Ramping and CMSC (Congestion Management Settlement Credit) payments.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Achieving Price-Responsive Demand in New England Henry Yoshimura Director, Demand Resource Strategy ISO New England National Town Meeting on Demand Response.
Advertisements

2000, Independent Electricity Market Operator All Rights Reserved 1.
Congestion Management Settlement Credits December, 2002.
IJT Transaction Timelines and Scheduling – NISL and CMSC.
The information in this presentation has been collated by ELEXON and while all due care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of this information, ELEXON.
©2012 | Commercial in Confidence | Proprietary to Ventyx, An ABB Company NYISO Real-time Market Presentation to ERCOT METF – April 26, 2012 Confidential.
MPID 223 (Failure to Follow Synchronising Instruction) JGCRP 12 th November 2014 (Anne Trotter)
Understanding Ontario’s Electricity System
Congestion Pricing: Competitive Locational Prices of Power Stoft (2002)
Susan Covino Senior Consultant, Emerging Markets March 31, 2015
Electricity Markets Overview Lo-Cal seminar, 09/21/2010.
Utility Regulation March 10, 2011 Raj Addepalli Deputy Director, Electric, Office of Electric,Gas and Water New York State Department of Public Service.
Wind Power in Ireland: Treatment of wind in the Single Electricity Market APEx Conference, Paris 16 th October 2007.
EE 369 POWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
Demand Response in MISO Markets NASUCA Panel on DR November 12, 2012.
International Swaps & Derivatives Association Transforming the Derivatives Business The Emerging Ontario Electricity Market July 11, Meg Timberg.
IMO Market Evolution Program Drew Phillips Market Evolution Program
Pricing and Gaming in a Simple electricity Market Queen’s University Regulatory Economics Class Guest Lecture March 24, 2015.
Costs of Ancillary Services & Congestion Management Fedor Opadchiy Deputy Chairman of the Board.
Powering forward. Together. Pathways to ZNE: SMUD Perspectives, Grid Impacts, Shared Solar Obadiah Bartholomy Rebecca Rundle Stephen Frantz Presented at.
An Overview of the Australian National Electricity Market Brian Spalding Chief Operating Officer.
Welcome New York Independent System Operator. (Pre-NYISO) Regulated Market Physical contracts Regulated industry Cost Based System Two Party Deals Bundled.
1 Adjusting the “Dispatch Instructions” to the Defined Metering Point (DMP). “Functional Deferral 6 (FD-06)” Market Operations Standing Committee (MOSC)
(C) NordPool1 The Nordic Power Market Zonal Pricing Jan Vidar Thoresen Managing Director Nord Pool Consulting AS.
Challenges for the SEM.  Day-ahead price coupling is a key feature of the final draft Framework Guidelines on congestion management issued by ERGEG in.
1 New England Demand Response Resources: Present Observations and Future Challenges Henry Yoshimura Demand Resources Department ISO New England, Inc. Holyoke,
Day Ahead Market Working Group March 31, Agenda Review minutes - March 24 Coral Proposal - Working Group Discussion Loads/LDCs and DAM.
CMSC Rules Changes under Consideration Market Operations Standing Committee December 3, 2003 PUBLIC.
Proposed CMSC Amendments - Imports & Exports Intertie Trading Sub-committee November 24, 2003 PUBLIC.
Ontario Electricity Supply Forum PEO Mississauga Chapter - September 6, 2007 Rhonda Wright-Hilbig, P.Eng Market Analysis - IESO.
Bulk Power Transmission System
The Ontario Electricity Market 1 Year in Richard Penn Mgr - Market Assessment The IMO Richard Penn Mgr - Market Assessment The IMO.
Market Evolution Program Day Ahead Market Project How the DSO Calculates Nodal Prices DAMWG October 20, 2003.
1 Electricity System and Energy Market Basics David J. Lawrence Manager, Auxiliary Market Products Prepared for: RGGI I&L Workshop June 15, 2006.
Day Ahead Market Working Group April 7, Agenda March 31 minutes DAM Feasibility Study - Questions? Coral Proposal - Discussion Generators and.
Grabbing Balancing Up Load (BUL) by the Horns December 2006.
Treatment of Intertie Failures Intertie Trading Subcommittee November 24, 2003.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Economic DR participation in energy market ERCOT April 14, 2014 Pete Langbein.
Addressing Constrained-Off Payments for Intertie Transactions Darren Matsugu, Supervisor - Markets, IESO Presentation to Technical Panel: June 2, 2015.
IWWG Annual Conference Wind Management at MISO July 22, 2011.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Demand Side Working Group Loads in SCED Angelo Marcino Real-Time Market Operations – PJM April 14, 2014.
Sep 22, 2003Market Operations Standing Committee of the IMO1 Change Management: Market Rules Update John MacKenzie, IMO.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SM Southern California Edison Company’s Proposal to Participate in Convergence Bidding August 23, 2010.
Jun 18, 2003Market Operations Standing Committee of the IMO1 Market Pricing Integrated Proposal: Consequences, Trade-Offs & Implementation.
Illinois Wholesale Market Update December 10, 2003.
2003 State of the Market Report ERCOT Wholesale Electricity Markets.
Floyd Trefny, P.E. Director of Wholesale Market Design Nodal Market Tools to Manage Wind Generation January 29, 2009 Presentation to the Renewables Technology.
1. Non-Dispatchable Resources and EIS Market Carrie Simpson May 30,
Announcements Homework 8 is 11.19, 11.21, 11.26, 11.27, due now
Transmission Rights. The Markets EnergyForwardTransmissionRightsAncillaryServices Must Run Contracts Energy OperatingReserveCapacityReserve Procurement.
An Overview of Demand Response in California July 2011.
Operating Reserves and Extended Locational Marginal Pricing 1.
Business Case NPRR 351 Floyd Trefny Amtec Consulting Brenda Crockett Champion Energy Services.
Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM)
“Managing the Integration of Energy Storage Technologies” Kenneth Ragsdale ERCOT.
Overview of Market Reforms and the WESM
Role Of ERC in the WESM To enforce the rules and regulations governing the operations of the WESM and monitors the activities of the Market Operator and.
Market Operations Standing Committee MOSC October 19, 2005 Pat Doran.
Electricity Markets Simon Watson. Overview UK as exemplar The state-owned Electricity Supply Industry The Electricity Pool Hedging Your Bets! Deregulation.
Electricity Markets Simon Watson.
Wind Management at MISO
Consolidated EIM Initiatives from 2017 Roadmap Issue Paper
Calculation of BGS-CIEP Hourly Energy Price Component Using PJM Hourly Data for the PSE&G Transmission Zone.
Calculation of BGS-CIEP Hourly Energy Price Component Using PJM Hourly Data for the PSE&G Transmission Zone.
30 Minute Reserves EPFSTF January 4,
Mod_38_18 Limitation of Capacity Market Difference Payments to Loss Adjusted Metered Quantity. 12th December 2018.
Pricing and Gaming in a Simple Electricity Market
Wholesale Electricity Costs
Market Pricing Initiatives Update September 9th, 2003
Calculation of BGS-CIEP Hourly Energy Price Component Using PJM Hourly Data for the PSE&G Transmission Zone.
Presentation transcript:

Ramping and CMSC (Congestion Management Settlement Credit) payments

The IESO administers the wholesale electricity markets in Ontario. It operates a real ‑ time energy market, in which electricity demand and supply are balanced and instructions are issued to dispatchable generators and loads every five minutes as well as to intertie traders on an hourly basis. The IESO selects the most economic offers from generators and importers as well as bids from dispatchable loads and exporters in order to match the supply and consumption of electricity for each five-minute interval. The outputs of this process include dispatch quantities and the Market Clearing Price (“MCP”). The simple average of the 12 interval MCPs in an hour is the HOEP.

The real ‑ time wholesale electricity market is a uniform-price market in which suppliers (generators and importers) generally receive, and wholesale customers (including dispatchable and non ‑ dispatchable loads as well as exporters) generally pay, a system ‑ wide market price for electricity irrespective of their location in Ontario. The decision to adopt a uniform ‑ price market, rather than a market in which prices vary by location, has resulted in a “two ‑ schedule” system in order to deal with differences between the province ‑ wide “market” (or “unconstrained”) demand/supply and the physical capabilities of the system which results in the need for the IESO to “constrain” market participants in order to deal with localized demand/supply imbalances. The price for generators and dispatchable loads is the MCP for each interval. Non-dispatchable loads pay the HOEP. Export and import transactions are also based on the HOEP, subject to adjustments related to localized intertie congestion.

A dispatchable generator is “constrained on” when the constrained schedule dispatches it to produce more electricity than is indicated in the unconstrained schedule. Conversely, a dispatchable generator is “constrained off” when the constrained schedule dispatches it to produce less electricity than is indicated in the unconstrained schedule. As discussed below, CMSC payments may be triggered when a dispatchable facility is constrained on or constrained off.

In the case of dispatchable generators, CMSC payments are intended to compensate the market participant when, based on the constrained schedule, the IESO instructs it to supply electricity in an amount that is less profitable for the participant relative to the operating profit that would have been expected from generating or consuming at the level indicated for the participant in the unconstrained schedule.

CMSC payments arose from the decision to adopt a uniform-price market and the two-schedule system. The Market Design Committee (“MDC”) – the committee charged with designing a competitive electricity market for Ontario – proposed such payments to compensate dispatchable facilities for reductions in their operating profits that resulted from responding to system operator instructions to alter their output or consumption in order to relieve transmission constraints:

The CMSC payment for a dispatchable generator in any five-minute interval is effectively calculated as the difference between its offer price and the MCP, multiplied by the difference between its unconstrained schedule and constrained schedule quantities. As the quantity differences between the two schedules increase, so too do the associated CMSC payments.

CMSC payments made by the IESO are recovered from wholesale market participants based on their respective withdrawals from the IESO-controlled grid (in other words, based on their consumption) through what is referred to as an “uplift” charge. In the case of an electricity distributor, uplift charges paid by the distributor to the IESO are ultimately passed through to the distributor’s own customers (or, where applicable, to any embedded distributors who in turn pass the charges through to their respective customers ).

When determining the constrained schedules for a market participant, the constrained mode uses the ramp rates submitted by the market participant. However, in determining the unconstrained schedules the unconstrained mode assumes that a facility can ramp up or down three times faster than reflected in the ramp rates submitted by the market participant (referred to as the “3x Ramp Rate Multiplier”). As a result of the 3x Ramp Rate Multiplier, the quantity in the unconstrained schedule for a generation facility that is ramping up or down will, all else being equal, always differ from the quantity in the constrained schedule; specifically, when the generation facility is ramping down, the constrained schedule is greater (in MW terms) than the unconstrained schedule and when the generation facility is ramping up, the constrained schedule is less (in MW terms) than the unconstrained schedule.

All else being equal, the 3x Ramp Rate Multiplier results in the generation facility being treated as constrained on (during ramp down) or constrained off (during ramp up) during the ramping period, and receiving CMSC payments as a result.

Quantity differences under slow and fast ramp rates

All ramping events will induce CMSC payments (including those dispatched for legitimate efficiency reasons by the system operator), but by manipulating the offer price, generators (and loads) can “game the system” and generate large CMSC payments for themselves which have no efficiency component at all.

As a result of the 3x Ramp Rate Multiplier, the quantity in the unconstrained schedule for a generation facility that is ramping up or down will, all else being equal, always differ from the quantity in the constrained schedule; specifically, when the generation facility is ramping down, the constrained schedule is greater (in MW terms) than the unconstrained schedule and when the generation facility is ramping up, the constrained schedule is less (in MW terms) than the unconstrained schedule.

The amount of CMSC payments to a generator during ramp-down depends on: The generator’s submitted ramp rate. The slower the ramp rate, the higher the quantity difference between the constrained and unconstrained schedules and the higher the CMSC payments. The number of times that a generator ramps down. All other things being equal, more frequent ramping leads to more CMSC payments being made. The generator’s offer price for the ramp-down hour. Higher offer prices lead to higher CMSC payments.

Unconstrained 3X ramp rate Constrained (actual) ramp rate AB Computing Ramp Down CMSC