Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />4.0 OPTIMIZATION WITH PUMPED STORAGE <br /> <br />To determine the economic attractiveness of pumped storage, the base case analyses <br />were modified by allowing the program to select pumped storage facilities as an option <br />in addition to the other types of power generation. The EGEAS optimization program <br />was again used to determine the lowest-cost plan in terms of system costs with <br />pumped storage. The difference in cost between the base case expansion plans and <br />the expansion plans with pumped storage represents the avoided costs attributed to <br />the pumped storage units. This cost difference could be positive or negative. <br /> <br />As discussed in Chapter 2, a 350-MW generic pumped storage facility at an <br />investment cost of $1,000 per kW (1988 dollars) was assumed as a starting point in the <br />iterative solution of the cost at which pumped storage would compete with alternative <br />forms of power generation. If the difference in the cost of the base case plan and the <br />pumped storage plan is positive, the net savings can be used to determine how much <br />more could be invested in a pumped storage project while remaining competitive with <br />the other types of generation. On the other hand, if the difference between the plans is <br />negative, the investment cost in the pumped storage unit would have to be reduced to <br />become competitive. The investment cost at which pumped storage units become <br />economically attractive is discussed in Chapter 6.0. <br /> <br />The specific results of the optimization analysis included: <br /> <br />. The amount and unit sizes of pumped storage that can be included in <br />the generation expansion plan, <br /> <br />. The optimum staging of pumped storage development, and <br /> <br />. The avoided fixed and variable costs or benefits related to the <br />inclusion of pumped storage. <br /> <br />Results were separately derived for each of the individual utilities and subsequently <br />combined to provide an overall expansion plan on a statewide basis. The expansion <br />plan summary is presented in the same manner as the case without pumped storage <br />except that the combined cycle column has been replaced by the pumped storage <br />alternative since the combined cycle option proved to be noneconomical. <br /> <br />4-1 <br />