Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMWMC Agenda Packet AGENDA II.a. M E M O R A N D U M AGENDA IV. Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Resolution 23-08 Page1 of 2 Digital Signature: Digital Signature: Digital Signature: Attachment 2 Resolution 23-08 Page2 of 2 . M E M O R A N D U M _____________________________________________________________________ AGENDA V. • • • • • • 1 2022-2023 Teachers’ Guide cleanwateruniversity Adventures in stormwater, drinking water, and wastewater. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 2 Introduction & Table of Contents Welcome to Clean Water University, Virtual Edition! Welcome to the Clean Water University (CWU) Teachers’ Guide for the 2022-2023 school year! The City of Springfield, City of Eugene, and Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) are proud to offer this program to 5th grade classes in the Eugene-Springfield area free of charge. This guide can be used as prep for attending the in-person field trip if your school enters the selection lottery and is selected, or if your school is not selected or can’t due to school policies, but want to participate in the online version. The overarching goal of the program remains the same regardless of attending the in-person field trip or participate in the virtual offering: to teach students about the importance of clean water. This Teachers’ Guide is to make CWU as easy to implement into your existing lesson plans as possible. Outlined below and on the following pages, you’ll find curriculum on a variety of topics pertaining to clean water with links to videos, activities, and worksheets on the City of Springfield’s website. Move through them at whatever pace works best for you and your virtual classroom. Thank you for your participation and enjoy! Clean Water University Curriculum Contents Incentive Program.......................................................................................................................................................................Page 3 Lesson 1: Water Cycle.................................................................................................................................................................Page 4 Lesson 2: Drinking Water..........................................................................................................................................................Page 5 Lesson 3: Water Quality.............................................................................................................................................................Page 6 Lesson 4: Macroinvertebrates.................................................................................................................................................Page 7 Lesson 5: Wastewater Treatment...........................................................................................................................................Page 8 Lesson 6: Microorganisms........................................................................................................................................................Page 9 Lesson 7: Pollution Prevention.............................................................................................................................................Page 10 Lesson 8: Sustainability...........................................................................................................................................................Page 11 Lesson 9: Wrap-Up Jeopardy Game...................................................................................................................................Page 12 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................................................Page 13 Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 3 Incentive Information School STEM Program Donation As a thank you for incorporating Clean Water University into your curriculum and to further science, technology, engineering, and math education in the Eugene-Springfield area, the MWMC will donate $500 to each participating school’s STEM program. To ensure this funding is sent to your school, simply confirm participation in Clean Water University with Loralyn Spiro, City of Springfield/MWMC Communications Supervisor, at lspiro@springfield-or.gov. The MWMC will then coordinate with your school district’s Finance Department to send those funds to your specific school and designate them for your STEM program. If your school doesn’t have an official STEM program, the donation can go toward your science curriculum supplies, such as microscopes or other equipment. Class Drawing: Eugene Science Center Memberships In addition to the school STEM program donation, participating classes will be entered into a drawing for all students in the winning class to receive a membership to the Eugene Science Center for one adult and one child (a $50 value!). This will give the students and a parent/guardian free admission to Eugene Science Center exhibits and to Planetarium stargazing shows for an entire year! Memberships also include discounts on a variety of the Science Center’s other offerings. To learn more, visit https://eugenesciencecenter.org/ support/membership. To enter your class in the drawing, submit proof of your class’s participation (can be a student’s Micro Story Assignment, a screenshot of you leading your class in a game of Jeopardy, etc.) to lspiro@springfield-or.gov. The winning class will be announced in May 2023, and the teacher will then receive instructions for distributing the memberships to students/parents. Good luck! Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 4 Lesson 1: Water Cycle Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will be introduced to the water cycle and learn about the continuous movement of water on, above, and below the surface of the earth. They’ll learn about the various phases of the water cycle, including evaporation, condensation, precipitation, and absorption. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Explain where water comes from. • Identify the various stages of the water cycle. • Recognize water as an essential resource. Teaching Points • Water is essential to all life. Without it, humans, animals, and plants couldn’t survive. • All water moves continuously and is recycled over and over again. The same water we use today has been here for billions of years - that means the water you drink could be the same water thirsty dinosaurs were drinking 65 million years ago! It’s also the only water we’ll ever have in the future. • While water hasn’t changed much over billions of years, what does change is the stage of the water cycle that it’s in. The four main stages of the water cycle are evaporation, condensation, precipitation, and runoff. Procedures/Materials 1. Start by asking students where they think their water comes from when they take a bath or shower, wash their hands, or do the dishes. 2. Play the Water and You: The Water Cycle video from American Water on YouTube to give students an overview of the water cycle. 3. Take a look at the Water Cycle Diagram handout from the U.S. Geological Survey together as a class. Identify the various stages of the water cycle that were explained in the video. 4. To close the lesson, have students complete the Water Cycle Word Search. Key Words Graphic Credit: Vecteezy.com Water Cycle Water Droplet Water Vapor Surface Water Evaporation Condensation Precipitation Runoff Absorption Aquifer Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 5 Lesson 2: Drinking Water Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will learn where their drinking water comes from, how it’s cleaned, and the tools used to transport the water to the faucets in their homes. They’ll be introduced to the various steps in the process of cleaning drinking water to ensure high water quality. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Explain how drinking water gets to their home. • Identify various sources of drinking water. • Recognize that water must be properly cleaned to rid it of pollutants before it can become drinking water. Key Words Drinking Water Water Quality Fresh Water Ground Water Aquifer Flocculation Clarification Filtration Disinfection Chlorine Ozone Pipes Pumps Teaching Points • All humans and animals must consume water in order to survive. On average, 9-13 year olds should drink about 7-9 cups of water per day to stay hydrated. • Though 71% of earth’s surface is water, only 0.3% of that water is usable by humans. The other 99.7% is in the oceans, soils, icecaps, and floating in the atmosphere. That’s why it’s important that we take good care of the fresh water that we can use! • Most of the water used by humans comes from rivers and aquifers, or water stored underground. • In Eugene, drinking water comes from the McKenzie River. In Springfield, drinking water comes from a large aquifer under the City and from the Middle Fork Willamette River. • Before water from these sources can become drinking water, it has to be cleaned to remove bacteria, viruses, and micro-pollutants. Then water quality tests are conducted to make sure the water is safe to drink. • In Eugene and Springfield, the two organizations that clean our drinking water are the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) and Springfield Utility Board (SUB). They do such a good job that what comes out of our faucets is often even cleaner than what the State of Oregon and U.S. government require! • After it’s treated, drinking water is transported to homes and businesses through a system of pumps and underground pipes throughout the region. Procedures/Materials 1. Ask students where they think their drinking water comes from and how it gets to the faucets in their home. 2. Play the Water and You: The Drinking Water Treatment Process video from American Water on YouTube to introduce students to the sources of drinking water and the process of cleaning it. 3. Have students complete the Drinking Water Word Search to become more familiar with key words associated with the drinking water treatment process and pollutants that can affect our water sources. 4. If time allows, visit either the Eugene Water & Electric Board or Springfield Utility Board website at eweb.org or subutil.com to learn more their treatment processes and water quality standards. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 6 Lesson 3: Water Quality Overview & Key Learning Outcomes Key Words Water Quality Water Testing Laboratory Turbidity Dissolved Oxygen Phosphates Nitrates Temperature pH Stormwater Runoff In this lesson, students will learn about the various measures that affect the quality of water in our rivers and streams. They’ll also learn about stormwater runoff and how it can impact that water quality. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Identify the key measures that help us determine the health of a river, stream, or lake. • Explain why high levels of water quality are important to human and animal life. • Recognize the role stormwater plays in the quality of our local waterways. Teaching Points • Water is essential to human, animal, and plant life. As we learned in the previous lesson, only 0.3% of the earth’s water is usable by humans, and most of the fresh water we can use above the ground comes from rivers and streams. That’s why it’s important that we take good care of our rivers and maintain high water quality for human use, outdoor recreation, and aquatic life. • Some of the key measures that help determine water quality are turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, temperature, and pH. More on each of these points is covered in the Water Quality Lecture Notes document. • Stormwater is water that falls to earth’s surface as rain or snow. We get quite a bit of rain here in the Eugene- Springfield area - about 47 inches per year! When it rains, that water flows over streets, rooftops, driveways, and lawns as runoff. Runoff flows into storm drains, which connect to local waterways that eventually lead to the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers. • As the runoff flows across the ground, it picks up pollutants from things like litter, fertilizers, fluids used to maintain cars, and pet waste. Since stormwater isn’t treated the way drinking water and wastewater are, these pollutants can end up in our local waterways. It’s important we keep pollutant levels in stormwater runoff to a minimum. • There are some simple actions community members like you and your family can take to help us keep our water clean from street to stream! These include scooping your pet’s poop, picking up litter, avoiding use of certain chemicals and fertilizers, and fixing leaking cars. Procedures/Materials 1. Go over the water quality measures defined in the Water Quality Lecture Notes document. 2. Have students complete the Water Quality Prep Worksheet, where they’ll answer questions based on defined key words at the top of the page. Discuss the answers of the worksheet on the Water Quality Prep Answer Key, explaining the turbidity, dissolved oxygen, phosphates, nitrates, temperature, and pH of the McKenzie River. Ask students how close their guesses about the McKenzie River were to the actual numbers. 3. Open the “Only Rain Down the Drain” Interactive Game. Play together as a class, allowing for group discussion between each question before answering. 4. If time allows, visit the City of Springfield or City of Eugene’s Stormwater webpages to learn more about what each of the cities do to protect our local waterways. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 7 Lesson 4: Macroinvertebrates Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will learn about aquatic macroinvertebrates, their place in the food web, and the importance of clean water to their survival - and ultimately the survival of their predators. They’ll learn about the different bugs prevalent in our area’s waterways. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Define a macroinvertebrate and recognize their important role in the food web. • Explain the connection between clean water and the food web. • Identify some common macroinvertebrates such as mayflies, dragonflies, and aquatic earthworms. Key Words Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Metamorphosis Larva Nymph Life Cycle Food Web Teaching Points • Aquatic macroinvertebrates are water bugs (aquatic) that are visible to the naked eye (macro) and don’t have a spine (invertebrates). These insects are an important part of the food web in our area’s waterways. They are prey to fish, frogs, and other aquatic animals. • Some examples of macroinvertebrates are mayflies, dragonflies, damselflies, scud, aquatic earthworms, aquatic beetles, snails, water boatman, backswimmers, and caddisflies. (Each of these insects is shown in detail in the Macros Guide document.) • Just like us, maroinvertebrates require clean water to survive. No clean water would mean no macroinvertebrates, which in turn would mean trouble for the fish and frogs that eat macroinvertebrates. All living things require water, and a lack of clean water can disrupt the food web. • In order to protect macroinvertebrates and the food web in our local waterways, it’s important to take good care of our rivers and streams. Procedures/Materials 1. Ask students if they have spotted any insects near the Willamette or McKenzie Rivers and if they know what kinds of insects they have seen. 2. Play the CWU: Macroinvertebrates video to give students an overview of these bugs, where they’re found, and why they’re important to our local environment. 3. Open the CWU Macros Guide document and go through the photos of each of the macroinvertebrates. Have students refer to their Macroinvertebrates Overview handout and discuss the life cycle of a mayfly. Ask students if, after watching the video and viewing close-up images of these bugs, they now recognize insects they’ve seen near the Willamette or McKenzie Rivers. 4. Have students access their printed Aquatic Life in our Local Waterways Coloring Books and color in outlines of the different macros. If time allows, ask for volunteers to share their favorite colored-in bug and present one fact they learned during today’s lesson. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 8 Lesson 5: Wastewater Treatment Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will learn about where their dirty water goes after they flush the toilet, wash the dishes, or take a shower. They’ll learn about the underground pipe system that takes water from their home to the Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, the steps that are taken to clean wastewater, and that all cleaned water is returned to the Willamette River. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Explain where their wastewater goes to be cleaned. • Explain why effectively cleaning wastewater helps to protect our community’s health and local environment. • Identify the key steps in the wastewater treatment process. Key Words Wastewater Treatment Plant Pump Station Pipes Influent Effluent Clarifiers Aeration Basins Disinfection Laboratory Testing Teaching Points • As wastewater goes down the drain, it enters into a system of pipes underground. Large pumps help to move the wastewater through the pipes to the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission’s, or MWMC’s, Wastewater Treatment Plant. The MWMC is a partnership of the Cities of Eugene and Springfield, along with Lane County, and cleans wastewater for the whole region - about 35 million gallons of it every day (that’s 106 Olympic-size pools)! • Once wastewater arrives at the treatment plant, it goes through a series of different treatment processes over about 24 hours before it is ultimately returned to the Willamette River. The three main stages of wastewater treatment are physical, biological, and chemical. The different treatment processes we use remove large and small solids from the wastewater, along with bacteria and other pollutants. We’ll learn more about those different processes in the Wastewater Treatment video. • Cleaning water thoroughly is very important in keeping our community safe, while also protecting our local environment. The Willamette River is a popular spot for activities like kayaking and swimming. We want to keep it clean so people in the community can continue to enjoy our beautiful river. Additionally, aquatic life needs clean water to survive! By cleaning wastewater, we’re helping to protect a variety of animals in the food web. Water is a limited resource and cleaning dirty water ensures we aren’t wasting it. Procedures/Materials 1. Play the MWMC Wastewater Treatment video to give students an overview of the process. 2. Have students access their Wastewater Treatment Process Maze handout and complete the maze to connect the water droplet to the river. 3. Play a game of Wastewater Bingo using the MWMC Bingo boards. Distribute a Wastewater Bingo Board to each student (boards will need to be printed and cut). Every card has the same 24 phrases, just in a different order. Using the Questions & Answers sheet, read the description for each and have students mark out the answer on their board. Prior to moving on to the next description, ask for volunteers to share the correct answer. The first person(s) to mark off five phrases in a row, horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, wins. 4. Have students access their Wastewater Wise worksheet. Explain that students will track their water usage over a 24-hour period to see just how much water they use. They’ll then brainstorm three ways they could reduce their water usage. Have the class reconvene a few days later and discuss the ideas they came up with. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 9 Lesson 6: Microorganisms Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will learn about the good bacteria, or microorganisms, that play a key role in the wastewater treatment process. They’ll learn how these small bugs make a big impact in the overall biological health of wastewater. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Define a microorganism. • Explain the role microorganisms play in the wastewater treatment process. • Identify some of the common microorganisms present in the biological treatment of wastewater. Key Words Microorganism Good Bacteria Biological Treatment Aeration Basins Secondary Clarifiers Oxidation Organic Matter Teaching Points • Microorganisms are organisms that are so small they can only be seen with a microscope. • Microorganisms play an important role in the biological treatment of wastewater at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The good bacteria, or good bugs as we like to call them, are mixed with incoming wastewater in the aeration basins. They’re called aeration basins because we pump air, or oxygen, into the basins through a process called oxidation. If a person tried to swim in an aeration basin, they couldn’t because there is so much air they would sink to the bottom! Adding this oxygen into the water helps to break down any remaining solids, or pollutants, in the water. • As the pollutants remaining in the water are breaking down, the microorganisms eat them out of the water. These good bugs get fat and heavy, settling to the bottom of the secondary clarifiers to take a quick rest before they go back into the aeration basins to eat more solids. • The ideal age for bacteria in the aeration basins is five days. The presence of the right amount of microorganisms is an important indicator that the wastewater is being properly treated. Procedures/Materials 1. Play the CWU: Microorganisms video to give students an overview of the role microorganisms play in the wastewater treatment process. 2. Open the CWU Microorganisms Field Guide document and show students the photos illustrating each of the micros. Zoom in on each of the magnifying glasses in the document to take a closer look at examples of protozoa, bacteria, and metazoa. 3. Leaving the Microorganisms Field Guide document open, have students access their Tell a Micro Story worksheet. For this activity, they’ll select a micro from the document, give it a name, draw a picture of it, and tell their micro’s story. If time allows, have volunteers share their work. Graphic Credit: Vecteezy.com Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 10 Lesson 7: Pollution Prevention Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will learn about the pollutants that can affect our wastewater collection system, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and ultimately, our local waterways. They’ll learn about everyday actions they can take to make a difference in the pollution prevention effort. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Recognize the importance of preventing pollution from entering the wastewater collection system. • Identify actions that community members can take to prevent pollution, such as keeping trash out of the toilet. • Explain what happens to pollutants when they are flushed/ poured down the drain. Key Words Pollution FOG (Fats, Oils, & Grease) Toilet “Flushable” Wipes Pipes Clog Backups Waste Environment Source Reduction Teaching Points • About 99.9% of what comes into the Wastewater Treatment Plant is water and 0.1% is pollutants. The MWMC’s treatment processes remove more than 97.5% of solids. The best way to remove pollutants from water though is to prevent them from entering the wastewater system in the first place! That’s what we refer to as source reduction, or reducing pollutants at the source (toilet, drain, etc.). • Some common pollutants that we have to physically remove from wastewater at the treatment plant are fats, oils, grease, “flushable” wipes, baby wipes, paper towels, car fluids, fertilizers, paints, medications, plastics, and hygiene products. After solids are removed from wastewater, they are ground up and then taken over to the landfill. Since these materials will end up having to be trashed anyway, it’s best to dispose of them properly rather than send them down the drain. • Fats, oils, and grease can cause a lot of issues if poured down the drain for both families and the entire community. These materials harden in wastewater pipes and can cause clogs, which are often expensive to fix. Instead of pouring fats, oils, and grease down the kitchen sink, try pouring them in a can, waiting until they harden, and then throwing the can away in the trash. • Items like “flushable” wipes, baby wipes, and paper towels can also cause clogs in pipes. These items aren’t designed to dissolve in water the way toilet paper is, so they can get stuck in pipes and pumps, leading to blockages and backups. Remember, the toilet is not a trash can! The only things that should be flushed are the three Ps - pee, poop, and (toilet) paper. • Taking simple steps like these can make a big difference in protecting our local waterways. Procedures/Materials 1. Play the MWMC Pollution Prevention video to give students an overview of the pollutants that often enter the wastewater collection system and the actions we can take to prevent them. 2. Have a class discussion about what students can do to prevent pollution based on the video. 3. Have students access the Flush With Care handout, where they’ll unscramble key words pertaining to pollution prevention. 4. If time allows, visit the MWMC’s Pollution Prevention webpage to learn more. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 11 Lesson 8: Sustainability Overview & Key Learning Outcomes In this lesson, students will learn about the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission’s efforts to sustainably manage its resources, benefitting both the community it serves and the environment it protects. They’ll learn about byproducts of the wastewater treatment process like biosolids and recycled water that are reused to help poplar trees on our Biocycle Farm grow. By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: • Explain the benefits of sustainability efforts in protecting our local environment. • Identify the byproducts of the wastewater treatment process that the MWMC beneficially reuses: biosolids, recycled water, and renewable natural gas. • Recognize that the Biocycle Farm uses waste to produce wood, a renewable resource for our community. Key Words Sustainability Recycling Beneficial Reuse Natural Resources Renewable Non-Renewable Byproduct Recycled Water Biosolids Biocycle Farm Poplar Tree Renewable Natural Gas Fossil Fuels Waste Teaching Points • As we learned during our Wastewater Treatment lesson, the MWMC cleans water for the Eugene-Springfield area. They strive to do so in a sustainable way. Sustainability is the act of taking good care of the resources we have and reducing waste. • One example of sustainability in action is the MWMC’s use of biosolids on its poplar tree farm. Human waste is a natural part of everyday life, and it has to be removed from wastewater during the treatment process. Rather than trashing solids in the landfill, the MWMC transports them underground to the Biosolids Management Facility, where they’re turned into a safe fertilizer. • That fertilizer helps poplar trees on the MWMC’s Biocycle Poplar Farm grow. It’s also applied on grass farms to help local farmers. After the poplar trees grow for about 12 years, they’re harvested and turned into plywood, wood chips, and other wood products that are sold in the community. • The MWMC uses recycled water, or treated wastewater, to irrigate the poplar trees, along with landscaping at the treatment plant. This allows us to save our drinking water and recycle water we already have! • Another example of the MWMC’s sustainability efforts is the reuse of energy produced during the wastewater treatment process. The MWMC is currently working on an exciting project to convert this energy into renewable natural gas, which will be used as a clean fuel for cars. This will help to reduce the amount of gasoline we’re using that’s made from non-renewable, or limited, natural resources. Procedures/Materials 1. Play the MWMC Sustainability video to give an overview of the MWMC’s sustainability efforts. 2. Have students complete their Waste to Wood worksheet, where they’ll fill in missing key words using a word bank to tell the story of biosolids and recycled water being used on the poplar farm. Go over the answers on the Waste to Wood Answer Key. 3. Ask students what sustainability means to them and what ideas they have for reducing waste. 4. If time allows, visit the MWMC’s Biosolids Management Facility and Biocycle Farm webpages. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 12 Wrap-Up Jeopardy Game Wrap-Up Game To help students review what they’ve learned during Clean Water University, play a fun game of Jeopardy using our PowerPoint presentation. Students will answer questions on water quality, macroinvertebrates, wastewater treatment, microorganisms, pollution prevention, and sustainability. This game can be played either in person or virtually, with the teacher managing the PowerPoint presentation either in classroom or via screen sharing. If you need technical assistance or would like MWMC staff to facilitate the game via Zoom or another video conferencing platform, please email lspiro@springfield-or.gov. How to Play Clean Water University Jeopardy 1.Access the CWU Jeopardy PowerPoint presentation and play the slideshow from the beginning. Additionally, open a blank spreadsheet or use a piece of paper and a pen to keep score. Share the PowerPoint presentation with your class either on a projector if in person or through screen sharing in your video conferencing platform if virtual. 2.Split your class into 3-5 teams. Ask each team to designate one team leader to announce answers to different questions aloud to the class. If playing in a virtual environment, have each team leader create their own team group chat in order to discuss their answers. 3.Starting with Team 1, have students select a category/point value. When the team makes that selection, simply click on the point value within the specified category’s column. This will take you to the question associated with that specific category/point value. 4.Each question slide contains a progress bar with a duration of 30 seconds, which begins automatically once you click to that slide. The team that selected the question will have those 30 seconds to agree on one final answer, which must be in the form of a question. Have the team leader announce their answer before the time runs out. After the time is up, the correct answer will appear on screen for the whole class to see. If the team answers before time is up, click in any blank area on the slide to reveal the correct answer. 5.If the team answers the question correctly, they win the designated number of points for that specific question. If they answer incorrectly, they lose that number of points. Keep track of those scores using the previously mentioned spreadsheet or pen and paper. 6.Once the correct answer has been revealed, click the question to be taken back to the grid of categories and point values. Move on to the other teams, repeating steps 3-5 for each team. Categories/point values that have already been selected by another team will turn purple. 7.After all 30 questions have been answered, click Final Jeopardy within the categories/point values grid. All teams will get to answer this question. Teams will be able to see this last question before the countdown begins and select a number of points to wager, with a maximum of their current score. If the team answers correctly, they win that number of points and if they answer incorrectly, they lose that number of points. Once each team has selected a number of points, click anywhere in the slide to start the countdown. Ask each team leader to write their answer down on a piece of paper, and wait to reveal their answer until the timer has ended and all teams have come up with an answer. If virtual, have each team leader send their answer to you in a private message. Then click in any blank area on the slide to reveal the correct answer. 8.Tally the final scores for each team and reveal your winner! Have fun! Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year 13 Conclusions In Closing That’s it! You’ve made it to the end of our Clean Water University virtual curriculum for the 2022-2023 school year. Thank you so much again for your participation. We hope you found the materials valuable in teaching your students about the importance of clean water. We would love to hear your feedback. Please feel free to send any questions or comments to lspiro@springfield-or.gov and be on the lookout for a feedback survey that will be emailed to you. As a reminder if you haven’t done so already, please submit proof of your participation in Clean Water University to lspiro@springfield-or.gov to enter your entire class into a drawing for memberships to the Eugene Science Center. See page 3 for more details on both this incentive and the $500 donation to participating schools’ STEM/science programs. Recap of Key Learning Outcomes •Explain where water comes from. •Identify the various stages of the water cycle. •Recognize water as an essential resource. •Explain how drinking water gets to their home. •Identify various sources of drinking water. •Recognize that water must be properly cleaned to rid it of pollutants before it can become drinking water. •Identify the key measures that help us determine the health of a river, stream, or lake. •Explain why high levels of water quality are important to human and animal life. •Recognize the role stormwater plays in the quality of our local waterways. •Define a macroinvertebrate and recognize their important role in the food web. •Explain the connection between clean water and the food web. •Identify some common macroinvertebrates such as mayflies, dragonflies, and aquatic earthworms. •Explain where their wastewater goes to be cleaned. •Explain why effectively cleaning wastewater helps to protect our community’s health and local environment. •Identify the key steps in the wastewater treatment process. •Define a microorganism. •Explain the role microorganisms play in the wastewater treatment process. •Identify some of the common microorganisms present in the biological treatment of wastewater. •Recognize the importance of preventing pollution from entering the wastewater collection system. •Identify actions that community members can take to prevent pollution, such as keeping trash out of the toilet. •Explain what happens to pollutants when they are flushed/poured down the drain. •Explain the benefits of sustainability efforts in protecting our local environment. •Identify the byproducts of the wastewater treatment process that the MWMC beneficially reuses: biosolids, recycled water, and renewable natural gas. •Recognize that the Biocycle Farm uses waste to produce wood, a renewable resource for our community. Attahment 1,Teacher’s Guide for 2022-2023 school year Clean Water University 2022 In-Person Event Debrief Summary Overview The in-person event portion of Clean Water University came back in October 2022 after a two-year hiatus due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2022 event was set-up based on feedback from staff and teachers after the 2019 in-person event. After the event was completed, the MWMC Communications team held three debrief sessions with staff from Springfield and Eugene to capture what went well, what could be tweaked or changed for the 2023 event and overall impressions and thoughts. Additionally, feedback from teachers was captured. The following summarizes the feedback received and suggestions for the 2023 in-person event: What Went Well • Activity booth topics continue to be engaging; loved the addition of the Water Jeopardy game • Amount of time at the event – 2 hours – continues to work well for schools • Location of bus drop off and pick up was great • Use of the pole barn made it easy to keep track of students with booths not so spread out • The pole barn allowed us to meet ADA requirements, i.e. not being on rocks or uneven grass • Keep giving prize/goodie bags to teachers at the end to hand out back at schools • Signage location was helpful for both for getting to the event location and for the booths • Availability of restrooms and hand-washing stations was nice • Selfie stations was fun • Electricity already available in pole barn was convenient • Not having to rent tents, perform locates and meet vendor to set up and tear down What to Possibly Change • Sound in pole barn at times was loud; possibly spread booths out more • ADA – establish a permanent route for the tour as part of CWU and create map showing it • Tour booth – move out of the pole barn to reduce sound and provide more space for other booths; possibly closer to start location of tour • Biofilter booth – move down to the bioswale to reduce the amount of time students are walking to and from the bioswale plus to reduce sound and provide more space for other booths o Possibly have classes do the Biofilter booth at the end of the tour o If so, will need more identification cards for students to use • Biosolids to Poplar – have more tactile items in booth and possibly an activity/game • Cornhole – set up to have 3 students throw at a time • Macros – add a third table to set up • Have a portable toilet available for bus drivers down in the loop where they park and wait • Possibly have a defibrillator available in addition to the first aid kit • Add signs to handwashing stations about foot pump for water Attachment 2 Debrief Summary for 2022 In-Person Event Page 1 of 2 • Possibly have microphones for tour, bioswale activity, and/or others as needed Additional Thoughts • Facilities/Maintenance staff had more involvement this year with the use of the pole barn which included prep, set up, and cleanup of the pole barn • Had to access additional equipment during the event and while booths were slide over without issues to do so, it was not ideal • Recommend that no testing and piloting of new equipment or process occur at the plant during the event • Staffing was thin which made it challenging to help staff booths, perform daily work and address the equipment failure that occurred • Hold a planning meeting at the plant for staff that would like to or needs to attend prior to the event in addition to the staff orientation • The pole barn has plus and minus, is there another location at the plant to hold the event that is more ideal but also allows us to meet ADA requirements? Attachment 2 Debrief Summary for 2022 In-Person Event Page 2 of 2 ______________________________________________________________________________ AGENDA VI. • • • • • M E M O R A N D U M DATE: December 1, 2016 TO: Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FROM: Josh Newman, Managing Civil Engineer SUBJECT: MWMC Biogas Opportunities and RFP Update ACTION REQUESTED: Information only, no action requested _____________________________________________________________________ ISSUE Opportunities for marketing the MWMC’s biogas continue to evolve, in part due to the rising monetary value of state and federal environmental credits associated with Renewable Natural Gas (RNG). Accordingly, staff is exploring these opportunities and has issued a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit interest from prospective RNG buyers (Attachment 1). BACKGROUND In 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authorized a pathway for biogas derived from anaerobic digestion of domestic wastewater solids to be considered a “Cellulosic Biofuel” under the federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). This pathway allows RNG made from the MWMC’s biogas to qualify for D3 Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs), which are the highest dollar value environmental attribute available under the RFS program. A detailed discussion of the federal RFS and state low carbon fuel programs is provided in Attachment 2. In 2015, the MWMC completed an assessment to determine how best to use its biogas. The study included a triple bottom line (TBL) assessment of biogas utilization alternatives, which was presented to the Commission in February 2015. The highest TBL ranked alternative involved retaining the current 800 kW co-generation system plus addition of further biogas treatment to allow gas currently flared to be sold into the RNG fuel market. In the long term, the study recommended continued tracking and exploration of a list of items, including: • Increasing biogas production through FOG and other high strength wastes • Status of incentives and funding opportunities for renewable fuels • Incentives and barriers for conversion of fleets to be able to run on RNG Attachment 1 December 1, 2016 Memo to MWMC Page 1 of 3 Memo: MWMC Biogas Opportunities and RFP Update December 1, 2016Page 2 of 3 In March of 2016, staff learned of a proposal developed by equipment manufacturer Clean Methane Systems, Inc. (CMS). In the proposal concept, CMS would aggregate, treat and transport biogas produced in Oregon (including municipal and private sector biogas) to an injection point on the interstate natural gas transmission pipeline and market the aggregated biogas for sale under a single off-taker agreement. Based on the interest indicated by CMS and subsequently others for potential purchase of the MWMC’s biogas, staff developed an RFP concept to formally solicit interest in such a purchase. In June of 2016, staff issued a communication packet item describing an outline for the RFP concept, which was roughly based on the CMS concept above. DISCUSSION MWMC’s biogas is a renewable energy commodity with a variety of market possibilities. Since the initial conversations with CMS, staff has been in communication with a variety of RNG off-takers, project developers, equipment makers, renewable fuel credit brokers, and other wastewater utilities. Based on these discussions, staff has determined the following: • Low forecasted electricity prices and associated revenue potential: Renewable electricity prices are projected to be stagnant over the next decade in the Pacific Northwest in general and in EWEB’s service area in particular. Long paybacks on investments to produce renewable energy with biogas are projected. • Increasing opportunities in renewable fuel markets: Biogas-to-vehicle-fuelprojects are gaining momentum due to the steadily increasing value of renewable attributes. High value federal D3 RINs appear strong for the next 5 years (and potentially longer). • State credit programs: State low carbon fuel programs are moving forward in the western states. However, confidence in these programs is currently less robust than the federal RFS: o California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is the most mature of the state programs and currently has a viable LCSF credit market. o Oregon’s Clean Fuel Standard has followed suit but is at an earlier stage of development than California’s LCFS. o Washington recently adopted a Clean Air Rule which will become effective in 2017. • Biogas scrubbing equipment is highly scalable: An advantage of moving toward vehicle fuel is that the equipment will better accommodate future increases in biogas production (and associated revenue) without flaring should MWMC choose to grow its service area or implement a FOG or high strength waste program in the future. Attachment 1 December 1, 2016 Memo to MWMC Page 2 of 3 Memo: MWMC Biogas Opportunities and RFP Update December 1, 2016 Page 3 of 3 While the trend of increasing value in renewable fuel environmental attributes is creating demand and interest in the MWMC’s biogas, obstacles to project implementation and other uncertainties persist, including: • Restrictive pipeline connection requirements • Staff is unfamiliar with equipment operations and maintenance requirements • Uncertainty of the long-term market value of D3 RINs NEXT STEPS The following proposal evaluation schedule was included in the RFP (as shown in Attachment 1): Issue Request for Proposals December 2, 2016 Pre-Submittal Conference and Site Tour December 15, 2016 Final Questions Deadline January 6, 2017 Due Date for Proposals January 13, 2017 Oral Interviews, if necessary January 25, 2017 Tentative Selection of Proposer February 1, 2017 The RFP is structured to allow flexibility in terms of cost, revenue and risk sharing. Staff anticipates the following variables will be better understood after reviewing the proposals: • Revenue potential • Biogas scrubbing design and construction delivery and ownership options • MWMC capital investment requirements • Interconnection options and requirements ACTION REQUESTED Information only, no action requested. Attachment 1 December 1, 2016 Memo to MWMC Page 3 of 3 240 Country Club Road, Suite A Eugene, Oregon 97401 541-338-8135 FAX: 541-338-8180 MWMC RNG Upgrades Technical Memorandum 3 Scenario Analysis 15 June 2018 Prepared for Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission 410 River Avenue Eugene, OR 97404 K/J Project No. 1876001*00 Attachment 2 Kennedy Jenks Technical Memo #3 June 15, 2018 TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades i Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. i List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ i Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 1 Section 1: Purpose ...................................................................................... 1-1 Section 2: Project Background ................................................................... 2-1 Section 3: Scenarios ................................................................................... 3-1 Section 4: WTE Model Description ............................................................. 4-1 Section 5: Key Assumptions ....................................................................... 5-1 Section 6: Results ....................................................................................... 6-1 Section 7: Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................... 7-1 List of Tables Table 6-1: WTE Model Summary Results for each Scenario List of Figures Figure 4-1: WTE Model Features Figure 6-1: Average Annual Cash Flow (Revenues and Costs) Figure 6-2: Cumulative 10-Year Net Savings or Cost Figure 6-3: NPV of Annual Net Savings/Costs for each Scenario Figure 6-4: NPV of Annual Net Savings/Costs for each Scenario - Ranked Figure 6-5: NPV of the Medium Case Scenarios TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Executive Summary - 1 Executive Summary The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) is interested in making a final decision on a renewable natural gas (RNG) upgrade facility and pipeline at its regional Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF). The goal of this Technical Memorandum (TM) is to analyze the economic outcomes from a range of possible scenarios so that the MWMC can make a final Go/No-Go decision on the RNG Upgrade project. To accomplish this, we used the credit price forecasts developed in TM 1 and the capital cost and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs developed in TM 2 as inputs into Kennedy/Jenks’ “WTE Model” to determine the cost- effectiveness of various scenarios. Scenarios The scenarios in this analysis reflect the five possible combinations of the available RNG credits from governmental fuel policy programs, including: 1. Federal Renewable Fuels Standard – Renewable Identification Number (RIN) only 2. California Low Carbon Fuel Standard – LCFS only 3. Oregon Clean Fuels Program – CFS only 4. RIN plus LCFS 5. RIN plus CFS Each combination is further combined with the three credit price forecasts (low, medium, and high) to form 15 possible scenarios to analyze: 1. RIN only – Low 2. RIN only – Med 3. RIN only – High 4. LCFS only – Low 5. LCFS only – Med 6. LCFS only – High 7. CFS only – Low 8. CFS only – Med 9. CFS only – High 10. RIN+LCFS – Low 11. RIN+LCFS – Med 12. RIN+LCFS – High 13. RIN+CFS – Low 14. RIN+CFS – Med 15. RIN+CFS – High These scenarios represent the bookends of this economic analysis, and while there are possible outcomes that exceed the high forecast and go below the low forecast, these represent the vast majority of the reasonably expected possible outcomes. A lifecycle financial analysis was done for each scenario. 10 years, rather than 20 years, was chosen for the analysis period because of the increased uncertainty of the credit revenue and O&M costs after 10 years. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Executive Summary - 2 Key Assumptions There are four key assumptions in this scenario analysis: 1. Capital Cost: Total is $8.8 million. (Biogas equipment cost is based on the average of the four “plant tour” vendors = $2.2 million noted in TM 2. NW Natural pipeline and point of receipt equipment = $1.7 million. Balance of the plant, engineering, and installation = $3.7 million. Contingency = $1.2 million.) The analysis assumes the available capital reserve would be used to fund this project and no bonds would be issued, thus there is no debt service or interest expense included in the analysis. 2. O&M Cost: Annual O&M cost starts at $280,000 per year and escalates with inflation at 2.3%. (O&M cost is based on the average of the four “plant tour” vendors from TM 2.) 3. Cost of Digester Heat: Annual cost is $186,000. (Annual digester heat cost is based on the lower of either the use of the boiler fueled with natural gas, or using the heat from the Jenbacher engine and selling the electricity generated to EWEB. Running the boiler to create digester heat has a slightly lower cost.) 4. Expected Credit Revenue: The credit level 10-year price forecasts from TM 1 (low, medium, and high) was used for this analysis. Results Metric The Net Present Value (NPV) is the most common financial evaluation tool used in capital budgeting to analyze the profitability of an investment or project. It takes into account all costs and benefits of the project over its life – it is a lifecycle cost analysis. NPV, or “net present worth,” in this case is an indicator of how much value an investment or project adds to the MWMC. NPV analysis compares the value of a dollar today to the value of the same dollar in the future, taking inflation and financial returns into account. Another way to look at the NPV is that the MWMC should be indifferent to accepting the 10-year cash flow and savings from a project, or accepting a lump sum current year amount of cash (the NPV). In general, if the NPV is positive it should be considered for implementation. This analysis calculated the NPV for each of the 15 scenarios. The NPV was calculated using the annual net revenue or cost over the 10-year analysis period. Annual net revenue or cost is calculated by subtracting the annual credit revenue from the annual O&M cost. Results The figure below shows the NPV of each of the scenarios, ranked from the worst financial scenario on the left to the best financial scenario on the right. The scenarios with the blue bars above the zero line indicate scenarios with a positive NPV or net benefit to the MWMC, and the red bars below the zero line indicate scenarios with a net cost to the MWMC. There are seven scenarios with a positive NPV and eight with a negative NPV. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Executive Summary - 3 Figure ES-1: NPV of Net Savings/Cost of Each Scenario It should be noted that not all of these scenarios have the same probability of occurring. All the red bar (negative NPV) scenarios are considered to have a low probability of occurring while the blue bars (positive NPV) are much more likely to occur. The Medium scenarios (Med) cases are more likely to occur than the Low or High scenarios. The figure below shows the NPV for only the Medium cases for each of the five credit scenario combinations. Figure ES-2: NPV of the Medium Case Scenarios ($10,000,000) ($5,000,000) $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 Net Present Value ($)$7,587,000 $4,313,000 $14,592,000 $15,875,000 $21,035,000 ($10,000,000) ($5,000,000) $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 CFS only LCFS only RIN+CFS RIN only RIN+LCFSNet Present Value ($) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Executive Summary - 4 There are three key takeaways from this analysis.  First is the recognition that the availability of RINs is important to making this project cost-effective. In almost every case where RINs are available the project has a positive NPV, and these cases are considered to be most likely to occur. The cases that have a negative NPV, except for the “RINs only – Low” case, are because the RINs are not available, and all these cases are considered to have a low probability of occurring. All of these cases are in the Medium-Low portion of the risk matrix described in TM 1.  Second is that the upside benefit is significant, while the downside cost is relatively modest. The NPV range of all scenarios is from $24.4 million to -$8.6 million. The upside benefit is three times that of the downside cost. Looking at only the Medium case scenarios the NPV range is $21.0 million to -$7.6 million. This is important because the upside benefit scenarios are considered significantly more likely to occur than the downside cost scenarios. From a perspective on MWMC customer rates (where $320,000 equals 1% of the rate base), using the net annual savings for the Medium case scenarios represent a range of 0% to 11% potential positive annual rate impact. Again, the scenarios that include RINs are considered the most likely to occur, meaning the positive cash flow from these scenarios could substantially mitigate future MWMC rate increase.  Third is that the average annual cash flow is positive in every case. The figure below shows the expected average annual revenues from the credits (the blue bars) and the O&M costs (the red line) for each scenario. The annual cash flow from the project, not including the cash paid out for the capital cost of the project, is the revenue minus the costs. For each scenario the MWMC would, on average over the 10-year analysis period, see a positive cash flow. Figure ES-3: Cash Flow (Average Annual Revenues and Costs) $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000 Annual Revenue & Cost ($/Yr)Avg Annual Revenue ($/Yr)Avg Annual Costs ($/Yr) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Executive Summary - 5 Conclusion and Recommendation Kennedy/Jenks’ conclusion is that the legislative risk of the credit programs (RFS, LCFS and CFS) being eliminated or substantially reduced is medium-low. That is not to say there is no risk. Given all that we know, all three programs appear secure for the foreseeable future. The economic analysis shows that the most likely scenarios result in significant benefit to the MWMC. Given the magnitude of the benefit relative to the potential cost, and that every scenario creates a positive net cash flow to operations, we recommend that the RNG Upgrade project proceed to development contingent upon reaching acceptable agreements with NW Natural and Trillium. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 1-1 Section 1: Purpose The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) is interested in making a final decision on a renewable natural gas (RNG) upgrade facility and pipeline at its regional Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF). The goal of this Technical Memorandum (TM) is to analyze the economic outcomes from a range of possible scenarios so that MWMC can make a final Go/No-Go decision on the RNG Upgrade project. To accomplish this, we used the credit price forecasts developed in TM 1 and the capital cost and O&M cost developed in TM 2 as inputs into Kennedy/Jenks “Waste-to-Energy (WTE) Model” to determine the cost-effectiveness of various scenarios and credit price forecasts. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 2-1 Section 2: Project Background The MWMC (referred to as producer, per the NWN agreement) provides wastewater treatment services for the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan area. The MWMC’s WPCF, located at 410 River Avenue, has a dry weather design flow of 49 million gallons per day (MGD). The WPCF uses a mesophilic anaerobic digestion process to convert wastewater solids into Class B biosolids, which are applied as a soil amendment to the MWMC’s own dedicated biosolids application site and to privately owned agricultural land. In addition to biosolids, the anaerobic digestion process also produces an energy‐rich biogas. The MWMC currently produces 470,000 cubic feet per day (cfd) of biogas from its digesters, which is approximately 325 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) or 103,000 million British thermal units per year (MMBTU/year) at an average heating value of 600 BTU per cubic foot. The MWMC does not have a program to accept Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) directly into digesters to boost gas production, nor has it planned to do so. About 70% of the biogas is used in an 800 kW Jenbacher internal combustion (IC) engine that supplies 55% of the WPCF’s electrical needs and waste heat for the digesters. The combined heat and power (CHP) system also includes a gas scrubbing system to remove water, hydrogen sulfide, and siloxanes. The Jenbacher engine was recently overhauled and the CHP system is in operation as of March 2018. The other 30% of the biogas is flared. Typically, biogas is fed to the boiler with natural gas as a back-up. Starting in late 2011, the MWMC embarked on a Biogas Utilization Study. The purpose of the study was to evaluate potential uses of the MWMC’s biogas to identify the best use given current technical and financial opportunities, as well as opportunities for environmental and community benefits. The study focused on identification, screening, and assessment of potential biogas use concepts. The outcome of the study was the identification of three viable options or pathways for maximizing the value of the biogas:  Pathway 1 - CHP Upsizing  Pathway 2 - RNG Conversion  Pathway 3 - Combined CHP + RNG Initially Pathway 3 was deemed the best alternative. Pathway 3 would have continued the operation of the CHP system and would supply the remaining biogas to Northwest Natural Gas (NWN) to use in a voluntary greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction program authorized by Oregon Senate Bill 844 (SB 844). Unfortunately, NWN decided not to pursue this program. That made Pathway 1 the next best alternative. This Pathway would upsize the CHP system from 800 kW to 1,200 kW and utilize all the biogas available from the plant. The Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) has conditionally agreed to allow the MWMC’s original 800 W size CHP system to be grandfathered in at the current retail rate structure. Any increase in the size of the MWMC’s generation capacity would void that agreement. This arrangement follows from EWEB’s market position with respect to its power generation capacity and the price of wholesale power, which is regionally at historic lows. Among other considerations, this market position underlies EWEB’s strategic planning model, which over the last several years has resulted in policies and rate structures that make upsizing the MWMC’s generation capacity financially unsupportable. On the other hand, by keeping the current 800 kW system intact, the MWMC can continue to bypass its retail electric power costs. Discussions with EWEB managers indicate that these market conditions appear to be with us for the foreseeable future. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 2-2 In 2015, Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) rules changed to allow biogas to qualify as a cellulosic biofuel, which made Pathway 2 become the most cost-effective option for the MWMC. Pathway 2 would provide all the biogas for transportation fuel and use natural gas in the boilers for heating the digesters. The value of Pathway 2 is derived from the Renewable Identification Number (RIN) credits from the federal RFS, and either California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credits or Oregon’s Clean Fuel Standard (CFS) credits. In December 2016 the MWMC issued an RFP for the purchase of the RNG for vehicle fuel use. The MWMC chose Trillium as the off-taker of the RNG over the two other proposers. Further discussions regarding the terms for Trillium’s purchase of the RNG from the MWMC are planned to occur as this project progresses. To facilitate the delivery of the RNG, an additional interconnection agreement with NWN is required. Portland BES, who is also pursuing an RNG project, has taken the lead on negotiating this interconnection agreement, but that agreement has not yet been finalized. This predesign focuses on the viability of implementing Pathway 2 – RNG Conversion project, and includes:  An assessment of the risks associated with reliance on the federal and state renewable fuel incentive programs.  Verification of the technology options, refined project cost estimates and a conceptual design of the RNG facility.  Strategies for rapid project implementation to maximize capture of federal and state renewable fuel incentives. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 3-1 Section 3: Scenarios This section describes the scenarios that are analyzed using the WTE Model. The scenarios reflect the five possible combinations of the available RNG credits from governmental fuel policy programs, including:  Federal Renewable Fuels Standard – RIN credits  California Low Carbon Fuel Standard – LCFS credits  Oregon Clean Fuels Program – OCFS credits There are five possible combinations of these credit programs applicable to the MWMC: 1. RIN only 2. LCFS only 3. OCFS only 4. RIN plus LCFS 5. RIN plus OCFS There are also three credit price forecasts identified in TM 1: 1. High 2. Medium 3. Low The five credit program combinations are combined with the three credit price forecasts to form 15 possible scenarios: 1. RIN only - Low 2. RIN only - Med 3. RIN only - High 4. LCFS only - Low 5. LCFS only - Med 6. LCFS only - High 7. CFS only - Low 8. CFS only - Med 9. CFS only - High 10. RIN+LCFS - Low 11. RIN+LCFS - Med 12. RIN+LCFS - High TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 3-2 13. RIN+CFS - Low 14. RIN+CFS - Med 15. RIN+CFS - High These scenarios represent the bookends of this economic analysis, and while there are possible outcomes that exceed the High forecast and go below the Low forecast, these represent the vast majority of the reasonably expected possible outcomes. Kennedy/Jenks’ WTE Model was used to conduct a lifecycle financial analysis for each scenario using the key assumptions. The WTE Model is explained in detail in the next section. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 4-1 Section 4: WTE Model Description WTE Model Kennedy/Jenks developed the WTE Model to conduct business case evaluations (BCE) or cost-effectiveness analyses on potential wastewater treatment plant energy projects. The WTE Model has been refined and enhanced over the years while analyzing over 35 WTE projects. The WTE Model can quickly compare different project configurations, options, and scenarios. The WTE Model can:  Estimate the amount of digester gas produced from existing influent, and by adding FOG, food waste, and other high strength waste streams.  Calculate the capital costs from biogas upgrading equipment, waste receiving equipment, and generation equipment.  Calculate any applicable credits or financial incentives using our incentive database.  Do a thorough BCE or cost-effectiveness analysis. The WTE Model uses nine modules to perform these tasks as shown on the figure below. Figure 4-1: WTE Model Features TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 4-2 The BCE is done using an integrated Cost-Effectiveness Spreadsheet (CES) which is a sophisticated model that takes into consideration all lifecycle costs and benefits to determine if an energy project is cost-effective. The CES has been refined over the past 10 years; and has been applied well over 100 times to evaluate various energy projects from WTE projects, to solar PV projects, to hydro projects, to energy efficiency projects. To accomplish the BCE, a spreadsheet has been built that has as its inputs: equipment and capital costs, O&M costs, electric generation or savings, financing costs, inflation and utility cost escalators, engineering costs, credits, renewable fuel credits, incentives, and the avoided costs of electricity. On an annual basis the CES calculates a total net annual cost of the project. It does this every year of the life of the project or for each year in the analysis period. Using these net cost estimates the CES determines the project’s Average Annual Net Savings or cash flow, the Cumulative Net Savings, the Net Present Value (NPV) of the annual net savings, and the Rate of Return. The WTE Model allows for easy and quick modifications of key assumptions or inputs to run multiple scenarios of a project. The WTE Model was used to do a BCE for each of the 15 scenarios identified in Section 3. The cost and engineering estimates from the WTE Model are within +50% to -30% which is representative of a planning level study as developed by the America Association of Cost Engineers (AACE). TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 5-1 Section 5: Key Assumptions Key Assumptions The following key assumptions were used in all of the scenario analyses: 1. Project Online Year: 2020. 2. Analysis Period: 10 years, rather than 20 years, was chosen for the analysis period because of the increased uncertainty of the credit revenue and O&M costs after 10 years. 3. Capital Cost: Total is $8.8 million. Biogas upgrading equipment cost is based on the average of the four “plant tour” vendors = $2.2 million noted in TM 2. NW Natural pipeline and point of receipt equipment = $1.7 million. Balance of the plant, engineering, and installation = $3.7 million. Contingency = $1.2 million. 4. Cash vs Borrow: The analysis assumes the available capital reserve would be used to fund this project and no bonds would be issued, thus there is no debt service or interest expense included in the analysis. 5. Inflation: 2.3% per year. 6. O&M Cost: Annual O&M cost starts at $280,000 per year and escalates with inflation. O&M cost is based on the average of the four “plant tour” vendors from TM 2. 7. Cost of Digester Heat: Annual cost is $186,000. Annual digester heat cost is based on the lower of either the use of the boiler fueled with natural gas, or using the heat from the Jenbacher engine and selling the electricity generated to EWEB. Running the boiler to create digester heat has a slightly lower cost. The cost to maintain the boiler is included in this value. 8. Expected Credit Revenue: The credit level 10-year price forecasts from TM 1 (Low, Medium, and High) was used for this analysis. 9. Buyer/Off-Taker Percentage (Trillium): The potential buyer/off-taker of the RNG is Trillium. The percent of the credit value taken by Trillium in the MWMC-Trillium Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is 20% if the RNG is used for vehicle fuel in California and 30% if used in Oregon. The higher Oregon percentage is because of the lower credit prices in Oregon compared to California. 10. Digester Gas Energy Content (MMBtu): The amount of digester gas available to convert to RINs is determined by the lowest output of the potential biogas equipment packages and that was 200 cubic feet per minute (cfm) or 104,000 million British Thermal Units per year (MMBtu/Year) [200 cfm multiplied by the assumed heating value content of 990 Btu/cf times 60 minutes/hour times 24 hours/day times 365 days/year, all divided by 1,000,000]. This amount increases by 2% per year based on the expected influent flow rate of growth. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 5-2 11. Natural Gas Commodity Price: The assumed starting price for pipeline natural gas in 2020 is $3.00/MMBtu, escalating $0.25/MMBtu annually through 2023, and then staying flat at $4.00/MMBtu from 2023 through 2029. 12. Carbon Intensity (CI): The CI is expressed in grams of carbon dioxide per mega joule (gCO2e/MJ). The CI score is necessary to determine how many LCFS or OCFS credits are granted to the MWMC per MMBtu of RNG consumed in a transportation application. The MWMC can either use the default CI for California WWTP RNG used in the LCFS which is 30.92 or it can use the OR-GREET v 3.0 to create its own site-specific CI calculation. A lower CI will mean higher credits from the CFP, so it may be worth creating an MWMC site-specific CI calculation. 13. Digester Feedstock: FOG will not be added at a later date and therefore will not impact the value of credits from D3 Cellulosic Biofuel to D5 Advanced Biofuel. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-1 Section 6: Results This section describes the two metrics used in this analysis to analyze the results, cash flow and Net Present Value, and then shows the results from the WTE Model for the 15 scenarios. Results Metrics 6.1 Cash Flow: The cash flow of a project is important to see its annual effect on operating cost. Projects that have a positive cash flow do not put upward pressure on rates, and can sometimes relieve pressure on future rate increases. Annual cash flow is calculated by subtracting the total O&M costs from the total credit revenue. For this analysis we did not assume the MWMC would borrow for this project, but would rather use cash from the capital reserve to fund the up-front capital costs of the project. This is significant for two reasons. First, the MWMC does not incur interest expense on the project, thereby lowering the overall lifecycle cost of the project significantly. Second, there is no annual debt service to be paid, so from an operational perspective, the large potential credit revenue from the most likely scenario, minus the modest O&M cost, results in an annual positive cash flow from the project. An average annual cash flow was calculated for each of the 15 scenarios. Net Present Value (NPV): NPV is the most common financial evaluation tool used in capital budgeting to analyze the profitability of an investment or project. It takes into account all costs and benefits of the project over its life – it is a lifecycle cost analysis. NPV, or “net present worth,” in this case is an indicator of how much value an investment or project adds to the MWMC bottomline. NPV analysis compares the value of a dollar today to the value of the same dollar in the future, taking inflation and financial returns into account. Another way to look at the NPV is that the MWMC should be indifferent to accepting the 10-year series of cash flows and savings from a project, or accepting a lump sum current year amount of cash (the NPV). In general, if the NPV of a project is positive it should be considered for implementation. The discount rate is an important factor in the NPV analysis. The rate is used to discount future cash flows to their present value. Typically, an agency’s weighted average cost of capital is used as the discount rate, plus an appropriate adjustment for risk. For this analysis we used a conservative weighted cost of capital of 3%, and added a risk factor of 0.5%, for a discount rate of 3.5%. The NPV was calculated for each of the 15 scenarios using the annual net revenue/cost over the 10-year analysis period. Annual net revenue/cost is calculated by subtracting the annual credit revenue (from the RINs and LCFS) from the annual O&M cost of the RNG upgrade equipment. TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-2 Results 6.2 The WTE Model was used to calculate the annual and lifecycle cost of each of the 15 scenarios. The table below shows the average annual cost over the 10-year analysis period, the average annual revenue, and the resulting average annual net savings/cost for the scenario. As well, the cumulative 10-year savings was calculated by summing each of the individual annual net savings results. The NPV was calculated using the series of ten individual annual net savings/cost calculations with a 3.5% discount rate. Table 6-1: WTE Model Summary Results for each Scenario Scenario Credit Market Price Forecast Avg Annual Costs ($/Yr) Avg Annual Revenue ($/Yr) Cash Flow Avg Annual Net Savings/Cost ($/Yr) Cumulative 10-Year Savings/Cost ($) NPV of Annual Net Savings/Cost ($) RIN only Low $540,000 $1,435,000 $895,000 ($60,000) ($1,300,000) Medium $540,000 $3,541,000 $3,001,000 $21,001,000 $15,875,000 High $540,000 $4,048,000 $3,508,000 $26,069,000 $20,079,000 LCFS only Low $540,000 $633,000 $93,000 ($8,081,000) ($7,852,000) Medium $540,000 $1,067,000 $527,000 ($3,740,000) ($4,313,000) High $540,000 $965,000 $425,000 ($4,758,000) ($5,159,000) CFS only Low $540,000 $544,000 $4,000 ($8,969,000) ($8,633,000) Medium $540,000 $674,000 $134,000 ($7,664,000) ($7,587,000) High $540,000 $674,000 $134,000 ($7,664,000) ($7,587,000) RIN+LCFS Low $540,000 $1,644,000 $1,104,000 $2,028,000 $516,000 Medium $540,000 $4,159,000 $3,619,000 $27,182,000 $21,035,000 High $540,000 $4,564,000 $4,024,000 $31,232,000 $24,393,000 RIN+CFS Low $540,000 $1,428,000 $888,000 ($124,000) ($1,311,000) Medium $540,000 $3,380,000 $2,840,000 $19,393,000 $14,592,000 High $540,000 $3,823,000 $3,283,000 $23,827,000 $18,271,000 TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-3 The figure below shows the expected average annual revenues from the credits (the blue bars) and the O&M costs (the red line) for each scenario. The annual cash flow from the project, not including the cash paid out for the capital cost of the project, is the revenue minus the costs. For each scenario the MWMC would, on average over the 10-year analysis period, see a positive cash flow. This means that every scenario would, on average, create a net benefit that could reduce overall operating cost, and help alleviate upward pressure on rates. Figure 6-1: Average Annual Cash Flow (Revenues and Costs) $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000 Annual Revenue & Cost ($/Yr)Avg Annual Revenue ($/Yr)Avg Annual Costs ($/Yr) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-4 The figure below shows the cumulative total savings or cost over the 10-year analysis period. The red bars indicate a net cost to the MWMC and the blue bars indicate a net benefit to the MWMC. It should be noted that these scenarios do not have the same probability of occurring. All the red bar (net cumulative cost) scenarios are considered to have a low probability of occurring while the blue bar (net cumulative benefit) scenarios are much more likely to occur. Note that the scenario “RIN+CFS – Low” is not missing; the net cumulative cost of -$124,000 is too small to show up on the graph. The same is true for the “RIN only – Low” scenario’s net cumulative cost of -$60,000. Figure 6-2: Cumulative 10-Year Net Savings or Cost ($15,000,000) ($10,000,000) ($5,000,000) $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 Cumulative 10-Year Net Savings/Cost ($) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-5 The figure below shows the NPV of the 15 scenarios. The NPV is calculate based on the annual net savings/cost for the 10-year period using a 3.5% discount rate. The scenarios with the blue bars above the zero line indicate scenarios with a positive NPV or net benefit to the MWMC, and the red bars below the zero line indicate scenarios with a net cost to the MWMC. There are seven scenarios with a positive NPV and eight with a negative NPV. It should be noted that these scenarios do not have the same probability of occurring. All the red bar (negative NPV) scenarios are considered to have a low probability of occurring while the blue bars (positive NPV) are much more likely to occur. Figure 6-3: NPV of Annual Net Savings/Costs for each Scenario ($10,000,000) ($5,000,000) $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 NPV of Annual Net Savings/Costs ($) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-6 The figure below shows the NPV of each of the scenarios, ranked from the worst financial scenario on the left to the best financial scenario on the right. Again, the blue bars are much more likely to occur than the red bars. The range of NPVs is from -$8.4 million to $24.4 million. Figure 6-4: NPV of Annual Net Savings/Costs for each Scenario - Ranked ($10,000,000) ($5,000,000) $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 NPV of Annual Net Savings/Costs ($) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 6-7 The Medium scenarios (Med) cases are more likely to occur than the Low or High scenarios. The figure below shows the comparison of the NPVs for only the Medium cases for each of the five credit scenario combinations. The range of NPVs is from -$7.6 million to $21.0 million. Again, since the probability of the RFS program being eliminated is not considered likely (medium-low probability), the scenarios including RINs are considered much more likely than either the CFS or LCFS only scenarios. So, the blue bars in the figure below are considered to be likely to occur, while the red bars are considered not as likely to occur. Figure 6-5: NPV of the Medium Case Scenarios $7,587,000 $4,313,000 $14,592,000 $15,875,000 $21,035,000 ($10,000,000) ($5,000,000) $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 CFS only LCFS only RIN+CFS RIN only RIN+LCFSNet Present Value ($) TM 3 Scenario Analysis, MWMC RNG Upgrades Page 7-1 Section 7: Conclusions and Recommendations There are three main conclusions from this analysis.  First is the recognition that the availability of RINs is important to making this project cost-effective. In most scenarios where RINs are available the project has a positive NPV, and these scenarios are considered to be the most likely scenarios to occur. The scenarios that have a negative NPV are mostly because the RINs are not available, and all these scenarios are considered to have a low probability of occurring as shownin the Medium-Low portion of the risk matrix described in TM 1.  Second is that the upside benefit of this project is significant, while the downside cost is relatively modest. The NPV range of all scenarios is from $24.4 million to -$8.6 million. The potential upside benefit is three times that of the potential downside cost. Looking at only the Medium case scenarios the NPV range is $21.0 million to -$7.6 million. This is important because the upside benefit scenarios are considered significantly more likely to occur than the downside cost scenarios. From a perspective on MWMC customer rates (where $320,000 equals 1% of the rate base), the net annual savings for the Medium case scenarios represent a range of 0% to 11% potential positive rate impact, helping to alleviate upward pressure on rates. Again, the scenarios that include RINs are considered the most likely to occur, meaning the positive cash flow from these scenarios could mitigate future MWMC rate increases.  Third is that the average annual cash flow is positive in every scenario. The annual cash flow from the project, not including the cash paid out for the capital cost of the project, is the revenue minus the costs. For each scenario the MWMC would, on average over the 10-year analysis period, see a positive cash flow. Kennedy/Jenks’ conclusion is that the legislative risk of the credit programs (RFS, LCFS, and CFS) being eliminated or substantially reduced is Medium-Low. That is not to say there is no risk. Given all that we know, all three programs appear secure for the foreseeable future. The economic analysis shows that the most likely scenarios result in significant benefit to the MWMC. Given the magnitude of the benefit relative to the potential cost, and that every scenario creates a positive net cash flow to operations, we recommend that the RNG Upgrade project proceed to development contingent upon reaching acceptable agreements with NWN and Trillium. ______________________________________________________________________________ AGENDA VII. • o • o • o VERIFY SCALE BAR IS ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING.o 0 1"cn MARCH 2023 LUDATE QPROJD3564000 011-A-2010|o^DWG OSHEET 1 2 3 4 51 1 1 1 GENERAL SHEET NOTES 1.FOR GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL NOTES, MATERIAL SYMBOLS, LEGEND AND WALL TYPES, SEE DRAWING 001-G-0040.0.5 1.2) 1.6 2I2.8I3 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2M4.5 4.1 5 5.5) 2. FOR LIFE SAFETY PLAN AND CODE DATA, SEE DRAWING 001-G-0041..os;A D RAILING/VISUAL SCREEN 3.FOR CONCRETE PATIO, SIDEWALKS AND RAMPS, SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS. 111-A-3003 .011-A-3004 011-A-3001 METAL STAIR, LANDING, GUARDRAIL AND HANDRAIL, SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGSAft4?KW^JqMIC OFFICE | OFFICE | OFjFICE i Hoi 11 f,toi i|_Q 11119 OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE FFICECE 15 011116 011117 011118 STORAGE I 01 |l 121 |011112 011113 011114 0111;o ttyfr. ITHALLWAYH HOLLOW METAL DOOR AND FRAME, TYP 011111 Mlf. j~ [HALLWAY i -i | ,| 0,11122 | ^TTG m-b",J ADMIN LEAD HALLWAY M Mn.OFFICE 011109 011106 1 OFFICEHodo □011110 I 011123 ALUMINUM WINDOW, TYP-4F.6)rr IT OPEN1 CLASSROOM / ' MEETING |ROOM 0111(14 i 9XF.B qFFICE I | dl1124 |'C>)AADMINISTRATION OPEN OFFICE011-A-3003F.4)'fi-nAREA A AR^A B011107-4F-ft 011-A-3003ImF.3).1 1- IB _ JPRINTERALUMINUM STOREFRONT DOOR AND WINDOW W— Tonnen j II AREf <?I I UNISEX REST | o|1131 4iili I ^OH-A-3001FB"-----TN' V7UNISEX RESTROOM Er UNISEX REST STORAGE- 0'1130 011105 i /011102 TvUNISEX REST E.6) HALLWAYLOBBY + VESTIBULEC TV WELLNESSJNISEX F^EST BREAKNURSE-011-A-3003 011-A-3003011103 0111. 01fl128 P i011101CD 01112601112g_j_p tjOa D[pa®FF EL 397-2^E.3)BJAN / STOiR | 011127 |m a■ i E.IUOL Q.ALUMINUM STOREFRONT DOOR AND WINDOWCONFERENCE------------Qt-H-BS— -EROOMi£—DE---------------1-f 011153FOLDING PARTITION 1OFF CE/MECI JROOfM O 3S 1 | 01-4133 |_______- <9— -TOO- E011151011FLEX SPACE / | MEETING ROOM,3 u OFFICEHALLWAV 011-A-300-L011152 011132 '-l ELcB©-ATD T'lAREA C AREA DL-0 0 ns trlxOFwops: LOCKEF-0 0I__AREA E AREAFOPS OPEN ' WORK AREA OPS1 LABoSUPERO01114€011135L^UfMORY011151 01H150ESSENTIAL CORE BOUNDARY iIhj™ i (T 1HALLWAVi ENLARGED PLANV V, 011-A-4001011149 C HALLWAY r IENLARGED PLAN 2 ( 3 ) I ENLAR 011-A-40031 PLAN011136011-A-400I2Br RESTROOMaOPS I OFFICER | oififc ENLARGED PLAN loo1C SHOWERIT AND DCS 4 011138BullEETING ROcl EMERGENCY m011-A-4004 011139M/ONSOLE c MOPS I MUD ROOMROOMOFFICE 2 i 011144^]011137142011141ISOUTH ROOM EllECTRIClP KEY PLANTOPS OFFICE 3 011140 1l£011149 |UUK-JLUULJ .........hft-A BADT -I- 122-0"c TvA D "t NT)11-A-3003 .011-A-3004 011-A-3001 E F©FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL 3/32"=r-0" $PWURL SPWPATH FILENAME: PLOT TIME: 4:49:10 PMPLOT DATE: 2023\03\21 M SHARPTHIS DOCUMENT, AND THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS INCORPORATED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, IS THE PROPERTY OF JACOBS AND IS NOT TO BE USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF JACOBS.M SHARP |©JACOBS 2022. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.REUSE OF DOCUMENTS:G KIRSTENT NGUYENADMIN/OPS BUILDINGMWMC P80104METROPOLITAN WASTEWATERMANAGEMENT COMMISSION410 RIVER AVENUEEUGENE OREGONARCHITECTURALFLOOR PLANOVERALLCHKDSGN APVDDRAPVDBYREVISIONNO. DATEADMIN/OPS BUILDINGJacobs