City of Tallahassee

City of Tallahassee
REPORT
March 31, 2015
Ten-Year Site Plan: 2015-2024
City of Tallahassee Utilities
Photo: Substation 4
Report prepared by: City of Tallahassee Electric System Integrated Planning
Front Cover - 10 Year Site Plan - 2015.indd 1
3/12/15 2:35 PM
CITY OF TALLAHASSEE
TEN YEAR SITE PLAN FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATING FACILITIES
AND ASSOCIATED TRANSMISSION LINES
2015-2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Description of Existing Facilities
1.0
1.1
1.2
Figure A
Table 1.1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
System Capability ............................................................................................................................................... 1
Purchased Power Agreements ............................................................................................................................ 2
Service Territory Map......................................................................................................................................... 3
FPSC Schedule 1 Existing Generating Facilities ................................................................................................ 4
II. Forecast of Energy/Demand Requirements and Fuel Utilization
2.0
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.2
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table 2.3
Figure B1
Figure B2
Table 2.4
Table 2.5
Table 2.6
Table 2.7
Table 2.8
Table 2.9
Table 2.10
Table 2.11
Table 2.12
Table 2.13
Table 2.14
Table 2.15
Figure B3
Table 2.16
Table 2.17
Table 2.18
Table 2.19
Table 2.20
Figure B4
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
System Demand and Energy Requirements ........................................................................................................ 5
System Load and Energy Forecasts .................................................................................................................... 5
Load Forecast Uncertainty & Sensitivities ......................................................................................................... 8
Energy Efficiency and Demand Side Management Programs ............................................................................ 9
Energy Sources and Fuel Requirements ........................................................................................................... 12
FPSC Schedule 2.1 History/Forecast of Energy Consumption (Residential and Commercial Classes) ........... 13
FPSC Schedule 2.2 History/Forecast of Energy Consumption (Industrial and Street Light Classes) .............. 14
FPSC Schedule 2.3 History/Forecast of Energy Consumption (Utility Use and Net Energy for Load) .......... 15
Energy Consumption by Customer Class (2005-2024) .................................................................................... 16
Energy Consumption: Comparison by Customer Class (2015 and 2024) ....................................................... 17
FPSC Schedule 3.1.1 History/Forecast of Summer Peak Demand – Base Forecast......................................... 18
FPSC Schedule 3.1.2 History/Forecast of Summer Peak Demand – High Forecast ........................................ 19
FPSC Schedule 3.1.3 History/Forecast of Summer Peak Demand – Low Forecast ......................................... 20
FPSC Schedule 3.2.1 History/Forecast of Winter Peak Demand – Base Forecast ........................................... 21
FPSC Schedule 3.2.2 History/Forecast of Winter Peak Demand – High Forecast ........................................... 22
FPSC Schedule 3.2.3 History/Forecast of Winter Peak Demand – Low Forecast ........................................... 23
FPSC Schedule 3.3.1 History/Forecast of Annual Net Energy for Load – Base Forecast ............................... 24
FPSC Schedule 3.3.2 History/Forecast of Annual Net Energy for Load – High Forecast ............................... 25
FPSC Schedule 3.3.3 History/Forecast of Annual Net Energy for Load – Low Forecast ................................ 26
FPSC Schedule 4 Previous Year Actual and Two Year Forecast Demand/Energy by Month ........................ 27
Load Forecast: Key Explanatory Variables ..................................................................................................... 28
Load Forecast: Sources of Forecast Model Input Information ........................................................................ 29
Banded Summer Peak Load Forecast vs. Supply Resources ............................................................................ 30
Projected DSM Energy Reductions .................................................................................................................. 31
Projected DSM Seasonal Demand Reductions ................................................................................................. 32
FPSC Schedule 5.0 Fuel Requirements ............................................................................................................ 33
FPSC Schedule 6.1 Energy Sources (GWh) .................................................................................................... 34
FPSC Schedule 6.2 Energy Sources (%) .......................................................................................................... 35
Generation by Fuel Type (2015 and 2024) ...................................................................................................... 36
III. Projected Facility Requirements
3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.2.6
Figure C
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 3.3
Table 3.4
Planning Process ............................................................................................................................................... 37
Projected Resource Requirements .................................................................................................................... 37
Transmission Limitations .................................................................................................................................. 37
Reserve Requirements ...................................................................................................................................... 38
Recent and Near Term Resource Additions ..................................................................................................... 38
Power Supply Diversity .................................................................................................................................... 39
Renewable Resources ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Future Power Supply Resources ....................................................................................................................... 42
System Peak Demands and Summer Reserve Margins .................................................................................... 44
FPSC Schedule 7.1 Forecast of Capacity, Demand and Scheduled Maintenance at Time of Summer Peak ... 45
FPSC Schedule 7.2 Forecast of Capacity, Demand and Scheduled Maintenance at Time of Winter Peak ...... 46
FPSC Schedule 8 Planned and Prospective Generating Facility Additions and Changes ............................... 47
Generation Expansion Plan .............................................................................................................................. 48
IV. Proposed Plant Sites and Transmission Lines
4.1
4.2
Table 4.1
Figure D1
Figure D2
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Proposed Plant Site ........................................................................................................................................... 49
Transmission Line Additions/Upgrades ........................................................................................................... 49
FPSC Schedule 9 Status Report and Specifications of Proposed Generating Facilities ................................... 51
Hopkins Plant Site ............................................................................................................................................ 52
Purdom Plant Site ............................................................................................................................................. 52
Planned Transmission Projects 2015-2024 ....................................................................................................... 53
FPSC Schedule 10 Status Report and Spec. of Proposed Directly Associated Transmission Lines ............... 54
Chapter I
Description of Existing Facilities
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The City of Tallahassee (“City”) owns, operates, and maintains an electric generation,
transmission, and distribution system that supplies electric power in and around the corporate
limits of the City. The City was incorporated in 1825 and has operated since 1919 under the
same charter. The City began generating its power requirements in 1902 and the City's Electric
Utility presently serves approximately 116,700 customers located within a 221 square mile
service territory (see Figure A). The Electric Utility operates three generating stations with a
total summer season net generating capacity of 746 megawatts (MW).
The City has two fossil-fueled generating stations, which contain combined cycle (CC),
steam and combustion turbine (CT) electric generating facilities. The Sam O. Purdom
Generating Station, located in the City of St. Marks, Florida has been in operation since 1952;
and the Arvah B. Hopkins Generating Station, located on Geddie Road west of the City, has been
in commercial operation since 1970. The City has also been generating electricity at the C.H.
Corn Hydroelectric Station, located on Lake Talquin west of Tallahassee, since August of 1985.
1.1
SYSTEM CAPABILITY
The City maintains seven points of interconnection with Duke Energy Florida (“Duke”,
formerly Progress Energy Florida); three at 69 kV, three at 115 kV, and one at 230 kV; and a 230
kV interconnection with Georgia Power Company (a subsidiary of the Southern Company
(“Southern”)).
As shown in Table 1.1 (Schedule 1), 222 MW (net summer rating) of CC generation and
20 MW (net summer rating) of CT generation facilities are located at the City's Sam O. Purdom
Generating Station. The Arvah B. Hopkins Generating Station includes 300 MW (net summer
rating) of CC generation, 76 MW (net summer rating) of steam generation and 128 MW (net
summer rating) of CT generation facilities.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 1
The City's Hopkins 1 steam generating unit can be fired with natural gas. The CC and
CT units can be fired on either natural gas or diesel oil but cannot burn these fuels concurrently.
The total capacity of the three units at the C.H. Corn Hydroelectric Station is 11 MW. However,
because the hydroelectric generating units are effectively run-of-river (dependent upon rainfall,
reservoir and downstream conditions), the City considers these units as “energy only” and not as
dependable capacity for planning purposes.
The City’s current total net summer installed generating capability is 746 MW. The
corresponding winter net peak installed generating capability is 822 MW. Table 1.1 contains the
details of the individual generating units.
1.2
PURCHASED POWER AGREEMENTS
The City has no long-term firm capacity and energy purchase agreements. Firm retail
electric service is purchased from and provided by the Talquin Electric Cooperative (“Talquin”)
to City customers served by the Talquin electric system. The projected amounts of electric
service to be purchased from Talquin is included in the “Annual Firm Interchange” values
provided in Table 2.19 (Schedule 6.1) Reciprocal service is provided to Talquin customers
served by the City electric system. Payments for electric service provided to and received from
Talquin and the transfer of customers and electric facilities is governed by a territorial agreement
between the City and Talquin.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 2
Figure A
City of Tallahassee, Electric Utility
Service Territory Map
,
)
I
GECJRGrA
F
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 3
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 4
[7]
[6]
[5]
[3]
[4]
Notes
[1]
[2]
C. H. Corn
Hydro Station
[6]
Leon
Leon
NG
NG
NG
NG
NG
NG
WAT
WAT
WAT
HY
HY
HY
NG
NG
NG
Pri
(5)
ST
CC
GT
GT
GT
GT
CC
GT
GT
Unit
Type
(4)
Fuel
WAT
WAT
WAT
NA
FO2
FO2
FO2
FO2
FO2
FO2
FO2
FO2
Alt
(6)
(8)
WAT
WAT
WAT
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
WAT
WAT
WAT
NA
TK
TK
TK
TK
TK
TK
TK
TK
Fuel Transport
Primary
Alternate
(7)
NA
NA
NA
[3]
[2]
[2]
[2]
[2]
[2]
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
1/21
Unknown
3/16
3/17
Unknown
Unknown
12/40
10/16
10/16
Expected
Retirement
Month/Year
(11)
(14)
0
Plant Total
746
0
0
0
504
Plant Total
4,440
4,440
3,430
76
300
12
24
46
46
822
0
0
0
0
544
78
330 [7]
14
26
48
48
278
242
Plant Total
75,000
358,200 [5]
16,320
27,000
60,500
60,500
258 [7]
10
10
222
10
10
Net Capability
Summer
Winter
(MW)
(MW)
(13)
247,743
15,000
15,000
Gen. Max.
