A Partial Interim Report To WMS Guidance on Implementing Protocol Implementation Plan (PIP) 102 Reactive Power Task Force.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Distributed Generation (DG)
Advertisements

Emerging Technologies Working Group Discussion: AXRs September 24, Contents I.Ready or Not, Here They Come II.ALRs, the Camel’s Nose III.The Whys.
Regional Planning Group Charter Revisions May 2008.
Updated 1/28/2011. Technical Requirements & Regulatory Issues In Interconnection Agreements March 9, 2011 Jay Caspary ·
Testing Workshop: Reactive Capability Testing
Energy Storage Definitions/Definitions ETWG 18 Feb 2013.
Maharashtra State Load Despatch Centre Role of SLDC in RRF Implementation & Issues By MSLDC.
9/22/00 1 Jerry W. Smith. 9/22/00 2 Jerry W. Smith.
1 New Resource Qualification Testing Sandip Sharma Supervisor, Operations Analysis New Generation Information Forum ERCOT Public November 4, 2014.
Joint Grid Code Review Panel POR Working Group Meeting 2 27 th March 2015 Chairperson : Michael Preston.
Power Factor: What Is It and Estimating Its Cost Presented by:Marc Tye, P.E APPA Business & Financial Conference September 21, 2004.
June 6, 2007 TAC Meeting NERC Registration Issues Andrew Gallo, Assistant General Counsel, Litigation and Business Operations ERCOT Legal Dept.
Determine Facility Ratings, SOLs and Transfer Capabilities Paul Johnson Chair of the Determine Facility Ratings Standard Drafting Team An Overview of the.
Ship Recycling Facility Management System IMO Guideline A.962
Retail Market Update June 5, New meter is requested for a specific customer’s location. 2.Application is filed by customer and/or the customer’s.
IEGC PROVOSIONS FOR RENEWABLE GENERATION SCHEDULING & UI SETTLEMENT 1.
RTWG Report to TAC August 5, 2010 Howard Daniels.
April 23 rd OWG UFLS Survey & Power Factor Review.
Generator Test Data, Generator Capability Curve, and NPRR 366 Terms March 14, 2012 Mike Noth & Bracy Nesbit 1.
COMMUNICATIONS AND SETTLEMENTS WORKING GROUP (CSWG) April 2015 Update to COPS.
Actions Affecting ERCOT Resulting From The Northeast Blackout ERCOT Board Of Directors Meeting April 20, 2004 Sam Jones, COO.
Demand Side Working Group Load Resource Performance Subgroup April 9, 2010 Mary Anne Brelinsky EDF Trading North America.
1 Bilateral Interconnection Agreement Model Presented to HAPUA Working Group 5 (ESI Services), Project 6 By Power Purchase Agreement Division Electricity.
PRR835 – Reactive Power Capability Requirement
SPS policy – Information Presentation Presentation to ROS June 16, 2004.
August 17, 2012 Solar PV Inverters Anuj Dixit Planning Engineer Resource Integration RPG Meeting.
Is Reactive Power Worth Anything? The sun sets on a lightless New York City – August 14th Reactive & Voltage Maintenance Joint Proposal by TexGenCo/Calpine.
Texas Nodal 1 Nodal Operations Model Posting Confirmation TAC May 7, 2009 Matt Mereness, ERCOT.
Distributed Generation Task Force November 29, 2007 TAC Report.
ERCOT PROGRESS REPORT Board of Directors Austin, Texas October 15, 2002.
1 ERCOT Nodal Protocols Telemetry Requirements. 2 Protocol References Telemetry TAC will establish TASK force and approve a telemetry criteria.
Project Cyber Security Order 706 Version 5 CIP Standards Potential to Adversely Impact ERCOT Black Start Capability.
ERCOT Wind Survey Leo Villanueva. Abilene Mc Camey Big Spring.
1 Energy Storage Settlements Consistent with PUCT Project & NPRR461 ERCOT Commercial Market Operations May 8, 2012 – COPS Meeting May 9, 2012 – WMS.
Retail Metering Working Group Progress Report 04/15/09.
– 1Texas Nodal Texas Nodal Electrical Buses – 2Texas Nodal Electrical Bus Definition as Proposed in NPRR 63 Electrical Bus A physical transmission element.
– 1Texas Nodal Texas Nodal ICCP Business Case By Jeyant Tamby, ERCOT.
RMS/COPS Workshop VI 1 October 06, Antitrust Admonition ERCOT strictly prohibits Market Participants and their employees who are participating in.
Advanced Metering Rule Christine Wright Public Utility Commission of Texas June 6, 2007 Retail Market Workshop COMET WG Meeting.
ERS Update – DSWG Presentation September 21, 2012.
1Texas Nodal Texas Nodal NMMS/RARF Data Discussion By John Moseley, ERCOT, Network Modeling Group.
Floyd Trefny, P.E. Director of Wholesale Market Design Nodal Market Tools to Manage Wind Generation January 29, 2009 Presentation to the Renewables Technology.
Distributed Generation Registration June 30, 2008.
Steady-State Working Group: Resource Modeling Discussion Wes Woitt September 27 th, 2011.
October 29, 2012 RARF Workshop 2 Introduction to ERCOT Modeling Process Jay Teixeira Manager, Model Administration.
February 3, 2011 TAC ERCOT Planning Go-Live Update Jay Teixeira Manager, Model Administration.
Scheduling and Operating Transmission Devices in the Nodal Environment.
1 New MO Projects June COMS Extract, Report & Web Services Monitoring & Usage Statistics Jackie Ashbaugh.
ERCOT Wind Survey Leo Villanueva. Abilene McCamey Big Spring.
RMS Update to TAC November 1, RMS Activity Summary RMGRR057, Competitive Metering Working Group Name Change (VOTE) Update on RMS Working Group and.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Report to ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee September 4, 2003.
1 PRR #409 Voltage Support Service from Generating Resources Timeline Date Received 4/25/2003 Date Posted 4/28/2003 Comments Due 5/19/2003 PRS Review Date.
ERCOT DYNAMICS WORKING GROUP Report to ROS August 16, 2007 Vance Beauregard, American Electric Power.
Capacity, Demand and Reserves Report Bill Bojorquez Board of Directors Meeting May 16, 2007.
Demand Side Working Group March 5, 2010 Mary Anne Brelinsky EDF Trading North America.
Current Nodal OS Design 1.The NMMS database will have an OWNER and an OPERATOR designation for each piece of equipment in the model. The OWNER and OPERATOR.
Voltage Control Brad Calhoun Consultant, Sr. Trainer Spring 2016.
PRR 503 Coordination of Resources Due to TSP Section Management of Transmission Forced Outage or Maintenance Outages.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Sandy Morris May 5, 2011.
Issues with Reactive Testing and the NDCRC S. Looney QMWG, 11/5/2012.
October 15, 2012 PV & Storage Workshop ERCOT’s Interconnection Process John Adams Principal Engineer.
February 26, 2015 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Update to RMS Kathy Scott March 3, 2015 TAC Update to RMS 1.
Black Start Service in New England System Operator’s Perspective Robert B. Burke ISO New England Inc. July 23, 2002 IEEE - Chicago, Illinois.
Abilene Mc Camey Big Spring. Far West Abilene Area All the values are based on returned ERCOT survey results Total number of Wind Powered Generation.
Texas Nodal Electrical Buses and Outage Scheduling.
GC0104 – Demand Connection Code (DCC)
Is Reactive Power Worth Anything?
Nodal COMS Additional Items Update
Reactive Power Task Force
Subteam 1a Competitive Solicitations Framework Working Group Meeting
Presentation transcript:

