My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10A Action Items 2016 1121
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2016
>
Packet 2016 1121
>
10A Action Items 2016 1121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2016 5:08:45 PM
Creation date
11/16/2016 5:08:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Agenda
Document Date (6)
11/21/2016
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
Reso 2016-160
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
121
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
Community Choice Aggregation Feasibility Analysis Alameda County <br />June 2016 ix MRW & Associates, LLC <br />Sensitivity Analysis <br />In addition to the base case forecast described above, MRW assessed alternative cases to evaluate the sensitivity of the results to possible conditions that could impact the Alameda <br />CCA’s rate competitiveness. The key factors are summarized in Table ES-2. <br />Table ES-2. <br />Factor Sensitivity Change <br />Relicensing Diablo Canyon Increases PG&E’s generation rates by ~30%5 <br />Increased cost of renewable power 10% higher through 2021, 20% higher in 2021 <br />and 2022, and 30% higher after 2022 <br />High PCIA (“exit fee”) Retains the high PCIA expected in 2018 <br />(2.1¢/kWh) through 2030 <br />High Natural Gas Prices <br />US Energy Information Administration’s High Gas <br />Price Scenario, which is about 60% higher than <br />the base case price <br />Low PG&E Rates PG&E rates 10% lower than base forecast <br />Stress Scenario Combined impact of high renewable costs, high <br />PCIA, high gas price and low PG&E rates. <br /> <br />The sensitivity results are shown as the difference between the annual average PG&E generation <br />rate and the Alameda CCA rate6 and are shown in Figure ES-7. Scenario 1 (RPS Compliance) is <br />the least costly scenario for the CCA and therefore has the highest rate differentials under most <br />of the sensitivity cases considered. Scenario 2 (Accelerated RPS), though still quite competitive with PG&E, fares slightly worse, with a rate differential typically about 8% lower than in <br />Scenario 1. Scenario 3 (80% RPS by 2021) has the highest renewable content and is the costliest <br />scenario, with rate differentials much lower than those in the other two scenarios. While Scenario <br />3 is anticipated to be competitive with PG&E in most cases (on average), the margins are much <br />lower, particularly in the “High Renewable Prices” sensitivity case, and they become negative in the “Low PG&E rates” sensitivity case (i.e., CCA customer rates are higher than PG&E rates). <br /> <br />5 The new cooling system, which would be required per state regulations implementing the Federal Clean Water <br />Act, Section 316(b), would alone have an estimated cost of $4.5 billion. It is because of these very high costs that the base case assumes the that power plant is retired. <br />6The Alameda CCA rate includes the PG&E exit fees (PCIA charges) that will be charged to CCA customers but does not include the rate adjustment for the reserve fund.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.