HomeMy WebLinkAbout20160715AVU to Staff 60.docAVISTA CORPORATION
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
JURISDICTION: IDAHO DATE PREPARED: 07/07/2016
CASE NO.: AVU-E-16-03 WITNESS: Bill Johnson
REQUESTER: IPUC RESPONDER: Bill Johnson
TYPE: Production Request DEPARTMENT: Power Supply
REQUEST NO.: Staff - 060 TELEPHONE: (509) 495-4046
REQUEST:
According to Mr. Johnson’s Exhibit No.6 Schedule 3, “Coyote Springs Fuel Cost $/MWh” is $17.74, and “Lancaster Fuel Cost $/MWh” is $18.35. Please explain the reasons for the price difference. Also provide a definition of “fuel cost” and the components of cost that is included.
RESPONSE:
Coyote Springs 2 is a more efficient plant than Lancaster, meaning it has a lower heat rate. Because it is more efficient, it generates more often than Lancaster when both power and natural gas prices are lower. The result is that, even though both plants are dispatched based on the same natural gas price point (Malin), the average fuel cost per MWh generated at Coyote Springs 2 is lower than at Lancaster.
Fuel cost is natural gas purchase expense only and does not include transportation or O&M expenses.
Page 1 of 1