity and the countrys largest hydropower firm, which evolved as a generating company after dissolution of the UES in 2008. With strong government backing, several initiatives are under way to develop the potential of rivers of the North Caucasus, in the Volga regions, and in Siberia. Nuclear Power. The countrys nuclear sector is wholly controlled by Rosenergoatom, a subsidiary of state corporation Rosatom. That firm operates 32 reactors in 10 nuclear power plants with a total capacity of 23.2 GW. These comprise six early VVER design pressurized water reactors, 11 current-generation VVERs, and 13 light water graphite reactors. Between the 1986 Chernobyl accident and the mid1990s, only one nuclear power station was commissioned in Russia (the four-unit Balakovo plant). Further development was restrained by an acute shortage of funds after the collapse of the Soviet bloc. Work is currently under way on 10 other reactors as well as on projects to increase the load factors at existing plants by 4.5 GW. Rosatoms international arm, Atomstroyexport, meanwhile, has three reactor construction projects abroad, all involving VVER-1000 units. Recognizing the strategic and economic significance of nuclear power, Russia last November reaffirmed priorities to modernize and expand its nuclear fleet and announced plans to invest $1.3 billion annually in nuclear research and development by 2020 (a 10-fold increase from figures proposed in 2007). Specific goals include demonstration of a full range of fastreactor technology by 2020, first by installing the pilot BREST-300 lead-cooled fast reactor at the Siberian Chemical Combine at Seversk in the Tomsk region as a forerunner to a series of 1,200-MW versions planned nationally.
46
Rosatoms long-term strategy envisions nuclear power making up a 45% to 50% share of the nations total power profile by 2050, and up to 80% by the end of the century. The plan, which calls for 43.4 GW of new nuclear capacity, involves moving to advanced fast reactors with a closed nuclear cycle and mixed-oxide fuel (see Russias Nuclear Mission, August 2010). Alternative Energy. Renewables make up a minuscule portion of Russias power profile, their development hindered by a lack of renewable energy subsidies, concerns over the transparency of the tendering process, and the level of market liberalization. Yet, the countrys energy strategy calls for a program from 2022 to 2030 that will be marked by an expansion of nuclear, hydropower, wind, and other renewables. The plan declares that by the end of the forecast period, renewables should account for 14% of the countrys demand.
The Grid. Russias national grid is referred to as the Unified National Electric Grid in Russia because it consists of seven regional power systems: North West, Central, Middle
Russias current 220 GW of installed capacity is mostly composed of thermal plants, about 60% of which is fired by natural gas and 40% by coal. Source: Russian Ministry of Industry and Energy
Nuclear 11%
3. Behemoth gas.
With a total generating capacity of 5,600 MW, Surgut-2, near Surgut in Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug is one of the largest natural gas thermal power plants in Europe. It is also the largest Russian power station operated by energy supplier E.ON Russia, which is majority-owned by E.ON. Startup of Unit 3 was planned for October 2012. The Surgut-2 station continuously provides Western Siberia and Ural with power and heat. Emerson Process Management is the main automation contractor for Unit 3 of the Surgut-2 power station. Courtesy: Emerson
4. Water storage.
RusHydros 1,200MW Zagorsk Pumped Storage Station Russias only pumped storage plantnear Sergiev Posad, was approved in 1974 and became operational in 2000. Zagorsk-2, with a future installed capacity of 840 MW, is currently being constructed next to it. Courtesy: RusHydro
5. In the aftermath.
The catastrophe at the 6,400-MW Sayano-Shushenskaya hydroelectric plant that killed 75 workers in southern Siberia on Aug. 17 , 2009, had a number of contributing causes, including design, operational, and repair weaknesses. Reconstruction of the plant is under way and is expected to be completed in full by 2014. Courtesy: Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense, Emergencies, and Elimination of Consequences of Natural Disasters
www.powermag.com
POWER IN RUSSIA
Volga, North Caucasus, Urals, Siberian, and Far Easternwhich is not linked to an integrated grid (Figure 6). The bulk is owned by the state-controlled Federal Grid Co. (RAO FGC), which oversees Russias 118,000-km high-voltage transmission grid and plans to invest $14.5 billion between 2010 and 2013 to modernize it. Projects under way include a unification of the Russian and the West European transmission networks. The grid companys profits have been squeezed in recent years due to what it says are rising costs and the governments reluctance to raise regulated tariffs for myriad stateregulated monopolies such as the railway. a 10-year guaranteed rate of return on power produced at new plants. In return, the firms are obligated to build a range of gas, oil, and coal-fired power plants with fixed deadlines to boost the nations generating capacity by 30 GW (Gazprom alone will take on 9 GW) by 2017. A total of 140 new power plant blocks are already in the pipeline to be built between now and 2017, many of which will be gasfired combined cycle power plants. At the same time, the Federal Grid Co., owner of most of the countrys high-voltage transmission grid, plans to invest $25 billion between 2013 and 2017 to modernize its infrastructure, a program that includes renovation of the unified all-Russia energy grid and putting 16,965 km of new lines into operation. Yet, any progress on this front will depend crucially on how Russia overcomes the challenging hurdle to attract investment. Some industry observers are optimistic that it will succeed. Several foreign investorssuch as Finnish energy company Fortum, Italys Enel, and Germanys E.ONhave already entered the sector, enticed by liquidation of the former power monopoly UES in 2008, and many have reported profits from Russian ventures. According to Prof. Rolf Langhammer of the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, to attract an influx of foreign investment, Russias entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the fall of 2011 sent a signal that foreign investors can count on legal guarantees and the protection of their intellectual property rights in the country. But others see continued problems with reform efforts, specifically that the sector still bears the legacy of the state-governed Soviet era. Alexander Kornilov, a senior analyst