Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Policy Forum Series: Smith - Natural Gas as Fuel for Electric Generation in the Midwest
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Policy Forum Series: Smith - Natural Gas as Fuel for Electric Generation in the Midwest

473
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
473
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Natural Gas as a Fuel forElectric Generation in the Midwest: The Regional ContextPolicy Forum Series: Natural Gas and Minnesota’s Energy Future September 21, 2012
  • 2. MISO Overview RenewablesNuclear 14% 6% Coal 48% Gas/Oil 32% MISO Reliability Coordination Area, June 2012 2
  • 3. Energy Production Mix January  through  July  Energy  Contribution  by  Fuel  Source 90% 80% 77% 78% 74% 70% Contribution  to  Total  Energy  Served 65% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 14% 14% 14% 13% 12% 7% 10% 6% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3% 0% 2009 2010 2011 2012 Year Coal Nuclear Gas Wind 3
  • 4. Queue Makeup Reflects Shifting Energy Policies100%   90%   Wood   Wind   80%   Waste  Heat  Recovery   Steam   70%   Solar   60%   Nuclear   Landfill  Gas   50%   Hydro   Gas   40%   Diesel   30%   Combined  Cycle   Co-­‐Gen   20%   Coal   Biomass  &  Natural  Gas   10%   Biomass   0%   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   2010   2011   2012   4
  • 5. Generation Interconnection Queue
  • 6. MISO’s September survey still indicates many EPAcompliance decisions have yet to be made Coal Resources Affected – 3rd Quarter Survey Cross State Air Capacity, GW Pollution Rule 66 19 53•  Vacated by District Court Units•  Minimal impact on MISO coal retirements 47 35 NoMercury and Air Toxins Action Standard 295 Required 242 98 Units Units Units•  Uncertainties remain•  Most retrofits focused on Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI) and 5 Activated Carbon Injection (ACI) 70 Control Units •  Less capital Required Uneconomic 7 •  Less outage 74 / Replace Units •  Higher production costs Total Total TBD / Coal Affected No Response Sept Survey Results* 66 19 47 35 5 7 GWs Impacted June Survey Results 66 19 47 35 4 8 March Survey Results 66 18 48 31 5 12 MISO Study (10/2012) 66 9 57 44 13 - *Sept survey results does not represent all expected respondents. 6 June results used where needed.
  • 7. Overview of MISO region major pipelines 7