Nameplate
(kW)
(12)
Total System Capacity as of December 31, 2014
9/85
8/85
1/86
5/71
6/08 [4]
2/70
9/72
9/05
11/05
7/00
12/63
5/64
Commercial
In-Service
Month/Year
Alt.
Fuel
Days
Use
[1, 2]
[1, 2]
[1, 2]
(10)
(9)
Due to the Purdom facility-wide emissions caps, utilization of liquid fuel at this facility is limited.
The City maintains a minimum distillate fuel oil storage capacity sufficient to operate the Purdom plant approximately 9 days and the Hopkins plant and approximately 3 days
at maximum output.
Hopkins 1 is a "Gas Only" unit.
Reflects the commercial operations date of Hopkins 2 repowered to a combined cycle generating unit with a new General Electric Frame 7A combustion turbine. The original commercial
operations date of the existing steam turbine generator was October 1977.
Hopkins 2 nameplate rating is based on combustion turbine generator (CTG) nameplate and modeled steam turbine generator (STG) output in a 1x1 combined cycle (CC) configuration with
supplemental duct firing.
Because the C. H. Corn hydroelectric generating units are effectively run-of-river (dependent upon rainfall, reservoir and downstream conditions), the City considers these units as "energy only"
and not as dependable capacity for planning purposes.
Summer and winter ratings are based on 95 oF and 29 oF ambient temperature, respectively.
1
2
3
1
2
GT-1
GT-2
GT-3
GT-4
A. B. Hopkins
Wakulla
Location
Unit
No.
8
GT-1
GT-2
(3)
(2)
Sam O. Purdom
Plant
(1)
Schedule 1
Existing Generating Facilities
As of December 31, 2014
City Of Tallahassee
Table 1.1
CHAPTER II
Forecast of Energy/Demand Requirements and Fuel Utilization
2.0
INTRODUCTION
Chapter II includes the City’s forecasts of demand and energy requirements, energy
sources and fuel requirements. This chapter also explains the impacts attributable to the City’s
current Demand Side Management (DSM) plan. The City is not subject to the requirements of
the Florida Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act (FEECA) and, therefore, the Florida Public
Service Commission (FPSC) does not set numeric conservation goals for the City. However, the
City expects to continue its commitment to the DSM programs that prove beneficial to the City’s
ratepayers.
2.1
SYSTEM DEMAND AND ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
Historical and forecast energy consumption and customer information are presented in
Tables 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 (Schedules 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3). Figure B1 shows the historical total energy
sales and forecast energy sales by customer class. Figure B2 shows the percentage of energy
sales by customer class (excluding the impacts of DSM) for the base year of 2015 and the
horizon year of 2024. Tables 2.4 through 2.12 (Schedules 3.1.1 - 3.3.3) contain historical and
base, high, and low forecasts of seasonal peak demands and net energy for load. Table 2.13
(Schedule 4) compares actual and two-year forecast peak demand and energy values by month
for the 2014-2016 period.
2.1.1
SYSTEM LOAD AND ENERGY FORECASTS
The peak demand and energy forecasts contained in this plan are the results of the load
and energy forecasting study performed by the City. The forecast is developed utilizing a
methodology that the City first employed in 1980, and has since been updated and revised every
one or two years. The methodology consists of nine multi-variable linear regression models and
four models that utilize subjective escalation assumptions and known incremental additions. All
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 5
models are based on detailed examination of the system's historical growth, usage patterns and
population statistics. Several key regression formulas utilize econometric variables.
Table 2.14 lists the econometric-based linear regression forecasting models that are used
as predictors. Note that the City uses regression models with the capability of separately
predicting commercial customers and consumption by rate sub-class: general service nondemand (GS), general service demand (GSD), and general service large demand (GSLD).
These, along with the residential class, represent the major classes of the City's electric
customers. In addition to these customer class models, the City’s forecasting methodology also
incorporates into the demand and energy projections estimated reductions from interruptible and
curtailable customers. The key explanatory variables used in each of the models are indicated by
an “X” on the table.
Table 2.15 documents the City’s internal and external sources for historical and forecast
economic, weather and demographic data. These tables summarize the details of the models
used to generate the system customer, consumption and seasonal peak load forecasts. In addition
to those explanatory variables listed, a component is also included in the models that reflect the
acquisition of certain Talquin Electric Cooperative (Talquin) customers over the study period
consistent with the territorial agreement negotiated between the City and Talquin and approved
by the FPSC.
The customer models are used to predict the number of customers by customer class,
which in turn serve as input into the customer class consumption models. The customer class
consumption models are aggregated to form a total base system sales forecast. The effects of
DSM programs and system losses are incorporated in this base forecast to produce the system net
energy for load (NEL) requirements.
Since 1992, the City has used two econometric models to separately predict summer and
winter peak demand. Table 2.14 also shows the key explanatory variables used in the demand
models. The seasonal peak demand forecasts are developed first by forecasting expected system
load factor. Based on the historical relationship of seasonal peaks to annual NEL, system load
factors are projected separately relative to both summer and winter peak demand. The predictive
variables for projected load factors versus summer peak demand include maximum summer
temperature, maximum temperature on the day prior to the peak, annual degree-days cooling and
real residential price of electricity. For projected load factors versus winter peak demand
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 6
minimum winter temperature, degree-days heating the day prior to the winter peak day, deviation
from a base minimum temperature of 22 degrees and annual degree-days cooling are used as
input. The projected load factors are then applied to the forecast of NEL to obtain the summer
and winter peak demand forecasts.
Some of the most significant input assumptions for the forecast are the incremental load
modifications at Florida State University (FSU), Florida A&M University (FAMU), Tallahassee
Memorial Hospital (TMH) and the State Capitol Center. These four customers represented
approximately 15% of the City’s 2014 energy sales. Their incremental additions are highly
dependent upon annual economic and budget constraints, which would cause fluctuations in their
demand projections if they were projected using a model. Therefore, each entity submits their
proposed incremental additions/reductions to the City and these modifications are included as
submitted in the load and energy forecast.
The rate of growth in residential and commercial customers is driven by the projected
growth in Leon County population. While population growth projections decreased in the years
immediately following the 2008-2009 recession the current projection shows a slightly higher
growth in population versus last year. Leon County population is projected to grow from 20152034 at an average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 0.80%. This growth rate is below that for the
state of Florida (1.13%) but is higher than that for the United States (0.72%).
Total and per customer demand and energy requirements have also decreased in recent
years. There are several reasons for this decrease including but not limited to the issuance of
new or updated federal appliance and equipment efficiency standards since 2009 and the 2010
modifications to the State of Florida Energy Efficiency Code for Building Construction. The
City’s energy efficiency and demand-side management (DSM) programs (discussed in Section
2.1.3) and the economic conditions during and following the 2008-2009 recession have also
contributed to these decreases. The decreases in per customer residential and commercial
demand and energy requirements are projected to offset the increased growth rate in residential
and commercial customers. Therefore, it is not expected that base demand and energy growth
will return to pre-recession levels in the near future.
The City believes that the routine update of forecast model inputs, coefficients and other
minor model refinements continue to improve the accuracy of its forecast so that they are more
consistent with the historical trend of growth in seasonal peak demand and energy consumption.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 7
The changes made to the forecast models for for load and energy requirements have resulted in
2015 base forecasts for summer peak demand and annual sales/net energy for load that are
generally the same as the corresponding 2014 base forecasts. The winter peak demand forecast
has been increased so that the projection is more consistent with the historical trend of actual
winter peak demands.
2.1.2
LOAD FORECAST UNCERTAINTY & SENSITIVITIES
To provide a sound basis for planning, forecasts are derived from projections of the
driving variables obtained from reputable sources. However, there is significant uncertainty in
the future level of such variables. To the extent that economic, demographic, weather, or other
conditions occur that are different from those assumed or provided, the actual load can be
expected to vary from the forecast. For various purposes, it is important to understand the
amount by which the forecast can be in error and the sources of error.
To capture this uncertainty, the City produces high and low range results that address
potential variance in driving population and economic variables from the values assumed in the
base case. The base case forecast relies on a set of assumptions about future population and
economic activity in Leon County. However, such projections are unlikely to exactly match
actual experience.
Population and economic uncertainty tends to result in a deviation from the trend over the
long term. Accordingly, separate high and low forecast results were developed to address
population and economic uncertainty. These ranges are intended to capture approximately 80%
of occurrences (i.e., +/- 1.3 standard deviations). The high and low forecasts shown in this
year’s report use statistics provided by Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. (Woods & Poole) to
develop a range of potential outcomes. Woods & Poole publishes several statistics that define
the average amount by which various projections they have provided in the past are different
from actual results. The City’s load forecasting consultant, Leidos Engineering, interpreted these
statistics to develop ranges of the trends of economic activity and population representing
approximately 80% of potential outcomes. These statistics were then applied to the base case to
develop the high and low load forecasts presented in Tables 2.5, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 2.11 and 2.12
(Schedules 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.3.2 and 3.3.3).
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 8
Sensitivities on the peak demand forecasts are useful in planning for future power supply
resource needs. The graph shown in Figure B3 compares summer peak demand (multiplied by
117% for reserve margin requirements) for the three forecast sensitivity cases with reductions
from proposed DSM portfolio and the base forecast without proposed DSM reductions against
the City’s existing and planned power supply resources. This graph allows for the review of the
effect of load growth and DSM performance variations on the timing of new resource additions.
