WSP04440 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~~~~_.,~~~",_.." .."....~,O"""'-..,_~"'":~-'<"~-.......W..a~~-.:r. "}_ -"r"iir----~i~v..w-"-~ Case 2 operation assumed that 850 MW peaks of 8-hour duration would be met each weekday. Fi gures 8 and 9 show the assumed operati on patterns terns for summer and winter operation under Case 2. The January static head fluctuation for this case is shown in Figure 10. Case 3 represents maximum operation of Fifth Water Pumped Storage Powerplant. Under this case, the plant would generate at maXlmum capacity for 12 hours each weekday. Fi gures 11 and 12 show the approximate summer and winter operating patterns for Case 3 and Figure 13 shows the corresponding January static head fluctuations. Conventional turbines can operate throuQh a fairly large range of flows and loads (40 to 100 percent of rated capacity).. without detrimental problems. Hlgh head, reversibl~_J?ump-tur~.in~~...~r:.~.._n~t..<:''!Pabl~..,_oL_OJ1er~in!l...at very. low flows. Sustained operation below 60 or 70.Qercent of rated capacity ;~~p f~ ga~:c~;a~i:dun~~?'~~~~'o*l~:~-~r:fffi~rU~t'~~iJf;~~~~f::Q~-!R~.I. I n the __................,..,...,......,.......'.... .....,......,....,......"......... __,..,.' ..._.._ ...1>..........___ _. The costs for Fifth Water Pumped Storaae Powerplant oresented in this docu- ment are based on four equal-sized units of 285 MW each. This configura- tion was used to obtain plant uniformity, construction economy, and minimum maintenance costs. However. this configuration would also limit the mini- mum sustained plant output to loads of 170 to 200 MW or greater. Other configurations could be used that would provide greater operational flexi- bility. One such configuration studied by Reclamaiton included three 285 MW units and two 125 MW units. Such a configuration would increase the initial construction costs by approximately $25 million. With the given head at the site, the smallest pump-generating unit that could be prac- tically manufactured is 125 MW. The final unit sizing will be based on the operational needs of the project participants. Table 3 contains a summary of average monthly releases from Monks Hollow Reservoir that would be required to meet downstream water demands. Figure 14 illustrates the probability of various annual release levels. As men- tioned previ ously, water releases wi 11 be made accordi ng to downstream water demands. Duri ng dry years, 1 arge quantiti es of water will be re 1 eased from Strawberry Reservoi r through the Di amond Fork Power System. During wet years, lesser amounts of water will be released. Monks Hollow and Diamond Fork Powerplants will operate according to down- stream water demands, whereas operation of the Syar and Fifth Water Powerplants will be more flexible, since flows can be reregulated in Fifth Water or Monks Hollow Reservoir. I 9