Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5016; Hydroelectric Facility Maerkle Reservoir; Hydroelectric Facility Maerkle Reservoir; 2010-02-012700 Ygnacio Valley Road • Suite 300 • Walnut Creek, California 94598 • (925) 932-1710 • FAX (925) 930-0208 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Carlsbad Municipal Water District TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM PRESSURE CONTROL HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY AT MAERKLE RESERVOIR FINAL February 2010 February 2010 i pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Carlsbad Municipal Water District PRESSURE CONTROL HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY AT MAERKLE RESERVOIR TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 1  1.1 Design Head and Flow ...................................................................................... 1  1.2 Turbine Type and Facility .................................................................................. 2  1.3 Results and Recommendations ......................................................................... 2  2.0 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... 3  3.0 TURBINE DESIGN HEAD AND FLOW ....................................................................... 3  3.1 Turbine Head ..................................................................................................... 3  3.2 Desalination Feed .............................................................................................. 6  3.3 Turbine Flow ...................................................................................................... 6  4.0 HYDROELECTRIC TURBINE ................................................................................... 10  4.1 Turbine Technology Background ..................................................................... 10  4.2 Recommended Turbine Type .......................................................................... 12  4.3 Emerging Hydroelectric Turbine Technology................................................... 16  5.0 FLOW CONTROL ...................................................................................................... 16  5.1 Existing Reservoir Flow Control ...................................................................... 16  5.2 Proposed Flow Control with Turbine ............................................................... 18  6.0 HYDROELECTRIC TURBINE BUILDING ................................................................. 21  6.1 New Building Location ..................................................................................... 23  6.2 Building Size and Type .................................................................................... 23  6.3 Noise ............................................................................................................... 23  6.4 Ventilation ........................................................................................................ 25  7.0 ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................ 25  8.0 ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS ............................... 25  8.1 Generator and Electrical Equipment ................................................................ 25  8.2 Controls ........................................................................................................... 27  8.3 Interconnection Standards ............................................................................... 27  8.4 Interconnection Details .................................................................................... 28  8.5 Customer Generator Rate Options .................................................................. 28  9.0 COST ESTIMATE ...................................................................................................... 31  10.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 32  10.1 NPV Assumptions ............................................................................................ 32  10.2 Economic Analysis Results ............................................................................. 32  10.3 Time of Use ..................................................................................................... 34  10.4 CEQA and Permitting ...................................................................................... 34  10.5 Consultation Process ....................................................................................... 35  10.6 Application ....................................................................................................... 36  11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION ............................................................ 36  February 2010 ii pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) LIST OF APPENDICES A - Maerkle Reservoir Site Plan B - Turbine Data Sheets C - SDG&E Rate Tariff D - Prefabricated Concrete Building Product Data E - Preliminary Cost Estimates F - Economic Analysis G - FERC Filing Information H - AB 2466 Information I - CanyonHydro Installation List and Phone Survey LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Pressure Reducing Station Pressures ............................................................. 4  Table 2 Connection 3 Historical Flow Data Statistics .................................................. 10  Table 3 Allowable Flow and Head Variation for Various Turbine Technologies ......... 11  Table 4 Typical Best Efficiency for Various Turbine Technologies ............................. 12  Table 5 Turbine Manufacturers Comparison............................................................... 15  Table 6 Hydroelectric Turbine Alternatives ................................................................. 26  Table 7 Hydroelectric Turbine Alternative Cost Estimates .......................................... 31  Table 8 NPV Assumptions .......................................................................................... 32  Table 9 Results of Economic Analysis ........................................................................ 33  Table 10 FERC Consultation Process - Relevant Agencies ......................................... 35  Table 11 Recommended Alternative ............................................................................. 36  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Connection 3 Historical Flow Data ................................................................... 7  Figure 2  Turbine Availability Chart ................................................................................. 8  Figure 3 Turbine Annual Electricity Production Versus Flow ......................................... 9  Figure 4 Turbine Flow and Head Ranges .................................................................... 13  Figure 5 Existing Reservoir Flow Diagram ................................................................... 17  Figure 6 Proposed Reservoir Flow Diagram ................................................................ 19  Figure 7 Hydroelectric Turbine Flow Diagram .............................................................. 20  Figure 8 Hydroelectric Turbine Yard Piping ................................................................. 22  Figure 9 Turbine Building Layout ................................................................................. 24  Figure 10 Hydroelectric Turbine Electrical Connection .................................................. 29  February 2010 1 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Carlsbad Municipal Water District PRESSURE CONTROL HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY AT MAERKLE RESERVOIR 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD), a subsidiary district of the City of Carlsbad gets a portion of its imported water from San Diego County Water Authority’s (SDCWA) Tri- Agencies Pipeline Connection No. 3 (TAP3). The pressure in the Tri-Agencies Pipeline is relatively high compared to the pressure needed to fill the 10 million gallon (MG) Maerkle Reservoir and 200 MG Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. Currently, the CMWD sustains the pressure of TAP3 at a constant pressure typically set between 155 pounds per square inch (psig) and 178 psig. The pressure is reduced to approximately 20 psig through a multi- stage pressure sustaining/reducing station. The stored energy that is in the high-pressure water is not captured when the pressure is reduced with pressure-sustaining valves (PSVs). The CMWD desires to recover this energy by installing the Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility (PCHF) in parallel with the multi-stage pressure sustaining/reducing station. The CMWD is considering the installation of the PCHF to help it meet two goals: to reduce the amount of electricity that it purchases from San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), and to reduce its carbon footprint by recovering this valuable renewable energy. The purpose of this report is to estimate the feasibility of installing the PCHF from an engineering and financial standpoint. This technical memorandum will also serve as a preliminary design report to layout the basis of design for a potential PCHF. 1.1 Design Head and Flow The turbine design head and flow were determined to properly size the turbine. The turbine would be installed downstream of the SDCWA TAP 3 connection and downstream of the first pressure sustaining valve in the vault, PSV-MD-1. The hydraulic grade line (HGL) downstream of PSV-MD-1 is maintained at 839 feet. The last PSV in the vault maintains a HGL of 530. This HGL is to allow a high enough hydraulic grade line for the flow to get to the 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir and to the 200 MG Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. Therefore, the available turbine head is 309 feet (839-530). However, 300 feet was used as the design head to account for head loss in the inlet and outlet turbine piping. The possibility of adjusting PSV-MD-1 to a higher pressure should be investigated since a higher set point pressure will allow for a higher head across the PCHF thus allowing for a greater power generation potential. The historical flow rates for 2006 through 2008 were analyzed to determine the ideal turbine capacity. A turbine availability curve was created which indicates the percent of the year that the turbine could operate based on a given turbine capacity. To further determine the February 2010 2 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) ideal turbine capacity, a curve was created which calculates the electricity produced per year based on the capacity of the turbine. The ideal flow rate, which would maximize electricity production, is between 6 and 7 cubic feet per second (cfs). 1.2 Turbine Type and Facility There are several hydroelectric turbine types. However, because of the flow and head available for this installation, the reverse pump type turbine is recommended. Currently only one manufacturer offers turbines for the design flow and head that is required for the Maerkle Reservoir. This manufacturer, CanyonHydro, offers complete turbine packages, which utilize Cornell turbines and include electrical panels, generator, and controls. Six CanyonHydro models ranging from 2.2 cfs to 11 cfs were used to develop alternatives for the project. As a result, 16 alternatives were developed which include single turbines and turbines in parallel. Additionally, several flow options and two rate tariffs were utilized in the economic analysis. In addition, an emerging technology from a Norwegian manufacturer, Zeropex, was reviewed. The technology involves using a reverse pump rotary lobe type configuration. The technology acts essentially as a pressure reducing or sustaining valve. Although unproven, it is recommended to investigate this technology further if the project moves forward. An economic analysis was performed for this potential technology. It is listed as Alternative No. 17. The turbine facility would consist of an 18 ft by 18 ft prefabricated concrete building which would house the turbine along with electrical gear and controls. Piping would lead from upstream of PSV-MD-2 at an existing blind flange to connect to the turbine. The outlet of the turbine would be routed to reconnect with the existing flow downstream of the PSV vault. Flow to the reservoirs and users would remain unchanged. 1.3 Results and Recommendations As a result of the economic analysis, Alternative No. 4 was selected. The results of the economic analysis for Alternative No. 4 are listed below:  Flow: 6.75 cfs  Maximum Power produced: 135 kilowatts (kW)  Annual Electricity Production: 832,812 kWhrs  Project Cost: $1,120,000  20-year Net Present Value: $410,000  NPV Payback Period: 14.7 years Based on the payback period of 14.7 years and 20-year net present value of $410,000, it is recommended to move forward with the project; with Alternative No. 4 as the recommended February 2010 3 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) alternative. Additionally, to allow for future flexibility to accept greater flow ranges, it is recommended to allow for the future installation of a smaller turbine in parallel with the 6.75 cfs turbine that would be installed as part of Alternative No. 4. As the project moves forward Alternative 17 should be further investigated as it potentially offers operational flexibility not available by traditional hydo-turbine installation as well as significantly higher electrical energy production and the resulting better NPV. 2.0 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION The Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD), a subsidiary district of the City of Carlsbad gets a portion of its imported water from San Diego County Water Authority’s (SDCWA) Tri- Agencies Pipeline Connection No. 3 (TAP3). The pressure in the Tri-Agencies Pipeline is relatively high compared to the pressure needed to fill the 10 million gallon (MG) Maerkle Reservoir and 200 MG Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. Currently, the CMWD sustains the pressure of TAP3 at between 155 psig and 178 psig and then reduces the pressure to approximately 20 psig through a multi-stage pressure sustaining/reducing station. The stored energy that is in the high-pressure water is not captured when the pressure is reduced with pressure-sustaining valves (PSVs). The CMWD desires to recover this energy by installing the Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility (PCHF) in parallel with the multi- stage pressure sustaining/reducing station. Appendix A shows a site plan of this infrastructure. The CMWD is considering the installation of the PCHF to help it meet two goals: to reduce the amount of electricity that it purchases from San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), and to reduce its carbon footprint by recovering this valuable renewable energy. The purpose of this report is to estimate the feasibility of installing the PCHF from an engineering and financial standpoint. This technical memorandum will also serve as a preliminary design report to layout the basis of design for a potential PCHF. 3.0 TURBINE DESIGN HEAD AND FLOW 3.1 Turbine Head Existing pressure data was gathered by the CMWD staff and by field observations by Carollo Engineers. Table 1 below lists the elevation of the piping, pressure gauges, gauge readings, and the HGL. Also listed, is the original HGL from the record drawings, dated 1991 by Luke-Dudek Civil Engineers, Inc. The record drawing HGL’s did not match our calculated values based on the pressure gauge readings. The pressure gauge readings were assumed to be correct. February 2010 4 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Table 1 Pressure Reducing Station Pressures Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District No. Location Description Pipe EL (ft) Gauge EL(1) (ft) Gauge Press. (psig) HGL (ft) Record Dwg HGL (ft) 1 Upstream of TAP3 N/A N/A 230(2) N/A 983(3) 2 Upstream of PSV-MD-1 479 480 170 873 930 3 Upstream of PSV-MD-2 479 481 155 839 830 4 Upstream of PSV-MD-3 479 481 89 687 580 5 Downstream of PSV-MD-3 479 480 21.5 530 540 Notes: (1) Estimated. (2) As reported by CMWD staff. (3) Shown on the record dwgs as the low end of the current operating range. The SDCWA TAP 3 flow meter and control valve reduce the hydraulic grade line (HGL) from a higher HGL (record drawings state as 983) to 873 feet. The existing multi-stage pressure sustaining/reducing station reduces the pressure from a HGL of 873 feet to an HGL of 530 feet, via two pressure sustaining valves and one combination pressure reducing and sustaining valve. The first pressure sustaining valve, PSV-MD-1, maintains an upstream HGL of 873 feet to allow the upstream TAP 3 flow meter and control valve to function properly and to provide control capability to SDCWA. To assure that the TAP 3 flow control station will not require any modifications and that SDCWA will maintain flow control capability, the hydroelectric turbine will need to operate in the lower HGL of 839 feet downstream of the PSV-MD-1. The second PSV, PSV-MD-2, maintains this upstream HGL of 839 feet. The last pressure reducing and pressure sustaining valve, PSV-MD-3, maintains a downstream HGL of 530 feet. This is to allow a high enough hydraulic grade line for the flow to get to the 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir and to the 200 MG Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. However, the 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir requires the highest HGL, which is set by the maximum water surface elevation in the reservoir, set at 514 feet. Therefore, the total usable turbine head is 309 feet (839-530). A turbine design head of 300 feet was used for sizing the turbine. The additional 9 feet will account for any pipe friction and minor losses in the system. The turbine was sized to operate at slightly higher and lower design heads. Any incrementally higher head will result in more flow and more power produced by the turbine. 3.1.1 Optimizing Available Head There is a potential to gain additional head for the turbine by increasing the PSV setting of PSV-MD-2. This setting is occasionally adjusted by CMWS staff to achieve certain flow rates. However, as noted previously, upon field inspection it was set to approximately 155 psig. During detailed design it is recommended to optimize this setting to allow for the highest pressure without compromising the functionality of the pressure sustaining/ February 2010 5 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) reduction station. However, if the setting on PSV-MD-2 were increased by 10 pounds per square inch (psi) to a total of 165 psig (HGL = 930 feet), this would allow for 23.1 additional feet of turbine head and would result in 11 kW of additional power production from the turbine at 6.75 cfs of flow. 3.1.2 Energistics Report A study and subsequent report entitled Carlsbad Connection 3 Hydroelectric Feasibility Study was performed by Energistics, Inc. (Energistics) and dated February 25, 2009. The Energistics report’s objective was to determine if there was a potential for installing hydroelectric facilities in CMWD’s distribution system and was meant as a screening report. It is likely that Energistics did not have the detailed information about flows, pressure and flow control strategies available for review during preparation of the report. The Energistics’ report executive summary lists the maximum power from the turbines as 350 kW. Using actual available equipment the highest power production without changing the existing flow control strategy is 203 kW. The Energistics report lists a potential annual electricity production of 2,024,565 kWhrs while using actual available equipment this is approximately 1,000,000 kWhrs. To explain the apparent discrepancies between this report and the Energistics report it is important to note the following:  Power production: The Energisitics report executive summary lists the overall power that can be recovered as 350 kW. However, the maximum as stated in Appendix E of the Energistics report is 90 kW, 52 kW and 107 kW for locations 3, 3A and 3B for a total of 249 kW. Therefore, it appears that the executive summary’s power listing is a typographical error.  Available pressure: The Energistics report assumes that the pressure in the SDCWA Aqueduct is available for capture by a hydroelectric turbine. This is referred to as Location No. 3. However, this report assumes that this was not available due to the fact that CMWD does not own the TAP3 connection that would have to be bypassed to capture this pressure. Additionally, in discussions with CMWD staff it was learned that SDCWA requires pressure downstream of TAP 3 of 170 psig for the TAP3 flow control valve to function properly. Therefore, this report does not assume that the pressure from 170 psig to 155 psig is available for capture as was assumed by the Energistics report (Location 3B). Also, the Energistics report assumes that the downstream pressure from PSV-MD-3 is 15 psig (Location 3B). Based on field pressure gauge readings, this pressure is 21.5 psig. All total, these pressure discrepancies amount to a total of 66.5 psig or 154 feet of turbine head is not available for capture.  Design flows: The Energistics report assumed that the turbine could pass varying flow rates to match daily changes in flow. However, due to the reverse pump type turbine technology that would be used for this project, this would not be possible. Actual February 2010 6 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) historical flows where used to determine a turbine availability percentage. This led to a reduction of turbine operating hours in Carollo’s report as compared to the Energistics report. The Energistics report assumed a lower flow rate of 4 cfs for location 3B while this report assumed that there would be one constant daily flow rate. 3.2 Desalination Feed Construction will begin shortly on a 50 million gallons per day (mgd) desalination plant near the Encina power plant located in Carlsbad. This desalination plant will feed water to the Maerkle Reservoir through a proposed pipeline. It will not tie into the existing piping upstream of PSV-MD-1. The desalination feed will meet the existing HGL in TAP 3 and so will not lower the available pressure. Therefore, since the proposed turbine will be downstream of PSV-MD-1, the desalination feed will not affect the design or operation of a potential hydroelectric facility. 3.3 Turbine Flow Figure 1 presents historical average daily flow rates from 2006 to 2008 were analyzed to determine the ideal turbine flow rate. The average daily flow rate varies significantly from day to day. Data from January 2008 to May 2008 was excluded because during this period, the reservoir was out of due to repairs and upgrades performed under the Maerkle Reservoir Floating Cover Inspection, Cleaning, Repair, and Rainwater System Upgrade, Project No. 5005. Figure 1 shows that from January 2006 to January 2008, excluding the repairs and upgrades period, the predominant supply flow ranged between 6 cfs to 10 cfs. Figure 2 presents the percent of time a given flow rate was available for power generation. The turbine can operate and produce power when the reservoir flow rate is greater than or equal to the capacity of the turbine. For flows greater than the turbine capacity, the extra flow can simply bypass the turbine through the PSV station. As an example, a turbine with a capacity of 10 cfs would only be available to produce power for less than 10 percent of the year while a turbine with a capacity of 8 cfs would be available to produce power for 60 percent of the year. To maximize the amount of power available from the historical average daily flows, an analysis was performed to see how turbine capacity selection related to electricity production. Electricity production is a function of the percent available, turbine efficiency, flow and head. Therefore, the flow rate which has the maximum annual electricity production would be the ideal turbine design capacity. However, this would only account for the maximum annual electricity produced and would not take into account capital cost and net present value analysis. Figure 3 shows the percent availability and also the annual electricity produced. From this figure, the optimum flow rate is between 6 and 7 cfs. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Sep-05 Mar-06 Oct-06 Apr-07 Nov-07 Jun-08 Dec-08 Jul-09Connection 3 Flows (cfs)Figure 1 Connection 3 Historical Flow Data Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Data for this period was omitted (reservoir was frequently out of service for repairs/upgrades)Majority of flow is in this range (6 to 10 cfs) Median (8.0 cfs) Figure 2 Turbine Availability Chart Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00Percent of Time AvailableTurbine Flow (cfs) Figure 3 Turbine Annual Electricity Production Versus Flow Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 Annual Electricity Production (kWhrs/yr)*Turbine Percent AvailableTurbine Capacity (cfs) Turbine Percent Available Annual Electricity Production * Based on 300 ft head; 73% eff. turbine; 5% out of service per year February 2010 10 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Additionally, it should be noted that this analysis assumes that future flows will be equal to the previous three years and that there is very little variation in flows from one year to another. The average flow and standard deviation for the previous three years is shown in Table 2. Table 2 shows a relative stability in flow rates over the last three years. Additionally, CMWD staff has indicated that it is more likely that average daily flows will increase in the future. The PSV station and piping was originally built to accommodate a future maximum flow of 20 cfs. Therefore, sizing the turbine based on previous flow rates seems reasonable. Table 2 Connection 3 Historical Flow Data Statistics Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Year Units Average Daily Flow Standard Deviation 2006 cfs 7.84 2.3 2007 cfs 7.83 2.7 2008 cfs 7.74 2.6 Currently, CMWD can change the flow rate to the reservoirs three times per day: 8:00 am, 2 pm and 8 pm. The previous analysis is based on average daily flow rates. It assumes that the flow rate would be constant over the entire day. 4.0 HYDROELECTRIC TURBINE 4.1 Turbine Technology Background Depending on the flow rate and the head available for energy recovery, there are four established types of hydroelectric turbines available:  Pelton  Francis  Reverse Pump  Kaplan (axial) Each of these turbine types utilizes either pressure or velocity to generate energy. The Pelton turbines utilize velocity to generate power while the Francis and Reverse Pump turbines utilize pressure to generate electric power and are intended for medium/high head applications. Kaplan turbines utilize pressure to generate power and are intended for low head applications. Pelton turbines must discharge to open chambers thus they are not typically suitable for in-conduit applications. February 2010 11 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Although the ranges of available head does limit which energy recovery technologies that could be considered there is some overlap in capabilities. In addition to design flow and design head, the selection of the right turbine should also consider flow range, head range, rotational speed (runaway speed), efficiency, cavitation (downstream head conditions) and cost. Table 3 shows the ability for each of the technologies listed above to accept a range of flow and head. Table 3 Allowable Flow and Head Variation for Various Turbine Technologies Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Turbine Type Acceptance of Flow Variation Acceptance of Head Variation(1) Pelton High Low Francis Medium Low Reverse Pump Low Low Kaplan (double regulated) High High Kaplan (single regulated) High Medium Note: (1) High indicates that the turbine can operate over a wide range of flows. Low indicates the turbine cannot operate over a wide range of flows. The rotational speed of a turbine is important because the parameters of the installation will dictate the maximum amount of energy that can be transferred to the turbine. Runaway speed is defined as the speed that the turbine will attain if load rejection occurred. Load rejection could be caused by a power outage in the grid feeding the facility. Therefore, it would represent the speed that the turbine would attain if power were lost to the turbine and before the inlet valve closes. With no electrical load on the turbine, it would increase in speed until it reached its runaway speed. Depending on the type of turbine runaway speeds of two or three times the nominal speed can typically be tolerated. The flow rate through the turbine decreases during runaway conditions. The cost of a turbine increases if the runaway speed is significantly more than the design point because the generator and speed increaser must be sized to withstand the higher speed. Although runaway speed is used to design the turbine correctly, runaway would have little or no affect on the Maerkle Reservoir system. In many ways, the efficiency of a turbine is similar to the centrifugal pumps that the water industry (and the CMWD) operates and maintains on a daily basis. Operating a turbine at its best efficiency point minimizes vibration and results in longer bearing life. Similarly, the efficiency of a turbine decreases as you move away from the best efficiency point. The best efficiency of each turbine type ranges from 85 to 94 percent with the impulse type turbines (Pelton) and reverse pumps having lower efficiencies. Table 4 shows the typical best February 2010 12 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Table 4 Typical Best Efficiency for Various Turbine Technologies Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Turbine Type Best Efficiency Pelton 89% Francis 94% Reverse Pumps 85% Kaplan 91% efficiency of each type of turbine. The best efficiency represents the maximum best efficiency point for this type of turbine and does not mean that every turbine model in this turbine category will operate at this efficiency. Additionally, the efficiency will decrease as the operating point moves away from the best efficiency point. Table 4 is meant to show the general differences in efficiency in the various turbine types. Figure 4 shows the range of flow and head that applies to each turbine technology. 4.2 Recommended Turbine Type Based on the design flow and head conditions, a reverse pump type hydroelectric turbine is recommended because of its lower cost, small footprint, and ease of operation. Figure 4 shows that the only other possibilities would be the Francis turbine or the Pelton. However, the Pelton is not viable because it requires atmospheric pressure on the downstream side. The Francis turbine would be cost prohibitive at flow rates below 20 cfs. Below 7 cfs, Francis turbines are not available. The reverse pump, as its name implies, is very similar to a traditional centrifugal pump. However, instead of an impeller to generate head and flow there is a runner, which captures this energy and turns it into torque. The runner is shaped differently than an impeller to capture the hydraulic energy rather than produce it. The runner shape is the same for both the reverse pump and the Francis turbine. However, the inlet guide vanes on the Francis turbine, which allow it to produce variations in flow, make it significantly higher in cost than the reverse pump turbine. The generator for the typical reverse pump turbine installation is a standard induction motor operating above its synchronous speed. The reverse pump requires a hydraulic or motorized butterfly valve on the inlet to the turbine. This valve is necessary to shut down flow to and through the turbine in case of load rejection, low flow, or low or high head condition. The turbine control panel monitors the voltage and amperage produced by the turbine as well as the speed of the turbine. It will then close this inlet valve on loss of grid power, over current, over/under voltage, over/under frequency and over/under turbine speed. Figure 4 Turbine Flow and Head Ranges Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project Design Flow and Head Range Reverse Pump February 2010 14 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) There are three known manufacturers for this technology; CanyonHydro, KSB and Flowserve. Only CanyonHydro was able to size units for this projects potential flow and head conditions. CanyonHydro, which uses a Cornell turbine in its package. The flow rates were too low for Flowserve and KSB’s turbine models. Turbine models were selected with capacities ranging from 2.2 cfs to 11 cfs based on actual available units. Table 5 compares the selected turbine models. These models and combination of models were then utilized to create a list of alternatives for the economic analysis. The Cornell turbine uses an end-suction pump casing. There are several sizes available with a turbine head of approximately 300 feet. A cut sheet of this reverse pump type turbine along with performance curves are shown in Appendix B. The point where the total turbine head of 300 feet and the turbine curve intersect represents the operating point and the corresponding flow. Power can then be determined from the power curve. Runaway speed can be read from the runaway speed curve for the design turbine head of 300 ft. 4.2.1 Reverse Pump Turbine Maintenance The maintenance associated with a reverse pump turbine is very similar to that of a pump. Mainly, the turbine and generator require bearing and seal service at regular intervals. The turbines may require realignment after several years of service. A survey of existing turbine owners was conducted to verify actual turbine maintenance requirements for similar installations. Three turbine owners were contacted. Only one had a maintenance contract and it was with a local consultant; they plan to do their own maintenance after the first year of operation. The other two owners perform service with in-house staff as these systems are very similar to pumping systems currently maintained by their staff. During detailed design, maintenance contract companies will be contacted. Maintenance training will be provided by the turbine manufacturer. 4.2.2 Installation List and Phone Survey A phone survey was conducted to determine the maintenance required, operation and to determine any issues with the installation, if any, of similar turbine installations. Three turbine owners were contacted and the results from this survey were positive. The general consensus was that the turbines operation is very simple and reliable and that there is minimal maintenance required. Detailed descriptions of the phone survey are contained in Appendix I. February 2010 - FINAL 15 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Table 5 Turbine Manufacturers Comparison Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Criterion Units Turbine Model No. 1 Turbine Model No. 2 Turbine Model No. 3 Turbine Model No. 4 Turbine Model No. 5 Turbine Model No. 6 Turbine Model No. 6 Manufacturer -- Canyon Hydro/ Cornell Pump Canyon Hydro/ Cornell Pump Canyon Hydro/ Cornell Pump Canyon Hydro/ Cornell Pump Canyon Hydro/ Cornell Pump Canyon Hydro/ Cornell Pump Zeropex Model -- 4TR3 5TR3 5TR2 6TR3 6TR4 8TR3 DG-18-18 Volute Type -- End Suction End Suction End Suction End Suction End Suction End Suction Rotary Lobe Design Head Feet 300 300 300 300 300 300 334 Flow at Design Head cfs 2.2 3.6 5.4 6.75 7.75 11.0 10.0 Turbine Speed rpm 1825 1825 1825 1830 1860 1820 Varies Turbine Efficiency % 75 80 78.5 86 86 86 -- Expected Water-to-wire Efficiency % 65 74 73 79 79 79 75 Expected Power Generation(1) kW 36 68 100 135 157 223 213 Turbine Footprint ft x ft 5 x 9 5 x 9(3) 5 x 9 6 x 10(3) 6 x 10(3) 7 x 11(3) 6 x 2(3) Turbine Equipment Cost $ $63,000(2) $70,000(3) $84,645(2) $95,145 $100,000(3) $125,000(3) $350,000(3) Notes: (1) This is the amount of power that can be put onto the electrical grid or used on site. (2) Based on vendor quote. Includes turbine, generator, control panel, and switchgear. (3) Estimated based on similar turbine models. Includes turbine, generator, control panel, and switchgear. February 2010 16 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 4.3 Emerging Hydroelectric Turbine Technology An additional manufacturer, Zeropex, was also contacted. Zeropex is a Norwegian company. The Zeropex turbine is unique because it utilizes a positive displacement, rotary lobe type reverse pump. Additionally, it can act as a pressure-sustaining valve to maintain a set pressure up or downstream. It can also act as a flow control device to maintain a desired flow. The unit is able to modulate its speed utilizing VFD controls to maintain pressure or flow. The unit has the ability to accept varying flow rates in contrast to other turbines which typically pass a set amount of flow. The unit functions similar to the existing pressure sustaining valves. As a result this technology has the ability to replace upstream PSV-MD-1 since it can maintain a constant upstream pressure. This would allow the capture of 34 feet of additional turbine head. The technology, although promising, is very new and emerging. There are no installations in the United States and a limited amount in Europe. However, a U.S. installation is scheduled for startup in late Spring 2010. A preliminary proposal and product information for the Zeropex turbine is located in Appendix B. An additional benefit of this technology include offering simplied interconnection requirements to connect to the local utility. This technology utilizes an inverter to convert the power to AC power. This effectively decouples the generator from the utility. As a result the equipment can be pre-approved by the utility significantly reducing the costs and time associated with obtaining an interconnection agreement. Due to the lack of experience, the turbine was not considered as a recommended alternative at this point. However, an economic analysis was performed and is listed as Alternative No. 17 as a comparison. It is recommended, should the project move forward, to further consider this technology. 5.0 FLOW CONTROL 5.1 Existing Reservoir Flow Control A partial existing flow schematic of the Maerkle Reservoir is shown in Figure 5. In the normal configuration, SDCWA’s TAP 3 controls the flow rate to the amount requested by CMWD. Currently CMWD can request a flow rate change three times per day: 8:00 am, 2:00 pm, and 8:00 pm. The control valve at TAP 3 then modulates to obtain the requested flow rate. Downstream of TAP 3 the pressure is then reduced at the PSV station (shown enclosed with dashed lines), which contains two PSV’s, and one combination PRV/PSV. After the first PSV, PSV-MD-1, a portion of the flow (typically up to 1,350 gpm or 3 cfs) is diverted to provide high-pressure water for the chlorine dioxide eductor, carrier water for chlorine dioxide, washdown water for the Maerkle Dam storage reservoir cover, onsite irrigation and potable water to the reservoir keeper’s adjacent house. The chlorine dioxide is added to the Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. The carrier water also acts to turnover the Figure 5 Existing Reservoir Flow Diagram Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District To Mearkle Reservoir To Reservoir Washdown To Farm Irrigation To Onsite IrrigationTo Chlorine Dioxide EductorTo HouseFrom Chlorine Dioxide Eductor839 530 HGL: 839 HGL: 873 HGL: 530 873 SDCWA TAP 3 To Reservoir Washdown February 2010 18 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. Another 4-inch tap downstream of PSV-MD-1 provides Maerkle Reservoir washdown water, fire hydrant water and for irrigating an adjacent farm. The carrier water pressure is required only to be high enough to get the flow into the Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. However, the onsite irrigation, house, 6-inch reservoir washdown and chlorine dioxide eductor, all need a higher pressure. The carrier water is monitored by a magnetic flow meter and manually controlled via a 12-inch butterfly valve. The pressure is reduced through PSV’s and the manual control valve and flows to the 200 MG Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. Any additional flow, which does not go to Maerkle Dam storage reservoir, flows through the two remaining PSV’s in the PSV station (vault) and goes to the 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir. This is the normal flow configuration; however, CMWD has several other flow scenarios, which it utilizes depending on the season, day, or emergency situations. Some of these scenarios involve flow bypassing the Maerkle Reservoir and flowing directly to the Maerkle Dam storage reservoir. 5.2 Proposed Flow Control with Turbine Piping, valves, and connections would be set up to maintain not only the normal flow configuration but also all other flow configurations. Figures 6 and 7 show schematics of the proposed configuration. Under this configuration, flow would enter the PSV station (vault) as it currently does. However, after the first PSV, PSV-MD-1, the rated flow of the turbine would bypass the remaining two PSV’s and flow through the turbine, creating power. After the flow discharges through the turbine it would connect into both the 42–inch MD line and the 10–inch HE line. The flow through the 10–inch HE line would be controlled as it currently is, through the use of the manual flow control valve. This valve may need to be resized since it will have a lower upstream pressure than it currently does. This will be determined during detailed design. Feed water for the two water users, reservoir washdown and the chlorine dioxide eductor, however, would no longer be provided from the 10-inch HE line. Instead, a new 6-inch line would be routed from the PRV station to provide water for these users. The exact location of the tap would be determined during detailed design. Additional flow above 1,350 gpm, would flow from the turbine discharge to the 42-inch MD line and continue to the 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir as it does currently, through the PSV station. When the turbine is out of service or when flows are below the capacity of the turbine, all flow would then flow through the existing PSV station (vault) and through PSV-MD-1, as it currently does. From there, the high-pressure users would branch off. After the last PSV, PSV-MD-3, the 1,350 gpm of carrier water would split off and transfer to the 10-inch HE line. All other flow continues to the 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir. Figure 6 Proposed Reservoir Flow Diagram Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District SDCWA TAP 3 To Mearkle Reservoir New Hydroelectric Turbine Building NC NO NO NO = normally open valve NC = normally closed valve = existing piping = new piping/flow path = exist flow path To Reservoir Washdown To Farm Irrigation To Chlorine Dioxide Eductor, House and Onsite Irrigation, Washdown From Chlorine Dioxide EductorNOHGL: 839 HGL: 530 HGL: 873 HGL: 530 839 530873 NO February 2010 21 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) During conditions when the flow rate is higher than the turbine rated flow, the pressure upstream of the turbine will rise, causing the two PSV’s in the existing PRV station (vault) to open and allow this additional flow to bypass the turbine. All other flow control configurations will be possible with the new hydroelectric facility installed. Figure 8 shows the potential yard-piping configuration based on the previously discussed flow configuration. 5.2.1 Optional Flow Control Option An optional low flow control strategy could be adopted to maximize the turbine availability and thus the amount of electricity produced. During periods when the requested reservoir daily flow rate was below that of the turbine capacity or when electrical buyback rates were highest, the flow rate could be set at a higher rate. The flow and turbine would be cycled on and off to reach the desired average daily flow. For example, if a daily average flow rate of 2.7 cfs was desired and the turbine was rated for 5.4 cfs, water could be supplied for 12 hours at 5.4 cfs. This would average out to the desired 2.7 cfs average daily flow rate. Alternatives for the economic analysis were developed which utilize this low flow control option to demonstrate its potential effect. 6.0 HYDROELECTRIC TURBINE BUILDING The turbine and associated electrical equipment would need to be housed in a building to protect it, prevent corrosion, allow for maintenance in a controlled environment, reduce noise, and provide for a longer lasting facility. The existing pressure sustaining station vault has parallel piping, which could be used to install the turbine. However, installing the turbine inside the existing vault has several disadvantages:  The vault is only accessible through a ladder. This would not be ideal for maintenance work.  There is limited space available in the existing vault; therefore, there may not be adequate space for maintenance access.  The parallel line was constructed to allow for installation of additional PSV’s in the future. This would allow CMWD to allow more flow into the reservoirs. Installing the turbine here would limit the amount of flow when the turbine is out of service.  An electrical building would still be required.  There is a potential for flooding in the vault. Installing the turbine in the existing vault was not considered further because of these disadvantages. Figure 8 Hydroelectric Turbine Yard Piping Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District New Hydroelectric Building New 6” High Pressure Water Line Existing 10 MG Maerkle Reservoir Exist 200 MG Maerkle Dam storage reservoir 50 ft Approximate Scale N February 2010 23 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 6.1 New Building Location Constructing a new building for the hydroelectric turbine would allow for adequate space around the turbine and would allow for the existing PSV station to accept additional flow in the future. The recommended location for a new building would be across the road from the existing PSV station (vault) as shown on Figure 7. This allows for simple connections to the existing piping. 6.2 Building Size and Type In order to minimize costs, a prefabricated concrete building could be installed. A cutsheet of this prefabricated concrete building is contained in the appendix. The prefabricated concrete building would need access door(s), lighting, electrical and HVAC. Figure 9 shows a possible configuration of the proposed building, piping, hydroelectric turbine and electrical equipment. The building would require approximately 18 feet by 18 feet footprint. A split level concrete slab base would be provided on which the building could be attached. The walls of the prefabricated concrete building would typically be 4-inches thick. The base concrete base slab would have 8-inch thick walls on which the building would be supported. The building would be attached to the slab walls with angle brackets and anchor bolts. One end of the angle bracket is cast into the precast wall and the other end is anchored to the slab with anchor bolts. The slab would have two elevations to facilitate installation in the proposed location. A standard size door would allow access into the upper level where the electrical equipment would be located. Stairs would allow access to the lower elevation. The lower elevation would be approximately 3 feet below the upper section. The turbine would be located in this area. In this way, the electrical gear would be protected from any potential drainage water from the turbine or during maintenance. An emergency drain would be provided in the lower area to prevent any potential flooding of the electrical gear. A 10-foot wide rollup door would be provided to access and remove the turbine or electrical gear because of spatial requirements of the opening. 6.3 Noise Noise is an issue for this installation because of the close proximity of the Ocean Hills Country Club residential development and the reservoir caretaker’s house. The building will help to reduce the amount of noise from the turbine. Acoustical louvers could be installed to limit the noise, which escapes through the ventilation system. Acoustical sound attenuation panels would be installed on the inside walls of the building to lessen the intensity of the sound. The noise from the turbine generator has been reported by turbine owners as being less than or equal to the noise of a similar sized pump. February 2010 25 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 6.4 Ventilation Ventilation would need to be provided, as both the electrical equipment and the generator would produce heat. A wall or roof exhaust fan would be installed to provide this ventilation. Louvers would allow supply air into the building. 7.0 ALTERNATIVES The six turbine models selected previously were used to create 16 alternatives. The hydroelectric turbine alternatives to be used in the economic analysis are shown in Table 6. For each alternative the turbine quantity, flow rate, and size are listed. These alternatives were selected based on available turbine models except for the 10 and 12 cfs alternatives. These are not based on actual turbine models, however were included to show how larger capacity turbines would affect the economics of the project. The Zeropex turbine is also listed as Alternative No. 17. However, at this point it is not considered a recommended alternative as described previously. 8.0 ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS 8.1 Generator and Electrical Equipment In order to generate power and apply it onto the main electrical grid or to use on site, specific electrical equipment would be required. A generator would convert the mechanical energy of the turbine into electricity. The turbine manufacturer would typically provide the generator. There are two types of generators that can be used: synchronous and induction type. Synchronous generators can operate when not connected to the main electrical grid. Induction generators draw their reactive power from the grid. Induction generators are essentially a squirrel cage motor with the rotor operating at speeds higher than the magnetic field (synchronous speed). Unlike the synchronous generators, they cannot run when they are disconnected from the grid. They are cheaper and typically used when they are an insignificant part of the overall system load. An induction generator is recommended for this installation. Additionally, electrical utilities prefer that the use an induction type generator for safety reasons. An inductor generator cannot feed power to the grid during loss of power. Therefore, when working on electrical lines during a power outage, SDG&E would not have to worry about disconnecting the turbine first. Switchgear, controls, breaker, local disconnects, and emergency stop station would be required, in addition to the generator. These items are typically supplied by the turbine supplier in one main control panel as a part of the turbine package. A quote for the turbine, which lists the equipment provided in the package, is shown in Appendix B. February 2010 26 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Table 6 Hydroelectric Turbine Alternatives Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Alt. No. Turbine 1 Flow Turbine 2 Flow Total Max Power (kW) Flow Rate Strategy 1 5.4 -- 100 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 2 2.2 -- 36 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 3 3.6 -- 68 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 4 6.75 -- 135 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 5 7.75 -- 157 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 6 3.6 -- 136 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 7 5.4 3.6 168 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 8 6.75 3.6 203 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 9 7.75 2.2 196 Utilizes existing flow strategy. 10 7.75 -- 157 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). 11 3.6 3.6 136 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). 12 11 -- 223 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). 13 6.75 3.6 203 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). 14 7.75 2.2 196 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). 15 10 -- 203 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). Not an actual turbine size. 16 12 -- 243 Utilizes optional flow control strategy(1). Not an actual turbine size. 17 0-10 -- 213 Utilizes existing flow strategy and Zeropex unit to parallel PSV’s. Note: (1) See section 5.2.1 for discussion of optional flow control strategy. February 2010 27 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 8.2 Controls To start the turbine manually, the TURBINE AVAILABLE light must be displayed. The control panel will display this light if several conditions are met to determine if the turbine can operate. These conditions include the correct current, voltage and frequency from the grid. If all of these items checkout, a TURBINE AVAILABLE signal is displayed. The operator must then press the TURBINE ON button to start the turbine. When this occurs, the inlet valve starts to open. This generally takes about 30 seconds. As the valve is opening, the turbine is exposed to a greater pressure and flow. It then begins to rotate. When the turbine speed approaches and then exceeds the synchronous speed of the generator, the turbine is connected to the grid. At this point electricity is generated and applied to the grid or used locally. The turbine can operate automatically. Once the turbine is set to auto, it waits for the TURBINE AVAILABLE signal. Once this is displayed, the turbine starts as described previously. If the turbine shuts down for any reason, it will try to restart itself after an adjustable time delay and once the TURBINE AVAILABLE signal is displayed. The turbine control panel monitors the speed of the turbine and will shut down on a high speed. Additionally, voltage, amperage, and frequency are mentioned. The turbine will shut down on high/low voltage, amperage, or frequency. The control panel shuts down the turbine by disconnecting the generator from the grid and closing the inlet valve. A remote signal would be sent that would let operations know that the turbine had failed immediately through SCADA. If power is lost to the grid, the turbine will not be able to put electricity on to the grid or locally. When this loss of grid power occurs, the turbine will momentarily increase speed towards a maximum speed referred to as runaway speed. As soon as power is lost, the inlet valve will begin to close by spring or weight. This is not instantaneous to prevent water hammer. It is during this closure period that the turbine will reach runaway speed. Once the inlet valve is closed, the turbine slows down and stops. There are no further impacts to the surrounding system. If additional flow is requested, which is more than the turbine is passing; the pressure upstream of the turbine will begin to increase. As it increases, the existing PSV valves inside the existing vault will modulate to lower the upstream pressure, as they currently do. This will allow the additional flow to pass through the PSV vault line. Sudden pressure increases would cause the turbine to increase amperage, thus activating a high amperage condition and shutting down the turbine. 8.3 Interconnection Standards The State of California has adopted a standard set of interconnection, operating, and metering requirements for distributed energy resources entitled Rule 21. This dictates how February 2010 28 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) the power can be applied to SDG&E’s electrical grid. The electrical interconnect for this project would need to satisfy the requirements of Rule 21. SDG&E also requires that the plans be submitted to them for review along with a review fee of $800. Depending on the comments from the review, an additional review may be required. This also requires an additional $600 review fee. 8.4 Interconnection Details The hydroelectric turbine system would be connected into the existing power system as shown in Figure 10. The hydroelectric generator would be connected to a 480-volt, 3-phase distribution panelboard (DP-PCHF) located in the PCHF Turbine Building. In addition to the hydroelectric generator, DP-PCHF would also provide a connection to a 208/120-volt panelboard for lighting, receptacles, and any HVAC loads in the PCHF Turbine Building. Power generated by the PCHF would be transmitted to the existing Maerkle Pump Station through an underground connection between DP-PCHF, located in the PCHF Turbine Building, and a new circuit breaker installed in the existing 480-volt motor control center at the pump station. The underground connection would consist of two parallel runs of 480- volt conductors sized to minimize voltage drop and losses between the interconnection point and the PCHF. To minimize construction cost, it is anticipated that the conductors will be installed in Schedule 40 PVC conduit in a sand-bedded duct bank. The existing conduits along this same route are too small to use for this service. Additionally, a communications connection between the existing Maerkle Pump Station SCADA system and the PCHF would be provided. This would consist of cable installed in the same underground duct bank containing the power conductors, and could be used to remotely monitor the PCHF. Turbine available, run and fail status would typically be monitored remotely. In addition to the new circuit breaker installed in the existing motor control center, the existing utility metering equipment at the Maerkle Pump Station may need to be replaced; coordination with SDG&E during final design will be required to determine the extent of the metering equipment modifications. In discussions with SDG&E staff, the only utility provided equipment would be the electrical meter at a cost of approximately $1,000. 8.5 Customer Generator Rate Options SDG&E offers several options for either using the power, selling this generated power, or a combination of both. Chris Brown with SDG&E was contacted to discuss the various rate options available to CMWD. Once the type of technology, location, and CMWD’s organization type (local government) was reviewed, there were only two options available to CMWD with only one currently being available. The applicable tariffs along with a brief description of each is presented below. February 2010 30 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 8.5.1 Schedule Water Tariff SDG&E offers a specific tariff for water and wastewater agencies to allow them to sell power back to the grid from renewable energy sources. This tariff is referred to as SCH-WATER. Under this tariff, the renewable power generated can be used on site with the excess sold back to SDG&E at predetermined rates. These rates are established annually and are referred to as the Market Price Referent (MPR). The rates for projects starting in the year 2011 would be $0.08843/kWhr for a 10-year contract. The price is adjusted for time of day and year based on the Time of Day (TOD) factors. However, for a constantly operating generator such as this hydroelectric turbine, the rate averages to be $0.08/kWhr. The MPR rates as well as TOD factors are shown in Appendix C. Under this tariff, all renewable energy credits (REC’s) generated for the electricity sold back to the grid would be owned by SDG&E. CMWD would retain ownership of all REC’s generated for power used on site at the Maerkle Reservoir. 8.5.2 AB 2466 Tariff Currently, SDG&E does not offer a tariff, which covers Assembly Bill 2466. Assembly Bill 2466 allows for renewable energy producers to produce electricity at one-meter location and use this as credit at another owned meter location. This is commonly referred to as wheeling. However, with this tariff there would not be any wheeling fees associated. A tariff from AB 2466 would allow CMWD to use the excess electricity generated at the Maerkle Reservoir as a credit on their electricity bill at another location. The excess electricity generated at the hydroelectric facility would become bill credits, which would be applied to the monthly bill of the benefiting facility. Any unused bill credits carry over to the next month. However, after a 12 month predefined period, any unused bill credits are set to zero. This tariff would provide the largest economic advantage. This is because the rates at which CMWD purchases electricity are higher than the rates at which they could sell power through the SCH WATER tariff. In addition to this, any REC’s generated would be owned by CMWD. SDG&E staff has reported that this tariff is currently in draft form and expected to be issued sometime in spring of 2010, although this was not certain. It is not certain also, whether water agencies would be included although they are currently included in the draft tariff. Additional information on this tariff is contained in the appendices. In order to assure compliance, CMWD would need to verify that CMWD’s organizational legal status was applicable to the tariff. 8.5.3 Recommended Tariff The recommended tariff and only tariff available is the SCHEDULE WATER tariff. However, if the AB 2466 tariff were implemented before the construction of a hydroelectric facility, it would be recommended to pursue this tariff. February 2010 31 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 9.0 COST ESTIMATE Cost estimates were prepared for Alternative Nos. 1 and 2 based on the assumptions listed below and from the vendor quotes for the turbines. For the additional alternatives, the cost estimate was increased (or decreased) to account for the differences in the alternatives. The cost estimates are listed below in Table 7. More detailed cost breakdowns for each Alternative are shown in Appendix D.  The building and piping would be the same for either alternative.  The building would be an 18 ft x 18 ft precast concrete building with 10 ft wide rollup door.  Turbine costs include the budget quote for the turbine plus installation costs and cost to provide UL listed control panel. Table 7 Hydroelectric Turbine Alternative Cost Estimates Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Alt. No. Turbine 1 Flow Turbine 2 Flow Estimated Project Cost ($ million) 1 5.4 -- $1.09 2 2.2 -- $1.06 3 3.6 -- $1.06 4 6.75 -- $1.12 5 7.75 -- $1.12 6 3.6 3.6 $1.29 7 5.4 3.6 $1.34 8 6.75 3.6 $1.34 9 7.75 2.2 $1.29 10 7.75 -- $1.12 11 3.6 3.6 $1.29 12 11 -- $1.15 13 6.75 3.6 $1.34 14 7.75 2.2 $1.29 15 10 -- $1.13 16 12 -- $1.16 17 0-5 0-5 $1.51 February 2010 32 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 10.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS A net present value (NPV) analysis was used to determine the payback period of the project based on a wide range of factors. The NPV is the current worth of a series of future revenues and costs based on a discount rate plus the capital cost of the project. 10.1 NPV Assumptions Table 8 lists the assumptions for the NPV analysis. These assumptions represent the factors that impact the length of the payback period for the project. Table 8 NPV Assumptions Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Assumptions Units Values Turbine Operation and Maintenance Cost $/kWhr 0.01 Turbine Out of Service % 5 Turbine Flow Available (1) % Varies(1) Discount Rate % 4.5 Inflation Rate (O&M)(1) % 3 Electricity Offset(2) kWhrs 165,000 Credit for Electricity Offset(2) $ 29,000 Inflation Rate (Electrical Rates and REC’s) % 5 REC Value $/kWhr 0.04 Notes: (1) Turbine availability differed for each turbine flow rate. Figure No. 2 was utilized to develop the availability for each alternative. (2) Based on 2009 partial year electrical bill and extrapolated for 12 months. 10.2 Economic Analysis Results The results of the economic analysis are shown in Table 9. Table 9 lists the number of turbines, the flow rate of each, the total maximum power from the facility, the annual expected electricity production, the project cost, 20-year net present value, and the payback based on the net present value. Additionally, for several alternatives, the AB 2466 tariff was used to demonstrate the affect of this potential tariff on the economics of the project. As Table 9 indicates, the two best alternatives with respect to economics and without changing the current flow strategy would be Alternative Nos. 4 and 9. Alternative No. 4 utilizes one 6.75 cfs unit while Alternative No. 9 would utilize one 7.75 cfs and one 2.2 cfs unit. Alternative No. 9 allows the smaller turbine to take advantage of the periods when flow is too low for a larger unit. February 2010 33 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Table 9 Results of Economic Analysis Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District No. Turbine 1 Flow Turbine 2 Flow Other Total Max Power (kW) Annual Electricity Production (kWhrs/yr) Project Cost ($ million) 20-year NPV ($ million) Payback (years) 1 5.4 -- -- 100 715,911 $1.09 $0.29 15.8 1a 5.4 -- with AB 2466 -- -- -- $1.15 9.8 2 2.2 -- -- 36 283,977 $1.06 ($0.22) 25.4 3 3.6 -- -- 68 525,373 $1.06 $0.08 18.6 4 6.75 -- -- 135 832,812 $1.12 $0.41 14.7 4a 6.75 -- with AB 2466 -- -- -- $1.59 8.1 5 7.75 -- -- 157 784,411 $1.12 $0.35 15.3 6 3.6 3.6 -- 136 881,271 $1.29 $0.30 16.2 7 5.4 3.6 -- 168 992,156 $1.34 $0.39 15.5 8 6.75 3.6 -- 203 985,340 $1.34 $0.38 15.6 8a 6.75 3.6 with AB 2466 -- -- -- $2.25 6.5 9 7.75 2.2 -- 196 1,004,621 $1.29 $0.45 14.8 10 7.75 -- To maximize peak revenue 157 1,210,424 $1.12 $0.97 10.7 11 3.6 3.6 To maximize peak revenue 136 1,069,963 $1.29 $0.61 13.6 12 11 -- To maximize peak revenue 223 1,386,904 $1.15 $1.24 9.6 13 6.75 3.6 To maximize peak revenue 203 1,329,838 $1.34 $0.96 11.7 14 7.75 2.2 To maximize peak revenue 196 1,333,496 $1.29 $1.00 11.3 15 10 -- To maximize peak revenue 203 1,372,106 $1.13 $1.21 9.6 16 12 -- To maximize peak revenue 243 1,387,471 $1.16 $1.26 9.6 17 0 to 10 -- With Zeropex unit. 213 1,356,084 $1.51 $0.68 13.8 February 2010 34 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 10.3 Time of Use The economic analysis assumed that the turbine would operate consistently throughout the day and did not account for the low flow control option discussed in Section 5.2.1. The SCHEDULE WATER tariff provides for a higher payment during certain times of the year and certain hours of the day referred to as time of use (TOU). Therefore, if the low flow control option was utilized, the turbine could also be run during peak hours of the day to maximize the electrical revenue. This is reflected in Alternative Nos. 10 through 16. Maximizing the peak rate schedule can significantly reduce the payback period. However, if Poseidon Resources required only one flow change per day for their desalination water, time of use would not be feasible, as it would require a minimum of two flow rate changes per day. 10.4 CEQA and Permitting A review of the project needs to be completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In addition to the permits that are typically required for water treatment plant construction, a hydroelectric turbine facility would also need to get approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The application for approval must be processed through the Hydroelectric Project Licensing Process. There are three different scenarios for Small Hydro/Low Impact Projects, refer to Appendix F for a brochure on the process:  License.  5 Megawatt Exemption.  Conduit Exemption. The Conduit Exemption is the easy and fastest scenario for approval. In order to get a Conduit Exemption the project must meet the following requirements:  Must use a conduit that was constructed for a non-hydropower use.  The utility must own the proposed powerhouse and land.  Generation must be before the final point of discharge. FERC was contacted and the potential Carlsbad project was discussed with them. Robert Bell (located in Washington, D.C.) is the contact for Conduit Exemptions and his e-mail is RBell@ferc.gov. Projects can be bid without a FERC permit but they cannot be constructed. He indicated that this project would qualify for the conduit exemption based on the project information provided to him. February 2010 35 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 10.5 Consultation Process The first part of obtaining a conduit exemption permit is the three-stage consultation process. Consultation must occur with all relevant state, federal and local agencies. Table 10 is a preliminary list of relevant agencies for this project. However, this could change as the project evolves. Each agency must be notified or a good faith effort made to contact them, of the potential project and supplied with preliminary application materials. The agency will have time to submit comments and/or input on the project. Additionally, after 30 days (and no more than 60 days) from when all agencies were sent notification, a public meeting will be held for all interested parties. Within 60 days from the meeting, all relevant agencies must submit comments or forego the consultation stage. If all agencies are satisfied or provide no comments, the FERC application process can move forward. If not, then additional consultation stages are conducted with those agencies. Typically, conduit exemption projects on potable water do not require additional consultation stages. Table 10 FERC Consultation Process - Relevant Agencies Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Relevant Agencies Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Western Office of Federal Agency Programs California Department of Conservation California Department of Fish and Game, South Coast Region California Department of Parks and Recreation California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation California Department of Water Resources, Southern District California Public Utilities Commission California State Water Resources Control Board Federal Emergency Management Agency National Marine Fisheries Service National Park Service U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Western Office of Federal Agency Programs February 2010 36 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) 10.6 Application Upon completion of the consultation process and completion of the contract documents for the project, the FERC conduit exemption permit application must be completed and submitted. FERC’s review process can take from 8 to 10 months for a conduit exemption. Additionally, a state Water Quality Certification or waiver must be applied for and obtained. 11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION Installing a Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility parallel to the existing pressure reducing station at the Maerkle Reservoir location via Alternative No. 4 appears feasible in respect to engineering and economic considerations. Additionally, it is recommended to leave space and piping connections for a possible future turbine. The future turbine could be a 3.6 cfs or 2.2 cfs unit that would enable CMWD to generate at a broader range of flows. The net present value (NPV) payback period is estimated to be 14.7 years. It appears that the NPV payback period could be reduced to 8 years if a tariff based on AB 2466 is issued in the spring of 2010. Table 11 summarizes the recommended alternative. Table 11 Recommended Alternative Pressure Control Hydroelectric Facility at Maerkle Reservoir Carlsbad Municipal Water District Criteria Units Alternative No. 4 Flow cfs 6.75 Power Produced kW 135 Electricity Produced per Year kWhrs 832,812 Project Cost $ $1,120,000 Net Present Value (NPV) $ $410,000 NPV Payback Period yrs 14.7 Alternative No. 17 is based on emerging technology, which is yet to be proven. However, its benefits, especially its ability to act as a pressure reducing or sustaining valve warrant that it be further investigated and monitored during detailed design. February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX A – MAERKLE RESERVOIR SITE PLAN February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX B – TURBINE DATA SHEETS November 13, 2009 Mr. Christopher Crotwell Carollo Engineers 704-598-0918 Ext. 228 ccrotwell@carollo.com Dear Mr. Crotwell, Thank you for the opportunity to offer equipment for the Carlsbad MWD Project. As always we welcome the opportunity to work with you. From your correspondence, we understand the site offers a dynamic head of 300 feet with a variable system flow. For the purpose of this estimate we are considering a flow rates of 3 cfs and 6 cfs. Option #1 Cornell model 4TR3 turbine which will pass 2.2 cfs at a dynamic head of 300 feet with an expected system production of 36 KW. Please see our equipment package description below. (1) Cornell 4TR3 turbine, CIB Fitted, w/ mech. seal, horizontal orientation (1) US Motors, 44 KW, 480 VAC, 60 Hz, 1800 RPM, 3 ph., ODP, induction generator. (1) 8” Bray/Rotork lug-style butterfly valve, hydraulic open/spring closure (1) Rex Omega direct drive couplings (1) Custom 120 VAC, hydraulic power unit (1) Custom structural steel equipment mounting skid (1) Custom 8” x 4” flanged inlet cone reducer (1) Custom 6” x 8” flanged outlet cone increaser (1) Switchgear/controls panel to parallel the generator with the utility grid and provide protective relays to North American utility grid standards for a project this size. Estimated system cost, as described ………………………………………………………… $63,000.00 Option #2 Cornell 5TR2 turbine which will pass 5.40 cfs at a dynamic head of 300 feet with an expected system production 100 KW. Please see our equipment package description below. (1) Cornell 5TR2 turbine, CIB Fitted, w/ mech. seal, horizontal orientation (1) US Motors, 150 HP, 480 VAC, 60 Hz, 1200 RPM, 3 ph., ODP, induction generator. (1) 10” Bray/Rotork lug-style butterfly valve, hydraulic open/spring closure (1) Rex Omega direct drive couplings (1) Custom 120 VAC, hydraulic power unit (1) Custom structural steel equipment mounting skid (1) Custom 10” x 5” flanged inlet cone reducer (1) Custom 8” x 10” flanged outlet cone increaser (1) Switchgear/controls panel to parallel the generator with the utility grid and provide protective relays to North American utility grid standards for a project this size. Estimated system cost, as described ………………………………………………………… $84,645.00 Each equipment package will be custom designed to your specific site requirements. As the project progresses and these requirements are defined, we will be pleased to offer a Preliminary Design Specification and a firm quotation. Budget estimates are offered for planning purposes but are typically within 15% of a firm quotation for the same equipment package scope. Estimated price FOB Deming, Washington (crated for shipment) Delivery: 16 weeks from receipt of drawing approval and release for manufacture payment Proposed Terms: 15% down payment to prepare final design and submittal drawings 35% payment on approval of submittal drawings and release for manufacture 25% mid-contract payment (8 weeks from release to manufacture) Balance due prior to shipment We look forward to assisting you as this project progresses. Please contact me when additional information will be helpful or as questions arise. Sincerely, Eric Melander W./:>.INLET =4.0 IN. NS =740 SPEED =1825 RPM TURBINE MODEL -4 TR3EXHAUST=6.0 IN. 300 -f0~r- ::J:m :t:- O Z "T1mm-f 500 400 200 100 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND .4 .8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 I I I I I I I 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 I U.S.GALLONS PER MINUTE I ))) "tI 80 m:D 0m 70 Z-f m"T1 60 !!0 mz500-< I100 -fc::80:Dt'D 60 0c:: :iJ 40 +20 c::Z-f "tI 20 10 "T1 :-I 0+0 ...... 4TR3 CORNELLPUMPCOMPANY.PORTLAND,OREGON CORNELL February 1, 2010 Mr. Christopher Crotwell Carollo Engineers 704-598-0918 Ext. 228 ccrotwell@carollo.com Dear Mr. Crotwell, Thank you for the updated information on the Carlsbad MWD Project. As always we welcome the opportunity to work with you. From your latest correspondence, we understand the site offers a dynamic head of 300 feet with a desired flow rate between 6 cfs and 7 cfs. For these conditions we offer the equipment package described below. (1) Cornell 6TR3 hydro turbine, CIB Fitted, w/ mech. seal, horizontal orientation (1) US Motors, 149 KW, 480 VAC, 60 Hz, 1800 RPM, 3 ph., ODP, induction generator. (1) 12” Bray/Rotork lug-style butterfly valve, hydraulic open/spring closure (1) Rex Omega direct drive coupling system (1) Custom 120 VAC, hydraulic power unit (1) Custom structural steel equipment mounting skid (1) Custom 12” x 6” flanged inlet cone reducer (1) Custom 8” x 12” flanged outlet cone increaser (1) Switchgear/controls panel to parallel the generator with the utility grid and provide protective relays to North American utility grid standards for a project this size. Estimated system cost, as described ………………………………………………………… $95,145.00 The model 6TR3 turbine is rated to pass 6.75 cfs at a dynamic head of 300 feet. Expected system production using the equipment package described above will be 135 KW, under design conditions. The turbine will require a flow rate of 6.75 cfs to become operational. The equipment package will not generate power below a site flow rate of 6.75 cfs. The equipment package offered will be custom designed to the specific requirements of the site. As the project progresses and these requirements are defined, we will be pleased to offer a Preliminary Design Specification and a firm quotation. Budget estimates are offered for planning purposes but are typically within 15% of a firm quotation for the same equipment package scope. Estimated price FOB Deming, Washington (crated for shipment) Delivery: 16 weeks from receipt of drawing approval and release for manufacture payment Proposed Terms: 15% down payment to prepare final design and submittal drawings 35% payment on approval of submittal drawings and release for manufacture 25% mid-contract payment (8 weeks from release to manufacture) Balance due prior to shipment We look forward to discussing this project further and welcome any questions you may have. Sincerely, Eric Melander Zeropex as org: 991 883 673 Ålgårdsveien 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway post@zeropex.com, www.zeropex.com Zeropex AS QUOTATION Confidential – Property of Zeropex AS Page 1 of 16 Client Carollo Site Carlsbad Quote type Budgetary quote Zeropex Contact Sven Anden Phone +1 (248) 644 0011 e-mail sa@xeropex.com Doc. No QT35-3 Doc. Title Carollo - Carlsbad Rev. 3 Issue date 2010-02-05 Alias Doc Name Author TAE;DC;PRO Create date 2010-02-05 Reviewed Review date 2010-02-05 Approved TAE Approve date 2010-02-05 Project No SALES Project Name Zeropex sales project QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 2 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Customer value ............................................................................................................ 4 2 System overview ................................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Turbine unit ................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Control panel ............................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Interfaces ..................................................................................................................... 5 3 Scope and Specifications .................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Interfaces ..................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Options ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Alternatives .................................................................................................................. 8 4 Technical information ........................................................................................................ 9 4.1 Efficiency calculations .............................................................................................. 10 5 Exceptions and clarifications ........................................................................................... 10 5.1 Clarifications ............................................................................................................. 10 5.2 Exclusions .................................................................................................................. 11 6 Terms of payment ............................................................................................................. 12 7 General terms for Sale of Products and Services ............................................................. 13 8 Contact information .......................................................................................................... 16 QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 3 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 1 Introduction Zeropex AS is pleased to present our proposal for the above referenced project. We recommend our patented Difgen turbine technology with micro generation which is a complete solution for simple installation and commissioning. One (1), Difgen systems, each consisting of two (2) turbines and one (1) generator and control cubicle, will fit the requirements of the project. The system is unique as it delivers energy as conventional turbines but with the advantage of controlling water pressure. Alternatively, the Difgen can easily be configured to manage water flow rate. The Difgen can even be used in pumping applications when required as an option. This comprehensive set of features permits the engineering of a smart grid water system. In short, the Difgen does what a modulating PRV can do, and much more. The Difgen components conform to water quality standards. Excess differential energy is released as electric power for export to the grid or for local consumption. Each generator produces 30-250 kW and is robust in design and of an industrial standard. The system has the advantages of low maintenance with predictable energy output. No manual intervention is required during the operation and the system has fully automatic operation and is failsafe. Our unique Difgen power turbine with pressure reduction capability offers the following features: · High efficiency over a wide range of flows · Rapid ROI and income generation · Adaptive Pressure and Flow Control · Predicable Electricity Generation · Built-in flow measurement · Designed to meet all relevant standards · The system can be used to pump water when required (optional) · The system can be used as a UPS when conditions allow (optional) QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 4 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 1.1 Customer value Based on input from the actual site, received from the customer, the following calculation is an indication of the value proposition. Flow 4,36 mgd average Flow max 5,40 mgd Head 130 psi Gravity (constant) 9,81 Efficiency 75 % percent Production in kW 125,97 kW Production in kW max 156,02 kW Price per kW 0,11 USD Yearly production 1 103 505 kWh Yearly revenue 119 179 USD Equipment investment 350 000 USD Payback 2,94 years IRR 45,3 % NPV 1 098 765 USD WACC 4,00 % Cost per kW 0,013 USD The calculation is based on the following assumptions: Cost of capital: 4% Life time: 20 years Value of generated power: 0,108 USD/kWh QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 5 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 2 System overview The Difgen is delivered as a complete pressure and flow control system with electrical power generation. It comprises a turbine with generator and a control cabinet. The interfaces are pipe flanges, grid connection and control system communication (optional). 2.1 Turbine unit The turbine and generator is delivered skid mounted. The base solution is a direct drive horizontal skid, but it can also be delivered stacked (belt driven) or direct drive vertical (both of these are optional). The turbine comes with standard flanges in both ends, in a straight line. The design of the turbine is optimized to maximize energy recovery from the intended pressure drop incurred. The efficiency is high over a large window of flow rates. Maintenance is lube oil replacement at regular intervals, and inspection of the turbine lobes ever 1-2 years. 2.2 Control panel The Difgen is delivered with all control and power electronics in a control panel. The system can control the turbine in the following modes: · As a pressure control unit (upstream or downstream) by measuring pressure and adjusting speed (RPM) and load. · As a flow controller, by running at a specific speed · Against a pre-set level in a tank (optional) · Pumping (optional) in forward or reverse The set points for the various modes can be changed as often as required for optimum operation of the plant. Alarm and warnings are raised according to predetermined limits and include e.g. - Pressure loss - Grid failure - High temperatures - Sensor failure - Water ingress The system is designed for fail safe operation, and can control an external valve. However, the arrangement of valves, bypasses, etc will vary from site to site, and is the responsibility of the client. 2.3 Interfaces The control cabinet comes with a number of analog and discrete inputs/outputs for interfacing with client equipment or I/O. QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 6 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com To interface with plant control systems or SCADA system, the Difgen can be delivered with a range of field buses (Profibus, Modbus, etc). A Web option for monitoring is optional. The cabinet is delivered with terminals for grid connection (sections 240/480/690V +/- regional parameters – 50/60Hz). Protection against islanding operation in case of grid outages is included based on voltage and frequency limits. Alarms and warnings are communicated through the above interfaces, or they can optionally be forwarded via SMS or e-mail. QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 7 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 3 Scope and Specifications The following Products shall be supplied by Supplier: Item no Qty Unit Product Description 1 1 Ea Difgen Duplo DG-18-18 Pressure management system with two turbines, including generator, frames, and drive system 2 1 Ea Power electronics 220V, 60 Hz grid connection 3.1 Interfaces Interface Description Comments flanges towards interfacing pipes ANSI DN 14 voltage towards Purchaser’s power grid 440/690V/60Hz To be agreed. Up to 700V is included in price specific requirements for foundation for the installation site Total weight is approx 1000 pounds electrical interfaces towards the Purchaser’s control system (preferably a “Communications bus”) Not included water flow and pressure conditions] Max 1200 m3/h Max 15 bar housing pressure Max 146 psi diff. pressure QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 8 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 3.2 Options Item Qty Unit Product Description Included 1 1 Ea Islanding kit Will ensure continuous operation during power outages No 2 1 Ea GPU – General Protection Unit No 3 1 Ea NEMA-protection No 3.3 Alternatives Item Qty Unit Product Description Unit price QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 9 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 4 Technical information Difgen DG18-18 are proposed for this application, as this provides the best combination of flow throughput, efficiency and flexibility. Dimensional drawings is for one turbine and generator, all figures are in metric units: QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 10 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 4.1 Efficiency calculations Based on input from the customer, the chart below is an indication of power production to be expected from the installation. The information in this document is indicative, and Zeropex cannot take on any responsibility for the actual performance. 5 Exceptions and clarifications The quote is based on the following assumptions: · The cabling connecting the site to the power grid is of sufficient quality and capacity · The turbine is designed to be exposed to water. The generator is not designed for exposure to water. If this is an issue, Zeropex will revert with a different set-up, where both parts are water intrusion protected. · The control electronics must be placed in a dry room. 5.1 Clarifications QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 11 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com · Unless included in our Scope of Supply Section, start-up service, training, supervision, etc. is not included in this quotation. If these services are required, they are available at prevailing rates plus all expenses portal-to-portal. 5.2 Exclusions · Installation and site cabling excluded unless included in our scope of supply. · No piping, valves, fittings, wiring, anchor bolts, etc. are included other than those listed. QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 12 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 6 Terms of payment Currency is US$. Total Net Price: $350,000 Price is valid for 90 days Taxes: Prices are exclusive of any and all sales taxes Delivery: FOB shipment address, not including installation. Delivery time: 16 weeks from time of order, excluding holidays Supplier warranty: 12 months from delivery date that unit is free from defects in materials, workmanship and design and conforms to specifications Payment terms; 50% with order, 40% at delivery and 10% after 30 days. QT35-3 - Carollo - Carlsbad version 3 Page 13 of 16 Zeropex AS, Gamle Algardsvei 170, 4325 Sandnes, Norway, Phone +47 930 29 610. www. Zeropex.com 7 General terms for Sale of Products and Services 1 APPLICATION The following General Terms shall apply for all Contracts entered into between Purchaser and Supplier for sale of Products and Services, unless otherwise specifically agreed. These General Terms shall also apply for future business transactions between Supplier and Purchaser, even if they are not referred to or enclosed in the individual future case(s). 2 DEFINITIONS "Supplier" means Zeropex AS and its subsidiaries at any time. "Force Majeure" means an event defined as Force Majeure in the ICC Publication no 650. “General Terms” means these General Terms for Sale of Products and Services forming an integral part of the Contract to which it relates. “Products” means the products together with pertaining materials, equipment and documentation to be delivered by Supplier to Purchaser pursuant to the Contract. "Purchase Price" means the total price of the Contract, as originally set out or later amended. The Purchase Price may include both lump sum elements and reimbursable elements. “Contract” means any agreement reached between the Purchaser and Supplier for provision of Products or Services. "Purchaser" means the legal entity purchasing Products or Services from the Supplier pursuant to the Contract. “Services” means services set forth in the Contract to be provided by the Supplier to the Purchaser pursuant to the Contract. 3 DELIVERY Unless otherwise set forth in the relevant Contract, delivery of the Products shall be made EXW, (in accordance with INCOTERMS 2000) Supplier’s manufacturing site. The delivery date(s) shall be as set forth in the in the Contract. The Products shall be delivered properly packed and marked in accordance with the requirements in the Contract. 4 LAWS AND REGULATIONS Purchaser is responsible for having all the relevant licenses in place for installing and operating the Products and for generating power on the basis of the Products. Purchaser shall at its own cost and risk abide by all laws, regulations and licenses applicable to its operation of the Products. 5 PURCHASER’S INFORMATION Supplier shall be entitled to gain access to operational data for the purpose of assessing any claims regarding the Products and for the purpose of optimization of the Products’ performance and maintenance. Purchaser shall be responsible for the correctness and sufficiency of all information provided by the Purchaser to Supplier in relation to the Contract. 6 VARIATIONS Purchaser has the right to order variations in quality, quantity or time of delivery of the Products and Services, provided that such variations do not exceed what the parties could reasonably expect when the Contract was entered into. Variations shall be requested by Purchaser in writing. Supplier shall within 10 business days by written notice confirm any effects on the Purchase Price, time of delivery and technical specifications. All adjustments to the Purchase Price shall correspond to the pricing method and principles applied in the Contract, and otherwise be at a reasonable level. Supplier shall be entitled to request adjustments in the Purchase Price or delivery date(s) should either of these be affected for reasons which Supplier is not responsible. The final variation shall be approved by Purchaser in writing. 7 TERMS OF PAYMENT Page 14 General Terms for Sale of Products and Services - rev. October 2009 Unless otherwise specifically set out in the Contract, Purchaser shall pay all invoices within 14 days from date of invoice. Purchaser may withhold any disputed amounts, provided that Purchaser shall pay undisputed amounts of partly disputed invoices. Supplier shall be entitled to interest on overdue payments calculated in accordance with the applicable rate pursuant to the Norwegian Interest on Overdue Payments Act (no. 100/1976). All prices are exclusive of value added taxes (VAT) unless otherwise specified in the Contract. 8 DEFECTS AND GUARANTEES Supplier guarantees for a period of 12 months from the date of delivery that the Products conform to the specifications in the Contract and are free of fault in material, workmanship and design. Purchaser shall examine the Products upon delivery. If any defects are found, Purchaser shall notify Supplier thereof in writing immediately thereafter. Supplier is liable for a defect only if Purchaser has given such notice immediately after it discovered or ought to have discovered such defect. Supplier is not liable defects notified of after the expiry of the guarantee period. If the Products are found to be defective during the guarantee period, Supplier shall within reasonable time at its own cost repair or replace (at its option) at Supplier’s facilities, and Supplier shall not be liable for any labour to remove or reinstall the Products or replaced parts, or for any transportation costs. Any repaired or replaced parts of the Products shall be guaranteed by Supplier for a renewed period with the same duration as the original guarantee. However, the total guarantee period shall not exceed 18 months from delivery of the Products. Products which Supplier determines to have been subjected to abuse, improper use, or use in contradiction to Supplier’s manuals, will not be entitled to the benefits of any guarantee by Supplier. Supplier only guarantees work performed by it self. Faulty Services shall be re-performed at Supplier’s own cost during the same installation operation. The rights and remedies expressly set out in Articles 8 and 10 are the sole remedies available to Purchaser in the event of defects in the Products and Services. 9 DELAY If delivery of the Products has not taken place on the date(s) of delivery set out in the Contract, for reasons which Supplier is responsible, Purchaser has the right to claim liquidated damages to an amount equal to 0.5% of the value of the item in delay per day until delivery occurs. Supplier’s cumulative liability for liquidated damages is limited to 5% of the value of the item in delay, and shall together with Article 10 be the sole remedy available to Purchaser upon delay in delivery of Products or Services. 10 TERMINATION DUE TO SUPPLIER’S DEFAULT Purchaser has the right to terminate the Contract with immediate effect by giving written notice to Supplier if Supplier becomes insolvent or is in material breach of its obligations under the Contract. 11 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS Intellectual property such as drawings, specifications, software, data-media and other technical or commercial information or documentation provided by Supplier to Purchaser, pertaining to the Product or otherwise, shall remain the property of Supplier. Supplier shall grant to Purchaser a limited non- exclusive, royalty-free, non-assignable right to use Supplier’s intellectual property for the strict purpose of use, operation and maintenance of the Products as set forth in the Contract. 12 FORCE MAJEURE Neither of the Parties shall be considered to be in default in performance of its obligations under the Contract to the extent such performance has been prevented by Force Majeure. The Party invoking Force Majeure shall notify the other Party in writing without delay on the intervention and on the cessation of such circumstance. 13 INDEMNITY – LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY The Parties shall mutually indemnify and hold each other harmless from and against; (i) all loss or damage to their respective property; (ii) injury to or death of their respective personnel; and (iii) its own consequential or indirect losses (such as but not limited to loss of production, costs or loss caused by reduced power generation or Page 15 General Terms for Sale of Products and Services - rev. October 2009 pollution), that may arise in connection with the Contract. This shall apply irrespective of how the loss or damage is caused, save upon gross negligence or wilful misconduct by the indemnified Party. Each Party shall be liable for any third party damages and losses caused by him, and he shall indemnify the other Party accordingly. Subject to the first paragraph of this Article 13 and applicable mandatory law, Purchaser shall however indemnify and hold Supplier harmless from any loss or damage caused by the Products in their life time. Supplier’s liability for breach of Contract shall be limited to 100% of the value of the Contract, provided, however, such that Supplier’s aggregate liability in no event shall exceed NOK 1 million. 14 TITLE TO PRODUCTS – RISK Title to the Products shall pass to Purchaser when the Purchase Price has been paid in full. Supplier shall in respect of the Products retain any right of security for unpaid purchases as applying under Section 3-14 et seq. of the Norwegian Mortgages and Pledges Act (act no. 2/1980). Risk for loss of or damages to the Products shall pass from Supplier to Purchaser upon delivery as set forth in Article 3 hereof. 15 CONFIDENTIALITY All commercial and technical information, such as professional secrets, specifications, descriptions, procedures, models, operational data etc. pertaining to a party (the Disclosing Party) which the other party have gained access to in connection with the Contract, shall be treated as confidential and shall not be disclosed to any third party without the prior written consent of the Disclosing Party. Such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Such information must not be duplicated and may not be used other than as expressly permitted by the Contract. Subject to the provisions of Article 13, Purchaser shall be liable for any losses suffered by Supplier as a consequence of breach of this Article 15. Neither Party may disclose information about the signing, termination or content of contracts between the Parties without the prior written consent from the other Party. 16 ASSIGNMENT Supplier may assign its rights and obligations under the Contract, wholly or partly, to any third party, subject to giving Purchaser prior written notice thereof. 17 GOVERNING LAW AND DISPUTES The Contract shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Norway. Any disputes that may arise from the Contract shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Norwegian courts, with Stavanger city court as agreed venue. Page 16 General Terms for Sale of Products and Services - rev. October 2009 8 Contact information Place Orders and Address Correspondence to: Zeropex AS Head of Business development Per Reidar Ørke Phone +47 909 76 415 Email: pro@zeropex.com Zeropex AS VP Sales & Marketing North America Sven Anden Phone: +1 (248) 644 0011 Email: sa@xeropex.com Pure power from fluid pressures www.zeropex.com About Zeropex Benefits to Customer Technology Agenda About the company Company overview Zeropex •Technology developed in Energreen –All rights transferred to Zeropex •Products now commercial •100% owned by Energreen AS •Head office –Sandnes, Norway •Zeropex Mission –sell technology producing pure power from intended pressure drop in fluid Energreen Group •Established 2006 •Shareholders –Energy Ventures (Private Equity fund) –StatoilHydro Venture –Founders •Three technologies –Zeropex has exclusive priority •Energreen Mission –Create profitable and sustainable energy sources from existing industrial processes Team Board of Directors •Chairman –Einar Gamman –Partner Energy Ventures. Former senior management positions in oil service companies •Erik Thorsen, former CEO of REC and Tomra. Wide experience from international operations and renewable energy •Arne Frøiland –Partner StatoilHydro Ventures. Former senior management positions in renewable energy companies. Management Team •Trond Melhus,co-founder –30y+ experience from offshore operations, construction and management. Turned serial entrepreneur •Per Reidar Ørke,co-founder –20y experience with product development from National Oilwell and Laerdal Medical •Jan K. Vasshus,co-founder –15y experience from product development offshore. Turned serial entrepreneur •Tor Albert Ersdal, CEO –15y experience from growth companies both from the entrepreneur and investor perspective. Experience include successful stock listing and trade sales. Benefit to Customer Operational benefits •High efficiency over a wide range of flows •Adaptive Pressure and Flow Control •Predicable Electricity Generation •Built-in flow measurement •Designed to meet all relevant standards •The system can be used to pump water when required •The system can be used as a UPS when conditions allow •Maintened by Zeropex certified engineer –Pump engineers will qualify for certification program –Maintenance procedure takes 6-12 hours per year •Utilize existing plant and infrastructure Financial benefits •Rapid ROI and income generation •24/36 months lease contracts are avaible •Investment per Watt is USD 2 –Production 24/7 •Cost per produced kW is 1-2 cent –Assuming 20 year life –Annual maintenance with larger maintenance every 5 years •Qualifies for feed in tariffs or investment incentives in many geographies $11,50 mgd Head 150 psi Gravity (constant)9,81 Efficiency 75 %percent Production in kW 383,38 kW Price per kW 0,13 USD Yearly production 3 358 410 kWh Yearly revenue 436 593 USD Equipment investment 800 000 USD Payback 1,83 years IRR 111,2 % NPV 4 752 525$ USD Example Environmental benefits •Improves overall energy efficiency for water utility •Releasing the Energy from existing water assets •No visual pollution •Lower cost than most alternative energy sources •Utilize existing competence in water utility Technology Pressure –the “forgotten” energy source •Two ways of reducing pressure: –Discharge to open basin –Conversion to kinetic energy and back again (pressure reduction valve) •Common for both types –energy from pressure drop is lost! •A third method is to control the pressure with a rotating barrier device, which is harvesting the energy from the pressure drop as electricity Pressure reduc- tion Pressure & leak mgmt Power produc- tion Feed-in tariffs/ CRC’s Manual PRV X Remote ctr. PRV X X difgen X X X X Difgen pressure reduction •Volumetric displacement turbine -impellers form a physical, rotating barrier between the upstream and downstream fluids •A fixed volume is dosed through the turbine for each revolution •By applying load, rotational speed is retarded, and a differential pressure is created •By dynamically controlling the generator speed, the upstream/downstream pressure is also dynamically controlled •The load is an electric generator, converting work to electricity Impellers acting as barriers are functionally comparable with mechanical transmissions Pressure management & Grid Connection •Pressure set point from DCS •Variable speed by dual front-end frequency drives •Parallel turbines controlled by one controller •Connected to the grid in the same way as wind turbines –Always connected –Dual front-end VFD’s to transform from generator voltage and frequency to grid voltage and frequency –Production determined by available flow/pressure Control Press. setpoint Power to grid/plant DCS XTPT Speed ref DC Bus 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1 000 1 100 1 200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Difgen production area Selection based on: •Net head •Flow range •Rotational speed •Cavitation •Cost Flow l/s Pressure in bar 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Difgen production area Selection based on: •Net head •Flow range •Rotational speed •Cavitation •Cost Flow mgd Pressure in psi Difgen production output Example with 8 bar pressure (116psi) and flow variation from 19 l/s to 125 l/s (0,5 mgd to 3 mgd) 0,00 20,00 40,00 60,00 80,00 100,00 120,00 140,00 Flow [l/s] Created Power [kW] Efficiency (turbine shaft output) [%] Flow l/s Efficiency % Power kW IVAR pilot site –Norway •Tested different versions since spring 2008 •Drinking water treatment plant –7,3 bar (105 psi) pressure –Max 7,3 bar diff. pressure –65 l/s (1,5 mgd) –35 kW Sample Application System Overview Summary •Unique patented technology •Enable power production within existing infrastructure •Short payback •First installation in US April/May 2010 Pure power from fluid pressures www.zeropex.com February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX C – SDG&E RATE TARIFF Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 20429-E San Diego Gas & Electric Company San Diego, California Canceling Original Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 20150-E SCHEDULE WATER Sheet 1 WATER AGENCY TARIFF FOR ELIGIBLE RENEWABLES (Continued) 1C18 Issued by Date Filed Feb 22, 2008 Advice Ltr. No. 1918-E-A Lee Schavrien Effective Feb 14, 2008 Senior Vice President Decision No. Regulatory Affairs Resolution No. E-4137 APPLICABILITY Pursuant to Public Utilities Code (PU Code) Section 399.20 and Commission Decision 07-07-027, this Schedule is optionally available to customers who meet the definition of an Eligible Public Water Agency or Wastewater Agency, as defined in Special Condition (SC) 3a and 3b below, who own and operate an Eligible Renewable Generating Facility, as described in SC 3c, with a total effective generation capacity of not more than 1.5 megawatts (MWs). Service under this Schedule is on a first come, first served basis and shall be closed to new customers once the combined rated generating capacity of Eligible Renewable Generating Facilities within SDG&E’s service territory reaches 20.055 MW which is SDG&E’s share of the statewide 250 MWs, based on the ratio of SDG&E’s peak demand to the total peak demand of all electrical corporations within the State of California, as described in SC 5 below. TERRITORY Within the entire territory served RATES The customer’s otherwise applicable tariff shall apply except as follows: SDG&E shall purchase the total output produced by an Eligible Renewable Generating Facility under Option A (Full Buy/Sell) or Option B (Sale of Excess Only) at a rate equal to the Market Referent Price (MPR), as determined by the California Public Utilities Commission pursuant to PU Code Section 399.15, that is applicable on the effective date of the Agreement, subject to the on-line date and term specified in the Agreement (Form 160-1000). SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. Agreement: An executed Agreement (Form 160-1000) is required prior to receiving service under this Schedule. 2. Participation in other SDG&E Programs: Customers participating under the provisions of this Schedule may not participate in any other SDG&E interruptible, Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP), California Solar Initiative, net energy metering program, or other similar programs. 3. Definitions: The following definitions are applicable to service provided under this Schedule. a. Eligible Public Water Agency – As defined in Water Code Section 12970, means any public corporation, district, political subdivision, or any other agency or authority now or hereafter organized under the laws of this state which develops, stores, distributes or supplies water. b. Eligible Wastewater Agency – Any state, local, or federal agency, as defined in Water Code Section 13625 (b)(1), owning a facility used in the treatment or reclamation of sewage or industrial wastes. N N Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 20430-E* San Diego Gas & Electric Company San Diego, California Canceling Original Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 20151-E SCHEDULE WATER Sheet 2 WATER AGENCY TARIFF FOR ELIGIBLE RENEWABLES 2C21 Issued by Date Filed Feb 22, 2008 Advice Ltr. No. 1918-E-A Lee Schavrien Effective Feb 14, 2008 Senior Vice President Decision No. Regulatory Affairs Resolution No. E-4137 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 3. Definitions (Continued) c. Eligible Renewable Generating Facility – A generating facility that is owned and operated by an Eligible Public Water Agency or an Eligible Wastewater Agency which receives distribution service from SDG&E, and where the Eligible Renewable Generating Facility meets all of the following criteria: (1) Has an effective capacity of not more than 1.5 MWs and the facility is located on property owned or under the control of the public water or wastewater agency. (2) Is interconnected and operates in parallel with the Utility’s electric transmission and distribution grid. (3) Is strategically located and interconnected to the Utility’s electric transmission system in a manner that optimizes the deliverability of electricity generated at the facility to load centers. (4) Is an eligible renewable energy resource, as defined in Public Utilities Code Section 399.12. 4. Metering Requirements: Customers served on this Schedule shall be separately metered with SDG&E’s metering to reflect the net generation output amounts of the Eligible Renewable Generating Facility. Customers shall be responsible for all costs associated with separately metering the customer’s Eligible Renewable Generating Facility output and associated station load. All metering required for service on this Schedule shall be installed and maintained in accordance with SDG&E’s requirements. 5. Customer Participation: Except as provided below, customers may participate in accordance with this Schedule until the sum of all customers’ contracted capacity reaches SDG&E’s proportionate share of the statewide capacity limit of 250 MW. SDG&E has been allocated 20.055 MW of the capacity limit. The sum of all customers’ contracted capacity will be calculated by the summation of all net power ratings (in kW) provided in Form 160-1000. Should additional customers express interest in this Schedule after SDG&E’s share of the contract capacity limit is reached, SDG&E will maintain a list of interested customers, ranked in order of the date on which they requested service under this Schedule. Should the capacity installed fall below 20.055 MW, SDG&E will allow those customers from the previously described list of interested customers who remain interested in the tariff the opportunity to participate under this Schedule on a first come, first served basis until the capacity installed plus the contracted capacity taken from the previously described list of interested customers equals 20.055. This process will continue until such time as the installed capacity of projects in operation does not exceed 20.055 which is SDG&E’s proportionate share of 250 MW. N N February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX D –PREFABRICATED CONCRETE BUILDING PRODUCT DATA Shelters Precast Concrete Shelters Up to 600sfPrecast Concrete Shelters Up to 600sf www.oldcastlecomm.com 1-877-434-5463www.oldcastlecomm.com 1-877-434-5463 Co-Location SheltersCo-Location Shelters ldcastle shelters are the answer to your most difficult equipment enclosure requirements for wireless, cable and telephone service providers. Made from steel reinforced precast concrete, these enclosures are designed to provide secure housing for your equipment whatever the seismic requirements, floor, roof or wind load. With short lead times and rapid installation on a foundation or gravel base, our shelters are the economical solution to your rapid national deployment enclosure needs. Utilizing both monolithic and panel construction methods, designed for both single and doublewide applications, some configurations include multi-room, stackable and partially buried units. OO Our shelters are available in a variety of dimensions to fit many co-location options such as private keying, individual cages and security features. They can be factory equipped for immediate use after a quick installation and hook up. Shelters Benefits and Design FeaturesBenefits and Design Features Sizes available up to 600sf Multiple exterior and roof designs available strength you can count on © 2007 Oldcastle Precast Inc. OC104 2/07 0000 Strong Reliable Secure strength you can count onstrength you can count on Rapid national deployment Maintenance-free finish © 2004 fg h e Precast Communications www.oldcastlecomm.com P.O. Box 3250 Phone(602)228-3499 Chandler, AZ 85244-3250 Mike.evans@oldcastleprecast.com Date: 02-17-10 Company:Carollo Engineering Address: 9115 Harris Corners Pky. Suite 440 Charlotte, NC Contact:Christopher Crotwell PE Contact Phone:704-598-0918 Re: Oldcastle Model 1818 Precast Concrete Shelter Project:Carlsbad Merco Reservoir Location:Carlsbad, CA 92010 Quote 32-1197 1818RCS Carlsbad 02-17-10 Dear Christopher, Oldcastle ispleased to provide this quote for our Model 1818 Monolithic Shelter for Carlsbad Merco Reservoir Please read the scope and quote carefully only items included on this quote will be provided by Oldcastle. If you would like to include any additional equipment let me know and we will quote it. Let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Western Region Sales Oldcastle Precast Communications Enclosures: Scope of Work, Terms and Conditions, Pricing e Precast Communications Quote 32-1197 1818RCS Carlsbad 02-17- 10 Page 2 of 8 Initial: ____ SCOPE OF WORK – 1818RCS I. Precast Structure A. Structure Engineering ♦ Drawings: Detailed engineering and drawings provided for all items in this Scope of Work. The structural drawings will be stamped by a professional engineer registered in the state of building placement. ♦ State Approvals: Oldcastle will receive state approval as required. As such, Oldcastle reserves the right to amend the proposed Scope of Work to comply with any code or regulation required to obtain state approval. ♦ Scope and Pricing Exclusions: The following items are also excluded and need to be provided by others: 1) Site Preparation 2) Foundation 3) Crane services to offload at the job site 4) Soil Report 5) Evaluation of geotechnical survey 6) Attachment to foundations. (Parts and instructions supplied) 7) Grouting / Coating of roof lifting pockets (Parts and instructions supplied) 8) Taxes 9) Freight (unless specified) 10) Local/municipal inspections and approvls: • site inspections • building permits • zoning approvals Oldcastle is not responsible for determining such local requirements. Oldcastle is not responsible for determining such local requirements. I. Precast Structure A. Structure Engineering ♦ Drawings: Detailed engineering and drawings provided for all items in this Scope of Work. The structural drawings will be stamped by a professional engineer registered in the state of building placement. ♦ State Approvals: Oldcastle will receive state approval as required. As such, Oldcastle reserves the right to amend the proposed Scope of Work to comply with any code or regulation required to obtain state approval. ♦ Exclusions: Local/municipal inspections and approvals, including site inspections, building permits, and zoning approvals (except as discussed herein) are not included. Oldcastle is not responsible for determining such local requirements. e Precast Communications Quote 32-1197 1818RCS Carlsbad 02-17- 10 Page 3 of 8 Initial: ____ B. Precast Concrete Shell ♦ Size (1) 1818 RCS Lightweight Concrete Shelter Outside Dimension – 18’-0” long x 18’-0” Wide x 10’-1” High Finished Inside Dimension – 17’-0” Long x 17’-0” Wide x 9’-0” High ♦ Weight: Approximate finished weight: 76,000 pounds (2) pcs. @ approx. 