Showing posts with label OPG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OPG. Show all posts

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Major changes in works for Canada's electrical grid - Canada - CBC News

This article provides a very comprehensive picture of the current Canadian electricity system.  A long read but informative and worth it!

The power structure in Canada is changing — not the government, but the country's electricity infrastructure.
By 2020, where electricity comes from and how it gets to your door will have undergone an unprecedented overhaul. Windmills will dot the landscapes of the Great Lakes and remote B.C. Smoke from coal plants will be buried in Saskatchewan and Alberta. A massive underwater cable will feed voltage from Labrador to as far away as New England.
It's all part of a complex series of initiatives that will reformulate everything from who produces the energy that powers your stove or dishwasher, to how they produce it, to your own power consumption habits and how much you'll pay each month.
"Electricity is one of the basic fuels of the economy. Not much happens without it," says Pierre Guimond, CEO of the +Canadian Electricity Association, an industry group. "So getting the basics done correctly — yeah, we've got a lot on our plates."
+CBC News  has analyzed hundreds of studies, contracts, reports, strategy documents, maps and statistics about the country's electrical future. Many of the details have never before been gathered and shared with the public. We've produced the first map, for example, of every major generating station that's operating in Canada today or forecast to start up by 2020. And we've calculated what it will likely cost for your electricity, based on each province's current power generation strategy — and the surprising array  of companies you'll be buying it from.

Will there be enough?

To the tens of millions of North Americans who spent many hours in the dark during the blackout of 2003, the question lingers: Do we generate enough electricity to meet the growing needs of homes and businesses, and do we have a robust enough grid to stave off future outages?
rtr90nkat220
The +Cn Tower  is silhouetted against the setting sun as a blackout grips Toronto on August 14, 2003. As many as 10 million people in eastern North America were affected by the massive power failure. ((Andrew Wallace/Reuters))
In 2003, Ontario, Canada's second-largest powerhouse after Quebec, was on the brink. Its independent grid operator made doomful pronouncements about shortages, and Ontario had to import a sizeable chunk of its energy from the United States.
More recently, British Columbia has become a net importer of current from south of the border. Alberta, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan also rely on foreign sources.
The outlook has improved, but there's still cause for caution.
Ontario now sends $400 million in electricity to the U.S. each year, while B.C. is aiming to be self-sufficient by 2016. Alberta has seen a torrid pace of generator construction, although a March report by +Canaccord Genuity Wealth Management  predicts the province's power consumption is expected to rise by an estimated 4 per cent a year, putting pressure on the amount of power available and driving prices up. On the East Coast, the hydroelectric development of the Lower Churchill River will eventually bring online enough capacity to power any one of the Atlantic provinces in its entirety. 
Overall, the country's system still needs massive cash infusions.
The International Energy Agency estimates Canada will require $10 billion a year in investments in its electrical infrastructure  from now until 2030. A little over half of that will go towards generation and the rest to improve the bulk transmission  grid and the more modest power lines  that distribute electricity to homes.
The most recent assessment from the North American Electric Reliability Corp. – which is authorized by both the Canadian and U.S. governments to ensure the adequacy of the grids in both countries and ensures there's an adequate power supply — isn't overly rosy, either. NERC says that as of 2012, Quebec "needs additional resources" on its generation side, while B.C. and Alberta still need to "accelerate … resource development" to meet their needs for 2020. Ontario, despite its scheme to bring hundreds of small-scale generation online through guaranteed rate offers, is predicted to be a "tight area." 

How much will it cost?

As a result, in almost every region of Canada, electricity prices are going up . Way up. (Try the interactive calculator  to get an idea of what you'll be paying for base electricity in the coming years.)
Customers in several provinces are already seeing it. BC Hydro raised its rates 7.3 per cent this year and has announced it will seek an additional 30 per cent hike over the next three. The Ontario government declared in late 2010 that the province's rates will rise an estimated 46 per cent by 2015. Alberta still has the fourth lowest electricity cost in the country, but the Canaccord Genuity report noted that the cost of wholesale electricty has surged recently, more than doubling in January and February compared to last year, and it is expected to continue to rise over the next few years.
With the possible exception of Manitoba, nobody will be spared cost increases. A CBC News analysis of provincial utilities' power-purchase agreements and financial statements suggests the average price per kilowatt-hour countrywide will rise more than 50 per cent by 2020.
cp-8918516at220x124
The Jean-Lesage hydroelectric dam in Baie-Comeau, Que. A large amount of Canada's electricity currently comes from sites like these but the cost to generate power will increase as new, more expensive projects are constructed. ((Jacques Boissinot/Canadian Press))
Until now, prices have stayed relatively low — among the cheapest of the nations belonging to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) — because the majority of Canada's power comes from hydroelectricity, most of which was developed decades ago and has been paid off for years. The operating costs of hydro dams are minimal, which is why Quebec can generate its power for a couple pennies per kilowatt-hour.
But those power plants are no longer enough to meet the country's needs. And the new plants being built, plus the copper and aluminum heavy-transmission lines to reach them, will cost a lot more. The end result is that ratepayers will end up footing the growing bill.
"Newer hydro that has been built is a lot more expensive than what was built generations ago," the Canadian Electricity Association's Pierre Guimond says. "Everything is more expensive nowadays, because the sites are further away, they're more difficult to develop, and that is reflected in the cost of electricity."
Take Quebec's current biggest hydro project, a series of dams on the Romaine River north of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. It's anticipated to generate power at a cost of close to 6.4 ¢/kWh — or more than three times the price of electrons from that province's currently installed capacity.
What's happening with hydro is happening with every kind of generation. In Ontario, new wind farms get paid 13.5 ¢/kWh, and rooftop solar systems 80 ¢/kWh. A recent power industry study found new nuclear plants cost twice as much to build as they did only seven years ago. Coal-fired plants, once a cheap source of energy based on an abundant fuel, cost far more because of emissions restrictions.
It spells certain pain for consumers' wallets.
"We've underinvested in our electricity system across the country for decades," says Tim Weis, the director of renewable energy and efficiency policy for the Pembina Institute, a national think-tank on sustainable energy. "Whatever you're going to build today is going to be more expensive."

Who will generate it?

Crown-owned utilities once dominated the production and transmission of electricity. A recently as 10 years ago, more than 80 per cent of the generating capacity in Canada was run by provincial governments. But since then, the private sector has held sway.
pickering-opgat220
In the past, most of the generating capacity has been owned by public companies, such as the Pickering nuclear plant. By 2020 nearly all of the new generating sites will be privately owned. ((OPG))
All new net generating capacity constructed since 2000 has been by private companies, and virtually all planned future net capacity will be built by the private sector. From now until 2020, private power sources will grow by almost 50 per cent countrywide, whereas government-provided electricity will nudge up a mere three per cent.
In British Columbia, where the government's procurement policy for new power sources relies almost exclusively on for-profit corporations, companies like General Electric are building hundreds of megawatts of new generating capacity.
In Alberta, oil patch heavyweights Suncor, Imperial Oil and TransCanada are putting up big plants fuelled by natural gas.
In Ontario, +TransAlta Corp. runs four gas-fired stations, but also three wind farms. And in the Maritimes, TransAlta is erecting dozens more wind turbines alongside a host of small specialist companies.
For some critics, it's a disquieting trend: Natural resources such as waterways are falling into private hands, while consumers pay higher prices to effectively subsidize the private development of new industries in solar and wind power. There are also few if any provisions for all the new generating assets to transfer to public ownership once the companies' power-purchase contracts are up, and no guarantees those companies won't seek to hike their prices when that day comes.    

Where will it come from?

758032at220
A worker pulls on a rope to help guide the blades while installing a wind turbine for Toronto Hydro at Exhibition Place on Dec. 18, 2002. The future of generation lies in wind and gas, experts say. ((Kevin Frayer/Canadian Press))
The first half-century of electrification in Canada was all about the country's hydro power. Then came coal, oil and nuclear. The future is written in wind and natural gas.
From fewer than 100 megawatts in wind turbines at the dawn of the millennium, Canada has been rapidly expanding its capacity   to 3,500 MW today, and plans to have 12,765 MW by 2020. That still represents less than 10 per cent of national capacity, but the country is adding more wind power than any other type (with the possible exception of hydro if the full development of Labrador's Churchill River proceeds). And the extra capacity will help enable the shutdown of one of the country's worst sources of greenhouse gas, the Nanticoke generating station in Ontario.
The move away from coal will also be aided by the slew of gas-fired plants that have started up in the past decade. While politicians prefer to tout their provinces' investments in enviro-chic renewable power, the reality is that natural gas is driving the grid's expansion. Sixty per cent of the new generation built in the 2000s is gas, and the sector is slated for another 25 per cent growth by 2020.
It's not perfect — the best gas-powered plants still emit about 40 per cent of the green house gases (GHGs) of a coal-based generator — but staring at the bogeyman of global warming, it's a significant step.

How dirty will it be?

cp-8399651at220
High voltage power lines spread out from Ontario Power Generation's Nanticoke Generating Station. Ontario will shut down 11 of its coal-fired plants by 2014. ((Frank Gunn/Canadian Press))
The electricity sector is far off track from meeting its share of Canada's Kyoto emissions commitments (try the emissions calculator  to see just how far, and experiment with ways to minimize them). The sector emitted 117 million tonnes of GHGs last year, down from a peak of more than 130 Mt in 2003. But that level is still well above the 89 Mt the industry would have to trim to by 2012 to be in line with the Kyoto protocol.
"It was pretty clear that there wasn't going to be an effort made to meet that target," the Pembina Institute's Tim Weis says. "It wasn't an unrealistic goal; we were just too slow to go get going."
Looking ahead, though, the emissions picture gets somewhat better.
The federal government has set its own goal of cutting GHGs 17 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020. Under that scheme, power plants would have to cut back to 102 Mt in emissions in the next nine years, and they may be able to achieve it.
Ontario will shut down all 11 of its remaining coal-fired units by 2014, while Alberta and Saskatchewan are exploring new (though still unproven) ways of stashing their coal plants' carbon dioxide underground. Add to that Ottawa's plan to put strict emissions caps on coal-fired power plants, and the sector could hit the federal government's milder GHG target.
If it doesn't, Canada will have a hard time achieving any emissions-reduction objectives. Electricity generation accounts for a sixth of the country's GHGs, the second-largest source after transportation.
"The government needs to lead, whether at a federal or provincial level," Weis says. "Anywhere you've seen major reductions, whether in Europe or Ontario, it's all happened because the government has taken the initiative to make it happen."

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Integrated Balance of System Solution: The Next Solar Cost Savings Frontier

Phil is First Green Energy's go to expert on all things Solar!  Great read for those interested in the solar industry.

Reducing BoS field labor and material costs on projects are critical to achieving competitive system performance and pricing.
By Phil Winters

As PV modules decline in price, the focus on cost savings increasingly turns to the Balance of Systems (BoS). Though material costs of BoS continue to rise (copper, aluminum, steel, etc.), costs savings are derived primarily from the engineered integration of the BOS system which can reduce labor and materials on the job site.
Two recent studies concluded that BoS costs will likely exceed the costs of PV modules in the near term, becoming the highest cost portion of a solar system (this is including the mounting system, which we are including in BoS descriptions). According to GTM research, “…attention from developers and EPCs will increasingly be placed on a project’s balance-of-system (BoS) costs. Historically, innovation in the BoS space has been somewhat limited, given its smaller share of the total system. However, BoS costs will represent more than half of total project costs by 2012, and many BoS players are beginning to integrate their offerings into full-service component packages and positioning for greater share in the market via meaningful economic gains.”
As well, the recently launched U.S. Department of Energy SunShot Initiative ‘aims to dramatically decrease the total costs of solar energy systems by 75% before the end of the decade’. Much of the focus of this initiative is on BoS and labor savings advancements.
During the last decade, we have seen a series of shifts in the PV landscape. In 2002, the solar industry was squarely focused on the modules while the inverter was considered a mysterious box with a limited 3 year warranty that could be sourced from only a handful of suppliers in the market. Slowly the focus changed to the inverter, which now comes with standard 10 and 20 year warranties, and boasts thousands of suppliers globally.
Until recently, nary a thought was given to the BoS, with integrators frequently building their own mounting systems out of strut, stuffing their own combiner boxes and cobbling together their BoS solutions from a series of manufacturers via their local electrical distributor.
Thankfully, the industry has matured and many of these ‘home-made’ solutions have abated over time with suppliers like Eaton stepping in with high-quality, volume manufacturing. This has contributed to the decreasing installed cost of PV. There is, however, much to improve upon where significant BoS cost savings can occur, which Eaton is now squarely addressing.
Take for instance, the current state of connecting modules to combiner boxes. Most contractors currently do all this work manually; running PV cable the length of the combiner box to module connection point, cutting and stripping the wires, crimping their contacts, assembling the connectors, attaching ID labels and terminating the string in the combiner box. This will be repeated dozens, hundreds and thousands of times depending on the scale of the project. Did we mention this is generally being done by highly paid electricians?
Like days of old, with homemade mounting systems and combiner boxes, this practice results in more cost, more connection points, more leak paths and definitely more potential quality and safety issues due to human error. On top of this, it is questionable whether testing is conducted on every one of those connection pointsi.e. pull, hi-pot and continuity testingthus further increasing potential human error trouble spots, which can be dangerous down the road, costing significant resources to fix.
There’s an option, Eaton BoS alternative: a custom made PV cable assembly that is manufactured for your project in a controlled condition, by highly trained personnel using precision Swiss made equipment. These custom assemblies arrive at the job mapped, labeled, guaranteed and 100% certified for pull test, continuity and Hi-Pot. This approach also reduces material and labor costs up to 30% while significantly increasing the quality and certainty of long-term system performance. The Eaton solution replaces a highly laborious and time consuming process with a plug and play solution.
BoS breakthroughs like this are driving the reduction in system costs while driving solar towards grid parity. Companies like Eaton, with their integrated total BoS solution, are driving innovation and cost reductions across the system to benefit the entire solar industry.
Part of what differentiates the Eaton approach to BoS is how the engineering teams from each product work together to optimize layouts and system designs to achieve material and labor savings.
Eaton engineers across product disciplines work together, so our designs are focused on reducing labor and materials in the field. While other mounting manufacturers design their mounting solution and provide a quote around this one component of the system, the Eaton approach is to review the electrical design parameters of the project to ensure mounting, cable, cable management and combiners are all designed in one integrated fashion to maximize efficiency and cost savings opportunities on each specific project. A complete BoS engineered solution looks at every angle of the project, ensuring consideration of every component in tandem rather than in a vacuum. This reduces cost while increasing certainty of construction logistics, material costs and performance of PV asset.


Let me give you a real-world example: Eaton recently worked on a 10 MW project which had received three quotes from three different companies to provide single component solutions (mounting, combiner boxes and PV cable solutions). Standard solutions at a standard price. Then, Eaton got involved with our Total BoS Solutions. What we were able to achieve by integrating our design practices across our BoS solutions was a 15% reduction in mounting costs, and a reduction in pier requirements by 33%. By matching our mounting configuration to the string sizing of the system, were able to reduce PV cable costs by 50% while reducing the labor on PV cable installation by 70%. This is a remarkable achievement on one projectand this approach drove the advancement of innovation at Eaton.
It is a remarkable and positive change for the PV industry that one company can offer roof and ground mounting solutions, combiners and re-combiners, cable management solutions, PV cable harness assemblies, wireless monitoring and grid tie solutions all from one qualified highly bankable vendor.
As solar continues to step onto the world stage of large scale utility and massively distributed rooftops, the manufacturing community also needs to step up their game to ensure they are integrating BoS solutions which provide better performance, higher long-term certainty and reduced costs in materials and labor.

Phil Winters is the Renewable Energy Business Development Manager for Eaton in Canada. Prior to joining Eaton, Winters launched and led project development and EPC firms serving the Canadian and global solar markets. Winters is a graduate of both Solar Energy International (1999) and the Ontario Solar Academy (2009), and is currently the Vice President of the Solar and Sustainable Energy Society of Canada. He holds MBA from Southern Methodist University’s Cox School of Business.
http://www.interpv.net/market/market_view.asp?idx=814&part_code=03

Friday, September 5, 2014

Stay Clear, Stay Safe - Dam Safety

Always an important message when it comes to hydroelectric power.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) is urging the public to exercise extreme caution around waterways, and to be mindful of water safety especially near or around hydroelectric stations and dams.

"Stay clear, stay safe is a simple message," says Mike Martelli, OPG's Senior Vice President of Hydro-Thermal Operations. "Ontario's lakes and rivers are popular holiday weekend destinations but people need to keep themselves and their families safe by paying attention to the warnings signs, fences and booms around hydroelectric stations."
Most hydroelectric facilities are controlled remotely by operators located many kilometres away. As a result, dams can suddenly open at any time, creating rapid change to water levels and flows, while producing deadly undertows.
Additional water safety information can be found online at www.stayclearstaysafe.ca including links to OPG's water safety partners - the Ontario Provincial Police, and the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters.

SOURCE Ontario Power Generation Inc.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Hydroelectric Energy Advantages and Disadvantages « Green World Investor

Hydro Power is one of the largest sources of energy accounting for roughly 20% of the worldwide demand of electricity and for well resourced countries it accounts for majority of the energy.For Paraguay 100% of the electricity comes from hydro power and lot of it is exported as well.Compared to other sources of Energy, Hydroelectric Power is one of the cheapest,non Carbon Emitting,non Polluting,Mature Energy Sources.Hydro Power plants have been developed to almost full potential in developed countries because of their superior characteristics and many more are being constructed by developing countries like China and India.However Hydro Power like all other thins in life suffers from disadvantages as well.The failure of a Hydro Dam can result in massive losses of human life and cause widespread devastation.Large Dams have always been controversial leading to displacement of people and ecology.They have also been cited as the reason for earthquakes due to large land changes.Here is a list of the advantages and disadvantages of Hydro Power

Hydroelectric Energy Advantages

No Fuel Cost - Hydro Energy does not require any fuel like most other sources of energy.This is a huge advantage over other fossil fuels whose costs are increasing at a drastic rate every year.Electricity prices are increasingly rapidly in most parts of the world much faster than general inflation.Price shocks due to high fuel costs are a big risk with fossil fuel energy these days
Low Operating Costs and little Maintenance - Operating labor cost is also usually low, as plants are automated and have few personnel on site during normal operation.
Low Electricity Cost – The Electricity produced from Hydro Power is quite low making it very attractive to construct hydro plants.The payback period is estimated to be between 5-8 years for a normal hydro power plant.Hydro Plants also have long lives of between 50-100 years which means that they are extremely profitable
No Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Air Pollution – Hydroelectricity does not produce any GHG emissions or cause air pollution from the combustion of fossil fuels unlike coal,oil or gas.This makes them very attractive as a source of cheap,non carbon dioxide producing electricity.
Energy Storage – Pumped Hydro Storage is possible with most of the hydro power plants.This makes them ideal storage for wind and solar power which are intermittent in nature.Hydro Dams can be modified at low costs to allow pumped storage.
Small Size Possible - Hydroelectricity can be produced in almost any size from 1 MW to 10000 MW which makes it very versatile.Small Hydro Plants are being encouraged by government as they cause less ecological affects than large hydro plants.Even micro hydro plants are possible
Reliability - Hydro Power is much more reliable than wind and solar power though less than coal and nuclear as a baseload source of power.Hydroelectricity is more or less predictable much in advance though it can decrease in summer months when the water is low in the catchment areas.
High Load Factor - The Load Factor for Solar and Wind Energy ranges from 15-40% which is quite low compared to Fossil Fuel Energy.Hydroelectricity on the other hand has a load factor of almost 40-60% .
Long Life - Hydro Plants has a very long life of around 50- 100 years which is much longer than that of even Nuclear Power Plants.The long life implies that the lifecycle cost of a Hydel Power Plant becomes very low in the long term
Hydroelectric Energy DisAdvantages

1) Environmental, Dislocation and Tribal Rights - Large Dam construction especially in populated areas leads to massive Tribal Displacement,Loss of Livelihood and Religious Infringement as potentially sacred Land is occupied by the Government.

2) Wildlife and Fishes get Affected - The Fishes are the most affected species from Dam Construction as the normal flow of the river is completely changed form its river character to a lake one.Submergence of land also leads to ecological destruction of the habitat of land based wildlife.

3) Earthquake Vulnerability – Large Dam Construction has been linked to increased propensity of Earthquakes.Massive Earthquakes in China and Uttarakhand in India were linked to the building of Massive Dams in these countries

4) Siltation When water flows it has the ability to transport particles heavier than itself downstream. This has a negative effect on dams and subsequently their power stations, particularly those on rivers or within catchment areas with high siltation

5) Tail Risk,Dam Failure - Because large conventional dammed-hydro facilities hold back large volumes of water, a failure due to poor construction, terrorism, or other cause can be catastrophic to downriver settlements and infrastructure. Dam failures have been some of the largest man-made disasters in history.The Banqiao Dam Failure in Southern China directly resulted in the deaths of 26,000 people, and another 145,000 from epidemics.

6) Cannot be Built Anywhere - This disadvantage of Hdyro Energy is present with other forms of Energy as well.Some forms of Energy are just better suited to some places.For example you can’t build a nuclear plant on top of an earthquake prone region,you can’t build a wind farm near the Dead Sea etc.Hydro Energy can only be built in particular places though enough of those places exist globally

7) Long Gestation Time - The time to construct a large hydro power project can take between 5-10 years which leads to time and cost overruns.

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Industry Insight: Hydroelectricity: The Versatile Renewable

http://www.hydroworld.com/index/display/article-display/7205041011/articles/hydro-review/volume-29/issue-1/lead-story/industry-insight_.html





Hydropower in North America is experiencing a renaissance. As a result, equipment manufacturers are being flooded with orders to provide equipment for projects using improved conventional technology and new, emerging technologies.
As one of the earliest and most elementary forms of power generation, hydropower remains by far the largest source of renewable energy in the world, including in North America.
In the early 1900s, hydropower was the dominant source of U.S. electric generation. As recently as the 1940s, hydro facilities accounted for more than 40 percent of electricity production. By the 1950s, developers had tapped the hydro potential of the most mountainous regions in the U.S. – many in the Northwest – where steep inclines supply the strongest river flows and permit the most cost-efficient projects.
Hydropower supplies almost two-thirds of Canada's power and makes it the world's largest hydropower producer, representing 13 percent of global output. This country also is the world's second largest exporter of hydro (after France). Altogether, its roughly 450 hydro plants, half of which have a capacity of less than 10 MW, account for 72,660 MW. Another 1,800 MW of capacity currently is under construction, and an additional 12,000 MW are being considered for development, according to the Canadian Hydropower Association.
Today, hydro represents about 8 percent of all power in the U.S. and more than 90 percent of all the renewable power generated in the U.S. Hydro provides more than 16 times as much energy as wind and solar power combined.
Hoover Dam, on the Colorado River between Nevada and Arizona, impounds water for two powerhouses that provide a total capacity of 2,078 MW.
And hydro's use is increasing, both through updates to older generating technology and through new technologies. Utilities are proposing more than 70 projects that would boost U.S. hydroelectric capacity by at least 11,000 MW over the next decade.
Driving a new wave of hydropower development is unprecedented demand for renewable energy and rising fossil fuel costs. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and other programs include tax provisions to attract investment in incremental hydropower; hydro at non-powered dams; and ocean, tidal, and in-stream (hydrokinetic) technologies.
Upgrades and new builds
American Municipal Power (AMP) owns and operates power production facilities for 126 member entities in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky. AMP is developing six hydro projects, representing one of the largest deployments of hydroelectric generation in the U.S. The projects are run-of-river facilities to be installed at existing dams on the Ohio River and on the New River in West Virginia. Combined, these projects would add more than 380 MW of new generation at an estimated construction cost of more than $1.5 billion.
As part of the project, AMP signed a contract worth more than $300 million with Voith Hydro to manufacture turbines and generators for the first three of these projects at the Smithland, Cannelton, and Willow Island locks and dams. A fourth Ohio River project will be at the Captain Anthony Meldahl Locks and Dam. In addition, AMP is pursuing a project (called Robert C. Byrd) at the Gallipolis Lock and Dam on the Ohio River and performing a feasibility study for a project at the Bluestone Dam on the New River.
Another company, PPL Corp., recently received approval of its request to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to expand its Holtwood plant, on the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania, by 125 MW. Holtwood currently is rated at 108 MW and has generated power since 1910. PPL said that incentives in the federal stimulus package could make the project feasible by offsetting the factors that caused the company to cancel its original plans for expansion in December 2008. Construction of the estimated $440 million project could begin in February 2010 and be complete by spring of 2013.
The boom in construction of larger hydro projects internationally has provided benefits to developers of smaller projects in the U.S. and Canada. "The hydro business is so robust right now that the contractors only go after big projects, leaving lots of room for smaller players to stay busy with medium and smaller projects," said Norm Bishop, senior vice president of hydroelectric and renewable energy for Knight Piesold. Knight Piesold is an international company of consulting engineers and environmental scientists who work in a variety of fields, including hydropower, wind energy, and mining.
In addition to the demand for renewables and the rising costs of fossil fuels, Bishop cites hydro's flexibility that allows it to meet today's power market demands. These demands include ancillary grid support, which is especially critical in places with increasingly high penetrations of wind farms.
And the potential to make cheap power from water has barely been tapped. Of the existing dams in the U.S., only 3 percent (or around 2,400) are equipped to produce power. These facilities annually generate 270,000 gigawatt-hours (GWh), according to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). DOE estimates another 30,000 MW of capacity could be developed, including 17,000 MW at existing dams.
Pump it up
After decades of little or no development, pumped storage in the U.S. is seeing renewed attention. Between 2007 and 2009, FERC issued preliminary permits for more than 20 pumped-storage projects, representing a total capacity of more than 15,000 MW.
In early 2009, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said hydro pumped storage must be a part of a national plan to expand clean energy resources and to integrate variable renewable energy resources into the transmission grid. Chu said the U.S. has limited existing resources for storing energy, and most of what it does have comes from the 20,355 MW of pumped-storage capacity now in service.
National Hydropower Association (NHA) Executive Director Linda Church Ciocci said that expanding hydro pumped storage capacity will be a high priority for her association's new pumped storage council. "The federal government has no program to spur expansion of U.S. pumped storage," she said. "We advocate investment tax credits or other similar measures that can incentivize pumped storage development immediately."
One benefit could be changes to the licensing process, an initiative NHA has worked on for many years. The new process focuses on collaboration among agencies, which should reduce the amount of time required for a new or renewed license from 15 years to as little as three or four years.
Relicensing is hot right now as owners hope to reap even 2 or 3 percent improvements for a price tag that can be as low as $200 per kilowatt.
"There's a tremendous opportunity to repower and upgrade the mechanical aspects of existing facilities to increase output," said Don Erpenbeck, vice president of engineering firm MWH. He's particularly upbeat about some new technologies, such as ultra-low-head hydro, and emerging technologies such as hydrokinetic. "If a project is 20 years old, there's a good chance today's technology can eke out more power at a very small cost per kW," he said.
Water to wire = ultimate efficiency
Hydropower has always had high availability and quick ramping rates. No fuel is needed, just the volume and motion of the water. It also enjoys an overall efficiency unmatched by any other power source. Mechanical efficiency is high, and the only true efficiency losses are limited to line loss.
"Availability is pushing 90 percent with hydro, and on the mechanical side we hit 95 percent efficiency," Erpenbeck said. But some plants have lost as much as 10 percent of their efficiency due to the age of their turbine-generating units. New technology can reclaim that efficiency and even increase output above previous levels. "You could be looking at up to 20 percent efficiency increases if the existing machines are in bad shape," he said.
The new turbines being installed at the 1,038-MW Wanapum project are fish-friendly and also will increase efficiency by 3 percent per unit over the old turbines.
Hydro's ability to ramp quickly enhances its attractiveness as a power portfolio asset. New technology can expand that flexibility. "We can make the efficiency curve flatter, so hydro is more efficient running off peak," said Erpenbeck. "We can now run with even greater flexibility and respond to market conditions across a wider range of megawatts in terms of cycling, load following, and turn down."
Erpenbeck said hydropower can routinely operate at 55 to 100 percent of rated load and back off to 20 to 40 percent as needed.
Increases to operating range provide prime quality spinning reserve for grid support, which is more important today than ever before. The increases are achieved through the ability to run in condensing mode where the generator is synchronized and motoring while the turbine spins air, or synchronized at low power (20 to 40 percent of rated load) and going to full power in seconds. For example, a single unit in the Third Powerhouse at the 6,809-MW Grand Coulee project on the Columbia River in Washington State can go from low load to full load (about 800 MW) in a matter of seconds.
Technology improvements
Improvements to conventional hydro technology provide a variety of upgrades that help hydropower remain low cost while offering environmental benefits.
Grant County Public Utility District in Washington State is installing ten $15 million fish-friendly turbines at its 1,038-MW Wanapum project and plans to replace another ten turbines at 855-MW Priest Rapids. The old turbines are being replaced with models that use six smaller blades instead of five. When completed in 2012, the work is expected to improve each turbine's efficiency by 3 percent and the Priest Rapids facility's overall capacity by 15 percent.
Recent upgrades to the Sacramento Municipal Utility District's 154-MW Jaybird and 82-MW Loon Lake powerhouses have led to still more efficiency gains. Installing new computerized controllers to better regulate water flow to the turbines increased output by 15 MW for the same amount of water when running at low power levels. The new governor control system automatically regulates the Pelton nozzles.
With the old equipment, the controller opened all six needles at once, boosting water flow to the turbine as electricity demand rose. When the unit was at low load, it required less water. But this fanned out of the needles similar to a garden hose set to a wide spray pattern and caused most of the water to miss the turbine wheel.
The new equipment opens two needles initially and adds others as demand for power rises. By moving the same volume of water through two needles instead of six, the water stream is more tightly focused and hits the turbine wheel more directly. This results in significant water savings for the same amount of power generation. Based on current short-term power price forecasts, the utility estimates the equipment will save it $130,000 a year.
Canada's two largest hydro utilities – Ontario Power Generation (OPG) and Hydro-Quebec – continue to expand capacity. Hydro-Quebec's expansion plans include completing the last generating units at the 385-MW Peribonka development and the first units at 62-MW Chute-Allard and 76-MW Rapides-des-Coeurs.
Work also proceeds at the utility's 906-MW Eastmain-1-A/Sarcelle/Rupert jobsite. The project will divert a portion of the flow from the Rupert River watershed into the Eastmain River watershed. The complex will involve four dams, a spillway on the Rupert River, 74 dikes, two diversion bays, and construction of a 1.8-mile-long tunnel and a network of canals and hydraulic structures on the Rupert River to maintain post-diversion water levels along half of the river's length.
OPG's Niagara tunnel project will increase the amount of water flowing to turbines at the 2,000-MW Sir Adam Beck complex at Niagara Falls, allowing the utility to better use available water. When the 6.5-mile-long tunnel is complete, average annual generation from the Beck stations is expected to increase by about 1,600 GWh. In April 2009, OPG completed a 12.5-MW hydroelectric station on the English River. The new Lac Seul facility uses most of the spill currently passing the existing 18.5-MW Ear Falls generating station, thus increasing overall efficiency, capacity, and energy generated from the plant.
Operation of the first of two turbines at Mississippi Lock and Dam No. 2 heralded the opening of the first commercially-operational hydrokinetic station in the U.S.
OPG also is proceeding with the definition phase for a 450-MW development on the Lower Mattagami River, including replacing the 52-MW Smoky Falls station and expanding the 136-MW Little Long, 140-MW Harmon, and 158-MW Kipling stations. The company also approved redeveloping four existing stations, which otherwise would have been removed from service.
New wave for hydropower
The tremendous force of moving water is obvious to anyone who has stood in breaking ocean waves or swum against a river's current. Ocean, tidal, and instream technologies generate electricity from waves or directly from the flow of water in ocean currents, tides, or inland waterways. This technology is gaining increased attention.
Hydrokinetic technology uses stream flow to make power and requires a steady 3 to 5 knots of flow to operate. Hydrokinetic water turbines can be placed where there is no dam; for example, they may be attached to bridges or to frames on the river bottom. Hydrokinetic technology boosts potential capacity far beyond conventional hydro power. As one example, thousands of miles of canals in California are designed primarily for irrigation but could also host hydrokinetic turbines.
Hydrokinetic turbines are smaller than wind turbines because water is about 800 times denser than air. Ocean tidal currents can deliver a predictable 20 hours per day of energy, and a hydrokinetic turbine can produce up to four times more energy than a wind turbine on a good day. Venturi and centrifugal designs can accelerate water speed through the turbine and double the energy produced. Current project proposals suggest that energy produced by U.S. waves, tides, and rivers could provide a capacity of 13,000 MW by 2025.
In August 2009, officials celebrated the opening of the first commercially-operational hydrokinetic power station in the U.S. The first of two turbines was installed and operational at the 4.4-MW Mississippi Lock and Dam No. 2 facility, in Hastings, Minn., This installation will use two hydrokinetic units, each with a nameplate capacity of 100 kW. The second unit is expected to be installed in 2010.
Near-shore and offshore ocean waves might have the greatest hydrokinetic potential. Extracting just 15 percent of the energy in U.S. coastal waves would generate as much electricity as is currently produced at conventional hydro projects. Much of this wave potential is along the Pacific Coast and close to population centers.
Beyond the sheer size of the resource, ocean, tidal, and in-stream resources are attractive because of their predictability. Wave patterns can be predicted days in advance. Because the kinetic energy in a stream is related to its speed cubed, extracting the most electricity from each hydrokinetic project will depend heavily on site selection. Energy output increases eight times with only twice as much water current speed.
State and federal policymakers across the U.S. have taken notice of the potential of hydrokinetic energy and have begun to support its development through legislative and monetary means. Ocean energy is eligible for credit under renewable electricity standards in 16 states and for federal renewable production tax credits, as expanded in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Furthermore, hydrokinetic energy development was marked for increased research funding appropriations in the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act.
Overcoming environmental opposition
Hydro has all but disappeared from the energy options usually cited by renewable energy advocates. Many environmentalists have long opposed hydroelectric power and do not consider it "green" or renewable. Much of the opposition is based on the water diversions required by traditional hydroelectric projects and the effects on land and wildlife. Fish killed as a result of passing hydro turbines has also led to a substantial amount of environmental concern.
Because of this environmental opposition, some states restrict the extent to which hydroelectric projects may qualify under renewable portfolio standards. "Policy makers at the federal and state level have a difficult task of designing regulations and incentives that recognize the fact that an existing renewable source like hydropower can be further developed with the right incentives," said Michael Cutter, vice president of engineering and development for Brookfield Renewable Power. The company has developed, owned, and operated hydro facilities for more than 100 years and has 100 hydropower facilities totaling nearly 2,000 MW in nine U.S. states.
Cutter said opportunities exist throughout the U.S. for continued development of hydroelectric generation. "Recent studies show the amount of hydropower could double from the current amount of installed hydro generating capacity by 2030 if the country could upgrade existing hydropower, add hydropower at non-power dams, and develop some of the new technologies," he said. "To reach hydropower's potential, it is important to continue to strengthen federal and state energy policies and to educate the public on hydropower's role as an indigenous, renewable energy source." 

Steve Blankinship was associate editor of Power Engineering magazine, a PennWell Corporation publication. This article originally appeared in the June 2009 issue of Power Engineering. Blankinship passed away in 2009. 

Monday, January 3, 2011

When is it right to redevelop hydroelectric sites?

It is a question that many in the industry are familiar with. There are many concerns when developing renewable energy projects. The most important concern is the environmental impact. Ultimately, renewable energy's selling feature is that it provides greater environmental benefits than not doing it. In most scenarios, there are cost benefits to any new development. My feeling it that the redevelopment of already impacted areas provides an opportunity to maintain the existing impacts and the resulting adapted environment with the creation of renewed green energy production. Water is already the greatest form of renewable energy. Waterpower is commonly viewed as reliable, reactive and renewable. It has been described as a source of energy "more than renewable". I agree. So important to the energy mix is that hydro is used as the perfect and only large scale support system for the wind industry. Where we can dramatically curb the new environmental impacts and provide this source of energy, it is my feeling that we should take all means necessary to support the redevelopment and refurbishment of our heritage green energy assets.
Many of these sites are seen as too small, or too aged to attract large corporate investment. This has caused an environment of less than optimal usage of the flowing resource, and in some cases the abandonment and removal of these sites.
When we are promoting new renewable technologies, we need to also be supporting our proven suppliers and encourage their continuing operations. Support can come from local communities, government initiatives, school level education programs demonstrating its history and benefits, and supplying to an informative discussion so as to avoid broad generalizations on hydroelectric development that have tarnished the good.

Core Components of the Green Energy Act of Ontario

Ontario Green Energy Act

In 2006, Premier McGuinty set a precedent in North America by introducing the Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program - the most progressive green energy initiative in more than twenty years.

In that same year the Ontario Power Authority began work on the Integrated Power System Plan – a 20-year plan that will determine how Ontario’s electricity system will evolve.


A great start. But not enough to get us where we need to go.


We need the Ontario Green Energy Act to propel Ontario into a leadership position in renewable energy, to reduce our pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, to create meaningful jobs for Ontarians and to enhance community economic development for rural, remote and First Nations communities.

Ontario Bill 150, Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009

Bill 150 was tabled at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario on February 23, 2009 and passed into law on May 14, 2009.

Official Liberal Party of Ontario Website for Ontario's Green Energy Act

Ontario's governing Liberal party has created a website providing explanation and information on their proposed Green Energy Act. Find it here.

Green Energy Act Introduction Testimonials - February 2009

Read what's being said about the tabling of the Green Energy Act by the Government of Ontario.

Green Energy Act Executive Summary

The Ontario Green Energy Act will make Ontario a global leader in the development of renewable energy, clean distributed energy and conservation - creating thousands of jobs, economic prosperity, energy security, and climate protection.

Proposed Green Energy Act

On December 10th at Queens Park in Toronto, a proposed draft of the Ontario green energy act was released titled: "An Act Granting Priority to Renewable Energy Sources to Manage Global Climate Change, Protect the Environment and Streamline Project Approvals". The draft will be under constant revision so please read it and send us your feedback.

Core Components of the Green Energy Act

The ten key points that define the goals of the Ontario Green Energy Act.

Sustainable energy unplugged: Making the connection

Getting connected to the electricity grid is proving a formidable problem for sustainable energy generators. A green energy act would oblige utilities to connect renewable energy.

Beyond the RESOP and the IPSP

Ontario’s Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program (RESOP) was the most progressive green energy initiative in North America for more than twenty years.

http://www.greenenergyact.ca/Page.asp?PageID=1224&SiteNodeID=202&BL_ExpandID=44