The highest probability weighting, of course, is placed on the base case assumptions, and the low
and high cases are given a smaller likelihood of occurrence.
2.1.3
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
The City currently offers a variety of conservation and DSM measures to its residential
and commercial customers, which are listed below:
Residential Measures
Commercial Measures
Energy Efficiency Loans
Energy Efficiency Loans
Gas New Construction Rebates
Demonstrations
Gas Appliance Conversion Rebates
Information and Energy Audits
Information and Energy Audits
Commercial Gas Conversion Rebates
Ceiling Insulation Grants
Ceiling Insulation Grants
Low Income Ceiling Insulation Grants
Solar Water Heater Rebates
Low Income HVAC/Water Heater Repair Grants
Solar PV Net Metering
Neighborhood REACH Weatherization Assistance
Demand Response (PeakSmart)
Energy Star Appliance Rebates
High Efficiency HVAC Rebates
Energy Star New Home Rebates
Solar Water Heater Rebates
Solar PV Net Metering
Duct Leak Repair Grants
Variable Speed Pool Pump Rebates
Nights & Weekends Pricing Plan
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 9
The City has a goal to improve the efficiency of customers' end-use of energy resources
when such improvements provide a measurable economic and/or environmental benefit to the
customers and the City utilities. During the City’s last Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) Study
potential DSM measures (conservation, energy efficiency, load management, and demand
response) were tested for cost-effectiveness utilizing an integrated approach that is based on
projections of total achievable load and energy reductions and their associated annual costs
developed specifically for the City. The measures were combined into bundles affecting similar
end uses and /or having similar costs per kWh saved.
In 2012 the City contracted with a consultant to review its efforts with DSM and
renewable resources with a focus on adjusting resource costs for which additional investment
and overall market changes impacted the estimates used in the IRP Study. DSM and renewable
resource alternatives were evaluated on a levelized cost basis and prioritized on geographic and
demographic suitability, demand savings potential and cost. From this prioritized list the
consultant identified a combination of DSM and renewable resources that could be costeffectively placed into service by 2016. The total demand savings potential for the resources
identified compared well with that identified in the IRP Study providing some assurance that the
City’s ongoing DSM and renewable efforts remained cost-effective.
An energy services provider (ESP) is under contract to assist staff in deploying a portion
of the City’s DSM program. This contract was renewed for an additional nine-month term in
September 2014 and the ESP’s work continues. Staff has worked with consultants and the ESP
to develop operational and pricing parameters, craft rate tariffs and solicit participants for a
commercial DR/DLC program. This measure is currently at about 40% of targeted enrollment
and the system is online. Implementation of the City’s residential demand response/direct load
control (DR/DLC) measures has been delayed as some of the technology to be employed is still
evolving. Otherwise, work continues with the City’s Neighborhood REACH measure and
participation in the City’s other existing DSM measures continues to increase. Future activities
include development of residential DR/DLC and expanding commercial demand reduction and
energy efficiency measure offerings.
As discussed in Section 2.1.1 the growth in customers and energy use has slowed in
recent years due in part to the economic conditions observed during and following the 2008-2009
recession as well as due to changes in the federal appliance/equipment efficiency standards and
state building efficiency code. It appears that many customers have taken steps on their own to
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 10
reduce their energy use and costs in response to the changing economy - without taking
advantage of the incentives provided through the City’s DSM program – as well as in response to
the aforementioned standards and code changes. These “free drivers” effectively reduce
potential participation in the DSM program in the future. And it is questionable whether these
customers’ energy use reductions will persist beyond the economic recovery. History has shown
that post-recession energy use generally rebounds to pre-recession levels. In the meantime,
however, demand and energy reductions achieved as a result of these voluntary customer actions
as well as those achieved by customer participation in City-sponsored DSM measures appear to
have had a considerable impact on forecasts of future demand and energy requirements.
Estimates of the actual demand and energy savings realized from 2007-2014 attributable
to the City’s DSM efforts are below those projected in the last IRP study. Due to reduced load
and energy forecasts and based on the City’s experience to date DSM program participation and
thus associated demand and energy savings are not expected to increase as rapidly as originally
projected, at least not in the near term. The latest projections reflect DSM savings increasing at a
steady rate that is more consistent with historical experience and level of annual program
expenditures to date.
Staff will continue to periodically review and, where appropriate, update technical and
economic assumptions, expected demand and energy savings and re-evaluate the costeffectiveness of current and prospective DSM measures. The City will provide further updates
regarding its progress with and any changes in future expectations of its DSM program in
subsequent TYSP reports.
Energy and demand reductions attributable to the DSM portfolio have been incorporated
into the future load and energy forecasts. Tables 2.16 and 2.17 display, respectively, the
cumulative potential impacts of the proposed DSM portfolio on system annual energy and
seasonal peak demand requirements. Based on the anticipated limits on annual control events it
is expected that DR/DLC will be predominantly utilized in the summer months. Therefore,
Tables 2.7-2.9 and 2.17 reflect no expected utilization of DR/DLC capability to reduce winter
peak demand.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 11
2.2
ENERGY SOURCES AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS
Tables 2.18 (Schedule 5), 2.19 (Schedule 6.1), and 2.20 (Schedule 6.2) present the
projections of fuel requirements, energy sources by resource/fuel type in gigawatt-hours, and
energy sources by resource/fuel type in percent, respectively, for the period 2015-2024. Figure
B4 displays the percentage of energy by fuel type in 2015 and 2024.
The City’s generation portfolio includes combustion turbine/combined cycle,
combustion turbine/simple cycle, conventional steam and hydroelectric units. The City’s
combustion turbine/combined cycle and combustion turbine/simple cycle units are capable of
generating energy using natural gas or distillate fuel oil. This mix of generation types coupled
with opportunities for firm and economy purchases from neighboring systems provides allows
the City to satisfy its total energy requirements consistent with our energy policies that seek to
balance the cost of power with the environmental quality of our community.
The projections of fuel requirements and energy sources are taken from the results of
computer simulations using the PROSYM production simulation model (provided by Ventyx)
and are based on the resource plan described in Chapter III.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 12
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 13
Population
[1]
269,619
272,648
273,684
274,926
275,059
275,783
276,799
277,935
279,468
282,006
284,199
286,877
289,578
292,309
295,067
297,728
300,216
302,723
305,251
307,798
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
[1]
[2]
[3]
Members
Per
Household
1,087
1,090
1,094
1,098
1,102
1,106
1,109
1,112
1,116
1,119
1,088
1,097
1,099
1,054
1,050
1,136
1,113
1,021
1,014
1,089
(GWh)
[2]
Rural & Residential
(4)
98,811
99,815
100,828
101,853
102,887
103,886
104,819
105,761
106,709
107,665
89,468
92,017
93,569
94,640
94,827
95,268
95,794
96,479
97,145
97,985
Average
No. of
Customers
(5)
10,996
10,923
10,851
10,782
10,714
10,647
10,582
10,518
10,455
10,394
12,161
11,922
11,745
11,137
11,073
11,924
11,619
10,583
10,438
11,119
Average kWh
Consumption
Per Customer
(6)
1,563
1,576
1,597
1,613
1,623
1,629
1,641
1,648
1,656
1,664
1,622
1,602
1,657
1,625
1,611
1,618
1,598
1,572
1,544
1,548
(GWh)
[2]
(7)
(8)
18,858
19,018
19,178
19,340
19,504
19,662
19,810
19,959
20,110
20,261
18,312
18,533
18,583
18,597
18,478
18,426
18,418
18,445
18,558
18,723
Commercial [3]
Average
No. of
Customers
Population data represents Leon County population.
Values include DSM Impacts.
As of 2007 "Commercial" includes General Service Non-Demand, General Service Demand, General Service Large Demand,
Interruptible (FSU and Goose Pond), Curtailable (TMH), Traffic Control, Security Lights and Street & Highway Lights.
-
-
(3)
(2)
(1)
Base Load Forecast
Schedule 2.1
History and Forecast of Energy Consumption and
Number of Customers by Customer Class
City Of Tallahassee
82,869
82,866
83,249
83,393
83,214
82,860
82,814
82,583
82,349
82,112
88,576
86,440
89,168
87,380
87,185
87,811
86,763
85,226
83,199
82,690
Average kWh
Consumption
Per Customer
(9)
Table 2.1
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 14
-
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
-
-
-
Average kWh
Consumption
Per Customer
Industrial
Average
No. of
Customers
[1]
-
(4)
(3)
Railroads
and Railways
(GWh)
(5)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Street &
Highway
Lighting
(GWh)
[2]
(6)
Other Sales
to Public
Authorities
(GWh)
(7)
Average end-of-month customers for the calendar year.
As of 2007 Security Lights and Street & Highway Lighting use is included with Commercial on Schedule 2.1.
Values include DSM Impacts.
(GWh)
Year
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
Base Load Forecast
Schedule 2.2
History and Forecast of Energy Consumption and
Number of Customers by Customer Class
City Of Tallahassee
2,649
2,666
2,691
2,711
2,725
2,735
2,750
2,761
2,772
2,783
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,638
Total Sales
to Ultimate
Consumers
(GWh)
[3]
(8)
Table 2.2
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
[1]
[2]
Utility Use
& Losses
(GWh)
Sales for
Resale
(GWh)
2,795
2,812
2,838
2,860
2,875
2,885
2,901
2,912
2,924
2,935
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
Customers
(Average No.)
Net Energy
for Load
(GWh)
[1]
2,887
2,868
2,914
2,834
2,801
2,931
2,799
2,710
2,684
2,751
(5)
(4)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Average number of customers for the calendar year.