38,000 ea. ♦ Specifications: Floor load: 250 PSF Roof load: 65 PSF Wind load: 110 MPH, Exp “C” ♦ Seismic Zone: 50-185%G ♦ Fire Rating: Two hour ♦ Bullet Resistance: UL 752 Level 4 C. Finishes ♦ Exterior Walls: Simulated Exposed aggregate ♦ Interior Walls: None ♦ Insulation: None ♦ Telco Board: None ♦ Floor: None ♦ Roofing: Elastomeric coating D. Doors and Openings ♦ Doors: (1) 3’-0” x 7’-0” 18 gauge steel door with 16 gauge steel frame ♦ Locks: Best lockset with Best Z1 Core ♦ Other Door Hardware: NRP Stainless steel hinges, door closure, door pick plate, door holder, weather strip, aluminum threshold, ♦ Door Hood: Door drip cap – 2 ½” wide; Door Canopy – 8” x 48” ♦ Roll up Door (1) 8’ 0’ roll up door chain manual operated. ♦ Coax Port: None E. Power ♦ Power Service: None ♦ Disconnect Switch: None; to be supplied by customer ♦ Generator Receptacle: None ♦ Manual Transfer Switch: None ♦ Main Distribution Panel: None ♦ Surge Suppression: None ♦ Convenience Outlets: None ♦ Exterior GFI Outlets: None F. Environmental System ♦ HVAC: None ♦ Controls: None ♦ Thermostat: None G. Alarms ♦ Alarms: None H. Lighting e Precast Communications Quote 32-1197 1818RCS Carlsbad 02-17- 10 Page 4 of 8 Initial: ____ ♦ Interior: None ♦ Exterior: None ♦ Emergency: Noen ♦ Switches: None ♦ Timer: None I. Cable Ladder ♦ Cable Ladder: None J. Grounding ♦ Ground Bar: None ♦ Grounding: None K. Additional Items ♦ Smoke Detector: None ♦ Fire Extinguisher: None ♦ Log Book: None ♦ Tie Down Kit (1) Set includes brackets and bolts shipped loose ♦ First Aid Kit: None ♦ Eye Wash Station: None ♦ Battery Safety Kit: None ♦ Exhaust Fan: None ♦ Other: None II. Delivery A. Precast Structure price is quoted FOB Plant B. The delivery price quoted is to the indicated location only and is only good for 120 days from the date herein C. Delivery to occur on weekdays during normal daylight working hours D. Proper site conditions, including clear access roads and a reasonably level surface, so that vehicles, trucks, and cranes can safely maneuver under their own power. i. All roads, crossing, and load bearing surfaces to be able to accommodate a vehicle with a gross weight up to 160,000 pounds. ii. Required turning radius for up to a 70-foot tractor-trailer and up to a 150-ton crane. iii. No overhead power lines, obstructions or overhanging trees that could block the maneuverability of equipment. III. Services A. The following items are excluded and need to be provided by others i. Overall project management and on-site supervision ii. Real estate services iii. Site design and permitting and obtaining building codes iv. Site work, fencing and landscaping v. On-site soils investigation and foundations vi. On-site electrical and mechanical a. Utility transformer (confirmation of phase and type of electrical service), transformer pad / pole, right of way work, boring / street excavation and duct bank work, meter base installation and all final electrical connections b. External grounding systems e Precast Communications Quote 32-1197 1818RCS Carlsbad 02-17- 10 Page 5 of 8 Initial: ____ c. Sewer and water work, if needed vii. Crane and rigging services and off-loading of the structure viii. Assembly and tie-down of the structure on-site ix. Electronic equipment integration x. On-going repair and maintenance and upgrades B. If needed, Oldcastle can provide some or all of these services as part of a turn-key installation III. Crane Service: A. Not Included IV. Field Setting Service: A. Not Applicable B. A detailed installation manual will be provided and explained prior to delivery. February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX E –PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost DIVISION 1 General Requirements Mobilization/Demobilization LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 DIVISION 2 Earthwork Erosion Control LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Miscellaneous Sitework LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Drainage LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Grading/Excavation LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Finish Grading LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Site Piping & Miscellaneous Yard Piping LS 1 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 Miscellaneous Site Water Lines LF 200 $50.00 $10,000.00 Disinfection & Testing LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 DIVISION 3 Concrete Precast Building (16.5 x 16.5) LS 1 $26,875.00 $26,875.00 Base Slab CY 11 $450.00 $5,055.75 Walls CY 15 $550.00 $8,360.00 Walkways/Misc./Stairs CY 2 $600.00 $1,200.00 DIVISION 5 Metals Structural Steel LS 1 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 Handrails & Railings LF 25 $75.00 $1,875.00 Miscellaneous Metals(FRP) LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 DIVISION 9 Finishes Painting LS 1 $500.00 $500.00 DIVISION 11 Equipment Hydroelectric Turbine EA 1 $78,000.00 $78,000.00 DIVISION 15 Mechanical Process Piping and Valves(Interior) LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 HVAC LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 DIVISION 16 Electrical Electrical and Instrumentation LS 1 $165,000.00 $165,000 SCADA Connection LS 1 $35,000.00 $35,000 Subtotal $471,866 Contractor Overhead and Profit (15%)$70,780 Subtotal $542,646 Contingency (20%)$108,529 Estimated Capital Cost $650,000 Engineering Less Study $374,426 Owner Reserve for Change Orders (5%)$32,500 TOTAL 1,060,000$ Carlsbad Municipal Water District, Carlsbad, CA CAROLLO PROJECT # 8362A10 FACILITY: Hydroelectric Turbine Building - Alternative No. 1: 2.2 cfs turbine PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE Hydroelectric Turbine Facility Carollo Engineers PrelimCostEstimate-Carlsbad.xls 12/7/2009 8362A10 Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost DIVISION 1 General Requirements Mobilization/Demobilization LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 DIVISION 2 Earthwork Erosion Control LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Miscellaneous Sitework LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Drainage LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Grading/Excavation LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Finish Grading LS 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Site Piping & Miscellaneous Yard Piping LS 1 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 Miscellaneous Site Water Lines LF 200 $50.00 $10,000.00 Disinfection & Testing LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 DIVISION 3 Concrete Precast Building (16.5 x 16.5) LS 1 $26,875.00 $26,875.00 Base Slab CY 11 $450.00 $5,055.75 Walls CY 15 $550.00 $8,360.00 Walkways/Misc./Stairs CY 2 $600.00 $1,200.00 DIVISION 5 Metals Structural Steel LS 1 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 Handrails & Railings LF 25 $75.00 $1,875.00 Miscellaneous Metals(FRP) LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 DIVISION 9 Finishes Painting LS 1 $500.00 $500.00 DIVISION 11 Equipment Hydroelectric Turbine EA 1 $99,645.00 $99,645.00 DIVISION 15 Mechanical Process Piping and Valves(Interior) LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 HVAC LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Acoustical Panels LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 DIVISION 16 Electrical Electrical and Instrumentation LS 1 $165,000.00 $165,000 SCADA Connection LS 1 $35,000.00 $35,000 Subtotal $495,511 Contractor Overhead and Profit (15%)$74,327 Subtotal $569,837 Contingency (20%)$113,967 Estimated Capital Cost $680,000 Engineering Less Study $374,426 Owner Reserve for Change Orders (5%)$34,000 TOTAL 1,090,000$ Carlsbad Municipal Water District, Carlsbad, CA CAROLLO PROJECT # 8362A10 FACILITY: Hydroelectric Turbine Building - Alternative No. 2: 5.4 cfs turbine PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE Hydroelectric Turbine Facility Carollo Engineers PrelimCostEstimate-Carlsbad.xls 12/7/2009 8362A10 February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX F – ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls5.4 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.1Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments: Turbine Flow 5.4 cfs =3.5 mgdNumber of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.785 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 100 kW =134 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 86.1%%(based on historical flow)Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7165 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg)Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract) Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,090,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 290,318$ NPV Payback Period 15.8 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,090,000)$ 0 1 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (7,159)$ 76,981$ (1,016,334)$ 121007165715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (7,374)$ 78,546$ (944,407)$ 2 3 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (7,595)$ 80,194$ (874,133)$ 3 4 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (7,823)$ 81,929$ (805,430)$ 451007165715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (8,058)$ 83,755$ (738,221)$ 5 6 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (8,299)$ 85,676$ (672,431)$ 6 7 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (8,548)$ 87,699$ (607,987)$ 781007165715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (8,805)$ 89,828$ (544,821)$ 891007165715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (9,069)$ 92,069$ (482,868)$ 9 10 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.0881 48,540$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (9,341)$ 94,427$ (422,064)$ 10111007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (9,621)$ 127,434$ (343,539)$ 11121007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (9,910)$ 130,045$ (266,856)$ 12 13 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (10,207)$ 132,792$ (191,925)$ 13141007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (10,513)$ 135,683$ (118,660)$ 14151007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (10,829)$ 138,724$ (46,979)$ 15 16 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (11,154)$ 141,923$ 23,198$ 16171007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (11,488)$ 145,289$ 91,945$ 17181007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (11,833)$ 148,830$ 159,335$ 18 19 100 7165 715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (12,188)$ 152,555$ 225,438$ 19201007165715,911 550,911 0.1435 79,067$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (12,554)$ 156,473$ 290,318$ 20TOTAL14,318,220 572729 143182 2,260,852$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls5.4NPV AB2466 Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.1aTurbine NPV Analysis - with AB 2466 (wheeling) =input Comments: Turbine Flow 5.4 cfs =3.5 mgdNumber of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.785 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 100 kW =134 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 86%%(based on historical flow)Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7157 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhrSummer Peak Demand Charge $13.77 Winter Peak Demand Charge $4.77Coincident Demand Charge $11.53Base Rate $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0966 See 'AL-TOU Rates' for elect rates Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract) Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $0 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 0 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,090,000$ (input project capital cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 1,145,441$ NPV Payback Period 9.8 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate (2) Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings (1) REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,090,000)$ 0 1 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.0966$ 69,070$ 19,883$ 28,603$ -$ (7,151)$ 110,406$ (984,349)$ 121007157715,080 715,080 0.1014$ 72,524$ 20,877$ 30,033$ -$ (7,365)$ 116,069$ (878,061)$ 2 3 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.1065$ 76,150$ 21,921$ 31,535$ -$ (7,586)$ 122,020$ (771,135)$ 3 4 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.1118$ 79,958$ 23,017$ 33,112$ -$ (7,814)$ 128,272$ (663,571)$ 451007157715,080 715,080 0.1174$ 83,955$ 24,168$ 34,767$ -$ (8,048)$ 134,842$ (555,366)$ 561007157715,080 715,080 0.1233$ 88,153$ 25,376$ 36,506$ -$ (8,290)$ 141,745$ (446,521)$ 6 7 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.1294$ 92,561$ 26,645$ 38,331$ -$ (8,538)$ 148,999$ (337,032)$ 781007157715,080 715,080 0.1359$ 97,189$ 27,977$ 40,248$ -$ (8,795)$ 156,619$ (226,900)$ 891007157715,080 715,080 0.1427$ 102,048$ 29,376$ 42,260$ -$ (9,058)$ 164,626$ (116,122)$ 9 10 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.1498$ 107,151$ 30,845$ 44,373$ -$ (9,330)$ 173,039$ (4,698)$ 10111007157715,080 715,080 0.1573$ 112,508$ 32,387$ 46,592$ -$ (9,610)$ 181,877$ 107,374$ 11121007157715,080 715,080 0.1652$ 118,134$ 34,007$ 48,921$ -$ (9,898)$ 191,163$ 220,096$ 12 13 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.1735$ 124,040$ 35,707$ 51,367$ -$ (10,195)$ 200,919$ 333,469$ 13141007157715,080 715,080 0.1821$ 130,242$ 37,492$ 53,936$ -$ (10,501)$ 211,169$ 447,495$ 14151007157715,080 715,080 0.1912$ 136,755$ 39,367$ 56,632$ -$ (10,816)$ 221,938$ 562,175$ 15 16 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.2008$ 143,592$ 41,335$ 59,464$ -$ (11,141)$ 233,251$ 677,510$ 16171007157715,080 715,080 0.2108$ 150,772$ 43,402$ 62,437$ -$ (11,475)$ 245,136$ 793,503$ 17181007157715,080 715,080 0.2214$ 158,311$ 45,572$ 65,559$ -$ (11,819)$ 257,622$ 910,154$ 18 19 100 7157 715,080 715,080 0.2325$ 166,226$ 47,851$ 68,837$ -$ (12,174)$ 270,740$ 1,027,466$ 19201007157715,080 715,080 0.2441$ 174,537$ 50,243$ 72,279$ -$ (12,539)$ 284,520$ 1,145,441$ 20TOTAL14,301,590 572064 143016 3,694,974$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls2.2 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water DistrictProject:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle Reservoir By:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.2 Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments: Turbine Flow 2.2 cfs =1.4 mgdNumber of Turbines 1 each Turbine Eff 0.75Generator Eff 0.85Head Differential 300 ft =130 psi Generator Power 36 kW =48 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 96.0%%(based on historical flow)Availability 95%% In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7989 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg) Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,060,000$ (input project capital cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value (224,369)$ NPV Payback Period 25.4 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,060,000)$ 0 1 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (2,840)$ 43,243$ (1,018,619)$ 12367989283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (2,925)$ 44,938$ (977,468)$ 2 3 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (3,013)$ 46,719$ (936,528)$ 34367989283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (3,103)$ 48,591$ (895,781)$ 4 5 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (3,196)$ 50,559$ (855,210)$ 56367989283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (3,292)$ 52,627$ (814,798)$ 67367989283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (3,391)$ 54,800$ (774,530)$ 7 8 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (3,493)$ 57,083$ (734,390)$ 89367989283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (3,597)$ 59,483$ (694,364)$ 9 10 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.0881 10,483$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (3,705)$ 62,005$ (654,437)$ 1011367989283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (3,816)$ 71,248$ (610,534)$ 11 12 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (3,931)$ 74,033$ (566,880)$ 1213367989283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (4,049)$ 76,959$ (523,454)$ 13 14 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (4,170)$ 80,034$ (480,237)$ 1415367989283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (4,295)$ 83,266$ (437,212)$ 1516367989283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (4,424)$ 86,661$ (394,361)$ 16 17 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (4,557)$ 90,229$ (351,667)$ 1718367989283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (4,694)$ 93,978$ (309,113)$ 18 19 36 7989 283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (4,835)$ 97,917$ (266,686)$ 1920367989283,977 118,977 0.1435 17,076$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (4,980)$ 102,056$ (224,369)$ 20 TOTAL 5,679,546 227182 56795 1,376,429$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls3.6 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.3Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments:Turbine Flow 3.6 cfs =2.3 mgd Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.8 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 68 kW =91 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 93.0%%(based on historical flow) Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7739 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg) Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,060,000$ (input project capital cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 80,041$ NPV Payback Period 18.6 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,060,000)$ 01687739525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (5,254)$ 62,098$ (1,000,576)$ 1 2 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (5,411)$ 63,721$ (942,225)$ 23687739525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (5,574)$ 65,427$ (884,891)$ 3 4 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (5,741)$ 67,223$ (828,520)$ 45687739525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (5,913)$ 69,111$ (773,062)$ 56687739525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (6,091)$ 71,097$ (718,467)$ 6 7 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (6,273)$ 73,186$ (664,688)$ 78687739525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (6,461)$ 75,383$ (611,679)$ 8 9 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (6,655)$ 77,694$ (559,398)$ 910687739525,373 360,373 0.0881 31,752$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (6,855)$ 80,124$ (507,804)$ 10 11 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (7,061)$ 102,649$ (444,552)$ 1112687739525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (7,272)$ 105,337$ (382,438)$ 12 13 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (7,491)$ 108,163$ (321,405)$ 1314687739525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (7,715)$ 111,135$ (261,396)$ 1415687739525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (7,947)$ 114,260$ (202,355)$ 15 16 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (8,185)$ 117,546$ (144,233)$ 1617687739525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (8,431)$ 121,001$ (86,978)$ 17 18 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (8,684)$ 124,633$ (30,544)$ 1819687739525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (8,944)$ 128,452$ 25,115$ 19 20 68 7739 525,373 360,373 0.1435 51,721$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (9,212)$ 132,468$ 80,041$ 20TOTAL10,507,464 420299 105075 1,870,708$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls6.75 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.4Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments:Turbine Flow 6.75 cfs =4.4 mgd Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.85 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 135 kW =181 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 74.0%%(based on historical flow) Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 6158 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg) Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,120,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 407,735$ NPV Payback Period 14.7 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,120,000)$ 011356158832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (8,328)$ 86,112$ (1,037,596)$ 1 2 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (8,578)$ 87,642$ (957,339)$ 231356158832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (8,835)$ 89,254$ (879,126)$ 3 4 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (9,100)$ 90,951$ (802,858)$ 451356158832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (9,373)$ 92,739$ (728,440)$ 561356158832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (9,655)$ 94,621$ (655,780)$ 6 7 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (9,944)$ 96,603$ (584,793)$ 781356158832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (10,243)$ 98,691$ (515,396)$ 8 9 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (10,550)$ 100,888$ (447,508)$ 9101356158832,812 667,812 0.0881 58,840$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (10,866)$ 103,201$ (381,054)$ 10 11 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (11,192)$ 142,641$ (293,159)$ 11121356158832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (11,528)$ 145,205$ (207,537)$ 12 13 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (11,874)$ 147,903$ (124,079)$ 13141356158832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (12,230)$ 150,744$ (42,682)$ 14151356158832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (12,597)$ 153,733$ 36,755$ 15 16 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (12,975)$ 156,879$ 114,328$ 16171356158832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (13,364)$ 160,191$ 190,126$ 17 18 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (13,765)$ 163,675$ 264,238$ 18191356158832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (14,178)$ 167,342$ 336,748$ 19 20 135 6158 832,812 667,812 0.1435 95,845$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (14,603)$ 171,201$ 407,735$ 20TOTAL16,656,237 666249 166562 2,500,217$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls6.75NPV AB2466 Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.4aTurbine NPV Analysis - with AB 2466 (wheeling) =input Comments: Turbine Flow 6.75 cfs =4.4 mgdNumber of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.85 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 135 kW =181 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 74%%(based on historical flow)Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 6158 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhrSummer Peak Demand Charge $13.77 Winter Peak Demand Charge $4.77Coincident Demand Charge $11.53Base Rate $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0966 See 'AL-TOU Rates' for elect rates Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract) Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $0 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 0 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,090,000$ (input project capital cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 1,588,720$ NPV Payback Period 8.1 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate (2) Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings (1) REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,090,000)$ 0 1 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.0966$ 80,442$ 26,912$ 33,312$ -$ (8,328)$ 132,338$ (963,361)$ 121356158832,812 832,812 0.1014$ 84,464$ 28,257$ 34,978$ -$ (8,578)$ 139,122$ (835,963)$ 2 3 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.1065$ 88,688$ 29,670$ 36,727$ -$ (8,835)$ 146,249$ (707,805)$ 3 4 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.1118$ 93,122$ 31,154$ 38,563$ -$ (9,100)$ 153,739$ (578,885)$ 451356158832,812 832,812 0.1174$ 97,778$ 32,711$ 40,492$ -$ (9,373)$ 161,608$ (449,203)$ 561356158832,812 832,812 0.1233$ 102,667$ 34,347$ 42,516$ -$ (9,655)$ 169,875$ (318,757)$ 6 7 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.1294$ 107,800$ 36,064$ 44,642$ -$ (9,944)$ 178,562$ (187,544)$ 781356158832,812 832,812 0.1359$ 113,190$ 37,867$ 46,874$ -$ (10,243)$ 187,689$ (55,564)$ 891356158832,812 832,812 0.1427$ 118,850$ 39,761$ 49,218$ -$ (10,550)$ 197,279$ 77,186$ 9 10 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.1498$ 124,792$ 41,749$ 51,679$ -$ (10,866)$ 207,353$ 210,706$ 10111356158832,812 832,812 0.1573$ 131,032$ 43,836$ 54,263$ -$ (11,192)$ 217,938$ 345,000$ 11121356158832,812 832,812 0.1652$ 137,584$ 46,028$ 56,976$ -$ (11,528)$ 229,059$ 480,068$ 12 13 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.1735$ 144,463$ 48,329$ 59,824$ -$ (11,874)$ 240,743$ 615,912$ 13141356158832,812 832,812 0.1821$ 151,686$ 50,746$ 62,816$ -$ (12,230)$ 253,017$ 752,534$ 14151356158832,812 832,812 0.1912$ 159,270$ 53,283$ 65,956$ -$ (12,597)$ 265,913$ 889,937$ 15 16 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.2008$ 167,234$ 55,947$ 69,254$ -$ (12,975)$ 279,460$ 1,028,122$ 16171356158832,812 832,812 0.2108$ 175,595$ 58,745$ 72,717$ -$ (13,364)$ 293,693$ 1,167,090$ 17181356158832,812 832,812 0.2214$ 184,375$ 61,682$ 76,353$ -$ (13,765)$ 308,645$ 1,306,845$ 18 19 135 6158 832,812 832,812 0.2325$ 193,594$ 64,766$ 80,170$ -$ (14,178)$ 324,352$ 1,447,387$ 19201356158832,812 832,812 0.2441$ 203,274$ 68,004$ 84,179$ -$ (14,603)$ 340,854$ 1,588,720$ 20TOTAL16,656,237 666249 166562 4,427,489$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls7.75 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.5Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments:Turbine Flow 7.75 cfs =5.0 mgd Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.86 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 157 kW =211 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 60.0%%(based on historical flow) Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 4993 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg) Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,120,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 346,700$ NPV Payback Period 15.3 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,120,000)$ 011574993784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (7,844)$ 82,332$ (1,041,214)$ 1 2 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (8,079)$ 83,876$ (964,406)$ 231574993784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (8,322)$ 85,503$ (889,480)$ 3 4 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (8,571)$ 87,216$ (816,344)$ 451574993784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (8,829)$ 89,019$ (744,911)$ 561574993784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (9,093)$ 90,918$ (675,095)$ 6 7 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (9,366)$ 92,917$ (606,817)$ 781574993784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (9,647)$ 95,021$ (540,000)$ 8 9 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (9,937)$ 97,236$ (474,569)$ 9101574993784,411 619,411 0.0881 54,576$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (10,235)$ 99,568$ (410,454)$ 10 11 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (10,542)$ 136,345$ (326,438)$ 11121574993784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (10,858)$ 138,928$ (244,518)$ 12 13 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (11,184)$ 141,647$ (164,590)$ 