Power Supply Adequacy for the 2021 Operating Year Resource Adequacy Advisory Committee Steering Committee Webinar June 8, 2016.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Preliminary Resource Adequacy Assessment for the 2017 Pacific Northwest Power Supply NW Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee Meeting August 16 th.
Advertisements

Preliminary Impacts of Wind Power Integration in the Hydro-Qubec System.
Power Supply Adequacy Assessment Model/Methodology Review Steering Subcommittee Meeting January 29, 2010.
Preliminary Review of July 24 th Extreme Temperature Event & Implications for Pilot Capacity Standard Mary Johannis & Wally Gibson PNW Resource Adequacy.
Resource Adequacy Forum 2019 Adequacy Assessment Overview PNGC Offices June 28, 2013.
The impacts of hourly variations of large scale wind power production in the Nordic countries on the system regulation needs Hannele Holttinen.
Joel Koepke, P.E. ERCOT Operations Support Engineer ERCOT Experiences During Summer 2011.
ERCOT PUBLIC 4/21/ Loss of Load Probability Assessment for NERC April, 2015.
NW Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Conference Call November 4, 2010.
Announced Coal Unit Retirements: Effect on Regional Resource Adequacy Council Meeting January 16, 2013 Portland, Oregon Boardman Centralia 1.
ERCOT Long-Term Demand and Energy Forecasting February 20, 2007 Bill Bojorquez.
1 Planning Reserve Margin Dan Egolf Senior Manager, Power Supply & Planning.
A Resource Adequacy Standard for the Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Technical Committee January 17, 2008 Portland Airport.
Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Meeting April 6, 2011.
Developing an Adequacy Metric Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Subcommittee Meeting October 16, 2009.
B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N 2009 Draft Resource Program Released: September 30, 2009 Accepting Comments until: November 30,
Adequacy Assessment for the 2017 Pacific Northwest Power Supply Steering Committee Meeting October 26, 2012 Portland, Oregon 1.
Revising the Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Standard Resource Adequacy Technical Committee June 23, 2011.
Loss of Load Probability (LOLP) Project October 16, 2009 Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Meeting.
Illustrative FCRPS Examples Comparing Capacity Adequacy Calculations for Federal Hydro- Dominated System Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Technical.
Comparison of LOLP Practices Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Mtg January 23, 2009.
May 31, Resource Adequacy Capacity Standard Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee May 31, 2006 Background Image: Bennett, Christian Science.
June 27, Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Assessment for 2010 and 2012 Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Meeting Northwest Power Pool.
Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Meeting April 6, 2011.
Evaluating Hydro Capacity for Capacity Adequacy Standard: Selection of Hydro Events Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Mtg November.
Resource Adequacy Steering Committee Meeting October 4, 2011.
Relationship of Regional Resource Adequacy Standards to Utility Planning PNW Resource Adequacy Steering Committee Meeting June 27, 2007.
Power Association of Northern California Maintaining Grid Reliability In An Uncertain Era May 16, 2011 PG&E Conference Center Jim Mcintosh Director, Executive.
Providing Resource Planning Guidance to Individual Utilities PNW Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Meeting June 20, 2007.
EFFECTIVE LOAD CARRYING CAPABILITY FOR WIND-POWER.
Winter Power Supply Adequacy/Reliability Analysis Power Committee Briefing October 17, 2001.
2009 Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Assessment Resource Adequacy Technical Committee October 16, 2009.
Moving toward a Final Resource Adequacy Standard Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Meeting September 27, 2007.
Providing Resource Planning Guidance to Individual Utilities PNW Resource Adequacy Steering Committee Meeting April 13, 2007.
Work Plan Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee July 29, 2009.
DWG – Dependable Capacity Kevin Harris, ColumbiaGrid TEPPC\Hydro Modeling Task Force - Chair.
Capacity Metric & Hydro Capacity Assessment Decisions Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Meeting June 20, 2007.
Resource Adequacy Assessment for 2015 Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee Meeting October 1, 2010.
Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Assessment for 2011 and 2013 Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Meeting July 21, 2008.
Developing Synthetic Temperature-Correlated Wind Generation Data Steering Committee Meeting January 29, 2010.
Probabilistic Approach to Resource Adequacy Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee Meeting Portland, OR January 23, 2009.
Hybrid Forecast for Resource Adequacy Analysis with recommendations Massoud Jourabchi April
Defining LOLP Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Subcommittee Meeting November 14, 2008.
Steering Committee Meeting March 9, Why talk about assumptions? Garbage in, garbage out! “Let’s go dumpster diving!” Results sensitive to key.
2021 Adequacy Assessment Data Requirements Resource Adequacy Advisory Committee Technical Committee Meeting March 18, 2016.
Pan-Canadian Wind Integration Study (PCWIS) Prepared by: GE Energy Consulting, Vaisala , EnerNex, Electranix, Knight Piésold Olga Kucherenko.
Target Reserve Margin (TRM) and Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC) of Wind Plants Evaluation - Input and Methodology ERCOT Planning 03/25/2010.
Kevin Harris, ColumbiaGrid TEPPC\Model Work Group - Chair
Assess variability from year to year: 2010, 2012, 2013, 2015
2018 VELCO IRP Forecast Preliminary results
Demand Response in the 7th Power Plan
Assess variability from year to year: 2010, 2012, 2013, 2015
Steering Committee Webinar March 25, 2016
Key Findings and Resource Strategy
Vetting the GENESYS Model
Resource Adequacy Assessment for 2015 Interim Results Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee Meeting July 28, 2010.
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Market
GENESYS Current Functionality
Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Assessment
Technical Committee Meeting January 27, 2012
2021 Adequacy Assessment Status Report
Capacity Analysis in the Sixth Plan
Study Results Drought Scenario Study
Technical Committee Meeting March 18, 2016
Planning Reserve Margin
Technical Committee Meeting March 18, 2016
Steering Committee Webinar March 25, 2016
Progress on Resource Adequacy Assessment for 2017
Jim Mcintosh Director, Executive Operations Advisor California ISO
Simulated vs. Real Hourly Dispatch Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee Meeting October 1, 2010.
Presentation transcript:

Power Supply Adequacy for the 2021 Operating Year Resource Adequacy Advisory Committee Steering Committee Webinar June 8, 2016

2021 Reference and Sensitivity Cases 2

2021 Reference Case (see next 3 slides for more detail) Loads (from long-term model hybrid method) Long-term model weather-normalized frozen-efficiency monthly loads Add weather-normalized daily and hourly shapes Add 7th plan EE targets by applying monthly effects Add temperature variations from short-term model Demand Response: Existing MW planned DR Import availability Spot (available all hours, winter only) Purchase Ahead (available light-load hours, all year) IPP generation Full availability (2,943 MW) winter Limited availability (1,000 MW) summer Wind 4,896 MW nameplate (modeled as Columbia Gorge wind) Solar 396 MW nameplate, fixed generation pattern 3

Reference Case Assumptions ItemQuarter 4Quarter 1Quarter 2Quarter 3 Mean Load (aMW)21,23420,97518,81319,987 Peak Load (MW)33,76833,84826,50428,302 DSI Load 2 (aMW)338 Mean EE (aMW)1,5451,5741,2741,208 Peak EE (MW)2,660 1,680 Spot Imports (MW)2, Purchase Ahead (MW)3,000 2 DSI load is 338 aMW in low, med and high load cases in

Example of Energy Efficiency Savings 2021 Hybrid Loads January (1929 Temp) 5 Average On-Peak Savings = 1,736 MW-Weeks Average Off-Peak Savings = 1,097 MW-Weeks Average Weekly Savings = 1,416 MW-Weeks

Scenarios Reference Studies (for heat map) Reference Case (see previous slides) Load Ranges (low, medium and high) Import Ranges (1700, 2500, 3400 MW) Sensitivity Studies Reference Case using STM loads Fuel Limitation Case: Reduce winter gas IPP capability by 35% (650 MW), reduces all-fuel winter IPP cap by 22% Reduces winter IPP total cap from 2943 to 2293 MW Reduces summer IPP total cap from 1000 to 779 MW Standby Resource Sensitivity Existing + Planned DR and Emergency Generation Existing + Planned + RPM Minimum DR (500 MW) Existing + Planned + RPM Expected DR (1,257 MW) 6

2021 Adequacy Assessment 7

2021 Power Supply Adequacy 10% LOLP = Inadequate Supply (medium case) Counting existing and expected resources only, and Seventh plan EE targets, and Existing MW of planned DR + standby generation Primarily capacity short – 1,040 to 2,230 MW of new capacity needed (for medium and high load growth cases) Seventh power plan resource strategy should be used for resource acquisition plans. Part of needed capacity can come from demand response. Any amount of new DR will increase adequacy. 8