145
146
148
149
149
150
151
151
152
153
163
154
158
155
140
177
88
117
126
114
(3)
(2)
(1)
Base Load Forecast
Schedule 2.3
History and Forecast of Energy Consumption and
Number of Customers by Customer Class
City Of Tallahassee
117,669
118,833
120,007
121,193
122,391
123,548
124,630
125,720
126,819
127,926
107,780
110,550
112,152
113,237
113,305
113,694
114,212
114,924
115,703
116,708
Total
No. of
Customers
[2]
(6)
Table 2.3
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 16
Residential
0
400
800
1,200
1,600
2,000
2,400
2,800
3,200
Non-Demand
Gigawatt-Hours (GWh)
Demand
Large Demand
Curtail/Interrupt
Calendar Year
Traffic/Street/Security Lights
History and Forecast Energy Consumption
By Customer Class (Including DSM Impacts)
Figure B1
Figure B2
Energy Consumption By Customer Class
(Excluding DSM Impacts)
Calendar Year 2015
41%
7%
1%
3%
25%
23%
Total 2015 Sales = 2,659 GWh
Calendar Year 2024
41%
7%
1%
4%
24%
23%
Total 2024 Sales = 2,919 GWh
Residential
Non-Demand
Demand
Large Demand
Curtail/Interrupt
Traffic/Street/Security Lights
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 17
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 18
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
567
575
581
589
596
602
608
614
620
625
631
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Wholesale
(3)
575
581
589
596
602
608
614
620
625
631
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
567
Retail
(4)
0
3
11
16
21
23
24
24
24
24
0
2
4
5
7
9
11
12
13
14
16
1
(6)
(7)
Residential
Load
Residential
Management Conservation
Interruptible
[2]
[2], [3]
(5)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at busbar. 2014 DSM is actual at peak.
2014 values reflect incremental increase from 2013.
Total
Year
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
4
6
8
10
12
12
12
12
12
13
0
(8)
Comm./Ind
Load
Management
[2]
Schedule 3.1.1
History and Forecast of Summer Peak Demand
Base Forecast
(MW)
City Of Tallahassee
1
3
5
8
10
13
14
16
18
20
0
Net Firm
Demand
[1]
Comm./Ind
Conservation
[2], [3]
568
566
560
556
551
551
552
554
556
558
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
565
(10)
(9)
Table 2.4
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 19
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
567
588
598
609
620
630
640
650
659
669
678
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Wholesale
(3)
588
598
609
620
630
640
650
659
669
678
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
567
Retail
(4)
0
3
11
16
21
23
24
24
24
24
0
2
4
5
7
9
11
12
13
14
16
1
(6)
(7)
Residential
Load
Residential
Management Conservation
Interruptible
[2]
[2], [3]
(5)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at busbar. 2014 DSM is actual at peak.
2014 values reflect incremental increase from 2013.
Total
Year
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
4
6
8
10
12
12
12
12
12
13
0
(8)
Comm./Ind
Load
Management
[2]
Schedule 3.1.2
History and Forecast of Summer Peak Demand
High Forecast
(MW)
City Of Tallahassee
1
3
5
8
10
13
14
16
18
20
0
Net Firm
Demand
[1]
Comm./Ind
Conservation
[2], [3]
582
583
580
580
579
582
588
593
599
606
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
565
(10)
(9)
Table 2.5
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 20
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
567
561
564
568
572
574
577
579
581
582
584
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Wholesale
(3)
561
564
568
572
574
577
579
581
582
584
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
567
Retail
(4)
0
3
11
16
21
23
24
24
24
24
0
2
4
5
7
9
11
12
13
14
16
1
(6)
(7)
Residential
Load
Residential
Management Conservation
Interruptible
[2]
[2], [3]
(5)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at busbar. 2014 DSM is actual at peak.
2014 values reflect incremental increase from 2013.
Total
Year
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
4
6
8
10
12
12
12
12
12
13
0
(8)
Comm./Ind
Load
Management
[2]
Schedule 3.1.3
History and Forecast of Summer Peak Demand
Low Forecast
(MW)
City Of Tallahassee
1
3
5
8
10
13
14
16
18
20
0
Net Firm
Demand
[1]
Comm./Ind
Conservation
[2], [3]
555
549
539
532
523
519
517
515
513
511
598
577
621
587
605
601
590
557
543
565
(10)
(9)
Table 2.6
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at busbar. 2014 DSM is actual at peak.
Reflects no expected utilization of demand response (DR) resources in winter.
2014-2015 values reflect incremental increase from 2013-2014.
561
568
575
581
587
593
598
604
609
614
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
561
568
575
581
587
593
598
604
609
614
0
6
9
12
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
4
5
7
8
9
11
12
13
0
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Residential
Comm./Ind
Load
Residential
Load
Comm./Ind
Management Conservation Management Conservation
Interruptible
[2], [3]
[2], [4]
[2], [3]
[2], [4]
(5)
-2016
-2017
-2018
-2019
-2020
-2021
-2022
-2023
-2024
-2025
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
558
Retail
(4)
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
558
Wholesale
(3)
-2006
-2007
-2008
-2009
-2010
-2011
-2012
-2013
-2014
-2015
Total
(2)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Year
(1)
Schedule 3.2.1
History and Forecast of Winter Peak Demand
Base Forecast
(MW)
City Of Tallahassee
553
557
559
561
563
566
568
570
572
574
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
556
Net Firm
Demand
[1]
(10)
Table 2.7
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at customer meter. 2014 DSM is actual.
Reflects no expected utilization of demand response (DR) resources in winter.
2014-2015 values reflect incremental increase from 2013-2014.
577
588
598
608
618
627
636
645
655
664
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
577
588
598
608
618
627
636
645
655
664
0
6
9
12
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
4
5
7
8
9
11
12
13
0
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Residential
Comm./Ind
Load
Residential
Load
Comm./Ind
Management Conservation Management Conservation
Interruptible
[2], [3]
[2], [4]
[2], [3]
[2], [4]
(5)
-2016
-2017
-2018
-2019
-2020
-2021
-2022
-2023
-2024
-2025
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
558
Retail
(4)
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
558
Wholesale
(3)
-2006
-2007
-2008
-2009
-2010
-2011
-2012
-2013
-2014
-2015
Total
(2)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Year
(1)
Schedule 3.2.2
History and Forecast of Winter Peak Demand
High Forecast
(MW)
City Of Tallahassee
570
576
583
588
594
600
606
612
618
624
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
556
Net Firm
Demand
[1]
(10)
Table 2.8
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 23
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at customer meter. 2014 DSM is actual.
Reflects no expected utilization of demand response (DR) resources in winter.
2014-2015 values reflect incremental increase from 2013-2014.
544
549
552
555
557
559
561
562
563
565
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
544
549
552
555
557
559
561
562
563
565
0
6
9
12
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
4
5
7
8
9
11
12
13
0
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Residential
Comm./Ind
Load
Residential
Load
Comm./Ind
Management Conservation Management Conservation
Interruptible
[2], [3]
[2], [4]
[2], [3]
[2], [4]
(5)
-2016
-2017
-2018
-2019
-2020
-2021
-2022
-2023
-2024
-2025
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
558
Retail
(4)
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
558
Wholesale
(3)
-2006
-2007
-2008
-2009
-2010
-2011
-2012
-2013
-2014
-2015
Total
(2)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Year
(1)
Schedule 3.2.3
History and Forecast of Winter Peak Demand
Low Forecast
(MW)
City Of Tallahassee
537
537
536
534
533
532
530
529
527
525
537
528
526
579
633
584
516
480
574
556
Net Firm
Demand
[1]
(10)
Table 2.9
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 24
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,646
2,659
2,688
2,724
2,758
2,787
2,815
2,843
2,868
2,894
2,919
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
(4)
9
17
26
34
43
51
60
68
77
85
9
2
4
8
13
19
29
34
39
45
51
0
Residential
Comm./Ind
Conservation Conservation
[2], [3]
[2], [3]
(3)
2,649
2,666
2,691
2,711
2,725
2,735
2,750
2,761
2,772
2,783
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,638
Retail
Sales
[1]
(5)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at customer meter. 2014 DSM is actual.
2014 values reflect incremental increase from 2013.
Total
Sales
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
Wholesale
(6)
145
146
148
149
149
150
151
151
152
153
163
154
158
155
140
177
88
117
126
114
Utility Use
& Losses
(7)
Schedule 3.3.1
History and Forecast of Annual Net Energy for Load
Base Forecast
(GWh)
City Of Tallahassee
2,795
2,812
2,838
2,860
2,875
2,885
2,901
2,912
2,924
2,935
2,887
2,868
2,914
2,834
2,801
2,931
2,799
2,710
2,684
2,751
Net Energy
for Load
[1]
(8)
56
57
58
58
58
59
59
59
59
59
55
57
54
55
53
53
54
56
56
55
Load
Factor %
[1]
(9)
Table 2.10
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 25
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,646
2,721
2,766
2,819
2,869
2,916
2,962
3,009
3,051
3,095
3,140
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
(4)
9
17
26
34
43
51
60
68
77
85
9
2
4
8
13
19
29
34
39
45
51
0
Residential
Comm./Ind
Conservation Conservation
[2], [3]
[2], [3]
(3)
2,711
2,745
2,785
2,822
2,855
2,882
2,915
2,943
2,973
3,003
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,638
Retail
Sales
[1]
(5)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at customer meter. 2014 DSM is actual.
2014 values reflect incremental increase from 2013.