13141574993784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (11,519)$ 144,508$ (86,560)$ 14151574993784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (11,865)$ 147,519$ (10,334)$ 15 16 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (12,221)$ 150,687$ 64,176$ 16171574993784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (12,587)$ 154,021$ 137,055$ 17 18 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (12,965)$ 157,529$ 208,384$ 18191574993784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (13,354)$ 161,220$ 278,241$ 19 20 157 4993 784,411 619,411 0.1435 88,898$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (13,755)$ 165,103$ 346,700$ 20TOTAL15,688,227 627529 156882 2,401,112$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls (2) 3.6 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water DistrictProject:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.6Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments: Turbine Flow 3.6 cfs =2.3 mgd Number of Turbines 2 each Turbine Eff 80% Generator Eff 93%Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power per Turbine 68 kW =91 hpGenerator Power Total 136 kW =182 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available for Both Turbines 63.0%%(based on historical flow)Adequate Flow for Only One Turbine 30.0%%(based on historical flow)Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7739 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 5243 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg)Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,290,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 298,844$ NPV Payback Period 16.2 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,290,000)$ 016812982881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (8,813)$ 89,897$ (1,203,974)$ 126812982881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (9,077)$ 91,413$ (1,120,264)$ 2 3 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (9,349)$ 93,010$ (1,038,760)$ 3 4 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (9,630)$ 94,692$ (959,356)$ 4 5 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (9,919)$ 96,463$ (881,949)$ 5 6 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (10,216)$ 98,329$ (806,442)$ 6 7 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (10,523)$ 100,295$ (732,743)$ 7 8 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (10,839)$ 102,364$ (660,762)$ 8 9 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (11,164)$ 104,544$ (590,414)$ 9 10 68 12982 881,271 716,271 0.0881 63,110$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (11,499)$ 106,839$ (521,618)$ 10116812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (11,844)$ 148,945$ (429,838)$ 11126812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (12,199)$ 151,489$ (340,511)$ 12136812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (12,565)$ 154,167$ (253,519)$ 13146812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (12,942)$ 156,987$ (168,750)$ 14156812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (13,330)$ 159,955$ (86,098)$ 15166812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (13,730)$ 163,079$ (5,460)$ 16176812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (14,142)$ 166,368$ 73,261$ 17186812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (14,566)$ 169,829$ 150,160$ 18196812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (15,003)$ 173,472$ 225,326$ 19206812982881,271 716,271 0.1435 102,799$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (15,453)$ 177,306$ 298,844$ 20TOTAL17,625,423 705017 176254 2,599,442$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls 3.6-5.4 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water DistrictProject:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.7Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments: Turbine1 Flow 3.6 cfs =2.3 mgd Turbine2 Flow 5.4 cfs =3.5 mgd Total Turbine Flow 9.0 cfs =5.8 mgd Number of Turbines 2Turbine1 Eff 80%Turbine2 Eff 78.5%Generator Eff 93%Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiTurbine1 Generator Power 68 kW =91 hpTurbine2 Generator Power 100 kW =134 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available for Both Turbines 42.0%%(based on historical flow)Adequate Flow for Turbine1 -Only 6.9%%Adequate Flow for Turbine2 - Only 44.1%%Percent Avail - Turbine1 48.9%Percent Avail - Turbine2 86.1%Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 4069 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 7165 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg)Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,340,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 388,675$ NPV Payback Period 15.5 years Year Total Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,340,000)$ 0 1 168 11235 992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (9,922)$ 98,558$ (1,245,686)$ 1 2 168 11235 992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (10,219)$ 100,041$ (1,154,076)$ 2 3 168 11235 992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (10,526)$ 101,603$ (1,065,041)$ 3 4 168 11235 992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (10,842)$ 103,250$ (978,460)$ 4516811235992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (11,167)$ 104,985$ (894,214)$ 5616811235992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (11,502)$ 106,814$ (812,193)$ 6716811235992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (11,847)$ 108,740$ (732,287)$ 7816811235992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (12,202)$ 110,770$ (654,395)$ 8916811235992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (12,568)$ 112,909$ (578,418)$ 91016811235992,156 827,156 0.0881 72,880$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (12,945)$ 115,162$ (504,262)$ 101116811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (13,334)$ 163,369$ (403,595)$ 111216811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (13,734)$ 165,868$ (305,788)$ 121316811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (14,146)$ 168,500$ (210,708)$ 131416811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (14,570)$ 171,273$ (118,226)$ 141516811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (15,007)$ 174,192$ (28,217)$ 151616811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (15,457)$ 177,266$ 59,436$ 161716811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (15,921)$ 180,503$ 144,845$ 171816811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (16,399)$ 183,911$ 228,120$ 181916811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (16,891)$ 187,499$ 309,363$ 192016811235992,156 827,156 0.1435 118,714$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (17,398)$ 191,276$ 388,675$ 20TOTAL19,843,112 793724 198431 2,826,488$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls 3.6-6.75 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water DistrictProject:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle Reservoir By:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.8Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments:Turbine1 Flow 3.6 cfs =2.3 mgdTurbine2 Flow 6.75 cfs =4.4 mgdTotal Turbine Flow 10.4 cfs =6.7 mgdNumber of Turbines 2Turbine1 Eff 80%Turbine2 Eff 85.0% Generator Eff 93% Head Differential 300 ft =130 psi Turbine1 Generator Power 68 kW =91 hp Turbine2 Generator Power 135 kW =181 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available for Both Turbines 8.0%%(based on historical flow)Adequate Flow for Turbine1 -Only 19.0%%Adequate Flow for Turbine2 - Only 66.0%%Percent Avail - Turbine1 27.0%Percent Avail - Turbine2 74.0% Availability 95%% In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 2247 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 6158 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual HoursOn Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg)Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,340,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 380,079$ NPV Payback Period 15.6 years Year Total Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,340,000)$ 012038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (9,853)$ 98,026$ (1,246,195)$ 122038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (10,149)$ 99,510$ (1,155,071)$ 232038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (10,453)$ 101,075$ (1,066,499)$ 342038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (10,767)$ 102,724$ (980,359)$ 452038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (11,090)$ 104,461$ (896,534)$ 562038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (11,423)$ 106,292$ (814,913)$ 672038405985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (11,765)$ 108,221$ (735,389)$ 7 8 203 8405 985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (12,118)$ 110,254$ (657,860)$ 8 9 203 8405 985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (12,482)$ 112,395$ (582,229)$ 9 10 203 8405 985,340 820,340 0.0881 72,279$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (12,856)$ 114,650$ (508,402)$ 10 11 203 8405 985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (13,242)$ 162,482$ (408,281)$ 11122038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (13,639)$ 164,984$ (310,996)$ 12132038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (14,049)$ 167,619$ (216,413)$ 13142038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (14,470)$ 170,394$ (124,405)$ 14152038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (14,904)$ 173,317$ (34,849)$ 15162038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (15,351)$ 176,394$ 52,373$ 16172038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (15,812)$ 179,634$ 137,371$ 17182038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (16,286)$ 183,045$ 220,254$ 18192038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (16,775)$ 186,636$ 301,124$ 19202038405985,340 820,340 0.1435 117,735$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (17,278)$ 190,417$ 380,079$ 20TOTAL19,706,791 788272 197068 2,812,531$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls3.6-6.75NPV AB2466 Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.8aTurbine NPV Analysis - with AB 2466 (wheeling) =input Comments:Turbine Flow cfs =0.0 mgd Number of Turbines eachTurbine Eff Generator EffHead Differential ft =0 psiGenerator Power kW =0 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr hrs Adequate Flow Available %(based on historical flow) Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhrSummer Peak Demand Charge $13.77 Winter Peak Demand Charge $4.77Coincident Demand Charge $11.53 Base Rate $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0966 See 'AL-TOU Rates' for elect ratesInflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $0 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 0 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,090,000$ (input project capital cost for payback period calc) 20 yr Net Present Value 2,251,210$ NPV Payback Period 6.5 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate (2) Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings (1) REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,090,000)$ 0 1 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.0966$ 95,175$ 40,420$ 39,414$ -$ (9,853)$ 165,156$ (931,956)$ 122038405985,340 985,340 0.1014$ 99,934$ 42,441$ 41,384$ -$ (10,149)$ 173,610$ (772,976)$ 232038405985,340 985,340 0.1065$ 104,931$ 44,563$ 43,453$ -$ (10,453)$ 182,494$ (613,057)$ 3 4 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.1118$ 110,177$ 46,792$ 45,626$ -$ (10,767)$ 191,828$ (452,198)$ 452038405985,340 985,340 0.1174$ 115,686$ 49,131$ 47,907$ -$ (11,090)$ 201,634$ (290,396)$ 5 6 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.1233$ 121,470$ 51,588$ 50,303$ -$ (11,423)$ 211,938$ (127,650)$ 672038405985,340 985,340 0.1294$ 127,544$ 54,167$ 52,818$ -$ (11,765)$ 222,763$ 36,042$ 7 8 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.1359$ 133,921$ 56,875$ 55,459$ -$ (12,118)$ 234,137$ 200,684$ 892038405985,340 985,340 0.1427$ 140,617$ 59,719$ 58,232$ -$ (12,482)$ 246,086$ 366,276$ 9 10 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.1498$ 147,648$ 62,705$ 61,143$ -$ (12,856)$ 258,640$ 532,822$ 10112038405985,340 985,340 0.1573$ 155,030$ 65,840$ 64,201$ -$ (13,242)$ 271,829$ 700,322$ 11122038405985,340 985,340 0.1652$ 162,782$ 69,132$ 67,411$ -$ (13,639)$ 285,685$ 868,780$ 12 13 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.1735$ 170,921$ 72,589$ 70,781$ -$ (14,049)$ 300,242$ 1,038,199$ 13142038405985,340 985,340 0.1821$ 179,467$ 76,218$ 74,320$ -$ (14,470)$ 315,535$ 1,208,579$ 14 15 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.1912$ 188,440$ 80,029$ 78,036$ -$ (14,904)$ 331,602$ 1,379,925$ 15162038405985,340 985,340 0.2008$ 197,862$ 84,031$ 81,938$ -$ (15,351)$ 348,480$ 1,552,237$ 16 17 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.2108$ 207,755$ 88,232$ 86,035$ -$ (15,812)$ 366,211$ 1,725,519$ 17182038405985,340 985,340 0.2214$ 218,143$ 92,644$ 90,337$ -$ (16,286)$ 384,838$ 1,899,774$ 18 19 203 8405 985,340 985,340 0.2325$ 229,050$ 97,276$ 94,853$ -$ (16,775)$ 404,405$ 2,075,003$ 19202038405985,340 985,340 0.2441$ 240,503$ 102,140$ 99,596$ -$ (17,278)$ 424,961$ 2,251,210$ 20TOTAL19,706,791 788272 197068 5,522,073$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls 2.2-7.75 NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water DistrictProject:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.9Turbine NPV Analysis =input Comments: Turbine1 Flow 2.2 cfs =1.4 mgd Turbine2 Flow 7.75 cfs =5.0 mgd Total Turbine Flow 10.0 cfs =6.4 mgd Number of Turbines 2Turbine1 Eff 75%Turbine2 Eff 86.0%Generator Eff 93%Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiTurbine1 Generator Power 39 kW =52 hpTurbine2 Generator Power 157 kW =211 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available for Both Turbines 29.0%%(based on historical flow)Adequate Flow for Turbine1 -Only 35.0%%Adequate Flow for Turbine2 - Only 32.0%%Percent Avail - Turbine1 64.0%Percent Avail - Turbine2 61.0%Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 5326 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 5076 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg)Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,290,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 454,394$ NPV Payback Period 14.8 years Year Total Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,290,000)$ 0 1 196 10403 1,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (10,046)$ 99,532$ (1,194,754)$ 1 2 196 10403 1,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (10,348)$ 101,011$ (1,102,256)$ 2 3 196 10403 1,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (10,658)$ 102,569$ (1,012,375)$ 3 4 196 10403 1,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (10,978)$ 104,212$ (924,986)$ 45196104031,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (11,307)$ 105,943$ (839,972)$ 56196104031,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (11,646)$ 107,768$ (757,218)$ 67196104031,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (11,996)$ 109,690$ (676,615)$ 78196104031,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (12,356)$ 111,715$ (598,058)$ 89196104031,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (12,726)$ 113,849$ (521,448)$ 910196104031,004,621 839,621 0.0881 73,978$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (13,108)$ 116,097$ (446,690)$ 1011196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (13,501)$ 164,990$ (345,023)$ 1112196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (13,906)$ 167,485$ (246,264)$ 1213196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (14,323)$ 170,112$ (150,275)$ 1314196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (14,753)$ 172,879$ (56,925)$ 1415196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (15,196)$ 175,793$ 33,911$ 1516196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (15,652)$ 178,861$ 122,352$ 1617196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (16,121)$ 182,092$ 208,514$ 1718196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (16,605)$ 185,494$ 292,505$ 1819196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (17,103)$ 189,075$ 374,432$ 1920196104031,004,621 839,621 0.1435 120,503$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (17,616)$ 192,846$ 454,394$ 20TOTAL20,092,425 803697 200924 2,852,012$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls7.75 NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.10Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments: Turbine Flow 7.75 cfs =5.0 mgdNumber of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.86 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 157 kW =211 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available %Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7705 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 37%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 63% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%11%884 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%26%1967Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%6%452 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%13%1019 Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%14%1043Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%30%2340 Average Rate $0.0934 (weighted avg)100%7,705 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract) Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,120,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 974,078$ NPV Payback Period 10.7 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,120,000)$ 0 1 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (12,104)$ 121,168$ (1,004,050)$ 1215777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (12,467)$ 122,585$ (891,795)$ 2 3 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (12,841)$ 124,080$ (783,064)$ 3 4 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (13,227)$ 125,657$ (677,693)$ 4515777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (13,623)$ 127,321$ (575,524)$ 5 6 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (14,032)$ 129,076$ (476,407)$ 6 7 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (14,453)$ 130,927$ (380,198)$ 7815777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (14,887)$ 132,878$ (286,760)$ 8915777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (15,333)$ 134,936$ (195,961)$ 9 10 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.0934 97,672$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (15,793)$ 137,106$ (107,674)$ 101115777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (16,267)$ 200,820$ 16,070$ 111215777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (16,755)$ 203,231$ 135,908$ 12 13 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (17,258)$ 205,773$ 252,020$ 131415777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (17,775)$ 208,452$ 364,578$ 141515777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (18,309)$ 211,275$ 473,748$ 15 16 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (18,858)$ 214,250$ 579,688$ 161715777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (19,424)$ 217,385$ 682,550$ 171815777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (20,006)$ 220,687$ 782,477$ 18 19 157 7705 1,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (20,607)$ 224,167$ 879,609$ 192015777051,210,424 1,045,424 0.1522 159,098$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (21,225)$ 227,833$ 974,078$ 20TOTAL24,208,482 968339 242085 3,419,606$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls(2)3.6NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.11Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments:Turbine Flow 7.2 cfs =4.6 mgd (3.6 + 3.6 cfs) Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 80% Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 136 kW =182 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available % Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 7881 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 36%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 64% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%11%880 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%25%1958Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%6%469 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%13%1059Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%14%1083Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%31%2432 Average Rate $0.0930 (weighted avg)100%7,881 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,290,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 609,185$ NPV Payback Period 13.6 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,290,000)$ 0 1 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (10,700)$ 109,101$ (1,185,597)$ 1213678811,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (11,021)$ 110,560$ (1,084,354)$ 2313678811,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (11,351)$ 112,098$ (986,122)$ 3 4 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (11,692)$ 113,720$ (890,761)$ 4513678811,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (12,043)$ 115,430$ (798,134)$ 5 6 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (12,404)$ 117,233$ (708,112)$ 6713678811,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (12,776)$ 119,132$ (620,570)$ 7 8 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (13,159)$ 121,134$ (535,390)$ 8913678811,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (13,554)$ 123,244$ (452,458)$ 91013678811,069,963 904,963 0.0930 84,201$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (13,961)$ 125,467$ (371,667)$ 10 11 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (14,379)$ 180,763$ (260,280)$ 111213678811,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (14,811)$ 183,231$ (152,236)$ 12 13 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (15,255)$ 185,831$ (47,376)$ 131413678811,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (15,713)$ 188,570$ 54,447$ 14 15 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (16,184)$ 191,455$ 153,376$ 151613678811,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (16,670)$ 194,494$ 249,547$ 16 17 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (17,170)$ 197,695$ 343,092$ 171813678811,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (17,685)$ 201,065$ 434,134$ 181913678811,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (18,215)$ 204,614$ 522,794$ 19 20 136 7881 1,069,963 904,963 0.1516 137,154$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (18,762)$ 208,352$ 609,185$ 20TOTAL21,399,251 855970 213993 3,103,192$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls11 NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.12Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments:Turbine Flow 11 cfs =7.1 mgd Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.86 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 223 kW =299 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available % Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 6220 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 45%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 55% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%14%868 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%31%1931Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%5%318 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%12%718Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%12%735Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%27%1649 Average Rate $0.0965 (weighted avg)100%6,220 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,150,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 1,242,891$ NPV Payback Period 9.6 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,150,000)$ 0 1 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (13,869)$ 139,657$ (1,016,357)$ 1222362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (14,285)$ 141,021$ (887,220)$ 2322362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (14,714)$ 142,461$ (762,382)$ 3 4 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (15,155)$ 143,982$ (641,644)$ 4522362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (15,610)$ 145,588$ (524,816)$ 5 6 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (16,078)$ 147,284$ (411,718)$ 6722362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (16,560)$ 149,073$ (302,175)$ 7 8 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (17,057)$ 150,962$ (196,021)$ 8922362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (17,569)$ 152,954$ (93,097)$ 91022362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.0965 117,926$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (18,096)$ 155,057$ 6,748$ 10 11 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (18,639)$ 231,439$ 149,361$ 111222362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (19,198)$ 233,779$ 287,212$ 12 13 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (19,774)$ 236,247$ 420,519$ 131422362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (20,367)$ 238,851$ 549,492$ 14 15 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (20,978)$ 241,596$ 674,330$ 151622362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (21,608)$ 244,491$ 795,223$ 16 17 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (22,256)$ 247,543$ 912,355$ 171822362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (22,923)$ 250,761$ 1,025,900$ 181922362201,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (23,611)$ 254,153$ 1,136,025$ 19 20 223 6220 1,386,904 1,221,904 0.1572 192,089$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (24,319)$ 257,729$ 1,242,891$ 20TOTAL27,738,072 1109523 277381 3,904,630$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls3.6-6.75NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.13Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments:Turbine Flow 10.35 cfs =6.7 mgd (6.75 + 3.6 cfs) Number of Turbines 2 eachTurbine Eff 0.83 (weighted avg of two eff's) Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 202 kW =271 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available % Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 6568 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 43%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 57% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%13%875 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%30%1949Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%5%348 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%12%786Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%12%804Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%27%1805 Average Rate $0.0957 (weighted avg)100%6,568 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,340,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 958,608$ NPV Payback Period 11.7 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,340,000)$ 0 1 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (13,298)$ 133,823$ (1,211,940)$ 1220265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (13,697)$ 135,204$ (1,088,130)$ 2320265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (14,108)$ 136,662$ (968,373)$ 3 4 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (14,531)$ 138,201$ (852,483)$ 4520265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (14,967)$ 139,826$ (740,280)$ 5 6 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (15,416)$ 141,540$ (631,592)$ 6720265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (15,879)$ 143,350$ (526,254)$ 7 8 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (16,355)$ 145,259$ (424,111)$ 8920265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (16,846)$ 147,273$ (325,010)$ 91020265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.0957 111,521$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (17,351)$ 149,397$ (228,810)$ 10 11 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (17,872)$ 221,773$ (92,153)$ 111220265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (18,408)$ 224,136$ 40,012$ 12 13 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (18,960)$ 226,628$ 167,892$ 131420265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (19,529)$ 229,256$ 291,684$ 14 15 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (20,115)$ 232,027$ 411,577$ 151620265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (20,718)$ 234,948$ 527,751$ 16 17 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (21,340)$ 238,027$ 640,380$ 171820265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (21,980)$ 241,272$ 749,628$ 181920265681,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (22,640)$ 244,692$ 855,653$ 19 20 202 6568 1,329,838 1,164,838 0.1559 181,656$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (23,319)$ 248,297$ 958,608$ 20TOTAL26,596,761 1063870 265968 