Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) 1 2004 Pacific Northwest Loads and Resources Operational Peaking Adjustment Council Briefing.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Demand-Side Management Influence on Reliability NERC Demand-Side Management Task Force (DSMTF) Rick Voytas, Chair November 2007 Presented To The U.S.
Advertisements

Demand Resource Operable Capacity Analysis – Assumptions for FCA 5.
Hydro Peaking Capacity Analysis & Northwest Regional Forecast Comparison Resource Adequacy Technical Committee July 28, 2010.
ENERGY VALUE. Summary  Operational Value is a primary component in the Net Market Value (NMV) calculation used to rank competing resources in the RPS.
Update on the Western Region Resource Plan Presented to the Community Energy Advisory Council November 14, 2008.
1 Managing Uncertainty in Generation, Inventory and Revenue January 23, 2011 AMS Meeting AMS SHORT COURSE: HYDROLOGIC PREDICTION AND VERIFICATION TECHNIQUES.
Technical Conference Avoided Cost Modeling January 6, 2015.
Power Supply Adequacy Assessment Model/Methodology Review Steering Subcommittee Meeting January 29, 2010.
1 Generation Adequacy Task Force Report to TAC April 7, 2005.
Preliminary Review of July 24 th Extreme Temperature Event & Implications for Pilot Capacity Standard Mary Johannis & Wally Gibson PNW Resource Adequacy.
3/16/20001 BPA’s traditional revenue stream varies with water supply (higher water conditions, higher revenues) BPA’s revenues from Slice are independent.
Genesys Model Enhancements October 4, 2011 NW Resource Adequacy Steering Committee Meeting Gwendolyn S Shearer.
Susan Covino Senior Consultant, Emerging Markets March 31, 2015
Connecticut’s Energy Future Connecticut Energy Advisory Board Conference Hartford, Connecticut December 2, 2004 Kevin Kirby Vice President, Market Operations.
G 200 L 200 ISO NEW ENGLAND T H E P E O P L E B E H I N D N E W E N G L A N D ’ S P O W E R. COLD SNAP Overview of Proposed Options for Winter 2004/2005.
Andy Meyers Interchange Scheduling and Accounting Subcommittee Chair Discussion Item: Use of Emergency eTags January 2015 Salt Lake City, UT.
Federal Columbia River Power System Operations Planning.
Canadian Columbia River Basin Forum Stephen Oliver VP Generation Supply Bonneville Power Administration November 10, 2005.
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.
California’s Electricity Situation Briefing for the staff of the U.S. House of Representatives February 9, 2001 Energy Information Administration (Updated.
NW Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Conference Call November 4, 2010.
©2004 PJM 1 STATE OF THE MARKET REPORT 2003 Joseph E. Bowring Manager PJM Market Monitoring Unit FERC Briefing Washington, D.C. April 14, 2004.
Hydro Power 102. Hydroelectric Models in the Northwest.
ERCOT Long-Term Demand and Energy Forecasting February 20, 2007 Bill Bojorquez.
A Resource Adequacy Standard for the Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Technical Committee January 17, 2008 Portland Airport.
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,
California Energy Commission Staff Paper - April 12,20071 Estimating the Generation Resource Mix of Electricity Imports to California – Energy Commission.
Updated Cost/Benefit Analysis for PRR Part A/S Bidding Proposed Methodology.
Revising the Pacific Northwest Resource Adequacy Standard Resource Adequacy Technical Committee June 23, 2011.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Draft Wholesale Power Price Forecasts Maury Galbraith Northwest Power and Conservation Council Generating.
Visit by Government Officials from Mozambique COLUMBIA RIVER SYSTEM BRIEFING III U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division North Pacific Water.
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.
Proposed Contract to Perform Regional Sustained Hydro Peaking Capability Study Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Steering Committee January 29, 2008.
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.
©2005 PJM 1 STATE OF THE MARKET REPORT 2004 Joseph E. Bowring Market Monitor FERC Briefing April 13, 2005.
Resource Adequacy Steering Committee Meeting October 4, 2011.
1 Pacific Northwest Hydro-Thermal System and RTO West Market Design FERC Market Design Workshop January 23, 2002.
Alaa Alhamwi, David Kleinhans, Stefan Weitemeyer, Thomas Vogt 3rd European Energy Conference - E2C 2013 October 29 th, 2013 Optimal Mix of Renewable Power.
October 29, Organizational role of Short-Term Planning and Hydro Duty Scheduling Relationship to other groups in BPA Planning and analysis job.
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.
CANADIAN COLUMBIA RIVER FORUM U.S. Flood Control and Operational Perspective Jim Barton, Chief of Corps of Engineers Columbia Basin Water Management Division.
Background for Demand Response in PNW Pacific Northwest Demand Response Project May 2, 2007 Ken Corum.
Target Reserve Margin (TRM) and Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC) of Wind Plants Evaluation - Input and Methodology ERCOT Planning 03/25/2010.
Moving toward a Final Resource Adequacy Standard Resource Adequacy Forum Steering Committee Meeting September 27, 2007.
09/17/2006 Ken Donohoo ERCOT Peak Day August Initial Settlement Data by Fuel Type.
Evaluation of Columbia River Sustained Hydro Peaking Capacity Eric King / Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Meeting May 31, 2006.
Slide 1 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 June 2011 Non-Treaty Storage Agreement non-Binding Terms for Storage Accounts.
Alan F. Hamlet Jeffrey Payne Dennis P. Lettenmaier Richard Palmer JISAO Climate Impacts Group and the Department of Civil Engineering University of Washington.
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.
Sustained Hydro Peaking Capacity Contract with Don Long Finalizing Phase II SOW Mary Johannis PNW Resource Adequacy Technical Committee Mtg January 23,
Karen Chiang Diane Cunningham Southern Company Load Research 1 When Normal Weather Is Not Normal AEIC Load Research Workshop April 2006.
Update: 30-Minute Emergency Response Service (ERS) Pilot Project Mark Patterson, ERCOT October 7, 2013.
The following slides provide information about integrating wind energy into the electricity grid. Photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL 25907NREL
©2003 PJM 1 Presentation to: Maryland Public Service Commission May 16, 2003.
Modeling the Hydroelectric System in GENESYS Resource Adequacy Forum Technical Committee Meeting July 25, 2007.
2010 Northwest Regional Forecast Resource Adequacy Technical Committee April 22, 2010.
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Draft Wholesale Power Price Forecasts Maury Galbraith Generating Resource Advisory Committee Meeting.
Target Reserve Margin (TRM) and Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC) of Wind Plants Evaluation - Input and Methodology ERCOT Planning 03/25/2010.
Division of Energy Resources
GENESYS Current Functionality
Capacity Analysis in the Sixth Plan
Update on the Western Region Resource Plan
Presentation transcript:

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) Pacific Northwest Loads and Resources Operational Peaking Adjustment Council Briefing November 2, 2005 Regional Coordination Group Loads and Resources Information System (LaRIS)

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Revised Federal System Hydro Operational Peaking Adjustment Background Background The Federal system instantaneous hydro capacity is estimated to be over 21,000 MW. However, this estimate overstates the amount of Federal hydro capacity actually available to meet firm load obligations, month after month, year after year due to the following: Federal hydro projects have more generating units than hydro fuel available to operate all the units on a continuous basis and Limited amount of water and water storage in the Columbia River basin An adjustment to the Federal system instantaneous hydro capacity estimates must be made to accommodate for: Actually availability of Federal system hydro project units Availability of water to operate the hydro project units and Reductions for forced outage reserves, spinning reserves, and hydro maintenance Due to electricity industry deregulation, changes in electricity marketing methods, and changes in the Biological Opinion hydro requirements, BPA reevaluated its old 50-hour sustained peaking reduction methodology. BPA revised this methodology using the HOSS model and new hourly data to produce its operational peaking adjustment

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Revised Federal System Hydro Operational Peaking Adjustment Old Sustained Peaking Method and Logic Old 50-Hour Sustained Peaking Adjustment prior to the 2004 White Book simulated the Federal system meeting a 50-hours per week capacity sale BPA reduced the Federal system hydro instantaneous capacity using the 50-hour sustained peaking adjustment formulated in the early 1990s Reduction incorporated an Hourly Model that was replaced by the HOSS model in 1999 Due to technology constraints, the Hourly Model incorporated hourly data approximations and was able to simulate only 2 seasons for 50 water conditions: Winter (December through March) and The rest of the months (April through November)

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Revised Federal System Hydro Operational Peaking Adjustment Old Sustained Peaking Method and Logic (continued) The old process to estimate the sustained peaking adjustment was as follows: The Hourly Model was operated to meet typical Federal system loads under 50 water conditions The maximum Federal sustained capability was found for each water condition in the following iterative process: Federal loads were increased to simulate a 50-hours per week capacity sale with 24-hour returns. If the Hourly Model met new load shape while meeting existing hydro requirements, the capacity sale would be increased and the Hourly Model rerun When the Hourly Model reached the point of violating hydro requirements, the Federal system hydro capacity for the prior study case, was considered the maximum Federal system sustained capacity Curves were developed that related the Federal system hydro energy to the sustained Federal system hydro capacity The difference between the instantaneous Federal system hydro capacity and the sustained Federal system hydro capacity was the sustained peaking reduction The sustained peaking reduction was adjusted for hydro maintenance, forced outage reserves, and spinning reserves

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Revised Federal System Hydro Operational Peaking Adjustment Operational Peaking Adjustment The new operational peaking adjustment was developed to capture the ability of the Federal hydro system to meet normal peak loads in today’s current electricity market Method incorporated BPA’s HOSS model to simulate monthly, the hourly Federal system operations to meet Federal system obligations for each of the 50 water conditions HOSS used the latest hydro requirements from the 2004 NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 2000 Biological Opinion HOSS maximized Federal system hydro generation by selling surplus energy in better than average water conditions and purchased energy to meet peak load demands in low water conditions The HOSS model produced an hourly matrix of Federal system hydro generation by month and by water conditions

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Revised Federal System Hydro Operational Peaking Adjustment Operational Peaking Adjustment (continued) This new method estimates the Federal hydro system monthly maximum operational capacity that is available to meet the 1-hour expected peak load for each of the 50 water conditions. The process used to estimate the operational peaking adjustment is as follows: The HOSS model was operated monthly to meet typical Federal system hourly loads under the 50 water conditions HOSS stressed Federal system HLH loads by maximizing Federal system hydro generation to sell surplus energy in better than average water conditions. When needed, HOSS purchased energy to meet peak load demands in low water conditions The maximum monthly Federal operational peaking capability was found for each water condition that represents the following: The Federal system hydro maximum 1-hour peak generation needed to meet normal peak loads Monthly relationships between the Federal system hydro energy and the Federal system hydro maximum 1-hour generation were developed by month and by water condition The operational peaking adjustment is adjusted for hydro maintenance, spinning reserves, and Forced outage reserves to avoid double counting

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Federal System Hourly Capacity Resource Stack For a Typical January Day 1937 Critical Water Conditions MW Columbia Generating Station Federal Hydro Generation. Federal Surplus Sales Net Federal Sales Obligations Hours

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Federal System Operational Peaking Adjustment Hourly Federal System Hydro for a Typical January Day 1937 Critical Water Conditions MW Maximum Hourly Monthly Generation 10,250 MW Total Operational Peaking Adjustment 10,950 Megawatts Takes Into Account Available water for hydro Hydro maintenance Forced Outage Reserves Spinning Reserves Instantaneous Federal System Hydro Capacity Regulated plus Independent Hydro Hours

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) 9

White Book Federal System Operational Peaking Capacity Comparison 2004 White Book and 2003 White Book Studies 1937 Critical Water Conditions MW 2004 White Book New Operational Peaking Capacity Monthly 1-Hour Maximum under 1937 WY 2003 White Book Old Sustained Peaking Methodology. Instantaneous Federal System Hydro Capacity Regulated plus Independent Hydro 2004 White Book Hydro Energy (aMW)

Powered by the Loads and Resource Information System (LaRIS) White Book Revised Federal System Hydro Operational Peaking Adjustment Conclusion Instantaneous capability of the Federal hydro projects overstates the amount of Federal hydro capacity actually available to meet firm load obligations, month after month, year after year. The revised operational peaking adjustment for calculating firm capacity for the Federal system provides a better measure of the Federal system and PNW resource peaking capability for BPA planning purposes by approximating monthly HOSS Federal system capacity maximums to BPA’s long-range studies for normal weather peaking Due to this change, Federal and regional capacity surplus/deficit values in the 2004 White Book are not comparable with prior studies Hourly data used in this analysis can also provide different levels of sustained Federal system hydro capacity-such as 30 or 50 hours per week. This is sustained for the month and is associated with current electricity marketing practices and could potentially be used for future reliability analysis