Total
Sales
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
Wholesale
(6)
149
151
153
155
157
158
160
161
163
165
163
154
158
155
140
177
88
117
126
114
Utility Use
& Loss's
(7)
Schedule 3.3.2
History and Forecast of Annual Net Energy for Load
High Forecast
(GWh)
City Of Tallahassee
2,860
2,895
2,938
2,977
3,011
3,040
3,075
3,105
3,136
3,168
2,887
2,868
2,914
2,834
2,801
2,931
2,799
2,710
2,684
2,751
Net Energy
for Load
[1]
(8)
56
57
58
58
58
58
58
58
59
59
55
57
54
55
53
53
54
56
56
55
Load
Factor %
[1]
(9)
Table 2.11
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 26
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,646
2,598
2,610
2,631
2,648
2,659
2,670
2,680
2,688
2,695
2,702
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
(4)
9
17
26
34
43
51
60
68
77
85
9
2
4
8
13
19
29
34
39
45
51
0
Residential
Comm./Ind
Conservation Conservation
[2], [3]
[2], [3]
(3)
2,588
2,588
2,597
2,601
2,597
2,590
2,586
2,581
2,573
2,565
2,724
2,714
2,756
2,679
2,661
2,754
2,711
2,593
2,558
2,638
Retail
Sales
[1]
(5)
Values include DSM Impacts.
Reduction estimated at customer meter. 2014 DSM is actual.
2014 values reflect incremental increase from 2013.
Total
Sales
[1]
[2]
[3]
(2)
(1)
Wholesale
(6)
142
142
142
143
142
142
142
142
141
141
163
154
158
155
140
177
88
117
126
114
Utility Use
& Losses
(7)
Schedule 3.3.3
History and Forecast of Annual Net Energy for Load
Low Forecast
(GWh)
City Of Tallahassee
2,730
2,730
2,740
2,744
2,740
2,732
2,728
2,722
2,715
2,706
2,887
2,868
2,914
2,834
2,801
2,931
2,799
2,710
2,684
2,751
Net Energy
for Load
[1]
(8)
56
57
58
58
59
59
59
59
59
59
55
57
54
55
53
53
54
56
56
55
Load
Factor %
[1]
(9)
Table 2.12
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 27
574
470
410
410
478
563
562
565
565
460
500
436
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
[1]
[2]
2014
Actual
2,751
253
191
198
198
228
256
269
282
251
213
206
205
NEL
(GWh)
(3)
(4)
(5)
551
520
449
433
507
566
568
568
540
477
423
477
2,795
230
202
205
205
236
265
279
285
257
221
197
213
2015
Forecast [1][2]
Peak Demand
NEL
(MW)
(GWh)
Peak Demand and NEL include DSM Impacts.
Represents forecast values for 2015.
Peak Demand
(MW)
Month
TOTAL
(2)
(1)
(7)
553
523
452
435
510
566
566
566
543
480
426
480
2,812
231
203
206
206
237
267
280
287
259
223
198
215
2016
Forecast [1]
Peak Demand
NEL
(MW)
(GWh)
(6)
Schedule 4
Previous Year and 2-Year Forecast of Retail Peak Demand and Net Energy for Load by Month
City Of Tallahassee
Table 2.13
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 28
Residential Customers
Residential Consumption
General Service Non-Demand Customers
General Service Demand Customers
General Service Non-Demand Consumption
General Service Demand Consumption
General Service Large Demand Consumption
Summer Peak Demand
Winter Peak Demand
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
[1] R Squared, sometimes called the coefficient of determination, is a commonly used measure of goodness of fit of a linear model. If the observations fall on
the model regression line, R Squared is 1. If there is no linear relationship between the dependent and independent variable, R Squared is 0. A reasonably
good R Squared value could be anywhere from 0.6 to 1.
Model Name
Ln.
No.
0.998
0.936
0.965
0.959
0.932
0.956
0.862
0.914
0.910
Tallahassee
Minimum Maximum
Leon
Cooling Heating Per Capita
State of
Winter Summer
County Residential Degree Degree Taxable Price of
Florida Peak day Peak day Appliance
Population Customers Days
Days
Sales
Electricity Population Temp.
Temp. Saturation R Squared[1]
Key Explanatory Variables
2015 Electric System Load Forecast
City of Tallahassee, Florida
Table 2.14
Table 2.15
City of Tallahassee
2015 Electric System Load Forecast
Sources of Forecast Model Input Information
Energy Model Input Data
Source
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Bureau of Economic and Business Research
City Power Engineering
NOAA reports
NOAA reports
Appliance Saturation Study
Appliance Saturation Study
Florida Department of Revenue, CPI
Bureau of Economic and Business Research
Department of Management Services
FSU Planning Department
FAMU Planning Department
City Utility Services
City Utility Services
System Planning/ Utilities Accounting.
City System Planning
System Planning & Customer Accounting
System Planning & Customer Accounting
Blue Chip Economic Indicators
Blue Chip Economic Indicators
System Planning & Customer Accounting
Leon County Population
Talquin Customers Transferred
Cooling Degree Days
Heating Degree Days
AC Saturation Rate
Heating Saturation Rate
Real Tallahassee Taxable Sales
Florida Population
State Capitol Incremental
FSU Incremental Additions
FAMU Incremental Additions
GSLD Incremental Additions
Other Commercial Customers
Tall. Memorial Curtailable
System Peak Historical Data
Historical Customer Projections by Class
Historical Customer Class Energy
GDP Forecast
CPI Forecast
Interruptible, Traffic Light Sales, &
Security Light Additions
21. Historical Residential Real Price of Electricity
22. Historical Commercial Real Price Of Electricity
Calculated from Revenues, kWh sold, CPI
Calculated from Revenues, kWh sold, CPI
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 29
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 30
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
2015
Supply
2016
Megawatts (MW)
2018
Base w/ DSM
2017
2020
High w/ DSM
Calendar Year
2019
2022
Low w/ DSM
2021
2023
2024
Base w/o DSM
Banded Summer Peak Load Forecast Vs. Supply Resources
(Load Includes 17% Reserve Margin)
Figure B3
Table 2.16
City Of Tallahassee
2015 Electric System Load Forecast
Projected Demand Side Management
Energy Reductions [1]
Calendar Year Basis
Year
Residential
Impact
(MWh)
Commercial
Impact
(MWh)
Total
Impact
(MWh)
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
9,008
18,017
27,025
36,034
45,042
54,051
63,059
72,068
81,076
90,084
1,582
4,537
8,595
13,633
19,651
30,077
35,756
41,600
47,609
53,783
10,591
22,554
35,620
49,667
64,693
84,128
98,815
113,668
128,685
143,868
[1]
Reductions estimated at generator busbar.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 31
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 32
2018-2019
2019-2020
2020-2021
2021-2022
2022-2023
2023-2024
2024-2025
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
16
14
13
12
11
9
7
5
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
12
9
6
20
18
16
14
13
10
8
5
3
1
13
12
11
9
8
7
5
4
3
1
(MW)
24
24
24
24
23
21
16
11
3
0
(MW)
Summer
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(MW)
Winter [2]
13
12
12
12
12
12
10
8
6
4
(MW)
Summer
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(MW)
Winter [2]
73
69
66
63
58
51
40
29
15
6
(MW)
Summer
Total
40
37
34
30
27
24
20
16
12
7
(MW)
Winter
Management
Represents projected winter peak reduction capability associated with demand response (DR) resource. However, as reflected on Schedules 3.1.13.2.3 (Tables 2.4-2.9), DR utilization expected to be predominantly in the summer months.
2017-2018
2017
4
2
(MW)
Winter
Impact
Demand Response
Demand Side
[2]
2016-2017
2016
(MW)
Summer
Impact
Demand Response
Commercial
Reductions estimated at busbar.
2015-2016
2015
(MW)
Winter
Impact
Impact
Summer
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency
Residential
[1]
Winter
Summer
Year
Commercial
Residential
Projected Demand Side Management
Seasonal Demand Reductions [1]
2015 Electric System Load Forecast
City Of Tallahassee
Table 2.17
Coal
Residual
Distillate
Natural Gas
Other (Specify)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
Nuclear
Fuel Requirements
(2)
(2)
(1)
(1)
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 33
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
(3)
Trillion Btu
1000 MCF
1000 MCF
1000 MCF
1000 MCF
1000 MCF
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 BBL
1000 Ton
0
21,648
2,263
18,756
629
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22,250
1,829
19,669
752
0
Actual
2014
Actual
2013
Units
Billion Btu
(6)
(5)
(4)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20,928
672
19,402
854
0
2015
(7)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20,972
530
19,735
707
0
2016
(8)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,016
400
20,173
443
0
2017
(9)
Schedule 5
Fuel Requirements
City Of Tallahassee
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,191
553
19,979
658
0
2018
(10)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,216
542
19,989
686
0
2019
(11)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,321
310
20,604
407
0
2020
(12)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,285
0
20,028
1,257
0
2021
(13)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,337
0
20,576
761
0
2022
(14)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,397
0
20,826
571
0
2023
(15)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21,503
0
20,808
694
0
2024
(16)
Table 2.18
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 34
2,795
2,812
2,838
2,860
2,875
0
Negative values reflect expected need to sell off-peak power to satisfy generator minimum load requirements, primarily in winter and shoulder mont
2,751
0
-23
14
[1]
2,684
0
-26
14
2,856
46
2737
73
0
GWh
0
-30
14
2,845
47
2729
70
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Net Energy for Load
0
-33
14
2,829
34
2748
47
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(22)
0
-31
14
2,806
45
2,687
73
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
0
-56
20
2,787
57
2,646
85
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
2019
(11)
GWh
(21)
23
2,788
150
2566
72
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
2018
(10)
Renewables
Economy Interchange[1]
(20)
GWh
2,662
177
2433
52
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
2017
(9)
-3
Hydro
(19)
GWh
GWh
GWh
GWh
GWh
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
2016
(8)
GWh
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
Natural Gas
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
GWh
GWh
GWh
GWh
GWh
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
Distillate
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
GWh
GWh
GWh
GWh
GWh
Residual
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
GWh
Nuclear
(3)
0
0
GWh
2015
Actual
2014
Actual
2013
0
(7)
(6)
(5)
Coal
(2)
Units
(4)
1
(3)
GWh
Annual Firm Interchange
Energy Sources
(2)
(1)
(1)
Schedule 6.1
Energy Sources
City Of Tallahassee
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
2,885
0
-31
14
2,875
27
2,805
43
0
2020
(12)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
2,901
0
-21
14
2,880
0
2747
132
0
2021
(13)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
2,912
0
-23
14
2,894
0
2814
80
0
2022
(14)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
2,924
0
-24
14
2,906
0
2846
60
0
2023
(15)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
2,935
0
-24
14
2,917
0
2844
73
0
2024
(16)
Table 2.19
Distillate
Natural Gas
Hydro
Economy Interchange
Renewables
Net Energy for Load
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)
(22)
Nuclear
(3)
Residual
Coal
(2)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
Annual Firm Interchange
Energy Sources
(2)
(1)
(1)
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 35
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
Total
Steam
CC
CT
Diesel
(3)
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
100.0
0.0
-0.1
0.8
99.2
6.6
90.6
1.9
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
-2.0
0.7
101.3
5.5
93.3
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Actual
2014
Actual
2013
Units
%
(6)
(5)
(4)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-1.1
0.5
99.7
2.0
94.7
3.0
0.0
2015
(7)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-1.2
0.5
99.8
1.6
95.5
2.6
0.0
2016
(8)
Schedule 6.2
Energy Sources
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-1.1
0.5
99.7
1.2
96.8
1.6
0.0
2017
(9)
City Of Tallahassee
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-0.9
0.5
99.5
1.6
95.4
2.4
0.0
2018
(10)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-0.8
0.5
99.4
1.6
95.2
2.5
0.0
2019
(11)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
100.0
0.0
-1.1
0.5
99.6
0.9
97.2
1.5
0.0
2020
(12)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
100.0
0.0
-0.7
0.5
99.3
0.0
94.7
4.6
0.0
2021
(13)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-0.8
0.5
99.4
0.0
96.6
2.8
0.0
2022
(14)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
100.0
0.0
-0.8
0.5
99.4
0.0
97.3
2.1
0.0
2023
(15)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
100.0
0.0
-0.8
0.5
99.4
0.0
96.9
2.5
0.0
2024
(16)
Table 2.20
Figure B4
Generation By Resource/Fuel Type
Calendar Year 2015
14 GWh or 0.5%
2,645 GWh or 94.7%
-6 GWh or -0.2%
85 GWh or 3.0%
57 GWh or 2.0%
Total 2015 NEL = 2,795 GWh
Calendar Year 2024
2,844 GWh or 96.9%
14 GWh or 0.5%
4 GWh or 0.1%
73 GWh or 2.5%
Total 2024 NEL = 2,935 GWh
CC - Gas
Steam - Gas
CT/Diesel - Gas
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 36
Net Interchange
Hydro
Chapter III
Projected Facility Requirements
3.1
PLANNING PROCESS
In December 2006 the City completed its last comprehensive IRP Study. The purpose of
this study was to review future DSM and power supply options that are consistent with the City’s
policy objectives. Included in the IRP Study was a detailed analysis of how the DSM and power
supply alternatives perform under base and alternative assumptions.
The preferred resource plan identified in the IRP Study included the repowering of
Hopkins Unit 2 to combined cycle operation, renewable energy purchases, a commitment to an
aggressive DSM portfolio and the latter year addition of peaking resources to meet future energy
demand.
Based on more recent information including but not limited to the updated forecast of the
City’s demand and energy requirements (discussed in Chapter II) the City has made revisions to
its resource plan. These revisions will be discussed in this chapter.
3.2
PROJECTED RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS
3.2.1 TRANSMISSION LIMITATIONS
The City’s projected transmission import capability continues to be a major determinant
of the need for future power supply resource additions. The City’s internal transmission studies
have reflected a gradual deterioration of the system’s transmission import (and export) capability
into the future, due in part to the lack of investment in the regional transmission system around
Tallahassee as well as the impact of unscheduled power flow-through on the City’s transmission
system. The City has worked with its neighboring utilities, Duke and Southern, to plan and
maintain, at minimum, sufficient transmission import capability to allow the City to make
emergency power purchases in the event of the most severe single contingency, the loss of the
system’s largest generating unit.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 37
The prospects for significant expansion of the regional transmission system around
Tallahassee hinges on the City’s ongoing discussions with Duke and Southern, the Florida
Reliability Coordinating Council’s (FRCC) regional transmission planning process, and the
evolving set of mandatory reliability standards issued by the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC). Unfortunately, none of these efforts is expected to produce substantive
improvements to the City’s transmission import/export capability in the short-term. In
consideration of the City’s limited transmission import capability the results of the IRP Study
and other internal analysis of options tend to favor local generation alternatives as the means to
satisfy future power supply requirements. To satisfy load, planning reserve and operational
requirements in the reporting period, the City may need to advance the in-service date of new
power supply resources to complement available transmission import capability.
3.2.2
RESERVE REQUIREMENTS
For the purposes of this year’s TYSP report the City uses a load reserve margin of 17%
as its resource adequacy criterion. This margin was established in the 1990s then re-evaluated
via a loss of load probability (LOLP) analysis of the City’s system performed in 2002. The City
periodically conducts LOLP analyses to determine if conditions warrant a change to its resource
adequacy criteria. The results of recent LOLP analyses suggest that reserve margin may no
longer be suitable as the City’s sole resource adequacy criterion. This issue is discussed further
in Section 3.2.4.
3.2.3
RECENT AND NEAR TERM RESOURCE ADDITIONS
At their October 17, 2005 meeting the City Commission gave the Electric Utility
approval to proceed with the repowering of Hopkins Unit 2 to combined cycle operation. The
repowering was completed and the unit began commercial operation in June 2008. The former
Hopkins Unit 2 boiler was retired and replaced with a combustion turbine generator (CTG) and a
heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). The Hopkins 2 steam turbine and generator is now
powered by the steam generated in the HRSG. Duct burners have been installed in the HRSG to
provide additional peak generating capability. The repowering project provides additional
capacity as well as increased efficiency versus the unit’s capabilities prior to the repowering
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 38
project. The repowered unit has achieved official seasonal net capacities of 300 MW in the
summer and 330 MW in the winter.
No new resource additions are expected to be needed in the near term (2015-2019).
Resource additions expected in the longer term (2020-2024) are discussed in Section 3.2.6,
“Future Power Supply Resources”.
3.2.4
POWER SUPPLY DIVERSITY
Resource diversity, particularly with regard to fuels, has long been a priority concern for
the City because of the system’s heavy reliance on natural gas as its primary fuel source. This
issue has received even greater emphasis due to the historical volatility in natural gas prices.
The City has addressed this concern in part by implementing an Energy Risk Management
(ERM) program to limit the City’s exposure to energy price fluctuations. The ERM program
established an organizational structure of interdepartmental committees and working groups and
included the adoption of an Energy Risk Management Policy. This policy identifies acceptable
risk mitigation products to prevent asset value losses, ensure price stability and provide
protection against market volatility for fuels and energy to the City’s electric and gas utilities and
their customers.
Other important considerations in the City’s planning process are the diversity of power
supply resources in terms of their number, sizes and expected duty cycles as well as expected
transmission import capabilities. To satisfy expected electric system requirements the City
currently assesses the adequacy of its power supply resources versus the 17% load reserve
margin criterion. But the evaluation of reserve margin is made only for the annual electric
system peak demand and assuming all power supply resources are available. Resource adequacy
must also be evaluated during other times of the year to determine if the City is maintaining the
appropriate amount and mix of power supply resources.
Currently, about two-thirds of the City’s power supply comes from two generating units,
Purdom 8 and Hopkins 2. The outage of either of these units can present operational challenges
especially when coupled with transmission limitations (as discussed in Section 3.2.1). Further,
the projected retirement of older generating units will reduce the number of power supply
resources available to ensure resource adequacy throughout the reporting period. For these
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 39
reasons the City has evaluated alternative and/or supplemental probabilistic metrics to its current
load reserve margin criterion, such as loss of load expectation (LOLE), that may better balance
resource adequacy and operational needs with utility and customer costs. The results of this
evaluation confirmed that the City’s current capacity mix and limited transmission import
capability are the biggest determinants of the City’s resource adequacy and suggest that there are
risks of potential resource shortfalls during periods other than at the time of the system peak
demand. Therefore, the City’s current deterministic load reserve margin criterion may need to
be increased and/or supplemented by a probabilistic criterion that takes these issues into
consideration. Toward this end the City began work on an economic resource adequacy study
and this work is on-going. The study will give consideration to the capital carrying costs and
potential production cost savings associated with new generating units, the costs associated with
power purchases from the external bulk power market (including potential investments to
improve transmission import transfer capability) during normal operations, emergencies and
during periods of scarcity, and the cost of unserved energy from the customer’s perspective.
From the results the level of reserves that best balances resource adequacy and economics
consistent with the City’s risk tolerance will be identified. An update of the City’s efforts in this
regard will be provided in a future TYSP report(s).
Purchase contracts can provide some of the diversity desired in the City’s power supply
resource portfolio. The City’s last IRP Study evaluated both short and long-term purchased
power options based on conventional sources as well as power offers based on renewable
resources. A consultant-assisted study completed in 2008 evaluated the potential reliability and
economic benefits of prospectively increasing the City’s transmission import (and export)
capabilities. The results of this study indicate the potential for some electric reliability
improvement resulting from the addition of facilities to achieve more transmission import
capability. However, the study’s model of the Southern and Florida markets reflects, as with the
City’s generation fleet, natural gas-fired generation on the margin the majority of the time.
Therefore, the cost of increasing the City’s transmission import capability would not likely be
offset by the potential economic benefit from increased power purchases from conventional
sources.
As an additional strategy to address the City’s lack of power supply diversity, planning
staff has investigated options for a significantly enhanced DSM portfolio. Commitment to this
expanded DSM effort (see Section 2.1.3) and an increase in customer-sited renewable energy
projects (primarily solar panels) improve the City’s overall resource diversity. However, due to
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 40
limited availability and uncertain performance, studies indicate that DSM and solar projects
would not improve resource adequacy (as measured by LOLE) as much as the addition of
conventional generation resources.
3.2.5
RENEWABLE RESOURCES
The City believes that offering green power alternatives to its customers is a sound business
strategy: it will provide for a measure of supply diversification, reduce dependence on fossil
fuels, promote cleaner energy sources, and enhance the City’s already strong commitment to
protecting the environment and the quality of life in Tallahassee. As part of its continuing
commitment to explore clean energy alternatives, the City has continued to invest in
opportunities to develop viable solar photovoltaic (PV) projects as part of our efforts to offer
“green power” to our customers.
The City continues to seek out suitable projects that utilize the renewable fuels available
within the big bend and panhandle of Florida. Most recently the City has issued a request for
proposals (RFP) for a purchase power agreement (PPA) for a 10 MWac utility scale solar PV
project. It is expected that the project will be located within the City’s service territory or
adjacent to a City-owned facility. Due to the intermittent nature of solar PV the PPA will be for
energy only and will not be considered firm capacity.
Although there are ongoing concerns regarding the potential impact on service reliability
associated with reliance on a significant amount of intermittent resources like PV on the City’s
relatively small electric system, the City will continue to monitor the proliferation of PV and
other intermittent resources and work to integrate them so that service reliability is not
jeopardized.
As of the end of calendar year 2014 the City has a portfolio of 232 kW of solar PV
operated and maintained by the Electric Utility and a cumulative total of 1,550 kW of solar PV
has been installed by customers.
The City promotes and encourages environmental
responsibility in our community through a variety of programs available to citizens. The
commitment to renewable energy sources (and particularly to solar PV) by its customers is made
possible through the Go Green Tallahassee initiative, that includes many options related to
becoming a greener community such as the City’s Solar PV Net Metering offer. Solar PV Net
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 41
Metering promotes customer investment in renewable energy generation by allowing residential
and commercial customers with small to moderate sized PV installations to return excess
generated power back to the City at the full retail value.
In 2011, the City of Tallahassee signed contracts with SunnyLand Solar and Solar
Developers of America (SDA) for over 3 MWs of solar PV. These demonstration projects are to
be built within the City’s service area and will utilize new technology pioneered by Florida State
University. As of December 31, 2014 both of these projects continue to face delays due to
manufacturing and development issues associated with the technology. Such delays are to be
expected with projects involving the demonstration of emerging technologies. While the project
developers have not announced a revised commercial operations date (COD), the City remains
optimistic that the technology will mature into a viable energy resource. Until a new COD is
announced, this will be the last reporting of these projects.
3.2.6
FUTURE POWER SUPPLY RESOURCES
The City currently projects that additional power supply resources will be needed to
maintain electric system adequacy and reliability through the 2024 horizon year. The City has
identified the need for additional capacity in the summer of 2021 following the retirement of
Hopkins 1 (which has been delayed by one year) in order to satisfy its 17% reserve margin
criterion.
The timing, site, type and size of any new power supply resource may vary
dependent upon the metric(s) used to determine resource adequacy and as the nature of the need
becomes better defined. Any proposed addition could be a generator or a peak season purchase.
Alternatively, the planned retirement of Hopkins 1 could be further postponed. The suitability of
this resource plan is dependent on the performance of the City’s DSM portfolio (described in
Section 2.1.3 of this report) and the City’s projected transmission import capability. If only 50%
of the projected annual DSM peak demand reductions are achieved, the City would require
about 3 MW of additional power supply resources to meet its planning reserve requirements in
the summer of 2019.
The City continues to monitor closely the performance of the DSM portfolio and, as
mentioned in Section 2.1.3, will be revisiting and, where appropriate, updating assumptions
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 42
regarding and re-evaluating cost-effectiveness of our current and prospective DSM measures.
This will also allow a reassessment of expected demand and energy savings attributable to DSM.
Tables 3.1 and 3.2 (Schedules 7.1 and 7.2) provide information on the resources and
reserve margins during the next ten years for the City’s system. The City has specified its
planned capacity changes on Table 3.3 (Schedule 8). These capacity resources have been
incorporated into the City’s dispatch simulation model in order to provide information related to
fuel consumption and energy mix (see Tables 2.18, 2.19 and 2.20). Figure C compares seasonal
net peak load and the system reserve margin based on summer peak load requirements. Table
3.4 provides the City’s generation expansion plan for the period from 2015 through 2024.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 43
Figure C
System Peak Demands
(Including DSM Impacts)
800
Summer
700
Winter
600
MW
500
400
300
200
100
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Year
Percent Reserve
Summer Reserve Margin (RM)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
RM w/ DSM
2015
2016
2017
2018
RM w/o DSM
2019 2020
Year
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 44
17% RM Criterion
2021
2022
2023
2024
2024
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 45
746
734
690
690
690
690
660
660
660
660
Year
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
[1]
Firm
Capacity
Import
(MW)
Total
Installed
Capacity
(MW)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Firm
Capacity
Export
(MW)
(4)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
QF
(MW)
(5)
746
734
690
690
690
690
660
660
660
660
Total
Capacity
Available
(MW)
(6)
568
566
560
556
551
551
552
554
556
558
System Firm
Summer Peak
Demand
(MW)
(7)
(9)
(10)
178
168
130
134
139
139
108
106
104
102
31
30
23
24
25
25
20
19
19
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reserve Margin
Scheduled
Before Maintenance Maintenance
(MW)
% of Peak
(MW)
(8)
All installed and firm import capacity changes are identified in the proposed generation expansion plan (Table 3.4).
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(3)
(2)
(1)
(12)
178
168
130
134
139
139
108
106
104
102
31
30
23
24
25
25
20
19
19
18
Reserve Margin
After Maintenance
(MW)
% of Peak
(11)
Schedule 7.1
Forecast of Capacity, Demand, and Scheduled Maintenance at Time of Summer Peak [1]
City Of Tallahassee
Table 3.1
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 46
808
762
762
762
762
684
732
732
732
732
Year
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
[1]
Firm
Capacity
Import
(MW)
Total
Installed
Capacity
(MW)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Firm
Capacity
Export
(MW)
(4)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
QF
(MW)
(5)
808
762
762
762
762
684
732
732
732
732
Total
Capacity
Available
(MW)
(6)
553
557
559
561
563
566
568
570
572
574
System Firm
Winter Peak
Demand
(MW)
(7)
(9)
(10)
255
205
203
201
199
118
164
162
160
158
46
37
36
36
35
21
29
28
28
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reserve Margin
Scheduled
Before Maintenance Maintenance
(MW)
% of Peak
(MW)
(8)
All installed and firm import capacity changes are identified in the proposed generation expansion plan (Table 3.4).
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(3)
(2)
(1)
(12)
255
205
203
201
199
118
164
162
160
158
46
37
36
36
35
21
29
28
28
27
Reserve Margin
After Maintenance
(MW)
% of Peak
(11)
Schedule 7.2
Forecast of Capacity, Demand, and Scheduled Maintenance at Time of Winter Peak [1]
City Of Tallahassee
Table 3.2
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 47
CT-1
CT-2
CT-2
1
5
Hopkins
Purdom
Purdom
Hopkins
Hopkins
Hopkins
NG
NG
NG
NG
NG
Alt
(6)
(8)
5/17
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3/21
5/71
9/72
5/64
12/63
2/70
Commercial
In-Service
Mo/Yr
Const.
Start
Mo/Yr
NA
1/21
3/17
10/16
10/16
3/16
Expected
Retirement
Mo/Yr
(11)
50,000
75,000
27,000
15,000
15,000
16,320
Gen. Max.
Nameplate
(kW)
(12)
Kilowatts
Megawatts
Existing generator scheduled for retirement.
Planned for installation but not utility authorized. Not under construction.
TK
NA
TK
TK
TK
TK
(10)
(9)
(14)
46
-76
-24
-10
-10
-12
48
-78
-26
-10
-10
-14
Net Capability
Summer
Winter
(MW)
(MW)
(13)
P
RT
RT
RT
RT
RT
Status
(15)
For the purposes of this report, the City has identified the addition of a GE LM 6000 combustion turbine generator (similar to the City's existing Hopkins CT3 and CT4) at its existing
Hopkins Plant site. The timing, site, type and size of this new power supply resource may vary as the nature of the need becomes better defined. Alternatively, this proposed addition could
be a generator(s) of a different type/size at the same or different location or a peak season purchase or the planned retirement of Hopkins 1 could be postponed .
kW
MW
RT
P
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
Fuel Transportation
Pri
Alt
(7)
[1]
DFO
NA
DFO
DFO
DFO
DFO
Fuel
Primary Fuel
Alternate Fuel
Natural Gas
Diesel Fuel Oil
Residual Fuel Oil
Pipeline
Truck
CT
ST
GT
GT
GT
NG
Pri
(5)
Gas Turbine
Steam Turbine
Pri
Alt
NG
DFO
RFO
PL
TK
Leon
Leon
Leon
Wakulla
Wakulla
GT
Unit
Type
(4)
GT
ST
Acronyms
CT-1
Plant Name
[1]
Location
Unit
No.
