Vancouver Power Grid Thread

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fromthelake

Has Pumped Storage Hydropower every been explored in BC? Wouldn't a PSH that works in tandem with a wind operation be a viable option for baseload?

Brought that up in a few earlier threads. Turns out there's not enough wind energy near the dams to make it practical:

Also, there's only so much you can pump back up into the reservoir until you straight up run out of water downriver.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fromthelake

Has Pumped Storage Hydropower every been explored in BC? Wouldn't a PSH that works in tandem with a wind operation be a viable option for baseload?

Yes, there was a study in 1977, which was confirmed as still accurate in a review in 2013. At this stage BC Hydro don't think they need any of them. There's also a question of whether they would be supported by the local first nations - that's not been the case in Washington State (if they need a new reservoir constructing).

There are also a number of independently sponsored 'proposals' (although they all rely on BC Hydro guaranteeing to buy the power, obviously. There's one in Revelstoke,

[Tvisforme]

I seem to recall a post here quite some time ago with regard to the Capilano reservoir and the possibility for a second dam above the first one, possibly in the valley northwest of Crown Mountain. If that ever becomes viable, could it work as both a power source and reservoir?

[casper]

Originally Posted by Changing City

SMR studies are already taking place in Canada, but not in BC. It's planned for Saskatchewan, Ontario and New Brunswick, with Alberta joining in. Various designs have already been submitted for approval. At this stage BC has no involvement, and BC Hydro see no short to medium term need to even consider a nuclear plant. There is apparently some potential to increase production from existing hydro locations, if it is needed.

This recent paper from UBC gives the background to why nuclear is falling internationally in the mix of power production, (mostly because of cost, but also concerns about waste and security of materials).

It specifically looks at SMRs, which are reactors designed to produce less than 300 Mw. They are not expected to produce energy any cheaper than existing large plants - in fact it will cost more. (The paper explains why in detail).

"The costs of nuclear energy, especially from SMRs, are prohibitively high and rising, whereas the costs of renewables are low and declining. More narrowly, renewables benefit from the almost zero marginal costs of solar and wind energy because they don’t incur any fueling costs and operator costs are minimal"

Technological innovation in battery design, large-scale storage, and co-generation of renewables (like the German Sinnpower module as one example) are happening far faster, on a much greater international scale, and offer far more localized solutions to any potential shortfall in electricity BC might face in the medium to long term.

The non-proliferation/safeguards issues associated with nuclear should be a non-issue in the context of Canada. In other parts of the world yes, but not here.

Waste is tricky. The Canadian strategy is quite feasible.

I do agree cost of a 300 MWe reactor is going to be challenging. These new reactor designs promise to be far more cost effective than older designs. However that still has to be proven. The nuclear industry also has a track record or going over budget on new designs. Building a proven design is a very different situation.

The big cost with the classical CANDU 6 was always the heavy water. Canada has closely guarded how big of an inventory it has of heavy water. I have been out of the industry for a number of years. I don't know how cost effective it would be to build a CANDU 6 or CANDU 9 in BC today.

I don't see the business case for battery storage in BC. BC Hydro has a track record of controlling flow on its hydro assets to adjust to changing demand through the day.

As a said earlier, I think we need to exhaust our undeveloped hydro sites first before nuclear. But then nuclear becomes the next logical choice.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

do people see it being easier to build hydro in BC or Nuclear? i dont see anyone preferring nuclear over hydro. even i dont, and i understand the technology and history vs most people.

WA State has nuclear, I'm not sure why but yes hydro makes the most sense for BC, it's just so flexible.

I do think Site C might be the last mega project we'll see though. We need smaller stuff that can come online faster. How long would an SMR project take?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

As I've come to understand it, BC's got room for one more dam on the Peace River (Site E), then it's either nuclear or dams on the Fraser - both politically toxic. Wind is a decent peak load source, but we shouldn't rely on it for baseload.

Keep in mind BC Hydro is also retrofitting and upgrading existing dams. There's more energy potential available in what we've already built.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

SMR studies are already taking place in Canada, but not in BC. It's planned for Saskatchewan, Ontario and New Brunswick, with Alberta joining in. Various designs have already been submitted for approval. At this stage BC has no involvement, and BC Hydro see no short to medium term need to even consider a nuclear plant. There is apparently some potential to increase production from existing hydro locations, if it is needed.

A better plan for Canada would be a big east-west transmission line to share resources.

I believe the last CPC platform hinted at this kind of investment.

[casper]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

A better plan for Canada would be a big east-west transmission line to share resources.

I believe the last CPC platform hinted at this kind of investment.

That would be a political and not technical decision.

Geography would suggest North-South. That is what we have. Mountain ranges between BC and Alberta make connected grids expensive to build. Also there is a large stretch between Ontario and Manitoba that is difficult and expensive to span.

Quebec having DC interconnects with the US is what saved them during the blackout. BC Hydro also has profited extensively by being connected to the market in California.


MAP Source:wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_...ERC-map-en.svg

[scottN]

Originally Posted by casper

That would be a political and not technical decision.

Geography would suggest North-South. That is what we have. Mountain ranges between BC and Alberta make connected grids expensive to build. Also there is a large stretch between Ontario and Manitoba that is difficult and expensive to span.

Quebec having DC interconnects with the US is what saved them during the blackout. BC Hydro also has profited extensively by being connected to the market in California.


MAP Source:wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_...ERC-map-en.svg

The seasonal loads in California and BC are also complementary. California's peak load is in the summer and our peak load is in the winter. They have an excess supply and solar power in March and April, when there's lots of sunshine but it's not hot yet. Our Hydro storage is at its lowest in March and April as the runoff hasn't really started yet.

Politically a cross border transmission line is a tougher sell though. Why build a California - BC transmission line when a California - Washington State line will do just fine?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by scottN

The seasonal loads in California and BC are also complementary. California's peak load is in the summer and our peak load is in the winter. They have an excess supply and solar power in March and April, when there's lots of sunshine but it's not hot yet. Our Hydro storage is at its lowest in March and April as the runoff hasn't really started yet.

Politically a cross border transmission line is a tougher sell though. Why build a California - BC transmission line when a California - Washington State line will do just fine?

As Casper noted, we're already connected to California. Our system is part of the Western Interconnection, and BC Hydro's trading arm, Powerex, buys and sells to California when it's necessary or financially advantageous.

They note "in recent years, more and more renewables, like solar, have become available on the market from places like California. Just like with any other product, the price of electricity will fluctuate depending on the amount of supply and demand. Solar generation is highest during mid-day and often there is so much that it can lead to low prices. Powerex will often purchase power during these times at a much lower cost, and sometimes they’re even paid to take the excess electricity."

We're also already connected to Alberta. "One of B.C.’s electricity trading partners is Alberta. While it is one of our closest neighbours, imports from Alberta represent just 3% of all imports into B.C. In fact, B.C. exports six times as much as it imports from Alberta, which helps to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions there."

[casper]

Originally Posted by Changing City

As Casper noted, we're already connected to California. Our system is part of the Western Interconnection, and BC Hydro's trading arm, Powerex, buys and sells to California when it's necessary or financially advantageous.

They note "in recent years, more and more renewables, like solar, have become available on the market from places like California. Just like with any other product, the price of electricity will fluctuate depending on the amount of supply and demand. Solar generation is highest during mid-day and often there is so much that it can lead to low prices. Powerex will often purchase power during these times at a much lower cost, and sometimes they’re even paid to take the excess electricity."

We're also already connected to Alberta. "One of B.C.’s electricity trading partners is Alberta. While it is one of our closest neighbours, imports from Alberta represent just 3% of all imports into B.C. In fact, B.C. exports six times as much as it imports from Alberta, which helps to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions there."

Not certain how Powerex is currently doing things. There was a period they we typically selling power to California during the daytime peek when they were able to get top dollar. Then overnight reducing flow on the hydro resources and buying power back from California. California historically has had lot of base load capacity and as a result excess power during late evening.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Brought that up in a few earlier threads. Turns out there's not enough wind energy near the dams to make it practical:

Also, there's only so much you can pump back up into the reservoir until you straight up run out of water downriver.

Rather than using pumped storgage, BC Hydro could further optimize the utilization of thier existing resevoirs. As others have noted, Powerex will import electricity when the market price is low (turning off the generators and letting the resevoirs build up) and then sell it when the price is high, bringing down the resevoirs. The thing is, there is no garuntee that the electricity being imported is green. It is quite likely that there are times when the model says that it is the financially optimal time to turn off the the generators, but the price is still high enough for foreign coal power plants to make a proffit.

By building wind turbines, Powerex could potentially push down the threshold price at which electricity would be imported, reduce the overall cost for electricity, and increase the amount of electricity they can export overall (or meet the increased baseload demand from the transition to electrified transportation and heat). Obviously a datailed analisis would need to be done to confirm this, but as outsiders, we can't just wave our hands and say it doesn't work without any real data.

I am not trying to say we shouldn't build any more hydro-electric dams, just that wind (especially off shore) is a valuable tool in the tool box, and BC's resevoirs can help compensate for its intermitant nature.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

We're also already connected to Alberta. "One of B.C.’s electricity trading partners is Alberta. While it is one of our closest neighbours, imports from Alberta represent just 3% of all imports into B.C. In fact, B.C. exports six times as much as it imports from Alberta, which helps to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions there."

Being connected, and being able to load share in a significant way are two different things. There are interconnects with BC down to California, but we can't supply them a ton of power or vice versa.

The connection with Alberta is even smaller. It would be nice to have a future where Alberta's excess solar (and maybe nuclear) can push into BC on sunny days, and we can direct all of Site C power back into Alberta when needed. We're nowhere near that.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Rather than using pumped storgage, BC Hydro could further optimize the utilization of thier existing resevoirs. As others have noted, Powerex will import electricity when the market price is low (turning off the generators and letting the resevoirs build up) and then sell it when the price is high, bringing down the resevoirs. The thing is, there is no garuntee that the electricity being imported is green. It is quite likely that there are times when the model says that it is the financially optimal time to turn off the the generators, but the price is still high enough for foreign coal power plants to make a proffit.

From what I understand, a lot of what BC buys overnight at 3c/kWh is nuclear from WA State.

California's power mix has changed a lot in the last few decades.

[scottN]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Rather than using pumped storgage, BC Hydro could further optimize the utilization of thier existing resevoirs. As others have noted, Powerex will import electricity when the market price is low (turning off the generators and letting the resevoirs build up) and then sell it when the price is high, bringing down the resevoirs. The thing is, there is no garuntee that the electricity being imported is green. It is quite likely that there are times when the model says that it is the financially optimal time to turn off the the generators, but the price is still high enough for foreign coal power plants to make a proffit.

By building wind turbines, Powerex could potentially push down the threshold price at which electricity would be imported, reduce the overall cost for electricity, and increase the amount of electricity they can export overall (or meet the increased baseload demand from the transition to electrified transportation and heat). Obviously a datailed analisis would need to be done to confirm this, but as outsiders, we can't just wave our hands and say it doesn't work without any real data.

I am not trying to say we shouldn't build any more hydro-electric dams, just that wind (especially off shore) is a valuable tool in the tool box, and BC's resevoirs can help compensate for its intermitant nature.

BC Hydro is already increasing generation capacity at existing dams by adding more turbines (i.e. Revelstoke 5&6, Mica 5&6). These additional units allow the generating stations to run at higher output during peak times (or when there is no wind), and then ramp back down during off peak times or times where wind energy production is high to save water. Effectively they would operate like pumped storage, but without the need to actually pump water back uphill which makes it more efficient. The reservoirs are also much larger, capable of provides months or years of energy storage.

The pump storage proposals all seem to be gears to flattening out daily load variations. This means that they don't store enough energy to fill in for a period of low wind energy production, which could last weeks. Instead, I think these kinds of facilities are really meant to be an alternative to increasing transmission line capacity between the big dams in the interior and the south coast and vancouver island where most of the load is.

Shifting EV charging to night time (though time of day electricity pricing) is another way to achieve this goal. Electrifying building heating loads with heat pumps will also add significantly to off peak electricity loads (since it's coldest at night)

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Rather than using pumped storgage, BC Hydro could further optimize the utilization of thier existing resevoirs. As others have noted, Powerex will import electricity when the market price is low (turning off the generators and letting the resevoirs build up) and then sell it when the price is high, bringing down the resevoirs. The thing is, there is no garuntee that the electricity being imported is green. It is quite likely that there are times when the model says that it is the financially optimal time to turn off the the generators, but the price is still high enough for foreign coal power plants to make a proffit.

It's increasingly unlikely that any imported power will be coal powered for much longer. It might be from natural gas though. Alberta was to phase out coal powered plants by 2030, but that has now been brought forward to next year. The newly installed wind farms in Alberta means the generation capacity from wind is already more than the remaining coal plants produce. There's only one coal-fired plant in Washington State, in Centralia, but one of the boilers has already been converted to gas, and the other will be converted by 2025.

[Changing City]

Until this thread started up, I wasn't up to date on how BC compares to other provinces and states on power imports and exports. Powerex (the BC Hydro trading company) is easily the biggest electricity trader in Canada - "British Columbia (B.C.) was responsible for 84% of Canada’s electricity imports. Although B.C. has generating capacity to meet internal demand, it tries to maximize the value of its generation by trading with the U.S. During the day, when U.S. electricity prices are higher, B.C. increases its hydroelectricity generation and exports electricity to the U.S. to earn more revenue. Overnight, when U.S. electricity prices are lower, B.C. significantly reduces its hydro generation, letting its hydro reservoirs refill while importing cheap electricity from the U.S." [source]

Powerex currently uses four large export transmission lines "This system is interconnected with the western U.S. by two 500-kilovolt transmission lines on the West Coast between B.C. and Washington state; one 230-kilovolt line connecting B.C. and Washington on the east side; and a 500-kilovolt line to the east, connecting B.C. with Alberta." [source]

In 2021 BC exported 11,430,000 MW.h of electricity, and imported 7,528,000. 61% of our exports went to California, 21% to Washington and 6% to Arizona. We exported to 14 states, and imported from 12. The vast majority of our imports came from Washington (86%) and California (11%). [source].

