Production Cost Modeling Data Work Group

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Spinning Reserve from Load Consideration of a Trial at Xcel Energys Cabin Creek Station Presentation to CMOPS January 7, 2005 John Kueck ORNL Brendan Kirby.
Advertisements

ENERGY VALUE. Summary  Operational Value is a primary component in the Net Market Value (NMV) calculation used to rank competing resources in the RPS.
NREL Wind Integration Workshop By Electric Power Systems, Inc. June 28-29, 2010.
Preliminary Analysis of the SEE Future Infrastructure Development Plan and REM Benefits.
2001 South First Street Champaign, Illinois (217) Davis Power Consultants Strategic Location of Renewable Generation Based on Grid Reliability.
Supervisory Systems.
THE TRES AMIGAS SUPERSTATION Southwest Renewable Energy Conference Santa Fe, NMSeptember 16 th 2010 UNITING THE NATION’S ELECTRIC POWER GRID.
Costs of Ancillary Services & Congestion Management Fedor Opadchiy Deputy Chairman of the Board.
EPRI CIM for Dynamic Models Project Report Terry Saxton Xtensible Solutions May 13, 2009.
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable.
1 The Tres Amigas SuperStation VLPGO November 2011.
Optimization for Operation of Power Systems with Performance Guarantee
Production Cost Model Fundamentals
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable.
Black Sea Regional Transmission Planning Project By Predrag Mikša EKC - Electricity Coordinating Center Istanbul, March 2011.
THE TRES AMIGAS SUPERSTATION ABB Western Utility Executive Conference September 28, 2010 UNITING THE NATION’S ELECTRIC POWER GRID.
The Role of Energy Storage as a Renewable Integration Solution under a 50% RPS Joint California Energy Commission and California Public Utilities Commission.
SPP.org 1. Status Update for Reliability and Economic Assessments Stakeholder Meeting June 20 th, 2008 Austin, TX.
Planning the Networked Grid Transmission Planning J.E.(Jeff) Billinton Manager, Regional Transmission - North Building the Networked Electricity Grid –
1 NPCC – A-2 Dr. Mayer Sasson Transmission Planning Consolidated Edison of New York June 1, 2006 Presented to the NYSRC-RRS.
Economic Planning Study June 23, In this presentation  Major changes from last meeting  Results: 2010, 2014, 2019  Finish analyst  Next steps.
SM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON® RETI 2.0 Workshop 03/16/2016 IOU Panel.
This module will dig deeper into Smart Grid implementation issues. It will focus on two key issue of particular interest to the PNW: 1)How the Smart Grid.
Target Reserve Margin (TRM) and Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC) of Wind Plants Evaluation - Input and Methodology ERCOT Planning 03/25/2010.
Modeling DER in Transmission Planning CAISO Experience
Minnesota Renewable Energy Integration and Transmission
Agenda TSOG 8th November
Wind Management at MISO
EPS Updates ColumbiaGrid Planning Meeting October 13, 2016
Analysis of the Effects of a Flexible Ramping Ancillary Service Product on Power System Operations Ibrahim Krad Eduardo Ibanez Erik Ela.
DWG Meeting March 7, 2017 (Update to a Meeting held July 26, 2016)
Kevin Harris, ColumbiaGrid TEPPC\Model Work Group - Chair
PSCAD models.
TEPPC Review Task Force Meeting February 4-5, 2016
Matthew Wittenstein Electricity Analyst, International Energy Agency
Challenges of integrating Variable Renewable Energy Sources (V-RES)
Reconciling Power Flow (PF) with Production Cost Model (PCM) Cases
Subteam 1a Competitive Solicitations Framework Working Group Meeting
ISO New England System R&D Needs
Outline Background Study Assumptions Study Results To Do
Recommended Hydro Improvement April 11, 2017
ECEN 460 Power System Operation and Control
LMP calculations Congestion evaluation
Transmission and Sub-Transmission Network India – Present and Future Rajesh Suri GE (T&D) India Ltd 8 November 2018.
Planning Tools Overview
EU-IPA12/CS02 Development of the Renewable Energy Sector
Module 4 Smart Grid Implementation Issues
Reliability Assessment Committee Reliability Workshop Priorities
DEC System Voltage Planning - June 2018
Mid-Continent Area Power Pool
CMPLDWG Composite Model with Distributed Generation Approval
Jonathan young ColumbiaGrid
Impact of Wind Farms Aggregation on Large System Scheduling Cost Under Frequency Linked Deviation Settlement Mechanism Presented by Anoop Singh Authored.
ADS and WPR Seed Case Background
RE Grid Integration Study with India
Byron Woertz, Manager—System Adequacy Planning
Reliability Assessment Committee Reliability Workshop Priorities
Planning Tools Overview
Modeling Subcommittee (MS) Updates
CMPLDWG Composite Model with Distributed Generation Approval
Recommended Hydro Improvement April 11, 2017
Byron Woertz, Manager—System Adequacy Planning
Forecasting and Operations CAISO Case
ADS and WPR Seed Case Background
Palo Verde-COI RAS Retirement
Palo Verde-COI RAS Retirement
PDWG Validation of the 2028 ADS PCM V1.0
Jim Mcintosh Director, Executive Operations Advisor California ISO
July update JANUARY 2019.
Data Subcommittee Production Cost Model Data Work Group (PDWG) Update
Presentation transcript:

Production Cost Modeling Data Work Group System Data Work Group Meeting PDWG Update, Addressing Power Flow & PCM Differences Jamie Austin Production Cost Modeling Data Work Group (PDWG) – Chair January 24, 2018

Overview (11:45 – 12:00) Presentation on the Production Cost Model (PCM) and GridView Software. Propose a few areas where the PDWG and the SDWG can work together to improve the two models, PCM and Power Flow (PF).

GridView (Production Cost Modeling Software by ABB) Simulate security-constrained unit commitment and economic dispatch in large-scale transmission networks

What is GridView? GridView Program is A linear Programming/Mixed Integer Programming-based, Security Constrained, Unit Commitment and Economic Dispatch program Detailed models for generation and transmission Simulate hourly and sub-hourly dispatches, typically for a year Transmission System Planning and Operation Simulation tool GridView Program does NOT Solve for AC Power Flow solution (like PSS/E or PSLF) Calculate Voltage Magnitude ( ≈ 1p.u.) Calculate reactive power flow, voltage stability Design for distribution system with three phase separated

Key Features related to Transmission Modeling GridView updates Generation Shift Factor (GSF) if topology changes DC power flow in GridView is close to real power flow in AC Power Flow Chronological unit commitment and economic dispatch that takes the normal as well as contingency limits of lines, interfaces and nomograms into account. Seamless data exchange with PSS/E and PSLF loadflow program. Marginal loss model that takes the effect of transmission losses into unit commitment and economic dispatch. Phase angle regulators (PARs) and high voltage DC lines (HVDC) can be modeled and PAR angle and HVDC flow can be exported hourly. Allows for the modeling scheduled transmission maintenance / outages.

GridView Dispatch GridView Mimics Market/Utility Operations System wide optimization to minimize production cost to serve loads Transmission constraints – normal and contingency conditions The various generation limits and operation nomograms Operating Reserves – spinning, regulation, load following reserves Determines the startup, shutdown schedules and economic dispatch GridView can answer the following questions Economic benefits for transmission projects Operational impacts from wind / solar projects Wind/Solar Curtailments Congestion analysis and Congestion Revenue Right (CRR) evaluation Loss of Load Expectation (LOLE) calculation Market structure benefits

Transmission Planning FERC Order 890: Nine Transmission Planning Principles Economic Planning Studies FERC Order 1000: Cost Allocation Studies Three Major Transmission Planning Drivers: Reliability Economic Public Policy

Power System Studies PF (PSLF, PSSE) – Operation Reliability PCM (e.g., GridView) – Economic Operation Power Flow Analysis System Impact Assessment Voltage & Transient Stability Reliability Compliance Reactive Compensation Study Retirement Study Path Rating Study Congestion Revenue Right & LMP Forecasting Market Structure Ancillary Services Public Policy Congestion Analysis Cost Benefit Analysis Renewable Integration study

