HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Mail Packet - 7/3/2018 - Memorandum From Lindsay Ex, John Phelan, Tim Mccollough Re: 100% Renewable Electricity Goad AnalysisMEMORANDUM
DATE: June 28, 2018
TO: Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
CAP Executive Team1
FROM: Lindsay Ex, Climate Program Manager
John Phelan, Energy Services Senior Manager
Tim McCollough, Deputy Director, Utilities Light & Power
RE: 100% Renewable Electricity Goal Analysis
Purpose: This memo summarizes the analysis Council requested related to the potential adoption of
a community wide 100% Renewable Electricity (100RE) goal by 2030.
Recommendation: After a review of the five areas outlined in the May 11, 2018 memo (achievability,
rate impacts, planning effort alignment, carbon inventory impacts, and peer city review – see
Attachment B), staff recommends considering a Resolution in Q4 directing the various planning efforts
to assess the feasibility and impacts of a 2030 100RE goal.
The planning efforts include Platte River’s Integrated Resource Planning process, and the proposed
combined update to the Climate Action Plan (CAP) Framework and Energy Policy (Budget Offer
43.12). This process is similar to Resolution 2014-028, which directed the development and timing of
the current climate action goals and associated framework.
Rationale: This recommendation is based on the following key findings:
• The Initial Analysis of Setting a 100RE Goal (Attachment A) has illustrated more study is
needed to understand the achievability and risks of such a goal.
• Platte River has committed to exploring a 100RE scenario within their upcoming Integrated
Resource Planning effort (Attachment C).
Next Steps:
• Staff is meeting on July 5, 2018 with some of the stakeholder groups that requested the
immediate adoption of the goal to review this recommendation.
• Pending direction from leadership, staff will update the six-month calendar to include the
recommended Resolution in Q4.
Attachments:
A: Initial Analysis of Setting a 100% Renewable Electricity Goal
B: May 11, 2018 Joint Analysis Memo
C: Platte River IRP Goals, Objectives & Schedule
D: CAP Community Advisory Committee Meeting Notes
E: Energy Board Abridged Draft Meeting Minutes
1 Includes Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich; Utilities Executive Director Kevin Gertig; Chief Financial Officer
Mike Beckstead; Director of Planning, Development, and Transportation Laurie Kadrich; Chief Sustainability
Officer Jackie Kozak Thiel; and Environmental Services Director Lucinda Smith
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Attachment A: Initial Analysis of a 100% Renewable Electricity Goal
Purpose: This analysis summarizes initial staff review of five analysis areas (achievability, rate
impacts, planning effort alignment, carbon inventory impacts, and peer cities’ approaches) related to
potential City adoption of a 100% Renewable Electricity by 2030 goal (100RE). In addition, the
analysis shares the feedback from two stakeholder groups: the Climate Action Plan (CAP) Community
Advisory Committee and the Fort Collins Energy Board.
BOTTOM LINE FOR EACH AREA REVIEWED:
1. Achievability: While initial analyses, such as Platte River’s Zero Net Carbon (ZNC) Study, have
demonstrated that a carbon neutral electricity system is feasible, the level of investment required and
additional market risk requires further study. Other areas of uncertainty, such as the timeline for
forming an organized energy market in the Mountain West Transmission Group, suggest that a formal
position on the achievability of 100RE cannot be determined without further study.
2. Rate Impacts: Several future areas of study are necessary to understand the full costs and rate
impacts of achieving 100RE, including the rate forecast for a baseline scenario to which 100RE can
be compared. The required strategies and technologies to achieve 100RE must first be identified, and
then the capital cost of necessary investments must be quantified. The recommended upcoming
planning processes will identify the likely technology pathways to 100RE, and the rate strategy and
rate design processes below will follow and assist in quantifying the rate impacts.
3. Alignment of Planning Efforts: Three planning processes are proposed to be developed together
to ensure alignment: 2020 Integrated Resource Plan by Platte River, CAP Update, and Energy Policy
Update; the latter of which are proposed via the 2019-2020 Budget for Outcomes (BFO) process.
Platte River has committed to evaluating low and no-carbon strategies, including a 100RE scenario,
through their IRP; these scenarios will be aligned in the Energy Policy and CAP update. These
planning processes are proposed to be completed by 2020 and focus on achieving the community’s
2030 goals of an 80% reduction in emissions below 2005 levels.
4. Carbon Inventory Impacts: The CAP Framework (2015) identified a single pathway to being 73%
below 2005 levels by 2030. An initial analysis indicated that achieving 100RE could close the 7% gap
and the community could achieve the 2030 goal. However, an accurate picture of how 100RE will
impact 2030 requires an updated overview of the entire pathway because of rapidly changing markets
for renewable energy technology and pricing, waste materials, and financial analyses over the past
three years (this is proposed via the CAP Framework/Energy Policy BFO offer).
5. Peer City Review: From the 17 cities reviewed during this analysis (of the 65 that have set 100RE
goals), there are varied pathways to setting a 100RE goal. While Fort Collins typically uses a planning
process before establishing a goal, staff found that approximately half of the cities developed a plan
before setting a goal, while the other half set the goal first and then developed a plan.
