Cost and Energy Impacts of Fish and Wildlife Operations

1
Cost and Energy Impacts ofFish and Wildlife
Operations

• NW Power Planning Council
• April 3, 2002
• Boise, Idaho

2
Why are we doing this?

• To help the Council focus on where best to spend
  research money.
• To help prioritize fish and wildlife measures in
  the event that some may have to be curtailed for
  power emergencies.
• To help the Council choose between two or more
  alternatives that achieve the same biological
  objectives.

3
What is it?

• Each component of the fish and wildlife main-stem
  operation is analyzed separately.
• Each scenario has one and only one component
  removed from (or added to) current operations.
• We observe the average monthly change in
  generation and the cost for each component.

4
What is it not?

• A cost/benefit analysis for fish and wildlife
  measures
• An integration of fish wildlife and power
  planning
• A balancing of power and fish wildlife needs

5
Caveats

• Not all components were examined
• Components are not independent
• The cost of removing two components at the same
  time is not the same as the sum of the cost of
  each separately.
• Cannot simply add up the cost of all components
  to get the total cost of current operations.

6
Components of a FW Operation

• Flow Augmentation
• Reservoir Elevation
• Bypass Spill

7
Flow Augmentation (purpose)

• To reduce travel time
• To keep redds under water
• To reduce water temperature

8
Flow Augmentation (examples)

• Chum flows at Bonneville (fall and winter)
• Vernita Bar flows (winter and spring)
• Summer flow augmentation (Snake and Columbia)
• Water releases for temperature control in late
  summer

9
Reservoir Elevation (purpose)

• Winter fill to store water for flow augmentation
• Spring-Summer release for flow augmentation
• Drafting/filling limits for resident fish

10
Reservoir Elevation (examples)

• Winter fill at Coulee, Libby, Horse and Dworshak
• VARQ flood control at Libby, Horse and Coulee
• Integrated Rule Curves at Libby and Horse
• Coulee retention time operation
• Summer draft limits at Coulee, Libby, Horse and
  Dworshak

11
Bypass Spill (purpose)

• Increase survival past dams
• Most useful at sites w/o guidance systems
• Coordinate spill with transportation policy

12
(No Transcript)
13
Stable (?) Electricity Prices
14
(No Transcript)
15
Highest Cost Components

• John Day Summer Spill
• Bonneville Summer Spill
• The Dalles Summer Spill
• John Day Spring Spill
• The Dalles Spring Spill
• Ice Harbor Spring Spill
• Ice Harbor Summer Spill
• Bonneville Spring Spill
• Lower Monumental Spring Spill

16
Low Cost Components

• Grand Coulee Winter Fill
• Lower Granite Spring Spill
• Libby and Horse Integrated Rule Curves
• Little Goose Spring Spill
• Grand Coulee Summer Draft
• Libby Summer Draft
• Dworshak Summer Draft
• McNary July Flow Augmentation
• Lower Granite July Flow Augmentation
• McNary Spring Spill

17
No Cost Components

• Lower Granite August Flow Augmentation
• Generally no flow augmentation water is left
• Upper Snake 427 Kaf Flow Augmentation
• Libby Winter Fill
• Dworshak Winter Fill
• Hungry Horse Winter Fill

18
Revenue Increasing Components

• McNary August 1-15 Flow Augmentation
• VarQ Flood Control (Libby, Horse, Coulee)
• Hungry Horse Summer Draft
• McNary August 16-31 Flow Augmentation
• Chum Flows
• Grand Coulee Retention Time Operation

19
Cost of Spill Changes with Flow

• When bypass spill is a percentage of outflow
• When flows are above turbine capacity
• Forced spill is counted first and does not add to
  the cost of bypass spill
• Does not change when the gas supersaturation
  limit is reached

20
Bypass Spill vs. Outflow(when spill is a
percentage of outflow)