Indicator of System Stress PCM Output Indicator of System Stress Energy Not Served Insufficient resource adequacy and/or operational flexibility Hydro Spill, Dump Power, Negative LMPs Over-generation conditions Reserve and/or ramping violations High transmission congestion (U99, U90, U70) Indicator of load-supply-transmission imbalance High levels/volatility of imports/exports Infeasible levels of inter-regional dependency Excessive cycling of thermal units Reliability of units may be compromised and insufficient operational flexibility High RE Penetration/minimum thermal commitment Dependence on inverter-based resources for voltage, inertia, frequency response, stability

Round Trip

Round Trip Process The round trip is a shorthand nickname for a process that facilitates and expedited transfer of power system data and information between power system planning models–the Power Flow model (PF) and the Production Cost Model (PCM). The round trip process is the first step to better coordinate data exchange between the PF and PCM models and facilitates quick transfer of the results from one model to the other.

Export Power Flow Case Based on GridView Simulation Generator – update dispatch Load – update real power load, adjust reactive load proportionally Transmission (line & transformer) – update status HVDC – update schedule Data will be copied from the reference case Bus Shunt Controlled Shunt Area / Zone Interface Transaction Owner Transformer Impedance Adjustment

Why the “Round Trip”? Process attributes: Having common data and assumptions allows planners to use both models (PCM and PF) to address transmission planning issues that cannot be dealt with using only one of the programs, such as: loss of inertia, and assessment of operating flexibility concerns that come with retiring generating plants. Process attributes: better data management, automated exchange capability, and data consistency between models

ADS Cases (PF & PCM) The goal is to have a common starting point for PCM and PF datasets produced by WECC and the Western Planning Regions The ADS provides a dataset that is intended to be a common starting point for WPR Transmission Planning Studies. It may be used by WECC and stakeholders to conduct PCM studies and coordinated PF/dynamic studies. The “2026 ADS Seed Cases” produced by the WPR is the starting point for the 2028 ADS Cases

“Round Trip” Data Processing For the round trip process to work smoothly, the data for the two models must have: consistent identification (in PF - bus numbers, ckt ID) representation compatibility consistent ancillary information data files (transfer limits, cost ranking, other operating limits) compatible assumptions Changes to data needs must be properly accounted for in both models; it is best to apply all system topology changes in the power flow.

Areas of Potential Improvements

Process Automation Sponsored by NTTG NTTG engaged ABB to improved the data handling capabilities of Gridview: Fully allow associating multiple powerflow generators to one PCM generator (Many-to-One). Required more in-depth checking during import. Gridview has two generator tables, both needed to be checked prior to creating a new PCM generator. Required the aggregation of the “many” PCM generators to a single powerflow generator on export (One-to-Many) During importing branches and generators, circuit and generator IDs with leading zero’s (“01”) were being converted to “1”. Code was changed to not strip the “0” and the database was updated to restore the correct ID

Process Automation Sponsored by WPRs The WPRs engaged ABB to improved the data handling capabilities of Gridview: Bus names were being truncated to 8 characters. Bus types were being altered: Bus type = 0, 1, & 2 Code now exports the powerflow bus type Bus nominal voltages were exported to 2 significant digits. Code now exports 3 significant digits Some DC line Rectifiers mode were being changed.

Power Flow /PCM Remaining Differences Differences that warrant reconciliation: Station Service Pmin\Pmax The modeling of Distributed Generation(e.g., BTM-PV) Netted Generation/Negative Loads Pumping/Motor Loads Distributed Resources DC modeling, back to back, cross-bay, etc.