CAP Community Advisory Committee and Energy Board Feedback: Members of both groups felt
that defining the terminology of renewable electricity was critical, as well as ensuring that future
services continue to be affordable and equitable for residents and businesses. Reliability was also
highlighted as critical to the community’s ongoing success.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
2
DETAILED FINDINGS FOR EACH AREA REVIEWED:
1. A Plan to Study Achievability:
Achievability Bottom Line: While initial analyses, such as Platte River’s ZNC Study, have
demonstrated that a carbon neutral electricity system is feasible, the level of investment
required and additional market risk requires further study. Other areas of uncertainty, such as
the formation of an organized energy market in our region, suggest that a formal position on
the achievability of 100RE cannot be determined without further study (see Section 5 and
below for more details).
As fully described in the May 8, 2018 Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary assessing a
carbon neutral electricity system has been an ongoing collaboration between the City, Platte River,
and the other three owner cities since 2016. Initiated in 2016 as the Customized Resource Plan and
then via the ZNC study completed in 2017, each of these efforts have demonstrated a positive first
step toward assessing the feasibility of a carbon-free portfolio. The study found that ZNC could be
implemented, but it would require investment and create additional market risk.
In addition to these analyses led by Platte River, another critical component to assessing achievability
is whether Platte River and its member communities, as a part of the remaining Mountain West
Transmission Group, will form or join an energy market. These decisions will be further discussed at
the Platte River Board meeting in August of 2018.
Finally, Fort Collins Utilities has done initial modeling of the amount of distributed generation that can
be hosted on the existing distribution system. Initial model results indicate that up to fifty (50)
megawatts of total distributed generation (two to five times the current amount) can be managed with
the existing infrastructure with little additional investment. More modeling is necessary to understand
the investments necessary to increase the hosting capacity for distributed generation of the
distribution system beyond the currently defined limits.
In addition, only limited modeling has been completed to date on the hosting capacity of our
distribution system of other distributed resources such as demand response, battery storage, and
electric vehicles.
The electric sector has the largest impact in the carbon inventory (51% of 2017 emissions). However,
with our unique position as a retail electric utility with an ownership stake in our wholesale power
provider, this is the sector for which we have the most influence for decarbonizing our community.
While there remains uncertainty in the electricity sector (see section 3 below), greater uncertainty
exists in other sectors such as transportation and natural gas use. There is less influence over what
cars people drive, how much they choose to drive, regional transportation systems, population growth,
building community, etc.
Building upon the work through ZNC and other key efforts, achievability of 100RE will be studied
through three upcoming plan and policy updates.
1. 2020 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) by Platte River
Platte River is committing to evaluate low and no-carbon generation strategies, including a
100RE scenario, in the IRP (see attachment C for further details on Platte River’s goals and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
3
objectives for the IRP). The excerpt below describes the impetus for the accelerated IRP and
their commitment to evaluate 100RE in the IRP.
Since the 2016 IRP was released, significant changes have already been made within our
business and industry, so Platte River is undertaking a new IRP effort, with an expected
completion date of mid-2020. The 2020 IRP will be submitted approximately 1-year earlier than
required to formulate an action plan that addresses current community goals for carbon
reduction that exceed those studied in the 2016 IRP, including cases that will evaluate 100%
non-carbon portfolios.
2. Climate Action Plan Update
Offer 43.12 in the 2019-2020 Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) process is entitled “2030 Climate
Action and Energy Policy Update – Optimizing Policy, Targets and Strategies.” The purpose of
this offer is to jointly plan for the strategies and policies needed to achieve the communities
2030 climate action goals.
The key questions the planning process is designed to address with regards to achievability
are as follows:
• What are the most cost-effective, pragmatic, and equitable initiatives in this timeframe?
• What pricing structures support the outcome?
• What is the right sequencing of initiatives needed to achieve the 2030 goal?
• What infrastructure and/or capital needs are necessary to reach the goal?
• What are the key areas of tension or tradeoffs that will need to be considered?
In addition, the planning process will include a focus on increasing the community’s climate
resilience (supporting the City’s Strategic Plan Objective 4.5 to develop strategies to improve
the community’s climate resilience), and will be developed in partnership with Utilities to
include the Energy Policy’s focus on 2030.
3. Fort Collins Energy Policy
Fort Collins Energy Policy lays out the vision for the energy sources and systems serving the
community, and contains specific goals for efficiency, renewable energy and reliability. The
policy also includes implementation principles regarding systems thinking, partnership and
community economics. The proposed BFO offer (see above) will review and update this policy,
including targets for renewable energy through at least 2030.
In addition, a key input to Platte River’s IRP from the City will include strategies and plans for
distributed energy resources (DERs), inclusive of efficiency. DERs will continue to play an
important role for the community to reach carbon and renewable electricity objectives. DERs
contribute to defining the amount of electricity required to be delivered by the electric system,
and the timing of this delivery. These resources include:
• Efficiency and conservation: Improved energy efficiency and behavioral energy
conservation are well understood mechanisms to reduce electricity use. Continuing
efficiency programs through the 2030 timeframe will continue to provide the lowest cost
strategy to meet overall community electricity requirements.
• Distributed generation: Customer adoption of solar energy systems has grown rapidly in
recent years, and is expected to increase through the 2030 timeframe and beyond.
• Strategic electrification: Natural gas and petroleum transportation fuels comprise over 40%
of Fort Collins climate inventory. In conjunction with development of a carbon-free
electricity supply, beginning the transition away from the use of natural gas for heating and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
4
toward the use of electric vehicles will be necessary to reach Fort Collins 2030 climate
goal.
• Demand flexibility and electricity storage: Utilities envisions a dynamic future distribution
electric grid which will value demand flexibility to accommodate increasing adoption of
intermittent renewable generation sources. Utilities expects battery storage and smart
home integration to be essential components of long-term solutions to Fort Collins' energy
goals.
2. A Plan to Study Rate Impacts:
Rate Impacts Bottom Line: Several future areas of study are necessary to understand the full
costs and rate impacts of achieving 100RE, including the rate forecast for a baseline scenario
to which 100RE can be compared. The required strategies and technologies to achieve 100RE
must first be identified, and then the capital cost of necessary investments must be quantified.
The upcoming planning processes will identify the technology pathways to 100RE, and the
rate strategy and rate design processes below will follow and assist in quantifying the rate
impacts.
Platte River is currently undergoing a rate strategy and design study, which is a comprehensive
review of its current rate making practices, to recognize and address any significant existing and
anticipated changes occurring in the electric utility industry. Through this process, Platte River will
develop a rate strategy to guide the development and implementation of future rate designs. This
project is expected to continue into 2019.
Fort Collins Utilities routinely performs cost-of-service studies to identify the cost of providing service
to each rate class as a function of load and service characteristics. A cost-of-service study provides
guidelines for assigning costs to each customer classification to help ensure rates are fair and
equitable. This analysis also provides information to help staff design individual rate class schedules
for retail customers. Future Fort Collins Utilities cost-of-service studies will identify shifts in allocations
and will assist in determining the optimal rate structure that supports necessary investments (both
customer, private and Utility) to achieve 100RE. Staff will report findings and provide
recommendations to City Council, the regulatory body approving retail electricity rates, as they are
available.
3. Aligning Planning Efforts – Energy Policy, CAP Framework, and Integrated Resource Plan:
Planning Bottom Line: Three planning processes are proposed to be developed together to
ensure alignment: 2020 Integrated Resource Plan by Platte River, Climate Action Plan Update,
and Energy Policy Update (the latter of which are proposed via the 2019-2020 BFO process).
Platte River has commitment to evaluating low and no-carbon strategies, including a 100RE
scenario, through their IRP; these scenarios will be aligned in the Energy Policy and CAP
Update, including the impact of local distributed energy resources. These planning processes
are proposed to be completed by 2020 and focus on achieving the community’s 2030 goals of
an 80% reduction in emissions below 2005 levels.
The Platte River IRP is already in motion and scheduled to be finalized by the end of 2020. See
attachment C with a detailed schedule of the sequence of tasks from Platte River.
Staff is recommending an aligned update to the CAP Framework and Energy Policy beginning in 2019
(as outlined above). If funded, there is an opportunity to align all three planning efforts in a single
planning cycle. While each plan has a specific purpose, outputs of each plan inform the others. Thus,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
5
by completing the three plans in the same cycle, it will allow for iterations of inputs and outputs among
the plans to be accomplished efficiently.
Plan Update
Cycle
Future Outlook Revs Next
Update Due
Platte River Integrated Resource Plan 4-5
years
20 year planning period with 5 year
resource acquisition period
2012
2016
2020
Climate Action Plan Framework 7-9
years
35 year planning period with 5, 15,
and 35 year targets
1999
2008
2015
2022-24
Fort Collins Energy Policy 5 years 35 year planning period with 5 year
targets
2009
2015
2020
4. Carbon Inventory Impacts:
Carbon Inventory Impacts Bottom Line: The CAP Framework (2015) identified a single pathway
to being 73% below 2005 levels. An initial analysis indicated that achieving 100RE could close
the 7% gap and the community could achieve the 2030 goal of 80% below. However, an
accurate picture of how 100RE will impact 2030 requires an updated overview of the entire
pathway because of rapidly changing markets for renewable energy technology and pricing,
waste materials, and financial analyses over the past three years (this is proposed via the CAP
Framework/Energy Policy BFO offer).
The 2015 CAP framework assumed that with 80% renewable electricity generation, community
carbon emissions would be 73% below the 2005 baseline in 2030.
Using the CAP framework model from 2015, increasing renewable electricity generation to 100% and
holding other assumptions constant, carbon emissions would hit the goal at 80% below the 2005
baseline in 2030.
However, current modeling assumptions shows a significant gap to 2030 (65% below, gap of 15%)
even with 100RE. This is because many initiatives relevant to 2030 from carbon sources have not yet
been identified or funded at the local, state or federal levels. In addition, solar and wind pricing,
storage technology and the potential for regional electricity markets have rapidly evolved in the past
three years since adoption. It is clear a combination of existing and new strategies will be necessary
to achieve the 2030 goal.
5. Peer City Review:
Peer City Review Bottom Line: From the cities reviewed via this process, there are varied
pathways to setting a 100% Renewable Electricity goal.
As of this year, 65 communities, five counties, and one state have made 100% renewable energy or
electricity commitments (Source: Sierra Club). Of these commitments, staff reviewed 17 communities'
and Hawaii’s pathways to setting a goal with the following questions:
• Did communities establish a goal first or did they develop a plan or a roadmap?
• What characteristics can be assessed about the community, e.g., do they also have a
municipal utility, a climate action plan, etc.?
Key Findings:
• Which came first – plan or goal?: Of the 17 communities, they are nearly split in half on
developing a plan first or setting a goal first. Some communities (e.g., Salt Lake City,
Breckenridge, and Vancouver) developed a plan first while others established a goal first and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
6
then focused on a roadmap to achieve their goals (e.g., Longmont, Pueblo, and Aspen).
Denver is also in the process of setting a goal, and they chose to develop their goal through
their current Climate Action Planning process; an official announcement is expected this year.
• Community versus municipal goal setting: In some of the 65 communities that have set goals
(e.g., Chicago, Ann Arbor, and Austin), the communities focused their goal-setting on 100%
renewable electricity for their municipal operations instead of the community level. In these
cities that only have a municipal goal, they were developed without a formal planning process,
but at least some level of financial costs was estimated. For example, in the case of Chicago,
costs to purchase Renewable Energy Credits were estimated as a part of the goal-setting
process.
• Municipal versus Investor-Owned Utilities (IOU): Staff also found varied pathways for
communities with municipal utilities (e.g., Aspen and Longmont) which set a goal first whereas
Burlington developed a plan first. Communities with investor-owned utilities (IOU) also varied
in their approach (e.g., Breckenridge did and Denver is working with their IOU (Xcel) to
develop their goals) whereas Salt Lake City set their goals first and then worked on an
agreement with their IOU (Rocky Mountain Power).
• Presence or absence of a Climate Action Plan: Finally, the presence or absence of a climate
action plan was not consistent, Pueblo and Longmont did not have a climate action plan when
their goals were adopted, yet Breckenridge, Boulder, and Ann Arbor did.
• Goal versus commitment: Some communities were explicit that expressing support for 100RE
was a goal and not a binding commitment; Breckenridge’s Resolution is one example.
Full list of communities reviewed:
• Colorado: Aspen, Boulder, Breckenridge, Lafayette, Longmont, Nederland, Pueblo, and
Denver (who is in the process of setting a goal)
• Outside Colorado: Salt Lake City, UT; Vancouver, BC; State of Hawaii; Boise, ID; Fayetteville,
AR; Tempe, AR; Ann Arbor, MI; Burlington, VT; Austin, TX; and Chicago, IL.
CAP Community Advisory Committee and Energy Board Feedback:
Stakeholder Feedback Bottom Line: Members of both groups felt that defining the terminology
of renewable electricity was critical, as well as ensuring that any future services continue to be
affordable and equitable for residents and businesses. Reliability was also highlighted as
critical to the community’s ongoing success.
Detailed Information: As described in the May 11, 2018 memo outlining the proposed analysis
strategy, staff visited with the CAP Community Advisory Committee on May 31, 2018 and the Energy
Board on June 14,2018 to discuss the potential setting of a 100% Renewable Electricity Goal for Fort
Collins. At each of these meetings, a graphic recording was used to capture the conversations (see
the following page for these recordings). The themes of the discussions and the graphic recordings
are included within this memo, and the meeting notes can be found in attachment D (CAP Community
Advisory Committee Notes) and attachment E (Energy Board Abridged Draft Meeting Minutes).
Common themes across the two discussions:
• Terminology – members in both meetings discussed the terms renewable energy and
renewable electricity and that, if a goal is set, the language needs to be clear, e.g., energy vs.
electricity, and relevant to the average resident.
• Importance of being cost-effective and equitable.
• Importance of maintaining reliability.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
7
• There were mixed opinions from the groups whether it is important to plan first and then set a
goal, or set a goal first and then plan.
Specific Themes at the CAP Community Advisory Committee
• Energy storage solutions as the key enabler of 100RE
• Need to account for the life cycle impacts of all technologies (e.g., retiring infrastructure early
as well as the impacts of new technologies) to truly compare the various options
• Impact to employers and businesses in Fort Collins, as well as renters
Specific Themes at the Energy Board Meeting
• Needs to be financially sustainable for the Utility, first and foremost.
• Needs to consider affordability for the customer
• Economic development and partnership opportunities a goal could create
• Some members shared that the City‘s goals in each of the other sectors, e.g., waste materials
and transportation, made sense with a 2030 goal for electricity; other members expressed
concern that another goal could distract from the CAP goals.
• If a Resolution is desired by Council, the Energy Board would like to provide a
recommendation in advance of the Council discussion.
In addition, a joint meeting was held between Platte River staff, Fort Collins Utilities staff and the five
large customers in Fort Collins that have asked for corporate renewable tariffs to help achieve their
specific renewable electricity goals. The discussions at this meeting focused on the current Platte
River rate study and rate design project, the upcoming Platte River renewable generation projects that
will be built before the end of 2020, and the recent news of potential delays in the formation of an
organized energy market in our region and the potential impact on further renewable development in
the short term. These customers will continue to be engaged through the process of developing
energy products to help them achieve their goals.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
8
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 11, 2018
TO: Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers
FROM: Darin Atteberry, City Manager, City of Fort Collins
Jason Frisbie, General Manager, Platte River Power Authority
RE: 100% Renewable Electricity Analysis
Purpose: The purpose of this memo is to outline what analysis can be done in the next 30 days to
evaluate a 100% Renewable Electricity goal (100RE).
Response: Within the next month, Platte River and the City would conduct an analysis within five
areas:
1. Peer City Review: Fort Collins would include an analysis of Colorado cities and cities
nationally that have set 100RE goals and an assessment of their established pathways or
plans to achieve the goals (if any).
2. Carbon Inventory Projections: Fort Collins would project the carbon inventory impact of
achieving a 100RE goal.
3. A Plan to Study Achievability: Jointly outline what areas need further analysis through which
upcoming planning process (IRP, Energy Policy, CAP Framework) such as:
Replacement of the firm capacity of coal generation units.
Studying intermittent generation balancing needs, while ensuring high reliability
Recognition of the rapidly changing technology, e.g., battery storage
Feasibility in the presence/absence of an Organized Energy Market, and
The role of energy efficiency and distributed energy resources.
4. A Plan to Study Rate Impacts: Jointly outline what future costs and benefits analyses are
needed in the IRP to understand rate impacts such as sensitivity analyses on:
Natural gas commodity prices
Battery storage capital costs
Renewable generation total delivered costs, and
Broader future energy market conditions
5. A Plan to Align Planning Efforts: Jointly outline how Platte River’s and City’s upcoming
plan/policy updates will be sequenced and aligned. (IRP, Energy Policy, CAP Framework).
In addition to analyzing the goal from these five lenses, staff will also have initial discussions with the
CAP Community Advisory Committee on May 31 and the Energy Board at their June 14 regular
meeting. Staff will provide this feedback in the memo with the analysis. In addition to these groups,
staff is also scheduling a meeting with Platte River and the large energy customers to discuss their
request for a separate tariff for additional renewable electricity options.
DocuSign Envelope ID: A332AA2B-1644D4D1-0E44-8F8F-4558-41E1-9B8D-A2BA-A2B9775DFE28 9AC2B0292DE8
Platte River Power Authority 2020 Integrated Resource Plan
Goals and Objectives
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Overview
Platte River’s last IRP was submitted in 2016, with the primary planning objectives of resource
diversification and carbon reduction. The carbon reduction objectives were based on the EPA’s
proposed Clean Power Plan, and targeted decreases of 35-50% by 2030.
Since the 2016 IRP was released, significant changes have already been made within our
business and industry, so Platte River is undertaking a new IRP effort, with an expected
completion date of mid-2020. The 2020 IRP will be submitted approximately 1-year earlier than
required to formulate an action plan that addresses current community goals for carbon
reduction that exceed those studied in the 2016 IRP, including cases that will evaluate 100%
non-carbon portfolios.
Reasons for Accelerated IRP
Business change—Since the 2016 IRP, Platte River has committed to a reduction of 77 MW
of coal generation, an addition of 180 MW of renewable resources and has seen significant
growth in distributed generation and lower cost renewable resources.
Industry change—Platte River recognizes the electric utility industry is undergoing swift
changes leading toward lower carbon resource mixes. The 2020 IRP will help formalize a plan
to continue the cost-effective pursuit of resource diversification and carbon reduction.
Community interest and goals—Platte River’s owner communities and their customers have
varied renewable, carbon and climate action goals. The 2020 IRP will define a near-term
action plan and flexible long-run trajectory to pursue the resource needs of our communities.
Primary Objectives of 2020 IRP
Conduct extensive outreach with our owner communities to establish the direction of the
2020 IRP
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Evaluate the cost and environmental performance of a full range of resource paths,
including 100% renewable portfolios and those that yield low or zero net carbon
Continue to integrate and explore more renewable resources, distributed technologies,
conservation programs and energy storage technologies
Look for ways to reduce reliance on coal resources and/or defer the need for investment
in natural gas resources
Supporting Studies
Platte River will support its IRP with many additional studies including:
A comprehensive review of existing and potential generation technologies
The evaluation of externalities from the manufacture of fuels, wind, solar and storage
equipment
Regional economic impacts from potentially higher retail electricity rates
Economic and technical potential of distributed energy resources
The potential for energy storage systems and devices
Cost and performance impacts to existing coal facilities from more frequent cycling
Review of impacts and benefits of bilateral energy markets vs. organized energy
markets
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Platte River Power Authority
2020 IRP Schedule
Process Task 12345678910 11 1212345678910 11 1212345678910 11 12
Objectives Develop materials for discussion (based on 3 pillars)
Retreat(s)
Board Approval
Resource Mobilization Internal kickoff meeting(s) X
Contracting for All Third-Party Services
Coordinate early delivery approval with WAPA
Develop IRP budget
Stakeholder Outreach Update Generation Technology Review
Community input on technologies and timing
Stakeholder report
Gather Assumptions IRP RTO Model vs BAU Model
Congestion Analysis
Cost Estimates for Production Resources
Cost Estimates for Renewables Resources
Update Battery Study -- focus on capability
Revise Gas Interconnection Costs
Decommissioning Update
Life Cycle GHG Impacts -- Gas and Coal
Regional Economic Impacts -- Rates
Distributed Technologies
Conservation Potential
Aurora Analysis Incorporate assumptions and stakeholder input
Verify cases meet board-adopted business objectives
Present findings to Mgt/UDs/Board
Financial / Rate Analysis Incorporate results of Aurora cases into financial models
Verify cases meet board-adopted SFP targets
Present findings to Mgt/UDs/Board
Internal Review Consolidate planning and finance findings
Develop draft report
Board review
External Presentation Presentation and Review
Filing Editing and Printing
Filing
2018 2019 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
CAP CAC – MAY 31 MEETING – MEETING NOTES 1
Climate Action Plan - Community Advisory Committee
May 31, 2018 12:00 – 2:30 pm
Council Information Center (CIC Room) @ 300 Laporte
Anticipated Meeting Results: CAC Members will advise staff in the following ways…
Be informed on the most recent community carbon inventory results and identify key questions
Provide staff with what supports and concerns them most about various CAP-related budget offers
Provide initial feedback on considerations around analyzing a 100% Renewable Electricity goal
Receive updates on other key efforts, e.g., CAP marketing campaign and Innovate Fort Collins
Challenge
Attendees:
CAC Members:
Dawn Paepke, Kaiser Permanente
Marissa Bell, Colorado State University
Lisa Leveillee, Wells Fargo
Hunter Buffington, Fort Collins Sustainability Group
Trudy Trimbath, Poudre School District
Scott Denning, Colorado State University
Jim Beers, Former Communications Professional at CSU
Todd Dangerfield, Downtown Development Authority
Stacey Baumgarn, Colorado State University
Fred Kirsch, Community for Sustainable Energy
Ann Hutchinson, Fort Collins Area Chamber
Molly McLaughlin, Colorado State University
Bob Gowing, Apex Engineering
Dana Villeneuve, New Belgium Brewing
Sheble McConnellogue, Northern Colorado Clean Cities
Evelyn Carpenter, Solas Energy Consulting
CAC Members Not present:
Jean Runyon, Front Range Community College
Todd Parker, Brinkman Development
Bruno Sobral, One Health Institute, CSU
Steve Kuehneman, Care Housing
Staff Members: Lindsay Ex, Molly Saylor, Katy McLaren, Jackie Kozak Thiel, Carrie Frickman, Victoria
Shaw, John Phelan, Brian Tholl, Tim McCollough, Wendy Serour, Rebecca Everette, Honore Depew
Facilitators: Chris Hutchison, Diana Hutchinson
Community members: Mark Houdashelt – Air Quality/Bicycle Advisory/Drive Electric, Dale Adamy
Conceptual Discussion around 100% Renewable Electricity (Collaborate) (Tim McCollough, John
Phelan, CAC Members)
Initial considerations identified by staff
o Terminology – what is included in RE
o Alignment with Platte River (timing & sequence of changes, producer vs. consumer
perspective)
o Reliability (up time)
o Flexibility (able to adopt different technology as developed)
o Equitable & cost effective (equitable among communities, among rate customers –
industrial/residential, social)
o Partnerships
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
CAP CAC – MAY 31 MEETING – MEETING NOTES 2
o Engagement
What was missed on list of elements to consider?
o Goal setting vs. market conditions – will we achieve 100% whether or not if we set this goal?
o Impact on potential employers – Could attract more businesses who like 100% RE. Could
have a negative impact if rates are raised or reliability reduced to achieve 100% RE.
o Time of day rate changes – time variance of cost may get larger as we get more renewables
(requiring storage abilities, paying people to take away energy)
o How does all this relate to Total Health (Individuals & community)
Medical health, clean air and water, well-being
Environmental, social, economic; mind-body-spirit
What is impacting day to day – strong need to make the language we use feel
relevant to the average community member
o Terminology for “experts” vs. general public. RE = Renewable Energy, Renewable
Electricity? Net carbon vs. 100% RE
o “Renewable” is a term from the 1970’s, tied to Middle East and availability of fossil fuels and
them eventually being depleted. “Carbon Neutral” might be a better term, or “Green Energy”
o Natural gas as stepping stone. Currently it is a back-up capacity, fast, flexible. Cost is higher
right now but not higher than storage cost.
o Energy storage – global impacts of mining, global supply
Worldwide amount of Lithium Ion batteries would supply PRPA for 1 hour
o Life cycle cost and assessment of carbon – disposing of PV panels and storage, carbon
impact of building dams for hydroelectric
o Non-carbon, non-fossil generation is the goal. Right now inventory method does not include
long term GHG emissions accounting.
o Engagement – how will people learn about changes like time of day? For example students,
renters.
o Equitable and cost effective should be 2 separate items – flat-out cost increases is a big
concern.
o Equity – 20% cost increase could be a huge difference for those on poverty line
o Economic impact –will key employers try to create own source to ensure reliability (if
100%RE is less reliable) or to ensure 100% net zero carbon (if City doesn’t move toward
100%RE)?
What excites CAC members?
o Fossil-free fuel strategy – not just net carbon. Need to also balance desire for fossil-free with
cost and reliability.
o Smart grids, micro grid opportunities
o Value in setting a goal even if we don’t get there. For example how we set the CAP goal in
1996, it set the intention and drove action.
o New Belgium hasn’t felt empowered to set this RE goal for themselves, but a city goal could
make it more publicly possible for NBB to have such a goal.
What concerns CAC about this opportunity?
o Costs include reliability, flexibility, etc. in addition to generation.
o Costs have fallen 5x faster than expected for the last 15 years. Projections need to take
these falling costs in mind.
o Partnerships – includes with customers, energy suppliers, others
o What is event horizon for energy storage becoming cost effective? Could FC be more of a
driver of this? PRPA developing a storage facility, also a demo storage at 222 building.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
CAP CAC – MAY 31 MEETING – MEETING NOTES 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Fort Collins Utilities Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT Thursday, June 14, 2018
Energy Board Chairperson
Nick Michell, 970‐215‐9235
City Council Liaison
Ross Cunniff, 970‐420‐7398
Energy Board Vice Chairperson
Amanda Shores, 408‐391‐0062
Staff Liaison
Tim McCollough, 970‐305‐1069
Roll Call
Board Present: Chairperson Nick Michell, Alan Braslau, Vice Chairperson Amanda Shores, Stacey
Baumgarn, Bill Becker, Jeremy Giovando, Greg Behm
Late Arrivals:
Board Absent: Krishna Karnamadakala, John Fassler
Others Present
Staff: Tim McCollough, Marisa Olivas, Lance Smith, Lindsay Ex, Ginny Sawyer, Cyril Vidergar, Adam
Bromley, Wendy Serour, Alexix Hmielak
Platte River Power Authority: Paul Davis
Colorado State University: Dan Zimmerle, Jerry Duggan
Members of the Public: Arsineh Hecobian, Fred Kirsch, David Gatzke, Nick Francis
Meeting Convened
Chairperson Michell called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m.
Public Comment
None
Approval of May 10, 2018 Board Meeting Minutes
In preparation for the meeting, board members submitted amendments via email for the May 10, 2018
minutes. The minutes were approved as amended.
100% Renewable Electricity Goal Analysis
Lindsay Ex, Senior Manager Environmental Sustainability
Tim McCollough, Light and Power Operations Manager
(attachments available upon request)
Before the presentation started it was noted by Ms. Ex that a Graphic Recording would take place during
the discussion. Ms. Ex reminded the Board that a large group of citizens went to Council to ask Council
to set a goal of 100 percent renewable electricity (100% RE) by 2030. Council then directed staff to
conduct an initial analysis. The presentation outlined different initial considerations, put together by City
staff and Platte River. In an earlier meeting the considerations were presented to the Climate Action
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Plan (CAP) Community Advisory Committee meeting. There was also a graphic recording of that
discussion Ms. Ex mentioned a few questions to consider:
Do other communities set a goal first and develop a plan or vice versa (reviewing14 cities (six in
Colorado) and the state of Hawaii)?
How would the 2030 goal of 100% RE relate to the existing CAP plans goal of 80 percent
reduction of carbon emissions by 2030?
What levels of technology, storage, renewables, and energy markets are needed to achieve this
goal?
What are the rate impacts and projected costs?
Tim McCollough shared areas of initial consideration which include terminology, alignment with Platte
River, reliability, flexibility, equitable and cost‐effective, partnerships, and engagement. Mr. McCollough
said there are three major questions that the Utility would like to receive feedback on from the Board:
1. Considering the various elements outlined, are there other key elements you feel are missing?
2. Which of these elements are most important to your stakeholders? Which excite you the most?
3. Which of these elements are more concerning to you stakeholders/people like you?
Mr. McCollough touched briefly on each of the terms before opening the conversation to the Board. Mr.
McCollough started with terminology; there are a lot of ways renewable electricity can be described (i.e.
clean, renewable, net, or no electrons from fossil/carbon based). Defining the terms is an important
piece in setting these goals and looking forward to the outcomes. Mr. McCollough said alignment with
Platte River is also key to adopt these potential goals. It is felt there is a high level of reliability at
distribution levels, considering the impact of these outcomes in reliability is an important part of the
analysis. Flexibility is needed rather than believing there is only one way to do this, instead remain
flexible to achieve outcomes. If this goal is Equitable (equitable to the four Platte River partner cities,
equitable across rate classes of electric customers, and equitable amongst the social economic classes of
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
customers). The Utility is also looking at cost‐effectiveness to see if this is a goal that should be done at
all cost, moderate cost, or at no cost increase over the baseline. Partnerships can speak to the
partnerships with other Platte River Cities and the public/private partnerships leveraging public/private
funds toward outcomes. Mr. McCollough said the final condition of engagement could be seen through
the example of this Board meeting, because of the informed discussion taking place about adopting
these goals. Mr. McCollough then opened the conversation to allow questions from the Board.
Mr. Becker started the conversation by saying that the viability of the Utility must be sustained. Mr.
Becker said perhaps it is implied with the rates that must be generated, but at some point there is a
curve of less customers bringing higher rates and higher rates creating less customers. Mr. Becker said
his point is that the Utility cannot go out of business. Mr. Michell agreed with Mr. Becker and shared
that while he worked at Hewlett‐Packard it was said that David Packard, Co‐Founder Hewlett‐Packard,
believed the number one job was to stay in business. Mr. Michell said the number one thing is for the
Utility is to stay viable financially no matter what model is come up with for the 100% RE goal. Mr.
Behm said that unless there is some dogmatic reason to stick to seven considerations, adding an eighth
to specifically address viability and the Utility makes sense. Mr. Becker added that to supply the
resource plan commitment, Platte River must be viable too.
Mr. McCollough reminded the Board that answers are not being sought after tonight, but instead
seeking to gather feedback to take to Council. Mr. Braslau said what is missing in the points of
consideration is affordability. Mr. McCollough asked if there is a consideration that Mr. Braslau would
replace with affordability. Mr. Braslau said no because equitableness, affordability, cost‐effectiveness,
and viability are all needed. Mr. Becker commented that the wording in the memo to the Board,
“equitable and cost‐effective – how does this ensure rates continue to be competitive and affordable,”
is clearer than the presentation.
Mr. Michell wanted to touch on the first consideration of terminology. Mr. Michell said he did not like
the terminology of 100% RE. Mr. Michell said he does not know what 100 percent renewable energy
means exactly, and that is comes across as a marketing tool attempting to sound nice. Mr. Michell said
from an engineer’s point of view, it feels more like marketing than science. Mr. Braslau jokingly added as
physicist the notion of renewable energy is absurd. Mr. Braslau then said the goal of this is to get away
from burning fossil fuels and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, so it doesn’t matter if it is called
renewable energy through wind generation, solar panels, or anything else. Mr. Behm said he thinks
terminology is vital whether you take the absurdist point of view that renewable energy is meaningless
or that it is meaningless because it is a marketing term, for most people who don’t fall into those camps
there may be confusion about what is being discussed. Mr. Behm said, he understands the “RE” in 100%
RE to mean renewable electricity, and a lot of people are going to conflate renewable energy with
renewable electricity without thinking about the difference between the two. Mr. Behm said whether it
is a marketing tool or not he tends to believe 100% RE is a goal. Mr. Behm believes nailing down the
terminology of what 100% RE entails is central to the marketing and the communication. Mr. Michell
said if the City says they are going to do 100% RE, but people are still driving gas‐guzzling cars and using
natural gas to heat their homes then the City fails. Mr. Michell asked if the CAP goal of 80 percent below
greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 was not sexy enough. Mr. Braslau’s rebuttal was with the question of
how will the CAP goal of 80 percent below by 2030 be achieved without the 100% RE commitment.
Mr. Becker said that economic development should be part of the plan to drive business opportunities
and wealth in the Fort Collins community. So that the Utility is not mandating exactly what happens and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
allocating tax payer funds, Mr. Becker suggested that businesses should be given the industry goal and
left to figure out their own business models.
Mr. Braslau said competitive rates are important on an economic scale for the business, but not
necessarily for the customers who want affordability. Mr. Michell said affordability in terms of cost of
service is a high priority. Mr. Becker said he differs with that opinion, because there are several things in
life people choose to pay more for (i.e. purchasing a more expensive car for safety, taxing for better
roads). Mr. Becker hears the argument of affordability repeatedly, but he struggles to believe that
people are not willing to pay a little more for something that is believed in. Mr. Braslau commented that
some people do not have the choice to pay more, but must submit to their situation. In exaggeration,
Mr. Becker answered affordability does not necessarily mean it is always the lowest number, if that was
the case the community would be coal spewing, with toxic fumes and acid rain, and pot holes in the
road. Mr. Becker said he does not think affordability is the number one priority. Mr. Behm said one
reason why the City is discussing making an 100% RE goal is the over‐arching issue of climate change.
Mr. Behm said when cost‐effectiveness is discussed some people can afford the monthly bill without
thinking about it and for others there is more of a hardship, but the burden ultimately comes down on
everyone. Mr. Behm believes that Fort Collins citizens have a general idea that climate change is an issue
since the community has adopted CAP, but not everyone has a grasp of the science. Looking at the past
several decades of relative inaction combined with the mounting cost of natural disasters due to climate
change, Mr. Behm believes everyone pays for the consequences. Mr. Behm said all of this must be
considered when the Utility is engaging with the public to explain the Why; people must understand
that there is a cost even if it’s not on their bill.
Ms. Ex displayed the graphic recording of the conversation that occurred at the CAP Community
Advisory Committee Meeting on May 31, 2018. The recording showed that terminology was also
discussed for a decent amount of time, energy storage being the elephant in the room, the difference
between setting a goal and achieving it, and CSU’s commitment to 100% RE. Ms. Ex said a larger
business in the community made an interesting comment; If the City set the goal it could provide cover
and support for that business to set a similar goal. Mr. McCollough added that the idea of natural gas as
a transition for facilitating reliability as a possible solution and life‐cycle assessment of renewable
technologies was discussed. The committee also spent a lot of time on cost‐effectiveness and defining
equity, the differences in customer types, and considering partnerships beyond Platte River.
Mr. Michell said in his opinion staff needs to do a lot more work on the 100% RE goal proposal. Mr.
Becker said one thing the Board can do is provide guide rails to staff and help define the goal. Mr.
Michell shared that in his personal opinion the CAP goals are already very aggressive and 100% RE is a
distraction from that. Mr. Braslau disagreed, he thinks it helps reach the CAP goals. Mr. Behm said he
thinks in the next three to five years 100% RE goals will be standard in the conversation. Mr. Behm
noted there are currently two major candidates for Colorado governor that are calling for 100% RE,
whatever that means, by 2040. Mr. Behm said it is not a distraction, but will become central to achieving
CAP. Mr. Baumgarn said he personally thinks it important to set a goal to move the conversation and the
outcomes forward. Mr. Braslau commented if the goal is empty, more information is needed from staff
on achievability. Mr. Baumgarn said he was confused if the Board’s role is to say yes, no, or maybe to
100% RE. Mr. Michell said maybe the Board needs to be more explicit. Mr. Baumgarn said perhaps
Council already feels it is implicit. Mr. McCollough reminded the Board that the issues and questions
brought up did not need to be solved at the meeting.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Energy Board Minutes
DRAFT June 14, 2018
Adjournment
The Energy Board meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1644D4D1-0E44-4558-9B8D-A2B9775DFE28