building the next generation of capacity - bo buchynsky, diamond generating corporation

Diamond Generating Corporation

Building the Next Generation of Capacity

Generation Summit - MarcusEvans Spring 2012

Bo BuchynskySenior Vice President



• Wholly owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi Corporation established in 1988 as Diamond Energy and restructured in 1999 to Diamond Generating Corporation999 o o d Ge e g Co po o

• Developer, Owner, Operator and Acquirer of electrical generation and transmission facilities in North America

• Portfolio contains eleven combined cycle, simple cycle and wind generation facilities operating in various regions of the USof the US

• Currently two simple cycle facilities under construction in California totaling 1000 MW

February 8, 2012 MarcusEvans Spring 20122


Diamond Generating’s Portfolio

F d l W hi tFerndale, Washington262MW Operating Assets

Goshen II, ID, 125MWRockland ID 80MW

Construction Assets

Oklahoma (kiamichi) 1�250MW

Mariposa, CA 195MW�under construction)

Diamond Generating CorporationOklahoma (kiamichi) 1�250MW

Sentinel, CA 800MW�under construction)

Georgia 936MW

Gateway, TX 840MWAlabama II (Central Alabama) 885MW

Larkspur, CA 94MW


Alabama I (Lindsey Hill) 846MW

Indigo, CA 138MW


Forces Driving Generation Decisions

• Renewable Energy Mandates & Associated Grid Requirements• Renewable Portfolio Standards (“RPS”) increase intermittent energy• Renewable energy utilized to minimized Greenhouse Gas (“GHG”)

emissions

• Environmental Regulations Impacting Air Emissions, Solid Waste Disposal and Cooling Water Usage• Air and Solid Waste rules impact coal plant viability• Cooling Water directives impact coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities

• Grid Requirements for Highly Flexible & Dispatchable SourcesGrid Requirements for Highly Flexible & Dispatchable Sources• Generation to provide for grid stability, satisfy Resource Adequacy and

address Load Pockets

• Regulatory Preferences for Certain Generating TechnologiesRegulatory Preferences for Certain Generating Technologies• California Public Utilities “Loading Order” to meet identified needs



Regional Market Str ct res Regional Market Structures Impact Generation Decisions

• Utility or IPP Owned Generation• Traded or Contracted Energy and Capacity

• Traded Energy Markets• Traded Energy and Capacity Markets• Traded Energy and Contracted Capacity Marketsgy p y

• Integrated Resource Planning Requirements• Formal Request For Proposals or Merchant Facilities• Environmental Permitting Structure – Consolidated or Not• Generation Interconnection Procedures – RTO/ISO or Utility



F el & Technolog Choices for Fuel & Technology Choices for New Generation

• Renewables – Wind, Solar, Biomass, Geothermal, Small HydroC l S i i l Fl id B d P l i d C i l• Coal – Supercritical, Fluid Bed, Pulverized Conventional

• Natural Gas – Simple or Combined Cycle• Other Possibilities• Other Possibilities

• Nuclear• Wave or Tidal Generation • Pumped Storage, Batteries & Fly Wheels

• Cooling Options – Air cooled, cooling towers, once through cooling hybrid systems recycled waterthrough cooling, hybrid systems, recycled water



Market OpportunityMarket OpportunityPG&E’s 2008 RFO Process

• Based upon need identified by CAISO & CEC• Resulted from the CPUC 2008 Long Term g

Procurement Plan• Requested 800 – 1,200 MW from all sources• Response – 21 bidders with 48 proposals• Upon short listing complete contract negotiationsp g p g• Once contract negotiations completed submit to

CPUC for approval



Mariposa Energ ’sMariposa Energy’sResponses & Decisions

• Respond to PG&E RFO for flexible & dispatchable capacity with a 10 year tolling agreementP d f GE LM 6000 PC S i i• Proposed four GE LM-6000 PC Sprint units

• Interconnected with the CAISO Grid through PG&E• Located within 100 yards of PG&E high pressure gas pipeline• Located within 100 yards of PG&E high pressure gas pipeline• Permitted through the CEC AFC process• Located in the CAISO designated San Francisco Load Pocket g

meeting Local Resource Adequacy Requirements• Equity finance development & construction with project

fi t k t ft i l tifinance takeout after commercial operationFebruary 8, 2012 MarcusEvans Spring 20128


Mariposa Energ Mariposa Energy Overall Project Location



Aerial Vie of the Area S rro nding Aerial View of the Area Surrounding the Proposed Mariposa Energy Site

PG&E Kelso SubstationPG&E Kelso Substation

Mariposa Energy Project

PG&E Gas Compressor Station



Required Permits & Approvals

• CPUC Power Purchase Agreement Approval• CEC Approval of the Application for Certification• CAISO / PG&E Large Generator Interconnection• FAA Determination of No Hazard to Aviation• BAAQMD Air Permit• Mitigations Plans - CEQA

• Habitat Replacement• Water Conservation• Downwind Air Emissions



California Energ CommissionCalifornia Energy CommissionApplication for Certification

• Consolidated permitting process for all thermal facilities over 100 MW

• Coordinated with the local land use jurisdiction and air• Coordinated with the local land use jurisdiction and air pollution control district

• Meets California Environmental Quality Act review requirements for any governmental action

• Similar to an Environmental Impact Statement under the National Environmental Policy Act required for a FederalNational Environmental Policy Act required for a Federal action

• Twelve month formal process that usually takes sixteen to p yeighteen months



A li ti f C tifi tiApplication for CertificationTopics to be Addressed

P j P & Al i• Project Purpose & Alternatives• Project Compliance & Closure• Facility Design

• Worker Safety & Fire Protection• Hazardous Materials

Management

• Power Plant Efficiency• Transmission System

Engineering

• Waste Management• Biological Resources• Soil & Water Resourcesg g

• Transmission Line Safety & Nuisance

• Air Quality & GHGs

• Cultural Resources• Geological & Paleontological

ResourcesAir Quality & GHGs• Public Health• Socioeconomics &

Environmental Justice

Resources• Land Use• Traffic & Transportation

Vi l REnvironmental Justice• Noise & Vibration

• Visual Resources



Mariposa Energ ProjectMariposa Energy ProjectSite Environment



A li ti f C tifi tiApplication for CertificationActual Timetable

Fil A li i J 15 2009• File Application June 15, 2009• Application Data Adequate August 26, 2009• Informational Hearing & Site Visit October 01, 2009

S ff k h b 1 2009• Staff Workshop – Data Requests December 15, 2009• Staff Workshop – Data Responses June 30, 2010• Informational Hearing & Site Visit October 06, 2010• Staff Analysis & Assessment November 08,2010• Supplemental Staff Assessment December 16, 2010• Prehearing Conference February 07, 2011• Staff Workshop – Outstanding Issues February 16, 2011• Evidentiary Hearings February 24 -25, 2011• Evidentiary Hearing March 07, 2011• Presiding Members Proposed Decision April 13, 2011• CEC Decision Accepting the AFC May 18, 2011



Application for CertificationApplication for CertificationConcerns or Issued Raised

• Need for a new generating facility – use renewables only• Efficiency & emissions of gas turbine selection• Downwind air quality impacts in neighboring air district• Downwind air quality impacts in neighboring air district• Conversion of non-irrigated pasture land• Water vapor from gas turbine exhaust plumes creating fogWater vapor from gas turbine exhaust plumes creating fog• Use of irrigation water versus recycled water• Impacts from tidal wave and flooding• Gas turbine exhaust plumes would upset small aircraft• Impacts on environmental justice community• Visual & Noise Impacts to a community 2.5 miles awayFebruary 8, 2012 MarcusEvans Spring 201216


Responses to ConcernsResponses to ConcernsStraightforward Replies

• Need concerns were responded to based upon CAISO, CEC and CPUC determinations and system requirements for integrating additional renewable energy

• Gas turbine selection questions were responded to based upon what technology that was available at the bid date in 2008 and not in the permitting process in 2010

• Tidal wave and flooding concerns addressed by geologist and geophysicist based on being 20 miles from the ocean and at a level of 120 feet above sea level

• Conversion of non-irrigated pasture land addressed by adding cattle watering troughs and extending the grazing season on the surrounding property



Responses to ConcernsResponses to ConcernsResearched Replies - Aviation

• Potential impact to aircraft & aviation addressed• Exhaust stack water concentrations along meteorological

data sho ed no approach to de point no fogdata showed no approach to dew point – no fog• FAA Determinations of No Hazard indicate that both

thermal plumes and physical structures are not an issuep p y• Further Studies Conducted on Thermal Plumes

• Katestone Environmental Pty Ltd – velocity profiles• CH2M Hill – velocity profiles• Senta Engineering/UC Davis – airframe impacts

N i l T Pil S h l i l• National Test Pilot School – measurements in plumes February 8, 2012 MarcusEvans Spring 201218



Plume Height vs. Hour of Day for MEP with all four turbines operationalPlume Height is extent of Medium Turbulence under various meteorological conditions


Plume Height is extent of Medium Turbulence under various meteorological conditionsShown as extremes, 95% – 5% , average



V ti l V l itVertical Velocity

9.62 MPH

13.6 MPH

1,000 ft

Maximum elevation at which 9.62 MPH occurs: ~ 760 ft AGL

Maximum elevation at which 13.6 MPH occurs: ~ 142 ft AGL

600 ft

800 ft

400 ft

f

200 ft


200 ft200 ft200 ft200 ft200 ft

0 ft

200 ft200 ft



Flight passes over the Indigo Plant measuring 52 aircraft parameters to determine plume impacts on i ft ith diff t l ti & di ti


aircraft with different elevations & directions


Responses to ConcernsResponses to ConcernsResearched Replies – Other Topics

• Downwind air quality impacts in neighboring air district mitigated by a combination of offsets and funding for a local program of emission controls

• Recycled water usage versus irrigation water• Recycled water source did not have documented capacity to supply• Access required 7 mile pipeline crossing RR, highway and two canals• Funded mitigation program to conserve annual the maximum usage

• Noise & Visual Impact • Facility located in a valley providing natural shielding for noise and view sheds• Conducted ambient noise survey and modeled facility to show compliance• Analyzed various views from public locations to demonstrate minimal if any

impact



Responses to ConcernsResponses to ConcernsResearched Replies – Visual Impacts

What is visible from the Community 2.5 miles away



Responses to ConcernsResponses to ConcernsResearched Replies – Visual Impacts

View from Public Road 1.5 miles away



Mariposa Energ Mariposa Energy Initial Site Mobilization



One Nesting Species Can Dela One Nesting Species Can Delay Construction

Burrowing Owl



B rro ing O l Locations Burrowing Owl Locations Develop Work Around for Access



Mariposa Energ ProjectMariposa Energy ProjectExpected COD July 01, 2012



Mariposa Energ ProjectMariposa Energy Project200 MW Simple Cycle Facility



CPV SentinelCPV SentinelProject Overview

• Respond to SCE RFO for flexible & dispatchable capacity with a 25 year tolling agreementP d i h GE LMS 100 i• Proposed eight GE LMS-100 units

• Interconnected with the CAISO Grid through SCE• Located within 2 miles of So Cal Gas high pressure gas• Located within 2 miles of So Cal Gas high pressure gas

pipeline• Permitted through the CEC AFC process• Located in the CAISO designated Los Angeles Basin Load

Pocket meeting Local Resource Adequacy Requirements



SentinelSentinelAFC – Actual Schedule

• File Application June 26, 2007• Application Data Adequate August 29, 2007• Informational Hearing & Site Visit September 14, 2007g p ,• Staff Workshop – Data Response November 14, 2007• Staff Workshop – Issue Resolution January 24, 2008• Staff Workshop – Groundwater June 12, 2008p ,• Staff Assessment October 10, 2008• Prehearing Conference October 16, 2008• Evidentiary Hearing October 21, 2008y g ,• Evidentiary Hearing – Emission Offsets November 6, 2008• Staff Assessment – Emission Offsets April 19, 2010• CEC Decision Accepting the AFC December 3, 2010p g ,



SentinelSentinel800 MW Simple Cycle Facility



B ilding the Ne t Generation of Building the Next Generation of Capacity

• Different market drivers require different technology choices

• Initial technology choices and conceptual designs can significantly impact permitting

• Environmental scrutiny is ever increasing• New generation can get built, but requires

• Thoughtful planning of development & permitting• Ability to constantly adjust to new circumstances• A broad range of expertise on the Project Team


building the next generation of capacity - bo buchynsky, diamond generating corporation

Business

diamond energy

wind generation facilities

mw diamond

contracted energy

corporation forces

ipp owned generation

capacity traded energy

simple cycle facilities