Stability Limit Management Chad Thompson Manager, Operations Support Planning Working Group Meeting ERCOT Public January 20, 2016.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WECC Operating Committee Report WECC Member Meeting April 20, 2006.
Advertisements

CMWG Update June WMS Meeting CMWG Update 1. CMWG (Vote) Confirmation of new Vice Chair: Greg Thurnher (Representing Luminant/TXU Energy) 2.
1 ®  Overview Benefits of a Good Construction Schedule Baseline Schedule Development Schedule Updating and Maintenance Managing Project Changes USACE.
Date (Arial 16pt) Title of the event – (Arial 28pt bold) Subtitle for event – (Arial 28pt) Internal models Gareth Truran Head of Department, London Markets.
PLWG Report to ROS July 9, PGRRs needing vote PGRR043 – FIS Scoping Amendment – PGRR043 moves the Subsynchronous Resonance (SSR) Study out of the.
1Texas Nodal Texas Nodal CRR Annual Model Discussion DRAFT By John Moseley, ERCOT.
1 Our Expertise and Commitment – Driving your Success An Introduction to Transformation Offering November 18, 2013 Offices in Boston, New York and Northern.
1 TSP Nodal Engagement Market Participant Call ERCOT August 04, 2010.
MISUG Meeting Materials ERCOT 04/03/ Agenda 04/03/ Antitrust AdmonitionJ. Lavas9:30 a.m. 2.Introduction/Agenda OverviewJ. Lavas9:35 a.m.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Sandy Morris August 5, 2010.
03/22/07 TPTF meeting ICCP Quality Codes Bill Blevins/Frank Kendall.
Project Tracking. Questions... Why should we track a project that is underway? What aspects of a project need tracking?
Peak RCCo Performance Metrics Draft –November 2013.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 TPTF Update for TAC November 29, 2007 Trip Doggett.
July 30, 2015 TAC Meeting Update to COPS Michelle Trenary August 12, 2015.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 External Web Services Update Nodal Implementation Team Presentation July 7, 2009.
SPS policy – Information Presentation Presentation to ROS June 16, 2004.
CRR Auction Scope John Moseley. To outline aspects of the CRR market process to assure that these proposed CRR market protocols (as interpreted by ERCOT.
Wholesale Market Subcommittee April 12, 2012 ERCOT Dynamic Ratings Application.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal Energy Management System Requirement Documents December 5, 2006 Jay Dondeti EMS Project.
EDS 2 Early Delivery Systems Review and Request for Approval May 2007 John Webb.
March 20, 2008 TPTF CIM Update Raj Chudgar Program Director for Market Redesign.
NPRR385, Security Violation Analysis and Reporting and Negative Price Floor WMS Meeting February 15, 2012.
March 11, 2008 Texas Nodal Market Redesign Program Commercial Operations Subcommittee.
East Texas Export Limit ERCOT Operations Planning ERCOT Market Presentation
CMWG Update to WMS Report of CMWG Meeting of M Wagner Edison Mission Marketing & Trading.
CRR Issues Transparency provided by CRR Reports CRR EDS handbook Business process NPRR TPTF November 27, 2007.
January 21, 2008 TPTF 168 Hour Test Initial Approach Discussion.
July 30, 2015 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Update to RMS Kathy Scott August 4, 2015 TAC Update to RMS 1.
February 20, 2006 Nodal Architecture Overview Jeyant Tamby 20 Feb 2006.
Appeal of PRS Action NPRR 351, Calculate and Post Projected Non-Binding LMPs for the Next 15 Minutes Floyd Trefny Texas Steel Companies.
2% Shift Factor rule and associated price discrepancies Kris Dixit 1.
QMWG Update to WMS S. Looney December 3, Assignments from WMS ERCOT Market Operations Report – