Difference between revisions of "HYDROPOWER"

The Upper Colorado River Basin Fund (Basin Fund) was established under Section 5 of the CRSP Act. The CRSP Act 'authorized a separate fund in the Treasury of the United States to be known as the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund... for carrying out provisions of this Act other than Section 8'. Money appropriated for construction of CRSP facilities, except recreation and fish and wildlife facilities constructed under Section 8, is transferred to the Basin Fund from the General Fund of the Treasury. Revenues derived from operation of the CRSP and participating projects are deposited in the Basin Fund. Most of the revenues come from sales of hydroelectric power and transmission services. The Basin Fund also receives revenues from M&I water service sales, rents, salinity funds from the Lower Colorado Basin (as a pass-through for the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program), and miscellaneous revenues collected in connection with the operation of the CRSP and participating projects. Revenues and appropriated funds are accounted for separately in the Basin Fund.

Basin Fund revenues must first be used to repay costs associated with the operation, maintenance, and replacements of, and emergency expenditures for, the CRSP initial units. The fund is then used to repay the United States Treasury Department for the following:

• The construction costs of the CRSP initial units allocated to the power purpose (with interest thereon)
• The construction costs of the CRSP initial units allocated to irrigation
• A portion of salinity investment and operation costs
• The construction costs of the participating projects allocated to the irrigation investment and above the irrigator's ability to pay

The Basin Fund also supports the following:

• Cost sharing for Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (approximately $2.0 million annually)
• The major portion of the cost of the Glen Canyon Adaptive Management Program (currently almost $9.5 million annually)
• Cost sharing for the Upper Colorado and San Juan Endangered Fish Recovery Implementation Programs (currently approximately $7 million annually)
• Water quality studies
• Consumptive use studies

The approximately $16.5 million per year of power revenues expended for the Glen Canyon Adaptive Management Program, the Upper Colorado River Recovery Implementation Program, and the San Juan Basin Recovery Program are expenses that are not built into the firm power rates. This arrangement benefits the programs in that they do not need to seek annual appropriations from Congress for these funds. However, this does have an impact to Western in times when firming power purchase expenses are high (due to drought or experimentation) because the moneys are transferred to the program and are not available to purchase the power needed to meet contractual requirements. The Basin Fund is managed by Western. Approximately $120 million in revenue is needed each year to fund Reclamation and Western operation and maintenance needs. Western is responsible for transmission and marketing of CRSP power, collecting payment for the power, and transfer of revenues for repayment to the United States Treasury Department. A change in the amount of available capacity or energy could potentially affect the revenue derived from the sale of energy and the contributions to the Basin Fund, or rates charged to power customers. [2]

How are the costs associated with experimentation and the environmental programs paid for?

• Costs incurred during experimentation, like funding dedicated to environmental programs, are booked as a non-reimbursable activity.
• This means they can be booked as a constructive return (i.e. in lieu of an actual cash return) to the U.S. Treasury as a payment against the loan that was taken out to construct the CRPS units.
• The amount WAPA returns to the Treasury for the construction of the CRSP units is finite and scheduled.
• As the amount WAPA needs to return to the Treasury gets smaller, the amount of interest incorporated in the return also gets smaller.
• As these amounts gets smaller over time, it reduces the amount WAPA can claim as a non-reimbursable return.
• Over time, this reduces the amount of funding available for non-reimbursable activities like experimentation and environmental programs.

http://gcdamp.com/images_gcdamp_com/2/23/Jeka_PPT_Western_CRPS_Aug_2013_AMWG.pdf

What happens if the amount in the Basin Fund falls below the amount necessary to purchase power for firm contracts?

Some combination of the following:

• Increase power rates through a CRC (cost recovery charge)
• Increase power revenues through a re-operation of the CRSP facilities (i.e. relax environmental restrictions)
• Reduce BOR and WAPA O&M funding
• Reduce allocations for firm power contracts
• Reduce funding for non-reimbursable activities

How has re-operation at Glen Canyon Dam affected power revenues?

• 1996 EIS and MLFF
• 2016 LTEMP EIS

How much does the Federal Government make off of power revenues at Glen Canyon Dam?

• None
• Legislation requires full cost recovery, meaning, total revenue equals total costs. Profits are not allowed.
• Total annual revenue for the SLCA/IP is about $200 million/year [3]

• U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)
• Western Area Power Administration (WAPA)
• Colorado River Energy Distribution Association (CREDA)
• GTMax Page

• FY16 Annual Report
• FY16 Statistical Appendix
• FY15 Annual Report
• FY15 Statistical Appendix
• FY15 Results of Operations
• FY14 Annual Report
• FY13 Annual Report
• FY12 Annual Report

2018

• The Future of the Colorado River
• Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) PPT
• Glen Canyon Dam Hydropower Production and Value, Status and Trends 2018 PPT

2017

• Status and Trends of Hydropower and Energy PPT

2016

• Basin Fund and Revenue Overview

2015

• CRSP Rates, Revenue, and Basin Fund Overview

2013

• Overview of the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) Management Center for Western Area Power Administration (WAPA)
• Capacity and Energy Handout
• Question & Answer Transcript
• High Flow Experiments: Financial and Operational Effects on CRSP and the Electric Power System
• Final Products of the 2011 Hydropower Knowledge Assessment and GTMax Model Review Workshop Dated January 4, 2012

2010

• Electrical Power System Economics

2009

• CREDA brief on “the generation of hydroelectric power, as an incident of the foregoing purposes.”
• Life Cycle Impact Assessment of Renewable Electrical Generation Technologies Compared to the WECC Baseline
• Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill, 2010 language (note last paragraph on GCD Adaptive Management Program)
• Letter from various U.S. senators, to Daniel Inouye, Byron Dorgan, etc., Subj: Concerns on Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, H.R. 3183

• Generation at Outlet Glen Canyon Dam Plan of Study CRSP Power Peaking Capacity (March 1981)

In GRAND CANYON TRUST vs U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, Grand Canyon Trust asserted that “[h]ydropower is an incidental benefit of every other stated purpose of the dam,” citing 43 U.S.C. § 620. Pl. Reply at p. 39. This is not a correct statement of the law. The relevant portion of 43 U.S.C. § 620 provides “for the generation of hydroelectric power, as an incident of the foregoing purposes.” Congress did not provide that hydropower is “incidental to” or “an incidental benefit of” the Colorado River Storage Project. Hydropower is an “incident of” the other Congressionally defined purposes. Used in this manner and in this context, the word “incident” means “related to,” or “resulting from,” and does not mean that hydropower resources are an “incidental” or minor authorized purpose of the Colorado River Storage Project. [1]

Alvarez and Schmeeckle (2013) that found that the erosion of sandbars (the primary reason we have ramp rate restrictions at Glen) are not affected by ramp rates themselves. They found that erosion of sandbars is primarily caused by the higher velocity flows that washes the toe of the sandbar away which then causes the rest of the sandbar to slough off and fall into the river (i.e. mass failure). Having flows come up or go down more quickly than they do now will not increase this rate of erosion aside from the fact that the faster you can come up and go down allows you more time on peak at those higher velocity flows, which was identified as the causal factor of sandbar erosion.

• Under Pressure: Dams make less electricity in drought
• Wave attenuation of hydropower releases at Glen Canyon Dam
• CREDA Fact Sheet on Hydropower and Glen Canyon Dam
• Capacity & Energy handout
• Explanation on Why Capacity is Important
• Importance of Hydropower Capacity
• Video: What is Black Start?
• Video: How does a Transformer work?