Addressing the Tsunami of Aging Assets and Infrastructure

Transcription

1 Addressing the Tsunami of Aging Assets and Infrastructure Asset Management WEI Operations Conference EXCHANGING EXPERTISE SINCE 1893

2 Addressing the Tsunami of Aging Assets and Infrastructure Federal Columbia River Power System

3 The Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) 31 Powerplants 21 owned by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 10 owned by the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) 196 Generating Units 22,060 MW 60% of region s hydroelectric capacity 65 million+ MWh/year Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) directly funds the Capital and O&M programs of USACE and USBR through a series of direct funding agreements established in the 1990s. 3

4 Institute of Asset Management Framework Provides guidance on how to implement ISO Asset Management Knowledge Base Adopted by BPA agencywide in IAM Certification for Asset Management Staff

5 Asset Strategy and Planning in the FCRPS 4. Optimized Portfolio and Subject Matter Expert judgement are used to develop the System Asset Plan 1. Asset Strategy (SAMP) analytics identify Optimal Replacement Dates for FCRPS Assets 3. Projects are optimized based on Costs and Benefits 2. Projects are created to address assets 5

6 FCRPS Asset Planning Analytics Overview Assess condition and forecast condition degradation Relate condition to a probability of failure Calculate risk (probability of failure * consequence) Minimizing the sum of the present value of risk, lost efficiency opportunities and replacement cost (total cost).

7 Condition Assessment Equipment condition is assessed using the hydroamp condition assessment framework 5,500 pieces of equipment and equipment systems Condition degradation is forecast using regression analysis on historical data 7

8 Probability of Failure Weibull curves established for powertrain and critical auxiliary components using Expert Opinion Elicitation SMEs from BPA, Chelan PUD, the Corps, Reclamation, TVA, WAPA and engineering firms Regression analysis from the previous slide relates condition to failure probability through a piece of equipment s effective age 8

9 Consequence of Outage Outage consequences are determined by the HYDSIM and HOSS models Outages are valued based on the value of the marginal unit (the least used generating unit at a plant) Outage Impact = Annual Marginal Value * Outage Duration (% of year)

10 Types of Risk and Costs Lost Generation Risk pppppppppppppppppppppp oooo ffffffffffffff mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm uuuuuuuu vvvvvvvvvv oooooooooooo dddddddddddddddd eeeeeeeeeeee pppppppppp Direct Cost Risk pppppppppppppppppppppp oooo ffffffffffffff aaaaaaaaaa rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr cccccccc dddddddddddd cccccccc rrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrr Lost Efficiency Opportunity ffffffffffffffff eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii eeeeeeeeeeee pppppppppp Replacement Cost

11 Minimizing Lifecycle Cost 11

12 Strategic Asset Management Plan Results of the analysis on the previous slides are the basis for the Strategic Asset Management Plan The SAMP communicates costs, mitigated risks and benefits both qualitatively and quantitatively for various investment strategies Optimal Replacement Dates calculated in the SAMP analytics feed the development of the System Asset Plan. 12

13 FCRPS System Asset Plan The System Asset Plan (SAP) is developed from the strategy identified in the SAMP, incorporating input from plant staff Uses the C55 Value Framework to score and optimize projects Hard and soft benefits are quantified on a common, unitless scale Currently intended to be a roadmap for projects, not project approval 13

14 Value Measure Scoring Consequence Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Extreme Financial Risk <$10k $10k - $100k $100k - $1M $1M - $10M >$10M Lost Generation Risk < 280 MWh 280 MWh - 2,800 MWh - 28,000 MWh 28,000 MWh - 280,000 > 280,000 MWh 2,800 MWh MWh Compliance Risk Environmental Risk Safety Risk Public Perception Risk No or insignificant effect on operations or administrative flexibility or annual mandated costs < $10k No impact No or minor injury, first aid No or isolated internal complaints Change in operations or administrative flexibility or inability or annual mandated costs < $100k Impact to on-site environment (simple remediation) or where the remediation costs < $100k Treatment by medical professional Local media attention; widespread internal complaints; some public embarrassment Adverse impact on beneficial legal principles or precedents; project operations noticeably affected for compliance; inability to maintain system frequency or voltage or annual mandated costs < $1M Limited impact off-site (localized remediation required) or where the remediation costs < $1M Lost time accident - temporary disability Transitory local media / federal / customer attention and criticism; some damage control; congressional enquiry; short duration loss of power to islanded community Adverse effect on existing beneficial legal principles or precedents; substantial changes needed in project operations or administration or annual mandated costs < $10M Detrimental impact onor off-site (long-term remediation required) or where the remediation costs < $10M Permanent disability Ongoing media / federal / customer attention; major damage control; significant impact on staff morale; congressional enquiry; extended duration loss of power to islanded community Extremely difficult to meet fundamental statutory obligations; extremely unreliable system; extreme changes needed in project operations or administration or annual mandated costs > $10M Detrimental or catastrophic impact offsite (mitigation impossible) or or where the remediation costs > $10M Fatality Adverse and ongoing media / federal / customer attention, criticism and agency intervention; extreme damage control; parliamentary secretary called to congress; permanent duration loss of power to islanded community Soft Value Measures are scored using a common scale Value Measures can be individually weighted

15 C55 Portfolio Optimization Gaps filled in by Asset Analytics recommendations, if optimal Scored investments are optimized to maximize the value of the portfolio within constraints Optimization can choose between alternatives and change timing of investments to achieve its objective Asset Analytics fills in gaps with assets at or passed their respective optimal 15 replacement dates

16 Investment Deferral Portfolio value is maximized within constraints by deferring projects 16

17 Portfolio Sources of Value Generation Safety Capital Financial Benefits Environmental Public Perception Productive Workplace Benefit Compliance Financial Generation Efficiency Benefit O&M Financial Benefit Investment Cost Portfolio Value Value Function Output 17

18 Dealing with Uncertainty Deterministic analysis is becoming insufficient for decision makers Desire to explicitly model uncertainty for business cases with stochastic analysis (Monte Carlo simulation) Equipment Condition Failure Curves River Flows Fault Tree Analysis Unit Status at time t Unit Dispatch Model Value of Investment (Stochastic) Maintenance Schedule Capital Investments Price Forecast Turbine Performance

19 Thank You Gordon Ashby

20 WEI Operations Conference 2018 Addressing the Tsunami of Aging Infrastructure Public

21 Transmission AssetManagement 2 Who is PG&E? Public

22 Asset Replacement Optimization Increased Cost Increased Risk Financial Cost ($) Optimization Total lifecycle cost management may not be practical due to capital, resource, orsystem constraints. Modifications in investment strategy result in trade off between performance and cost Examples of strategic decisions include repair vs. replace, run to condition, and rate of maintenance. Public 2

23 Transmission Breaker Profile - Failure Rate will be manageable over the next 30 years - Proactive replacement may be warranted to levelized investment in far future - Only 6% of Transmission Breakers failures result in an outage Strategy Replace 0 /yr Replace 5 /yr Replace 10 /yr Expected Failures Expected SAIDI Impact Planned $5 M $4.5 M $3 M Emergency $3 M $2.1 M $1.9 M Public 2

24 Distribution Transformer Profile - Without proactive replacement to levelized replacement rate, asset failures will increase over time as wave of aging infrastructure reaches the end of its useful life. - 33% of Distribution Transformers failures result in a customer outage Strategy Replace 0 /yr Replace 10 /yr Replace 20 /yr Expected Failures Expected SAIDI Impact Planned $ 0 M $68 M $80 M Emergency $62 M $56.25 M $55 M Public 2

25 Failure of Substation Bowtie Analysis Asset Risks Drivers* Controls Controls Consequences Substation Buses (SS9) Substation Transformers & Voltage Regulators (SS2) Equipment Failure [46*] Human Performance Error (HPE) [15*] Bus Upgrades ProactiveAsset Replacement Drawings and Facility Markings Standards and Procedures Capitalized Emergency Materials (CEM) Emergencywork Safety Environmental Substation Switches (SS7) Unit Substations (SS8) Substation Protective Relays, Instrument Transformers & Station Batteries (SS3) Substation Circuit Breakers and Switchgear (SS5) Weather [11.5*] Animal [11*] Seismic [0.4*] Physical Attack [0*] Cyber Attack [0*] Design Criteria Lightning Protection Switching Procedures DamageModeling Grounding Systems Substation M&C Inspections Proactive Maintenance AccessControls Intrusion Detection Failure of Substation Oil Containment Outage Communications Personal Protective Equipment Emergency Response Compliance Reliability [SAIDI /yr] [Equipment Failure =6.15] [WPE =2.74] [Animal = 2.23] [Weather = 1.22] [Contamination = 1.10] [Other = 2.30] Substation Voltage & Flow Control Equipment (SS4) Substation Grounding Systems (SS6) Solar Storm [0*] EMP Attack [0*] Gas Collocation [0*] Site Illumination Online Condition Monitoring Physical Security (walls, cameras, security guards) Gas Line Corrosion Protection * annual average number of events that led to a customeroutage Fire protection / Suppression systems Spill Prevention and Containment Controls Trust Financial Focus of Pilot PRAAnalysis Public 2

26 Substation Failure: PRA Analysis Pilot Summary: Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling was performed by the Diablo Canyon PRA team on the pilot Substation as a pilot study to demonstrate the advantage of using PRA techniques applied to Electric Operations. What is PRA? Boolean logic is used to combine the basic events to calculate an overall reliability of the substation. Use Case: Targeting of substations that require a indepth bottom-ups probability model dueto station ability for severe impact. Bus Section: pilot Substation Output Risk Measure overall station risk Asset Strategy Targeted Asset Replacement Station Rebuild Operations Clearances Maintenance Public 2

27 PRA: Risk Analysis and Modeling Method Event tree structure for one combination of a series of breakers failing to open that leads to a loss of all power from pilot substation. Risk Contribution Each bus section includes the frequency of a fault from the 12-kV radial and network distribution lines aligned to it. This accounts for the asymmetry between the different bus sections. Total Failure Probability The total frequency is 1.76E- 02yr for the nine modeled bus sections, which corresponds to a loss of all power approximately once every 56 years. *Loss of 12-kV Bus 2E would result in loss of power to the 125VDC battery chargers which provide power for all circuit breaker controls. Public 2

28 PRA: Asset Replacement Identification Ranking Components PRA identified components in pilot substation that if failed would increase the likelihood of failure. Asset Replacements Can be used to prioritize equipment for station reliability assurance, maintenance and security programs Asset Replacement Cost Optimization Identify which components can be replaced on failure vs. planned replacement Explanation of Terms: Risk Achievement Worth (RAW) of a modeled plant feature (usually a component, train, or system) is the increase in risk if the feature is assumed to be failed at all times. Risk Reduction Worth (RRW): Measures the amount that the total risk would decrease if a basic event s failure probability were 0 (i.e., never fails) Public 2

29 Transmission Tower Strategy PG&E operates a system with over 40,000 Transmission Towers -AND- PG&E has historically replaced 10s of towers per year Therefore Towers last 1000s ofyears What maintenance practices can give towers a near-indefinite life? How do maintenance decisionsimpact tower health? Can proactive maintenance like painting and coating prevent the underlying structure from aging? Will investment in maintenance escalate in order to sustain aging assets? -OR- Replacement is not occurring at steady-state What is a sustainable replacement strategy? What is the expected life of a towerunder a given set of conditions? What is the current state of the existing asset pool? What constraints exist on replacement rates? (e.g. capital availability, rate pressure, labor availability) What is the cost of failure for any given tower? Public

30 What is the life expectancy of a tower? In this analysis, the structure life is a function of the corrosion rate of the asset, defined by ISO standards, and the probability of failure at a given section loss The failure distribution estimate used for these analyses was derived from IEEE National Electric Safety Code load factor requirements Simulated Structure Time to Failure No Maintenance ISO Corrosion Zones Public 11

31 Tower Life Cycle The life cycle of a single tower can be simulated by applying the corrosion aging equations together with the failure probabilities and an assumed maintenance schedule In this case, a tower in a severe corrosion zone has been modeled with coating and maintenance occurring every 30 years, and replacement occurring after a failure Many of these stochastic simulations taken together can provide insight into the optimal maintenance schedule as well as estimated total system costs Example Tower Simulation Steel Maintenance event Failure event Coating Galvanized Layer Replacement Public 12

32 What maintenance cadence is optimal? Optimal maintenance cadence depends on a structures environmental characteristics Both the optimal time to initial maintenance and the time between subsequent maintenance events get smaller as the corrosion environment becomes more severe Optimal Coating and Maintenance Cadence Initial Year Years 20 Maintenance Frequency CZ3 CZ4 CZ5 CZ6 First Maintenance Maintenance Cadence Public 32

33 What is the exposure level of our assets? The two key parameters for the tower corrosion model are asset age and corrosion zone The plots below illustrate both the distribution of tower age, as well as the geographic distribution of towers as they relate to corrosion zones Key Asset Information Public 33

34 What is the current state of the system? As the system ages more towers begin to corrode i.e. the galvanizing layer is lost and a higher number of towers fall into the categories of needing repair or replacement If maintenance is further delayed, additional towers will require repairs or replacement, while also being at risk for failure Corrosion Start Repairs Replacements Estimated System State Estimated System State Public 34

35 How many towers are likely in need of replacement? In the optimal plan, replacements only occur in early years to work through the backlog of high risk towers, with preventative maintenance being called for in future years Approximately 25 tower replacements per year over 10 years are estimated Estimated Tower Events Public 35

36 How can interventions change the state of the system? As the model progresses beyond 2017, the optimal maintenance plan is executed Each time a tower is visited, in accordance with the dictated cadence, that tower is restored to an equivalent section loss of 5% or replaced as new Replacements only occur if the repair cost would be >95% of the replacement cost, which is estimated to occur at a section loss of approximately 30% Corrosion Start Repairs Replacements Estimated System State Estimated System State These assets in need of investment have built up over an extended period of time and are repaired or replaced in the first few maintenance cycles Public 36

37 Conclusion Increasing volumes of aging infrastructure, paired with capital and operational constraints, will require smarter asset investments. Opportunities to minimize the cost of increased risk include: Analytics to better understand the resiliency of the transmission system Stochastic modeling to define optimal life cycle management of long-life assets Historical practices of deterministic analysis for assetreplacement prioritization may not be sufficient to address the tsunami of aging infrastructure. Public 37

38 ASSETS, TSUNAMIS AND DECISIONS Boudewijn Neijens, Copperleaf, Canada

39 From Risk to Value Model the Long Term Model the Long Term Model the Long Term Funding Needs & Shopping List Optimize the Short Term Decision-Making & Execution Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 39

40 Lifecycle Costing Opex Baseline Time Capex Time Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 40

41 Predictive Analytics PREMIUM PAID TO MEET RELIABILITY TARGET PREMIUM PAID TO MEET COST TARGET ECONOMIC END-OF-LIFE TIME Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 41

42 Predicting the Tsunami Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 42

43 From Risk to Value Model the Long Term Model the Long Term Growth Technology Efficiency Competition Model the Long Term Optimize the Short Term Funding Needs & Shopping List Decision-Making & Execution Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 43

44 The Value of Mitigating Risk The effect of uncertainty on objectives Probability x Consequences Investment benefit = Mitigated risk = Baseline Residual Probability Consequence Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 44

45 Asset Investment Planning & Management ASSET BASE CANDIDATE INVESTMENTS SUSTAINMENT EMERGENT EXPANSION / GROWTH OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS ASSESS VALUE ASSET RISK UPDATES OPERATING UPDATES PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ASSET LIFECYCLE STRATEGY (<~20 YRS) INVESTMENT PLAN (<~5 YRS) BUDGETING (<~2 YRS) OPERATING (IN FLIGHT) Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 45

46 Multiple Objectives and Constraints CANDIDATE INVESTMENTS ASSESS VALUE OBJECTIVES PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION CONSTRAINTS ASSET LIFECYCLE STRATEGY (<~20 YRS) INVESTMENT PLAN (<~5 YRS) BUDGETING (<~2 YRS) OPERATING (IN FLIGHT) Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 46

47 More Choice Means Better Results CANDIDATE INVESTMENTS ASSESS VALUE A B C A B C D A B C D OBJECTIVES PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION CONSTRAINTS ASSET LIFECYCLE STRATEGY (<~20 YRS) INVESTMENT PLAN (<~5 YRS) BUDGETING (<~2 YRS) OPERATING (IN FLIGHT) Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 47

48 Options / Alternatives Opex Baseline Option 2 Option 1 Option 3 Time Capex Time Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 48

49 Strategic Value Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 49

50 Evaluating Alternatives Increased Revenue Common Economic Scale ($) -$250 $0 $250 $500 Customer Interruptions Productivity Safety Risk Environmental Risk Engagement Assess both hard & soft benefits to calculate a net value expressed on a common economic scale Cost Net Present Value Project 1 Project 2 Project 3 Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 50

51 Common Scale Calibrate all value measures to a common scale Ideally monetary Or an internal value unit Intangibles can be aligned using pair-wise comparisons Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 51

52 Calibration Risk: consequence levels aligned across different risk types Same logic can be applied to value Event Type Negligible Small Minor Moderate Major Extreme Safety Environmental On-site first aid injury Minor impact / no remediation required Injury requiring medical attention / near miss Minor impact / contained onsite / simple remediation Financial < $100K $100K $500K Dx SAIDI < 1.5 MWh MWh Tx Frequency of Outages Injury requiring medical attention / lost time Minor impact / contained / moderate remediation Multiple injuries requiring medical attention / lost time Limited impact offsite / contained / moderate impact on site Permanent disability Fatality / multiple fatalities Detrimental impact / on or offsite / long term remediation Catastrophic offsite / impossible to mitigate / uncontained $500K $1M $1M $5M $5M $10M >$10M 8 16 MWh MWh > 160 MWh MWh < > 1660 Lost Generation < 2 GWh 2 11 GWh GWh Copperleaf Technologies Inc I GWh GWh > 220 GWh

53 Finding the Efficient Frontier EXPECTED RETURN (VALUE) SPEND Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 53

54 Conclusions Bottom-up: model asset needs to predict tsunamis Risk as the primary driver Economic end-of-life sets the timing Top-down: model value to justify investments Risk and value as the drivers Alternatives help unlock value Optimization to honor multiple objectives and constraints Towards the efficient frontier The what-if approach Explore various scenarios Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 54

55 The 2018 Crop ISO Review of Managing assets vs. Asset Management See committee.iso.org/tc251 IAM Asset Management Application Guide SAMP Development Guide Monthly webinars on AM topics See theiam.org Cigré ISO for electrical utilities Still looking for examples! Contact Copperleaf Technologies Inc I 55