Leon
(3)
(2)
(1)
Schedule 8
Planned and Prospective Generating Facility Additions and Changes
City Of Tallahassee
Table 3.3
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 48
58
63
66
69
73
6
15
29
40
51
551
552
554
556
558
568
566
560
556
551
690
614
614
614
614
746
734
690
690
690
Existing
Capacity
Net
(MW)
[5]
[2,3]
[4]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Firm
Imports
(MW)
Firm
Exports
(MW)
46
46
46
46
Resource
Additions
(Cumulative)
(MW)
[6]
690
660
660
660
660
746
734
690
690
690
Total
Capacity
(MW)
25
20
19
19
18
31
30
23
24
25
Res
%
Demand Side Management includes energy efficiency and demand response/control measures.
Hopkins CT 1 official retirement currently scheduled for March 2016.
Purdom CTs 1 and 2 official retirement currently scheduled for October 2016.
Hopkins CT 2 official retirement currently scheduled for March 2017.
Hopkins ST 1 official retirement currently scheduled for January 2021.
For the purposes of this report, the City has identified the addition of a GE LM 6000 combustion turbine generator (similar to the City's existing Hopkins CT3 and CT4) at
existing Hopkins Plant site. The timing, site, type and size of this new power supply resource may vary as the nature of the need becomes better defined. Alternatively, this
proposed addition could be a generator(s) of a different type/size at the same or different location or a peak season purchase or the planned retirement of Hopkins 1 could be
postponed .
608
614
620
625
631
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Notes
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
575
581
589
596
602
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Year
Load Forecast & Adjustments
Forecast
Net
Peak
Peak
Demand
DSM [1]
Demand
(MW)
(MW)
(MW)
Generation Expansion Plan
City Of Tallahassee
Table 3.4
Chapter IV
Proposed Plant Sites and Transmission Lines
4.1
PROPOSED PLANT SITE
As discussed in Chapter 3 the City currently expects that additional power supply
resources will be required in the reporting period to meet future system needs (see Table 4.1).
For the purposes of this report, the City has identified the addition of a combustion turbine
generator (similar to the City's existing Hopkins CT3 and CT4) at its existing Hopkins Plant site.
The timing, site, type and size of this new power supply resource may vary as the nature of the
need becomes better defined. Alternatively, this proposed addition could be a generator(s) of a
different type/size at the same or different location or a peak season purchase or the planned
retirement of Hopkins Unit 1 could be postponed.
4.2
TRANSMISSION LINE ADDITIONS/UPGRADES
Internal studies of the transmission system have identified a number of system
improvements and additions that will be required to reliably serve future load. The majority of
these improvements are planned for the City’s 115 kV transmission network.
As discussed in Section 3.2, the City has been working with its neighboring utilities,
Duke and Southern, to identify improvements to assure the continued reliability and commercial
viability of the transmission systems in and around Tallahassee. At a minimum, the City
attempts to plan for and maintain sufficient transmission import capability to allow for
emergency power purchases in the event of the most severe single contingency, the loss of the
system’s largest generating unit. The City’s internal transmission studies have reflected a
gradual deterioration of the system’s transmission import (and export) capability into the future.
This reduction in capability is driven in part by the lack of investment in facilities in the
panhandle region as well as the impact of unscheduled power flow-through on the City’s
transmission system. The City is committed to continue to work with Duke and Southern as well
as existing and prospective regulatory bodies in an effort to pursue improvements to the regional
transmission systems that will allow the City to continue to provide reliable and affordable
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 49
electric service to the citizens of Tallahassee in the future. The City will provide the FPSC with
information regarding any such improvements as it becomes available.
Beyond assessing import and export capability, the City also conducts annual studies of
its transmission system to identify further improvements and expansions to provide increased
reliability and respond more effectively to certain critical contingencies both on the system and
in the surrounding grid in the panhandle. These evaluations indicate that additional
infrastructure projects are needed to address (i) improvements in capability to deliver power
from the Hopkins Plant (on the west side of the City’s service territory) to the load center, and
(ii) the strengthening of the system on the east side of the City’s service territory to improve the
voltage profile in that area and enhance response to contingencies.
The City’s transmission expansion plan includes a 230 kV loop around the City to be
completed by Fall 2015 to address these needs and ensure continued reliable service consistent
with current and anticipated FERC and NERC requirements. As the first phase of this
transmission project, the City tapped its existing Hopkins-Duke Crawfordville 230 kV
transmission line and extended a 230 kV transmission line to the east terminating at the existing
Substation BP-5. The City next upgraded existing 115 kV line to 230 kV from Substation BP-5
to Substation BP-4 as the second phase of the project. As part of the second phase additional
230/115 kV transformation was placed in service at BP-4. The final phase of the project will be
to upgrade the existing 115 kV line from Substation BP-4 to Substation BP-7 to 230 kV thereby
completing the loop by Fall 2015. This new 230 kV loop would address a number of potential
line overloads for the single contingency loss of other key transmission lines in the City’s
system.
Table 4.2 summarizes the proposed new facilities or improvements from the
transmission planning study that are within this Ten Year Site Plan reporting period.
The City’s budget planning cycle for FY 2016 is currently ongoing, and any revisions to
project budgets in the electric utility will not be finalized until the summer of 2015. Some of the
construction of the aforementioned 230 kV transmission projects is currently underway. If these
improvements do not remain on schedule the City has prepared operating solutions to mitigate
adverse system conditions that might occur as a result of the delay in the in-service date of these
improvements.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 50
Table 4.1
City Of Tallahassee
Schedule 9
Status Report and Specifications of Proposed Generating Facilities
(1)
Plant Name and Unit Number:
(2)
Capacity
a.) Summer:
b.) Winter:
46
48
(3)
Technology Type:
CT
(4)
Anticipated Construction Timing
a.) Field Construction start - date:
b.) Commercial in-service date:
(5)
Hopkins 5
May-18
Jan-21
Fuel
a.) Primary fuel:
b.) Alternate fuel:
NG
DFO
(6)
Air Pollution Control Strategy:
(7)
Cooling Status:
Unknown
(8)
Total Site Area:
Unknown
(9)
Construction Status:
Not started
(10)
Certification Status:
Not started
(11)
Status with Federal Agencies:
Not started
(12)
Projected Unit Performance Data
Planned Outage Factor (POF):
Forced Outage Factor:
Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF):
Resulting Capacity Factor (%):
Average Net Operating Heat Rate (ANOHR):
5.77
3.33
89.57
2.7
9,871
Projected Unit Financial Data
Book Life (Years)
Total Installed Cost (In-Service Year $/kW)
Direct Construction Cost ($/kW):
AFUDC Amount ($/kW):
Escalation ($/kW):
Fixed O & M ($kW-Yr):
Variable O & M ($/MWH):
K Factor:
30
1,248
1,076
NA
172
7.70
16.23
NA
(13)
Notes
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[1]
BACT compliant
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[5]
[5]
For the purposes of this report, the City has identified the addition of a GE LM 6000 combustion turbine
generator (similar to the City's existing Hopkins CT3 and CT4) at its existing Hopkins Plant site. The timing,
site, type and size of this new power supply resource may vary as the nature of the need becomes better defined.
Alternatively, this proposed addition could be a generator(s) of a different type/size at the same or different
location or a peak season purchase or the planned retirement of Hopkins 1 could be postponed.
Expected first year capacity factor.
Expected first year net average heat rate.
Estimated 2021 dollars.
Estimated 2015 dollars.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 51
Figure D-1 – Hopkins Plant Site
Figure D-2 – Purdom Plant Site
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 52
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 53
Line 55
Line 17 [1]
Sub 22 (Bus 7522)
Sub 23 (Bus 7523)
New Lines
Reconductor
Substations
NA
NA
Sub 4
Sub 14
NA
NA
7604
7514
NA
NA
Sub 7
Sub 7
Name
To Bus
NA
NA
7607
7507
Number
7/31/17
7/31/16
10/31/15
10/31/16
Expected
In-Service
Date
115
115
230
115
Voltage
(kV)
[1] The final phase of the 230 kV loop project. Current 115 kV line 17 will be operated at 230 kV after the respective in-service date.
Project Name
Project Type
From Bus
Name
Number
Planned Transmission Projects, 2015-2024
City Of Tallahassee
NA
NA
3.8
6.0
Line
Length
(miles)
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
City Of Tallahassee
Schedule 10
Status Report and Specifications of Proposed
Directly Associated Transmission Lines
(1)
Point of Origin and Termination:
Substation 5 - Substation 4 - Substation 7 [1]
(2)
Number of Lines:
1
(3)
Right-of -Way:
TAL Owned
(4)
Line Length:
12.8 miles
(5)
Voltage:
230 kV
(6)
Anticipated Capital Timing:
See note [2]; target in service 10/31/2015
(7)
Anticipated Capital Investment:
See note [2]
(8)
Substations:
See note [3]
(9)
Participation with Other Utilities:
None
Notes
[1]
[2]
[3]
Rebuilding/reconductoring existing Line 15A and Line 17 and changing operating voltage
from 115 kV to 230 kV.
Anticipated capital investment associated with rebuilding/reconductoring associated existing
transmission and substation facilities has not been segregated from that related to other
improvements being made to these facilities for purposes other than that of establishing this
230 kV transmission line.
North terminus will be existing Substation 7; south terminus will be existing Substation 5;
intermediate terminus will be existing Substation 4.
Ten Year Site Plan
April 2015
Page 54
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement