Duke Energy Corporation (holding Company) · NYSE:DUK
Duke Energy Corporation (holding Company) — Bernstein Environmental Utilities Conference 2011
15 slides from Duke Energy Corporation (holding Company)'s conference presentation, Apr 5, 2011
Slide 1: EPA's Cooling Water Intake Proposed Rule
EPA’s Cooling Water Intake Proposed Rule John Roebel - SVP of Generation Support, Duke Energy April 5, 2011
Slide 2: Safe Harbor Statement
2 SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT This document contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words or phrases such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,
Slide 3: Duke Energy Overview
3 * Forecasted 2011 adjusted segment Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT) contribution (based upon midpoint of 2011 adjusted diluted EPS range of $1.35 - $1.40). Percent of forecasted adjusted total segment EBIT does not include results for the operations labeled as Other. Generation Mix (perce
Slide 4: Overview of Proposed 316(b) Rule
4 Overview of Proposed 316(b) Rule U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed 316(b) cooling water intake rules on March 28, 2011 Subject to 90 day comment period after publication Final rules anticipated in July 2012 Impingement requirements Prevention of aquatic mortality due to contact w
Slide 5: Summary of the Four Options Presented for Comment
5 Summary of the Four Options Presented for Comment Option 1 - EPA's Preferred Option Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 DIF Threshold for Impingement Requirements 2 MGD 2 MGD 2 MGD 50 MGD [BPJ between 2 and 50 MGD] DIF Threshold for Entrainment Requirements 2 MGD 125 MGD 2 MGD 2 MGD Impingement Requirement
Slide 6: 316(b): EPA's Preferred Option – Option 1
6 316(b): EPA’s Preferred Option – “Option 1” Impingement requirements Affects all facilities >2 million gallons per day (MGD) of design intake flow (DIF) (which covers just about everyone, including combined cycle and “new” plants) Attain mortality rates below a standard or achieve flow velocity <0
Slide 7: Duke's Interpretation of the Proposed Rule
7 Duke’s Interpretation of the Proposed Rule Impingement Most likely involves modifications to intake screens Closed cycle cooling retrofits should not be warranted Documenting compliance could be challenging If the mortality rates cannot be demonstrated, then the intake velocity limit could summari
Slide 8: How Will Duke Make Project Decisions?
8 How Will Duke Make Project Decisions? Duke uses a multi-step economic modeling and project development process to build information for decision making purposes This includes a modeling process that combines all of the pending environmental requirements together Air, water, waste No individual env
Slide 9: Will this Proposed Rule Ultimately Affect Duke's Decisions?
9 Will this Proposed Rule Ultimately Affect Duke’s Decisions? Impingement mortality controls alone are not expected to be costly enough to affect run/retire decisions Those decisions will still be based on the sum total of all air, water, and waste requirements Entrainment controls will be based on
Slide 10: Duke Position Under the Proposed Rule
Duke Position Under the Proposed Rule 10 Total System (including capacity under construction) 27,681 Units With Closed-Cycle Cooling, or Not Affected by the Rule 42% Announced Retirements 4% Other Unscrubbed Coal Affected by the Rule 11% Scrubbed Coal & Nuclear Affected by the Rule 43% Duke Energy D
Slide 11: Potential Impacts to Nuclear Units vs. Fossil Units
11 Potential Impacts to Nuclear Units vs. Fossil Units Special considerations for retrofitting cooling towers at existing nuclear plants Interaction with safety related equipment Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing Refueling outage extensions for equipment tie-in Costs of cooling tower retrofits
Slide 12: Cost Recovery
12 Cost Recovery Regulated Units Duke does not currently have Commission pre-approval for cost recovery of these types of projects in any of our regulated operating jurisdictions Duke has strong historical experience with environmental cost recovery Clean Air Rules resulted in costs of approximately
Slide 13: PeEneray.
PeEneray.
Slide 14: Duke Facility Data
Duke Facility Data 14 Duke Energy Steam Units by Facility Capacity, Share MW Type Structure Current Cooling Method Cayuga 1,005 Fossil Reg Once-Through Gibson 2,845 Fossil Reg Cooling Lake, No NPDES Permit Wabash River 668 Fossil Reg Once-Through Edwardsport IGCC 617 Fossil Reg Closed Cycle - No Int
Slide 15: Non-GAAP Reconciliations
15 [LOGO] Duke Energy Corporation Non-GAAP Reconciliations Bernstein Environmental Utilities Conference April 5, 2011 2011 Adjusted Diluted EPS Outlook The materials for Duke Energy’s Bernstein Environmental Utilities Conference presentation on April 5, 2011, include a discussion of the forecasted 2
Duke Energy — Bernstein Environmental Utilities Conference 2011 on 6ix