skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Exploring the relationship between planning and procurement in Western U.S. electric utilities

Abstract

Integrated resource planning (IRP) is an important regulatory process used in many U.S. states to formulate and evaluate least-cost and risk-assessed portfolios to meet future load requirements for electric utilities. In principle, effective implementation of IRP seeks to assure regulators and the public that utility investment decisions, given uncertainty, are as cost-effective as possible. However, to date, there is no empirical assessment on the effectiveness of IRP implementation. In this analysis, we compare planning, procurement processes and actual decisions for a sample of twelve load serving entities (LSEs) across the Western U. S. from 2003-2014. The 2008/2009 recession provides a unique “stress test” to the planning process and offers an excellent opportunity to trace how procurement decisions responded to this largely unforeseen event. In aggregate, there is a general alignment between planned and procured supply-side capacity. However, there are significant differences in the choice of supply-side resources and type of ownership for individual LSEs. We develop case studies for three LSEs and find that subsequent plans differ significantly due to changes in the planning environment and that procurement decisions in some cases are impacted by factors that are not accounted for in the planning process. Our results reveal that amore » limited amount of information produced during the long-term planning process (e.g., forecasts, methods, and least cost/risk portfolios) are ultimately used during the procurement process, and that the latter process relies extensively on the most recent information available for decision making. These findings suggest that states' IRP rules and regulations mandating long-term planning horizons with the same analytical complexity throughout the planning period may not create useful information for the procurement process. The social value of a long-term planning process that departs from procurement and the balance between transparency and complexity of the planning and procurement processes is an open question.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [1]
  1. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States). Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Division
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE)
OSTI Identifier:
1393625
Report Number(s):
LBNL-2001029
ark:/13030/qt93g3p2k8
DOE Contract Number:
AC02-05CH11231
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY

Citation Formats

Carvallo Bodelon, Juan Pablo, Sanstad, Alan H., and Larsen, Peter H.. Exploring the relationship between planning and procurement in Western U.S. electric utilities. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.2172/1393625.
Carvallo Bodelon, Juan Pablo, Sanstad, Alan H., & Larsen, Peter H.. Exploring the relationship between planning and procurement in Western U.S. electric utilities. United States. doi:10.2172/1393625.
Carvallo Bodelon, Juan Pablo, Sanstad, Alan H., and Larsen, Peter H.. Thu . "Exploring the relationship between planning and procurement in Western U.S. electric utilities". United States. doi:10.2172/1393625. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1393625.
@article{osti_1393625,
title = {Exploring the relationship between planning and procurement in Western U.S. electric utilities},
author = {Carvallo Bodelon, Juan Pablo and Sanstad, Alan H. and Larsen, Peter H.},
abstractNote = {Integrated resource planning (IRP) is an important regulatory process used in many U.S. states to formulate and evaluate least-cost and risk-assessed portfolios to meet future load requirements for electric utilities. In principle, effective implementation of IRP seeks to assure regulators and the public that utility investment decisions, given uncertainty, are as cost-effective as possible. However, to date, there is no empirical assessment on the effectiveness of IRP implementation. In this analysis, we compare planning, procurement processes and actual decisions for a sample of twelve load serving entities (LSEs) across the Western U. S. from 2003-2014. The 2008/2009 recession provides a unique “stress test” to the planning process and offers an excellent opportunity to trace how procurement decisions responded to this largely unforeseen event. In aggregate, there is a general alignment between planned and procured supply-side capacity. However, there are significant differences in the choice of supply-side resources and type of ownership for individual LSEs. We develop case studies for three LSEs and find that subsequent plans differ significantly due to changes in the planning environment and that procurement decisions in some cases are impacted by factors that are not accounted for in the planning process. Our results reveal that a limited amount of information produced during the long-term planning process (e.g., forecasts, methods, and least cost/risk portfolios) are ultimately used during the procurement process, and that the latter process relies extensively on the most recent information available for decision making. These findings suggest that states' IRP rules and regulations mandating long-term planning horizons with the same analytical complexity throughout the planning period may not create useful information for the procurement process. The social value of a long-term planning process that departs from procurement and the balance between transparency and complexity of the planning and procurement processes is an open question.},
doi = {10.2172/1393625},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2017},
month = {Thu Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2017}
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • The increasing use and impact of automatic fuel adjustment clauses (AFCA's), which permit electrical utilities to pass through increased fuel costs to customers before rate increases have been approved by regulatory agencies is discussed. The much debated question of whether the use of AFCA's decreases the utilities' incentive to obtain fuel at the lowest possible price, and other aspects of utilities' fuel procurement behavior, including vertical integration into the production of fuel are examined.
  • COMPLEAT takes its name, as an acronym, from Community-Oriented Model for Planning Least-Cost Energy Alternatives and Technologies. It is an electric utility planning model designed for use principally by publicly owned electric utilities and agencies serving such utilities. As a model, COMPLEAT is significantly more full-featured and complex than called out in APPA's original plan and proposal to DOE. The additional complexity grew out of a series of discussions early in the development schedule, in which it became clear to APPA staff and advisors that the simplicity characterizing the original plan, while highly desirable in terms of utility applications, wasmore » not achievable if practical utility problems were to be addressed. The project teams settled on Energy 20/20, an existing model developed by Dr. George Backus of Policy Assessment Associates, as the best candidate for the kinds of modifications and extensions that would be required. The remainder of the project effort was devoted to designing specific input data files, output files, and user screens and to writing and testing the compute programs that would properly implement the desired features around Energy 20/20 as a core program. This report presents in outline form, the features and user interface of COMPLEAT.« less
  • The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for the protection of the marine environment from spills of oil and hazardous material. The USCG responsibilities include responding to oil and chemical spills from ships as well as from sources ashore. While responding to a spill, The USCG Marine Safety Offices and Detachments, and the National Strike Force (NSF) depend on interagency support from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and state and local agencies. Currently, the USCG depends on NOAA Scientific Support Coordinators for predicting and assessing atmospheric releases of hazardous material. NOAA has several computer modelsmore » that the Coast Guard can access in the event of a chemical release into the atmosphere or an in situ oil burn. However, the Department of Energy operates a more powerful modeling system called the Atmospheric Release Advisory Capability (ARAC). Located at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, ARAC offers a complex multiscale model in a system that is simple for the end user to operate. The applicability of ARAC to Coast Guard operations is the subject of this study.« less
  • The 1997 edition of the ``Financial Statistics of Major U.S. Publicly Owned Electric Utilities`` publication presents 5 years (1993 through 1997) of summary financial data and current year detailed financial data on the major publicly owned electric utilities. The objective of the publication is to provide Federal and State governments, industry, and the general public with current and historical data that can be used for policymaking and decisionmaking purposes related to publicly owned electric utility issues. Generator (Tables 3 through 11) and nongenerator (Tables 12 through 20) summaries are presented in this publication. Five years of summary financial data aremore » provided (Tables 5 through 11 and 14 through 20). Summaries of generators for fiscal years ending June 30 and December 31, nongenerators for fiscal years ending June 30 and December 31, and summaries of all respondents are provided in Appendix C. The composite tables present aggregates of income statement and balance sheet data, as well as financial indicators. Composite tables also display electric operation and maintenance expenses, electric utility plant, number of consumers, sales of electricity, operating revenue, and electric energy account data. The primary source of publicly owned financial data is the Form EIA-412, ``Annual Report of Public Electric Utilities.`` Public electric utilities file this survey on a fiscal year basis, in conformance with their recordkeeping practices. The EIA undertook a review of the Form EIA-412 submissions to determine if alternative classifications of publicly owned electric utilities would permit the inclusion of all respondents. The review indicated that financial indicators differ most according to whether or not a publicly owned electric utility generates electricity. Therefore, the main body of the report provides summary information in generator/nongenerator classifications. 2 figs., 101 tabs.« less
  • The 1995 Edition of the Financial Statistics of Major U.S. Publicly Owned Electric Utilities publication presents 5 years (1991 through 1995) of summary financial data and current year detailed financial data on the major publicly owned electric utilities. The objective of the publication is to provide Federal and State governments, industry, and the general public with current and historical data that can be used for policymaking and decisionmaking purposes related to publicly owned electric utility issues. Generator (Tables 3 through 11) and nongenerator (Tables 12 through 20) summaries are presented in this publication. Five years of summary financial data aremore » provided (Tables 5 through 11 and 14 through 20). Summaries of generators for fiscal years ending June 30 and December 31, nongenerators for fiscal years ending June 30 and December 31, and summaries of all respondents are provided in Appendix C. The composite tables present aggregates of income statement and balance sheet data, as well as financial indicators. Composite tables also display electric operation and maintenance expenses, electric utility plant, number of consumers, sales of electricity, and operating revenue, and electric energy account data. 9 figs., 87 tabs.« less