Advanced Metering’s Next Frontier: Demand Response Interim Report Advanced Metering Implementation Team/ ERCOT Demand Side Working Group February 2012.

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

0 © 2011 Silver Spring Networks. All rights reserved. Building the Smart Grid.
Gloria Godson VP, Federal Regulatory Policy Reliability Pricing Model Part 2.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR Workshop Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG/REP Workshop April 9, 2014.
Utility Regulation March 10, 2011 Raj Addepalli Deputy Director, Electric, Office of Electric,Gas and Water New York State Department of Public Service.
Donny Helm Director – Technology Strategy and Architecture Oncor Electric Delivery November 1, 2012 The Challenges of Establishing A Common AMS View In.
Smart Metering in ERCOT: Implementation Update CCET Board of Directors Meeting August 3, 2011 Presented by Christine Wright, Competitive Markets Division.
1 Department of Water and Power City of Los Angeles Automatic Meter Infrastructure Program Mariko Marianes and John Yu.
RMS Update December 14,  Advanced Meter Settlement Impacts  January 2012 – ERCOT settling 4.4M ESIIDs using Advanced Meter data  January 2012–
Battling Load Growth in NYC Chris Smith NYSERDA NARUC 2007 Summer Meeting.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR Data Collection Project and Lessons Learned Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG March 2014.
Smart Grid Forum - Update DCMF Meeting – 7 February 2013 Gareth Evans Head of Profession – Engineering Ofgem.
Price Responsive Load Next Steps – Data Collection Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG and RMS sub team October 16, 2012.
CCET as a Forum to Help Resolve Interoperability Issues Grid-Interop Stakeholders Coordination Panel Nov 11-13, 2008 Atlanta, GA Milton Holloway, Ph.D.
Energy Efficiency Implementation Project # Load Management Subcommittee Report to: ERCOT Demand Side Working Group August 8, 2008.
32853 Evaluation of Demand-Response Programs in the Competitive Electric Market Workshop 1 September 15, 2006 Shawnee Claiborn-Pinto.
Retail Smart Grid Trends Paul Wattles Senior Analyst, Market Design & Development UT Energy Week: “How Smart Grids Enable Consumers” Feb. 18, 2015.
FERC Assessment of Demand Response & Advanced Metering 2006 APPA Business & Financial Conference September 18, 2006 – Session 11 (PMA) Presented by: Larry.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR Update to RMS Karen Farley June 3, 2014.
FERC’s Role in Demand Response David Kathan ABA Teleconference December 14, 2005.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR Workshop Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG/REP Workshop April 2014.
ERCOT Demand Side Working Group Mary Anne Brelinsky Eagle Energy Partners.
Price Responsive Load Survey Draft Results Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG and RMS Aug. 22, 2012.
Distributed Energy Resources Concept Document Discussion ERCOT Staff DREAM Task Force Aug. 25,
Advanced Metering Implementation Team Update Christine Wright Public Utility Commission of Texas October 2008.
“Demand Response: Completing the Link Between Wholesale and Retail Pricing” Paul Crumrine Director, Regulatory Strategies & Services Institute for Regulatory.
Demand Response Workshop September 15, Definitions are important Demand response –“Changes in electricity usage by end-use customers from their.
Advanced Meter Settlement Background and NPRR. Overview PUC Rule (wholesale settlement) Project – Wholesale Settlement Project Filed Deployment.
 Advanced Metering Working Group (AMWG) Update to RMS 1 August 5, 2014.
Retail Market Subcommittee Update to COPS Kathy Scott May 13,
Advanced Metering Implementation Team (AMIT) Update to RMS Presented by Christine Wright August 17, 2011
RMS Update to TAC January 8, Voting Items From RMS meeting on 12/10/2008  RMGRR069: Texas SET Retail Market Guide Clean-up – Section 7: Historical.