Addressing Differences

Station Service (SS) PF – Data preparation manual, page 23, under Loads: “…SS load>1 MW shall be modeled explicitly…shall have ID set to SS.” Issue: not all utilities use “SS” for ID PCM – Currently, PCM doesn’t model SS (SS is netted from Pmax, total unit generation capacity). Other Considerations: The “SS” load value is dependent on a number of factors, when considering the 8760 hours dispatch (e.g., PCM dispatch): The number of units in service The dispatch level of the units SS load value may change by season

Managing “SS” Differences Short term solution Model SS as standalone, consistent with PF modeling Using unit “gross” capacity for Pmax in PCM will require recalculating the Heat Rate (HR) curves that are currently configured using gross generating capacity, net SS. Round-Trip PF: Should we turn SS on if associated generator is committed? SDWG can help with identifying all SS Loads, including those that are using other than “SS” for load ID. Long term solution Model SS dynamically to reflect hour-to-hour changes in unit commitment and generating levels SDWG can help by collecting SS operating definition for each SS load, from which a pattern can be formulated and an equation can be written. Work with ABB to integrate the equation in GridView

Pmax Interim representation, Pmax =gross gen vs. Pmax=gross gen, net SS Short Term Solution Process out SS load in PCM (Turn off); Pmax= gross unit rating net SS. Round-Trip PF: model SS load as non-conforming load (constant) and Pmax = gross unit rating. This requires recalculating the Heat Rate curves. Long Term Solution The goal is to have consistent values for Pmax in both databases, PCM and PF. Add capability in GridView to manage SS load differences, hence, use the same table for Pmax.

Behind the Meter-Distributed Generation (BTM-DG) Modeled: on demand side in PF & on supply side in PCM Three different approaches for modeling BTM-DG in PCM PCM – Model as an equivalent generator at a specific bus with a unique hourly profile that is different than that for the load PF – treat as a generator on the load bus; seamless transition with “round trip” PCM - Model as an equivalent generator at locations with user specific weight PF – treat as multiple generators at these locations based on weight distributed “round trip” can manage “many to one” PCM – Model as a generator with load weighted distributed in an area PF – Subtract from load forecast and then distributed to load buses by load weight Composite Load model – CMPLDWG For dynamic study only. Not for steady state power flow analysis Do not affect the load model in PSSE and PSLF Pdg is netted to demand Pload

Negative Generation The California Energy Commission (CEC) staff reviewed hourly historic data for utility scale PV plants and observed negative reported values for many plants (during non-daylight hours).  It was determined these negative values represented electric consumption by the power plant when it was not generating.  The CEC Demand Office staff recommended that we not include these negative values in the production cost model since this was load already captured in the CEC’s demand forecast. However, negative values may not be captured in the PF case. Can this be verified by SDWG?

Pumping/Motor Loads/Distributed Resources Pumps PCM: Irrigational pumps loads (Delta, Buena Vista, Wheeler Ridge, Windgap, Edmondton and others) are backed out from the load forecast and are modeled as generators with negative output. Irrigation pumps have output shapes according to the historical data Note: this is done because the irrigation shapes are different from the load shapes.    Pump-storage power plants (Helms, Castaic) are modeled as dispatchable generation/load. PF: Irrigational pumps are modeled as generators with negative output, with the exception of the Tracy pumps that are modeled as load. Distributed Resources (DR) Distributed Resources are modeled as generators with hourly profiles Distributed Resources are not modeled in PF, but these do amount to a sizable block of energy. Not having DR in PF causes a mismatch with the “round trip”.

DC Modeling, Trans-Bay Cable The Trans-Bay Cable, which is located under the San Francisco Bay, is a high voltage DC line that uses voltage-source converter (VSC) technology. PCM: Trans-Bay Cable is modeled as a DC line. PF: it is modeled as two generators: one at the source (Pittsburg substation) with negative output, and one at the sink (Potrero substation) with positive output. Losses in the DC line are also considered, thus the generator at the Potrero Substation has smaller positive output, than the generator at Pittsburg that has larger negative output. In dynamic stability, Trans-Bay cable is modeled with a user-written model which is linked to the generators modeled in power flow. The difference in the modeling of the Trans-Bay Cable in the power flow and production cost models may cause additional challenges with the “round trip” when the PCM case is converted into a power flow case.