Western Energy Corridor -- Full Study

Western EnergyCorrid r

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Executive SummaryT he energy resources con- In 2009, WEC oil production was Coal production within the WEC Significant quantities of uranium centrated along the Rocky approximately 2.3 million barrels was approximately 620 million found in the WEC supply a number Mountains and northern per day, with continued produc- short tons (~560 million metric of nuclear power plants interna-plains in Canada and the United tion growth anticipated from the tons) with approximately 15 billion tionally. Saskatchewan currentlyStates (U.S.) are world class, Alberta oil sands and the Bakken short tons (14 billion metric tons) dominates uranium production andas measured by their diversity, Formation. Proven reserves, domi- in recoverable reserves from active hosts the largest uranium mine inmagnitude, and longevity. This nated by Alberta oil sands, cur- mines in 2009. WEC coal supplies the world. The province contrib-area, informally referred to as rently place the region third in the much of the electricity produc- uted 18% of world production inthe Western Energy Corridor world with approximately 170 bil- tion for Canada and the U.S., and 2009, and is complemented by lion barrels. Undeveloped potential the WEC hosts the largest coal- growing production south of the(WEC), is strategic to meeting oil resources within the WEC are producing area (the Powder River U.S.-Canada border.the increasing energy demand in estimated at over 4 trillion barrels Basin) in Canada and the U.S.Canada, the U.S., and interna- (in-place). This includes oil shale Although large amounts of WECtionally. These energy resources, reserves in the Green River Forma- The WEC also contains several raw energy resources are exported,collectively, also provide a tion that spans parts of Wyoming, large river systems, which host these resources also contribute tofoundation for regional economic Colorado, and Utah. a number of hydropower dams local electricity and transportationdevelopment, including a plat- within and outside the WEC. Brit- fuel production. In 2009, electric-form for moving the region’s en- Natural gas production in the WEC ish Columbia alone produced over ity generation within the WEC wasergy products up the value chain. was approximately 10.5 trillion cu- 62 GWh of hydropower in 2009. over 370 million MWh. Of this,To provide a foundation and bic feet (297 billion cubic meters) Significant electrical generation more than 70% came from fossilstimulus for a bi-national regional in 2009, which places the WEC potential remains untapped, espe- energy plants (primarily coal anddialogue, Idaho National Labora- third in natural gas production cially in the north. natural gas), approximately 24%tory (INL) created this document worldwide. Although conventional from hydropower, and approximate-with input from representatives of gas production is declining, new Other renewable energy resources, ly 4% from other renewables withparticipating states and provinces. techniques and technological ad- such as some of the greatest wind no contribution from nuclear energy.Further data was gathered from vances have enabled development and bioenergy potential in Canadareliable internet and print sources of unconventional gas resources and the U.S., are available, but Transportation fuels productionand compiled to provide an over- within the area (i.e., shale gas, remain mostly untapped in the in the WEC is primarily from oilview of energy resources within tight gas, and coal bed methane), WEC. Efforts are underway to refining, with small amounts ofthe WEC. increasing overall natural gas also develop geothermal and solar biofuels (i.e., biodiesel and etha- production. potential within the region. nol). Plans are underway to build

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Executive Summarycoal-to-liquids (CTL) and liquid wildlife, and climate change. In ad- WEC states and provinces are criti-natural gas (LNG) plants. dition, energy resources are critical cal players in supplying the U.S. for developing other natural re- and Canada with energy resourcesEnergy delivery infrastructure is sources in the region such as water, this century and beyond. Givenrapidly expanding. Oil and gas minerals, agricultural, and fertil- the importance of these resourcespipelines are both planned and izer. Also, technological innovation there is an unprecedented opportu-built to provide access from newly continues to play a pivotal role in nity for these states and provincesdeveloped fields such as the Bak- accessing energy resources andken Formation to both traditional mitigating environmental impacts.and nontraditional markets, includ- And energy demand and invest- The Western Energy Corridor contains a world-classing Asia. There are also plans to ment from Asia will continue to concentration of energy resources critical to ensuringexpand CO2 pipelines to enhance impact markets around the world.oil recovery and CO2 sequestration. regional, U.S., Canadian, and international energy securityNew transmission lines are being The outlook for the WEC’s eco-planned and built to access and nomic prosperity is both timely and economic development. The states and provincesintegrate more remote renewable and promising. Vast natural within the Corridor have an unprecedented opportunityenergy sources, such as wind. Rail resources, strong commitmentexpansion continues to be essen- to economic development and a to collaborate with each other relative to challenges andtial to coal development. New rail pledge to maintain quality of lifelines could also support delivery place the WEC in a unique posi- opportunities associated with developing these resources.of biomass feedstock as well as tion to capitalize on its riches andproduct from the Alberta oil sands become an international leader to collaborate and more effectivelyand the Bakken Formation to new in energy resource development. address pertinent energy chal-markets. Realizing the potential for devel- lenges and opportunities including opment, distribution, and utiliza- policy, regulation, technology de-Sustainable energy development tion of the WEC’s energy resources ployment, and regional economicwithin the WEC relies on a num- will present both opportunities and development. Such an approachber of interdependent factors. For challenges that will require more may be advantageous to these low-example, energy development sophisticated and regionally inte- population jurisdictions given theirincreasingly requires mitigating grated approaches, enabling policy, sometimes limited political influ-impacts on air, water, landscape, and continued investment. ence at the national level.

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r ContentsContents Electricity Power Generation . . 22 Energy-Resource Nexus . . . . . . 38Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Coal-Fired Electric Power Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fertilizer Production . . . . . . . 38 Natural Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Fossil Energy Resources . . . . . . . 4 Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . 39 Renewable Energy . . . . . . . . 24 Crude Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Fossil Energy Development . 39 Nuclear Energy . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Conventional Crude Oil . . . 5 Influences on WEC Energy Liquid Fuels Production . . . . . . 26 Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Unconventional Oil Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Petroleum Refineries and Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Upgraders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Natural Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Energy Supply . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Liquid Natural Gas Conventional Natural Energy & Environment . . . . 41 Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Existing and Emerging Coal-to-Liquids . . . . . . . . . . 27 Unconventional Export Markets . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Natural Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Biofuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Coal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 WEC Energy Delivery . . . . . . . 28 Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Renewable Energy Resources . . 12 Electricity Transmission . . . . 28 Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Hydropower . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Natural Gas Pipelines . . . . . . 29 Technological Innovation . . . 42 Wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Oil Pipelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Research Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Solar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 CO2 Pipelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Rail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Appendix A—References . . . . . 48 Geothermal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Energy and Environment . . . . . 36 Appendix B—Tables . . . . . . . . . 57 Tidal/Ocean Energy . . . . . . . 19 Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Uranium Resources . . . . . . . . . . 20 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Landscapes and Wildlife . . . 37 Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . 37

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r AcronymsAECO Alberta Energy Company CSUG Canadian Society for IPPBC Independent Power SAGD steam-assisted gravity (trading symbol) Unconventional Gas Producers of British drainageARRA American Recovery and CTL coal-to-liquids Columbia TCF trillion cubic feet Reinvestment Act DOE Department of Energy ,6&* LQ VLWX FRDO JDVLÀFDWLRQ U308 triuranium octoxide 2ATR Advanced Test Reactor EEI Edison Electric Institute kWh/m kilowatt-hours per square UHOP Utah Heavy Oil Programbbl/d barrels per day meter EIA Energy Information USGS United States GeologicalBCF billion cubic feet Administration /1* OLTXLÀHG QDWXUDO JDV SurveyBCFD billion cubic feet per day EOR enhanced oil recovery MMCFD million cubic feet per WCI Western Climate day InitiativeBDt/yr bone dry metric tonnes EPA Environmental per year Protection Agency MMst million short tons WEC Western Energy CorridorBOE barrel of oil equivalent EPAct Energy Policy Act MRO Midwest Reliability WECC Western Electricity Organization Coordinating CouncilBP British Petroleum FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission MW megawatt WGA Western Governors’Bst billion short tons GIS geographic information MWh megawatt-hour AssociationCAPP Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers system NERC North American Electric GW gigawatt Reliability CorporationCBM coal bed methane GWh gigawatt-hour NETL National EnergyCCEI Canadian Center for Technology Laboratory Energy Information IEA International Energy Agency NPP nuclear power plantCCS carbon capture and sequestration ,*&& LQWHJUDWHG JDVLÀFDWLRQ NYMEX New York Mercantile combined cycle Exchange (trade symbol)CEA Canadian Electricity Association IJHD International Journal of R&D research and Hydropower and Dams developmentCHA Canadian Hydropower Association INL Idaho National 5027& 5RFN 0RXQWDLQ 2LOÀHOG Laboratory Testing CenterCO2 carbon dioxide IPCC Intergovernmental Panel RPS renewable portfolioCPV concentrator photovoltaic on Climate Change standard 1

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r IntroductionW orld-class energy As world energy demand increases resources strategic in the 21st century, the U.S., to North American Canada, and likely Asia will be-energy security and economic come more dependent upon WECdevelopment are concentrated resources. Development, distribu-along the Rocky Mountains and tion, and utilization of these re-northern plains in Canada and gional resources will present boththe U.S. This region is informally opportunities and challenges thatreferred to as the Western Energy will require more sophisticated and integrated approaches. StrategicCorridor [WEC; Figure 1]. The energy development and steward-fossil energy resources in this ship will be required to ensureregion are rivaled in only two energy security, regional economicother regions, and the proven development, and quality of lifeuranium reserves are among throughout the region. In addition,the world’s largest. Renewable the enormous quantity of energyresources including wind power, resources in the region provideshydropower, bioenergy, geother- a foundation for attracting value-mal energy, and solar energy are added industrial enterprises.also concentrated in this region.Substantial existing and planned The states and provinces hostingenergy infrastructure, including these resources can build a greater,refineries, pipelines, electrical more prosperous and sustainabletransmission lines, and rail lines future based on their supplies. Toprovide access to these resources stimulate a bi-national regionaland facilitate their development. dialogue on the current and future Figure 1. Approximate boundary of the WEC and outline of participating provinces and states. [M1] 2

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Introductionuse of these resources, Governor strategy with common goals and provinces, and even Canadian ter-Brian Schweitzer of Montana and policies that promote a balance ritories can potentially be added inPremier Brad Wall of Saskatche- between environmentally-sound the future, which would increasewan solicited interest from several development, energy security, and to the collective energy resourceregional governors and premiers to a competitive industrial base. This wealth of the WEC.engage further on this topic. This document provides a foundationgroup subsequently determined and framework for governors and Finally, the energy sector mar-that it requires additional informa- premiers to focus their dialogue on ketplace is dynamic, meaningtion about the regional resources leveraging each other’s resources information can quickly becometo foster a productive dialogue. and capabilities within the bi-na- obsolete and need to be updated asTo address this need, Gov. Sch- tional WEC region. research and dialogues progress.weitzer, on behalf of a number ofincumbent governors and pre-miers, requested that INL prepare Strategic energy development and resource stewardship area inventory of energy resourceswithin the WEC. paramount to ensure energy security, regional economicWith the assistance of representa- development, and quality of life throughout the region.tives from participating states andprovinces, INL prepared this docu- The WEC’s boundary, as currently This document provides the latestment highlighting general energy outlined for this discussion, is available information at the timeresource information, conversion approximate, designed to encour- the research was done, which hasmethods into marketable forms, age dialogue built around a novel been extracted from public sourcesand infrastructure required to geographic perspective, and should with references provided. Mapsdeliver it to users. A select num- be considered preliminary. This included in the document typicallyber of affiliated topics have been document focuses on addressing represent compilations of mapsincluded to facilitate the dialogue the following states and provinces: produced at various levels of detailaround interdependent aspects of Alberta, British Columbia, Colora- and should be considered qualita-developing these resources. These do, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, tive graphical overviews.topics, whether technical, social, Saskatchewan, South Dakota,or economic, must rely on a sound Utah, and Wyoming. Other states, 3

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy ResourcesS ubstantial crude oil, natu- Crude Oil ral gas, and coal resources exist throughout the WEC. Conventional and unconventionalCrude oil contributes substantial- oil reservoirs exist throughout the WEC [Figure 2]. Combinedly to U.S. and Canadian transpor- proven reserves of both conven-tation needs, while natural gas tional and unconventional oil areand coal contribute substantially estimated to be 175 billion barrels,to electricity production. Both dominated by Alberta oil sands atconventional and unconventional approximately 170 billion barrelsWEC oil and gas resources are and the province’s conventionaldiscussed below. Oil and gas that crude reserves of approximatelycan be recovered through meth- 1.4 billion barrels [1]. This estimateods in use for decades are con- places Alberta’s reserves (and thussidered “conventional” resources. the WEC) third behind VenezuelaHowever, fossil resources that (211 billion barrels) and Saudi Ara-require recently developed and bia (267 billion barrels) in proveninnovative recovery technologies oil reserves [2; Figure 3]. Provenare deemed “unconventional” reserves provide a conservativeresources. As the “easier-to-get” estimate of the amount of oil (orconventional resources are de- gas) that will be produced. Cur-pleted, unconventional resources rent overall crude oil productionwill make up a greater proportion from the region is approximatelyof the oil and gas portfolio in the 2.3 million barrels per day, 36% ofWEC. which comes from conventional sources and 64% from the Alberta oil sands [Table 1]. Figure 2. WEC crude oil reservoirs. [M2] 4

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy Resources 300 tion, the Cardium Formation in development of this resource is still 267 Alberta is generating significant in its infancy. As a result, reserve 250 211 interest given the potential to apply estimates for the Grosmont Deposit 200 fracturing stimulation techniques, have not been released because 175 Billion bbl of Oil similar to those employed in the there are no commercial projects 150 Bakken, which may dramati- operating in the area. In 2009, total 100 cally increase oil recovery in these bitumen production in Alberta was fields. There are also emerging approximately 1.5 million barrels 50 opportunities within the Viking per day [7]. Utah’s in-place bitu- 0 Formation in Alberta and Shauna- men reserves are between 12 and Saudi Arabia Venezuela WEC von Formation in Saskatchewan. 19 billion barrels [8].Figure 3.Conventional and unconventional proven crude oil resources. Unconventional Oil Resources In Place: 1,800 B bbl Oil SandsConventional Crude Oil An “oil boom” has recently In 2009, proven bitumen oil sands Ultimate Recoverable: 315 B bbl Proven: 170 B bbl emerged around development of reserves within the WEC wereSome of the larger conventional the Bakken Formation, which approximately 170 billion barrels.oil reserves are located in Alberta, encompasses portions of Montana, Ultimate recoverable reserve esti-Saskatchewan, and North Dakota North Dakota, and Saskatchewan. mates for this Alberta resource are[Table 2]. Collectively, the WEC The Bakken Formation’s estimated as high as 315 billion barrels. Esti-is estimated to contain proven re- proven reserves are between 3.1 mates of Alberta’s in-place resourceserves of approximately 5.4 billion billion barrels (95% probability of are about 1.8 trillion barrels of bitu-barrels as of 2009 (excludes oil recovery) and 4.3 billion barrels men [Figure 4]. It is estimated thatsands), which accounts for about (5% probability) [3]. In the fall of the Grosmont Carbonate Deposit21% of total Canada/U.S. conven- 2011, the U.S. Geological Survey contains approximately 406 billiontional reserves. Production of con- will initiate a new assessment of barrels of bitumen resource in placeventional crude oil within the WEC the recoverable oil in the Bakken and is the second largest bitumen-is just under 1.3 million barrels per Formation [4]. In 2010, from North bearing formation in Alberta [6].day, based on 2009 data, which is Dakota alone, production averaged Technologies and techniques to Figure 4.about 35% of total U.S./Canadian nearly 310,000 barrels per day [5]. recover bitumen from carbonates Alberta’s unconventional oilproduction in 2009 [Table 1]. In addition to the Bakken Forma- are not finalized, and commercial reserves from oil sands. 5

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy ResourcesOil Shale room-and-pillar mining)yields a behind a much heavier crude oil tional production and decliningOil shale is another immense recoverable resource estimate of [11]. Heavy/extra heavy oils have onshore conventional production inyet relatively undeveloped WEC 1.58 trillion barrels of oil, which higher densities and viscosities the U.S. through 2035 [Figure 3].resource. Approximately 70% of is close to the 1.82 trillion barrels than light oil, but their densities Shale gas will be the largest con-the world’s oil shale is found in the suggested by the Department of and viscosities are lower than those tributor to the projected increaseGreen River Formation in Colo- Energy [10]. Estimates of recover- of bitumen. Approximately 1.25 in gas production. Tight gas andrado, Utah, and Wyoming—nearly able oil shale resource are 17-33% billion barrels are found in the U.S. CBM will contribute significant3.15 trillion barrels in place [Table greater than current estimates of portion of the WEC, primarily in fractions to the projected total [12;3; Figure 5]. Oil shale deposits also world-wide proven conventional Wyoming. Alberta and Saskatch- Figure 6].exist in Saskatchewan and British oil resources. ewan have significant resources ofColumbia. However, these deposits heavy oil, primarily in their car- Total reserves of conventionalare not well characterized and are Heavy Oil bonate formations; Wyoming and and unconventional natural gas inconsidered small relative to the Heavy and extra heavy oils are un- the rest of the WEC have relatively the WEC are at least 680 trillionGreen River Formation resource. conventional sources that have lost minor amounts. The WEC’s total cubic feet (TCF), primarily as tight their lighter oil fractions, leaving heavy oil reserves are estimated at gas and coal bed methane. This isOil shale is rock containing 550 billion barrels [Table 4]. equivalent to more than 64 years ofrelatively high amounts of organic production, based on current pro-matter known as kerogen. When Natural Gas duction rates. Alberta, Wyoming,kerogen is heated, it can be con- and Colorado rank first through The WEC contains abundant third in the WEC. Almost 98%verted to petroleum products that conventional natural gas resources of Canada’s proven conventionalcan be upgraded and refined. The WEC 3,100 (70%) including more than 38% of the natural gas is located within theoil shale may be treated in place combined remaining reserves of WEC [Table 5].(in-situ retort) or in a surface facil- Canada and the U.S. [Table 5]. Inity (ex-situ retort). Not all of this addition, the WEC has vast uncon-resource, however, is recoverable. Rest of World ventional gas resources includingEstimates of the recoverable frac- 1,300 (30%) coalbed methane (CBM), shaletion range from 45-80% for mining gas, and tight gas. The relative im-operations. There are currently no portance of these reserves is clearlysuch estimates for in-situ methods Figure 5. illustrated by the U.S. Energy In-[9]. Assuming a recoverable factor In-place oil reserves from shale formation Administration’s (EIA’s)of 50% (near the lower end for (billion bbl of oil). estimates for increased unconven- 6

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy ResourcesWEC natural gas production esti- make up almost two thirds of the In 2009, 57.4 billion cubic feet per the next 25 years due to enormousmated in 2009 was approximately WEC’s production, which ranks day (BCFD), or 85%, of natural North American quantities.10.5 TCF per year, which is ap- third behind Russia and the U.S. gas consumed in the U.S. cameproximately one third of the com- [Table 6]. from domestic sources. More than Coalbed Methanebined U.S. and Canadian produc- 10% came from Canada, and about Nearly 63% of the U.S. and Cana-tion, and almost 8% of the world 5% came from international sourc- da’s total CBM reserves are locatedproduction. Alberta and Wyoming es in the form of liquefied natural in the WEC. Approximately 44% gas. Nearly 59% of Canada’s of established U.S. reserves are production is exported to the U.S., located in Colorado and Wyoming,Natural gas production in the WEC is approximately 10.5 with Alberta alone exporting over while 64% of established Cana- 71% of that (approximately 1.85TCF per year, which places it third behind Russia and the TCF) in 2009 [13]. Figure 8 showsU.S. in world ranking the locations of these reserves. Colorado and Wyoming 54% British Columbia and Alberta 46% History 2009 Projections Conventional Natural Gas 30 Rest of WEC 10% Established conventional natural 25 gas reserves in the WEC exceed Total 127 TCF — nearly 40% of the re- Total 20 Shale gas maining established reserve totals Trillion cubic feet [TCF] 60 TCF for Canada and the U.S. [Table 5; 15 Figure 7]. 13 TCF Tight gas 10 Unconventional Natural Gas 57 TCF Lower 48 onshore conventional The growing amount of accessible 5 Alaska Lower 48 offshore unconventional gas resources will Coalbed methane increase natural gas production in 0 1990 2000 2009 2015 2025 2035 both the WEC and the rest of North America. Shale gas is expected to Figure 7.Figure 6. be the most significant contribu- Established (conventional)U.S. natural gas production by source, 1990–2035. [12] tor to domestic production during reserves: 127 TCF. 7

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy Resourcesdian reserves are found in Alberta North Dakota have proven reservesand British Columbia [Table 7]. of 510 BCF. This value is less thanProduction of CBM in the WEC is 1% of the U.S. proven reserve ofexpected to grow in the future. shale gas [Table 8]. In 2009, shale gas production in these states wasTight Gas 33 BCF. Estimates of the amountTight gas formations are distribut- of gas in place will almost certain-ed throughout the WEC. Estimates ly increase as previously neglectedof tight gas sands for individual shale formations are evaluated. Thestates are not readily available, but amount of gas that ultimately willa recoverable U.S. reserve estimate be recovered may depend more onis ~379 TCF [14]. In-place resourc- improvements in extraction tech-es of tight gas in British Columbia nology, market prices, and govern-are greater than 300 TCF [15]. ment regulation than the amount of gas in place. At this stage,Shale Gas proven reserves are a conservativeShale gas is extracted from true estimate of the amount of gas thatshales and mudstones, by far the can be recovered, and technicallymost common rocks in sedimenta- recoverable resource estimates arery basins. The gas content in these speculative.rocks varies widely, but it is likelythat important shale gas discover-ies will be made in the WEC. Newassessments of the technicallyrecoverable North American shalegas in the past few years have sub-stantially increased confidence thatthe domestic natural gas supplywill be sufficient to meet growingdemand for decades to come. Forexample, Colorado, Montana, and Figure 8. WEC natural gas reservoirs. [M3] 8

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy ResourcesCanadian activity in shale gas is Coal The WEC’s vast coal resources Canada’s recoverable reserves areprimarily focused on the Montney [Figure 11] range in grade from located in the WEC [Table 9].and Horn River Basin plays of Coal supplies 45% of all U.S. lignite to anthracite. Recoverablenortheast British Columbia, which electricity and less than 20% of reserves (from active mines) in the In 2009, the WEC produced ap-has recoverable reserves of 69 and Canada’s electricity [18]. More WEC include 15 billion short tons proximately 620 million short132 TCF, respectively. The Horn than 30 states receive coal from (around 14 billion metric tons) tons (560 million metric tons) ofRiver and Cordova Embayment Wyoming, and several midwestern [Figure 9], approximately 63% of coal, which is about 8.2% of worldalone account for almost two thirds and southern states are highly or the total U.S. and Canadian recov- production and about 54% of theof currently defined shale gas in entirely dependent on Wyoming’s erable coal reserves. More than combined total production of theCanada. Another Canadian play, coal [19].Export of coking coal 54% of the recoverable U.S. coal U.S. and Canada [Table 10; Figurethe Colorado Group in Alberta from WEC jurisdictions to Asia, reserves and approximately 84% of 10]. Of the WEC states, Wyomingand Saskatchewan, has 61 TCF of primarily for use in steel produc-recoverable reserves and may be tion, is increasing. Alberta andCanada’s largest in-place reserve British Columbia comprise one WEC Recoverable Coal Reserves at Active Minesat 408 TCF. Note that there is an of the largest metallurgical coal 15.6 billion short tons (Bst)estimated 43.4 TCF of natural gas suppliers in the world and exportreserves in offshore British Colum- significant amounts of coal to Asia [20]. Wyoming and Montana are U.S. Demonstrated: 486 Bst Canada Demonstrated: NAbia; however, a federal moratorium U.S. Recoverable: 260 Bst U.S. WEC Canada Recoverable: NA now exploring ways to access ship- 9.5 Bston drilling currently prevents any U.S. Recoverable Active Mines: 17.5 Bst Canada Recoverable Active Mines: 7.2 Bst WEC Recoverable Coal Reserves Canada WEC WEC Recoverable Coal Reservesproduction activity there [16,17]. ping terminals along the U.S. West 6.1 Bst Coast to do the same.. Figure 9. The sum of recoverable U.S. and Canada coal resources. 9

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy Resourcesmaintains the greatest production than 42% of all coal mined in theat 431 million short tons (about U.S. Approximately 51% of U.S.390 million metric tons) in 2009. coal production [21] and nearly allThe Powder River Basin, most of Canadian coal production occurs inwhich lies in northeastern Wyo- WEC states and provinces [22].ming, is the largest coal producingregion in both the WEC and the An example of a novel approachU.S. The region accounts for more to coal-based electrical generationFor the next 3 to 4 decades, coal will continue to play afoundational role within North America, greatly contributingto the generation of relatively low-priced, base-load electricity. World: 7,514 MMst U.S. and Canada: 1,144 MMst WEC: 620 MMst Figure 11.Figure 10. Distribution of coal resources inCoal production. the WEC. [M4] 10

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Fossil Energy Resourceswithin the WEC is found as part ofthe Swan Hills project in Alberta.The project will use an in-situ coalgasification (ISCG) process to ac-cess coal seams that are consideredtoo deep to mine. The coal seams,located about 1,400 meters (4,593feet) beneath the earth’s surface,will be accessed through wells thatare similar to conventional oil andgas wells. The ISCG wells willbe used to convert the coal under-ground in its original seam into syn-gas. The syngas will be piped to theWhitecourt area to fuel new high-efficiency, combined-cycle powergeneration for Alberta’s electricitymarket, providing about 300 MW More than 30 states receive coal from Wyoming, and severalof generation capacity [23]. Midwestern and southern states are highly or entirely dependent on Wyoming’s coal supply 11

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy ResourcesS ignificant renewable energy Hydropower resources in the WEC include energy derived from Extensive river systems in thewater (including rivers and ocean WEC make hydropower a significant resource for electricitycurrent/tidal/wave), wind, sun, generation. These systems consistgeothermal, and biomass. Re- of several major North Ameri-newable energy sources generate can rivers [Figure 12], includingelectricity, provide heating, and the North Saskatchewan, Peace,produce transportation fuels, as Athabasca, Slave, Missouri, Co-well as provide feedstocks for a lumbia, Snake, Mackenzie, andhost of other products from meth- Colorado rivers, whose head-ane to plastics. Renewable energy waters are contained within thesources can lessen dependence WEC. In the WEC, over 88,000on imported and non renew- GWh of electricity was generatedable resources, and many can from hydropower in 2009, whichhelp reduce the environmental represents approximately 24% ofimpacts of overall energy gen- the WEC’s total electricity gen-eration. The Western Renewable eration that year from all sources.Energy Zones (WREZ) initia- This power was produced by 374tive, a collaboration between the hydropower plants having a totalWestern Governors’ Association installed capacity of 21 GW. Inand the U.S. DOE (along with British Columbia, the greatestother stakeholders) is designed to annual hydropower generation sofacilitate development and deliv- far, 64,000 GWh occurred in 2007ery of renewable energy within [24]. Hydropower generation inthe Western Interconnect and has British Columbia, Idaho, and Southa wealth of renewable energyinformation. Figure 12. Major waterways in the WEC. [M5] 12

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy ResourcesDakota produce large percentages two 500-MW generating unitsof total in-state/province electricity into existing dam infrastructure atgeneration [Table 11]. the Mica Generating Station [24]. According to a recent report [25],The WEC has approximately 60 major hydro projects in AlbertaGW of untapped hydropower may be developed in the next 30potential capacity, which is three years and could capture almosttimes the current installed capac- 20% of Alberta’s over 53,000 GWhity and translates to a potential of hydropower potential per year.over 265,000 GWh of additional Also, 28% of proposed pumpedannual electricity generation. The storage projects in the U.S. aremajority of this potential lies in the sited in WEC states [26].north side of the WEC. Althoughfull hydropower potential may Windnever be realized, state/provincegeneration potentials range from Wind energy is abundant through-160% (Montana) to 3800% (Al- out the WEC [Figure 13] with aberta) above their 2009 generation total wind power potential of over[Table 11]. A significant portion of 3,700 GW. Within the Corridor,the additional hydropower resource Montana leads in wind energy pro-would come from small facilities duction potential at 944 GW, fol-and micro-hydro and would require lowed closely by South Dakota andnew transmission to successfully North Dakota [Table 12]. Northharvest the resource, especially in Dakota, Wyoming, and ColoradoBritish Columbia. lead the WEC in installed wind generation. Although the WEC hasSeveral planned projects — the very high wind power potential,majority in northern Canada —would increase the WEC’s hy-dropower capacity. For example, Figure 13.British Columbia plans to install Wind energy potential in the WEC. [M6] 13

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy Resourcesthe realized potential is relatively tops and the remote northwest of MW of wind power capacity is lumbia is working to advance thelow. For example, despite Mon- British Columbia. For areas that from on-shore operations. province’s coastal wind energy po-tana’s high generation potential, in- could be reasonably developed, the tential with a project that, if built,stalled capacity was only 375 MW major constraint is transmission. will involve up to 110 turbines andas of 2009 [Table 12]; however, The low capacity factor results in a potential capacity of up to 1,750 MW [29].Wind, geothermal, solar, and ocean/tidal continue to grow and offer a promising future, Recent increases in WEC wind power capacity have been stronglyeven more so when used in combination with other energy forms – hybrid energy systems. driven by energy pricing and regulations/policies, subsidies,significant increases in installed ca- Wind power generation is increas- and other incentives. For example,pacity in Alberta and Montana will ing at a rapid rate. Wind plants production tax credits and renew-be feasible with completion of the have a much shorter planning and able portfolio standards havenew Montana Alberta Tie Limited building schedule than conven- boosted wind industry develop-transmission line. tional power technologies. Some ment [30]. As the scale of wind examples of planned or in-process power increases, the wind powerThe intermittent nature of wind WEC wind projects include a industry can no longer be confi-makes integration into the elec- 300–700 MW in Montana, 500– dent that current subsidies willtrical grid challenging if trans- 700 MW in Idaho, and several hun- continue, which may slow growthmission, firming resources, and dred MW of wind farms planned in of wind power generating capac-distribution of wind resources are Wyoming and other northwestern ity. Wind resources tend to beinsufficient or unavailable This and western states. In British Co- located in remote areas, requiringchallenge becomes more severe lumbia, projects totaling over 710 a confluence of transmission andas wind capacity increases rela- a high capital cost per unit output, MW of wind capacity are planned, wind resources coupled to popula-tive to other power sources. The although the fuel (wind) is free. while in Alberta new transmission tion centers to effectively integratemajor reason that realized wind The first off-shore project, with infrastructure that can accom- and serve the markets. A possiblepotential is low is that much of the a potential wind power capacity modate up to 2,700 MW of wind answer that deserves study is howwind resource is located in areas of 396 MW, just received federal generation in Southern Alberta is to cost-effectively fuel electricitythat cannot be developed or are not approval in British Columbia [27], under construction [28]. NaiKun growth in the region using botheasily accessible, such as mountain but the province’s existing 248 Wind Energy Group in British Co- wind and natural gas, both low 14

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy Resourcescarbon sources. Separately, neither ergy (DOE) is funding a project inis ideal. But together, they offer Utah designed to facilitate at leastincreased reliability and generation 10 MW (or an additional 10,000with low price volatility and low solar PV systems) of new solar PVoverall carbon emissions. installations by 2015 [32].Solar Currently, the capital cost of photovoltaic and solar thermal powerThe WEC has solar energy po- plants, relative to annual energytential, especially in its southern production, is extremely high.extreme [Figure 14]. The amount New technologies in solar energy,of solar energy in some parts of such as concentrator photovoltaicColorado, Utah, and Wyoming are (CPV) approaches, could reduceamong the highest in the U.S., with the cost and increase the adoptionlevels exceeding 6 kWh/m2 per rate [33]. Similarly, decreasingday. costs could increase the adoption at a household scale. AdditionalIn 2009, the installed solar electric cost reductions could come fromcapacity in WEC was less than 40 improvements in production,MW, most of which comes from manufacturing, and installationresidential installations. Colorado techniques.is the only jurisdiction with totalgrid connected photovoltaic (PV)installations exceeding 1 MW[Table 13]. Other efforts within theWEC are underway as well. Forexample, in Medicine Hat, Alberta,the first solar-powered steam gen-eration system in Canada will useparabolic dishes to focus sunlight Figure 14.to produce heat for a steam turbine Photovoltaic solar resources[31]. The U.S. Department of En- in the WEC. [M7] 15

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy ResourcesBiomass ing uses. This is particularly true for grains, which are largely usedWithin the WEC, ample herba- for food and feed, and for straw,ceous and woody biomass resourc- which is in high demand for animales exist [Figure 15] that are suit- bedding. Potential also exists forable as feedstock for production growing dedicated energy cropsof electrical power, transportation that have no food value such asfuels, or heat. Biomass can be used poplar, miscanthus.in biochemical conversion process-es such as fermentation to produce Grain production is a major sourceethanol, or in thermochemical of WEC biomass and generatesconversion processes such as substantial agricultural residuesdirect combustion, gasification, or as a by-product. Grain is includedpyrolysis. In addition, transesterifi- as a biomass potential, becausecation, a chemical process in which technologies are already availableoil seeds are used to produce diesel for conversion of corn and wheatfuel, contributes to transportation to ethanol. Lignocellulosic residuesfuels. Potential bioenergy resourc- from food and feed grain crops canes in the WEC include grain and also be used to produce ethanolagricultural residues, forest bio- and other products, but there are,mass and woody residues, and mill as yet, no full scale commercialand urban wood waste, annually production facilities. Saskatch-generating over 170 million metric ewan, Alberta, South Dakota, andtons (~187 short tons) of material North Dakota are world-class grain[Table 14]. The Canadian prov- producers, and have a relativelyinces in the WEC have much more higher volume of agriculturalin total resources available than residues. A shift to integrated bio-the U.S., largely due to geographicdifferences. Furthermore, not allthe materials discussed would be Figure 15.readily available for bioenergy pro- WEC biomass feedstock potential.duction, as there may be compet- [M8] 16

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy Resourcesrefining, rather than facilities The most effective conversion and favors the displacement of fos- for greater utilization of low-tem-producing a single product, may process depends on the nature of sil fuels with biofuels. Of note, the perature geoexchange for heatinghelp optimize the co-production of the biomass resource. For example, Alberta Government as well as the and cooling applications.food, energy, and other bio-based high-ash agricultural residues may Canadian government have placedproducts. damage thermochemical conver- a large investment in development Essentially, all geothermal power sion process equipment; however, of Triticale, a hybrid of wheat and plants within the WEC are locatedThe WEC also has significant certain woody biomass species rye, as an energy crop which can in areas having higher heat flows.forest resources with associated may have components that resist grow on marginal lands. These areas, combined with ad-quantities of residue — in particu- biological conversion processes equate ground water and availablelar, large quantities exist in British used for ethanol production. Trends Geothermal transmission, offer an opportunityColumbia and Alberta. In 2010, towards energy crops, which take for producing reliable, available,British Columbia produced one advantage of marginal lands, may The WEC has significant geother- high-value, low-carbon electricity.million bone dry metric tons (BDt) shift the distribution of biomass mal potential. A 2011 report of But not all potential sources areof wood pellets, most of which resources in WEC. the U.S. geothermal capacity [37] available — some are difficult towas exported to Europe for power indicated that the five WEC states access or within protected areasproduction. A potential source of The U.S. has historically focused included in the study have at least such as a national park. The pres-forest residue is pine beetle dam- its biomass program on the pro- 1,409 MW of near-commercial ence of cooler water at shallowaged timber. Natural Resources duction of biofuels in an effort developments and 4,398 MW of depths can mask the geothermalCanada (2011) estimates that the to move away from foreign oil initiated projects [Table 15]. Simi- potential of some resources (thecurrent rate of spread will kill dependency. However, recognizing lar estimates have not been made Cascades, for example) or compli-80% of mature pine trees in Brit- the large potential for biopower for other jurisdictions, so there is cate geothermal characterizationish Columbia by 2013 — over 1 electricity or process heat, the U.S. no definitive estimate for the entire (such as the Snake River plain).billion m3 (35 billion ft3) of trees. Government is supporting more WEC. However, British ColumbiaThe current beetle epidemic affects biopower development [36]. Can- alone has an estimated 3,000 MW Despite this, some geothermalmore than 8 million hectares (20 ada has not had the same incentive of geothermal electricity potential; potential has been realized in themillion acres) of forest in British to produce biofuels because it has Alberta and Saskatchewan have WEC. As of March 2011, in-Columbia [34,35] and may con- a smaller population and some of less potential. The greatest poten- stalled geothermal capacity in thetinue to affect Alberta’s northern the largest petroleum reserves in tial for WEC geothermal electricity WEC was 58 MW between Idaho,boreal forest. The infestation has the world. Canada does, however, production is in its western portion, Wyoming, and Utah [Table 15]also hit Colorado, Montana, Idaho, support the reduction of CO2 emis- as suggested in the heat flow map and geothermal projects are underand Wyoming. sions from fossil power generation shown in Figure 16. All jurisdic- development in Wyoming, Colo- tions in WEC have opportunities 17

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy Resourcesrado, Utah, and Idaho. Of particu- sands mining operations [41]. Thelar note, the estimated resource Massachusetts Institute of Technol-under development in Idaho alone ogy’s 2006 estimate indicated thatis between 703 and 778 MW [37], potential power from the co-pro-illustrating the potential across the duced fluids could exceed 450 MWregion. Although no geothermal within the WEC [42].resources have been developed forpower production in Canada, the Geothermal energy may be anSouth Meager project in British economically viable resource,Columbia is being evaluated and but it requires sufficient tempera-could support up to 100 MW [38]. ture, water, and permeability atIncreasing interest in renewable economically retrievable depths.energy for non-electricity applica- Locating resources with these char-tions has led evaluation of several acteristics is the greatest challengegeothermal projects for develop- to developing geothermal energy.ment in British Columbia and Enhanced Geothermal SystemsAlberta. (EGS) technologies — which aim to enable the use of geothermalRecent efforts have explored other energy when heat is present butinnovative uses of geothermal water and/or permeability are notresources such as using the hot — could significantly expand geo-water co-produced with oil and thermal power in the WEC [41].gas to generate electrical power. Several technical and economicExamples include a 250-kW issues must be resolved before thisfacility recently made operational potential can be realized. The U.S.in Wyoming [39], and a 1 MW DOE is developing goals to pro-project being proposed in Alberta vide significant amounts of EGS[40]. Another opportunity is the power by 2030 and 2040; however,potential for zones beneath the Ca-nadian oil sands to pre-heat waterused to make steam for in-situ oil Figure 16. WEC geothermal potential. [M9] 18

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Renewable Energy Resourcesdetails (including timeline) for the The cost of tidal and ocean energygoals have not been finalized. is highly influenced by geography, distance to grid, and water condi-Tidal/Ocean Energy tions (i.e., speed and volume of the current) [45]. Although waveBritish Columbia is the only area energy resembles wind generationin the WEC that has ocean wave in its intermittent nature, it is easierand tidal energy resource potential. to forecast and has a uniform avail-For the British Columbia coast, ability. Specifically, ocean wavesthe total deep water annual wave propagate at a constant speedpower potential is approximately with little attenuation, so they can37,000 MW, and total tidal current be detected several hours beforepower potential is approximately reaching a generator. Tidal and4,000 MW [43]. The best sites for ocean-current energy systems mustcapturing strong tidal currents are endure extreme weather conditionsin the Strait of Georgia and John- and corrosion, and maintenance isstone Strait as shown in Figure expected to be expensive.17, which offer the major benefitof proximity to the point of use.High-potential sites for ocean cur-rent may be farther away from land[44]. The number and capacity ofpotential tidal and ocean currentsites could increase as improvedtechnologies are developed.High cost and limited site avail-ability have traditionally plaguedtidal and other ocean-energyprojects. Tidal energy requires a Figure 17.confined location with sufficiently Wave power and tidal currenthigh tidal ranges or flow velocities. energy potential. [M10] 19

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Uranium ResourcesT he WEC contains signifi- In 2010, the U.S., ranked 8th in cant quantities of uranium world uranium production, gen- [Figure 18], which is erating 1,830 short tons (1,660used to generate electricity in metric tons) of uranium [46], muchnuclear power plants. Canada’s of which came from mines insole uranium-producing area Colorado, Utah, New Mexico andis in Saskatchewan and is sec- Wyoming, with the latter two statesond in world production only to dominating[48]. According to aKazakhstan. In 2010, Saskatch- 2009 estimate, the U.S. has known recoverable resources of 228,000ewan produced 10,784 short tons short tons (207,000 metric tons) of(9,783 metric tons) of uranium — uranium [47]. In 2008, Wyomingjust over 18% of world produc- led the nation in total uraniumtion. Saskatchewan’s McArthur reserves; together, Wyoming andRiver Mine, which is the largest New Mexico contain about two-producing uranium mine in the thirds of the country’s estimatedworld, produced 8,437 short tons reserves [49]. An important note(7,654 metric tons) of uranium, in relation to British Columbia isor approximately 14% of the that in April 2008 a news releaseworld’s uranium output in 2010. indicated that the Province will notKnown recoverable uranium support the exploration and devel-resources in Saskatchewan are opment of uranium.estimated at 466,000 short tons(423,000 metric tons) of uraniumbased on a 2007 estimate [46],8% of the world’s known recov-erable resources [47]. Figure 18. Distribution of uranium resources in the WEC. [M11] 20

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Uranium ResourcesHalf of the nuclear fuel cur- The WEC also contains significant energy in many countries includ- and abundant to meet current needsrently used in the U.S. is derived quantities of thorium, especially ing the U.S., Canada, Europe, [50]. Some countries (namely,from dismantled Russian nuclear in Idaho. Unlike uranium, thorium Japan, Russia, and India. Thorium India) may, however, favor tho-warheads. This program will be has not been used extensively has not been a major competitor rium over uranium as a fuel source,halted in 2013, which may result for nuclear energy production, with uranium for use as a nuclear depending upon local availabilityin increased demand for uranium although it has been successfully fuel because the world supply of and policy [47].resources within the WEC. used to experimentally generate uranium is sufficiently inexpensiveThe McArthur River Mine, located in Saskatchewan, is the largest producing mine in theworld with over 7,600 metric tons of uranium produced in 2009, approximately 14% ofthe world’s uranium production. 21

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Electricity Power GenerationI n 2009, the WEC’s electric power generation capacity 15000 Pumped Storage was estimated at over 75,000 12500 OtherMW; Colorado led with 13,045 Other RenewablesMW, followed by Alberta at 1000012,996 MW. Figure 19 and Table 7500 Hydro16 show the generating capacity Other gasesby state/province and source. The 5000 Nat. GasWEC generation capacity is dom- Petroleum Figure 19. WEC electric power 2500inated by coal-fired infrastructure installed capacity by state/ Coalfollowed by hydropower and 0 province. o ho na ta ta ah ing ia a annatural gas, as shown in Figure ert ad mb ko ko ew nta Ut Ida om lor Alb Da Da olu tch Mo Co Wy N. S.20. Over 60% of WEC generation hC ska tis Sa Bricapacity is supplied by fossil en-ergy. Although renewable energy Figure X. Electric power totals by location (MW)production capacity is increas-ing, outside of hydropower, its 32500 30000sources make up less than 10% of 27500 Saskatchewanthe total capacity and are led by British Columbia 25000wind power investments [Table Alberta 2250021]. No commercial nuclear 20000 Wyoming Utahpower plants (NPPs) exist within 17500 15000 S. Dakotathe WEC, but there are emerg- 12500 N. Dakotaing interests in their inclusion. 10000 MontanaTotal electrical energy genera- 7500 Idahotion within the WEC in 2009 was 5000over 370 million MWh. Of this, 2500 Colorado Figure 20. WEC electric power installed capacity by source.more than 70% came from fossil 0energy plants (primarily from al m as ses dro les er e rag Co Oth leu t. G ab ga Hy sto tro ew Na ercoal and natural gas), 24% from Pe ed Oth ren mp er Pu Oth Figure X. Electric power totals by source (MW) 22

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Electricity Power Generationhydropower, and approximately Comanche (850 MW) and Wygen term within the WEC. New coal refined lignite, will produce nearly4% from other renewable [Table II (110 MW) plants, located in plants are continuing to be intro- 100 MW during peak demands,17]. The low capacity factor of Colorado and Wyoming, respec- duced, especially in Wyoming, and will provide steam to a nearbywind power plants results in a far tively [51]. North Dakota, and Alberta. An ex- malting plant [52]. However,smaller contribution to annual ample of a new plant construction Environmental Protection Agencyelectric generation than to gener- Coal is estimated to continue play- is the combined heat and coal-fired (EPA) and state regulations on airating capacity. ing a foundational role by provid- power plant (Spiritwood Station) emissions, coal ash, and water are ing base load power in the long in North Dakota. It uses dried and expected to drive retirement ofCoal-Fired Electric PowerGeneration Given the abundant natural gas, coal, and hydropower resources within the WEC, the region isIn 2009, coal-fired plants were able to supply some of the most reliable and lowest priced electricity in North America.estimated to make up approxi-mately 40% of the electricitygeneration capacity within the certain existing coal-fired genera-region — approximately 30,500 tion plants. For example, ColoradoMW. Alberta has the largest utilities are being directed to retirecapacity (5,971MW) followed by or retrofit coal capacity and replaceWyoming and Colorado [Table it with natural gas or renewable16]. Since 1999, the WEC’s overall energy resources to comply withcapacity from coal-fired plants has new state Clean Air-Clean Jobs Actchanged very little with the excep- [53]. Another trend is the pursuit oftion of Montana, which has lost higher efficiency in power produc-approximately 20% of its coal-fired tion while reducing environmen-electrical generation capacity over tal impact. Enabling clean coalthe last 10 years. British Colum- technologies include CO2 capturebia generates no electricity from and sequestration, undergroundcoal. It should be noted that 2010 gasification, integrated gasificationactually represents the largest build combined cycle (IGCC), and oxy-of coal-fired plants since 1985 fuel combustion (coal gasification).within the U.S., which included the 23

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Electricity Power GenerationNatural Gas Renewable Energy 63% came from British Columbia the fastest growing source of new, [Figure 21]. In 2009, the WEC pro- renewable electric power genera-In 2009, gas-turbine-based plants Hydropower makes up approxi- duced almost 90 million MWh from tion. Within the WEC, wind powerwithin the WEC provided just mately 28% of WEC electric gener- hydroelectric energy [Table 17]. generation is led by Colorado,over 22% of the generation capac- ating capacity, with British Colum- followed by North Dakota and Al-ity, with Colorado and Alberta bia by far the highest at 11,000 MW, Electric power capacity from other berta; together they represent overleading at 5,357 MW and 5,201 just over 50% of the entire WEC hy- renewable sources is dominated 77% of the WEC’s wind genera-MW, respectively [Table 16]. The dropower capacity [Table 16]. Hy- by wind, which provides approxi- tion. Total WEC generation fromlast ten years has seen significant dropower contributed approximately mately 90% of the WEC’s non- wind in 2009 was just under 10investment in gas-fired generation, 24% of total WEC electric energy hydro renewable capacity [Table million MWh [12]. The growthwith notable examples in Colo- generation in 2009, and more than 21; Figure 22]. Wind power is also in U.S. wind farm generation isrado, which grew in capacity from691 MW in 1999 to almost Saskatchewan (3) 3% Colorado (2) 2% Colorado (666) 3%8 times that amount in 2009 Saskatchewan (853) 4% Idaho (2,346) 11% Idaho (9.5) 11%[54,55]. During this sameperiod, Alberta doubled its Electricity generationown capacity in natural-gas- by type (MWh) Montana (9.1) 10%fired electricity generation. Hydro 24% Montana (2,660) 13%The attractiveness of natural North Dakota Fossil 72%gas is growing due to low (1.5) 2% South Dakotanatural gas prices and the North Dakota (486) 2% (4.3) 5%fact that it is the cleanest- South Dakota Utah (0.7) 1% Wyoming (0.8) 1%burning fossil fuel and has (1,463) 7% Other Renewables (mostly wind) 4% Alberta (1.4) 2%relatively low capital con- Utah (256) 1% Wyoming (304) 2%struction costs. Concerns, Alberta (900) 4%however, remain relative to British Columbiathe long-term position of gas (11,000) 53% British Columbia (56.5) 63%given the historic volatilityof gas prices. Figure 21. Figure 22. Hydropower generating capacity (MW) . Hydropower generation (million MWh). 24

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Electricity Power Generation tricity to some areas of the WEC but milling. The province is moving toIn 2009, 90 million MWh of electricity was generated from is not included in this report. drive nuclear-related research and development (R&D) and is explor-hydropower in the WEC which represents approximately Saskatchewan is interested in ing other opportunities associated24% of the WEC’s total electricity generation that year. increasing the value of its uranium- with power generation, reposito- based products and has conducted ries, and enrichment [59]. a feasibility study addressing thedriven primarily by state renewable Commission (USNRC). In 2012, nuclear energy cycle beyond itsportfolio standard (RPS) require- the USNRC is anticipating license current activities in mining andments and federal tax credits. The applications for two new nuclearremainder of renewable energy power plants near Green River,sources includes biomass, geother- Utah. British Columbia has amal, and solar [Table 20]. moratorium in place that prohibitsNuclear Energy nuclear power [57].The WEC has no operating com- Relative to other nuclear energymercial nuclear reactors, but there infrastructure, AREVA plans tohas been recent interest in building develop a uranium-enrichmentthem within the region. In 2008, plant 20 miles west of Idaho Falls,Bruce Power applied for a license Idaho. The license approval processto prepare a site for the future is almost complete, and construc-construction and operation of a tion is expected to start soon after.new reactor complex (4,000 MW) The facility’s capacity will fuel 25on the Peace River in northern reactors producing 1,000 MW each,Alberta. The company has since with the possibility of doubling thatwithdrawn the application [56]. capacity if market conditions are fa-Alternate Energy Holdings, Inc. is vorable [58]. Also near Idaho Falls,pursuing preliminary local approv- INL operates a 250-MW (thermal)als to develop the “Idaho Energy Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) forComplex” in Payette County, materials and nuclear fuel testing. InIdaho, in advance of an applica- eastern Washington, a commercialtion to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory nuclear power plant provides elec- 25

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Liquid Fuels ProductionI n addition to conventional capacity. For perspective, in 2010, petroleum refineries located the U.S. had 16 million barrels per within the WEC, several large day of operable capacity [Tableexisting and future investments 18].are being made in infrastructureassociated with bitumen and Alberta and Saskatchewan containheavy oil upgrading. Interests are six upgraders with a 2009 collec-also emerging in non-traditional tive operable capacity of 1.2 mil-fuels production infrastructure lion barrels per day. Their primary focus is upgrading bitumen fromassociated with liquefied natural oil sands and heavy oil to pro-gas (LNG) and coal-to-liquids duce synthetic crude oil. Three(CTL) production within the renew upgrader projects and threegion. In parallel, a liquid biofuels expansions are either approved orindustry is emerging around vast under application in Alberta. Theyquantities of biomass, including could collectively bring additionalforest residue, corn, wheat, and upgrading capacity of nearly 1.0oil seed. million barrels per day of bitumen [60].Petroleum Refineries andUpgraders Liquid Natural Gas FacilitiesTwenty-seven crude oil refineries An LNG plant and shipping termi-are located throughout the WEC nal is being planned for Kitimat,with a total of 1.3 million barrels British Columbia, with a capacityper day operable capacity [Figure of 5 million metric tons (5.5 short23]. Alberta’s three refineries com- tons) per annum and the potentialprising over 30% of the WEC’s to double processing capacity in a Figure 23. Fuel processing plants. [M12] 26

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Liquid Fuels ProductionPhase 2 expansion; the target date 22,000 barrels per day [62]. There In the U.S., five of the seven statesis 2015 for the first LNG shipment. is also a proposed pilot plant in in the WEC have some biodieselAn application for a second plant Kanab, Utah, that would use a capacity; the highest single produc-and terminal at Kitimat has been hydrogasification process to con- er is in Casselton, North Dakota,submitted to the National Energy vert feedstocks such as coal and producing 153 million gallons perBoard for a Canadian Federal biomass into synthetic gas suitable year (581 million bbl/yr) [TableExport License [61]. The facilities for processing to liquid fuel or to 19]. Although over 380 millionwould tap British Columbia and substitute natural gas. gallons (9 million bbl/yr) of annualAlberta natural gas resources and biofuels capacity is under construc-target Asian markets to comple- Biofuels tion in the U.S., none of it is in thement the existing U.S. market. At WEC [63]. One ethanol plant thatleast two additional LNG projects There are currently 39 operating will use municipal waste as feed-are being studied with one project ethanol plants and 13 operating stock and has a planned annual ca-exploring construction of an export biodiesel plants within the WEC. pacity of 36 million gallons (0.86terminal in Prince Rupert [16]. These facilities have an annual million bbl/yr) is under construc- operating capacity of approxi- tion in Edmonton, Alberta. mately 2,000 million gallons perCoal-to-Liquids year (7,600 million bbl/yr). South The WEC has a total of 68 biodieselAn emerging trend within the Dakota has the greatest capacity of fueling stations with all provincesWEC over the past few years is the WEC, at approximately 1,000 and states represented [64,65]. Col-assessing the feasibility of coal- million gallons per year (3,800 orado stands out with 23 biodieselto-liquids (CTL) facilities, which million bbl/yr), followed by North stations, followed by Wyomingcould help develop the vast coal Dakota and Saskatchewan. All eth- with 15 as of 2009. There are someresources in Alberta, Montana, anol plants in the WEC use grain incentives for biofuels infrastruc-and Wyoming. One CTL facility such as corn and wheat as a feed- ture development in the WEC. Fordevelopment project has emerged stock, with the exception of a 1.5 example, qualified biofuel fuelingin Medicine Bow, Wyoming. The million gallon per year (100 bbl/d) infrastructure in Idaho is eligible forproject, which is expected to start pilot plant in Upton, Wyoming, up to 6% tax credit. Biofuels plantsin 2014, will use Carbon Basin which uses lignocellulosic biomass in North Dakota receive up to $1.6coal to produce refined hydrocar- (wood waste) as a feedstock. million/year and $10 million overbon liquid products with an initial the life of the plant. [64]commercial operation of up to 27

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy DeliveryT he processing, use, and for a few small connection points export of WEC energy east of the Rocky Mountains. resources depend heavily Québec These points have limited poweron a strong underlying energy Interconnection transfer capabilities or require thatinfrastructure. This section con- power be converted from AC tocerns bulk movements of energy DC to AC.resources or products, focusingon electricity transmission, oil In short, the WEC has access toand gas pipeline, and rail. CO2 two major electric-power energy markets. They consist of a sophis-pipeline has been included, as NPCC ticated network, involving inter-CO2 delivery is becoming im- MRO connected power plants and powerportant throughout the region lines that operate at many differentfor enhancing oil recovery and voltages. Figure 25 shows existing Easternsequestration, and it will increas- WECC Interconnection major transmission lines within theingly become integrated with SPCC WEC.other energy infrastructure. SERC Investment in WEC transmissionElectricity Transmission FRCC infrastructure began to increaseThe WEC spans two of four major Western Interconnection several years ago in response totransmission reliability organiza- various needs, including reliabil-tions in North America and lies TRE Ercot ity and generator interconnection.within the balancing authorities Interconnection The proposed transmission build-of the Western Electricity Coordi- out aims partly to better capturenating Council (WECC) and the Figure 24. and integrate renewable energyMidwest Reliability Organization Transmission interconnection resources, such as wind, to meet(MRO), both part of North Ameri- grids. state or provincial renewablecan Electric Reliability Corpora- energy requirements. Increasedtion [Figure 24]. From both market transmission investment in theand control perspectives, these in- U.S. is also due, in part, to severalterconnections are isolated except landmark developments in U.S. 28

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy Deliveryfederal and state policies affecting ticular relevance is the Regionaltransmission infrastructure (e.g., Transmission Expansion Project. Itthe Energy Policy Act 2005), state is funded by the U.S. DOE, beingrenewable power standards (RPS), executed by the Western Gov-federal transmission pricing policy ernors Association and Western(e.g., Federal Energy Regulatory Electricity Coordinating Council.Commission), and federal initia- The project is designed to analyzetives promoting transmission transmission requirements under aSmart Grid development under the broad range of alternative energyAmerican Recovery and Reinvest- futures and to develop long-term,ment Act (ARRA). interconnection-wide transmission expansion plans [68].Although the environmentalpermitting process for transmis- Natural Gas Pipelinession line construction was slowfrom 2001 to 2009, utilities that The North American natural gasare members of the Edison Electric market relies heavily on naturalInstitute (EEI) invested over $55 gas delivery from the WEC. It isbillion USD in transmission infra- underlain by a substantial naturalstructure improvements to meet gas pipeline infrastructure for ex-these various needs. Another $61 port to various markets, accompa-billion USD in future transmission nied by infrastructure componentssystem investments is expected such as storage facilities and com-from 2010 through 2021 [67]. In pression stations. In addition, thereWestern Canada, the increased are longer-term plans to conveydemand on natural resources, natural gas from the Alaska Northparticularly unconventional crude Slope and the Mackenzie Deltaoil and hydropower potential, willburden existing infrastructure andeventually require added genera- Figure 25.tion and transmission. Of par- Transmission lines within the WEC. [M13] 29

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy Deliveryarea to markets in North America Significant investment in new pipe-via the proposed Alaska and McK- line and associated infrastructureenzie pipelines, which would pass will be required to support thisthrough the WEC and could add growth.another 15% load to the existingpipeline network. Figure 26 shows Recently, natural gas shipmentsboth existing and proposed gas from the Canadian portion of thepipeline within the WEC. WEC to the East Coast have been declining, due to (a) growing shaleSome WEC-produced natural gas gas production in the U.S., (b)is consumed within the region, increased use of natural gas forbut most is exported to other parts the extraction and processing ofof North America (Canada is the crude bitumen within the Albertanumber one natural gas supplier to oil sands, and (c) increased com-the U.S.). Interregional flow pat- petition from newly constructedterns for 2008 show large move- natural gas pipelines in the U.Sments of natural gas out of the [70]. As a result of this decreasedWEC to major consuming regions demand and lower market pricesin the U.S. Midwest and East for Canadian gas [Figure 27], pro-Coast, and to a lesser extent, to the ducers are exploring other potentialWest Coast and Florida. By 2030, markets including Asia. The priceinterregional flows are projected of LNG is much higher than Northto increase to meet demand pre- American gas prices and is espe-dominantly by accessing growing cially so in Asia [71].unconventional production in themidcontinent and Northern Rock-ies, natural gas from the Arcticprojects such as along the AlaskaNorth Slope and McKenzie Delta[69], and supplying LNG exports Figure 26.that would target Asian markets. Natural gas pipelines within the WEC. [M14] 30

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy DeliveryWhen oil is produced from the proposed to extend south from the Oil Pipelines lines to transport diluted bitumenBakken formation, there is also Bakken Shale to connect with the and synthetic crude to downstreamsignificant natural gas liquids Overland Pass Pipeline [72]. The WEC contains established facilities in the Edmonton area for(and gas) produced. Much of that and growing pipeline infrastruc- refining outside of Alberta (72%natural gas is flared, resulting in ture [Figure 28] that transports is currently transported). Productssubstantial lost revenue. Because crude oil or refined product from from Alberta and Saskatchewaninfrastructure is needed to gather oil-producing areas of the WEC are primarily delivered to the Mid-natural gas, a pipeline (ONEOK to refineries in the WEC and the west, British Columbia, Ontario,Bakken NGL Pipeline) has been rest of North America. The U.S. is California, and Washington; how- the primary destination for these ever, there are plans to target other resources, as it is the largest oil markets as well [73]. 16 market in the world with a refin- 14 ing capacity of approximately 16 TransCanada’s Keystone XL million barrels per day (bbl/d). Pipeline, combined with an exist- 12 Western Canada is the largest ing pipeline, would bring more 10 source of petroleum imports to the than 1.1 million bbl/d to the U.S. US$/MMBtu 8 U.S., providing nearly 2 million and could deliver oil as far as Port bbl/d of crude oil (~2.5 million Arthur and Houston, Texas [66]. 6 bbl/d total petroleum), which ac- In addition, a number of potential 4 September 2009 counts for more than 20% of U.S. projects are proposed to transport imports [73]. was the lowest price 2 AECO (Canada) NYMEX (U.S.) since August 2002 oil to the British Columbia coast 0 (Kitimat) with the primary purpose In Western Canada production of meeting the growing Asian de- Jan ‘05 Jul ‘05 Jan ‘06 Jul ‘06 Jan ‘07 Jul ‘07 Jan ‘08 Jul ‘08 Jan ‘09 Jul ‘09 Jan ‘10 is expected to increase from 2.9 mand. Two pipelines are proposed million bbl/d in 2009 to about 4.2 for this purpose: the Kinder Mor-Figure 17. million bbl/d by 2025 (according gan TMX Northern Leg and theCanadian and U.S. natural gas prices. [16] to the Canadian Association of Northern Gateway pipelines, with Petroleum Producers, 3.5 million initial capacities of 400,000 bbl/d bbl/d of this will be oil-sands-de- and 525,000 bbl/d, respectively rived hydrocarbon). This increased [74,75]. It should be noted that the production will require new pipe- TMX Northern Leg is in the early 31

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy Deliveryplanning stages and will go ahead In the longer term, if the largeonly if demand warrants it and quantities of oil shale in the basinsafter completion of planned expan- of Colorado’s Piceance, Utah’ssions to the existing Trans Moun- Uinta, and Wyoming’s Green Rivertain line’s Westridge Terminal in and Washakie are developed, theyBurnaby, British Columbia. There will also require suitable pipelineare also two proposals that would infrastructure.utilize rail to transport Alberta oilto the west coast. CO2 PipelinesDevelopment of other oil reser- Currently, seven CO2 pipelines arevoirs has been constrained by a operating or are nearing comple-lack of refineries, pipelines, and tion in the WEC. In addition torail facilities. For example, ad- these seven major lines, there are atditional pipeline is planned for least five spur lines feeding smallthe Bakken field, which spans oil fields close to the main pipelineparts of Saskatchewan, Montana, route [Figure 29]. These pipelinesand North Dakota and is one of make up approximately 1,350 kmthe fastest growing oil production (~840 miles), just over 23% of theareas in North America. To address commercial CO2 pipelines cur-this, TransCanada is planning pipe- rently operating in the U.S. Theyline (65,000 bbl/d) to connect these transport CO2 from a combinationresources to the TransCanada’s of natural and industrial sourcesKeystone XL Pipeline, while En- to aging western oilfields forbridge will build another pipeline enhanced oil recovery [76], whichconnection (145,000 bbl/d) to the helps tap more than 90 billionEnbridge Pipelines Inc. mainline. barrels of trapped recoverable oil.Both lines are intended to transport These pipelines are not part of ancrude oil to refinery markets inNorth America. Figure 28. Oil pipelines within the WEC. [M15] 32

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy Deliveryintegrated network. In fact, they north-south, 242-km (~150 miles)have arisen in an ad hoc fashion Alberta Carbon Trunk Line, whichdetermined by the economics of a will gather CO2 from variousgiven oil play, and the availability operations and transport it to oilof government incentives. The fields to the south to enhance oilmajor CO2 pipelines include the recovery. Wyoming will add CO2McElmo Dome Pipeline, which is pipeline to capture emissions fromover 800 km (500 miles) long and the Lost Cabin Gas Plant in Fre-carries 1.1 billion cubic feet per mont County, injecting it into oilday (BCFD) of CO2 to the Permian wells in Encore’s Bell Creek FieldBasin and 60 million cubic feet per and eventually the Cedar Creekday (MMCFD) to McElmo Creek Anticline in southeastern Montana,Utah; and the Greencore pipeline, with the aim of increasing oil pro-which will go into production in duction from those fields.late 2011, moving 720 MMCFD370 km (~230 miles) from Wyo- Pipelines in the U.S. currentlyming to Southeast Montana. transport the CO2 needed to produce 237,000 barrels of oil per dayNew CO2 pipeline development domestically [77], with an addi-projects are planned or underway tional 18,000–20,000 barrels perin the WEC to increase CO2 use day produced by CO2-enhancedfor enhanced oil recovery and to oil recovery (EOR) operationsa lesser degree, to reduce CO2 in southern Saskatchewan (mostemissions [Figure 29]. These of which is sold to U.S. markets)projects are driven by a variety of [78]. With oil prices expected toobjectives, including commercial, be high for the foreseeable fu-legislative, research, and regula- ture, and the U.S. EPA regulatingtory interests. Alberta has initiateda $2B CAN [76] effort to realizefour major CO2 management proj- Figure 29.ects. One project is the proposed CO2 pipelines within the WEC. [M16] 33

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy Deliverycarbon emissions, the need for CO2 Coal is the single largest com-pipelines will continue to grow. modity moved by rail, a signifi-Although it has taken nearly four cant portion of which is moveddecades to bring the first 1,300 within the WEC. Crude oil andkm (~810 miles) of pipelines into refined petroleum products suchexistence, economic and regula- as gasoline, diesel, and jet fueltory (emissions) drivers are likely are transported by rail to marketsto bring the next 1,300 km online where pipelines are not available.much more quickly. Asphalt and fertilizer are typically transported by rail. With the ex-Rail pansion of the bioenergy industry, biomass transportation by rail isRailway transportation provides likely to increase. Distributed col-bulk movement of commodities lection points for biomass productssuch as coal, potash, agriculture typically require a combinationproducts, and petrochemicals of trucking and rail and are mostthroughout WEC. This rail system attractive for rail applications forprovides either direct access or in- long-distance markets.terconnecting rail to most of NorthAmerica, and key connections to Coal transport is driving railports allow direct access to foreign expansion within the WEC. Themarkets. The WEC is serviced by 103-mile (~165-km) Powder Riverfive major railway companies, with Basin “Joint Line” is a dedicatedCanadian Pacific Railway Com- coal railway, and it is one of thepany and Union Pacific Railroad heaviest used rail systems in theacting as the primary providers. world. Expansion is also being dis-The three other major rail compa- cussed to increase the movementnies are Burlington Northern Santa of bitumen to markets (refineriesFe, Canadian National Railway,and Utah Railway Company. Figure 30. Railway lines. [M17] 34

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r WEC Energy Deliveryand terminals) where pipelinesmay not yet be available. Movingbitumen from the oil sands to vari-ous markets is an old practice witha new push for the rail industryto analyze whether it can offer acompetitive alternative. Rail trans-Expanding and maintaining a healthy energy infrastructurein the WEC is critically important to realize its energy andeconomic potential.portation of LNG is being inves-tigated by liquefaction companiesas a means of moving energy toareas where pipeline infrastructureis not available. Although liquefy-ing natural gas increases its energydensity to the point at which largequantities of gas may be trans-ported by rail, the overall econom-ics of this process will ultimatelydetermine the delivery method’sviability. Similarly, developmentof the Bakken formation is drivingevaluation of rail to transport oil tothe Gulf of Mexico and the GreatLakes areas. 35

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Energy and EnvironmentE nergy development and concern is winter ozone formation the environment are in high elevation basins believed to inextricably linked in the be associated with volatile organicWestern Energy Corridor, and compounds (VOCs) being releasedlike all other human activity, en- from gas fields. Along with GHGs,ergy development can affect the impaired visibility from engineenvironment in numerous ways. emissions, suspension of dust fromThose energy-environment inter- unpaved roads,surface mining op-actions need to be managed ap- erations, and coal cars are among the potential air-related impactspropriately to ensure sustainable of energy production, especiallyenergy production. The WEC’s given that the WEC contains parksrich energy resources will be fully and monuments that are protectedunlocked only when environmen- by stringent visibility standards.tal impacts are properly addressed[Figure 31]. The followingsection provides an overview of Watersome of these impacts. Water is used extensively in energy development, and energy develop-Air ment can affect water supply and quality [79]. Depending on theAir quality concerns associated energy technologies employed,with energy production often significant quantities of water mayfocus on combustion by-products be used in upstream processes (e.g.,from coal-fired plants, including mining, pumping and processingthe emission of greenhouse gases fuels), the fuel combustion/energy([GHGs]; carbon dioxide, nitrous generation process, and down-oxide), criteria pollutants (nitrous stream processes (e.g., carbon cap-oxides, particulate matter less than10 µm, and carbon monoxide),and toxic air pollutants such as Figure 31.sulfur oxides and mercury. Another Ecoregions within the WEC. [M18] 36

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Energy and Environmentture and sequestration) [80]. These encompasses a diverse range of of anthropogenic GHG emissions energy efficiency, improving energyconcerns are especially important in landscapes, from high alpine parks and potential contributor to climate generation processes, and assessingthe more arid portions of the WEC and peaks to lowland playas and change. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is carbon capture and sequestrationwhere water supplies are already canyon lands and from wilder- the primary GHG; however, other alternatives.fully or over-subscribed. Water ness to large cities [81]. Energy emissions such as methane andquality concerns include emerging development within the WEC can nitrous oxide, though produced in Concerns have caused increasedissues such as the potential for con- have significant impacts on this quantitatively smaller volumes, are consideration of lower GHG-taminating drinking water aquifer landscape, critical to sustaining actually more potent GHGs. The emitting energy production options,systems using hydraulic fracture or ecological zones, and fragmenta- primary sources of GHG emissions such as renewable and nuclear en-in-situ heating of oil sands or oil tion of such landscapes can have a in the WEC are the generation of ergy and lower carbon fossil energyshale. In addition, there are grow- negative impact on wildlife habitat electricity and the combustion of resources like natural gas. Naturaling concerns about the potential and can disturb migration corridors transportation fuels [83]. gas produces fewer CO2 emissionscontamination of land and water [82]. Cumulative impacts from en- per equivalent energy unit than oilresources by large tailings ponds ergy development along with other Relative to energy, coal-fired plants or coal. However, methane, theand coal ash piles. Other concerns human activities (e.g., ranching and in the WEC are the largest CO2 main component in natural gas, isinclude potential pipeline releases agriculture) on landscapes need producers; however, there has been a much more powerful GHG thanthat could cause oil spills into riv- to be planned and managed. It is a significant amount of debate rela- CO2. If natural gas is to become theers and streams , pollution of the important to take the long view be- tive to the impact of GHG emissions preferred fuel for electric powermarine environment by increased cause these ecological systems can associated with oil sands develop- generation, transportation, andoil tanker traffic off the British be disturbed easily and take years ment, which is estimated to contrib- industrial applications, leakageColumbia coastline that would be to rehabilitate. Some examples of ute 6% of Canada’s GHG emissions during production, transport, andassociated with the potential export energy-landscape interactions in [84]. An example of a potential consumption will likely need to beof synthetic crude oil to Asia. the WEC include energy produc- regional concern is the projected hy- addressed. Cogeneration, the copro- tion facilities, roads, drilling, trans- dropower impact of climate change duction of heat and electricity, canLandscapes and Wildlife mission lines, pipelines, and dams. on snow accumulation and runoff improve the efficiency of natural [85]. To address this and related gas generation, helping to reduceThe WEC has some of the greatest Climate Change concerns, the federal governments GHG emissions through lower fuelexpanses of undeveloped lands, in- and numerous WEC members have source consumption. Between 2001cluding some of the finest national Another environmental concern is been pursuing the development of and 2010, 2,349 MW of installedparks and monuments in North the potential impact of energy de- relevant climate change mitigation cogen capacity has been added toAmerica along with a significant velopment on the earth’s climate. and adaptation policies, addressing Alberta’s grid [86,87].population of wildlife. The WEC Fossil fuel combustion is a source 37

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Energy-Resource NexusT he WEC is host to sig- type of interdependence are of- capita caloric intake in emerging the effects of future energy price nificant natural resources, fered below. markets [90]. A significant factor in volatility or sustained increase. many of which are not the rising costs of producing theseused for energy but have econom- Agriculture commodities is both “direct” and Other interdependencies that haveic value to the region, and require “indirect” energy use [91]. emerged between energy and agri- The WEC produces many agricul- culture include the use of agricul-energy for their development. tural commodities, with wheat and Direct energy consumption in- tural lands for energy production,The availability of reliable energy corn dominating both acreage and cludes actual on-farm energy con- i.e., for the biofuels market, ratherat competitive prices becomes revenues [88,89]. General trends sumption such as running pumps than for food production. Relation-a driving factor in investment in all WEC crops are increasing or farm machinery or powering ships developing between ranchersdecisions to develop non-energy commodity prices and farm in- food-processing plants. Indirect en- and wind energy developers cannatural resources native to the come, driven by both rising world ergy consumption includes energy optimize the land use.WEC. A few examples of this population and increasing per consumed to deliver farm products to market as well as energy con- Fertilizer Production sumed in off-farm production and delivery of goods consumed on the The WEC produces significant farm, such as producing fertilizers quantities of the major plant fertil- and pesticides. Increases in both izer nutrients, e.g., nitrogen, phos- direct and indirect energy uses in- phate, and potash [92]. Of these crease production costs. However, nutrients, nitrogen is used in the indirect consumption costs may be greatest quantity and accounted for more volatile and have a greater 56% of the U.S. usage of chemical impact on agricultural production fertilizers in 2005 [93]. The value costs, depending on factors such as of these nutrients and the compa- nutrient needs of the crops being nies that produce them has risen produced and input costs such as dramatically recently in response fertilizer and pesticide production. to rising demand for food, particu- A critical evaluation of energy use larly as wheat and corn produc- in agriculture could reveal ways to tion have increased [90]. Several improve efficiencies that would in- forms of energy are consumed by crease farm incomes and/or offset the fertilizer industry, including 38

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Energy-Resource Nexusnatural gas for plant operations commonly used to cool thermal Fossil Energy Development oil sands and oil shale. Nuclear(e.g., producing process heat) and power plants, so it is important to energy could also produce oxy-the consumption of petroleum for ensure an adequate water sup- Fossil energy development may gen for coal gasification and coalproduct delivery. However, natural ply exists prior to construction of require substantial external energy combustion. There are significantgas is the key ingredient used to power plants, whether nuclear, inputs derived from other energy opportunities for further exploringproduce hydrogen and provide fossil, or solar thermal. Air cool- sources. Examples include, in-situ the application of integrated en-energy for ammonia production, ing is becoming more common,which is in turn the key ingredient but it is more expensive and plant It takes energy to make energyin nitrogenous fertilizer produc- efficiency is generally lower.tion. Natural gas amounts tomore than half of the input costs Another example of water use is in coal gasification where part of ergy systems, built upon regionally(in some cases 75 to 90%) for the steam-assisted gravity drainage the coal is oxidized to provide available energy resources thatnitrogenous fertilizer production (SAGD) process, in which steam is heat. Large-scale production of would potentially result in greaterand delivery. Understanding how injected through horizontal wells to oil from oil shale using in-situ efficiencies and better stewardshipthe costs of fertilizer production, help recover viscous bitumen from electric heating to recover kero- of WEC resources.especially the energy costs, can be the oil sands. Of course, water also gen would require a significantreduced would help assure WEC plays a direct role in the generation quantity of electricity. Currently,competitiveness in the agricultural of hydroelectricity, and it is critical large quantities of natural gasindustry and could open markets in many areas for the irrigation and are burned to generate heat foraround the world for improved processing of bioenergy crops [94]. thermal bitumen recovery fromWEC fertilizer technology. Characterizing the value of water oil sands, and upgrading of the in these applications, and under- produced oil depends on the use ofWater Resources standing what alternative processes natural gas for heat and hydrogen. could reduce the use of water, are As a final example, recent studiesWEC water resources are critical first steps towards reducing risks have been conducted [95] on thefor energy development, as well as associated with long term energy use of nuclear energy to providefor other regional resource devel- investments. not just electricity, but also heatopment mentioned in this section. for the production of oil from oilWater is used to fracture tight shale, steam for the production ofgeologic formations (e.g., shale) oil from oil sands, and hydrogento recover oil and gas. It is also to upgrade the oil produced from 39

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Influences on WEC Energy DevelopmentE nergy development and 2009 to 4,908 billion in 2035 [96]. Energy Supply generation needs for the long-term; use in the WEC is influ- In addition, continued demand for however, the use of natural gas enced by a number of transportation fuels will require The WEC contains rich, diverse, for electric power generation isregional, North American, and in- continued U.S. import of millions and sustainable supplies of world- expected to increase relative to of barrels of oil, despite efforts to class energy resources strategic to coal [97]. The WEC is also wellternational driving forces. These reduce imports by making vehicles North America’s electricity and positioned to supply significantare complex, hard to predict with lighter and more efficient, substi- fuels needs, as well as the grow- amounts of renewable energy (ifany reliability (especially over tuting biofuels for fossil fuels, and ing needs in Asia. Unconventional accompanied by integrating infra-the decades-long time scales of using electric vehicles [97]. Also, oil and gas resources in the WEC structure), especially from hydroenergy projects), and difficult are large enough to meet many energy-intensive industries within and wind power. Uranium willto reconcile. Nonetheless, these of North America’s needs for the WEC, such as oil sands recov- continue to meet North Americandriving forces will be part of the foreseeable future as produc- ery and processing, will require and international demand, andthe broad environment in which tion from conventional oil and more natural gas to meet produc- additional development withinenergy projects must operate. gas supplies decline. The WEC’s tion goals. Demand is growing in the WEC is anticipated, givenSelected factors are discussed Asia as well — China in particu- vast coal reserves will continue to the 2013 cessation of the Unitedbelow. lar, is projected to be a dominant supply North American electricity- States using nuclear fuel derived energy consumer in 2035. ThisDemand will drive demand for certain WECDemand for energy resources from resources, such as oil, natural gas, 2,500the WEC — for reliable power, coal and uranium. Figure 32 showsheat, and transportation — will these projections for electricity 2,000expand with North America’s generation in the U.S. 2007 2009population and economic growth. 1,500 2035As demand grows, consumptionefficiency will increase as well asthe need for more electricity capac- 1,000ity within North America. For ex-ample, the U.S. electricity demand Figure 32. 500is anticipated to grow by 31% (an U.S. Electricity generation by fuelaverage of 1% per year), from type, for 2007, 2009, and 2035 03,745 billion kilowatt-hours in (billion kilowatt-hours). [13] Coal Natural Gas Nuclear Renewables Petroleum Figure X. Electricity generation by fuel, 2007, 2009, and 2035 (billion kilowatthours) 40

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Influences on WEC Energy Developmentfrom dismantled Russian nuclear Existing and Emerging export of coal, diluted bitumen, Investmentwarheads. synthetic crude oil, and natural gas Export Markets Because of the massive scale of en- to Asia.Energy & Environment The WEC will continue to grow its ergy production, transportation and energy exports to both traditional Price use, and the benefits of “economiesWEC energy resource development and nontraditional U.S., Canadian, of scale,” energy infrastructure isand use are increasingly influenced and Asian markets. As an example, The price of energy has significant large and expensive – new proj-by policy that leads to regulating Alberta is fast becoming the larg- impact on energy development ect costs tend to be measured inimpacts on the environment. For est provider of oil to the U.S., investments. High oil prices and billions or even tens of billions ofexample, existing or proposed CO2 relative to countries outside North low volatility, for example, encour- dollars. Direct foreign investmentemissions standards drive invest- America, because of its increas- age unconventional and high-risk in WEC fossil energy resourcesment decisions related to electric ing production from oil sands. commercial developments, as well by Asia-Pacific countries has beenpower generation, particularly the Canadian natural gas exports to as R&D investments aimed at increasing through cross-borderinvestment in, or decommission- the U.S. may be impacted by the improving exploration success and mergers and acquisitions [99].ing of coal-fired power plants. need to supply oil sands processing increased recovery. Another ex- Governments also have providedRelative to Alberta oil sands, the activities, deliver exports to Asia, ample is the impact on natural gas incentives for energy investment.Government of Alberta recognizes and respond to the growing shale prices of the recent boom in un- For example, Alberta invested partthe great importance of balancing gas boom in the U.S. [98]. Another conventional shale gas, which has of its income from royalties inenvironmental sustainability and emerging export opportunity is to resulted in certain WEC provincial energy innovation, which enabledeconomic development. One last provide electricity from renewable partners to seek alternative markets the subsurface extraction of oilexample is concern about 1) the energy sources to markets in the in Asia, and associated investment from oil sands. Another type ofimpacts of exporting oil or coal west and southwest U.S., help- in building LNG processing facili- investment includes subsidies. Toto China, which has generated re- ing meet their renewable energy ties and export terminals in British encourage investment in renewablenewed scrutiny of oil tanker traffic mandates. Electricity export will Columbia. The current low price of energy, subsidies have become anoff the coast of British Columbia, also help international north-south natural gas, along with the rela- increasingly important form ofand 2) the U. S. export of coal to trade, especially with the signifi- tively low capital cost of building government intervention.Asia from Washington and Oregon cant hydropower potential in the natural gas power plants, currentlyterminals. northern portion of the WEC. Cur- enhances the attractiveness of gas rent market conditions and policy for electricity generation. settings are driving WEC states and provinces to explore greater 41

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Influences on WEC Energy Development Research Assets TInfrastructure would be economically competi- developed to lessen environmental he WEC has significant tive and publicly acceptable. impact. The deployment of new research capabilities inThe availability of infrastructure technology carries risk, and pro- areas relevant to the tech-to process and deliver energy and Technological Innovation totype demonstrations are needed nical, environmental, and socialto increase system reliability and to reduce the risk for industry and issues surrounding energy produc-efficiency is critical to unlock- Technological innovation has been investors while gaining regulatory a key driver in developing energy tion. Figure 33 shows the 43 majoring WEC energy resources and and public acceptance. Given the resources within the WEC, such institutions with such capabilities.inter-jurisdictional trade. Lack resource wealth and associated as the application of SAGD to the Each WEC state and provinceof infrastructure has driven cer- technological challenges within thetain development decisions. For extraction of oil sands and hydrau- has at least two such institutions, WEC, there is an opportunity forexample, because of insufficient lic fracturing technology applied which include U.S. universities the WEC to lead internationally inrefining capacity in Alberta, much to unconventional gas extraction. classified by the Carnegie Foun- technology development, demon-of the synthetic crude oil pro- This constant improvement in dation for the Advancement of stration, and deployment.duced there will be sent to U.S technology will be required to Teaching as “Doctoral ResearchGulf States for refining. Another further develop energy resources Universities” or “Research Uni-example is the need for natural within the WEC, especially as versities with High or Very Highgas, diluted bitumen, and synthetic conventional energy resources are Research Activity.” The Canadiancrude oil pipelines to export ter- depleted. Technological innovation institutions shown are those with atminals along the British Columbia is also critical to mitigate environ- least one Canada Research Chair.coastline to support diversification mental consequences associated Schools with Canada Researchto Asian markets. One last example with energy development. Chairs awarded by either the Natu-is the lack of suitable electrical ral Science and Engineering or thetransmission and storage needed Of note is Alberta’s considerable Social Sciences and Humanitiesto better integrate and deliver vast, investment in energy technol- programs were included as havingbut highly variable, wind power in ogy innovation, beginning with programs relevant to energy devel-the area, as well as support cross- oil sands development technol- opment issues. These criteria iden-border movement of electricity. In ogy, CO2 management, and water tified 34 universities with researchthis case, substantial advances in treatment associated with oil sands strength. All are public exceptstorage and transmission technolo- tailings ponds. Another example three: Brigham Young University,gies are needed before large-scale is the number of innovative in-situ oil shale retort processes being Colorado Technical University, anddeployment throughout the WEC University of Denver. 42

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Research AssetsIn addition to the 34 academic typically has government agenciesestablishments, the region has ten dedicated to researching variousmajor non-academic institutions energy resources and generation.with missions relevant to energyresources: four U.S. government These institutions can play a sig-laboratories, one Canadian govern- nificant role in increasing produc-Industry relies on an educational system with strong andactive research and development talent. The WEC has aunique set of top research institutions to leverage in itsenergy development endeavors.ment laboratory, three independent tivity and improving the economicsresearch organizations, and two of further developing the WEC’sprovincial organizations in Canada. vast energy resources. Collabora-All ten are oriented towards ap- tions between these institutions,plied research and the development industry, and the private sectorof commercial applications. This could yield long-term academiclist of research organizations does programs in highly specializednot include any corporate research energy topics.facilities dedicated to the problemsof one company. Neither does itinclude the many focused researchprograms or centers that operatewithin individual universities orthat are partnered with universi-ties and corporate research groups.Each state and province also Figure 33. Research institutions. 43

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r SummaryE nergy Resources. The collectively estimated at approxi- portions of the WEC, where continue to play a foundational WEC is a source of enor- mately 175 billion barrels, placing shale gas, tight gas and coal bed role within North America, greatly mous quantities of fossil, the WEC third in world ranking. methane are plentiful. The current contributing to the generation ofrenewable, and nuclear energy- These reserves are dominated by abundance and low market price relatively low-priced, base-loadrelated resources that will well unconventional oil resources, such of natural gas and its associated electricity. For coal seams tooserve the energy security needs of as the Canadian oil sands in Al- lower CO2 emissions, has led to deep to mine, in-situ coal gasifica-the region and North America for berta and Saskatchewan, which are its current favor as a feedstock for tion is being introduced in Alberta,the foreseeable future. It is not projected to experience significant fossil electricity plants. The result- which converts coal to a syngasjust the vastness of these resourc- growth in production and comprise ing natural gas market conditions used to fuel combined cycle gas a greater proportion of imports in are encouraging British Columbia turbines to generate electric-es that is important, but also their the U.S. The oil sands production and Alberta to invest in convey- ity. The current combination ofcollective diversity and projected is supplemented by significant ing natural gas to the British available low-priced natural gaslongevity. Increasingly, there will production from the emerging Columbia coastline where it can and existing or proposed envi-be greater dependency on these Bakken formation development in be converted to LNG and shipped ronmental policies is influencingresources for electricity and fuels the Williston Basin. In the longer to Asia, where market prices are investment decisions relative tothroughout this century. Given term, there is tremendous poten- higher. The gas production boom building new coal plants; however,this platform of energy resources tial associated with vast oil shale has also inspired renewed interest in the long term, coal will remainand other natural resources, there resources located in Utah, Colo- in natural gas as a transportation a crucial component of the Northis great potential to create value- rado and Wyoming. Reliance on fuel; however, this path has not American energy mix.added industrial enterprises. This WEC crude oil supplies will only yet been fully developed.setting will also be necessarily increase and they can potentially Renewable Energy. The headwatersinfluenced by emerging overseas lessen dependence on oil imports Coal. The WEC contains excellent of some of North America’s great-energy demand, in particular from economically and politically coal reserves upon which much of est rivers are located within thefrom Asia. unstable countries. North America is currently heavily WEC, and produce a significant dependent for electricity produc- amount of hydropower both withinCrude Oil. WEC oil resources cur- Natural Gas. Natural gas production. WEC coal production in and outside the WEC. In 2009, 90rently play a significant role in tion in the WEC places it third 2009 approximated about 8.2 % of million MWh of electricity — ap-meeting both U.S. and Canadian behind Russia and the U.S. in world production and about 54% proximately 24% of the WEC’sdemand, primarily associated with world ranking. The current North of the combined U.S. and Canada total electricity generation that yeartransportation fuels. WEC crude American natural gas produc- production. Demand projections — was generated from hydropoweroil proven reserves in 2009 are tion boom is exemplified within through 2030 suggest coal will in the WEC. Much of this resource 44

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Summarypotential has already been tapped reserves), and in 2009 the Sas- tion, about 70% came from fossil The WEC is also part of the emerg-within the WEC, in particular south katchewan produced 18% of the fuel plants, (primarily from coal ing biofuels industry, which couldof the U.S.-Canadian border. How- world’s uranium. The McArthur and natural gas), 24% from hydro- help lessen selected imports of oilever, there is significant potential River Mine, located in Saskatche- power, and approximately 4% from to the U.S. In 2009, the collectivefor additional power, such as low- wan, is the largest uranium produc- other renewables, with the latter operating capacity was approxi-head hydro and larger scale dam ing mine in the world with 7,654 expected to increase. The WEC mately 2,000 million gallons (50projects, with the latter opportunity metric tons of uranium produced does not currently host any oper- million barrels) per year. Coal-to-more likely to occur in the northern in 2009, approximately 14% of the ating commercial nuclear power liquids is another potential trans-portion of the WEC. world’s uranium production. De- plants (NPPs), but there have been portation fuel source to be intro- mand for uranium within the WEC emerging interests to add NPPs to duced in the WEC with a newlyThe WEC also hosts some of the may increase, given that half of the energy portfolios of certain states planned operation in Wyominghighest wind potential regions nuclear fuel currently used in the and provinces. and another proposed in Utah. Inin the North America, which U.S. is derived from dismantled the longer term, oil shale can alsoare increasingly being used for Russian nuclear warheads, and this Liquid Fuels Generation. The WEC contribute to the production of un-electricity generation. In addition, program will be halted in 2013. hosts energy resources that can conventional liquid fuels. Finally,the WEC includes some of the Other nuclear energy related assets contribute to development of there is renewed interest in usingmost productive croplands and are emerging in the area, such as conventional and unconventional natural gas as a transportation fuel,forestlands, which are potential a uranium enrichment plant to be liquid fuels. As of 2009, nearly but it is yet uncertain how this op-feedstock sources for biofuels. located in Idaho. 30 crude oil refineries with a 1.3 portunity will emerge.Minor enterprises associated with million barrel per day total oper-geothermal, solar, and ocean/tidal Electric Generation. Abundant able capacity are located within the Energy Delivery. Expanding andenergy potential also operate in gas, coal, and hydropower re- WEC. The WEC also has several maintaining a healthy energy infra-the WEC. sources within the WEC enable oil sands and heavy oil upgrad- structure in the WEC is critically the region to supply some of the ers in Alberta and Saskatchewan important in realizing its energyUranium. The WEC hosts substan- lowest priced electricity in North with a total operable capacity to and economic potential. A largetial amounts of uranium, much of America. In 2009, the WEC’s produce 1.2 million barrel per day number of infrastructure projectsit of high grade, which is used to electric power generation capacity of synthetic crude oil. A recent are currently being pursued, somefuel North American and inter- was estimated at over 76,000 MW, “game changer” is the proposed of which have already been men-national nuclear power plants. and total electrical power genera- LNG production to facilitate export tioned, but are included below forSaskatchewan deposits dominate tion within the WEC in 2009 was of British Columbia and Alberta completeness:the WEC (and North American 370 million MWh. Of this genera- natural gas to Asia. 45

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Summary• Large investments are being for export to refinery Energy and Environment. Significant Energy – Resource Nexus. The made in association with the infrastructure. concerns on a number of levels WEC contains a variety of natural planned expansion of oil sands relate to the potential impacts of resources important to the regional production. This will require • Large investments continue to energy development on the envi- economy and interdependent with substantial increases in the be made within the WEC to ronment within the WEC. Areas regional energy resources. These amount of oil recovered via both convey CO2 to various depleted of concern include impacts on air, include agriculture, water, fertil- mining and subsurface recovery, oil fields, where it can enhance water, landscape and wildlife, fish- izer, and other minerals. Develop- increased use of natural gas to oil recovery processes, and eries, and climate change. Environ- ment and/or use of these resources produce hydrogen and steam, sequester carbon. mental regulations are increasingly requires energy input in various increased upgrading capacity imposed on energy development forms (electricity, heat, fuels) and via new construction and expan- • Developing new electrical trans- and use, but at the same time, new intensity levels. Energy resource sion of existing capacity, and mission infrastructure is criti- technology and innovation are development is itself energy inten- new pipeline to export synthetic cal to capturing the enormous enabling energy companies to pro- sive, especially recovery of fossil crude oil to refineries and new potential associated with WEC duce energy more efficiently and fuels from unconventional re- markets, including Asia. renewable energy resources lo- with less environmental impact. As sources. Energy development may cated in more remote areas, and a result, environmental concerns also require use of other natural• Also associated with the Asian to better integrate and balance are increasingly addressed as part resources as well, including water, market is the current drive to electrical supply and demand of the energy development life agricultural feedstock, etc. Opti- build a natural gas pipeline to between different areas and cycle. Striking the right balance mal integration of WEC resources export LNG by tapping Alberta from different types of electric- between protecting the environ- may provide opportunities leading and British Columbia’s uncon- ity generation. ment and producing enough energy to efficient production of greater ventional natural gas fields and at a competitive price will be economic value. transferring natural gas to the • Sufficient infrastructure will be critical for the economic and social British Columbia coastline. paramount for more integrated development of the WEC. For ex- Influencing Factors. A number of and efficient resource develop- ample, Saskatchewan has led CO2 factors influence energy develop-• Associated with the oil produc- ment and use, at various scales, management research and Alberta ment and use within the WEC, tion boom in the Bakken forma- i.e., at plant, community, and recently invested in building the including supply and demand, tion, efforts are underway to regional scales. largest carbon capture project in export schemes, energy pricing, supply new pipeline to connect the world. investment, technology innovation, the oil resources to major oil environment, and infrastructure. pipeline and rail in the vicinity Understanding these factors and 46

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Summarytheir interactions can help WEC tory facilities found within regionalstakeholders develop a frame- universities, government labora-work attractive to investors who tories, and independent researchcan finance energy development organizations. And the significantprojects. Of particular note is the contribution from corporate-spon-growing Asian demand for WEC sored research can be expected toresources such as oil, natural grow rapidly as more hydrocarbongas, coal, uranium, and fertilizer. is produced from unconventionalThis demand is expected to have sources in the WEC.a major bearing on WEC exportstrategy and on direct Asian invest-ment in certain WEC resources andassociated infrastructure.Research Assets. Technological in-novation has been a major gamechanger within the WEC — forexample technology innovation,sustained over many years hasresulted in competitive technolo-gies for extracting oil from sandsand gas from shales and mudstoneson very large scales. Technologi-cal innovation will continue to bea key factor in developing WECenergy resources. Significant re-search assets that can contribute toaddressing the various energy de-velopment challenges in the regionare located within the WEC. Theseassets include expertise and labora- 47

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References[1] CCEI, 2011, “Energy Facts & [5] North Dakota Industrial U.S. Geological Survey Digital Information Administration, Statistics, Canada – Statistics,” Commission, n.d., “Industrial Data Series, DDS-69-BB, 162p. http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ Canadian Centre for Energy Commission of North Dakota ipdbproject/IEDIndex3. [10] U.S. Department of Energy, Information, http://www. Oil & Gas Division 2010 cfm?tid=3&pid=26&aid=24, Office of Petroleum Reserves, centreforenergy.com/FactsStats/ Monthly Statistical Update,” accessed May 2, 2011. Strategic Unconventional Fuels, Statistics.asp?Template=5,0, https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/ 2011, “Fact Sheet: U.S. Oil Shale [14] Kuuskraa, V. A., 2007a, “The accessed May 2011. stats/2010monthlystats.pdf, Resources,” http://www.fossil. Unconventional Gas Resource accessed June 2011.[2] CAPP, 2011, “Canada’s Oil Sands energy.gov/programs/reserves/ Base,” Oil & Gas Journal, – The Reality,” Presentations and [6] Energy Resources Conservation npr/Oil_Shale_Resource_Fact_ http://www.adv-res.com/ Speeches, Canadian Association Board, June 2011, Alberta’s Sheet.pdf, accessed May 2011. pdf/ARI%20OGJ%202%20 of Petroleum Producers, Energy Reserves 2010 and Unconventional%20Gas%20 [11] Utah Heavy Oil Program http://www.capp.ca/library/ Supply/Demand Outlook 2011- Resource%20Base%207_24_07. (UHOP), 2007, A Technical, presentations/Pages/default. 2010. http://www.ercb.ca/docs/ pdf, published July 24, 2007, Economic, and Legal Assessment aspx#QrouKpvEESwu,presented products/STs/st98_current.pdf. accessed May 2011. of North American Heavy Oil, Oil May 4, 2011, accessed May 2011. [7] Energy Resources Conservation Sands, and Oil Shale Resources, [15] CAPP, 2010, “Canada’s Shale[3] USGS, 2008, “National Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Report prepared for the U.S. Gas,” Canadian Association Assessment of Oil and Gas Energy Reserves 2009 and Department of Energy, http:// of Petroleum Producers, Fact Sheet, Assessment of Supply/Demand Outlook 2010- fossil.energy.gov/programs/ www.capp.ca/GetDoc. Undiscovered Oil Resources 2019. http://ercb.ca/docs/products/ oilgas/publications/oilshale/ aspx?DocID=165107&DT=PDF, in the Devonian-Mississippian STs/st98_2010.pdf. HeavyOilLowRes.pdf, published slide presentation published Bakken Formation, Williston September 2007, accessed May February 5, 2010, accessed May [8] BLM, n.d., “[2008] Oil Shale Basin Province, Montana & North 2011. 2011. & Tar Sands Programmatic Dakota, 2008,” U.S. Geological EIS Information Center: About [12] EIA, 2011, Annual Energy [16] EIA, 2001, World Shale Gas Survey, 2008-3081, http://pubs. Tar Sands,” Department of Outlook 2011 with Projections to Resources: An Initial Assessment usgs.gov/fs/2008/3021/pdf/FS08- the Interior, Bureau of Land 2035, U.S. Energy Information of 14 Regions Outside the 3021_508.pdf, published April Management, http://ostseis.anl. Administration, DOE/EIA- U.S., U.S. Energy Information 2008, accessed May 2011. gov/guide/tarsands, accessed June 0383, http://www.eia.doe.gov/ Administration, http://www.[4] Kohn, J., 2011, “USGS plans 2, 2011. forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2011).pdf, eia.gov/analysis/studies/ new assessment of Bakken oil published April 2011, accessed worldshalegas/pdf/fullreport.pdf, [9] Johnson, R. C., T. J. Mercier, M. formation,” KTVQ. http://www. May 2011. published April 2011, accessed E. Brownfield, and J. G. Self, ktvq.com/news/usgs-plans- May 2011. 2010, “Chapter 1, Assessment of [13] EIA, 2009, “International new-assessment-of-bakken-oil- in-place oil shale resources in the Energy Statistics, Natural [17] EIA, 2011, “Country Analysis formation/, posted May 19, 2011, Eocene Green River formation, Gas Overview 2009 (Billion Briefs: Canada,” U.S. Energy accessed June 2011 Uinta Basin, Utah and Colorado,” Cubic Feet),” U.S. Energy Information Administration, 48

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/ and%20Province.pdf, accessed [27] NaiKun Wind Energy Group, Inc., published December 9, 2010, canada/pdf.pdf, updated April June 2, 2011. 2011, “Federal Environmental accessed May 2011. 2011, accessed May 2011. Approval for NaiKun Wind [23] Carbon Capture Journal, [32] Utah Clean Energy, n.d., “Solar Positions North B.C. to Become[18] Centre for Energy, n.d., “Energy 2009, “Alberta finances Swan Salt Lake Project,” http:// Canada’s First Offshore Wind Facts & Statistics,” Canadian Hills project,” http://www. utahcleanenergy.org/our_work/ Producing Region,” News Center for Energy Information, carboncapturejournal.com/ solar_salt_lake_project, accessed Release, http://www.naikun.ca/ http://www.centreforenergy.com/ displaynews.php?NewsID=490, May 2011. news_media/news.php?id=124, AboutEnergy/Coal/Environment. published December 3, 2009, published March 17, 2011, [33] Kurtz, S., 2009, Opportunities asp?page=10, accessed May 2011. accessed May 2011. accessed May 2011. and Challenges for Development[19] EIA, 2009, U.S. Coal Production [24] Statistics Canada, 2011, Report of a Mature Concentrating [28] AltaLink, L.P., 2011, “Alberta by Coal-Producing Region and on Energy Supply and Demand PhotovoltaicPower Industry, Electricity Future, Southern State,2008-2009, Production in Canada: 2007, Minister of National Renewable Energy Alberta Transmisstion Tables, http://www.eia.gov/ Industry, Catalogue no. 57-003-X, Laboratory, NREL/TP-520- Reinforcement.” http:// cneaf/coal/page/acr/tables2. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57- 43208, http://www.nrel.gov/ albertaelectricityfuture.com/ html, Energy Information 003-x/57-003-x2007001-eng. pv/pdfs/43208.pdf, updated alberta/?page_id=19, accessed Administration, updated February pdf, January 2010, accessed June November 2009, accessed May June 2011.. 3, 2011, accessed May 2011. 2011. 2011. [29] NaiKun Wind Energy Group, Inc.,[20] Natural Resources Canada, 2009, [25] Hatch, 2010, Final Report for [34] Government of British Columbia, 2011, “The Project, Engineering,” “The Atlas of Canada – Coal Alberta Utilities Commission, n.d., “British Columbia’s NaiKun Wind Development Inc., Resources,” http://atlas.nrcan. Calgary, Alberta: Update Mountain Pine Beetle Action Plan http://www.naikun.ca/the_project/ gc.ca/site/english/maps/economic/ on Alberta’s Hydroelectric 2006–2011,” http://www.for.gov. engineering.php, accessed May energy/Coal, updated September Energy Resources, H334053 bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/ 02, 2011. 2, 2009, accessed May 2011. Rev. 1, http://www.energy. actionplan/2006/Beetle_Action_ alberta.ca/Electricity/pdfs/ [30] AWEA, 2011, “Production Tax Plan.pdf, accessed March 2011.[21] EIA, 2011, Wyoming AUCHydroelectricStudy.pdf, Credit (PTC),” American Wind Analysis, Energy Information [35] Biocap Canada, 2008, An published February 26, 2010, Energy Association, http://www. Administration, http://www.eia. Information Guide on Pursuing accessed May 2011. awea.org/issues/federal_policy/ gov/state/state-energy-profiles- Biomass Energy Opportunities upload/PTC_April-2011.pdf, analysis.cfm?sid=WY, updated [26] FERC, 2011, “Issued Preliminary and Technologies in British published April 2011, accessed October 2009, accessed May Permits,” Federal Energy Columbia for First Nations, Small June 2, 2011. 2011. Regulatory Commission, http:// Communities, Municipalities www.ferc.gov/industries/ [31] Gilbert, R., 2010, “Alberta and Industry, Produced for[22] Coal Association Canada, n.d., hydropower/gen-info/licensing/ solar project a Canadian first,” BC Ministry of Energy, Mines “Coal Production by Type and pre-permits.asp, updated May 5, Daily Commercial News and and Petroleum Resources, Province,” http://coal.ca/content/ 2011, accessed May 2011. Construction Record, http://www. BC Ministry of Forests and attachments/article/62/Coal%20 dcnonl.com/article/id42003, Range, http://www.energyplan. Production%20by%20Type%20 49

