[LDES-coremodel] [LDES] updates on RPS and carbon cap tasks

[Kenji Shiraishi]

I agree with you, Julia. I think using 500 kV values is fine, given SWITCH
uses one cost for all transmission lines and we have to choose one.

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 12:13 AM Sarah Kurtz <skurtz at ucmerced.edu> wrote:

> I tried to see if I could find the cost that RESOLVE uses for this, but
> the RSP doesn’t allow build out of the transmission lines, and I didn’t
> manage to find the cost they would assume in any of the other scenario
> files. I was thinking I saw it somewhere, but I think that was in your
> previous SWITCH inputs, which was $1208/MW-km.
>
> On Feb 7, 2021, at 11:57 PM, Julia Szinai <jszinai at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Thank you Kenji for sending this data!
> I will start by adding the updated solar and wind costs to the db.
>
> The transmission costs look great, and I'm glad we are not too far off in
> the average value we have currently in the db. Does it make sense to use
> the cost for the 500 kV line? I think currently SWITCH takes in one cost
> and doesn't distinguish between 345 vs. 500 vs. 765 kV.
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 6:27 PM Kenji Shiraishi <kenjis at berkeley.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Julia,
>>
>> I have reflected the ITC and PTC extensions for solar and wind in the
>> attached cost file. Please let me know if you have any questions.
>>
>> Also, after my review of transmission literature, I found that the
>> transmission costs that we can easily use for the input for SWITCH model
>> are the bulk transmission costs from the ReEDs document.
>> 345 kV: $1,449/MW-km
>> 500 kV: $837/MW-km
>> 765 kV: $870/MW-km
>> (all the numbers are in $2010)
>> 1) within California, multiply 2.25 with the number above.
>> 2) between California and other WECC states, multiply 1.125 with those
>> numbers.
>> 3) within other WECC regions, use the transmission costs as they are.
>> (page 54 of https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1606151)
>>
>> Recent transmission expansions in California are the Tehachapi Renewable
>> Transmission Project. This project costs fit with the number above very
>> well.
>> Tehachapi: $2.0 billion/173miles/4,500MW = $1,596/MW-km (500kV)
>>
>> The costs I reported in the previous meeting from EIA and NREL were the
>> costs of spur lines, not bulk transmissions. So they are rather connection
>> costs, not bulk transmission costs. I am sorry for causing confusion.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Kenji
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 10:29 PM Sarah Kurtz <skurtz at ucmerced.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for the update and for doing the work, Julia!  This sounds
>>> like great progress!
>>> I look forward to hearing the results of the detective work next week -
>>> I hope the clues turn out to be easy to spot!
>>>
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>> On Feb 6, 2021, at 10:24 PM, Julia Szinai <jszinai at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi team,
>>> I went through the current RPS policies state-by-state and updated the
>>> percentages for the SWITCH baseline input files. I made some
>>> simplifications because some states have different criteria for applying
>>> the RPS (by number of customers, utility type, load size, etc.) which don't
>>> correspond neatly with our load zone boundaries, but since it's really the
>>> carbon cap that is the binding constraint, these simplifications shouldn't
>>> matter.
>>>
>>> I wrote up the policies and SWITCH implementation here
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YZwKxv8_WFYBBP5WauEnpXcCGrrn31Jy-kdYEY1xo5o/edit>,
>>> and have attached the CSV of the data I added to the db. I also added the
>>> new carbon cap scenario to the db (WECC cap: 80% of 1990 levels by 2050,
>>> subtracting the carbon cap of CA each year, and CA cap: 0% carbon by 2045).
>>>
>>> One of the next things on my to-do list was to update the renewable
>>> costs to include the PTC extension. Kenji, could you please send the update
>>> cost time series when you get a chance?
>>>
>>> I'm also meeting with Paty early next week to work on figuring out the
>>> solar candidate capacity discrepancy.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Julia
>>> --
>>> *Julia Szinai*
>>> PhD Candidate | Energy & Resources Group | University of California,
>>> Berkeley
>>> Graduate Student Researcher | Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
>>> NSF InFEWS Fellow
>>> Energy & Resources Group, MS '17
>>> Goldman School of Public Policy, MPP '17
>>> University of California, Berkeley
>>> jszinai at berkeley.edu
>>> <rps_scenario_id_7_new.csv>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LDES-coremodel mailing list
>>> LDES-coremodel at lists.ucmerced.edu
>>> https://lists.ucmerced.edu/mailman/listinfo/ldes-coremodel
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LDES-coremodel mailing list
>>> LDES-coremodel at lists.ucmerced.edu
>>> https://lists.ucmerced.edu/mailman/listinfo/ldes-coremodel
>>>
>>
>
> --
> *Julia Szinai*
> PhD Candidate | Energy & Resources Group | University of California,
> Berkeley
> Graduate Student Researcher | Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
> NSF InFEWS Fellow
> Energy & Resources Group, MS '17
> Goldman School of Public Policy, MPP '17
> University of California, Berkeley
> jszinai at berkeley.edu
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucmerced.edu/pipermail/ldes-coremodel/attachments/20210209/4d4c52ba/attachment.html>