# Presentation: 164734

## Energy Infrastructure

**Washington D.C.**
**April 5, 2005**

## The total U.S. energy consumption in 2004 was nearly 100 quadrillion Btus

- Source:  Based on data from EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2005

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Projected domestic energy production shows 3% growth from 2004 to 2005, then leveling off until after 2016.

**Projected domestic energy production shows 3% growth from 2004 to 2005, then leveling off until after 2016.**

**Oil and Petroleum Products**

**Dry Natural Gas**

**Coal**

**Nuclear**

**Renewable and Other**

- Source:  Based on data from EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2005

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Energy imports are projected to increase

**Oil and Petroleum Products**

**Natural Gas**

**Coal**

**Energy imports are projected to increase**

- Source:  Based on data from EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2005

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## A total of 131 new hydropower licenses and relicenses

**A total of 131 new hydropower licenses and relicenses**
** ****have been issued since June 2001**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Major Pipeline Projects Certificated (MMcf/d)June 2001 to March 2005

**Major Pipeline Projects Certificated (MMcf/d)****June 2001 to March 2005**

**21.6 BCF/D Total**
**3,612 Miles**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Storage Projects (Capacity in Bcf)June 2001 to March 2005

**Copiah**
** ****(3.3)                          **

**SG Resources**
** ****(12.0)**

**Seneca**
**(0.8)**

**Dominion**
** ****(5.6)**

**Gulf South**
** ****(18.5)**

**Natural**
**(10.7)**

**Wyckoff**
**(6.0)**

**KM**
**(6.5)**

**Saltville**
**(5.8)**

**Pine Prarie**
** ****(24.0)**

**Natural**
** ****(10.0)**

**Petal**
** ****(8.0)**

**Storage Projects (Capacity in Bcf)****June 2001 to March 2005**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Existing and Approved North American

**Constructed**
**A. Everett, MA:  **1.035 Bcfd  (Tractebel - DOMAC)
**B. Cove Point, MD:  **1.0 Bcfd  (Dominion - Cove Point LNG)
**C. Elba Island, GA:  **0.68 Bcfd  (El Paso - Southern LNG)
**D. Lake Charles, LA :  **1.0 Bcfd**  **(Southern Union – Trunkline LNG)
**E. Gulf of Mexico: **0.5 Bcf/d (Gulf Gateway Energy Bridge 	                             	                     – Excelerate Energy**)****  **
** **
**Approved by FERC**
**1. Lake Charles, LA:  **1.1 Bcfd (Southern Union – Trunkline LNG)
**2. Hackberry, LA: **1.5 Bcfd,  (Sempra Energy)
**3. Bahamas:  **0.84 Bcfd,  (AES Ocean Express)*
**4. Bahamas:  **0.83 Bcfd,   (Calypso Tractebel)*
**5. Freeport, TX:  **1.5 Bcfd,   (Cheniere/Freeport LNG Dev.)
**6. Sabine, LA**:  2.6 Bcfd (Cheniere LNG)
**7. Elba Island, GA:  **0.54 Bcfd (El Paso - Southern LNG)
**Approved by MARAD/Coast Guard**
**8. Port Pelican: **1.6 Bcfd (Chevron Texaco)
**9. Louisiana Offshore:**  1.0 Bcfd (Gulf Landing – Shell)
**Mexican and Canadian Approved**
**10. St. John, NB:  **1.0 Bcfd (Canaport – Irving Oil)
**11. Point Tupper, NS:**  1.0 Bcfd (Bear Head LNG –  Anadarko)
**12. Altamira, Tamulipas:**  0.7 Bcfd (Shell/Total/Mitsui)
**13. Baja California, MX:**  1.0 Bcfd (Sempra & Shell)

**Existing and Approved North American**
**LNG Terminals**

**As of March 25, 2005**

- A

- 3

- 4

- E

- B

**US Jurisdiction**
-     **FERC**
**       ****US Coast Guard**

- *    *US pipeline approved; LNG terminal pending in Bahamas*

- 7

- C

- 2

- D,1

- 6

- 5

- 10

- 11

- 12

- 13

- 9

- 8

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Existing Bulk Electric Transmission Grid