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References gov.bc.ca/bioenergy/PDF/ rmotc.doe.gov/geothermal.html, pdf, published May 2010, html, updated April 2011, BioenergyInfoGuide.pdf, accessed accessed May 3, 2011. accessed May 2011. accessed May 2011. March 2011. [40] Borealis GeoPower, 2011, [44] BC Hydro, 2002, Green Energy [49] EIA, 2010, “U.S. Uranium[36] U.S. DOE, 2010, “Biomass “Swan Hills Heat Recovery Study For British Columbia Phase Reserves – U.S. Forward-Cost Mulit-Year Program Plan,” U.S. Project Proceeding, News, 2: Mainland, British Columbia Uranium Reserves by State, Year- Department of Energy, Office Borealis GeoPower,” http://www. Hydro, Report No. E44, http:// End 2008,” Energy Information of the Biomass Program Energy borealisgeopower.com/news/ www.bchydro.com/etc/medialib/ Administration, http://www.eia. Efficiency and Renewable Energy details/swan-hills-heat-recovery- internet/documents/environment/ gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/reserves/ http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ project-proceeding, published pdf/green_energy_study.Par.0001. ures.html, published July 2010, biomass/pdfs/mypp.pdf, published April 6, 2011. File.greenenergystudy-summary. accessed May 2011. March 2011, accessed June 2, pdf, published October 2002, [41] GEA, 2010, “Canadian [50] Van Gosen, B. S., V. S. Gillerman, 2011. accessed May 2011. Geothermal Energy Association and T. J. Armbrustmacher,[37] Jennejohn, D., 2011, Annual U.S. – Member Project Data Base,” [45] Martin, B., 2005, “What is 2009, “Thorium Deposits of the Geothermal Power Production Geothermal Energy Association, sustainable energy?”, BC U.S. – Energy Resources for the and Development Report, http://www.cangea.ca/images/ Sustainable Energy Association, Future?” U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Energy Association, uploads/Member%20Projects%20 http://www.bcsea.org/learn/ Circular 1336, http://pubs.usgs. http://geo-energy.org/pdf/ Database%20-%20October%20 get-the-facts/renewable-energy- gov/circ/1336/pdf/C1336.pdf, reports/April2011AnnualUS 2010.pdf, published October technologies/tidal-power, published 2009, accessed May Geothermal PowerProductionand 2010, accessed May 2011. published 2005, accessed May 2011. DevelopmentReport.pdf, 2011. [42] MIT, 2006, The Future of [51] National Energy Technology published April 2011, accessed Geothermal Energy: Impact of [46] World Nuclear Association, 2011, Laboratory, Presentation May 2011. Enhanced Geothermal Systems “World Uranium Mining,” http:// “Tracking New Coal-Fired Power[38] Holm, A., L. Blodgett, D. (EGS) on the United States in www.world-nuclear.org/info/ Plants,” January 14, 2011. Jennejohn, and K. Gawell, the 21st Century, Massachusetts inf23.html, updated April 2011, [52] Great River Energy, n.d., 2010, “Geothermal Energy: Institute of Technology, http:// accessed May 2011. “Spiritwood Station,” http:// International Market Update,” geothermal.inel.gov/publications/ [47] World Nuclear Association, 2010, www.greatriverenergy.com/ http://www.geo-energy.org/pdf/ future_of_geothermal_energy.pdf, “Supply of Uranium,” http://www. makingelectricity/newprojects/ reports/GEA_International_ published 2006, accessed May world-nuclear.org/info/inf75.html, spiritwoodstation.html, accessed Market_Report_Final_May_2010. 2011. updated December 2010, accessed June 2011ml pdf, published May 2010, [43] BC Hydro 2010, “Ocean Energy May 2011. accessed May 2011. [53] Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Sector in British Columbia,” [48] World Nuclear Association, 2011, 2011, “Expected New Nuclear[39] U.S. DOE, n.d., Rocky Mountain British Columbia Canada’s Pacific “US Nuclear Fuel Cycle,” http:// Power Plant Applications,” http:// Oilfield Testing Center (RMOTC), Gateway, http://www.empr.gov. www.world-nuclear.org/info/ nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/ Geothermal Testing¸ http://www. bc.ca/EAED/InvestmentInfo/ inf41_US_nuclear_fuel_cycle. new-licensing-files/expected-new- Documents/Ocean27May2010. 50

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References rx-applications.pdf updated April [58] AREVA, n.d., “Eagle Rock [63] Ethanol Producer Magazine, php?option=com_content&view 13, 2011, accessed May 2011. Enrichment Facility,” http:// 2011, “Canada Plants,” BBI =article&id=311Itemid, accessed us.areva.com/EN/home-203/ International, http://www. June 2011.[54] Centre for Energy, n.d., “Canada eagle-rock-enrichment-facility. ethanolproducer.com/plants/ — Statistics”, Canadian [69] ICF International, 2009, Natural html, accessed May 2011. listplants/Canada/, modified June Centre for Energy Information, Gas Pipeline and Storage 1, 2011, accessed May 2011. http://www.centreforenergy. [59] Uranium Development Infrastructure Projections Through com/FactsStats/Statistics. Partnership, 2009, Capturing [64] WGA, 2009, “2009 Progress 2030, prepared for the INGAA asp?Template=5,0[2], accessed the full potential of the Report to Western Governors”, Foundation Inc., http://www. May 2011. uranium value chain in Western Governors’ Assocation, ingaa.org/File.aspx?id=10509, Saskatchewan, http://www.gov. June 2009, accessed June 2011. published October 20, 2009,[55] EIA, 2011, State Electricity sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia. accessed May 2011. Profiles, Energy Information [65] Canadian Renewable Fuels aspx?mediaId=767&PN=Shared, Administration, DOE/EIA- Association, 2011, http:// [70] National Energy Board, 2011, published March 31, 2009, 0348(01)/2, http://pbadupws.nrc. www.greenfuels.org/uploads/ “Fact Sheet: Challenges for accessed May 2011. gov/docs/ML1113/ML111361080. documents/crfabiodiese Future Natural Gas Deliverability pdf, released April 15, 2011,, [60] Government of Alberta, plantsandmap13-05-11.pdf, in Canada,” http://www.neb-one. accessed May 2011. 2010, Fact Sheet: “Talk about published May 13, 2011, accessed gc.ca/clf-nsi/rnrgynfmtn/nrgyrprt/ upgrading and refining,” http:// June 2011. ntrlgs/ntrlgsdlvrblty20112013/[56] Canadian Nuclear Safety www.energy.alberta.ca/Oil/ fctsht1114-eng.pdf, published Commission, 2010, “Bruce [66] North American Electric pdfs/FSRefiningUpgrading.pdf, May 2011, accessed May 2011. Power Alberta – Withdrawn Reliability Corporation, published October 2010, accessed Application,” http://www. NERC Interconnections Map. [71] Dogwood Initiative, 2009, May 2011. nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/ http://www.nerc.com/page. Citizens Guide to Liquid Natural readingroom/newbuilds/ [61] Navingo BV, 2011, “Canada: php?cid=1|9|119, accessed May Gas in British Columbia, withdrawnapplications/index.cfm, JV Proposes Second Kitimat 2011. http://dogwoodinitiative.org/ modified May 20, 2010, accessed LNG Terminal,” http://www. publications/reports/lngguide, [67] Edison Electric Institute, 2011, May 2011. lngworldnews.com/canada-jv- published May 2009, accessed Transmission Projects: At a proposes-second-kitimat-lng- May 2011.[57] Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Glance, http://www.eei.org/ terminal/, posted March 29, 2011, 2011, “Expected New Nuclear ourissues/ElectricityTransmission/ [72] ONEOK Partners, 2011, “Bakken accessed May 2011. Power Plant Applications,” http:// Documents/Trans_Project_lowres. Shale Overview and Field Trip”, nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/ [62] DKRW Advanced Fuels, pdf, published March 2011, http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ new-licensing-files/expected-new- 2011, “Medicine Bow Fuel accessed May 25, 2011. External.File?item=UGFyZW50S rx-applications.pdf updated April & Power LLC,” http://www. UQ9NDEzMjg0N3xDaGlsZElEP [68] WGA, n.d., “Regional 13, 2011, accessed May 2011. dkrwadvancedfuels.com/fw/ TQyOTc1M3xUeXBlPTI=&t=1, Transmission Expansion Project,” main/Medicine_Bow-111.html, June 6-7, 2011, accessed June Western Governor’s Association, published 2011, accessed May 2011. http://www.westgov.org/indes. 2011. 51

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References[73] EIA, 2011, “Country Analysis oil/weyburn.html, accessed May pes+and+Regions&ots=kE0lMNA published June 2008, accessed Briefs: Canada,” Energy 2011. YZC&sig=l_SNc2Za1QNpVni6D May 2011. Information Administration, isleboY408#v=onepage&q&f=fal [79] DOE, 2006, Energy Demands [86] IEA, 2010, “Combined Heat http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ se, accessed May 2011. on Water Resources: Report to and Power,” Energy Technology cabs/Canada/pdf.pdf, published Congress on the Interdependency [82] WGA, 2010, “Initiative on Systems Analysis Program April 2011, accessed May 2011. of Energy and Water, U.S. Wildlife Corridors and Crucial (ETSAP), http://www.etsap.[74] Kinder Morgan, 2008, “Trans Department of Energy, http:// Habitat,” Western Governors’ org/E-techDS/PDF/E04-CHP-GS- Mountain Expansion (TMX) www.sandia.gov/energy-water/ Association, http://www.westgov. gct_ADfinal.pdf , accessed June Proposal,” http://www. docs/121-RptToCongress- org/wildlife, accessed May 2011. 2011. kindermorgan.com/business/ EWwEIAcomments-FINAL. [83] EPA, 2011, 2011 U.S. Greenhouse [87] AESO, 2010, “2010 Annual canada/tmx_documentation/ pdf, published December 2006, Gas Emissions And Sinks: Market Statistics Data brochure_single_page.pdf, accessed May 2011. 1990-2009, U.S. Environmental File,” http://www.aeso.ca/ published Summer 2008, accessed [80] NETL, 2009, Existing Plants Protection Agency, USEPA downloads/2010_Annual_ May 2011. Program: Energy – Water #430-R-11-005, http://epa. Market_Stats_Data_File.xls,[75] Enbridge Northern Gateway R&D, Technology Roadmap & gov/climatechange/emissions/ accessed June 2011. Pipeline, 2011, “Northern Program Plan, U.S. Department of usinventoryreport.html, published [88] USDA, 2011, Crop Production Gateway at a Glance,” http:// Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, February 2011, accessed May 2010 Summary, U.S. Department northerngateway.ca/project-info/ National Energy Technology 2011. of Agriculture, National northern-gateway-at-a-glance, Laboratory, http://www.netl.doe. [84] CAPP, 2010, Environmental Agricultural Statistics Service, accessed May 2011. gov/technologies/coalpower/ Challenges and Progress in ISSN: 1057-7823, http:// ewr/water/pdfs/Technology%20[76] Government of Alberta, 2011, Canada’s Oil Sands, Canadian usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/ Roadmap%20and%20 “CCS Major Initiatives,” www. Association of Petroleum usda/current/CropProdSu/ Program%20Plan.pdf, published energy.alberta.ca/Initiatives/1897. Producers, http://www.capp.ca/ CropProdSu-01-12-2011_new_ November 2009, accessed May asp, updated June 1, 2011, GetDoc.aspx?DocID=135721, format.pdf, published January 2011. accessed June 2011. accessed May 2011. 2011, accessed May 2011. [81] Forman, R. T. T., 2001,[77] Office of Petroleum Reserves, [85] IPCC, 2008, “Chapter 5: [89] AAFC, 2010, “Wheat Sector Landscape mosaics: The ecology n.d., Department of Energy, www. Analysing regional aspects Profile, Part One: Overview,” of landscapes and regions, fossil.energy.gov/programs/ of climate change and water Market Outlook Report, 2, Cambridge University Press, reserves/npr/CO2_EOR_Fact_ resources,” Climate Change Agriculture and Agri-Food Cambridge, United Kingdom, Sheet.pdf, accessed May 2011. and Water, Bates, B.C., Z.W. Canada. http://www.agr.gc.ca/ http://books.google.com/books?hl Kundzewicz, S. Wu, and J.P. pol/mad-dam/index_e.php?s1=[78] Cenovus Energy, n.d., =en&lr=&id=sSRNU_5P5nwC& Palutikof, Eds., Intergovernmental pubs&s2=rmar&s3=php&page “Operations: Weyburn,” http:// oi=fnd&pg=PR13&dq=Forman,+ Panel on Climate Change, http:// =rmar_02_06_2010-11-26#alt, www.cenovus.com/operations/ R.+T.+T.,+2001,+Landscape+Mo www.ipcc.ch/pdf/technical- published November 26, 2010, saics:+The+ecology+of+Landsca papers/ccw/chapter5.pdf, accessed May 2011. 52

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References[90] Huang, W-Y, 2009, Factors pdf, October 10, 2007, accessed [97] EIA, 2011, Annual Energy of/2007/1084/, updated March 29, Contributing to the Recent May 2011. Outlook 2011, U.S. Energy 2007, accessed May 2011. Increase in U.S. Fertilizer Prices, Information Administration, DOE/ [94] Scown, C. D., A. Horvath, [2] NETL, n.d., “Technologies: 2002-08, U. S. Department EIA-0383. T. E. McKone, 2011, “Water Nation Carbon Sequestration of Agriculture, AR-33, http:// Footprint of U.S. Transportation [98] National Energy Board, 2009, Database and Geographic www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/ Fuels,” Environmental Science & Canada’s Energy Future: Information System AR33/AR33.pdf, February 2009, Technology, Vol. 45, pp. 2541- Infrastructure Changes and (NATCARB),” National accessed May 2011. 2553, http://www.library.nhs.uk/ Challenges to 2020 – An Energy Energy Technology Laboratory,[91] Schnepf, R., 2004, Energy Use booksandjournals/details.aspx?t Market Assessment October 2009, Department of Energy, http:// in Agriculture: Background =water+footprint&stfo=True&s http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/ www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/ and Issues, Congressional c=bnj.ovi.amed,bnj.ovi.bnia,bnj. rnrgynfmtn/nrgyrprt/nrgyftr/2009/ carbon_seq/natcarb/index.html, Research Service (CRS) Report ebs.cinahl,bnj.ovi.emez,bnj. nfrstrctrchngchllng2010/ accessed May 2011. for Congress, http://www. ebs.heh,bnj.ovi.hmic,bnj.pub. nfrstrctrchngchllng2010-eng.pdf. nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/ MED,bnj.ovi.psyh&p=1&sf=srt. [M3] Figure 4: Natural Gas [99] Holden, M., 2011, Looking [1] EIA, 2009, “Coalbed Methane crs/RL32677.pdf, published publicationdate&sfld=fld. Overseas: Market Potential and Fields, Lower 48 States,” Energy November 19, 2004, accessed title&sr=bnj.ovi&did=ovid. Policy Considerations for West Information Administration, May 2011. com:/bib/embase/ Coast Pipeline Development, http://www.eia.gov/oil_gas/rpd/ 2011179082&pc=5&id=3,[92] CFI, 2010, “Statistics Canada Presented for the CanadaWest published April 1, 2011, accessed coalbed_gas.jpg, updated April 8, – Service Bulletin: Fertilizer Foundation, April 2011. May 2011. 2009, accessed May 2011. Shipments Survey 2010,” Canada Foundation for Innovation, [95] Nelson, L., A. Gribik, V. Maio, WEC Map References [2] EIA, 2011, “North American Catalogue no. 21-022-X, http:// M. McKellar, M. Patterson, and Shale Plays,” Energy Information www.cfi.ca/_documents/21-022- R. Wood, 2010, Integration of Use for all maps: Administration, http://www.eia. x2010004-eng.pdf, published High Temperature Gas-Cooled [ALL] ArcMap, Version 10.0, gov/oil_gas/rpd/northamer_gas. February 2011, accessed May Reactors into Industrial Process Olympia, WA: Environmental jpg, updated May 9, 2011, 2011. Applications, Idaho National Systems Research Institute, Inc., accessed May 2011. Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID. INL/ http://www.esri.com/, published[93] Frigon, M., 2007, Fertilizers, [3] NETL, n.d., “Technologies: Nation EXT09 16942 Revision 2. 2010, accessed May 2011. Carbon Sequestration Database and Ethanol, and the Peaking of Natural Gas Production [96] EIA, 2010, International Energy Geographic Information System [M2] Figure 2: Crude Oil in Alberta, Parliamentary Outlook 2010, U.S. Energy (NATCARB),” National Energy Information and Research Information Administration [1] Meyer, R., E. D. Attanasi, and P. Technology Laboratory, Department Service, PRB 07-49E, http:// Report #:DOE/EIA-0484. A. Freeman, 2007, “Heavy Oil of Energy, http://www.netl.doe.gov/ www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ and Natural Bitumen Resources technologies/carbon_seq/natcarb/ ResearchPublications/prb0749-e. in Geological Basins of the index.html, accessed May 2011. World,” United States Geological Survey, http://pubs.usgs.gov/ 53

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References[M4] Figure 5: Coal Geological Survey, http:// codectec/En/2009-053_marine/ main/Medicine_Bow-111.html,[1] U.S. DOI, 2011, “Raw Data lc.gapanalysisprogram.com/ CHC-TR-041.pdf, published April accessed May 2011. Download,” nationalatlas.gov, landcoverviewer/Downloads. 2006, accessed May 2011. [5] Biodiesel, n.d., “NBB Member U.S. Department of the Interior, aspx, published February 2010, [M11] Figure 12: Uranium Plants: Biodiesel Locator,” http://www.nationalatlas.gov/ accessed May 2011. National Biodiesel Board, atlasftp.html?openChapters=chpg [1] Natural Resources Canada, 2009, [M9] Figure 10: Geothermal http://www.biodiesel.org/ eol#chpgeol, updated January 27, “Uranium Resources,” The Atlas buyingbiodiesel/plants/biomaps/ 2011, accessed May 2011. [1] SMU, n.d., “Geothermal Map of of Canada, http://atlas.nrcan. biomaps.shtm#app=d088&4810- North America, 2004,” Southern gc.ca/site/english/maps/economic/ selectedIndex=2&fd8d-[M5] Figure 6: Waterways Methodist University, http://smu. energy/uranium, updated selectedIndex=3&65ce-[1] ArcMap, Version 10.0, Olympia, edu/geothermal/2004NAMap/ September 2, 2009, accessed May selectedIndex=0, accessed May WA: Environmental Systems 2004NAmap.htm, accessed May 2011. 2011. Research Institute, Inc., http:// 2011. [M12] Figure 15: Liquid Fuels [6] Biodiesel, n.d., “NBB Member www.esri.com/, published 2010, [M10] Figure 11: Tidal/Coastal accessed May 2011. [1] Ethanol Producer Magazine, n.d., Plants,” http://www.biodiesel.org/ [1] Cornett, A., 2006, “Figure 11: “U.S. & Canada Fuel Ethanol buyingbiodiesel/plants/biomaps/[M6] Figure 7: Wind Annual mean wave power for Plant Map,” Mansfield Fuels, biomaps.shtm#app=d088&4810-[1] Wind US Wind Data: 3Tier, sites in the NE Pacific,” in BBI International, http://www. selectedIndex=2&fd8d- Renewable Energy Risk Analysis, Inventory of Canada’s Marine ethanolproducer.com/plants/map/, selectedIndex=3&65ce- http://www.3tier.com/en/, Renewable Energy Resources, accessed May 2011. selectedIndex=0, accessed June accessed May 2011. Canadian Hydraulics Centre, 2011. [2] Ethanol Producer Magazine, Natural Resources Canada, http://[2] Canada: Environment Canada, 2011, “Canada Plants,” BBI canmetenergy-canmetenergie. [M13] Figure 17: Transmission Lines 2008, “Canadian Wind Energy International, http://www. nrcan-rncan.gc.ca/fichier.php/ [1] SaskPower, n.d., “Available Atlas,” http://www.windatlas.ca/ ethanolproducer.com/plants/ codectec/En/2009-053_marine/ Generation,” http://www. en/maps.php, updated August 21, listplants/Canada/, updated June CHC-TR-041.pdf, published April saskpower.com/about_us/ 2008, accessed May 2011. 2, 2011, accessed May 2011. 2006, accessed May 2011. generation_transmission_ [3] Kitimat LNG, “Project distribution/assets/system_map.[M7] Figure 8: Solar [2] Cornett, A., 2006, “Figure Description,” http://www. pdf, accessed May 2011.No reference for this. We took various 10: Potential Tidal Current kitimatlngfacility.com/Project/ background info and then made Resource Sites - Pacific Coast,” [M14] Figure 18: Gas Pipelines project_description.aspx, accessed our own. in Inventory of Canada’s Marine May 2011. [1] The World Factbook, 2008, Renewable Energy Resources, “North America Pipelines[M8] Figure 9: Biomass Canadian Hydraulics Centre, [4] DKRW Advanced Fuels, map – Crude Oil (petroleum)[1] Gap Analysis Program, Natural Resources Canada, http:// n.d., “Medicine Bow Fuel pipelines – Natural Gas pipelines 2010, “National Land Cover canmetenergy-canmetenergie. & Power LLC,” http://www. – Products pipelines,” Information Gas Analysis Project,” U.S. nrcan-rncan.gc.ca/fichier.php/ dkrwadvancedfuels.com/fw/ Technology Associates, http:// 54

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References www.theodora.com/pipelines/ http://www.spectraenergy.com/ [M15] Figure 20: Oil Pipelines transcanada.com/cushing.html, north_america_oil_gas_and_ Operations/New-Projects/, [1] EIA, n.d., “About U.S. Natural updated March 2, 2011, accessed products_pipelines.html, updated accessed May 2011. Gas Pipelines – Transporting May 2011. May 6, 2008, accessed May 2011. Natural Gas,” http://www.eia. [8] Ruby Pipeline LLC, 2010, [7] Enbridge, 2011, “Enbridge[2] Centre for Energy, n.d., “Energy “Ruby Location Map,” http:// gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/ Expansion: Southern Access,” Facts & Statistics, Maps: North www.rubypipeline.com/docs/ analysis_publications/ngpipeline/ http://www.transcanada.com/ America,” Canadian Centre for RubyOverviewMap.pdf, ngpipeline_maps.html, accessed cushing.html, accessed May 2011. Energy Information, http://www. published June 18, 2010, accessed May 2011. [8] Plains Midstream Canada, n.d., centreforenergy.com/FactsStats/ May 2011. [2] Centre for Energy, n.d., “Energy “Rainbow Pipeline II Project,” MapsNorthAmerica/, accessed Facts & Statistics, Maps: North [9] Ruby Pipeline LLC, n.d., “Ruby http://plainsmidstream.com/assets/ May 2011. America,” Canadian Centre for Map,” http://www.rubypipeline. files/Rainbow%20PipelineII_[3] Alaska Pipeline Project, n.d., com/docs/Ruby_Map.pdf, Energy Information, http://www. ProjectMap.pdf, accessed May “Proposed Pipeline Route,” http:// accessed May 2011. centreforenergy.com/FactsStats/ 2011. www.thealaskapipelineproject. MapsNorthAmerica/, accessed [10] TransCanada, 2010, “Bison May 2011. [9] CEPA, 2007, “Maps,” Canadian com/docs/alaska_pipeline_ Pipeline,” Bison Pipeline LLC, Energy Pipeline Association, project_map.pdf, accessed May [3] TransCanada, 2011, “Keystone http://bisonpipelinellc.com/, http://plainsmidstream.com/assets/ 2011. Pipeline Project,” TransCanada published November 2010, files/Rainbow%20PipelineII_[4] MacKenzie Gas Project, n.d., accessed May 2011. PipeLines Limited, http://www. ProjectMap.pdf, accessed May “Main Map,” http://www. transcanada.com/keystone.html, 2011. [11] Kern River Gas Transmission updated May 31, 2011, accessed mackenziegasproject.com/ Company, 2011, “Expansion June 2011. [10] Pembina, 2007, “Growth theProject/overview/mainMap. Projects: Apex Expansion,” Projects: Branching Out,” http:// html, accessed May 2011. [4] TransCanada, 2011, “Bakken http://www.kernrivergas.com/ plainsmidstream.com/assets/[5] TransCanada, n.d., “Horn River InternetPortal/Desktop.aspx, Marketlink Project,” TransCanada files/Rainbow%20PipelineII_ Map,” http://www.transcanada. accessed May 2011. PipeLines Limited, http://www. ProjectMap.pdf, accessed May com/docs/Media_Centre/Horn_ transcanada.com/keystone.html, 2011. [12] Colorado Interstate Gas, 2009, updated March 2, 2011, accessed River_Map.pdf, accessed May “High Plains Expansion Project,” May 2011. [11] Enbridge, 2011, “Southern 2011. El Paso, http://www.elpaso.com/ Lights,” http://www.enbridge-[6] Pacific Northern Gas Ltd, n.d., highplains/default.shtm, accessed [5] Ziola, A., and D. Harrison, 2011, expansion.com/expansion/main. “Systems Map,” http://www.png. May 2011. Bakken Shale Overview and Field aspx?id=1216&tmi=491&tmt=4, ca/company_map.cfm, accessed Trip, Oneok Partners, June 6–7, accessed May 2011. [13] Wyoming Interstate, 2006, 2011. May 2011. “Kanda Lateral and Mainline [12] Enbridge, 2011, “Alberta[7] Spectra Energy Corp., 2011, Expansion,” El Paso, http://www. [6] TranCanada, 2011, “Cushing Clipper,” http://www.enbridge- “New Projects: We’re Meeting elpaso.com/kanda/default.shtm, Marketlink Project,” TransCanada expansion.com/expansion/main. the Needs for Natural Gas Use,” accessed May 2011. PipeLines Limited, http://www. 55

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix A — References aspx?id=1218&tmi=292&tmt=4, http://www.dakotagas.com/Gas_ [7] Enhance Energy Inc., “Alberta [M17] Figure 22: Railways accessed May 2011. Pipeline/CO2_Pipeline/index. Carbon Trunk Line,” http://www. [1] NRCAN, 2008, “The Atlas of html, accessed May 2011. enhanceenergy.com/co2_pipeline/ Canada,” Natural Resources[13] Enbridge, 2011, “North Dakota index.html, accessed May 2011. Canada, http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/ System Expansion Phase [2] EMFI, n.d., “ChevronTexaco’s 6,” http://www.enbridge- Rangley Oil Field Operations,” [8] Shell, n.d., “About Quest – Quest site/english/maps/economic/ expansion.com/expansion/main. Energy and Minerals Field Carbon Capture and Storage,” transportation/pm_r, updated aspx?id=6576&tmi=408&tmt=4, Institute, http://emfi.mines.edu/ http://www.shell.ca/home/content/ February 19, 2008, accessed May accessed May 2011. emfi2005/ChevronTexaco.pdf, can-en/aboutshell/our_business/ 2011. accessed May 2011. business_in_canada/upstream/ [2] U.S. DOI, “May Layer Info:[14] Enbridge, 2011, “Project oil_sands/quest/, accessed May Railroads of the United States,” Info,” Enbridge Northern [3] Kinder Morgan, 2011, “Sheep 2011. U.S. Department of the Interior, Gateway Pipelines, http://www. Mountain Pipeline,” http://www. northerngateway.ca/project-info/ kindermorgan.com/business/CO2/ [9] Shell, 2010, “Quest CCS Project,” http://www.nationalatlas.gov/mld/ route-map, accessed May 2011. transport_sheepmtn.cfm, accessed http://www.shell.ca/home/content/ railrdl.html, updated January 27, May 2011. can-en/aboutshell/our_business/ 2011, accessed May 2011.[15] Kinder Morgan, 2011, “Kinder business_in_canada/upstream/oil_ Morgan – Canada: Projects,” [4] Kinder Morgan, 2011, “Kinder [M18] Figure 23: Eco-regions sands/quest/, published January http://www.kindermorgan.com/ Morgan CO2 – McElmo Dome,” [1] EPA, 2011, “Ecoregions of North 2010, accessed May 2011. business/canada/projects.cfm, http://www.kindermorgan.com/ America,” U.S. Environmental accessed May 2011. business/co2/supply_mcelmo.cfm, [10] Swan Hills Synfuels, 2009, Protection Agency, Western accessed May 2011. “Projects – Swan Hills ISCG/ Ecology Division, http://www.[16] Kinder Morgan, 2008, “Trans Sagitawah Power Project,” http:// epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/ Mountain Expansion Proposal,” [5] Denbury Resources Inc., www.shell.ca/home/content/ na_eco.htm, updated April 20, http://www.kindermorgan. 2010, “Branching Out,” WY can-en/aboutshell/our_business/ 2011, accessed May 2011. com/business/canada/TMX_ Pipeline Authority, http://www. business_in_canada/upstream/ Documentation/brochure_single_ wyopipeline.com/information/ oil_sands/quest/, accessed May page.pdf, published Summer presentations/2010/October/ 2011. 2008, accessed May 2011. Denbury_CO2update.pdf, published October 26, 2010, [11] Project Pioneer, n.d., “Project[17] UNEV, 2007, “UNEV Pipeline, accessed May 2011. Pioneer Proposed Pipeline LLC (home page),” http://www. Route,” http://projectpioneer.ca/ unevpipeline.com/default.htm, [6] Enhanced Oil Resources, 2007, sites/default/files/Project-Pioneer- accessed May 2011. “Company Goals and Objectives,” Proposed-Pipeline-Route.jpeg, http://www.enhancedoilres.com/[M16] Figure 21: CO2 Pipelines accessed May 2011. goals.htm, accessed May 2011.[1] Dakota Gasification Company, n.d., “CO2 Pipeline,” Basin Electric Power Cooperative, 56

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 1. Crude oil and oil sands production data for 2009. Table 2. Conventional crude oil reserve estimates. Total Production Total Production Remaining Established ReservesState/Province Thousands of Barrels/Day of Oil Sands State/Province Millions Barrels Year of EstimateColorado 78 0 Colorado 279 2009Montana 76 0 Montana 343 2009North Dakota 218* 0 North Dakota 1,046 2009South Dakota 5 0 Utah 398 2009Utah 63 0 Wyoming 583 2009Wyoming 141 0 Alberta 1,437 2008Alberta 1,650 1,490 British Columbia 104 2008British Columbia 45 0 Saskatchewan 1,229 2008Saskatchewan 57 0 WEC Total 5,419 WEC Total 2,333 1,490 U.S. Total 20,682 2009 U.S. Total 5,361 Canada Total 5,380 2008 Canada Total 2,722 1,490 EIA, 2010, “Petroleum and Other Liquids – Crude Oil Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production,” Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_pres_a_EPC0_R01_* he production of oil in North Dakota is rapidly increasing. In 2010 North Dakota produced an T mmbbl_a.htm, published December 30, 2010, accessed May 2011. average of nearly 310,000 barrels per day. https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/2010monthlystats.pdf UGS, n.d., “Proved Reserves of Crude Oil and Natural Gas Liquids in Utah, 1945–2009,” UtahEIA, 2010, “Petroleum and Other Liquids – Crude Oil Production,” U.S. Energy Information Geological Survey, http://geology.utah.gov/emp/energydata/statistics/petroleum3.0/pdf/T3.2%20&%20Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbblpd_a.htm, published July F3.1%20&%20F3.2.pdf, accessed May 2011.29, 2010, accessed May 2010. Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/EIA, n.d., “International Energy Statistics – Petroleum – Production,” U.S. Energy Information Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdfAdministration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=5&pid=57&aid=1&cid=regions&syid=2006&eyid=2010&unit=TBPD, accessed May 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdf 57

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 3. Green River Formation oil shale reserves. Table 5. Natural gas estimated remaining established reserves for 2009. Resource in Place State/Province Billions Cubic FeetBasin/State Trillions BOE Colorado 23,058Colorado (Piceance Basin) 1.53 Montana 976Utah (Uinta Basin) 1.32 North Dakota 1,079Wyoming (Washakie Basin) 0.30 Utah 7,257 Green River Formation Total 3.15 Wyoming 35,283Fraction of world resource in 69.896 Alberta 37,862Green River British Columbia 18,866USGS, 2010, “Fact Sheet 2010–2030: Assessment of In-Place Oil Shale Resources of the Green RiverFormation, Uinta Basin, Utah and Colorado,” United States Geological Survey, http://pubs.usgs.gov/ Saskatchewan 2,861fs/2010/3010/, posted May 7, 2010, accessed May 2011. WEC Total 127,242USGS, 2010, “In-Place Oil Shale Resources Underlying Federal Lands in the Piceance Basin, WesternColorado,” United States Geological Survey, http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3041/pdf/FS10-3041.pdf, U.S. Total 272,509published June 2010, accessed May 2011. Canada Total 61,005 E IA, 2010, “Natural Gas – Natural Gas Reserves Summary as of Dec. 31,” Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_enr_sum_a_EPG0_R11_BCF_a.htm, publishedTable 4. Heavy oils. December 30, 2010, accessed May 2011. AGA, 2009, “Natural Gas Reserves, Producing Gas Wells,” American Gas Association, http://www. Remaining Oil in Place aga.org/Kc/analyses-and-statistics/statistics/annualstats/reserves/Documents/Table2-3-2-4.pdf,State/Province Millions Barrels (U.S.) Year of Estimate accessed May 2011.Colorado 17 2004Montana 52 2004Utah 55 2004Wyoming 1,124 2004Alberta + Saskatchewan 549,400 2004 WEC Total 550,648Utah Heavy Oil Program, Institute for Clean and Secure Energy, and the University of Utah, 2007,A Technical, Economic, and Legal Assessment of North American Heavy Oil, Oil Sands, and OilShale Resources, Prepared for the Department of Energy, http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/publications/oilshale/HeavyOilLowRes.pdf, published September 2007, accessed May 2011 58

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 6. Annual natural gas production. Table 7. Coal bed methane estimated remaining established reserves.State/Province Millions Cubic Feet Year of Production State/Province Billions Cubic Feet Year of EstimateColorado 1,511,654 2009 Colorado 7,348 2009Montana 105,251 2009 Montana 37 2009North Dakota 92,489 2009 Utah 725 2009South Dakota 12,927 2009 Wyoming 2,328 2009Utah 449,511 2009 Alberta 2,260 2009Wyoming 2,536,336 2009 British Columbia 90,000 2007Alberta 4,400,000 2009 Saskatchewan 1,600 Not availableBritish Columbia 1,100,000 2008 WEC Total 104,298 2009Saskatchewan 269,553 2009 U.S. Total 21,875 WEC Total 10,477,721 Canada Total 143,860 U.S. Total 26,013,115 2009 E IA, 2010, “Coalbed Methane,” Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ ng_enr_coalbed_a_EPG0_R51_Bcf_a.htm, published December 30, 2010, accessed May 2011. Canada Total 5,633,000 2009 E PA, 2010, Coal Mine Methane Country Profiles, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, http://www. World Total 134,307,000 2009 globalmethane.org/documents/toolsres_coal_overview_ch6.pdf, published December 2010, accessed May 2011.E IA, 2010, “International Energy Statistics – Natural Gas – Production,” Energy InformationAdministration, http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid=3&pid=26&aid=1, G overnment of Saskatchewan, 2010, “Our Oil & Gas Resources, Natural Gas in Coal,” http://www.accessed May 2011. ir.gov.sk.ca/Default.aspx?DN=5108,3384,2936,Documents#sect1d, accessed June 2011.G overnment of Alberta, 2011, “Energy – Natural Gas Statistics,” http://www.energy.alberta.ca/ Cohen, D. M., n.d., “Coalbed methane activity cools off,” World Oil Online, http://www.worldoil.com/NaturalGas/727.asp, updated June 1, 2011, accessed June 2011. Article.aspx?id=38424, accessed June 2011.S askatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources, 2008, “Natural Gas in Saskatchewan Fact Sheet,”http://www.er.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?DocID=6552,3384,5460,2936,Documents&MediaID=20543&Filename=Fact+Sheet+-+Gas+in+Sask+(Sept+8+2008).pdf, published September 8,2008, accessed May 2011.B ritish Columbia – Canada’s Pacific Gateway, 2010, British Columbia Natural Gas and Petroleum:Yours to Explore 2010, http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/OG/oilandgas/royalties/infdevcredit/Documents/YourstoExplore18Mar2010web.pdf, published March 18, 2010, accessed May 2011. 59

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 8. Shale gas estimated remaining established reserves.State/Province Billions Cubic Feet Year of EstimateColorado 4 2009Montana 137 2009North Dakota 368 Not availableAlberta 40,000 2009British Columbia 23,000 2009Saskatchewan 10,600 2008 WEC Total 74,109EIA, 2010, “Table 14. Shale Gas Proved Reserves, Reserves Changes, and Production, Wet after LeaseSeparation, 2009,” http://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/data_publications/crude_oil_natural_gas_reserves/current/pdf/table14.pdf, accessed May 2011.G overnment of Alberta, 2011, “Shale Gas,” http://www.energy.alberta.ca/NaturalGas/944.asp,updated June 1, 2011.N ational Energy Board, 2008, Saskatchewan’s Ultimate Potential for Conventional Natural Gas,Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources, http://www.neb.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rnrgynfmtn/nrgyrprt/ntrlgs/ssktchwnltmtptntl2008/ssktchwnltmtptntl2008-eng.html#smmr, published November 2008,accessed May 2011. 60

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 9. Coal reserve estimates. Recoverable at Active/ Producing Mines Coal Recoverable Coal Demonstrated Reserve Reserves Reserves BaseState/Province Million Short Tons Million Short Ton Million Short Ton Year of EstimateColorado 314 9,634 15,981 2009Idaho 0 2 4 2009Montana 855 74,770 119,017 2009North Dakota 1,208 6,792 8,903 2009South Dakota 0 277 366 2009Utah 201 2,631 5,203 2009Wyoming 6,917 38,743 61,563 2009Alberta 1,221 Not available Not available 2009British Columbia 3,437 Not available Not available 2008Saskatchewan 1,433 Not available Not available Not available WEC Total 15,586 Not available Not available U.S. Total 17,474 260,551 486,102 Canada Total 7,251 Not available Not availableEIA, 2010, “Table 15. Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines, Estimated Recoverable Reserves, and Demonstrated Reserve Base by Mining Method,2009 (Million Short Tons),” Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines, Estimated Recoverable Reserves, and Demonstrated Reserve Base by MiningMethod, Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA-0584, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table15.html, published October 1, 2010, accessedMay 2011.E nergy Resources Conservation Board, June 2011, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2010 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2011-2010. http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_current.pdf.Ryan, B., 2002, “Coal in British Columbia,” Ministry of Energy and Mines, http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/Coal/CoalBC/Pages/default.aspx,accessed May 2011. 61

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 10. Coal production. Produced CoalState/Province Million Short Tons/Year Year of EstimateColorado 28.3 2009Montana 39.5 2009North Dakota 29.9 2009Utah 21.7 2009Wyoming 431.1 2009Alberta 34.3 2009British Columbia 23.2 2009Saskatchewan 11.6 2009 WEC Total 619.6 2009 U.S. Total 1,074.9 2009 Canada Total 69.3 2009 World Total 7514.7 2009EIA, 2010, Annual Coal Report, Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/acr_sum.html, updated February 3, 2011, accessed May 2011.N atural Resources Canada, n.d., “Coal Production by Type and Province,” http://coal.ca/content/attachments/article/62/Coal%20Production%20by%20Type%20and%20Province.pdf, accessed May2011. 62

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 11. Installed hydropower capacity generation and hydropower potential. Current Installed Hydropower Capacity Generation Hydropower Potential Feasible 2009 Annual 2009 Total Feasible Additional Hydropower Installed Hydropower Annual Hydropower % Additional Annual Potential Generation Number of Capacity Generation Generation* of Total Annual Capacity Generation Compared to 2009State/Province Plants (MW) (GWh) (GWh) Generation (MW) (GWh) GenerationColorado 57 666 2,058 50,738 4% 1,782 7,805 379%Idaho 127 2,346 9,057 12,172 78% 4,244 18,589 196%Montana 38 2,660 9,142 26,348 35% 3,338 14,620 160%North Dakota 1 486 1,475 34,196 4% 80 350 24%South Dakota 6 1,463 4,319 8,083 53% 238 1,042 24%Utah 67 256 697 43,404 2% 802 3,513 504%Wyoming 20 304 853 45,916 2% 1,014 4,441 521%Alberta 21 900 1,385 69,262 2% 11,775 53,000 3827%British Columbia 30 11,000 56,447 63,210 89% 33,137 145,140 257%Saskatchewan 7 853 3,000 17,900 17% 3,955 17,323 577% WEC Total 374 20,934 88,883 371,229 24% 60,365 265,823 299%* From all electricity sources.Canadian Hydropower Association, 2008, Hydropower in Canada: Past Present and Future, http://www.canhydropower.org/hydro_e/pdf/hydropower_past_present_future_en.pdf, accessed June 2011.BChydro Regeneration. 2010. Our Facilities. http://www.bchydro.com/about/our_system/generation/our_facilities.html. accessed June 2011.Statistics Canada, 2011, Report on Energy Supply and Demand in Canada: 2009 Preliminary, Minister of Industry, Catalogue no. 57-003-X, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57-003-x/57-003-x2009000-eng.pdf, publishedMay 2011, accessed June 2011.EIA, 2011, “Table 1.13.B. Net Generation from Hydroelectric (Conventional) Power by State by Sector, Year-to-Date through December 2010 and 2009,” Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_13_b.html, published April 14, 2011, accessed May 2011.EIA, 2011, “Table 1.6.A. Net Generation by State by Sector, December 2010 and 2009,” http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_6_a.html, Energy Information Administration, published April 14, 2011,accessed May 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdf, accessed June 2011. 63

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 12. Wind power capacity. Table 13. Grid-connected solar power capacity. Potential Capacity Installed Capacity Installed Solar CapacityState/Province (MW) (MW) State/Province (MW)Colorado 387,219 1,244 Colorado 35.7Idaho 18,075 146 Idaho 0.1Montana 944,004 375 Montana 0.7North Dakota 770,195 1,203 North Dakota <0.1South Dakota 882,412 313 South Dakota <0.1Utah 13,104 223 Utah 0.2Wyoming 552,773 1,099 Wyoming 0.1Alberta 64,000 591 Alberta <1.0British Columbia 72,000 198 British Columbia <1.0Saskatchewan 42,500 171 Saskatchewan <1.0 WEC Total 3,746,282 5,563 WEC Total 39.9AWEA, 2011, “Installed Wind Capacity by State,” American Wind Energy Association, http://www. CanSIA, 2010, Solar Vision 2025: Beyond Market Competitiveness, Canadian Solar Industrieswindpoweringamerica.gov/docs/installed_wind_capacity_by_state.xls, Accessed April 29, 2011. Association, http://www.cansia.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/solar_vision_2025.pdf, published December 2010, accessed May 2011.Green River Opportunities, n.d., “Wind Power Part 3,” http://www.greentech-opportunities.com/Sector%20Overview/WindPart3, accessed June 2011. Doris, E., J. McLaren, V. Healey, and S. Hockett, 2009, State of the States 2009: Renewable Energy Development and the Role of Policy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL),Pembina, n.d., “Greening the Grid: Powering Alberta’s Future with Renewable Energy,” The Pembina NREL/TP-6A2-46667, http://www.nrel.gov/applying_technologies/state_local_activities/pdfs/tap_Institute, http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/greeningthegrid-fs.pdf, accessed June 2011. webinar_20091118_46667.pdf, published October 2009.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdf 64

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 14. Biomass resources. Forest Residues Mill and Urban Wood Waste Agricultural Residues Grain ProductionState/Providence (BDt/yr) (BDt/yr) (BDt/yr) Green metric tonnes per year (t/yr)Colorado 45,300 605,700 1,997,400 5,518,600Idaho 743,500 2,373,200 2,139,000 4,123,200Montana 717,200 1,655,800 2,130,200 5,448,300North Dakota 29,200 74,400 7,338,300 21,238,600South Dakota 133,900 271,400 7,213,100 24,145,800Utah 19,000 287,400 88,100 302,700Wyoming 62,900 282,180 112,300 452,600Alberta 4,600,000 724,000 14,500,000 30,098,900British Columbia 11,940,000 1,815,000 143,900 2,167,100Saskatchewan 579,500 2,174,600 17,453,000 46,164,000 WEC Total 18,870,500 10,263,700 53,115,300 139,659,800Government of Alberta, 2010, “Alberta 2009 Crop Season in Review,” Government of Alberta, Agriculture and Rural Development, http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sdd13100?opendocument,published April 27, 2010, accessed March 2011.Knowledge Development Framework, https://bioenergykdf.net/, accessed March 2011.Welling, H. H., and T. J. Shaw, 2007, Energy From Wood Biomass Combustion In Rural Alberta Applications, The Agricultural Policy Framework (APF), A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Initiative, sponsored by theGovernment of Canada and the Government of Alberta, http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/apa11648/$file/alberta_wood_biomass_report.pdf?OpenElement, accessed March 2011.Biocap Canada, 2008, An Information Guide on Pursuing Biomass Energy Opportunities and Technologies in British Columbia for First Nations, Small Communities, Municipalities and Industry, Produced for BCMinistry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, BC Ministry of Forests and Range, http://www.energyplan.gov.bc.ca/bioenergy/PDF/BioenergyInfoGuide.pdf, accessed March 2011.Government of Saskatchewan, 2007, Report on Saskatchewan’s Provincial Forests, http://www.er.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?DocID=10408,5460,2936,Documents&MediaID=26483&Filename=Report+on+Saskatchewan’s+Forests+March+2007.pdf, accessed March 2011.Government of Saskatchewan Department of Agriculture, “Agricultural Statistics Crops- Grains and Oilseeds,” http://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/agriculture_statistics/HBV5_Crop1.asp, accessed March 2011.Natural Resources Canada, “About Uranium,” http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/eneene/sources/uranuc/uranium/aboapr-eng.php, updated July 6, 2009, accessed March 2011. 65

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 15. Geothermal power capacity: current and under development. U.S. Canada WEC CurrentExisting 3,087 0 58Capacity (MW)2010 Annual 14,254 × 103 0 337 × 103Generation(MW-hr) Projects Under DevelopmentNear 1,409 0 198CommercialDevelopments(MW)Initiated 4,398 3 1,097Projects (MW)Jennejohn, D., 2010, US Geothermal Power Production and Development Update, Geothermal EnergyAssociation, http://www.geo-energy.org/pdf/reports/April_2010_US_Geothermal_Industry_Update_Final.pdf, published April 2010, accessed May 2011.EIA, 2011, Electric Power Monthly: February 2011, Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA-0226 (201102). http://www.eia.gov/ftproot/electricity/epm/02261102.pdf, published February 2011,accessed May 2011. 66

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 16. Electric power net capacity by primary energy source in megawatts for 2009. Other PumpedState/Province Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Other Gas a Hydro Renewablesb Other c Storage TotalColorado 5,010 178 5,357 0 666 1,271.0 0 563 13,045.0Idaho 17 5 812 0 2,346 219.0 15 0 3,414.0Montana 2,442 57 200 2 2,660 386.0 0 0 5,747.0North Dakota 4,148 71 15 8 486 1,212.0 0 0 5,940.0South Dakota 497 230 722 0 1,463 320.0 0 0 3,232.0Utah 4,871 25 2,002 0 256 265.0 0 0 7,419.0Wyoming 5,929 7 120 92 304 1,104.0 12 0 7,568.0Alberta 5,971 10 5,201 0 900 914.0 0 0 12,996.0British Columbia 0 0 1,163 0 11,000 290.0 0 0 12,453.0Saskatchewan 1,664 0 1,029 0 8,53 171.2 0 0 3,717.2WEC Total 30,549 583 16,621 102 20,934 6,152.2 27 563 75,531.2a. or U.S. other gas includes blast furnace gas, propane gas, and other manufactured and waste gases derived from fossil fuels. Fb. or U.S. other Renewables includes wood, black liqour, other wood waste, municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts, other biomass, geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic energy, F and wind.c. or U.S. other includes batteries, chemicals, hydrogen, pitch, purchased steam, sulfur, tire-derived fuels and miscellaneous technologies.EIA, 2011, State Electricity Profiles, U.S. Energy Information F Administration, DOE/EIA-0348(01)/2, http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1113/ML111361080.pdf, released April 15, 2011, accessed May 2011.S tatistics Canada, 2011, Report on Energy Supply and Demand in Canada: 2009 Preliminary, Minister of Industry, Catalogue no. 57-003-X, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57-003-x/57-003-x2009000-eng.pdf, publishedMay 2011, accessed June 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdfBChydro Regeneration. 2010. Our Facilties. http://www.bchydro.com/about/our_system/generation/our_facilities.html. accessed June 2011.MOVE: the a/b/c footnotes above the reference list. 67

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 17. Electricity generation in megawatt-hours for 2009. Total Fossil Other PumpedState/Province Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Other Gas a Fuel* Hydropower Renewablesb Storage Otherc Total**Colorado 31,636,023 13,453 13,840,025 0 45,489,501 2,058,215 3,245,973 -108,658 53,411 50,738,442Idaho 82,565 41 1,643,595 0 1,726,201 9,506,510 867,316 0 72,371 12,172,398Montana 15,611,279 490,433 77,762 1,447 16,180,921 9,141,899 915,566 0 110,308 26,348,694North Dakota 29,606,966 45,016 16,606 43,526 29,712,114 1,475,251 3,009,102 0 0 34,196,467South Dakota 3,217,353 8,320 80,334 0 3,306,007 4,319,205 426,756 0 31,318 8,083,286Utah 35,526,126 36,057 6,444,042 27,933 42,034,158 696,991 486,536 0 186,994 43,404,679Wyoming 41,954,266 50,181 488,014 284,361 42,776,822 853,609 2,226,205 0 59,613 45,916,249Alberta 41,557,210 Not available Not available Not available 64,147,500 1,385,000 3,463,100 0 266,400 69,262,000British Columbia Not available Not available Not available Not available 6,764,000 56,446,600 0 0 0 63,210,600Saskatchewan Not available Not available Not available Not available 14,900,000 3,000,000 0 0 0 17,900,000WEC Total 267,037,224 88,883,280 14,640,554 (108,658) 780,415 371,232,815a. or U.S. other gas include blast furnace gas, propane gas, and other manufactured and waste gases derived from fossil fuels. Fb. or U.S. other renewables includes wood, black liqour, other wood waste, municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts, other biomass, geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic energy, F and wind.c. or U.S. other includes non-biogenic municipal waste, batteries, chemicals, hydrogen, pitch, purchased steam, sulfur, tire-derived fuels and miscellaneous technologies. F* The Fossil Fuel column is the total of Coal, Petroleum, Natural Gas and Other gases added together.** The Total column is comprised of Fossil Fuel, Hydropower, Other Renewables, Pumped Storage, and Other.EIA, 2011, State Electricity Profiles, U.S. Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA-0348(01)/2, http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1113/ML111361080.pdf, released April 15, 2011, accessed May 2011.Statistics Canada, 2011, Report on Energy Supply and Demand in Canada: 2009 Preliminary, Minister of Industry, Catalogue no. 57-003-X, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57-003-x/57-003-x2009000-eng.pdf, publishedMay 2011, accessed June 2011.Statistics Canada, 2011, Energy Statistics Handbook: Fourth Quarter 2010, Minister of Industry, Catalogue no. 57-601-X, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57-601-x/57-601-x2010004-eng.pdf, published May 2011,accessed June 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdf, accessed June 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, ST98:Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook. http://www.ercb.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_240_2547145_0_0_18/. accessed June2011.BChydro Regeneration. 2010. Our Facilties. http://www.bchydro.com/about/our_system/generation/our_facilities.html. accessed June 2011. 68

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 18. Petroleum refineries and upgraders capacity as of Sept. 2010. Table 19. Biofuels production capacity. Barrels per BiofuelsState/Province Number of Sites Calendar Day State/Province (U.S. million gal. per year)Colorado 2 102,000 Colorado 148Montana 4 187,600 Idaho 67North Dakota* 1 58,000 Montana 0Utah 5 167,700 North Dakota 497Wyoming 8 204,600 South Dakota 1,003Alberta 3 432,200 Wyoming 13British Columbia 2 64,000 Alberta 225Saskatchewan 2 128,000 British Columbia 6Upgraders Saskatchewan 90Alberta 5 1,209,000 WEC Total 2,049Saskatchewan 1 75,000 Knowledge Development Framework, https://bioenergykdf.net/, accessed March 2011. DOE-EERE, n.d., “Biomass Energy Data Book,” Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and WEC Refining Total 1,344,100 Renewable Energy, http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/biopower.shtml, updated 2010, accessed May 2011. WEC Upgrading Total 1,284,000 Ethanol Producer, 2011, “Canada Plants,” Ethanol Producer Magazine, BBI International, http:// www.ethanolproducer.com/plants/listplants/Canada, updated June 9, 2011, accessed June 2011.* This facility will expand to 58,000 barrels per day capacity in 2012.EIA, 2010, “Ranking of U.S. Refineries: U.S. Refineries Operable Capacity,” Energy InformationAdministration, http://www.eia.gov/neic/rankings/refineries.htm, updated September 2010, accessedMay 2011.Government of Alberta, 2010, “Talk About Upgrading and Refining,” Oil Sands Publications, Videos& Maps, “Talk About” Fact Sheets, http://www.energy.alberta.ca/Oil/pdfs/FSRefiningUpgrading.pdf,published October 2010, accessed May 2011.CPPI, 2011, “About the Industry – Refinery Operations,” Canadian Petroleum Products Institute,http://www.cppi.ca/index_e.php?p=65, accessed May 2011. 69

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 20. Electricity generation in megawatt-hours for renewables 2009. Biomass andState/Province Wind Waste Geothermal Solar Thermal Total Nonhydro* Hydro Total**Colorado 2,942,133 50,528 0 17 2,992,678 2,058,215 5,050,893Idaho 227,028 477,948 10,707 0 715,683 9,506,510 10,222,193Montana 810,815 100,425 0 0 911,240 9,141,899 10,053,139North Dakota 2,756,289 8,453 0 0 2,764,742 1,475,251 4,239,993South Dakota 392,308 5,775 0 0 398,083 4,319,205 4,717,288Utah 64,497 0 279,121 0 343,618 696,991 1,040,609Wyoming 221,382 0 0 0 221,382 853,609 1,074,991Alberta 1,557,900 1,905,200 0 0 3,463,100 1,385,000 4,848,100British Columbia 0 0 0 0 0 56,446,600 56,446,600Saskatchewan 500,000 0 0 0 500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 WEC Total 9,472,352 2,548,329 289,828 17 12,310,526 88,883,280 101,193,806* Nonhydro is the sum of wind, biomass and waste, geothermal, and solar thermal columns.** The total column is Hydro and Nonhydro only.EIA, 2011, State Electricity Profiles, U.S. Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA-0348(01)/2, http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1113/ML111361080.pdf, released April 15, 2011, accessed May 2011.Statistics Canada, 2011, Report on Energy Supply and Demand in Canada: 2009 Preliminary, Minister of Industry, Catalogue no. 57-003-X, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57-003-x/57-003-x2009000-eng.pdf, publishedMay 2011, accessed June 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdfEnergy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, ST98:Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook. http://www.ercb.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_240_2547145_0_0_18/. accessed June2011. 70

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r Appendix B TablesTable 21. Electricity generation capacity in megawatts for renewables 2009. Biomass andState/Province Wind Waste Geothermal Solar Thermal Total Nonhydro* Hydro Total**Colorado 1,244 13 0 14 1,271.0 666 1,937.0Idaho 146 63 10 0 219.0 2,346 2,565.0Montana 375 17 28 0 386.0 2,660 3,046.0North Dakota 1,203 10 0 0 1,212.0 486 1,698.0South Dakota 313 0 0 0 320.0 1,463 1,783.0Utah 223 9 34 0 265.0 256 521.0Wyoming 1,099 0 0 0 1,104.0 304 1,408.0Alberta 591 193 0 0 914.0 900 1,814.0British Columbia 248 190 0 0 290.0 11,000 11,290.0Saskatchewan 171 0 0 0 171.2 853 1,024.2 WEC Total 5,613 495 72 14 6152.2 20,934 27086.2* Nonhydro is the sum of wind, biomass and waste, geothermal, and solar thermal columns.** The total column is Hydro and Nonhydro only.EIA, 2011, State Electricity Profiles, U.S. Energy Information Administration, DOE/EIA-0348(01)/2, http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1113/ML111361080.pdf, released April 15, 2011, accessed May 2011.Statistics Canada, 2011, Report on Energy Supply and Demand in Canada: 2009 Preliminary, Minister of Industry, Catalogue no. 57-003-X, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/57-003-x/57-003-x2009000-eng.pdf, publishedMay 2011, accessed June 2011.Energy Resources Conservation Board, June 2010, Alberta’s Energy Reserves 2009 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2010-2019, ST98-2010, http://www.ercb.ca/docs/products/STs/st98_2010.pdfBChydro Regeneration. 2010. Our Facilities. http://www.bchydro.com/about/our_system/generation/our_facilities.html. accessed June 2011.AWEA, 2011, “Installed Wind Capacity by State,” American Wind Energy Association, http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/docs/installed_wind_capacity_by_state.xls, accessed April 29, 2011. 71

We s t e r n E n e r g y C o r r i d o r GlossaryConventional resources: Hydrocarbon Electricity generation: The process of pro- Kilowatt (kW): One thousand watts. Short ton: A unit of weight equal toresources that can be exploited us- ducing electric energy or the amount of 2,000 pounds. Kilowatthour (kWh): A measure ofing traditional oil and gas extraction electric energy produced by transform- electricity defined as a unit of work or Small-hydro: Refers to upper limittechniques. ing other forms of energy, commonly energy, measured as 1 kilowatt (1,000 capacities of between 20 and 30 MW, expressed in kilowatthours(kWh) orBarrel: A unit of volume equal to 42 watts) of power expended for 1 hour. however, a value of up to 10 MW megawatthours (MWh).U.S. gallons, 35 imperial gallons, or One kWh is equivalent to 3,412 Btu. total capacities is becoming generally159 liters. Energy source: Any substance or natural accepted. Small hydro can be further Megawatt (MW): One million watts of phenomenon that can be consumed or subdivided into mini hydro (usuallyBarrels per calendar day: Measurement electricity. transformed to supply heat or power. defined as <500kW and micro hydroused to describe the amount of crude Megawatthour (MWh): One thousand (<100kW).oil (measured in barrels) produced or Established reserves: Reserves recover- kilowatthours or 1 million watt-hours.consumed by an entity in one day. able under current technology and Technically recoverable reserves: Resources present and anticipated economic con- Metric ton or tonne: A unit of weight which can be produced using currentlyBillion: For this document a billion is ditions specifically proved by drilling, equal to 2,204.6 pounds. available technology.defined as 109 or ‘giga’. testing, or production, plus the portion Micro-hydro: Usually defined as Ultimate recoverable reserves: The totalBiofuels: Liquid fuels and blending of contiguous recoverable reserves <100kW (see Small-hydro). expected recoverable volume fromcomponents produced from biomass that are interpreted to exist from Potential Capacity: The possible in- a well, lease, or field under presentfeedstocks, used primarily for trans- geological, geophysical, or similar stalled capacity that could potentially economic and engineering conditions;portation. information with reasonable certainty. be achieved based on a hydropower synonymous with total recovery.Biomass: Organic nonfossil material of Generation: Process of producing resource assessment. Unconventional resources: Refers to abiological origin constituting a renew- electric energy by transforming other Proven reserves: Quantities, by analysis group of hydrocarbons that requireable energy source. forms of energy; also, the amount of of geological and engineering data, stimulation for the extraction of com-Barrel of oil equivalent (BOE): Unit of electric energy produced, expressed in can be estimated with reasonable mercial volumes.energy based on the approximate kilowatthours. certainty to be commercially recover-energy released by burning one barrel Gigawatt (GW): One billion watts or one able, from a given date forward, from(42 US gallons, 35 imperial gallons, or thousand megawatts. known reservoirs and under current158.9873 litres) of crude oil. Installed Capacity: The maximum power economic conditions, operating meth-Capacity Factor: Measure of the perfor- output rating of a power plant (usually ods, and government regulations.mance of a power source over time as in MW) measured on an instantaneous Reserve: That portion of the demon-a percentage of its full power potential. basis. strated reserve base that is estimated toCoal bed: A bed or stratum of coal. Also In-place reserves: Total amount without be recoverable at the time of determi-called a coal seam. regard to the cost or technology neces- nation (based on current knowledge, sary to get at it. technology, and economics). 73

Idaho National Laboratory 2525 N. Fremont Ave Idaho Falls, ID 83415 www.inl.gov Point of Contact: Michael Hagood (208) 526-5315 michael.hagood@inl.gov10-51116

Western Energy Corridor -- Full Study

by Ports-To-Plains Blog on Apr 04, 2012

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 60

Statistics

Western Energy Corridor -- Full Study Presentation Transcript