Renewable Energy Technology Assessments - Kauai Island Utility ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative Renewable Energy Technology Assessments 1.0 Executive Summary Table 1-7. Landfill Gas Life-Cycle Economic Assumptions ($2005). Unit Kekaha Landfill Capacity MW 0.8 Capital Cost $/kW 3,965 First Year Fixed O&M $/kW-yr 111 First Year Variable O&M $/MWh 16 First Year Fuel Cost $/MBtu - Net Plant Heat Rate Btu/kWh 11,491 Capacity Factor percent 86% KIUC Levelized Cost 2009$/MWh 98.83 KIUC Premium 2009$/MWh (61.54) The levelized cost of the landfill gas project was calculated to be about $99/MWh, with a premium of about ($62)/MWh. The favorable economics of the landfill gas project relative to forecasted avoided costs are due, in part, to the free fuel and the high capacity factor. 1.9 Final Renewable Energy Project Scoring Based on the project characterizations form the previous section, the projects were scored with a scoring methodology similar to the technology screening in the Phase 1 analysis. The assessment methodology included the following weighted criteria: • Levelized cost premium (50 percent) • Kauai resource potential (10 percent) • Fit to KIUC needs (10 percent) • Technology maturity (10 percent) • Environmental impact (7.5 percent) • Socioeconomic impact (7.5 percent) • Incentives/Barriers (5 percent) The evaluation criteria were slightly modified from the initial analysis to better account for conditions affecting specific projects rather than general technologies. The most significant change is the measurement of projects by the levelized cost premium rather than the cost of energy. The levelized cost premium is equal to the levelized cost of energy less KIUC’s forecasted avoided capacity and energy costs. The levelized cost premium scoring revealed that nearly all of the proposed projects could be developed at a negative price premium (savings) relative to the forecasted avoided costs. Stated clearly, almost all the projects appear to be economically attractive. Figure 1-5 is a supply curve of the renewable energy options 21 March 2005 1-15 Black & Veatch
Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative Renewable Energy Technology Assessments 1.0 Executive Summary available to KIUC. The curve shows the amount of generation available from each technology plotted against the levelized cost premium in ascending order. The lowest cost options (left side of chart) were revealed to be hydro and wind projects. The base case fuel prices are used for biomass and MSW options. An important conclusion from the supply curve is that about 400 GWh of renewable energy projects were identified by this study at a cost below KIUC’s forecasted avoided costs. KIUC generated about 430 GWh in 2003, largely from fossil fuel resources. Levelized Cost Premium, $/MWh 40 20 0 1 44 88 132 175 219 263 306 350 394 438 481 525 569 -20 -40 -60 -80 -100 -120 -140 Wainiha (Hydro) Wailua (Hydro) Kitano-Waimea (Hydro) MSW Plant (Mid Tipping Fee) Mauka (Hydro) Puu Lua-Kitano (Hydro) Generation, GWh Omao (Wind) Kalaheo (Wind) Mahuelepu (Wind) Upper Lihue (Hydro) North of Hanapepe (Wind) Anahola (Wind) Poipu (Wind) Kekaha Landfill Kokee (Wind) 21 March 2005 1-16 Black & Veatch MSW/Biomass Plant (Mid Fuel Cost) Figure 1-5. Levelized Cost Premium Supply Curve. The scores of the initial screening for resource potential were reused for the project analysis. These scores served as a measure of the replicability of a given project type over the next 20 years. For example, there is limited MSW resource on the island, but large wind resources. The fit to KIUC needs category provided a measure of the applicability and suitability of a given project for KIUC. Projects receiving the highest scores were generally small in capacity and provided more energy than capacity to the system. This is because the KIUC system is “capacity rich” in the short term. The projects scoring highest in this category included the hydro and wind projects. The level of environmental impact was scored for each project. There was a significant difference between the environmental impacts from projects even of the same technology. For example, the Upper Lihue hydro upgrade project has practical zero Biomass Plant Mid Cost
Page 1 and 2: 11401 Lamar Black & Veatch Corporat
Page 3 and 4: Page 3 Kaua’i Island Utility Coop
Page 5 and 6: Principal Investigators: Ryan Pletk
Page 7 and 8: Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative
Page 31: Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative
Page 83 and 84:
Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
show all

Renewable Energy Technology Assessments - Kauai Island Utility ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?