covering the electric power sector at AlfaBank, told business journal Russian American Business in 2012 that foreign investors were concerned about constant rule changes, pointing to one incident during early 2011 as an example, when senior government officials ordered caps on power tariffs that were deemed to be rising too rapidly. Investment will likely also hinge on the development of enough skilled labor. Qualified staff left the sector during the slump in the 1990s, and the next-generation workforce is critically lacking, with control unit engineers and maintenance specialists particularly in demand, industry experts report. Russia will also need to float its once-buoyant domestic power technology sector, which shrank during the transition period after the fall of the Soviet bloc and has been insufficient to meet surging demand for equipment. Major energy equipment firms like Siemens, GE, Alstom, ABB, Skoda Power, Schneider Electric, Westinghouse, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries have already entered the fray and established a firm footing. By some reports, Russian technology for heavy duty gas turbines, ultrasupercritical steam turbines, gasification, and process control systems, as well as electro-technical equipment, lags far behind global standards, afflicted by limited funding for research
6. Russias energy regions. The Federal Grid Co., an entity 80% owned by the Russian
Federation, maintains more than 1.22 million kilometers of transmission lines and 854 substations (with a total installed capacity exceeding 322,500 MVA) in the Unified Energy Grid (UNEG). The national grid comprises 73 Russian regions that are divided into zones, each falling under the control of one of the companys backbone electric grid branches (designated as MES). The sparsely populated Chukotka, Kamchatka, Taimyr, Yakutia, Magadan, and Sakhalin regions in the Far Eastern zone are not yet covered by the UNEG for lack of economic conditions. The national grid also includes about 137 inter-state electricity transmission lines with contiguous countries for import and export. Source: Federal Grid Co.
www.powermag.com
47
POWER IN RUSSIA
7. Gas giant. Gazprom, owner of Russias
largest power generating assetsMosenergo, TGC-1, and WGC-2has a total capacity of 38 GW, or about 17% of Russias total installed capacity. The company, like others in Russia, is building several combined cycle power plants, seeking to boost its aggregate capacity to 44.8 GW by 2020. Its newest addition is a 450-MW combined cycle gas turbine that was commissioned at the Pravoberezhnaya Combined Heat and Power Plant in St. Petersburg on Nov. 23. Courtesy: Gazprom
2030, the Ministry of Industry and Trade calls for high import taxes on equipment manufactured abroad to reduce imported products in new projects to 10% by 2025.
Fuel Woes
Russia may have some of the worlds largest coal and gas reserves, but domestic generators using these fuels are reportedly subjected to higher prices and less flexibility in obtaining them than might be expected. Russias recoverable reserves of coal have been estimated at 173 billion short tonssmaller only than those of the U.S., which holds roughly 263 billion short tonsbut the country produced just 372 million short tons in 2011 (76% of which is hard coal), less than a third of U.S. coal production. In 2011, Russia produced about 510 billion cubic meters of natural gasthe largest by volume in the worldabout 60% of which was sold on the domestic market. But the countrys gas generators, which represent 60% of thermal generation capacity and around 40% of domestic electricity production, suffer a different ordeal: Stakeholders routinely raise concerns about the competitiveness of upstream fuel supply markets. One issue is that Gazprom (whose controlling stake is held by the Russian government)
and outdated production facilities. The government has reportedly bought controlling stakes in enterprises to optimize equipment production for generation companies. In the 2011-issued Strategy for the Development of the Electro Machine Building Sector till
dominates the domestic gas market with a 75% market share. According to some, Gazprom has cut back on the very high level of natural gas supplies for electricity generation because it can glean five times more money by exporting the gas to the west (27% of European Union gas comes from Russia). But Gazprom is also the countrys largest owner of power generating assets (Figure 7). Its generating fleet totals 38 GW, or 17% of Russias installed capacity, which raises concerns about the potential for the company to discriminate against competing thermal generators. It should be noted, however, that independent producers, such as Novatek and some Russian oil companies, are beginning to build a notable presence in the generation fuel supply market. An interesting perspective offered by Austin-based global intelligence company Stratfor suggests that Russias natural gas producers are being forced to rely on revenues from gas exports and may be suffering financially because government measures let domestic users pay a fraction of the price paid by Russias foreign customers. According to current Gazprom data, it costs Gazprom approximately $132 to produce or acquire and then distribute 1 tcm of natural gas, but its revenue from the domestic market is only $80 per tcm, which means Gazprom loses
Edition: 2012
For more detailed information and a list of all available Platts data and directories, please visit www.platts.com/UDIDataDirectories
48 www.powermag.com
POWER IN RUSSIA
more than $50 per tcm sold domestically. Considering that the domestic market makes up 60% of sales, the loss is monumental, the group said in an analysis published in 2012. Gazprom has asked the government for a 45% increase in domestic natural gas prices by the end of 2013 and an end to price restrictions by 2014. If granted, Stratfor speculates, the increases will undoubtedly resculpt the countrys energy future and have major repercussions for its myriad gas generators and energy-intensive metals industries. If not, Gazpromwhich alone contributes around 20% of the state budget revenuescould find itself in trouble, given that the countrys domestic natural gas consumption is projected to increase, while sales to Europe are projected to decrease.
competitive neutrality in the longer term. The IEA has called for increased diversity of ownership through further divestment, or initiatives such as virtual power or other mechanisms to sell rights to the output of publicly owned generators, which could provide a practical option for assets, like hydro or nuclear facilities, that are difficult to privatize.
Pervading Politics
Russias power story has come a long way from the campaign to install Illychs lamp in every household to enlighten the masses, and it continues to be shaped by political and economic forces. Today, despite reforms to increase investment, the energy industrys biggest flaw continues to be that it is dominated by monopolies controlled by a government whose leadership hasnt really changed over the last decade, some experts say. International rankings point to Russias propensity for deep-seated corruption, and Putins return to the presidency in May signaled that not much will change, some observers lament. Foreign investors are able to operate in Russia only if they establish good working relations with members of the dominating clans. The quickest way to be awarded projects and contracts in Russia is to offer those clans stakes in respectable international companies, as Mikhail Krutikhin, an analyst and consultant for the oil and gas industry and politics in Russia, said in a fiery opinion for Euractiv. But this could actually work to the benefit of efforts to modernize Russia, as Vladislav Inozemtsev, a much-cited economist and founder and director of the Centre for PostIndustrial Studies in Moscow, told German publication Speigel Online in November. No political or economic upheavals are expected between now and 2018 because the economic system is robust and flexible, he said, [a]nd the majority of the population will remain content because they have never lived as normally as they do now. At a lecture in Vienna earlier that month, Inozemtsev argued that corruption has emerged as a necessary outcome of the collective repression of Soviet times because it gives individuals a sense of control. The state, too, devalues collective action, and a system has emerged where bribery is the most effective means to reach any goals and solve any existing problems. Therefore, he says, state representatives who get used to corruption are not seen as foes, but as a systemic part of the regime. Under such circumstances, public service becomes business, corruption turns into a form of rent, and the protest against the regime diminishes.
Russia 55%
www.powermag.com
49
ASSET MANAGEMENT
n October 2011, a group of two dozen energy graybeardsveterans of energy policy discussions in the U.S. over the past 40 years or soassembled in Oak Ridge, Tenn., to think about what, to some, might be unthinkable. For two days, the group looked at the kinds of unanticipated events that have brought down civilizations. They called these disturbing events the Achilles Heels of Civilization. Traditionally, we have thought of these events in Biblical terms, as the white, red, black, and pale horses of the apocalypse: famine, pestilence, war, and death. A more modern metaphor comes from the Lebanese-American scholar Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his 2007 book Black Swans. In that book, he defines a black swan event: First, it is an outlier, as it lies outside the realm of regular expectations, because nothing in the past can convincingly point to its possibility. Second, it carries an extreme impact. Third, in spite of its outlier status, human nature makes us concoct explanations for its occurrence after the fact, making it explainable and predictable.
is only realistic to assume that the United States is no exception. It is even possible that forces have already been set in motion which could devolve into a scenario that would at least terminate our status as a great power and perhaps lead to a far worse fate. Some of these rara avis outliers are familiar, even obvious. Natural disasters lead the list: widespread droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, infections that kill millions, nuclear war. Others may come to mind less easily. Sanders cites a slow but highly sulfurous volcanic eruption in Iceland in 17831784 that caused widespread crop failures and mortality spikes in Europe although it lasted only eight months, and two much shorter eruptions in 2010 [that] brought air travel to a halt in northern Europe. When the Oak Ridge energy gurus looked at modern American life, they saw
an unexpected weak spot in our civilization, an Achilles heel that is so ordinary we largely take it for granted. Dr. Ben McConnell, a retired Oak Ridge lab scientist, now a research scientist at the University of Tennessee, where he studies transformers and switchgear, was a participant in the Achilles Heel project. He told a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) technical conference last May that the U.S. electric transmission and distribution grid offers a clear path to destruction of our way of life. When the Oak Ridge boffins looked at the U.S., McConnell said, they found that grid collapse came out to be the most serious problem that would have to be considered in the shortest time frame. Outside of the electricity industry, few fully understand the centrality of the grid to life in America today. The most graphic realizations occur when the grid goes
1. Storm damage repairs. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) linemen begin to repair damage to a high-voltage transmission tower caused by a recent storm. Courtesy: TVA
ASSET MANAGEMENT
down. Its not just a matter of light and comfort in our homes. Without electricity, citizens may have no access to potable water, sewage treatment, safe food, fuel supplies, traffic control, or health care. A large swath of the U.S. got a taste of what happens when the grid goes down at the end of June, when a heat wave led to a super derecho that blacked out millions of electric customers over a 10-state swath from Illinois to the Atlantic and killed at least 20 people. The outage began June 29 and lasted past the U.S. Independence Day holiday for hundreds of thousands. By July 5, FirstEnergy was estimating that 250,000 customers (probably some 500,000 people) in just its West Virginia service territory were still without electricity (Figure 1). As meteorologist Kristina Pydynowski explains, a derecho is a widespread and long-lived wind storm that accompanies rapidly moving showers or thunderstorms. The most severe derechos are given the adjective super. Winds measured 91 mph in eastern Illinois on Friday afternoon, June 29, and 81 mph on the southern New Jersey coast early Saturday morning as the derecho screamed across the country. Unlike typical summer thunderstorms that take down distribution lines and local transformers, the super derecho clobbered high-voltage lines and major substations. The windstorm took down 50 major transmission lines and more than 70 substations in Ohio and West Virginia. In the Washington, D.C., area, the derecho shorted out the substation serving the water treatment facilities of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, depriving much of the area of drinking water for more than a day. Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell proclaimed the event the worst non-hurricane outage in the Old Dominions history. Not only is the electrical grid central to modern life, but the grid also has multiple vulnerabilities that make keeping it safe a very difficult task. Weather outages are common, although some, such as an ice storm, can do enormous damage. A January 1998 ice storm destroyed much of Hydro-Qubecs massive 765-kV transmission system, blacking out more than 3 erate its system with appropriate voltage criteria and remedial measures. The 2003 blackout also highlighted another chilling aspect of grid failure: the propensity of the system to suffer from a cascading failure. Because of the grids interconnectedness, grid failures can spread quickly, concatenating across the system. This same effect occurred during the 1965
Not only is the electrical grid central to modern life, but the grid also has multiple vulnerabilities that make keeping it safe a very difficult task.
million Canadians, causing 30 fatalities, and leaving many customers in the dark for weeks. Tropical storms, such as 2005s Hurricane Katrina, can also cause longterm and widespread destruction. Human error can also take down the grid in a hurry, as was the case with the massive August 2003 blackout that turned off power for 55 million people in the Northeast, Midwest, and Canada. According to the official inquiry, the prime mover in that event was a series of errors by operators and managers at Ohio-based FirstEnergy (FE). The DOE report on that event concluded that the utility and the reliability region staff failed to assess and understand the inadequacies of FEs system, particularly with respect to voltage instability and the vulnerability of the Cleveland-Akron area, and FE did not opblackout that slammed most of the eastern U.S., an event that began with a simple hardware failure in Canada.
Human Interference
In addition to human error, the electric grid is also quite vulnerable to intentional human intervention, from a mad person with a charge of dynamite at a crucial transmission tower to a surreptitious cyber-attack such as the U.S. and Israel created with the Stuxnet virus, to a deliberate stateordered explosion of a nuclear weapon to create an electrical and magnetic pulse that brings down the grid. Following the late-June Mid-Atlantic super derecho, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted that the event was a mild taste of what an EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) attack would do. Cyber attacks have gained the most attention recently, partly as a result of publicity arising from the Stuxnet attack on Irans nuclear program. As the grid becomes more complex, sophisticated, and computer-assistedsmart if you willit becomes more vulnerable to code hacking. Recent POWER articles (see the archives at www.powermag.com) discuss the growing areas of cyber vulnerabilities (Guidance on Cybersecurity for the Electricity Sector, June 2012) and threats to utility supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems (see Ensuring the Cybersecurity of Plant Industrial Control Systems, June 2012). But there also is a positive side to the increasing interconnectivity and intelligence in the grid. Identifying specific outages, down to the individual meter, becomes easier, as does measuring success
51
www.powermag.com
ASSET MANAGEMENT
in restoring connections. Discovery News, the online magazine that is a companion to televisions Discovery Channel, reported in July, In the outage this weekend in the Mid-Atlantic states, smart meters provided power companies data about which houses are out without owners having to call in. Many of these wireless smart meters have been installed in just the past few months. The story continued by quoting Matt Wakefield, senior program manager of smart grid systems for the Electric Power Research Institute: They wont prevent an outage, but they might allow you to restore things more quickly. The North American electrical grid also faces threats from space (though not from aliens). The problem is the sun (Figure 2). As a new period of solar flare activity begins a predicted 11-year cycle, the grid could face increasing disruption caused by a deluge of geomagnetic particles and pulses in the next couple of years. A 1989 solar storm caused a major Ontario blackout and damaged large transformers as far south as New Jersey. Far larger solar storms have hit Earth in the past, before development of the electric power grid, including the legendary Carrington event of 1859. That solar storm severely damaged Englands telegraph system. Had the Carrington storm struck 150 years later, it could have led to enormous electric outages for scores of millions of people lasting many months, according to the experts (see The Great Solar Storm of 2012? in the February 2011 issue). conference. A webcast of that conference is archived at http://bit.ly/10QQksb. McConnell, who has been studying the issue for decades, said in an interview that NERCs analysis is flawed. NERC needs to do more homework, he said. They dont understand the problems facing the transformers. The transformer manufacturers are sweating blood over this and backup systems put the running costs of the system over the roof. Peter Pry, a former CIA analyst and congressional staffer who worked on a congressionally mandated Electromagnetic Pulse Commission, told the FERC meeting that he believes NERC is low-balling the potential impact of solar storms on the grid because of the financial consequences for the electricity industry. In an interview before the FERC meeting, Pry told POWER, This is not honest disagreement. Its not a legitimate disagreement among scientists. It is an industry attempt to cover up. McConnell stunned the FERC commissioners at the technical conference when he described the civilization-threatening reach of a massive grid failure. His suggestion for the best ways to cope with a grid collapse was equally stunning. One of the best ways to protect the grid, he said, is to go into islanding mode, the deliberate disconnection of sections of the grid to prevent cascading. The idea is heretical, as it requires abandoning economic dispatch for at least some period of grid operation. FERC Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur was astonished at McConnells suggestion. As a former acting CEO of National Grid USA, LaFleur is the commissions transmission and distribution guru. The question is whether inductive power released by a geomagnetic event will prevail over the reactive power that will cause the system to break apart, she said. Im struck by Dr. McConnells comment that the best way to survive would be the go back to more local geographic operation. Thats the exact opposite of the direction the electric industry has gone in the last 20 years. A lot of what we do at this commission is to interest people to think bigger and think across regions and do more transmission. McConnell nodded sagely. It might not be economic and we might all pay 100% more per kilowatt-hour during two or three days, he said. But the heck with it. Thats the way it ought to go to save the system. Because if we go down, if even a third of the grid is out, a 10th of the transformers in the base load structure went down, we would be in a world of hurt.
Threat Disputed
A recent FERC technical conference revealed a rift between federal regulators and the North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC), which reports to FERC on reliability issues, over the threat of geomagnetic disturbances from increased solar flares. Whereas most assessments have found that geomagnetic damage is potentially catastrophic, NERC in a report early this year downplayed the issue. NERC said it recognizes that other studies have indicated a severe [geomagnetic disturbance] event would result in the failure of a large number of [extra high voltage] transformers but added that the work of its own task force does not support this result. The NERC study said that the transformer problem is more likely in older transformers and clearly implied that a voltage collapse would take the grid down before transformers would be damaged by the induced currents. The NERC report, because it challenges the mainstream, consensus view of the threat of solar storms, caused considerable head-scratching at FERC. We read the latest NERC report, a FERC staff person reportedly said, and our reaction was, What the heck is going on here. It was very surprising. FERCs consternation led to the April 30, 2012, technical
2. Solar flares.
Over a four-hour period on Nov. 16, 2012, two prominence eruptions occurred. The action was captured in the 304 Angstrom wavelength of extreme ultraviolet light. Similar solar eruptions have caused transmission system disruptions. Source: NASA
Kennedy Maize is a POWER contributing editor and executive editor of MANAGING POWER.
52 www.powermag.com
FUTURE POWER
programs and policies were also advanced under Republican governors as well.
uted generation (DG)localized generation close to consumer loads (Figure 1)as part of a 20,000-MW renewable energy buildout included in the states 33% RPS law. Approximately 3,000 MW of DG already exist in California, and an additional 6,000 MW are under development or authorized. The obvious regulatory preference for DG is indicated by the fact that it is 60% of the total new renewable capacity expected to be added. Interestingly, California includes individual system size up to 20 MW in its DG planning. Supporting the solar portion of DG are the incentives provided in Senate Bill (SB) 1 and the feed-in tariffs in SB 32. Projects based on gas-fired small turbines and engines need not apply for those perks. Large-scale renewable facilities represent the other 8,000 MW in the RPS that is supposed to be met by 2020. Geographic and permitting realities in the state suggest that the large-scale facilities must be accompa-
1. Ambitious planning.
Distributed generation is planned for deployment based on, among other things, unemployment characteristics and where low- to moderateincome households are located. Source: California Energy Commission
PacifiCorp
DG projects (MW) 1173 174466 467948 9493006 IOUs POUs Counties
PG&E SMUD
LADWP
California Is Different
A key element of Californias clean energy strategy is a target of 12,000 MW of distribwww.powermag.com
53
FUTURE POWER
2. Water rules challenge power producers. Many of Californias fossil power stations rely on once-through cooling, now under threat by a bill pending in the California assembly. Source: California Independent System Operator
nied by relatively long transmission lines if the renewable-based electricity is going to find customers. Thus, 13 critical transmission projects are contemplated along with the wind and solar installations. Taking reality into account, though, how likely is it that the necessary transmission will be built by 2020? Even in an infrastructurefriendly state, transmission lines can take up to 10 years to permit and build. By state, California is one of the largest importers of electricity in the country. Importing renewable energy from the hydro- and windrich Pacific Northwest and solar-rich Nevada and Arizona seems at first blush a smart way to meet the RPS. If you could get the transmission built, Colorado and Wyoming also could send California plenty of wind energy. Indeed, there are plans to build massive wind energy facilities in those states to serve the California market. The recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 1000 supports regional transmission planning and socializing the costs among ratepayers in the region. Part, if not most, of the inspiration for FERC 1000 was to get renewable energy to markets. The Department of the Interior, DOE, and other federal agencies are also supporting the development of big renewable energy
If you need information on the global power first. generation industry, look to
www.powermag.com
To subscribe, visit www.powermag.com/subscribe or call 847-763-9509.
54
www.powermag.com
FUTURE POWER
zones in the western states through expedited reviews and permitting. Unfortunately, Californias RPS policy is designed to discourage out-of-state renewable energy flows, although the restrictions take effect in the latter years of the mandate. As measured by energy (not capacity), 75% of the mandated flows must be in-state bundled transactions which caps the out-of-state opportunity. Also, SB 2X (the formal name of the RPS law) ensnares public utilities for the first time in the RPS program. Even if California did encourage out-ofstate flows, the regional strategy is questionable for other reasons. FERC 1000 could be challenged in the courts, and the means tests for socializing the costs, which requires valuing the benefits for specific classes of ratepayers, might be too arduous. The problem with regional development is that there is no regional government. Finally, multi-state transmission lines are more difficult to permit than in-state ones. an economy tanks and demand for goods and services is destroyed. Well, California is practicing a version of supply destruction. The state consumes very little coal for electricity production, although the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) gets electricity from the large coal-fired Intermountain power station in Utah and the Navajo station in Arizona. However, several oil/ gas-fired steam plants still operate along the coast, primarily in southern California. They depend on once-through cooling (Figure 2), a practice that could be outlawed by the pending Assembly Bill (AB) 1318. This bill, restricting thermal discharges, along with a new carbon emissions performance standard (1,100 pounds CO2/MWh), the strictest NOx emissions in the country, and other collars on fossil fuel in AB 32 (The Global Warming Solutions Act), are all likely to force the retirement of 15,000 MW of fossil-fired generation. Do the math: 15,000 MW of fossil-fuel capacity is to be replaced with 20,000 MW of renewable energy, 12,000 of which is DG. This suggests that DG is no longer something that is eating away at the edges. Its critical to the supply side of the equation in California. When you superimpose a map of where the thermal plants are being retired, where the population centers are, and where transmission is constrained, it becomes pretty clear that DG will be replacing the existing supply, not supplementing it (see sidebar). A map showing transmission constraints in Southern California Edisons territory also tells an interesting story (Figure 3). The power plants (not shown) are mostly along the coast, and the planned centralized renewable capacity is in the southwestern part of the state. According to the utility, the transmission constrained areas have little or no operational margin to handle any re-
References
Supply Destruction
It would be one thing if California were simply adding renewable energy and DG capacity to meet future load growth. But thats not the case. You may have heard the term demand destructionwhat happens when
3. Moving power problems. Getting power from the southwestern part of the state is constrained by transmission because so many power stations are located along the coast, stations whose operation is threatened because of pending once-through cooling prohibitions. Source: Southern California Edison
Enterprise zones SCE transmission constrained counties SCE transmission unconstrained counties Fresno
Sequoia Valley
Nevada
Barstow
Pac
ific
Oc
ean
San Diego Mexico
2012 Integrated Energy Policy Report, Draft Lead Commissioner Report, California Energy Commission, October 2012. Californias Clean Energy Future, Implementation Plan, CEC, CPUC, California Air Resources Board, CAISO, California Environmental Protection Agency, September 2010. CPUC Energy Storage Proceeding R. 10-12-007, Energy Storage Framework Staff Proposal, California Public Utilities Commission, December 2011. Energy Storage Phase 2 Workshop, Arthur ODonnell, Regulatory Analyst, California Public Utilities Commission. Implications of Integrating Wind at Scales That Matter for Climate Policy, Victor Niemeyer, Electric Power Research Institute, presented at the CTOTF Workshop, Integrating Renewables into the Generating Mix: Challenges and Unknowns, September 2010. LADWP Status Report on AB 1318 on Capacity Requirements/Emissions Implications, Mohammed Beshir, Electricity Infrastructure Issues In California Workshop, June 22, 2012. Overview of Electricity Infrastructure Issues, Michael Jaske, California Energy Commission, 2012 IEPR Update Workshop, Los Angeles, June 22, 2012. Prioritizing Geographical Areas for Renewable Energy Development, Southern California Edison, Lead CEC Commissioner Workshop on Identifying and Prioritizing Geographical Areas for Renewable Energy Development in California, May 10, 2012.
www.powermag.com
55
FUTURE POWER
4. Snubbing offshore wind. Offshore
wind is excellent in Northern California, but no one talks about developing it. This map shows the annual average wind power estimates at a height of 50 meters and ignores environmentally sensitive areas. Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory Wind power class 3 4 5 6 7 Resource potential Fair Good Excellent Outstanding Superb
distribution of network power flows without potentially adverse grid reliability impacts. What this means is that even small changes to the network flow patterns, such as from developing more renewable energy, may not be possible without significant transmission upgrades. According to the LADWP, the myriad clean energy mandates require the public utility to change 70% of its power system in a relatively short period of time. If power supply inside population areas is being shut down and renewable power to the west inside or outside the state cant get in, it seems certain that new DG facilities have to replace the older power station capacity.
tivities. Yet Northern California has some of the best offshore wind resources (Figure 4) in the country, and the offshore West Coast as a whole has some of the best oil/gas resources (Figure 5) outside of the Gulf of Mexico.
Distributed Storage
California has been active in developing energy storage technologies for many years; its one of only two states with an active research, development, and deployment program (New York being the other). It is also the only state considering, through AB 2541, setting targets for how much energy storage utilities should procure. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is scheduled to make its recommendation by October 2013 for a first energy storage procurement target to be achieved by affected load-serving entities by December 31, 2015. The recommendation, however, can also be that no target should be set. The CPUC is currently developing use cases to determine commercial readiness of technologies, operational viability, benefit streams, policy options, and deployment barriers. Storage has also become a key element in the states Integrated Energy Resource Plan. However, relevant agencies (CPUC, CEC, and the California Independent System Operator) planning and policy documents and presentations almost exclusively focus on distributed storage. Bulk storage solutions, like pumped hydro storage (PHS) and compressed air energy storage (CAES), are hardly mentioned, even though at least a dozen PHS projects are in active development in the state, and several others in neighboring states could serve the California market. Three CAES projects are also being contemplated by utilities in the state; two received stimulus funding. However, the CAES projects are proceeding slowly, if at all. Storage systems and natural gasfired plants, in fact, now are considered mostly as support for filling in around intermittently available renewable energy. Quoting from the latest version of the CEC Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR), Integrating [intermittent resources] will require a combination of complementary resources like energy storage, demand response, smart grid technologies, and flexible natural gas plants. In fact, every mention of energy storage in the IEPR, except one, discusses storage in connection with distributed resources.
5. Ignoring other offshore resources. Offshore oil and gas resources that could
be leased from the federal government are also not part of any California energy plan. This map shows offshore undiscovered technically recoverable oil and natural gas reserves. Source: Minerals Management Service, Department of the Interior
Off Limits
No Coastal Supply
Southern California 5.58 Bbl 9.75 Tcf
One things for sure: California isnt looking offshore for any of its energy needs. As states along the Eastern Seaboard and the Gulf Coast eye offshore wind enthusiastically, the resource isnt even mentioned in California planning acwww.powermag.com
Jason Makansi (jmakansi@ pearlstreetinc .com) is president of Pearl Street Inc., a technology deployment services firm. This article is based on material taken from a PGS Energy Training Seminar developed and presented by the author in Sacramento, April 2012, and Portland, Ore., October 2012: California Clean Energy and the Rest of the West.
POWER January 2013
56
NEW PRODUCTS
Rotary Peristaltic Pump
Vanton Pump and Equipment Corp.s portable, nonmetallic Flex-I-Liner rotary peristaltic pump evacuates drums and totes containing acids, caustics, salts, chlorides, and reagent grade chemicals, without corrosion of the pump or contamination of the uid. The self-priming design has no seals to leak or valves to clog, and the pump can run dry for extended periods without damage. Compact in size with integral handle, it ts on drum lids without protruding and has sufcient lift characteristics to operate from the oor, skid, or stand. Only two nonmetallic parts contact uid: a thermoplastic body block and an elastomeric exible liner that can be replaced in the eld without special tools. A rotor mounted on an eccentric shaft oscillates within the exible liner, imparting a progressive squeegee action on the uid trapped in the channel between the liner and the body block. Flanges on the exible liner are pressed to the side of the body block by concentric grooves on the bracket assembly and the cover plate, isolating the uid to the channel. The pump is suitable for ows from 0.33 gallons per minute (gpm) to 40 gpm (1.25 to 151 liters/hour) and pressures to 45 psig (310 kPa) at temperatures to 250F (121C). (www.vanton.com)
www.powermag.com
57
NEW PRODUCTS
An Evolution in Bolt Security
Chicago-based Nord-Lock added a new dimension of safety to bolt security with the launch of the Nord-Lock X-series washer, which combines Nord-Locks wedge-locking protection against spontaneous bolt loosening (due to vibration and dynamic loads) with an exclusive spring effect that protects against slackening due to settlement and relaxation. The principle of Nord-Lock X-series washers includes multiple functions that act on the bolted joint to maintain preload and prevent spontaneous bolt loosening. As with Nord-Locks original washers, each washer pair has cams on one side and radial teeth on the opposite side to secure the bolted joint with tension instead of friction. The Nord-Lock X-series washers conical shape also creates an elastic reserve in the bolted joint to compensate for the loss of preload and prevent slackening. (www.nord-lock.com)
21384
CAREERS IN POWER
NAES Corporation is a leading provider of 3rd party O&M services to the Independent Power Industry. As we continue to grow, we have constant needs for power professionals across the nation. For more info, log onto: www.naes.com/careers
George H. Bodman
Pres. / Technical Advisor
BoilerCleaningDoctor.com Ofice 1-800-286-6069
Ofice (281) 359-4006 PO Box 5758 E-mail: blrclgdr@aol.com Kingwood, TX 77325-5758 Fax (281) 359-4225
READER SERVICE NUMBER 205 READER SERVICE NUMBER 207
CONDENSER OR GENERATOR AIR COOLER TUBE PLUGS THE CONKLIN SHERMAN COMPANY, INC.
To Advertise in
POWER
CLASSIFIEDS
C O N TAC T Diane Hammes PHONE 713-444-9939 FAX 512-213-4855 dianeh@powermag.com
www.powermag.com
PRODUCT
GAS TURBINES FOR SALE LM6000 FRAME 9E FRAME 5
50/60Hz, nat gas or liq fuel, installation and service available Available for Immediate Shipment Tel: +1 281.227.5687 Fax: +1 281.227.5698 John.clifford@woodgroup.com
Showcase
FOR SALE/RENT
CU Services LLC 725 Parkview Cir, Elk Grove Vlg, Il 60007 Phone 847-439-2303 rcronfel@cuservices.net www.cuservices.net
READER SERVICE NUMBER 211 READER SERVICE NUMBER 212
wabash
POWER
EQUIPMENT CO.
www.molemaster.com
READER SERVICE NUMBER 210
www.powermag.com
61
20954
ADVERTISERS INDEX
Enter reader service numbers on the FREE Product Information Source card in this issue.
Reader Service Number Page
www.bibb-eac.com
TIC / Kiewit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
www.tic-inc.com
Metalfab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
www.metalfabinc.com
Rentech. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
www.rentechboilers.com
Shaw Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
www.shawgrp.com
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
Pages 60-61. To place a classified ad, contact Diane Hammes, 512-250-9555, dianeh@powermag.com
YES
NO
Digital
Print
ALL questions MUST be answered to qualify for a FREE subscription.
Name _______________________________________________________________ Title _______________________________________________________ Company _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Company address ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City______________________________________ State ___________________Zip/Post Code ___________________ Country ______________________ Phone No. ________________________________ Fax No. ______________________________Mobile/Cell No. ____________________________________ E-mail__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. DESCRIBE YOUR COMPANYS BUSINESS (check one): ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCER o Investor Owned Utility 1A o IPP/Cogen 1B o Rural Electric Co-op 1C o Municipal Utility 1D o Federal/State Electric System 1E o CONSULTING ENGINEERING FIRMS, INCLUDING CONSTRUCTION, ARCHITECTENGINEER FIRMS 2A PROCESS MANUFACTURING o Chemicals 3A o Petroleum 3B o Food 3C o Paper 3D o Rubber, stone, glass, clay 3E o Metal producing 3G o Mining 3F o Metal fabricating 3H o Machinery (electrical mechanical) 3I o Transportation equipment 3J o Lumber, wood products 3K o Textiles 3L o Other ___________________________ 2. PRIMARY JOB FUNCTION (check one) o General or Corporate Management A o Engineering, Operations or Maintenance B o Library or Company C o Other 3. FOR POWER PRODUCERS (check all that apply) What forms of energy are used at your power plants? For non-power producers, what forms of energy is your company interested in? o Coal A o Oil B o Natural Gas C o Nuclear D o Hydro E o Waste F o Renewables G o Other________________________ HA2009
63
o If you prefer not to receive promotional mailings from other companies, please check box. * Publisher reserves the right to determine qualications for free subscription.
January 2013 POWER
www.powermag.com
COMMENTARY
ith the passing of the 2012 election, one is reminded of the saying, The more things change, the more they stay the same. This, of course, stems from the fact that President Obama was reelected and both the Senate and the House remain in control of the same parties that held power, Democrats and Republicans respectively, before the election. For at least the next two years, expect more of the same.
On the other end of the coal front, federal, state, and local governments are actively working to block ports expansion that would allow increased coal exports, while the Obama administration has taken steps to restrict mountaintop mining. New regulations are in the pipeline that will make coal plants even less viable.
Nuclear Nuclear power will see some modest growth in the medium term. Even with no new reactors being built during the past 20 years in the U.S., the nuclear power industry has a great deal to brag about. In 1980, the average nuclear plant operated at 58.5% of its rated capacity. Todays nuclear plants average more than 90% of capacity. Indeed, the increased electricity produced by existing nuclear plants since 1990 could power 26 cities the size of Boston. Nuclears improved performance, combined with a new generation of purportedly less-expensive reactors and renewed concerns about Americas energy security has brought nuclear power construction out of the postThree Mile Island mothballs. Still, the industry is only likely to grow as long as the federal government offers loan guarantees to back the construction of new reactors. At the moment, four new reactors at two existing sites are in various stages of construction and a fifth reactor that had been mothballed during construction in 1985 is being finished out. Twenty-two more are in various stages of the proposal and/or planning processes. Many of these, however, wont be built for two primary reasons: relatively high construction costs and low natural gas prices that have undermined the push for new nuclear power plants for the near future. In the push to fund core programs to reduce the deficit, loan guarantees, and other programs that have helped restart the industry will likely be reducedif theyre not zeroed out of the federal budget. Coal For coal, expect the bad news to keep on coming. In swing states where the war on coal directly competed for votes with the auto bailout, auto workers beat coal miners. The administrations take-away message is likely to be that there are no serious repercussions for continuing to wage an assault on the coal industry from mine mouth to power plant to port. There were few bright spots for the coal power industry during the Obama administrations first term. Every clean air regulation that was made stricter had a disproportionate impact on coal plants. These regulations combined with low natural gas prices have made new coal plants undesirable from a cost perspective. Both trends also have made a number of existing coal plants unprofitable to operate and, in light of natural gas as an alternative, too expensive to upgrade to meet stricter air standards.
64
Natural Gas Although with little encouragement from the Obama administration, the natural gas industry has boomed over the past six years as a result of the fracking revolution. This trend is likely to continue. President Obama needs the gas boom to continue because its key to the administrations claims that the U.S. is on the road to energy independence. Despite his need for the natural gas boom to continue, the president seems committed to making public lands less accessible for oil and gas development. In addition, the administration is threatening to raise costs to producers by instituting nationwide fracking disclosure regulations. States that desired more drilling transparency have shown themselves more than capable of instituting disclosure regulations. Federal regulations would be duplicative and unnecessarily reduce new production. Most fracking is carried out by relatively small independent operators. While the largest producers can afford the costs of the new regulations, many smaller operators cannot. As a result, less gas will be produced, and the president will strike the very segment of the economy that he has consistently claimed is the backbone of economic recoverysmall businesses. Having said this, the biggest threat to the fracking revolution is its own success. Large production increases have resulted in extremely low pricesgood for consumers, not so much for producers who are struggling to produce natural gas at a profit. If this continues, more and more gas wells will be shuttered and fewer new wells drilled until prices allow operators to cover the costs of construction and continuing operations with a profit thrown in. Congress In the end, although Senate Republicans are likely to offer a number of bills to expand off-shore drilling and expedite domestic production, few if any of these initiatives are likely to make it out of the Senate. And unless some Republicans cross party lines and support Senate Democratic energy legislation, gridlock will continue. This is bad news because it will leave energy policy to the whims of federal regulatory agencies. Legislation through regulation is almost always bad for the energy industry, but especially so under the current regime. H. Sterling Burnett, PhD (sterling.burnett@ncpa.org) is a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas.
POWER January 2013
www.powermag.com
Power Generation Products ----------------------------------------------Environmental Control Solutions ----------------------------------------------After Market Services -----------------------------------------------
N O C O M PA N Y I S M O R E
Westinghouse has services and technologies to make the worlds already safe nuclear plants both pressurized water reactors and boiling water reactors even safer. We provide products and services to help nuclear plants prepare for external events, address extended station blackout conditions, provide enhanced spent fuel pool protection and mitigate a severe accident. We built safety into the design of our AP1000 plant, which harnesses natural forces like gravity, convection and condensation to achieve passive safety system shutdown. During a station blackout, or loss of all electrical power, the AP1000 plants passive safety system shuts down the reactor automatically, with no need for human intervention for up to 72 hours. Safety is at the forefront of our plants operations Westinghouse is committed to helping provide safe, clean and reliable electricity. Check out our solutions for enhancing safety at www.westinghousenuclear.com