DOCSLIB.ORG

2010-2029 Integrated Resource Plan for the Empire District Electric Company

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2010-2029 Integrated Resource Plan for the Empire District Electric Company NP 2010-2029 Integrated Resource Plan for The Empire District Electric Company Volume III Supply-Side Resources Analysis (4 CSR 240-22.040) September 2010 NP Table of Contents S.0 Volume III Summary..........................................................................................S-1 S.1 Existing Resources..................................................................................S-1 S.2 Assumptions ...........................................................................................S-2 S.3 Conventional Future Supply-Side Resources .........................................S-3 S.4 Renewable Future Supply-Side Resources.............................................S-4 S.5 Transmission and Smart Grid .................................................................S-4 S.6 Screening Analysis .................................................................................S-5 1.0 Introduction.............................................................................................................1 1.1 Background.................................................................................................1 1.2 Regulatory Requirements............................................................................1 1.2.1 4 CSR 240-22.040 Supply-Side Resources Analysis ........................1 1.2.2 Followup to the 2007 IRP Unanimous Stipulation and Agreement (dated May 6, 2008) ........................................................................7 2.0 Existing and Committed Supply-Side Resources ...................................................9 2.1 Existing Resources............................................................................................9 2.1.1 Asbury....................................................................................................11 2.1.2 Riverton..................................................................................................11 2.1.3 Iatan........................................................................................................12 2.1.4 State Line...............................................................................................13 2.1.5 Empire Energy Center............................................................................13 2.1.6 Ozark Beach...........................................................................................14 2.1.7 Plum Point..............................................................................................14 2.1.8 Purchased Power....................................................................................14 2.1.8.1 Conventional.................................................................................14 2.1.8.2 Renewables...................................................................................15 2.1.9 Retirements ............................................................................................15 2.1.10 Emission Controls on Existing Units...................................................15 2.1.11 Existing Plant Upgrades.......................................................................15 2.2 Committed Resources .....................................................................................16 3.0 Assumptions..........................................................................................................19 3.1 Fuel Usage ......................................................................................................19 3.2 Coal Price Forecast .........................................................................................20 3.3 Natural Gas Price Forecast..............................................................................23 3.3.1 Natural Gas Price Forecasting Methodology.........................................24 3.3.2 Natural Gas Risk Management Policy...................................................25 3.4 FuelOil Price Forecast.....................................................................................25 3.5 Market Price Forecast .....................................................................................25 3.6 Capacity Margin..............................................................................................27 3.7 Financial Parameters.......................................................................................27 3.8 Emission Costs................................................................................................27 Empire District Electric 2010 IRP i Supply-Side Resources Analysis NP Table of Contents (continued) 4.0 New Conventional Resources...............................................................................32 4.1 Supercritical Coal............................................................................................32 4.2 Combustion Turbine .......................................................................................33 4.3 Combined Cycle..............................................................................................34 4.4 Nuclear............................................................................................................35 4.5 Distributed Generation....................................................................................36 4.6 Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle........................................................36 5.0 New Renewable Resources...................................................................................38 5.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards.......................................................................38 5.1.1 RPS – Missouri ......................................................................................38 5.1.2 RPS – Kansas.........................................................................................39 5.1.3 RPS – Oklahoma....................................................................................40 5.2 Renewable Resources .....................................................................................41 5.2.1 Wind.......................................................................................................41 5.2.1.1 Wind – Missouri...........................................................................42 5.2.1.2 Wind – Kansas..............................................................................44 5.2.1.3 Wind – Oklahoma.........................................................................46 5.2.1.4 Wind – Arkansas...........................................................................49 5.2.2 Biomass..................................................................................................50 5.2.2.1 Biomass – Chicken/Turkey Waste................................................51 5.2.2.2 Biomass – Landfill Gas.................................................................51 5.2.2.3 Biomass – Additional Biomass.....................................................54 5.2.3 Solar.......................................................................................................55 6.0 Transmission.........................................................................................................59 6.1 Losses..............................................................................................................60 6.2 Smart Grid.......................................................................................................61 7.0 Screening Analysis................................................................................................62 7.1 Base Environmental Costs ..............................................................................62 7.2 Probable Environmental Costs........................................................................64 Appendix A – SPP Transmission Expansion Plan Projects.........................................68 Appendix B – Empire District STEP Projects .............................................................77 Appendix C – Empire Transmission and Distribution Construction Budget ..............79 Abbreviations...............................................................................................................92 Empire District Electric 2010 IRP ii Supply-Side Resources Analysis NP List of Tables Table S-1. Natural Gas Price Forecast ($/MMBtu) ..................................................S-2 Table S-2. Emission Costs – Base Environmental....................................................S-3 Table 1-1. Clarification – Transmission and Distribution Planning.............................4 Table 1-2. Summary of Compliance with Reporting Requirements for IRP Rule for Supply-Side Resource Analysis (4 CSR 240-22.040(9))...................................7 Table 1-3. Summary of Compliance with the Requirements of the 2007 IRP Unanimous Stipulation and Agreement.............................................................8 Table 2-1. Empire Supply-Side Resources – Existing and Committed......................10 Table 2-2. Load and Capacity Summary 2010-2029 with Existing Resources, Committed Resources and Potential Retirements and Contract Expirations with Based Load Forecast for this IRP and no Contemplated Additions (MW)...............................................................................................18 Table 3-1. Empire’s Historical Delivered Fuel Costs ($/MMBtu) .............................19 Table 3-2. Asbury Coal Price Forecast ($/MMBtu) ...................................................21 Table 3-3. Riverton Coal Price Forecast ($/MMBtu) .................................................21 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File
    SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File Q1'2015 Q1'2014 State MW CF CF Arizona 227 15.8% 21.0% California 5,182 13.2% 19.8% Colorado 2,299 36.4% 40.9% Hawaii 171 21.0% 18.3% Iowa 4,977 40.8% 44.4% Idaho 532 28.3% 42.0% Illinois 3,524 38.0% 42.3% Indiana 1,537 32.6% 29.8% Kansas 2,898 41.0% 46.5% Massachusetts 29 41.7% 52.4% Maryland 120 38.6% 37.6% Maine 401 40.1% 36.3% Michigan 1,374 37.9% 36.7% Minnesota 2,440 42.4% 45.5% Missouri 454 29.3% 35.5% Montana 605 46.4% 43.5% North Dakota 1,767 42.8% 49.8% Nebraska 518 49.4% 53.2% New Hampshire 147 36.7% 34.6% New Mexico 773 23.1% 40.8% Nevada 152 22.1% 22.0% New York 1,712 33.5% 32.8% Ohio 403 37.6% 41.7% Oklahoma 3,158 36.2% 45.1% Oregon 3,044 15.3% 23.7% Pennsylvania 1,278 39.2% 40.0% South Dakota 779 47.4% 50.4% Tennessee 29 22.2% 26.4% Texas 12,308 27.5% 37.7% Utah 306 16.5% 24.2% Vermont 109 39.1% 33.1% Washington 2,724 20.6% 29.5% Wisconsin 608 33.4% 38.7% West Virginia 583 37.8% 38.0% Wyoming 1,340 39.3% 52.2% Total 58,507 31.6% 37.7% SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Wind Energy Update House Energy & Utilities Committee Kimberly Svaty on Behalf of the Wind Coalition 23 January 2012
    KANSAS WIND ENERGY UPDATE HOUSE ENERGY & UTILITIES COMMITTEE KIMBERLY SVATY ON BEHALF OF THE WIND COALITION 23 JANUARY 2012 Operating Kansas Wind Projects •1272.4 MW total installed wind generation •10 operating wind projects •Equates to billions in capital investment and thousands of construction jobs and more than 100 permanent jobs •Kansas has the second best wind resource in the nation th •Ranked 14 in the nation in overall wind power production • Percent of Kansas Power by wind in 2010 – 7.1% th •Kansas ranked 5 in the US in 2010 for percentage of electricity delivered from wind • Operating Kansas Wind Projects Project County Developer Size Power Turbine Installed In-Service Name (MW) Offtaker Type Turbines Year (MW) Gray County Gray NextEra 112 MKEC Vestas 170 2001 KCP&L 660kW Elk River Butler Iberdola 150 Empire GE 1.5 100 2005 Spearville Ford enXco 100.4 KCP&L GE 1.5 67 2006 Spearville II 48 48 2010 Smoky Hills Lincoln/ TradeWind 100.8 Sunflower – 50 Vestas 56 2008 Phase I Ellsworth Energy KCBPU- 25 1.8 Midwest Energy – 24 Smoky Hills Lincoln/ TradeWind 150 Sunflower – 24 GE 99 2008 Phase II Ellsworth Energy Midwest – 24 1.5 IP&L – 15 Springfield -50 Meridian Cloud Horizon 204 Empire – 105 Vestas 67 2008 Way EDP Westar - 96 3.0 Flat Ridge Barber BP Wind 100 Westar Clipper 40 2009 Energy 2.5 Central Wichita RES 99 Westar Vestas 33 2009 Plains Americas 3.0 Greensburg Kiowa John Deere/ 12.5 Kansas Power Pool Suzlon 10 2010 Exelon 1.2 Caney River Elk TradeWind 200 Tennessee Valley Vestas 111 2011 Energy Authority (TVA) 1.8 Operating Kansas Wind Projects Gray County Wind Farm- Gray County, Kansas - Kansas' first commercial wind farm was erected near the town of Montezuma by FPL Energy (now NextEra Energy Resources) in 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2012 Copyright © Frankfurt School of Finance and Management Ggmbh 2012
    GLOBAL TRENDS IN RENEWABLE ENERGY INVESTMENT 2012 Copyright © Frankfurt School of Finance and Management gGmbH 2012. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. Frankfurt School - UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate Change & Sustainable Energy Finance would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from Frankfurt School of Finance & Management gGmbH. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 4 FOREWORD FROM ACHIM STEINER ................................................................................................................ 5 FOREWORD FROM UDO STEFFENS ................................................................................................................. 6 LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................. 7 METHODOLOGY AND DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................... 9 KEY FINDINGS ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EEI Report March 2013.Pdf
    Transmission Projects: At A Glance Prepared by: Edison Electric Institute MARCH 2013 © 2013 by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). All rights reserved. Published 2013. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system or method, now known or hereinafter invented or adopted, without the express prior written permission of the Edison Electric Institute. Attribution Notice and Disclaimer This work was prepared by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). When used as a reference, attribution to EEI is requested. EEI, any member of EEI, and any person acting on their behalf (a) does not make any warranty, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information, advice or recommendations contained in this work, and (b) does not assume and expressly disclaims any liability with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of any information, advice or recommendations contained in this work. The views and opinions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect those of EEI or any member of EEI. This material and its production, reproduction and distribution by EEI does not imply endorsement of the material. Note: The status of the projects listed in this report was current when submitted to EEI but may have since changed between the time information was initially submitted and date this report was published. Note: Further, information about projects, including their estimated in-service dates, are provided by the respective EEI member developing the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy in Oklahoma
    Contents About the American Council On Renewable Energy ............................................................................................................. 2 User’s Guide ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Glossary ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 State Summaries ............................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE) Page 1 About ACORE The American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE), a 501(c)(3) non-profit membership organization, is dedicated to building a secure and prosperous America with clean, renewable energy. ACORE provides a common educational platform for a
    [Show full text]
  • Kingman Wind Energy II JUL 25 2016 App.Pdf
    20160725-5198 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 7/25/2016 4:11:17 PM July 25, 2016 VIA E-Tariff Filing Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Nathaniel J. Davis Sr., Deputy Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20426 Re: Kingman Wind Energy II, LLC, Docket No. ER16-___-000 Application for Authorization to Sell Energy and Capacity at Market- Based Rates Dear Ms. Bose and Mr. Davis: Pursuant to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act1, Rule 205 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission2, and Part 35 of the Commission’s regulations3, please find for filing the Application of Kingman Wind Energy II, LLC for Authorization to make market-based sales of energy, capacity and certain ancillary services under a market-based rate tariff. List of Documents Submitted with this Application Filing Attachment A - Kingman Wind Energy II, LLC Market-Based Rate Tariff, Volume No. 1 Appendix A - Market Power Analysis Appendix B-1 - Generation Assets List Appendix B-2 - Electric Transmission Assets and/or Natural Gas Intrastate Pipelines and/or Gas Storage Projects Appendix B-3 - Long-Term Purchased Power Agreements (PPA) Appendix B-4- Endnotes 1 16 U.S.C. § 824d. 2 18. C.F.R. § 385.205 (2015). 3 18 C.F.R. Part 35. 801 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 220, Washington, DC 20004 20160725-5198 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 7/25/2016 4:11:17 PM Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary July 25, 2016 Page 2 If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011-01-13 SPP Filing of 2010 STEP 07
    BEFORE THE NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF AN INVESTIGATION ) INTO THE PRUDENCE OF SOUTHWESTERN ) PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY’S ) PARTICIPATION IN THE SOUTHWEST ) POWER POOL REGIONAL TRANSMISSION ) Case No. 07-00390-UT ORGANIZATION ) ) SOUTHWESTERN PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, ) ) Respondent. ) SOUTHWEST POWER POOL INC.’S FILING OF THE 2010 SPP TRANSMISSION EXPANSION PLAN REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15 OF THE UNCONTESTED STIPULATION Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (“SPP”), by and through its attorneys, hereby submits a draft of the 2010 SPP Transmission Expansion Plan Report (“STEP Report”), dated January 4, 2011, in accordance with Section 15 of the Uncontested Stipulation (“Stipulation”), dated September 17, 2009 and approved by Final Order Approving Certification of Stipulation issued by the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission (“Commission”) on February 2, 2010. In support thereof, SPP states as follows: 1. Section 15 of the Stipulation requires that “[p]rior to SPP’s Board of Directors’ consideration and vote on SPP’s annual Transmission Expansion Plan (STEP), any Balanced Portfolio proposals or any other similar regional multi-project transmission proposal, SPP will provide the transmission plans to the Commission or its Staff and, upon request, will meet either in person or via teleconference with the Commission or its Staff and other interested parties to discuss the plans.” 2. The STEP Report summarizes 2010 activities that impact future development of the SPP transmission grid. Seven distinct areas of transmission planning are discussed in this report, each of which are critical to meeting mandates of either the 2010 SPP Strategic Plan or the nine planning principles in FERC Order 890.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2012 December EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File
    SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2012 December EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File NET State MWh in State MW in Plant ID Plant Name Operator Name MW Installed State Year GENERATION CF* Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec CF* CF* (mWh) 57098 Dry Lake Wind LLC Iberdrola Renewables Inc 63.0 AZ 2012 112,688 20.4% 9,138 10,756 14,531 11,669 14,512 11,348 6,274 5,575 5,273 7,914 4,762 10,936 57379 Dry Lake Wind II LLC Iberdrola Renewables Inc 65.1 AZ 2012 114,097 20.0% 9,557 10,851 14,909 11,651 14,489 11,453 6,023 5,149 5,672 8,205 5,119 11,019 128.1 226,785 226,785 128.1 20.2% 10586 Cameron Ridge LLC Terra-Gen Operating Co LLC 64.0 CA 2012 168,645 30.1% 13,528 17,533 16,396 14,914 22,278 18,435 9,910 10,895 7,473 15,322 7,665 14,296 10597 Ridgetop Energy LLC Terra-Gen Operating Co LLC 29.0 CA 2012 62,838 24.7% 5,109 6,433 5,806 5,578 8,485 6,957 3,884 3,803 2,624 5,778 2,880 5,501 50536 Sky River LLC Sky River LLC 77.0 CA 2012 110,279 16.3% 7,436 6,522 13,261 13,930 23,897 16,327 9,066 4,832 4,538 10,020 0 450 50552 Cabazon Wind Farm FPL Energy Cabazon Wind 39.8 CA 2012 71,929 20.6% 4,078 5,324 6,571 5,967 8,515 9,076 7,005 4,580 4,390 6,894 4,758 4,771 50690 San Gorgonio Westwinds II LLC Terra-Gen Operating Co LLC 43.0 CA 2012 125,992 33.4% 2,769 8,341 12,321 13,101 17,950 19,414 12,280 7,920 7,644 12,399 5,550 6,303 50712 Altamont Pass Windplant Kenetech Windpower Inc 164.0 CA 2012 379,143 26.4% 1,625 13,700 27,135 32,455 59,783 58,732 60,369 63,839
    [Show full text]
  • Intrapreneurship Infrastructure for Industrial Companies Pursuing New Ventures
    Intrapreneurship Infrastructure for Industrial Companies Pursuing New Ventures A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Drexel University by Carlo Stephen Ciliberti, Jr. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2015 © Copyright 2016 Carlo Stephen Ciliberti, Jr. All Rights Reserved. iii Dedications I dedicate my dissertation work to my family. First and foremost to my parents Janice and Carlo who have supported and encouraged me unconditionally throughout my life. They have instilled my desire to learn and to be the best that I can be through their love, inspiration and examples. The generations that have passed before me have all worked to make the lives of their children better which is what made this opportunity possible. To my wife, Dena, who watched me spend many long nights and weekends juggling school, work and daily activities. The many little acts of kindness like having gluten-free snacks ready and waiting and a big hug mean more to me than she will ever realize. To my daughter Tiffany whose excitement during her own pursuit of her college degree was inspirational and helped fuel my desires to forge ahead. And to my son, Carlo III, who not only stood by my side during two publication presentations working the power points at only 8 and 9 years old, but constantly reminded me through his actions that the true quest of learning starts with pure wonderment. iv Acknowledgments I wish to thank my committee members whose expertise, support, encouragement and time helped me achieve this life-long goal. Thank you Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Turbine Accident Compilation
    WIND TURBINE ACCIDENT COMPILATION Last updated at 30/09/2014 Compiled by CWIF Accident type Date Site/area State/Country Turbine type Details Info source Web reference/link Alternate web reference/link 1 Fatal 30/11/1980 Choteau, near Conrad, USA 2kw Tim McCartney, fall from tower while Wind Energy -- The Breath of Life or the http://www.wind- MT removing small turbine. Body found near Kiss of Death: Contemporary Wind Mortality works.org/articles/BreathLife.html tower. Rates, by Paul Gipe 2 Fatal 30/12/1981 Boulevard, CA USA 40kw Terry Mehrkam, atop nacelle, run-away Wind Energy -- The Breath of Life or the http://www.wind- rotor, no lanyard, fell from tower. Kiss of Death: Contemporary Wind Mortality works.org/articles/BreathLife.html Rates, by Paul Gipe 3 Structural failure 1981 Denmark Denmark 250 Turbines exposed to wind speeds of 35 Safety of Wind Systems, M Ragheb, m/sec for 10 min resulted in 9 failures and 3/12/2009 30% damaged 4 Fatal 1982 Bushland, TX USA 40kw Pat Acker, 28, rebar cage for foundation Wind Energy -- The Breath of Life or the http://www.wind- came in contact with overhead power lines, Kiss of Death: Contemporary Wind Mortality works.org/articles/BreathLife.html electrocuted. Rates, by Paul Gipe 5 Fatal 1982 Denmark 50kw Jens Erik Madsen, during servicing of Wind Energy -- The Breath of Life or the http://www.wind- controller, electrocuted. Kiss of Death: Contemporary Wind Mortality works.org/articles/BreathLife.html Rates, by Paul Gipe 6 Fatal 1983 Palm Springs, CA USA 500kw Eric Wright on experimental VAWT - tower Wind Energy -- The Breath of Life or the http://www.wind- collapsed while he was on it.
    [Show full text]
  • Land-Use Requirements of Modern Wind Power Plants in the United DE-AC36-08-GO28308 States 5B
    Technical Report Land-Use Requirements of NREL/TP-6A2-45834 Modern Wind Power Plants August 2009 in the United States Paul Denholm, Maureen Hand, Maddalena Jackson, and Sean Ong Technical Report Land-Use Requirements of NREL/TP-6A2-45834 Modern Wind Power Plants August 2009 in the United States Paul Denholm, Maureen Hand, Maddalena Jackson, and Sean Ong Prepared under Task No. WER9.3550 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC Contract No. DE-AC36-08-GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining (21), and Agriculture (11)
    To derive industrial power generators, remove utilities (primary_purpose =22), mining (21), and agriculture (11). Assume all are large, as in CONSAD (2005) Total Industrial Power Generators: 913 PlantY08 Industrial Power Gen UTILCODE PLNTCODE PLNTNAME 2806 54936 Richard J Donovan Correctional Facility 8927 54707 Hunterdon Cogen Facility 10339 54239 Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay 11216 10623 Civic Center 14395 50674 Municipal Cogen Plant 15380 50060 Prince Georges County Brown Station Road 15380 55964 PG Cnty Brown Station Road II 17578 10820 Aliso Water Management Agency 17711 50985 Solano County Cogen Plant 17723 50369 South Florida Cogen Associates 18028 54406 Capitol Heat and Power 18348 55817 Veolia Glacier Ridge Landfill 19724 52048 Vanderbilt University Power Plant 22199 50392 Eielson AFB Central Heat & Power Plant 55920 54842 Outagamie County Co-Generation Facility 56389 50308 Utility Plants Section 7 10867 Tate & Lyle Decatur Plant Cogen 8 50903 Sagamore Plant Cogeneration 109 10223 AG Processing Inc 358 54612 Amalgamated Sugar LLC Nyssa 450 10504 Amalgamated Sugar Twin Falls 491 54210 American Crystal Sugar Hillsboro 491 54211 American Crystal Sugar Moorhead 491 54212 American Crystal Sugar Crookston 491 54213 American Crystal Sugar Drayton 491 54214 American Crystal Sugar East Grand Forks 547 54512 Domino Sugar Arabi Plant 623 10430 Anheuser Busch St Louis 623 10431 Anheuser Busch Jacksonville 623 54913 Anheuser Busch Newark Brewery 772 10857 Archer Daniels Midland Fredonia 772 10859 Valdosta 772 10860 Archer Daniels Midland
    [Show full text]