Laserfiche WebLink
Community Choice Aggregation Feasibility Analysis Alameda County <br />June, 2016 31 MRW & Associates, LLC <br />the other hand, Scenario 3 is relatively unaffected by the “High Natural Gas Prices” sensitivity case due to the lower share of natural gas power in this supply portfolio. <br />In the stress case, Alameda CCA customer rates exceed PG&E customer rates on average over <br />the 2017-2030 period for all three scenarios, with the rate differential being highest in Scenario 3 <br />at -1.5¢/kWh. This is double the Scenario 2 stress case rate differential of -0.75¢/kWh. <br />Conclusions <br />Under the base case scenario, Alameda CCA customer rates compare quite favorably to PG&E rates in all years from 2017 to 2030, under all three supply scenarios. Furthermore, under the <br />base supply scenario (RPS compliance), Alameda CCA customer rates remain below PG&E <br />rates under all but the most extreme sensitivity case considered. However, under the alternate <br />supply scenarios, as the CCA renewable content increases, the CCA becomes less completive <br />with PG&E. This is especially pronounced in the 80%-by-2021 scenario, which shows marginal or negative competitiveness vis a vis PG&E in a number of scenarios. Under the stress case, <br />irrespective of the supply scenario considered, CCA rates are higher than PG&E rates. While the <br />stress case may appear extreme given that it involves four adverse sensitivities simultaneously <br />occurring, cost volatility in the power industry is well-established, and the possibility of adverse <br />conditions arising should be understood and planned for in any CCA venture. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />