"IO'ARO LE

.. Wm li<>'>'<",..**Ol.E~1i** S. WALKl'Jl**~(;o** •.""". Slate of Ulah Depanlllem of Natural Resources Soplembcr 25, 2003

WBU''fL "'Ol<GAl<

"""

.... Dim""
Jan Miller Utah**Di~i,ion** of

### Alf Quality 150 Nonh 1950 Wesl Salt LakeCity,UT 84114·4820

t:stlmalion A''1lmntinn' and**Mcthndnlo~l'**
Renewable [I""tncill' Generalion (Table 15) and Capacity 

# rfable IJ) in Utah The Utah Encrgy Offioe (UEO) developed and ;.onl two \u

.....ey in<truments to wholo,"lers. Tel.ilers, an<l installe'" ofrenewJble energy (RE)**~Iuipmenl** in the SMe. lIS well "S governmenl ageno;«, sllch as the Bme," ofL,nd Management, and Uli lities who J"!rticip,lC in ",",c"

..able energy proje<:1i. n", lim survey".., for sm.II-scale syslem, less lban 25kW;n size, 1l1e s..:<md**s~l** ....ey oovered**mcdi~m** ...scale renewable energy projects belween HkW and IO",IW in size. No large-scale survey ,ru;trutr<:nl wa, dcvclopcd because it was as'jUmc'd generation .nd capacity d1ta from**la'l,~scale** RE proje<;lS were a, ailal:>Ic from lhc Depanmenl ofEnergy (DOE)**En~rgy** I"formation Adminisualion (EIA). The SI,n'cys we"'" .>enl and follow-uj> cail' were place'd 10 incrcaso the 'e<['''''''' rale No formal enon "as**unden"h~,** ", 'In.mify response rdlCs. Also, lhe suniey effort likely {ni5s<:d se"eral RE projects for which equt['mem was purchase<! oul ofSlate an,Vor ,nstalk'd by nonpror""ional,. For these rca'lOO'. il i' possible that lhe approach taken may serve to underestimate the**amo~nt** ofsmall· to**me<lium'sc~le** RE gcneration .nd copac;ly in Ul.h, Upoo receipt ()fc()mj>lettd 'n\.1l1-**~nd** medium-,cale su,veys, UEO compiled the ""uh, .l()ng wilb relevant EIA data in 'rreadsheels. Because ()fd.ta and survey inslrument design limilatiol\s. il was difficult ifnot in"""sible lo**c""~'"** lhot no double-countIng oceurrtd when**ooml'~ring** wholesale.,., fI.'!ailer, and imlaller RE re'llO""'" 

### f()t ,olarpholovollaic (PV) projeclS. As a resuh, a de<:islOn "o'a, m>de to ""Iy include wlar rv gen""l;on "nd c'l'0eily from**go~emmenl** projecl' .od wn()lesaler<. Thi' may ha"c resulted in undcr

...**n~unting** for sm.lIse.le sol"r PV RE, bul safe.guarded against double-countmj;. The rcsuhing ,mall.scale rolar PV gene.,-,.,ion "nd capacity eSlimates may therefore 

### he**~Qnsid<:red con\e,,·"t,~e.** 



### "

.. "

....'

...'T

....... S

..,11lo.

# ro lim 

### "W" ,.. ,.., ..,.U

....

# ,,·"',u

_ •• ,,, II 'Pbll' 

## 'o«,,,jk". LI ",., '" •TTY '''0 '.'8.1<," • 

### "on "'

......,,'" 

# UJah! ,,_..... .--.-.

### Because some medium-scale RE proj<'Cts werc als<> iodcntifiC<.! in lOlA's gcneration and cap""ity data tables. medium-scale smwy fesults wen: screened against ElA's utility and non· mility power plant im'entorieo; to ",'Old double·counting. In the caSe ofme<Jium_scale hydroelectric powcr plants, a decision waS made to usc ErA utility and non_mility d.I., which we", more completc, Also, the Utah ,\1unicipal PowC!" Agcocy (lIMPA) O;,.,e-Fon power stlllion**~nemion** 

### and capleity data were obtained d,rectly from tile plant r",nager, since the UMPA me<Jiulll·scalc survey informatiOll fOf the plant was Incomplete and ErA gen"'ation data for the plant "we non_c,i'tent. Annual genemtion and capacity values we", then lotaled by survey-scale (i.e. small or medium) and by RE type (i,e, hydroelectric, wlar. geothem",t etc,). In some ca,.,s, annual generation value< were estimated using reponed cap""ity and the obscn'oo capacity r"",or ror similar RE projects. The results ofthis effon were summarized in two spreadsheels showing e<lin\:lted RIO generation and capacity in Ulah (or 1999 through 2002.

KE ,". Toml ElcctrleUy Cenerarion (rable 16) and Capadly (Table 14) in U",h RIO g<nerlllion and capacity eSlimJtes were lilen compared to EIA "'tinmte. ofMn·RE generation and capacity, Generation ",Id capacily from all ,ource'S (i.c, fossil fuel and RIO) weI'(: summed to show tOlal ele<:t,iClly gene,at,on Jnd capacity for the sMe and tbe percentages ofRIO and non-hydroelectric ",newable eleclricity (NHRE) were calculaled, It 

### should be noled that no effon ,,'as**~wlc** to 

### idenlify sm.lI. to medium·scale electric generotion from fossil fuel somces, ,uch >ti 

### ponablc amI**fi~ed** 

### location gasoline- and di<:sel-power«l**~et\erato",.** 

### Olher than lhose mcluded in the lilA non·uhlity powcr plant inventory, A,. result. the e'timate oflotal electricity generation and capacity i& likely to 

### be skewed slightly lower, \\'hich- in rum -will skew Ihe rJtio orNHREow,- total eleclrieity generalion ,lightly higbe,.
Con.uml,tion or Non_ll)'dro I{enewable Elcelrkil)' in Utah (Tabk 17) Consumption o(NHIlli in Utab was as,u",«l to 

### equal the Sum ofUtah NHRE gene,ation for Utahn, (i.e, distnbuted Utah NHRE gcnerut,on ."d Ut.h lTlull;"ip.1 utility N1IRE #"erotiol\) plm lhe "pol1ion" ofPocifiCofjl's sales to Utah from NHRE sourceS. To escim"te UlIlh NHRE con,"mption, the RE genorat;on**tot.~ls** 

### disClls<e<l e"lief were**scr~'Cned** 

### to remove**~ydrook'ctric** 

### genemtioll (nonc of**whic~** 

### is certified in Ut.h as "low-impJct'" by lhe Low Imp;ICf liydro Inslltute and OOJIsidCfC<! eligible for ",elU';ion;n thc 309 SIP filrng) aoo all PacifiCol']l g..... ·nnion, some ofwhid coull1theorelically be 

### sold oUlside o( Utah. Total "ale, from P",,;f,corp's .y.lem wcre then cstimated from EIA and PJc,liCorp (from Barry Bell, P.cifiCorp) d.la. The ratio ofPac;fiCorp's "IHRE electric generution (nol .nributabic to the BIue Sky prog:ram) to P3CifiCorp', total electric goneration was "pplic'd 10 PacifiCorp's 100al sale, v.lues as. proxy to estimate PacifiCorp', Utah NliRE ,ales. P3CifiCorp's Utah NHRE sal., wcre then added to rhe cOmpany's Blue Sky**progr~m** 

### sales, and the rcmaining NHRE generalion in Utah to 

### <\li,nate total ",HRE consumption for the Slate. This ,..lue was then romrarcd to 

### toml electricity sale, in Ulab to 

### ostimate the perccntage ofUtah electricity consumplion from 1\'11 RE ,ource..Utah NIIRE Potcntial- Generation and Capacity (I'arl I. 3. al UEO relied upon esli""'tes ofNHRE energy generation potential from lhe 

### Rene"cable**En~rgy** 

### Arl<JS oj,he IJhl. II 

### Guide /0 

### rile Regio" 

### 's Reso",ce Po/emi"l. ""iUen l>y Ihe Land 

### and Wale, Fund ofthe Rockies. the North"'esl S",tainable Energy for Economic Developmenl, and the Greenlnfo Network. These NH

### RE generation cslimalcs ",ere used along wilh indu,try-wide capacity factOfS rep<>ned by Ihe Nalional Renew ahle Energy l.llOOmtory (NR EL) and Nhcrs to del'elop e,lim.ates ofpotemiaJ 

### Utah NUKE cap""ity. l1Je>e colilllates represent a theo"'tical maximum for NHRE generation and capacity ifall known relOuITeS 

## w"'" exploited and should be lI""d with caution. 1>lost ofthese reMurces could not 

### t>c**e~ploile<l** economically gi"e" CUlTent technology, inlTastrucw,e, regulatory CIlvironment, and

- mOSI importantly

- market condition•.

Growlh in Nllllt Capacily vs, Total Capacily for Ulall, 2004-2020 (ParI 1.4

..1) UEO relied upon integrated "'SOufce plannmg (orecasts from utlillies to help eSlimate Ihe groWl]' ii' NHRE capacity betw"",n 20(04 and W20.**IIltho~gh** integ"'ted**rCSO~rce** pl.n (I Rp) periods considered the mix ofnew resourccs as far out as 20J

### 8, howo''Cf,**estim~tes** of inereme"I.I, annu.1 resource additions**w~.,-c** only anil.ble Ihrough 2013 for PacifIC,,'l' .nd through 2011 fot**Ut~h** Associ.ted MunIcipal Power Systems (UAMPS). UMPII reported thal no additiollul resources would 

### be addw during the time horizon co"sid.",d, looremeotal addilions to Utah's NI1 RE mid tOllll electricity capacity wcre then sullulled by**y~",r** and O"cr the pcriod from 2004 Ihrough 2013. alld ratios ofNHRE to lotalnew capacit), wcre culculatw. Due to data limitation<, no atlemiH waS made 10 fo",cast addlt\Ons ofnon_ut,l,ty and <lthe, distribute<:! or .mall scale NHRE resources. A. a ,">oil, estimates ofnew NIIRE capacity over the pcrtod in question are likely to 

### be eon'C11:ative (i.e. to IInderstate likely new MiRE capacity),**C~lT.Jlt** Utah**Cap~cilY** "". Weslern Elttlrkity Coordinating Council (W£cq Capaeil)' (ParI IA..) The mlio ofUtaIt NHRE ncw capacity (550 MW) to the desired WEee NHRE new c.pacily (20,000 MW) for lhe fo",c"," period (2,g pe,ccnt) waS then**comp~rcd** with lhe current ratio ofUtah to WECC capacity (3.5 percent). This was done to 

### gou!,,,, Ulah's antlcipatcd progress towards meetillg the goal of**h~"ing** 20,000 ,\1 W ofnew capacity in the West by 2020, Bocause Utah CUITeml)' only "-l""""lIlS 3.5 ""ree"t ofWECC capacity and because the estimate ofUla!1 NH 

### RE new caracity of550 

### MIV is probably low (as it only accumulates frorn 2004 throllgh 2(13), il is likely that Utah i, ()f1tmck towalJ. contrihuting to the regional 2020go.1. Sincerely.

Glade**Soward~** Energy Analyst Uta], Energy Oflice