NPRR 097 DSR and Small Capacity / Low Operating Level Issues for Compliance Monitoring.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
T&D Losses Reflecting Losses in DR within ERCOT August 22, 2012.
Advertisements

INSULATING PRICE RESPONSIVE LOAD FROM RUC CAPACITY SHORT CHARGE Mark W. Smith J. Kay Trostle August 2008 DSWG.
IMPACT TO FREQUENCY CONTROL DURING STARTUP AND SHUT DOWN OF UNITS
Proposal on Ancillary Service Deliverability Requirements QMWG January 6, 2012.
ERCOT Draft NPRR Phase 2 ORDC RATF July 8, ERCOT draft NPRR Phase 2 ORDC Draft NPRR will include the following clarifications or additions: Updates.
QSE Managers Working Group Meeting Notes 9 April, 2010 Report to WMS 21 April, 2010 David Detelich - Chairperson.
Unresolved Issues in NPRR 555 Texas Steel Companies July 9, 2013.
TPTF Presentation Registration of PUN Facilities December 19, 2007.
QSE Managers Working Group July 11, 2011 Base Point Deviation – NPRR377 ERCOT Settlement & Billing Group.
1 Cutover Daily Call 4:30 PM November 23, :30.
NPRRs NPRR680 Allow QSEs to Self-Arrange AS Quantities Greater Than Their AS Obligation. This Nodal Protocol Revision Request (NPRR) proposes to allow.
ERS Update for DSWG June 1, Agenda June – September 2012 Procurement XML Project Update Clearing Price discussion NPRR 451 Q & A.
Special WMS Meeting PRR 525 December 3, 2004 Austin Energy Proposal Leonard Stanfield.
Demand Side Working Group Load Resource Performance Subgroup April 9, 2010 Mary Anne Brelinsky EDF Trading North America.
Nodal Reliability Performance Measures Workshop Project No Public Utility Commission of Texas June 12,
Distributed Generation Registration Threshold Protocols Section 16.5 (5) ERCOT Staff DER Workshop June 18, ERCOT Public.
July QMWG Update (WMS). GREDP Discussion GREDP is currently used as a compliance tool ERCOT is considering now just using it as an investigative tool.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 EDS 3 Release 5 Monday / Friday Market Updates November 30, 2007.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 External Web Services Update Nodal Implementation Team Presentation July 7, 2009.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal Load Frequency Control (LFC) EDS 3 Release 6 - Handbook EDS 3 Release 6 MP Planning.
Section 5.9 – added export language Each ERS Generator site must have an interconnection agreement with its TDSP prior to submitting an ERS offer and must.
NPRR XXX: PRR 307 Inclusion in Nodal…Part II. Questions Raised 06/26/06 Section 3 –COP (resource parameters) –CLR participation limits –Telemetry Requirements.
NPRR425 - Creation of a WGR Group for GREDP and Base Point Deviation Evaluation and Mixing Turbine Types Within a WGR Art Deller, P.E. RARF Workshop 8/29/13.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Sandy Morris November 3, 2011.
Quick Start Resource – Payment for Start-Up at less than LSL Current NPRR language: ( 8) If a QSGR comes On-Line as a result of a Base Point less than.
Nodal ATF 1 Nodal Advisory Task Force Update for TAC November 4 th, 2010.
1 Reliability Deployment Task Force (RDTF Meeting) December 20 th 2011 December 20, 2011.
Congestion Management and Ramp Rate for Delivering Ancillary Services Resmi Surendran.
7 August, 2006 TPTF MMS Issues Review Brandon Whittle Lead, Real-Time Market Operations.
Appeal of PRS Action NPRR 351, Calculate and Post Projected Non-Binding LMPs for the Next 15 Minutes Floyd Trefny Texas Steel Companies.
Outstanding Issues & Action Items 1.Obligations to Honor Ancillary Services Commitments 2.Variable ERCOT Bias 3.Sign reversals of the Regulation Signal.
PDCWG Report to ROS David Kee Chair CPS Energy Sydney Niemeyer Vice Chair NRG Energy.
ERS Update – DSWG Presentation September 21, 2012.
Resource Parameters Needed for LFC NATF WebEx Meeting 05/11/2010 Dave Maggio Operations Engineer, Supply Integration and Grid Applications.
1 Tests for Reasonable LMPs & Price Validation Tool Overview October 27, 2009 NATF.
Floyd Trefny, P.E. Director of Wholesale Market Design Nodal Market Tools to Manage Wind Generation January 29, 2009 Presentation to the Renewables Technology.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Tom Burke September 7, 2012.
Texas Nodal © Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Load Frequency Control (LFC) Business Requirements Energy.
QMWG Update to WMS S. Looney October 9, WMS Assignments NPRR564, Thirty-Minute Emergency Response Service – Discuss concerns expressed at last WMS.
Scheduling and Operating Transmission Devices in the Nodal Environment.
QSE Managers Working Group Report to WMS, April 8, 2011 S. Looney, Luminant.
PRR525 SCE Method Comparison ERCOT Compliance December 3, 2004.
Future Ancillary Services Team (FAST) Update April 24, 2014 TAC Meeting 1.
QMWG February 7, 2011 January 2011 GREDP Performance Summary.
Overview of Governing Document for Weather-Sensitive ERS Pilot Project Stakeholder Workshop Mark Patterson, ERCOT Staff March 1, 2013.
DSWG Update to WMS 2/9/2011. EILS Procurement Results from 1/31 Business Hours 1 HE 0900 through 1300, Monday thru Friday except ERCOT Holidays; 425 hours.
Frequency Control Task Force Presentation to the ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee June 1, 2006.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 High-Level Overview of draft NPRR implementing PUCT Rule Posting Requirements January 8,
1/07/2014 QMWG – RUC and AS update QMWG – ERCOT Update ERCOT Market Analysis.
1 Cutover Daily Call 10:30 AM November 23, :30.
PDCWG Report to ROS January 13, 2011 Sydney Niemeyer.
NPRR 649 Addressing Issues Surrounding High Dispatch Limit (HDL) Overrides Katie Coleman for Air Liquide (Industrial Consumer) ERCOT Board February 9,
Analysis for the Determination of X, Y, and Z for Compliance Monitoring NATF.
Real Time Balancing (RTB) & Resource Plan Statuses Change to the QSE practice of showing offline units as online and available ERCOT Presentation to ROS.
Demand Side Working Group March 5, 2010 Mary Anne Brelinsky EDF Trading North America.
Proxy $G and other Loads in SCED 2 Litmus Tests Loads in SCEDv2 Subgroup Dec. 2, 2014.
Text reason for Deviation from Defined High Sustained Limit/Low Sustained Limit John Adams January 5, 2010 Nodal Advisory Task Force.
July 15, 2011 Reliability Deployments Task Force Meeting ERCOT Studies and Proposal on Reliability Energy Pricing John Dumas Director Wholesale Market.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal Market Management System Update on TPTF Comments on MMS Clarification Notes May 21,
NPRRs 705NPRR Provides Consistency for References to the End Date of the Generation Interconnection Process. In the Resource Interconnection Handbook,
Multi-Interval Real-Time Market (MIRTM) Updates SAWG Sean Chang Market Analysis February 22, 2016 ERCOT Public Version
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Sandy Morris May 5, 2011.
GREDP Monitoring QSE Manager’s Working Group December 15, 2010.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal Energy & Market Management System EMS/MMS Projects Requirement Documents November.
QSE Managers Working Group October 12, 2010 Base Point Deviation Issues – Short Term and Long Term Solutions Nodal Settlement & Billing Group.
Current FRRS Language & Explanation of Posted Data
Ancillary Service Trades and Ancillary Service Settlement
David Kee Chair CPS Energy Sydney Niemeyer Vice Chair NRG Energy
Interpreting DREAM NPRR 777.
Reflecting Losses in DR within ERCOT August 22, 2012
Presentation transcript:

NPRR 097 DSR and Small Capacity / Low Operating Level Issues for Compliance Monitoring

Background  Previous method to gauge Regulation deployment performance in Nodal Protocols worked for DSRs and was a compromise by TPTF members  New method adopted by TPTF in NPRR 097 and forwarded to PRS  Returned to TPTF by PRS to vet concerns over DSR ability to meet the new Regulation Service and Generation Resource Energy Deployment Performance Criteria

New Method  Unit by unit measurement of performance and delivery of energy and regulation  Essentially a % error measurement of the difference between actual generation and expected generation  Works well for most unit statuses  GREDP (%) = ABS[((ATG – AEGR)/(ABP + ARI)) – 1.0]*100

Problems Inherent with New Method  Original problem presented as comments to PRS – QSEs with DSRs forced to choose either to pass the GREDP metric or to follow their dynamic load Difficult, if not impossible, to do both Difficult, if not impossible, to do both  Second problem – For all units Units operating at low load levels or have a smaller capacity have a very small window for error Units operating at low load levels or have a smaller capacity have a very small window for error

Qualification / Reporting Requirements  To qualify to provide Regulation states – “During at least one five minute duration interval selected to evaluate each of the Reg-Up and Reg- Down amounts being tested, the Generation Resource Energy Deployment Performance (GREDP) calculated in accordance with Subsection below over the entire five minute interval must be less than or equal to 3.5%. Additionally, in all other test sequence intervals, the Resource’s measured GREDP must be less than or equal to 5% as calculated for the entire duration of each test interval.” “During at least one five minute duration interval selected to evaluate each of the Reg-Up and Reg- Down amounts being tested, the Generation Resource Energy Deployment Performance (GREDP) calculated in accordance with Subsection below over the entire five minute interval must be less than or equal to 3.5%. Additionally, in all other test sequence intervals, the Resource’s measured GREDP must be less than or equal to 5% as calculated for the entire duration of each test interval.”

Qualification / Reporting Requirements (cont’d)  In addition, (4) states that ERCOT shall post to the Certified Area of the MIS a report for each Generation Resource that includes GREDP %  The report provides intervals where: GREDP % < 2.5% GREDP % < 2.5% GREDP % > 2.5% but 2.5% but < 5% GREDP % > 5% GREDP % > 5%

Tackling the DSR Issues

DSR Impacts  New method requires calculations to be calculated from the SCED Base Point  As long as SCED does not dispatch a DSR from its submitted OS, the OS becomes the Base Point [ (2)(a)]  For a DSR, sum of DSR OSs is a best case estimation of where load will be

DSR Impacts  NOIEs have the ability to follow their telemetered load with DSRs and may do so with any combination of DSRs (ie. can move any DSR unit in their portfolio to meet changes in load)  If a DSR elects to follow its load instead of SCED Base Point, a natural deviation from Base Point will occur (natural error)  This natural error is captured in the new GREDP criteria creating a disadvantage to NOIEs in passing the metric – NOIEs are allowed a smaller bandwidth for error than non-NOIEs and will fail the criteria more frequently

DSR Impacts  NOIEs placed in an undesirable predicament Insulate customers from adverse pricing and fail the GREDP metric and face possible TRE action OR Insulate customers from adverse pricing and fail the GREDP metric and face possible TRE action OR Expose customers to adverse pricing but avoid failing the GREDP metric and possible TRE action Expose customers to adverse pricing but avoid failing the GREDP metric and possible TRE action  Neither choice is acceptable and places an unequal burden on NOIEs

Proposed Solution  Stays within framework of current GREDP calculation  Creates two methods for calculating GREDP Original calculation maintained for non-DSRs Original calculation maintained for non-DSRs New calculation for DSRs – similar to what previously existed in Protocols but was struck New calculation for DSRs – similar to what previously existed in Protocols but was struck  Removes the “natural error” from GREDP calculation

Proposed Solution  Allows for non-DSRs in a NOIE fleet to be calculated under the original GREDP methodology  Maintains same reporting and qualification requirements as original GREDP  Will not impact non-NOIE QSEs

Proposed Solution Goal  Allows NOIEs to insulate customers from adverse pricing while giving NOIEs a fair opportunity to pass the metric and avoid TRE action

Calculation for Generation Resources with non-DSR status GREDP (%) = ABS[((ATG – AEGR)/(ABP + ARI)) – 1.0]*100  No changes

GREDP Calculation for DSR Resources GREDP (%) = ABS[(ATDSRG – AIBPD + ADBPD + Intra-QSE Purchase – Intra- QSE Sale – AEGR) / (ATDSRL + ARI) – 1.0] * 100  Introduces a telemetered load component

The Low Operating Level / Small Capacity Issue

Low Operating Level Impacts  5% of a small number is a small number  2.5% of a small number is a really small number

Impacts Reporting Thresholds 2.50%3.50%5.0% Operating Level

Impacts  Many units that operate at very low output levels are often older and have less sophisticated controls to meet these tight standards  Many of these units provide needed Ancillary Services  Smaller capacity units, older units, and those operating at low load levels provide a valuable service to the market (especially across peaks) and should not be penalized based on an extremely small bandwidth

Ultimate Impact to the Market  Units operating at low levels are more likely to fail the GREDP metric although they are providing the same quality service as those operating at high levels – this will force smaller units out of the market and drive up AS costs to the consumer

Proposed Solution  Introduces a 5 MW bandwidth to the equation  If error is less than 5 MW then GREDP = 0  Consistent with the Base Point Deviation Charges in Section 6 of the Nodal Protocols

Non-DSR Solution If: ABS(ATG – AEGR – ABP - ARI) < 5 Then: GREDP = 0 Else: GREDP (%) = ABS[((ATG – AEGR)/(ABP + ARI)) – 1.0]*100

DSR Solution If: ABS(ATDSRG – AIBPD + ADBPD – ATDSRL+ Intra-QSE Purchase - Intra-QSE Sale – AEGR - ARI) < 5 GREDP = 0 Else: GREDP (%) = ABS[(ATDSRG – AIBPD + ADBPD + Intra- QSE Purchase – Intra-QSE Sale – AEGR) / (ATDSRL + ARI) – 1.0] * 100