Comparison to last year’s 2021 Assessment (from 8.3 to 9.9% LOLP) 2021 Annual Load: Last year’s forecast 21,780 aMW Current forecast 1 20,250 aMW (range 19,580 to 20,900) Net decrease- 1,530 aMW 2021 Average Winter Peak Load: 2 Last year’s forecast30,865 MW Current forecast33,848 MW Net increase 2,983 MW Resources Small amount of new solar capacity Up to 2,000 MW less hydro peaking (from BPA-only to regional INC/DEC) Newer version of GENESYS (tends to show slightly higher LOLP) 9 1 Load forecasting method was modified for a more accurate reflection of energy efficiency savings and the impacts of future codes and standards. 2 Even though the current annual average load forecast for 2021 is lower than last year’s, this year’s winter peak load forecast is much higher. Council will continue to investigate this and also why off-peak loads in this year’s forecast appear to be lower than expected. Main reasons why LOLP is higher in this year’s assessment

Comparison to Past Assessments Year Analyzed Operation YearLOLPObservations % Was part of the Council’s 6 th Power Plan % Imports deceased from 3,200 to 1,700 MW, load growth 150 aMW per year, only 114 MW of new thermal capacity % Load growth 0.6%, over 600 MW new generating capacity, increased imports by 800 MW % Lower load forecast, 350 MW of additional EE savings % Early estimate (BPA INC/DEC only) Loss of Boardman and Centralia 1 (~1,330 MW) % 2021 loads lower than last year’s forecast (~1,500 aMW) but winter peaks are higher (~3,000 MW), using regional INC/DEC reduces hydro peaking by as much as 2,000 MW 10

Sensitivity Studies 11

LOLP (%) Heat Map (existing standby resources) High Med Low Imports Loads Let’s examine the effects of adding DR to the reference case.

Effects of DR on LOLP (2500 MW import) Standby Loads Exist+ Minimum RPM DR + Average RPM DR High Load Med Load 1085 Low Load

Loss of Gas/Market Friction (Loss of 650 MW IPP, 2500 MW import) Standby Loads Ref Case Existing DR + Minimum RPM DR + Average RPM DR High Load Med Load Low Load

Other Adequacy Metrics 15

EUE (MW-hours) (existing standby resources) Imports Loads 3,4002,5001,700 High Load 6,4008,70011,800 Med Load 1,2002,5003,000 Low Load ,600 16

Effects of DR on EUE (2500 MW import) Standby Loads Exist+ Minimum RPM DR + Average RPM DR High Load 8,7006,4004,100 Med Load 2,5001, Low Load

Expected Hours Curtailed (hours) (existing standby resources) (Green satisfies 1-in-10 year criterion of 1.1 max) Imports Loads 3,4002,5001,700 High Load Med Load Low Load

CVaR Peak (MW) (existing standby resources) Imports Loads 3,4002,5001,700 High Load 2,5133,2934,178 Med Load 1,3742, ,045 Low Load , Implies a 1,145 MW threshold for a 5% LOLP (2,185 – 1,040 needed for 5%).

Historical vs. Forecast Loads Why do the 2021 forecasted hourly loads look peakier than historic hourly loads? 1.Historic loads based on 1993 to 2014 record 2.Forecasted loads use temperatures 3.Historic load period misses some extreme temperature years (e.g. 1950) 4.When same period is used, forecasted loads are not peakier 5.Minimum hourly loads seem to be too low but peak and average loads seem alright 20

Winter Max Load Hour Historical (’93-’05) vs. Hybrid Forecast (’29-’05) 21

Summer Max Load Hour Historical (’93-’05) vs. Hybrid Forecast (’29-’05) 22

Max Historic (93-05) vs Max Forecast (29-05) Week 14 23

Max Historic (93-05) vs Max Forecast (93-05) Week 14 24

Max Historic (93-05) vs Max Forecast (29-05) Week 17 25

Max Historic (93-05) vs Max Forecast (93-05) Week 17 26

Additional Slides 27

Curtailment Statistics (before standby resources) 6160 = number of simulations (years) 838 = number of event years 13.6 % = LOLP (9.9% after standby resources applied) 2374 = total number of events 11.1 hours = average event duration 2,704 MW-hours = average event magnitude 1,183 MW = average event peak outage 2.6 = expected number of events/year (over all years) 4.3 hours = expected hours curtailed/year (over all years) 28