1	Tri-State G&T Resource Plan Analysis & Alternatives à à à à à Colorado Renewable Energy Forum May 19, 2006
2	Energy Program Established in 1991 to advocate for sustainable energy policies in six states of the Interior American West Interdisciplinary staff Active in state, regional, and national forums Focus on electric power industry
3	WRA/SWEEP Report Unanswered Questions Goal: Open dialogue Limited information Limited oversight Enormous spending Large rate impacts Risks not addressed Alternative options dismissed
4	Sources of Growth* Industrial High Plains Power – 232 GWh or 21.3% Springer Electric – 167 GWh or 15.4% United Power – 122 GWh or 11.2% Suburban residential United Power – 172 GWh or 24.7% Mountain View – 99 GWh or 14.2% Poudre Valley – 63 GWh or 9.0% Members with shrinking sales Highline, Midwest, Wheat Belt, Southeast, Y-W, Columbus, High West, Panhandle
5
6
7	Proposed Resources 3 600MW sub-critical pulverized coal units Invoice w/transmission: $5,000,000,000 Rate impacts Estimated 3.4¢/kWh (~70% increase) by 2011 Tri-State estimates 23% to 76% Without any contingent risk value Does “postage stamp” rate make sense?
8	Resource Availability
9	Additional Capacity Resources
10	Data Sources Basis of WRA/SWEEP Report: October 2005 Annual Progress Report February 1, 2006 PUC Presentation Tri-State website Other: April 2006 Annual Meeting
11	Range of Load Forecasts
12	Annual Meeting Data
13	Annual Meeting Data
14	Resource Needs
15	Additional Risks Financial Effect on debt rating & coverage ratio? Effect on revenue requirements? Technology Are plants obsolete early in their lifetime? Environmental GhG: Carbon tax liability Control costs of other emissions, e.g. Hg & As? Fuel price & deliverability Forecast for PRB coal prices? Deliverability issues for PRB coal
16	Alternative Opportunities: Demand-side Management Available cost-effective programs could eliminate future resource needs Begin with 1.1% surcharge in 2007, and grow to 2.8% in 2009 and thereafter Results in 1,931 GWh of energy savings 736 MW of peak demand savings $760 million of net economic savings
17	Effect of DSM Programs
18	Alternative Opportunities: Select Renewable Resources Wind Among lowest cost new resources Economic development benefits to rural areas Enormous potential in NM, CO, & WY Solar Distributed: Direct savings/hedging benefits to rural members Reduced distribution system costs Central: Lower cost, dispatchable to match load requirements San Luis Valley is premier site and coop territory Other: Biomass, geothermal, small hydro
19	Alternative Opportunities: Combined Heat & Power Enhances industrial efficiency Addresses major Tri-State forecast concern Reduces costs and risks Virtually eliminates transmission losses Reduces fossil fuel price/deliverability risks Reduces costs associated with greenhouse gas and other emissions 3,000 MW available in NM, CO, and WY
20	Summary Resource Plan not in compliance Forecasted loads lacks support and appear to be overstated Resource availability is understated Plan contains no analysis of contingent costs, risks, and liabilities Rate impacts of proposed resource plan are huge, greater than 50% Next: Begin exchange of information?
21