Loads in SCED Comments submitted by Luminant Energy Company, LLC.
Demand Response in Energy and Capacity Markets David Kathan FERC IRPS Conference May 12, 2006.
PJM© Demand Response in PJM 2009 NASUCA Mid-Year Meeting June 30, 2009 Boston, MA Panel: Price Responsive Demand – A Long-Term Bargain.
Retail Metering Working Group Progress Report 04/15/09.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON® SM Preferred Resources Pilot August 17, 2015
DR issues in California discussed last year in March Historical DR in California: some background issues –Twenty years of programs/tariffs I/C and AC cycling.
Appeal of PRS Action NPRR 351, Calculate and Post Projected Non-Binding LMPs for the Next 15 Minutes Floyd Trefny Texas Steel Companies.
RMS/COPS Workshop VI 1 October 06, Antitrust Admonition ERCOT strictly prohibits Market Participants and their employees who are participating in.
ERCOT MARKET EDUCATION Retail 101. Legal Disclaimers and Admonitions PROTOCOL DISCLAIMER This presentation provides a general overview of the Texas Nodal.
RMS Update to TAC October 5, RMS Activity Summary 2008 Test Flight Schedule Update on TAC directive relating to identifying issues with net metering.
Texas Competitive Market & Governance October 4, 2015.
Retail DR and Price Responsive Load Next Steps – Data Collection Paul Wattles Karen Farley Updates to DSWG & RMS January 2013.
Advanced Metering Implementation Team (AMIT) Update to RMS Presented by Christine Wright September 21, 2011
Business Case NPRR 351 Floyd Trefny Amtec Consulting Brenda Crockett Champion Energy Services.
Programs/Products that ERCOT Does Not Presently Offer ERCOT Demand Side Working Group New DR Product Options Subgroup Jay Zarnikau Frontier Associates.
MARS Taskforce COPS Update August 10, Definitions AMC – AMS (IDR) meter type settled using the 15-Minute LSE data received from TDSP AMDG – 15 Minute.
1 New MO Projects June COMS Extract, Report & Web Services Monitoring & Usage Statistics Jackie Ashbaugh.
ERCOT Public 1 Project Panel 1 Dan Woodfin Director, System Operations August 15, 2014.
February 2, 2016 RMS Meeting 1. * Reasons: * Per the ERCOT Board Report dated 8/5/14 there were 6.6M Advanced Metering System (AMS) Electric Service Identifiers.
Role of Account Management at ERCOT 2006 TAC Subcommittee Review ERCOT Board February 21, 2006.
New Incentives for Pursuing Demand Response Scott Strauss and Sean Flynn Spiegel & McDiarmid APPA Legal Seminar San Francisco – November 2004.
AMIT/DSWG Workshop ERCOT Demand Side Working Group Meeting September 30, 2011 Jay Zarnikau, Frontier Associates.
Load Participation in Nodal Training Session Update DSWG December 7, 2007.
CEC Public Workshop Order Instituting Informational and Rulemaking Proceeding (08-DR-01) March 3, 2008.
RMS Update to TAC September 4, RMS Update to TAC August 13 RMS Meeting Summary: August 13 RMS Meeting Summary:
CEC Load Management Standards Workshop March 3, Update on the CPUC’s Demand Response and Advanced Metering Proceedings Bruce Kaneshiro Energy Division.
February 26, 2015 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Update to RMS Kathy Scott March 3, 2015 TAC Update to RMS 1.
Long-term Solution Task Force Ellis Rankin & Bob Wittmeyer Co-Chairs.
Texas Nodal Program ERCOT Readiness & Transition (ERT) Supplemental Information TPTF January 12, 2009 Kevin Frankeny.
3 rd Party Registration & Account Management SMT Update To AMWG September 23, 2014.
AMIT-DSWG Workshop ‘AMI’s Next Frontier: Demand Response Part 2’
1 RMS Update to RMWG June 6, Market Process for Solar & Wind Devices Retail customers are purchasing and installing wind and solar equipment on.
Pilot Project Concept 30-Minute Emergency Response Service (ERS)
Pilot Project Concept 30-Minute Emergency Response Service (ERS)
Reflecting Losses in DR within ERCOT August 22, 2012
The New Texas Wholesale/Retail Market
The Future of Demand Response in New England
Presentation transcript:

Advanced Metering’s Next Frontier: Demand Response Interim Report Advanced Metering Implementation Team/ ERCOT Demand Side Working Group February 2012

2 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Market Workshops AMIT and DSWG co-sponsored two market workshops along with follow up meetings in smaller work sessions to identify barriers, discuss issues and document potential recommendations Both workshops were well attended: –August 30-31: over 125 in person, ~85 on the phone –December 16: over 50 in person, ~45 on the phone Participation from across the market, including: –PUC staff, ERCOT staff, REPs, Municipally Owned Utilities and Co-ops, Generators, TDSPs, CCET, Aggregators, third party service providers, technology vendors

3 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Statistics* ~4.7 million advanced meters installed across 5 TDSP service territories ~4.3 million advanced meters being settled on 15-minute data ~28,000 customers enrolled at Smart Meter Texas portal ~4,600 Home Area Network Devices provisioned through Smart Meter Texas (by TDSPs and REPs) Unknown number of dynamic price offerings by REPs and unknown number of customers enrolled Unknown number of demand response/direct load control retail offerings and unknown number of customers enrolled * As of 12/31/2011

4 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative AMI environment – –Advanced metering infrastructure provides 15-minute interval data for customers –Wholesale settlement on that 15-minute data ensures retailers can realize benefits of any demand response or load management actions Customers could realize better pricing based on their actual load profile (via AMS 15-minute intervals) in lieu of pricing based on a deemed load profile (via scalar meter) Assumption underlying the workshops – –This foundation should be a catalyst for introduction and adoption of additional load management and demand response products and services

5 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Objective and Benefits Group objective: Accelerate the growth of demand response and load management among AMI customers leveraging this environment Benefits will include: –Improved market efficiency through price elasticity of demand –Improved grid reliability through measurable and verifiable demand response –Additional return on the AMI investment –Greater customer empowerment to manage their electricity use

6 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Purpose of report This interim report documents major issues and recommendations to inform ERCOT management and Board of Directors, PUC and Market Participants of the activities to date, and to seek guidance on next steps.

7 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Strategic Issues Strategic challenges discussed –Mass Market Loads’ lack of access to ERCOT markets for Energy & Ancillary Services Aggregations of AMI-enabled loads are not yet eligible to submit energy offers as Load Resources in Security-Constrained Economic Dispatch (SCED) SCED enablement could attract participation in the Ancillary Services markets –Short term retail contracts discourage DR investment Tendency of retail market contracts to be short term which may not allow for REP cost recovery for DR/Load management products/equipment –Over ¾ of residential offers on powertochoose.org are less than 24 months This barrier does not apply to products and services based purely on price incentives (IE, Time of Use (TOU)) that rely on behavioral changes Also noted: a lack of comprehensive knowledge of customer tolerance of DR (frequency and type of deployments) –Fragmented Benefits Many entities benefit from AMI; however no single entity yet captures sufficient benefits to justify investment in DR tools

8 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Strategic Issues (continued) Strategic challenges discussed –Limited ability for policymakers to affect product design Under PURA, REP DR-related products cannot be mandated and there is limited ability for regulators to stimulate DR-related products –Lack of a vehicle for near-term growth of AMI-enabled DR to contribute to resource adequacy Lack of products or services that could attract new demand response (DR) capacity quickly and improve ERCOT's planning reserves –Lack of knowledge of effects of price response (voluntary or passive load response) A publically available comprehensive study of ERCOT price responsive load has not been conducted –Lack of long-term DR revenue stream Energy-only market design offers limited opportunities to fund DR infrastructure (this acknowledges that there is little to no interest in changing the energy-only design)

9 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Tactical Issues Tactical issues discussed –Need for DR products with longer lead times (ramp periods) Current ERCOT DR products have 10-minute ramp requirements Longer ramp periods could attract more customer participation, especially for smaller loads –Need for advanced notification of wholesale prices In the current environment, Load Zone 15 minute prices are known after the settlement interval has expired Ideally notification would be at least 90 seconds prior to the interval –Limits on access to AMI data by entities other than customer or REP of Record Revised rules for access to Smart Meter Texas (SMT) data for DR providers and retail aggregators could lead to additional DR-related products –Need to identify customers participating in DR/price response ERCOT & TDSPs could benefit from knowing which customers are enrolled in DR/price response products Could benefit load forecasting and grid operations

10 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Process Workshop participants attempted to prioritize the recommendations: –Degree of impact: significant or incremental Context: –6.5 million meters –68,000 MW grid –Degree of difficulty: high, medium or low High examples: requires legislation / rulemaking, millions of dollars, multi-year development Medium examples: requires protocol / guide revision, less than 6 figures, less than 2 yrs for development Low examples: in scope of current market design, already budgeted Also documented whether consensus was achieved

11 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Recommendations –Impact: significant / difficulty: medium – market consensus Implement 3 rd party access to Smart Meter Texas (SMT) Develop and publish operational metrics for SMT Develop and publish service level objectives for SMT Create and implement Home Area Network (HAN) support –Impact: significant / difficulty: high – market consensus Implement load participation in SCED by aggregations of small customers Design ERCOT products with longer ramp periods

12 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Recommendations –Impact: incremental / difficulty: medium – with market consensus Expand scope of powertochoose.org to allow customers to search for DR/Smart Grid product offerings from REPs REPs communicate to ERCOT which of their customers are enrolled in REP administered DR products –Subst. R. § requires LSEs to share this information with ERCOT Develop and implement the SMT 4.0 release including requirements to support REP/Third party DR products Develop and implement the SMT / HAN customer education initiative including requirements to support REP/Third party DR products

13 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Recommendations –Impact: significant / difficulty: high – no market consensus Create a Demand Response Portfolio Standard (similar to Renewable Portfolio Standard/Renewable Energy Credit program) –Impact: significant / difficulty: medium – no market consensus Expand ability of TDSP to fund mass market DR infrastructure –For example Energy Efficiency programs (rulemaking currently open) –Impact: unknown / difficulty: unknown – no market consensus Increase (financial) attractiveness of EILS during peak hours Implement time-differentiated Transmission and Distribution tariffs (paying more for on peak usage than off peak) –Majority of participants opposed to this idea Review best practices in capacity markets and modify them for the Energy Only Market Design –Examine how demand resources are purchased in markets with ICAPs, etc.

14 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Next Steps: Participants agreed that issues and recommendations need further discussion and development –Communications / facilitation could be more efficient if a standing task force or working group is created Lesson learned between the two workshops is different groups had similar discussions; market participants had to attend different meetings to stay engaged with similar conversations Who should participate? –Parties interested in leveraging the value from the investment and developing market environment for the coming decades Strategic rather than tactical What is the best forum?

15 Appendix

16 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Parking Deck During the 2 nd workshop, items that had not been discussed in detail were added to a parking deck and categorized Future agenda items: –Create a way for the ISO/Market to pay loads for energy as an interim solution to load participation in SCED –Are ERCOT DR resources ‘under-valued’ due to the market design? –Study EILS procurements and timing to better reflect market value of DR (post-EILS rule changes) –3 rd Parties communicate to ERCOT and/or REPs which of their customers are enrolled in 3 rd party administered DR products –Create a ‘Power to Choose’ central clearing house for all DR including from 3 rd Parties –Modify or eliminate the demand ratchet in T&D rates for small commercial customers (post-Project workshop) One TDSP may already reduce the ratchet

17 AMI DR Acceleration Initiative Parking Deck Future research ideas: –Would longer ramps encourage participants to use more energy during the ramp period? –NYSERDA model – are there aspects that ERCOT could use to fund a DR infrastructure? –Further explore price response in the residential market -- update ERCOT survey with a new emphasis on residential response to dynamic prices in existing programs –Commission a large-scale demonstration project with goal of quantifying benefits of AMI-enabled DR and measuring customer acceptance –Update the pre-nodal white paper “Capturing the Value Stream of Demand Response in ERCOT Market” –Review existing or pending studies regarding customer tolerance for DR