SEPTEMBER 24, 2013JON PIETRUSZKIEWICZRYAN PLETKA

SCE SONGS SUBSTATION RENEWABLE DG POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT

Scope of WorkPotential AssessmentInterconnection Feasibility and

Cost AssessmentComparison to Other Renewable

Resource OptionsImplementation Issues

2

SECTION 1SCOPE OF WORK

3

4

This is a very-high level preliminary assessment to determine if the overall concept is feasible. Not a siting study or cost-benefit analysis

1. Solar PV Potential Assessment- Assess potential for distributed PV around six key Southern California Edison (SCE) substations.

2. Interconnection Feasibility and Cost Assessment- Assess high level scenarios to interconnect the PV capacity. Prepare rough order-of-magnitude estimates of interconnection cost.

3. Comparison to other Renewable Resource Options- Compare costs of DG resources to other options, such as large scale solar.

4. Implementation Assessment- Prepare high level discussion of issues and challenges of rapidly deploying large amounts of distributed PV

SCOPE OF WORK

SECTION 2POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT

5

6

SE

CT

ION

HE

AD

ING

–O

PT

ION

AL

AREA OF INTEREST – AREA SERVED BY 6 TRANSMISSION SUBSTATIONS IN ORANGE AND LA COUNTIES

Approximately 300 square miles

Source: Google Earth, SCE

Orange County

LA County

7

• Black & Veatch developed a new approach to automatically quantifying DG potential based on analysis of aerial imagery

• Three key areas of potential were analyzed:• Commercial and industrial (C&I) roofs• Residential roofs• Parking lots

• “Open” spaces have not been quantified in this assessment due to limited time• Special considerations and competing uses?

• Potential is quantified in terms of available square feet per parcel of land• Overall accuracy of the square footage estimates is perhaps around +/-25%

• Square footage converted to energy potential using key assumptions

• This comprehensive approach identifies significantly more potential for DG than previous estimates

METHODOLOGY FOR POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT

8

Theoretical Solar Potential – Potential that could be achieved if all identified area in a parcel was developed assuming typical PV deployment densities• (2.5 acres/MWdc - Leaves room between rows for access)

Technical Potential – Potential accounting for normal technical constraints on a site such as shading from trees, avoidance of other rooftop equipment, etc.

Developable Potential – Potential assuming that only a small fraction of potential sites will participate in a program due to timing, economic, or other factors

THREE ESTIMATES OF POTENTIAL WERE DEVELOPED

9

*Typical residential rooftop size based on CSI market data. Theoretical and technical potential estimates are the same as the CSI data already represents suitable development area.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS TO ESTIMATE POTENTIAL

Parking Lots C&I Rooftops Residential Rooftops

Notes

Theoretical Solar Potential

2.5 acres / MWdc

2.5 acres / MWdc

6 kWdc / parcel*

Accounts for typical development densities

Technical Potential

(% of Theoretical)

75% 50% 100% Accounts for suitable development area (shading, skylights, etc.)

Developable Potential (% of Technical)

10% 10% 10% Accounts for potential participation rate

10

IDENTIFIED LARGE ROOFS AND PARKING LOTSTechnical PotentialCapacity, MWdc

< 0.25

> 3

11

EXAMPLE DETAIL NEAR WOODBRIDGE AREA OF IRVINE (ABOUT 30-40 MW TOTAL)

Updated screenshot

Technical PotentialCapacity, MWdc

< 0.25

> 3

12In addition to technical potential, LCOE calculated for rooftop and parking applications for each parcel

EXAMPLE DETAIL NEAR JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT (5.2 MWDC PARKING LOT)

Updated screenshot

Technical PotentialCapacity, MWdc

< 0.25

> 3

13

Almost 8 GWac of technical potential. About 800 MWac of developable potential based on a 10% participation rate. A 5% participation rate would cut this potential in half.

ESTIMATED TOTAL POTENTIAL CAPACITY

10969

7931

7930

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Theoretical Technical Developable

Pote

ntial

(MW

ac)

14Parking lots are more than half the potential

TOTAL TECHNICAL POTENTIAL BY CATEGORY

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Tech

nica

l Po

tenti

al (M

Wac

)

Residential Roofs

C&I Roofs

Parking

15

TOTAL TECHNICAL POTENTIAL BY SUBSTATION

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500Te

chni

cal P

oten

tial (

MW

ac)

Residential Roofs

C&I Roofs

Parking

16

Interconnection capacity estimates at the substation level based on 30 percent of substation load (from SCE ). 30 percent estimate is rough rule-of-thumb to be verified with studies. Loading not available for one substation.

DEVELOPABLE POTENTIAL BY SUBSTATION – WITH POTENTIAL INTERCONNECTION CAPACITY

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Dev

elop

able

Pot

entia

l (M

Wac

)

Residential Roofs

C&I Roofs

Parking

30% of Substation Load

17Developing the largest 1,400 sites (5%) would be 2,750 MWac – if every site could be developedDeveloping the largest 238 sites (<1%) would be 1,000 MWac – if every site could be developed

NON-RESIDENTIAL TECHNICAL POTENTIAL – PARETO CHART OF PARCELS SORTED FROM LARGEST TO SMALLEST

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%

Pote

ntial

Cap

acit

y (M

Wac

)

0 2.8 5.6 8.4 11.2 14 16.8 19.6 22.4 25.2 28 % of sites:

No. of sites:(000’s)

Except for #11, these are not single parcels. They comprise multiple nearby parcels.

11 LARGE DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS: 450 MW TECHNICAL POTENTIAL, 45 MW DEVELOPABLE POTENTIAL

18

No. Primary Use Approx. Tech Potential (MWdc)

1 Mixed Retail & Office 70

2 College, Hospital 70

3 Mixed commercial 50

4 College, Recreation 505 Recreation 40

6 College 40

7 Mixed commercial 35

8 Retail 30

9 Retail 30

10 Retail 20

11 Warehouse 17

19

• Capital Costs• Black & Veatch developed capital cost assumptions based on data

from the CSI program and B&V engineering estimates (see appendix)

• Assumed capital costs are lower than average prices observed in the CSI program, but believed to be achievable for a large program of the type which may be implemented here

• Costs are based on the estimated technical potential for a site• Carports assumed to be $500/kW more expensive than equivalent

size roof system• Example costs:

COST AND PERFORMANCE ASSUMPTIONS

Application Capacity (kW ac) Capital Cost ($/kWac)

Residential 5 $4,800

C&I Roof 100 $4,100

Parking Lot 100 $4,600

C&I Roof 1,000 $3,600

Parking Lot 1,000 $4,100

A typical parking lot is 2-3 times the size of the roof area on a given parcel

CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES BASED ON PROJECT SCALE (SEE APPENDIX A FOR MORE INFORMATION)

20

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Capi

tal C

ost,

$/k

W a

c

System Size (kW ac)

Rooftops

Parking Lots

21

• O&M Cost• Assumed to be $40/kWac-yr for all systems assuming fleet maintenance

strategies implemented• Inclusive of O&M contract, lease, and insurance

• Performance• Black & Veatch estimated performance previously for solar projects across

California• Commercial systems in Orange County, assuming 10 degree tilt and 1.2

inverter loading ratio: 23% CF (ac)• Residential assumed to be 20% CF (ac) • Common assumption used across Orange and LA counties (simplification)

COST AND PERFORMANCE ASSUMPTIONS

22

EXAMPLE LEVELIZED COST OF GENERATION

Application Capacity (kW ac) LCOE ($/MWh)

Residential 5 $180

C&I Roof 100 $136

Parking Lot 100 $150

C&I Roof 1,000 $121

Parking Lot 1,000 $135

C&I Roof 5,000 $111

Parking Lot 5,000 $124

Excludes any significant interconnection and distribution upgrade costs

23

Technical Potential. Developable potential would be 10% of this, but which 10%? Excluded significant interconnection and distribution upgrade costs.

SUPPLY CURVE FOR URBAN DG LEVELIZED COST OF GENERATION

Residential<–––––––––––––––– C&I Roofs and Parking Lots ––––––––––––––––>

SECTION 3INTERCONNECTION FEASIBILITY AND COST ASSESSMENT

24

25

• Lower cost interconnection limit assumed to be 30% of transmission and distribution substation capacity.

• An ideal scenario would target lowest cost interconnections first:• First 15% of systems can be accommodated by existing

distribution system with minor upgrades • Estimated cost $100/kW or less

• Second 15% (up to 30%) will require upgrades similar to those identified in the recent Navigant study. • Estimated cost $300/kW or less

• Individual and aggregated systems above 30% local penetration will require additional upgrades to be identified by SCE (such as dedicated feeders).• Estimated cost $500/kW or less

INTERCONNECTION SCENARIOS

26

EXAMPLE DISTRIBUTION SCENARIO #1:WEST IRVINE

27

EXAMPLE DISTRIBUTION SCENARIO #2:EAST IRVINE

SECTION 4 COMPARISON TO OTHER RENEWABLE RESOURCE OPTIONS

28

29

• It can be asked whether urban DG or a plant located in the desert can best meet the current needs. There are two important factors that must be considered:• What is the cost of DG vs a central station solar

project?• What is the time required to implement each?

A central station solar plant located in the desert may require more time than available to accomplish permitting and to resolve transmission issues. If major system upgrades or new transmission lines are required, it may take 7 to 10 years to resolve not 3 to 4 years as needed.

COMPARISON TO DESERT-SITED SOLAR

30Costs are comparable, likely within 10%-20%, and transmission will take longer for desert plant

• Cost of Generation• Large-scale desert solar projects: $75-85/MWh• Urban DG: $110-140/MWh

• Transmission and distribution costs:• Large-scale desert solar projects: $35/MWh

• Assuming $1000/kW in capital costs @33% CF• Urban DG: $5-25/MWh

• Assuming $100-500/kW in capital costs @23% CF

• Total Costs• Large-scale desert solar projects: $110-120/MWh• Urban DG: $115-165/MWh

ROUGH COST COMPARISON

SECTION 5 IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT

31

32

• Scenario 1 - Utility-Owned• Scenario 2 - Developer / Customer Owned

SCENARIOS

33

• Interconnection Feasibility• Interconnection Cost• Procurement Approach• Regulatory• Siting• Permitting• PV industry capacity• Cost/benefit assessment• Design of targeted incentives

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES/CHALLENGES

APPENDIX ASOLAR DG CAPITAL COST ASSUMPTIONS

34

35

1. Reviewed 2013 Market Data from CSI Program

2. Reviewed recent LBNL/NREL Analysis3. Compared to B&V estimates previously

developed4. Recommended Assumptions

DG CAPITAL COST ESTIMATING APPROACH

36Costs and system sizes in this section based on nameplate rating (kWdc)

• Data downloaded on 9-13-2013 from CSI website• Generally focused on installed systems in 2013

• Filters:• Installed Status = Installed• First Incentive Claim Request Review =>2012• Some activity (dates) in 2013

• 27,000 data points for that sample alone, including good representation across 1-1000+ kW size range

• Minimal data clean-up performed

CSI DATA SET

37Steady decline, leveling recently. Some decline could be attributable to increasing system sizes.

AVERAGE SYSTEM COSTS ($/KW DC)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

2 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Total

Total

Date is based on the latest date listed in CSI database

38Significant variation by system size. Prices in 2013 relatively stable

COSTS BY CAPACITY BLOCK ($/KW DC)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2012 2013

a: <= 2kW

b: 2-5 kW

c: 5-10 kW

d: 10-30 kW

e: 30-100 kW

f: 100-250 kW

g: 250-500 kW

h: 500-1000 kW

i: 1-2 MW

j: 2-6 MW

Date is based on the latest date listed in CSI database

39Pricing for 30-500 kW systems flat at around 4.7

AVERAGE INSTALLED COSTS ($/KW DC) FOR CSI SYSTEMS (2013)

5,742

5,2505,005

4,804 4,711 4,658 4,686

4,176

3,694

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

<2 kW 2-5 kW 5-10 kW 10-30 kW 30-100 kW 100-250 kW

250-500 kW

500-1000 kW

1+ MW

Ave

rage

Cap

ital

Cos

t, $

/kW

dc

40Significant variation shows that lower costs are achievable, especially for 30-1000 kW systems.

RANGE (1 SD) OF INSTALLED COSTS ($/KW DC) FOR CSI SYSTEMS (2013)

5,742

5,2505,005

4,804 4,711 4,658 4,686

4,176

3,694

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

<2 kW 2-5 kW 5-10 kW 10-30 kW 30-100 kW 100-250 kW

250-500 kW

500-1000 kW

1+ MW

Ave

rage

Cap

ital

Cos

t, $

/kW

dc

41

COMPARISON TO RECENT LBNL ANALYSIS

42California tends to have slightly higher prices than LBNL’s national average; however, time difference compensates.

CSI 2013 COSTS SIMILAR TO LBNL 2012 COSTS

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

<2 kW 2-5 kW 5-10 kW 10-30 kW 30-100 kW 100-250 kW

250-500 kW

500-1000 kW

1+ MW

Ave

rage

Cap

ital

Cos

t, $

/kW

dc

CSI 2012

CSI 2013

LBNL 2012

43

5,742

5,2505,005

4,804 4,711 4,658 4,686

4,176

3,694

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

<2 kW 2-5 kW 5-10 kW 10-30 kW 30-100 kW 100-250 kW

250-500 kW

500-1000 kW

1+ MW

Ave

rage

Cap

ital

Cos

t, $

/kW

dc

B&V costs near lower range of market, but not outside of experience

B&V ESTIMATES THAT A 300 KW ROOFTOP SYSTEM WOULD COST $3.29/WDC TODAY

44

• B&V estimate of $3.29/Wdc for 300 kWdc system comports well with LBNL/NREL “bottoms-up” modeled estimate of $2.61-3.22/Wdc for 221 kWdc system

• B&V’s estimate represents the cost (including reasonable profit), whereas the CSI database records the price at which the system was sold

• B&V’s estimate is for a size that is not as competitive of a market segment as the rest of the CSI market (80 systems between 200-300 kW in 2013 vs. 24,000 systems <10 kW

• B&V’s estimate is current as of 3Q 2013, whereas the CSI database contains systems quoted earlier, in some cases in 2012 or earlier• B&V estimate also captures likely continued decline in system costs for next couple

of years

• Relatively high soft costs persist in CSI market, B&V has assumed those can be brought down• Other states and countries have significantly lower costs than California• A coordinated, targeted, and competitive program in this area should achieve

economies-of-scale resulting in lower costs

WHY IS B&V ESTIMATE ON LOWER END OF CSI MARKET DATA?

45Carports assumed to cost an additional $0.50/Wdc more than equivalent size rooftop system

B&V CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES FOR OTHER ROOFTOP SYSTEM SIZES BASED ON OBSERVED ECONOMIES OF SCALE IN CSI DATA

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Capi

tal C

ost,

$/k

W a

c

System Size (kW ac)

Rooftops

Parking Lots

46

Note: B&V system design philosophy different for rooftop and ground-mount systems. Ground mount designed to achieve higher performance (CF), with tradeoff of requiring more land area.

GROUND-MOUNT CAPITAL COST ASSUMPTIONSFixed Tilt Design

Single Axis Tracking Design

AC Capacity (kW) 1,000 5,000 10,000 20,000+

2013 $/Wdc $2.85 $2.65 $2.44 $2.35

2013 $/Wac $4.00 $3.71 $3.41 $3.28

AC Capacity (kW) 1,000 5,000 10,000 20,000+

2013 $/Wdc $3.22 $3.02 $2.81 $2.72

2013 $/Wac $4.19 $3.93 $3.65 $3.54