While 10 years ago we imported power generated by coal (in Montana) and gas (in Washington), now we only import from clean sources (wind and hydro). [source]. We're moving from 93% clean to 100% clean generation, as are California and Washington, our main electricity trading partners. We're currently at 96.5% renewable sources [source]. Alberta has only around 18% renewable electricity, although wind and solar projects are coming onstream rapidly and coal is being phased out (but replaced by gas, which already provides about half Alberta's electricity generation).

This all seems to suggest to me that we have more than enough power for our own needs for some time, and that our imports and exports are all about keeping prices as low as possible. BC Hydro publications confirm that, in effect we are using our hydro facilities as batteries, to supply power when demand is higher, and wind or solar supplies are inadequate. As those sources are expanding fast both across the Rockies, and to the south, we might see even more imports and exports to maintain renewable supply at the cheapest cost. It would seem that Alberta ought to be using all the green power they can generate to substitute for their thermal production, but maybe the efficiency/cost argument (and when their green power is available) would justify adding another 500-kilovolt line.

[Dave2]

Mica #5 and #6 were completed in 2016. Revelstoke #5 in 2010, but #6 is currently postponed indefinitely.

https://www.bchydro.com/energy-in-bc...ke-unit-6.html

https://www.bchydro.com/energy-in-bc...n_upgrade.html

[casper]

Originally Posted by Changing City

......
This all seems to suggest to me that we have more than enough power for our own needs for some time, and that our imports and exports are all about keeping prices as low as possible. BC Hydro publications confirm that, in effect we are using our hydro facilities as batteries, to supply power when demand is higher, and wind or solar supplies are inadequate. As those sources are expanding fast both across the Rockies, and to the south, we might see even more imports and exports to maintain renewable supply at the cheapest cost. It would seem that Alberta ought to be using all the green power they can generate to substitute for their thermal production, but maybe the efficiency/cost argument (and when their green power is available) would justify adding another 500-kilovolt line.

There are other considerations that would drive BC Hydro to add capacity.

Vancouver Island is a little mini-grid with a population that will likely hit 1 Million in the next decade or two. It is inter-connected to mainline, however if you can generate capacity on the island that is better that more transmission projects.

From a national/regional security perspective having excess capacity is a good thing. Having excess capacity during years with low levels of snow fall or rain is also good. You also need to be able to take generating stations out for maintenance from time to time. More critical with nuclear, coal, etc. You need a strategy to cover that.

The provincial government at late has been trying to address diesel generators. They are in very remote communities not connected to the grid. They are not material to the overall capacity of the province but still need to be address if we want to be 100% off fossil fuels.

I am all for BC Hydro exporting power to the US. If can get the US consumer to in essence pay off the debt in constructing BC generating capacity that is a positive for us. We own the assets at the end of the day.

BC Hydro need to be working with a 10-15 year time horizon. That is how long new major generating capacity will take to be delivered.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by casper

There are other considerations that would drive BC Hydro to add capacity.

Vancouver Island is a little mini-grid with a population that will likely hit 1 Million in the next decade or two. It is inter-connected to mainline, however if you can generate capacity on the island that is better that more transmission projects.

From a national/regional security perspective having excess capacity is a good thing. Having excess capacity during years with low levels of snow fall or rain is also good. You also need to be able to take generating stations out for maintenance from time to time. More critical with nuclear, coal, etc. You need a strategy to cover that.

The provincial government at late has been trying to address diesel generators. They are in very remote communities not connected to the grid. They are not material to the overall capacity of the province but still need to be address if we want to be 100% off fossil fuels.

I am all for BC Hydro exporting power to the US. If can get the US consumer to in essence pay off the debt in constructing BC generating capacity that is a positive for us. We own the assets at the end of the day.

BC Hydro need to be working with a 10-15 year time horizon. That is how long new major generating capacity will take to be delivered.

They've done better than that; there's a 20 year plan already published. They aren't concerned about Vancouver Island any time soon. "The Vancouver Island capacity Load Resource Balance before planned resources, shown in Figure 4-4, indicates that additional capacity resources are not required for the Vancouver Island region until fiscal 2034".

As I read it, through a combination of reduced demand from existing customers, improvements to the transmission system and limited new generation, they seem to think they can manage to supply the likely demand to 2041.

They say that "Based on BC Hydro’s high-level analysis of comparative unit energy costs, onshore wind resources are likely the lowest cost supply-side energy resource in the near-term. While difficult to predict decades out, large-scale solar resources are expected to become more competitive over the long-term.

Utility-scale batteries are a newer capacity resource with a relatively short lead-time, which can be deployed on a flexible and scalable basis, and are expected to see cost declines over the next 10 years."

They specifically address the additional demand from the switch to EVs, and are intending a management program (through cost benefits from charging off-peak) to manage the requirement for more power.