A Partial Interim Report To WMS Guidance on Implementing Protocol Implementation Plan (PIP) 102 Reactive Power Task Force

Scope of This Report Implementation of PIP 102 in ERCOT Protocol Section 8.8.4, Capacity Payments for Voltage Support Provided to ERCOT –Consistent with the contents of the recently approved ERCOT standard, ERCOT Voltage and Reactive Requirements and Compliance Monitoring

PIP 102 Provisions Generators must operate to control the ERCOT supplied voltage setpoint on the high side of the unit step-up transformer Generators - –are not compensated for reactive power production that is less than the Generator’s Unit Reactive Limit (URL) –are compensated for real power production reductions, at OOME Down, that are required to comply with an ERCOT Operation’s reactive dispatch instruction –are compensated for the Megavars produced in excess of their URL when dispatched by ERCOT Operations beyond their URL Rate of compensation is determined by the avoided cost of installed reactive devices

PIP 102 Definition - URL The amount of reactive power produced when the generation unit operates at a 0.95 power factor (leading and or lagging) at the unit’s rated capability (MW) {PIP102} or unit’s maximum net power to be supplied to the transmission grid {RCVC Standard}.

Implementation Issues Amount of the “avoided cost of reactive support Resources on the transmission network” Determination of a particular unit’s URL Recording for settlement –ERCOT Operation’s reactive power dispatch instructions and –unit reactive power production from EPS metering Consistency with the “ERCOT Voltage and Reactive Requirements and Compliance Monitoring” standard

Task Force Recommendation 1 That WMS select a generator compensation level based on either $20/KVAR {for static devices} or $50.00/KVAR {for dynamic devices} installed. Additionally, WMS should decide a reasonable capacity factor to apply when converting the installed capacity factor to a per KVAR-hour rate.

Installed Cost  $/MVAR-Hr Based on reactive devices installed on the transmission network, assume: –30 year life –10% discount rate –Annual variable cost for O&M = 1% of install cost –A 50% capacity factor for leading VARS and 20% for lagging VARS $20.00/KVAR installed converts to $0.757/MVAR-hr $50.00/KVAR installed converts to $1.893/MVAR-hr

That WMS resolved that the ERCOT Protocols be revised to require ERCOT and each generation owner to establish a URL that is consistent with the generator capability tests described in ERCOT Protocol Section The unit specific data that serves as the basis for such URLs shall be treated as confidential information by ERCOT. Task Force Recommendation 2

That WMS request ERCOT –to consider the necessary interfaces between operations and settlement necessary to implement the payment provisions of PIP 102 –to identify the changes needed to existing procedures and guidelines –to review the EPS metering impacts associated with the collection and storage of reactive power data, if any, and –to report their findings/conclusions to WMS Task force members are concerned about the cost impacts of these matters Task Force Recommendation 3

–That WMS resolve that the ERCOT Protocols be revised to include the requirement that QSE/generation unit operators, ERCOT Operations and TSPs, seek to achieve a routine operational goal that generation facilities operate within an established operational limit (either a 0.98 power factor (leading or lagging) or X% of the URL) by communication efforts, and generation voluntary response to ERCOT and/or TSP reactive operations requests. Task Force Recommendation 4