- Derived from Platts POWERmap

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## New generation units added from  June 1, 2001 to March 2, 2005 totals 185,908 MW

- Source: Derived from Platts POWERmap

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## 10 Transmission Projects completedFebruary 2003 – March 2005(GTE 230kV & GTE 40 miles)

**10 Transmission Projects completed****February 2003 – March 2005****(GTE 230kV & GTE 40 miles)**

**Source:  Derived from NERC ES&D database and Platts PowerMap**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Electric Transmission Needed to meet 2025 demand

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Need/Cost Recovery	
It is difficult to determine need and cost allocation for new transmission lines
Lack of investment capital
Difficulty in securing long-term transmission rights
Regulatory uncertainty regarding regional transmission organizations in relations to infrastructure needs

Siting
Stakeholder concerns adversely affect the ability to successfully site and construct needed transmission lines, in a timely manner. 
The lack of an effective forum/policy for coordinating or resolving multi-state disagreements on siting.

**It is difficult to determine need and cost allocation for new transmission lines**
**Lack of investment capital**
**Difficulty in securing long-term transmission rights**
**Regulatory uncertainty regarding regional transmission organizations in relations to infrastructure needs**
**Siting**
**Stakeholder concerns adversely affect the ability to successfully site and construct needed transmission lines, in a timely manner. **
**The lack of an effective forum/policy for coordinating or resolving multi-state disagreements on siting.**

**Impediments to new transmission include determining need, cost recovery and siting.**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

**Notes:**
Need/Cost Recovery	
It is difficult to determine need and cost allocation for new transmission lines because criteria to measure the regional benefits are unclear, inconsistent and ineffective; and achieving consensus in integrated networks is contentious.

Customers have difficulty securing long-term transmission rights at predictable prices.

It is difficult without some form of regional planning body to deal with regional infrastructure needs.

Rising needs for capital to replace aging transmission network assets and maintain system reliability.

Siting
Stakeholder concerns adversely affect the ability to successfully site and construct needed transmission lines, in a timely manner.  Many stakeholders have diverse interests, each with differing expectations and agenda.

The lack of an effective forum/policy for coordinating multi-state processes or resolving multi-state disagreements around siting is a barrier.

## Licensed and exempted hydropower projects

**Licensed and exempted hydropower projects**
** ****provide 59 GW of electric generation capacity**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## With a modest 2% growth in electricity demand, projected available generation capacity will be able to meet demand through 2020. 

**With a modest 2% growth in electricity demand, projected available generation capacity will be able to meet demand through 2020.**** **

**Projected Available Capacity**

**Demand**

**Net additions included retirements and plants currently under construction and in advanced development. **

- Source:  Based on data from EEA January 2005, PLATTS PowerDat and NewGen.

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Timely and efficient licensing process as provided by the ILP
Congressional incentives
Renewable portfolio standards
Rational siting process
Encourage new technologies

**Congressional incentives**
**Renewable portfolio standards**
**Rational siting process**
**Encourage new technologies**

**Removing impediments to hydro development**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Existing major natural gas pipelines in U.S and Canada

**Existing major natural gas pipelines in U.S and Canada**

**Source:  Based on Platts PowerMap**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Existing natural gas storage and LNG facilities

**Existing natural gas storage and LNG facilities**

**Source:  Based on Platts PowerMap**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Impediments to new LNG terminals and natural gas pipeline and storage facilities 

**Safety/Security concerns**
**Take away capacity**
**Local acceptance**
**Redundant federal and state approval**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

## Conclusions

**Challenges lie ahead**
**Coordination of integrated national energy infrastructure planning**
**Authority to ensure that projects in the national interest are constructed in a timely manner**
**Jurisdiction over bulk electric transmission used in interstate commerce.**
**Rational Siting Process**

- Pat Wood, III: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission