Topic:"Capacity Costs" in M12780

18 Table 1: Full range of avoided cost values used for this analysis CATEGORY YEARS DETAILS Capacity 2011–2014 79 $/kW-yr ($/kW-yr) 2009 IRP refresh (levelized over 2010-2032) 2015–2022 197 $/kW-yr 2014 IRP, Base DSM scenario (levelized ov...

AI summary The text presents Table 1, which outlines the full range of avoided cost values used for analysis across various categories such as capacity, transmission, distribution, energy, and carbon from 2011 to 2055. The values are based on different Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs) and include levelized and actual annual avoided cost streams, with inflation adjustments applied for certain years.

1 Series, the Avoided Cost of Energy has increased between updates for the years 2027- 2 2031. 3 4 Capacity Costs have increased over the entire time horizon due to an increase in 5 market costs, between updates, for new resources selected...

AI summary The Avoided Cost of Energy has increased between updates for the years 2027–2031. Capacity Costs have also increased due to market costs for new resources. EfficiencyOne (E1) uses the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) process for emissions forecasts and engages an independent consultant to evaluate DSM programs annually, incorporating updated emissions data into its planning cycles.

Request IR-48: Appendix A - Preferred Plan pp. 1-112 (Attach. 1-5) Regarding Appendix A, Attachment 1: worksheet AVC Energy & Capacity: please describe how the Capacity Adjustment for Planning Reserve Margin was derived . 8 Response IR-48:...

AI summary The Capacity Adjustment for Planning Reserve Margin (PRM) was derived by applying a 9% PRM to the levelized avoided cost of capacity, as determined by E3 in the 2019 study. This approach assumes that the avoided cost of capacity also reduces the relative cost of the PRM, used in the 2020 and 2023 Integrated Resource Plans.

Table 5: Scenario 1DR-Base – Round 2 Modelling Results PAC Lifetime Available Program Scenario 1DR-Base Investment Benefits Capacity1 Administrator (2027-2031) ($ million) ($ million) (MW) Cost (PAC) BNI Demand Response 18.8 40.5 25.5 2.4...

AI summary Table 5 presents the modelling results for Scenario 1DR-Base in Round 2, focusing on the BNI Demand Response and BNI Curtailment programs. It outlines investment, benefits, available capacity, and program administrator costs for the period 2027–2031.

NSPI has a contractual obligation to pay NSPML, a related party, for the use of the Maritime Link over approximately 38 years from its January 15, 2018, in-service date. On December 23, 2025, NSPML received an Interim Order from the NSEB t...

AI summary NSPI has a long-term contractual obligation to pay NSPML for the use of the Maritime Link. An interim order allows NSPML to collect up to $199 million from NSPI in 2026 for the recovery of costs, with a monthly holdback. NSPI's financial obligations include debt, pension contributions, and operating leases.

d- side management (DSM) programs, including both energy efficiency and demand response. • For energy efficiency, avoided capacity costs are realized through reductions in overall system peak demand. • For demand response, avoided capacity...

AI summary The text discusses how demand side management (DSM) programs, particularly energy efficiency and demand response, help avoid capacity costs by reducing system peak demand. A study by the NSIESO on Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC) is evaluating the reliability of demand response resources during system need, which will inform future utility benefit calculations and avoided capacity cost estimations.

acity value. E1 expects the study to inform future discussions on avoided capacity cost estimation and utility benefit calculations. For additional detail, please refer to E1's response to NSEB IR-43. Request IR-71: Please refer to page 10...

AI summary E1 discusses the capacity cost estimation and utility benefit calculations, and responds to questions about BNI DR performance differences between morning and evening events, attributing stronger morning performance to higher available load in the morning. E1 also notes that residential performance varies based on device type and event conditions.

Nova Scotia is not alone in recognizing limitations in the ability of Solar PV to address resource adequacy concerns. The comparable evidence from other winter-peaking jurisdictions supports a similar conclusion. Official planning material...

AI summary The text discusses the limitations of standalone Solar PV in addressing resource adequacy during winter peak times, citing evidence from Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. It emphasizes that Solar PV must be paired with storage or dispatchable controls to contribute effectively to capacity requirements. The discussion focuses on the use of DSM funding in Nova Scotia given its emphasis on capacity constraints and resource adequacy.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Also, as mentioned in the response to CA IR-4, E1 can maintain short-term 2 affordability by reallocating funds within the existing DSM portfolio budget – 3 away from higher cost energy efficiency measures to DR resource...

AI summary E1 can maintain short-term affordability by reallocating funds within the existing DSM portfolio budget, shifting from higher-cost energy efficiency measures to DR resources that contribute to winter peak reduction, capacity deferral, and resource adequacy. This approach is expected to create a cost-effective portfolio.

city resource, not simply as a customer program; undertake a See E1 response to NSEB IR-07, part (b)(ii). See E1 response to IG IR-17, part (b). new DR potential study focused on winter peak value; identify the relative potential of smart...

AI summary The text discusses the need for a new demand response (DR) study focused on winter peak value, emphasizing the importance of scaling BNI DR and improving residential DR delivery. It also suggests reallocating funds within the existing DSM budget to prioritize DR resources that reduce peak demand and defer future capacity costs.

Request IR-15: Reference: E-22, Page 3. Demand Response should play a larger and more disciplined role in the 2027– 2031 DSM portfolio. DR provides system value because it can reduce load during the hours when the system is most stressed a...

AI summary The text requests clarification on the system-level benefits of Demand Response (DR) in Nova Scotia, specifically whether these benefits accrue to all ratepayers or only those enrolled in DR programs. It also asks whether cost allocation of DR program costs should be reviewed and if such a review should occur within the DSMAG during the next 5-year plan.

Response to Request IR-5: (a) Please identify the statutory authority under which the Board could direct IESO Nova Scotia to procure longer-term demand response capacity. Solar Nova Scotia is not providing a legal opinion. Its recommendati...

AI summary Solar Nova Scotia explains that the Board does not have a specific statutory authority to direct IESO Nova Scotia to procure long-term demand response capacity. It suggests that if the Board has jurisdiction, it should direct the appropriate entity to develop a procurement pathway. It also outlines that costs for such contracts should be recovered through the Board-approved mechanism for capacity resources, not through DSM cost recovery. Finally, it notes that resources procured directly by IESO Nova Scotia would fall outside EfficiencyOne's performance targets.