3,751,589$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls7.75-2.2NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.14Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments:Turbine Flow 9.95 cfs =6.4 mgd (7.75 + 2.2 cfs) Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.84 (weighted avg of two eff's) Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 197 kW =264 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available % Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 6769 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 41%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 59% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%13%860 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%28%1915Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%5%372 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%12%839Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%13%858Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%28%1925 Average Rate $0.0950 (weighted avg)100%6,769 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,290,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 999,079$ NPV Payback Period 11.3 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,290,000)$ 0 1 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (13,335)$ 133,236$ (1,162,501)$ 1219767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (13,735)$ 134,616$ (1,039,229)$ 2319767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (14,147)$ 136,073$ (919,989)$ 3 4 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (14,571)$ 137,611$ (804,593)$ 4519767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (15,009)$ 139,235$ (692,865)$ 5 6 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (15,459)$ 140,948$ (584,631)$ 6719767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (15,923)$ 142,756$ (479,730)$ 7 8 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (16,400)$ 144,664$ (378,005)$ 8919767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (16,892)$ 146,676$ (279,306)$ 91019767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.0950 110,971$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (17,399)$ 148,799$ (183,490)$ 10 11 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (17,921)$ 220,828$ (47,416)$ 111219767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (18,459)$ 223,190$ 84,191$ 12 13 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (19,012)$ 225,680$ 211,536$ 131419767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (19,583)$ 228,307$ 334,815$ 14 15 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (20,170)$ 231,076$ 454,217$ 151619767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (20,775)$ 233,995$ 569,920$ 16 17 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (21,399)$ 237,072$ 682,097$ 171819767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (22,041)$ 240,316$ 790,912$ 181919767691,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (22,702)$ 243,734$ 896,522$ 19 20 197 6769 1,333,496 1,168,496 0.1547 180,760$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (23,383)$ 247,337$ 999,079$ 20TOTAL26,669,915 1066797 266699 3,736,147$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls10 NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTCDate Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/16/2010Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.15Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments: Turbine Flow 10 cfs =6.5 mgdNumber of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.86 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 203 kW =272 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's)Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available %Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 6769 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 41%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 59% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%13%860 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%28%1915Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%5%372 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%12%839 Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%13%858Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%28%1925 Average Rate $0.0950 (weighted avg)100%6,769 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract) Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009) Project Capital Cost 1,130,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 1,212,062$ NPV Payback Period 9.6 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV YearUnitkWhrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,130,000)$ 0 1 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (13,721)$ 136,517$ (999,362)$ 1220367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (14,133)$ 137,885$ (873,096)$ 2 3 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (14,557)$ 139,330$ (751,002)$ 3 4 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (14,993)$ 140,856$ (632,885)$ 4520367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (15,443)$ 142,467$ (518,562)$ 5 6 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (15,906)$ 144,167$ (407,857)$ 6 7 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (16,384)$ 145,962$ (300,600)$ 7820367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (16,875)$ 147,856$ (196,631)$ 8920367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (17,381)$ 149,854$ (95,793)$ 9 10 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.0950 114,638$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (17,903)$ 151,962$ 2,060$ 101120367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (18,440)$ 226,282$ 141,494$ 111220367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (18,993)$ 228,628$ 276,308$ 12 13 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (19,563)$ 231,103$ 406,713$ 131420367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (20,150)$ 233,712$ 532,911$ 141520367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (20,754)$ 236,464$ 655,097$ 15 16 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (21,377)$ 239,366$ 773,456$ 161720367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (22,018)$ 242,425$ 888,166$ 171820367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (22,679)$ 245,650$ 999,396$ 18 19 203 6769 1,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (23,359)$ 249,050$ 1,107,310$ 192020367691,372,106 1,207,106 0.1547 186,733$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (24,060)$ 252,633$ 1,212,062$ 20TOTAL27,442,124 1097685 274421 3,822,169$ Carollo Engineers 2/16/2010 CarlsbadHydro_NPV_rev1.xls12 NPVpeak Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle ReservoirBy:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009Printed Date:2/16/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.16Turbine NPV Analysis - Assuming Running Turbine During Peak Periods =input Comments:Turbine Flow 12 cfs =7.7 mgd Number of Turbines 1 eachTurbine Eff 0.86 Generator Eff 0.93Head Differential 300 ft =130 psiGenerator Power 243 kW =326 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available % Availability %In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 5704 hrs (refer to 'TurbineAvailability.xls') In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs Percentage Hours ON PEAK 49%Percentage Hours OFF PEAK 51% O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 31%15%866 On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 69%34%1929Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7%5%271 Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%11%611Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%11%625Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37%25%1402 Average Rate $0.0981 (weighted avg)100%5,704 Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract)Inflation (O&M)3% Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,160,000$ (input project cost for payback period calc)20 yr Net Present Value 1,264,220$ NPV Payback Period 9.6 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$0 (1,160,000)$ 0 1 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (13,875)$ 141,590$ (1,024,508)$ 1224357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (14,291)$ 142,953$ (893,601)$ 2324357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (14,720)$ 144,394$ (767,069)$ 3 4 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (15,161)$ 145,914$ (644,711)$ 4524357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (15,616)$ 147,520$ (526,334)$ 5 6 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (16,085)$ 149,215$ (411,752)$ 6724357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (16,567)$ 151,004$ (300,789)$ 7 8 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (17,064)$ 152,893$ (193,277)$ 8924357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (17,576)$ 154,886$ (89,054)$ 91024357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.0981 119,864$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (18,103)$ 156,988$ 12,035$ 10 11 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (18,646)$ 234,588$ 156,588$ 111224357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (19,206)$ 236,928$ 296,296$ 12 13 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (19,782)$ 239,397$ 431,381$ 131424357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (20,375)$ 242,000$ 562,054$ 14 15 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (20,987)$ 244,745$ 688,519$ 151624357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (21,616)$ 247,640$ 810,969$ 16 17 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (22,265)$ 250,692$ 929,590$ 171824357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (22,933)$ 253,909$ 1,044,561$ 181924357041,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (23,621)$ 257,301$ 1,156,050$ 19 20 243 5704 1,387,471 1,222,471 0.1597 195,246$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (24,329)$ 260,876$ 1,264,220$ 20TOTAL27,749,424 1109977 277494 3,955,433$ Carollo Engineers 2/24/2010 Zeropex_NPV.xlsZeropexUnit_NPV Client:Carlsbad Municipal Water District Project:Hydroelectric Turbine at Maerkle Reservoir By:CTC Date Created:10/30/2009 Printed Date:2/24/2010 Job #:8362A10 Alternative No.17 Zeropex Unit NPV Analysis =input Comments: Turbine Flow 7.7 cfs =5.0 mgd =218 l/s (if unit can only handle 8 cfs then the avg should be 7 cfs;Number of Turbines 1 each (2 units but modeled as one)if up to 11 cfs then 7.8 cfs; if up to 10 cfs, then 7.7 cfs) Water to wire Eff 0.75Head Differential 334 ft =145 psiGenerator Power 163 kW =218 hp REC Revenue $0.04 $/kWhr (if using Feed in Tariff, SDGE claims REC's) Total Hours/yr 8760 hrs Adequate Flow Available 100.0%%(can accept varying flow rates) Availability 95%%In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 1 8322 hrs In Service Hours/yr - TURBINE 2 0 hrs O&M Rate $0.01 $/kWhr Base Rate $0.0884 $/kWhr Based on SDGE MPR Schedule for 10 year contract (2011)Percent of Annual Hours On Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.1451 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% On Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.1054 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Semi-peak Summer (year 1)$0.0920 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 7% Semi-peak Winter (year 1)$0.0954 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16%Off Peak Rate Summer (year 1)$0.0781 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 16% Off Peak Rate Winter (year 1)$0.0701 $/kWhr Based on SDGE TOD Periods 37% Average Rate $0.0881 (weighted avg)Inflation (elect and REC)5.0%%/yr (used to calc MPR rate for 2nd 10 yr contract) Inflation (O&M)3%Revenue from Elect Bill Net Meter $29,000 (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos)Net Meter Energy 165,000 kWhrs (based on Maerkle Reservoir 2009 partial elect bills; extrapolated for 12 mos) Discount Rate 4.5%(Based on letter from CMWD, Response to Request for Information, dated 10/1/2009)Project Capital Cost 1,510,000$ (input project capital cost for payback period calc) 20 yr Net Present Value 677,605$ NPV Payback Period 13.8 years Year Power Produced Annual Operating Hours Annual kWhrs Annual kWhrs Minus Net Meter kWhrs Rate Elect Sell Revenue Demand Savings REC Revenue Net Meter Offsets O&M Costs Net Total NPV Year Unit kW hrs/year kWhrs kWhrs $/kWhr $$$$$$ 0 (1,510,000)$ 0116383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 6,600$ 29,000$ (13,561)$ 126,984$ (1,388,484)$ 1 2 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 6,930$ 30,450$ (13,968)$ 128,358$ (1,270,943)$ 2316383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 7,277$ 31,973$ (14,387)$ 129,808$ (1,157,193)$ 3 4 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 7,640$ 33,571$ (14,818)$ 131,338$ (1,047,058)$ 4516383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 8,022$ 35,250$ (15,263)$ 132,954$ (940,368)$ 5 6 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 8,423$ 37,012$ (15,721)$ 134,660$ (836,963)$ 6716383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 8,845$ 38,863$ (16,192)$ 136,460$ (736,688)$ 7816383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 9,287$ 40,806$ (16,678)$ 138,360$ (639,395)$ 8 9 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 9,751$ 42,846$ (17,178)$ 140,364$ (544,944)$ 91016383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.0881 104,945$ 10,239$ 44,989$ (17,694)$ 142,479$ (453,198)$ 10 11 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 10,751$ 47,238$ (18,225)$ 210,709$ (323,359)$ 111216383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 11,288$ 49,600$ (18,771)$ 213,062$ (197,724)$ 12 13 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 11,853$ 52,080$ (19,335)$ 215,543$ (76,100)$ 131416383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 12,445$ 54,684$ (19,915)$ 218,159$ 41,700$ 14 15 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 13,068$ 57,418$ (20,512)$ 220,918$ 155,853$ 151616383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 13,721$ 60,289$ (21,127)$ 223,827$ 266,529$ 161716383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 14,407$ 63,303$ (21,761)$ 226,894$ 373,890$ 17 18 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 15,127$ 66,469$ (22,414)$ 230,127$ 478,092$ 181916383221,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 15,884$ 69,792$ (23,086)$ 233,534$ 579,282$ 19 20 163 8322 1,356,084 1,191,084 0.1435 170,945$ 16,678$ 73,282$ (23,779)$ 237,125$ 677,605$ 20TOTAL27,121,688 1084868 271217 3,571,665$ February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX G – FERC FILING INFORMATION The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is experiencing increased interest from those seeking to develop small/low-impact hydropower projects. This brochure explains how best to obtain Commission authorization to construct and operate these small/low-impact projects while assuring adequate protection of environmental resources. Benefits of developing these projects include: FERC’s Role Under the Federal Power Act, FERC is charged with the authorization and regulation of the nation’s non-federal hydropower resources. FERC issues three types of authorizations: Emission-free renewable source of energy Low impacts to environmental resources Financial incentives to developers under state Renewable Portfolio Standards License – Issued for 30- to 50-year terms. Must be renewed. Gives the licensee the power of “eminent domain” to obtain lands or other rights needed to construct, operate, and maintain the hydroelectric project. 5-Megawatt (MW) Exemption – Issued in perpetuity. Must be located at the site of an existing dam or use a natural water feature. Must propose increased capacity. The exemptee must own all lands and facilities other than federal lands to be eligible. Conduit Exemption – Issued in perpetuity. Must use the potential of a conduit constructed primarily for non-hydropower purpose. The exemptee must own the proposed powerhouse and the lands upon which the powerhouse will be located. A conduit exemption may not use federal lands. Project at existing dam Little change to water flow and use Unlikely to: affect threatened and endangered species; or need fish passage Applicant owns all lands needed for project construction and operation Information on existing environmental resources and project effects readily available A complete application that addresses all issues With resource agency cooperation, waive some pre-filing consultation requirements Combine scoping of issues with pre-filing consultation Combine public noticing requirements Shorten comment periods Use a single environmental document in lieu of draft and final documents Factors that Reduce Time and Cost General Process for License and Exemption Applications How FERC May Expedite the Process Developing Small/Low-Impact Hydropower Projects Getting started Contact FERC staff to get advice on the best way to obtain authorization for your project (1-866-914-2849 or smallhydro@ferc.gov) Pre-filing consultation and initial project review Gather needed information to identify project-related effects Send package describing your proposal and environmental effects to Commission staff, all relevant government and tribal agencies, and non-government and public entities Meet with all affected agencies and entities to explain your proposal and to request input Determine whether and to what degree affected agencies and entities are willing to expedite the consultation process or forego a consultation stage Apply for and obtain a state Water Quality Certification or waiver Prepare and file a license or exemption application Application processing Commission staff requests comments on application from all interested agencies and entities Commission staff conducts comprehensive project review, including issuing environmental document (not usually required for conduit exemption) Commission acts on application Lower Turnbull Drop Project No. 12597 (5.0 MW), Upper Turnbull Drop Project No. 12598 (4.1 MW), Mill Coulee Drops Project No. 12599 (1.05 MW)- licenses issued (07/28/06) 8 months from filing Corriveau Project No. 12629 (350 kW)- exemption issued (10/24/06) 10 months from filing Examples of Successfully Expedited Projects Guide to Developing Small/Low-Impact Hydropower Projects Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First St., N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 Guidance on the Internet To access guidance on small hydropower development: Point your browser to www.ferc.gov Using the drop down menu from the fifth navy blue tab, Industries, select Hydropower. Scroll to the bottom of the page and click on General Information in the lower right hand corner. Click on Licensing. For further assistance please contact us at: 1-866-914-2849 or smallhydro@ferc.gov February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX H – AB 2466 INFORMATION AB 2466 Renewable Energy Credits for Local GovernmentsJoint Utility (PG&E, SCE and SDG&E)Joint Utility (PG&E, SCE and SDG&E)Presentation by Thomas DiazPresentation by Thomas DiazJanuary 8, 2009 2AB 2466 BackgroundŠAssembly Bill 2466– Introduced in Feb. 21, 2008 as the Local Govt. Renewable Energy Self-Generation Program. ŠSigned into law by the Governor on September 28, 2008 and codified as Section 2830 of the Public Utilities Code. [http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2451-2500/ab_2466_bill_20080928_chaptered.html]ŠAB 2466 requires an investor owned utility (IOU) to file a tariff within 30 days of an eligible customer requesting service as provided under AB 2466. [rephrased per: PU Code 2830(f)]ŠThe CPUC must then approve or modify tariff within 30 days. [rephrased per: PU Code 2830(f)]ŠThe IOU is no longer required to participate once the statewide capacity of 250 MW is reached or until the IOU reaches its proportionate share of the 250 MW. [rephrased per: PU Code 2830(h)]ŠThe new law becomes effective January 1, 2009. 3What does AB 2466 do?Allows an eligible customer to apply excess renewable power produced from a customer account (“Generating Account”) [defined term per: PU Code 2830(a)(4)] as energy credits against charges for power delivered to one or more of its other accounts (“Benefitting Accounts”) [defined term per: PU Code 2830(a)(1)] . [topic rephrased from definition of “bill credit” in 2830(a)(2)] 4AB 2466 applies to Local GovernmentsŠAB 2466 applies to local governments such as:ƒCities or counties,ƒSpecial districts, ƒSchool districts, ƒPolitical subdivisions, or ƒOther local public agencies, if authorized by law to generate electricityƒ[Rephrased from PU Code 2830(a)(5), definition of “Local Government”]ŠAB 2466 does not include within the local government definition:ƒThe State of California,ƒAny agency or department of the State, orƒA joint powers authorityƒ[Rephrased from PU Code 2830(a)(5), definition of “Local Government”] 5What type of power is eligible under AB 2466?1. The net power delivered to the grid from a generating facility consisting of generators whose nameplate ratings do not collectively exceed 1 MW. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(3)]2. The generating facility is located within the geographical boundary of, and is owned, operated, or on property under the control of, the customer. [per: PU Code 2830(b)(3)]3. The generating facility is sized to offset all or part of the electrical load of the Benefiting Account(s). [based on PU Code 2830(a)(3)]4. The generating facility is an eligible renewable resource under the Renewables Portfolio Standard Program (i.e. PU Code §§ 399.11) [based on definition in PU Code 2830(a)(3)]a. The facility uses biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation, digester gas, municipal solid waste conversion, landfill gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, or tidal current [based on PU Code 399.12(b) which refers to Public Resources Code Section 25741(b)(1)]b. The facility (or incremental generation) commenced operation after January 1, 2005. * [misquoted and not applicable to AB 2466 but was originally based on Public Resources Code Section 25741(b)(2)(C)] 6How are the energy credits calculated and applied?1. Both the Generating Account and Benefiting Account(s) must be on a Time-of-Use (TOU) rate. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(4), (b)(2) & (b)(4)]2. Customer usage and excess generation at the Generating Account are metered separately. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(4) and (b)(4)]3. Energy credits (known as “Bill credits”) are calculated by multiplying the Utility’s TOU generation usage component of the Generating Account by the amount of energy exported to the grid during the corresponding time period. [defined in and based on PU Code 2830(a)(2)]4. The customer selects one or more of its accounts (known as a “Benefiting Account(s)”) to which the Bill credits will be applied. [defined in and based on PU Code 2830(a)(1)]5. The Bill credits are used to offset the TOU generation componentcosts of the Generating Account and the Benefiting Account(s). [based on PU Code 2830(a)(3) and (c)(2)] 7How are the energy credits calculated and applied? (cont.)5. Remaining Bill Credits are carried over to the following month. [per on PU Code 2830(c)(4)]6. A 12-month period is established whereby at the end of 12 months, any unused Bill Credits are set to zero and a new 12-month period begins. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(5)]7. A customer may elect to change the Benefiting Account(s) entitled to receive Bill Credits within a 12-month period with at least 60 days notice to Utility.[based on PU Code 2830(e)] 8Miscellaneous Tariff Provisions1. Bill credits apply only to generation usage componentsof the Benefiting Account(s). [based on PU Code 2830(c)(2)]2. Both the Benefiting Account and Generating Account must be located within the geographical boundaries of the customer of the serving Utility. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(1) and (a)(2)]3. Bill Credits will first be applied to the Generating Account which is included as a Benefitting Account. [not in statute]4. Sufficient metering must be in place to identify eligible net generation delivered into grid. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(2), (b)(4)]5. Costs associated with the metering requirements for both types of accounts are the responsibility of the customer. [rephrased based on PU Code 2830(b)(5)] 9Miscellaneous Tariff Provisions (cont.)6. A customer may terminate service under this program by providingthe Utility a minimum of 60 days’ notice. [based on PU Code 2830(g)]7. Generating Account must receive Bundled Service. [not in statute]8. Benefiting Account(s) must receive Bundled Service. [not in statute]9. A Generating Account under AB 2466 would not be eligible to participate on Net Energy Metering (NEM) [not in statute]10. The CPUC is required to ensure that the costs to transfer the Bill credit to a Benefiting account does not result in a shifting of costs to bundled service customers. [based on PU Code 2830(d)] 10Miscellaneous Tariff Provisions (cont.)11. A local government shall provide the Utility to which the eligible renewable generating facility will be interconnected with not less than 60 days’ notice prior to the eligible renewable generating facility becoming operational. [based on PU Code 2830(e)] 11Typical Generating AccountUtility GridCustomer Retail BillBased on customer’s usage metered at Mretail[based on PU Code 2830(a)(4) and (c)(1)]Customer Bill CreditsBased on net power (kWh) to the grid times TOU generation component of the usage charge of the Generating Account [based on PU Code 2830(a)(2) and (c )(2)]MretailTypicalFacility’s PerimeterAuxiliary & other permitted loads 12CostsŠThe customer is responsible for all interconnection costs [based on PU Code 2830(b)(6)]ŠIf the customer does not have the metering necessary to bill on this tariff, it is responsible for all meter related costs [based on PU Code 2830(b)(5)]ŠBilling - The transfer of a Bill Credit to Benefiting Accounts should notresult in a shifting of costs to bundled service customers. [based on PU Code 2830(d)]The costs associated with the transfer of a Bill Credit shall include all billing-related expenses:a. Implementation Cost Recovery Mechanism - memorandum account or direct charge to participating customers?b. Ongoing incremental monthly crediting – monthly customer charge? [interpretation based on cost shift language in PU Code 2830(d)] 13Local Government ArrangementsAll of a Local Government AccountsB = Benefitting Acct.G# = Generation Acct.G1BBBG2BBBBArrangement 1 Arrangement 2ŠA customer can have more than one “Arrangement.” [not in statute]ŠThe 1 MW generation limit applies to G1 and G2 independently. [interpretation based on PU Code 2830(a)(3))] 14Arrangements (continued)G1BBBBG2 BBBBenefitting Accounts and Generator Accounts cannot be shared between different Arrangements. [not in statute]Arrangement 1Arrangement 2 15Credit ProcessŠThe "Bill Credit" is based on the TOU generation component usage charge of the Generating Account, multiplied by the net kWh generation exported to the grid during the corresponding time period. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(2)]ŠThe Bill Credit is subtracted from the Benefitting Account’s generation component usage charge. [based on PU Code 2830(c )(2)]ŠIf, during the billing cycle, the Bill Credit exceeds the generation component usage charges, the difference shall be carried forward as a Bill Creditto the next billing cycle. [based on PU Code 2830(c )(4)]ŠFollowing “the last billing cycle of a 12-month period, any remaining credit resulting from the application of [AB 2466] shall be reset to zero.” P.U. Code § 2830 (c)(5). [based on PU Code 2830(c )(5)]Note: The legislation states the monthly credit is valued at the otherwise-applicable tariff for the generating account, but does not require it to be applied to any benefiting account usage on a TOU basis - just on a dollar basis. [based on PU Code 2830(a)(2) and (c )(2) ) 16Bill Credits vs NEM CreditsStatutory treatment of the Bill Credits under P.U. Code § 2830 differs from NEM credits under P.U. Code § 2827ŠAB 2466 - Section 2830(c)(5) states:After the electricity usage charge ... are determined for the last billing cycle of a 12-month period, any remaining credit resulting from the application of this section shall be resetto zero.ŠNEM - Section 2827(h) for residential and small commercial generators states:The net energy metering calculation shall be made by measuring the differencebetween the electricity supplied to the eligible customer-generator and the electricity generated by the eligible customer-generator and fed back to the electric grid over a 12-month period. 17Bill Credits vs NEM Credits(continued)ŠNEM - Section 2827(i)(3) for large commercial generators states:In any months in which the eligible customer-generator has been a net consumer of electricity ... the customer-generator shall owe to the electric service provider the balance of electricity costs and credits during that billing period. In any billing period in which the eligible customer-generator has been a net producer of electricity calculated on the basis of value determined pursuant to paragraph (2), the electric service provider shall owe to the eligible customer-generator the balance of electricity costs and credits during that billing period. Any net credit to the eligible customer-generator of electricity costs may be carried forward to subsequent billing periods, provided that an electric service provider may choose to carry the credit over as a kilowatt hour credit consistent with the provisions of any applicable tariff, including any differences attributable to the time of generation of the electricity. At the end of each 12-month period, the electric service provider may reduce any net credit due to the eligible customer-generator to zero. 18True-up with Carry Forward Credits[example based on PU Code 2830(c ) billing description]credit lost$90 $ 5 $ 15 $ 25 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 xs creditpaid$90 $ 5 $ 15 $ 25 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 e payment$ (5)$ (15)$ (25)$ (25)$ (15)$ (5)$ 5 $ 15 $ 25 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 net$ 130 $ 140 $ 150 $ 150 $ 140 $ 130 $ 120 $ 110 $ 100 $ 100 $ 110 $ 120 credit$ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 e chargeMonth 12Month 11Month 10Month 9Month 8Month 7Month 6Month 5Month 4Month 3Month 2Month 1fall startcredit lost$ -$ 5 $ 15 $ 25 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 xs creditpaid$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -e payment$ 5 $ 15 $ 25 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 $ (5)$ (15)$ (25)$ (25)$ (15)$ (5)net$ 120 $ 110 $ 100 $ 100 $ 110 $ 120 $ 130 $ 140 $ 150 $ 150 $ 140 $ 130 credit$ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 e chargeMonth 12Month 11Month 10Month 9Month 8Month 7Month 6Month 5Month 4Month 3Month 2Month 1spring startcredit lost$45 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 $ 5 $ 15 $ 25 xs creditpaid$45 $ 5 $ 15 $ 25 e payment$ (25)$ (15)$ (5)$ 5 $ 15 $ 25 $ 25 $ 15 $ 5 $ (5)$ (15)$ (25)net$ 150 $ 140 $ 130 $ 120 $ 110 $ 100 $ 100 $ 110 $ 120 $ 130 $ 140 $ 150 credit$ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 $ 125 e chargeMonth 12Month 11Month 10Month 9Month 8Month 7Month 6Month 5Month 4Month 3Month 2Month 1summer start 19Relevant Period – How it applies to Benefiting Accts if there are different billing cycles [not described in statute]DecNovBen Acct #2Ben Acct #1Gen AcctJanNovOct SepAugJulJunMayAprMarFebJanDecThe Generator Account has to reach the end of its reconciliation period before all the Benefitting Accounts in order to be able to allocate credits going forward. 20Allocation of creditsŠAt the time of interconnection, the Utility will ask the customer to designate the Benefiting Accounts. [based on PU Code 2830(b)(1)]ŠThe Utility will allocate any Bill Credits, first to the Generating Account(s) and then to the other Benefiting Accounts. [not in statute] 21Challenges AB2466 states, 2830(a)(3)“ ‘Eligible renewable generating facility’ means a generation facility that has a generating capacity of no more than one megawatt, isan eligible renewable energy resource pursuant to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program,…” (emphasis added)Referring to the California Energy Commission"Renewables Portfolio Standard Eligibility Commission Guidebook". The third edition (January 2008) states (page 18):To qualify as RPS-eligible, the facility must not receive (or have received or be planning to receive) benefits from the CPUC-approved Self Generation Incentive Program or California Solar Initiative, the Energy Commission’s Emerging Renewables Program, New Solar Homes Partnership, or Pilot Performance Based Incentive Program, or any other similar ratepayer-funded program. Similarly, the facility must not receive or plan to receive benefit from net metering programs or net metering tariffs approved by the CPUC or any POU.If the facility is currently receiving benefits through net metering, it may apply for pre-certification and subsequently apply for certification once it has exited any net metering agreements. 22Challenges (continued…)ŠThis qualification requirement is going to restrict the eligibility of some types of generating technologies. PG&E worked with the CEC to change this handbook language for AB1969 (Feed-in tariffs) and PG&E believes the same can occur here. [interpretation]ŠThe CEC guidebook also states that to be eligible the “[generating] facility must not receive or plan to receive any benefit from net energy metering programs.” PG&E prefers to interconnect under the CPUC’sRule 21 process. However, to be exempt from the FERC’s interconnection jurisdiction if it exports, the generation facility must be interconnected either on net energy metering, or as a QF selling to the utility as a QF. If the utility calls this program “net energy metering” for the purposes of interconnection, the generating facility does not qualify according to the CEC guidebook. [interpretation] 23Challenges (continued…)ŠAdditionally, SB1 requires the generator to be sized to on-site load in order to receive SGIP or CSI funding. A generating facility under AB2466 will likely be sized to meet the on-site load, as well as that of the benefitting accounts. Will incentives be allowed for full generation rating, be limited to that portion of the generation that “covers” on-site load, or not allowed at all? [based on CA Senate Bill 1 signed 8/21/2006 and CPUC Decision 06-01-204 ]ŠIs it possible for the CPUC to can create an exemption to the CEC guidebook for this program by issuing a ruling? Or must the CECrevise the RPS guidebook by creating an exemption for this program, in order to expeditiously address this apparent contradiction? Energy Policy Initiatives Center 1 www.sandiego.edu/epic Legislative Summary: AB 2466 A Comparison of AB 2466 and AB 1969 Feed-in Tariffs 1. Summary of the Provisions in AB 2466 This bill, which was signed by the Governor on September 28, 2008, allows local governments to receive a credit for excess generation from a renewable energy generation system and to apply that credit against other accounts in the jurisdiction. The key provisions of this bill are described below. 1.1. Who is eligible? Under AB 2466, local governments that are eligible to take advantage of the crediting procedure provided for in the law, include a city, county, whether general law or chartered, city and county, special district, school district, political subdivision, or other local public agency. The state of California, any agency or department of the state of California, or joint powers authorities are not eligible. Further, to be eligible, a local government must satisfy all of the following criteria: • The local government designates one or more benefiting accounts to receive a bill credit. • A benefiting account receives service under a time-of-use rate schedule (such as AL-TOU). • The benefiting account is the responsibility of, and serves property that is owned, operated, or on property controlled by the same local government that owns, operates, or controls the eligible renewable generating facility. • The electrical output of the eligible renewable generating facility is metered for time of use to allow calculation of the bill credit based upon when the electricity is exported to the grid. • All costs associated with the metering requirements of the bill are the responsibility of the local government. • All costs associated with interconnection are the responsibility of the local government. • The local government does not sell electricity exported to the electrical grid to a third party. 1.1. What renewable energy generation technologies are eligible? To be eligible under AB 2466, a renewable generation facility must meet the following criteria: • Have a generation capacity of no more than one megawatt (MW). • Be owned, operated, or on property controlled by the local government entity. • Be located within the boundaries of the governmental entity or on land owned or controlled by governmental entity, including leased land. • Sized to offset all or a port of electrical load of the benefiting account. Energy Policy Initiatives Center 2 www.sandiego.edu/epic • Be an eligible renewable energy resource pursuant to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program (Public Utilities Code Section 399.12).1 1.2. How would credits be calculated and distributed to other accounts? Local governments with eligible renewable energy generation facilities that generate more electricity than can be used by the associated (or generating) account would elect a “benefiting account” or multiple benefiting accounts to which excess electricity would be credited. To receive credit, an account must be located within the geographical boundaries of the local government and be mutually agreed upon by the local government and the electrical utility. 1.2.1. Calculation of Credits A credit would be created when a renewable energy generation facility associated with an electrical account (“generating account”) produced more electricity in a given billing cycle than was consumed by that account. The total amount consumed by the generating account would be handled by net energy metering. The credit under AB 2466 would be equal to the amount of excess electricity produced in a billing cycle multiplied by the commodity rate of the applicable time-of-use tariff for the benefiting account. The credit would not include the transmission, distribution, and ancillary charges components that together with the generation components comprise full retail rates. For illustrative purposes, the current time-of-use commodity prices for the AL-TOU tariff, which is used by many commercial entities (including governments), are presented in the table below.2 The figure below presents a simple diagram of how the crediting procedure would work under AB 2466. 1 For details on eligibility, see California Energy Commission, Renewables Portfolio Standard Eligibility, Third Edition (January 2008). Go to http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-300- 2007-006/CEC-300-2007-006-ED3-CMF.PDF. 2 SDG&E Schedule EECC, Electric Energy Commodity Cost, Effective May 1, 2008. Energy Policy Initiatives Center 3 www.sandiego.edu/epic 1.2.2. Distribution of Credits The credits would be subtracted from the benefiting account’s normal billing cycle commodity (or generation) costs. It is important to note that credits are calculated based on the commodity or generation portion of the applicable rate and applied to the commodity portion of the benefiting account. This is sometimes called “Gen to Gen,” short for “generation to generation”. If, during the billing cycle, the generation component of the electricity usage charges exceeds the bill credit, the benefiting account would be billed for the difference (local government pays). If, during the billing cycle, the bill credit applied exceeds the generation component of the electricity usage charges, the difference would be carried forward as a financial credit to the next billing cycle (local government receives credit). Credit cannot be carried forward more than 12 months; that is, at the end of a 12-month period, any remaining credit would be reset to zero and the local government would not receive any compensation. 1.3. How would a local government initiate or terminate this arrangement? A local government must inform the electrical utility at least 60 days in advance that an eligible renewable generating facility will become operational. The electrical corporation must then file an advice letter with the CPUC not later than 30 days after receipt of the notice proposing a rate tariff for the benefiting account(s). The CPUC must approve or specify changes to the proposed tariff within 30 days of the date of filing. To terminate its participation in this arrangement, a local government must inform the electrical utility a minimum of 60 days prior to the proposed termination date. 1.4. Who owns the renewable energy credits (REC) under AB 2466? Similar to the way California handles renewable energy credits (REC) under net energy metering, the renewable energy generation system owner retains ownership of RECs under the crediting arrangement provided for in AB 2466. Further, electricity that is exported to the electric utility does not count toward the local electric utility’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS) requirements of providing 20% of retail sales by renewable sources by 2010. 1.5. What are the limitations on this crediting procedure? AB 2466 contains a total statewide limit (250 MW) to the amount of renewable energy generators that can participate in the crediting arrangement. Investor-owned electrical utilities are obligated to offer bill credit under AB 2466 until the rated capacity of eligible generators in their territory reaches its proportionate share of the 250 MW statewide limit based on the ratio of its peak demand to the total statewide peak demand. Using an estimate from a recent CPUC resolution, this would put SDG&E’s service territory limit at about 20 MW.3 1.6. What are the pros and cons of AB 2466? The table below summarizes the positive and negative attributes of AB 2466. 3 See CPUC Resolution E-4137, February 14, 2008. Energy Policy Initiatives Center 4 www.sandiego.edu/epic 2. Summary of AB 1969 “Feed-in” Tariffs In 2006, Assembly Bill (AB) 1969 (Yee) added Public Utilities Code (PU Code) Section 399.20, which authorizes tariffs and standard contracts for the purchase of eligible renewable generation from public water and wastewater facilities.4 To implement this law, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has taken the following actions: • On July 26, 2007, the Commission adopted Decision (D.) 07-07-027 ordering each regulated electric utility to submit tariff provisions implementing PU Section 399.20. • D.07-07-027 also authorized additional tariffs beyond those required for AB 1969 to facilities other than the public water and wastewater facilities in PG&E and SCE service territories. • Resolution E-4137 approved the final tariffs and standard contracts and set the effective date of the tariffs as February 14, 2008. • Decision 08-09-033, adopted on September 18, 2008, directs SDG&E to expand its feed- in tariff to all customers.5 • On September 29th, SDG&E submitted for approval Advice Letter 2207-E, which provides details on the Customer Renewable Energy (CRE) tariff structure and eligibility.6 This advice letter has not been approved by the CPUC, but approval is expected. AB 1969 feed-in tariffs allow the owner of a renewable energy generation system either to sell all electricity from an eligible facility directly to the electrical utility or to sell only the excess electricity above the needs of a specific account (building). The figure below presents these two options graphically and illustrates the difference between AB 1969 feed-in tariffs and AB 2466 credits. 4 For more information on the AB 1969 feed-in tariffs, go to http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/electric/RenewableEnergy/feedintariffssum.htm. 5 Go to http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/FINAL_DECISION/91159.pdf. 6 Go to http://www.sdge.com/tm2/pdf/2027-E.pdf. Energy Policy Initiatives Center 5 www.sandiego.edu/epic The following provides more details about the provisions of the current AB 1969 feed-in tariff offered by SDG&E. 2.1. Who is eligible? With adoption of Decision 08-09-033, all customers except a Public Water Agency and Wastewater Agency are eligible to enter into standard contracts under the CRE rate schedule.7 Public Water and Wastewater Agencies are eligible customers under SDG&E’s Schedule WATER. 2.2. What renewable energy generation technologies are eligible? A renewable energy generating facility is considered eligible if it meets the following criteria: • Is a generating facility that receives distribution service from SDG&E. • Has an effective capacity of not more than 1.5 MW. • Is interconnected and operates in parallel with the utility’s electric transmission and distribution grid. • Is strategically located and interconnected to the utility’s electric transmission system in a manner that optimizes the deliverability of electricity generated at the facility to load centers. • Is an eligible renewable energy resource, as defined in Public Utilities Code Section 399.12. 2.3. What is the rate at which SDG&E will purchase eligible renewable energy? The SDG&E CRE tariff allows eligible renewable energy generation owners to sell power directly to an investor-owned utility at a standard rate equal to the market price referent (MPR). This rate is administratively determined by the CPUC and is used, among other 7 SB 380, enacted in 2008, codifies the expanded eligibility of AB 1969 tariffs. Energy Policy Initiatives Center 6 www.sandiego.edu/epic things, to determine when funding from the supplemental energy fund can be applied to renewable energy contracts between generators and investor-owned utilities.8 In this case, the MPR serves as the standard rate at which renewable energy generation owners would be compensated for their electricity. Time-of-delivery (TOD) factors are used to determine rates for different times of the year and day. A contract under the CRE feed-in tariffs would purchase electricity at a differential rate depending on the time of day and time of year that the electricity is delivered to the electric utility. The table below provides an example of the 2008 MPR rates with TOD factors applied for three different contract lengths for summer and winter. Under this tariff a separate meter is required to determine the time of day and year that renewable energy was transferred to the electrical utility. 2.4. Who owns the renewable energy credits (REC) in AB 1969 feed-in tariff transactions? Unlike AB 2466 credits and net metering, under AB 1969 feed-in tariffs, ownership of all green attributes, including renewable energy credits, associated with the electricity purchased by the utility would transfer to the utility. Further, this electricity could count toward the utility’s RPS obligation. 2.5. What are the other limitations of AB 1969 Feed-in Tariffs? Feed-in tariffs provided for in AB 1969 are only available to customers until the total statewide capacity of participating facilities equals 500 MW, or 40 MW in SDG&E service territory.9 After this limit is reached the electrical utility is not required to offer these feed-in tariffs. 8 For more details on the market price referent, go to http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/electric/RenewableEnergy/faqs/04MarketPriceReferent.htm 9 SB 380, enacted in 2008, expands the total statewide capacity to 500 MW. Energy Policy Initiatives Center 7 www.sandiego.edu/epic Also, unlike AB 2466 credits, customers participating in AB 1969 feed-in tariffs are not eligible to participate in any other SDG&E interruptible, Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP), California Solar Initiative, net energy metering program, or other similar programs. 2.6. What are the pros and cons of the 1969 Feed-in Tariffs? The table below summarizes the positive and negative attributes of the feed-in tariffs offered by SDG&E. 3. Summary Comparison of Options The table below compares the key aspects of each option presented above. Note that this includes the current net energy metering option, which is not discussed in detail above. Net Energy Metring AB 2466 AB 1969 Feed-in Tari Rate O ered Retail Rate TOU Commodity Rate MPR+TOD System Limit 1 MW1 1 MW 1.5 MW Overall Limit 2.5% of Peak Demand 116 MW in 2007 20 MW 40 MW REC Ownership System Owner System Owner Utility Eligible Customers All Customers Local Governments All Customers except Water/Wastewater Agencies Eligible Technology Solar, Wind, Fuel Cells, Biogas All Renewables2 All Renewables2 Eligible for Rebates3 Yes Yes No Eligible for Net Metering n/a Yes No 110 MW for up to 3 biogas digesters. 2 Pursuant to Renewable Portfolio Standard. 3Self-Generation Inventive Program, California Solar Initiative Comparison of Options for Renewable Energy Generation in San Diego County February 2010 pw://Carollo/Documents/Client/CA/Carlsbad/8362A10/Deliverables/Carlsbad_TM.doc (FINAL) Technical Memorandum APPENDIX I – CANYONHYDRO INSTALLATION LIST AND PHONE SURVEY c:\pw_working\projectwise\ccrotwell\dms98502\tbrooks_jan 2010.docx TELEPHONE MEMORANDUM Date: January 26, 2010 Time: 3:00 PM WO #: 8362A10 From: Christopher Crotwell Contact: Dick Margetts - Manager, Adam Turner – Assist. Manager Project Name: Project 7 Water Authority Phone No.: 970-250-4676 Subject: Hydroelectric Turbine Turbine Size: 60.8KW 91.3KW Unit Type: 6TR1-F16 Unit 10TR1 Unit Address: 69128 E. Hwy. 50 PO Box 1185 Montrose, CO 81402 Email: project7@montrose.net Description of System? How elect connected? System consisted of two raw water lines to the WTP from nearby reservoir. Each 24 inch diameter. One is used for hydroelectric while the other is the standby and bypass. There are two hydroelectric turbines installed on the pipe, one small and one large unit. Currently they only operate the smaller unit. They operate the small unit in the winter when desired flows to the WTP are lower and the larger unit in the summer when desired flows are higher. They do not operate both turbines at the same time. Startup for the turbines was October 2009 and the units were bought in June 2009. FERC The turbine supplies power locally and then the extra power is delivered to the grid through a net-metering program. The excess power that is delivered to the grid is put in a credit bank. Project 7 Water Authority can then use this credit bank to pay for its electricity bills at the WTP and elsewhere. They have not had to pay for a electric bill since the turbines have been operating. Any additional valving besides inlet shutoff valve? Has two pressure relief valves for surge. These valves discharge to atmosphere and open upon a high surge pressure situation. Operation – start/stop, controls, etc.? The control panel was created by Bat Electric, Inc. The grid controls the rpm of the generator. The turbine starts by first determining if adequate grid power is available. Then the inlet butterfly valve begins to open. The butterfly valve is set to open in 45 seconds. When the inlet BFV is 30 percent open, the turbine starts to rotate. At 1810 rpm, the generator is connected to the grid and electricity is produced. Maintenance Issues? Contract maintenance? Cost? Turbines have pretty smooth operation. Had one current deviation problem that had to be resolved during startup. The reactive 3 phase power had currents that were not within the expected range of the turbine controls. Therefore the controls would trip the turbine offline. They had to get the local electric utility to work on the issue and get each phase current even. Turbine and generator require greasing once per week. This is done while turbine is in operation. They have a maintenance contract with a local consultant who has done a lot of turbines. He helped Project 7 through the FERC process. However, this is for the first year. After that, Project 7 will do all the maintenance. How long out of service? Have not been out of service since installed in October 2009. Noise? Noise is less than that of pump. Sounds like a quiet hum. The turbines are also in a insulated metal building. Has unit shut down automatically? Why? How? See startup, phase current issue. Other comments: Works really well. Delivers set flow based on input turbine head. If the turbine head is constant, the flow will be constant. Have two pressure sustaining valves to control surges. Has an a- synchronous generator. The generator produces a good bit of heat. A good ventilation system is important. c:\pw_working\projectwise\ccrotwell\dms98502\bburke_jan 2010.docx TELEPHONE MEMORANDUM Date: January 25, 2010 Time: 3:00 PM WO #: 8362A10 From: Christopher Crotwell Contact: Bob Burke and Wes Haskell Project Name: Bangor Maine Water District Project Phone No.: 207-947-4516 x386 (Bob) Subject: Hydroelectric Turbine Hydroelectric Turbine Size: 75KW Unit Type: 8TR3-CC Unit Address: PO Box 1129 Bangor, Maine 04402- 1129 Fax No.: 603-629-5036 Email: Bob.burke@bango rwater.org Discussed Bangor’s turbine with Bob and Wes. The majority of the information came from Wes. Description of System? How elect connected? They have the turbine installed but have not operated other than for an hour to test. Should be operational in a month. It has just been approved to startup. They are not using the power locally as the building has essentially no power demand. They are feeding into the grid. Had to battle with the power company about the interconnection and power purchasing agreement. The turbine would be installed at an existing PRV station. The existing PRV station has one duty/one standby cone valve. There is a fairly large elevation difference between the water treatment plant (5 mgd)/ finished water reservoir and the distribution system. Therefore they use the PRV’s and will use the turbine to lower the pressure before it enters the distribution system. Initially they thought that they would not need FERC approval. Then after the turbine was purchased they realized they needed the conduit exemption. This set the project back some because the Maine Wildlife and Fisheries wanted to use the conduit exemption to determine how much water they could treat. They finally got a FERC conduit exemption. Any additional valving besides inlet shutoff valve? Yes, Wes decided that he was not completely comfortable with relying on the inlet valve to close and also worried about water hammer when the hydraulically actuated inlet valve closes suddenly. To resolve this, a pressure relief valve was installed to relieve any pressure surges to atmosphere. Operation – start/stop, controls, etc.? CanyonHydro supplied the whole package with switchgear, controls and MCC. BAT did the controls/switchgear system. Maintenance Issues? Contract maintenance? Cost? None as unit is not operating. How long out of service? Not in service yet; should be in a month. Noise? During the hour test, the noise was minimal; no more than a pump, possibly less. Has unit shut down automatically? Why? How? Not in service yet; should be in a month. c:\pw_working\projectwise\ccrotwell\dms98502\mcharlebois_jan 2010.docx TELEPHONE MEMORANDUM Date: January 26, 2010 Time: 2:00PM WO #: 8362A10 From: Christopher Crotwell Contact: Mike Charlebois Project Name: SRP-Bartlett Dam Project Phone No.: 602-236-5116 Subject: Hydroelectric Turbine Hydroelectric Turbine Size: 55KW, Installed 2006 Unit Type: 10TR1 Unit Address: PO Box 52025 Mail Station PAB358 Phoenix, AZ 85072-2025 Fax No.: 602-236- 6694 Email: MCharlebois@srpnet.com Description of System? How elect connected? The turbine is located at the Bartlett Dam in Arizona which is located on the Verde River. Was installed in 2006. Originally they had a diesel generator to supply power locally at the dam facility. They installed the turbine to replace the diesel generator. The turbine is fed from the dam penstock. The penstocks consist of (2) 70 inch diameter pipes. Each penstock does not have a turbine, only a pressure reducing valve. The flows fluctuate too much for them to install a turbine on the penstock which would accept all of the dam flow. The max flow through the penstocks is 1200 cfs while the average is about 100 cfs. However, the 55kW turbine can always run. The facility typically does not need all of the 55 kW power. The power that is not needed is dissipated through two electric resistance heaters. Any additional valving besides inlet shutoff valve? They use the inlet shutoff valve to throttle the flow so that the turbine head is reduced and the power is therefore reduced. Operation – start/stop, controls, etc.? Push first button which starts to open the inlet valve. When the turbine registers as being available, an additional button is pushed to connect the turbine to the grid and start feeding power. Maintenance Issues? Contract maintenance? Cost? The turbine has been operating very well. Since the turbine was installed in 2006, it has only been out of service for a few days when a voltage regulator had to be replaced. Other than that the turbine operates 24/7. The turbine is virtually maintenance free. Turbine and generator must be greased about once a week. This is done while the turbine is operating. Generator oil must also be replaced at regular intervals. No other maintenance has been required. They will need to check the bearings in a few years. Noise? Fairly quiet unit. Has unit shut down automatically? Why? How? A high voltage will shut the unit down.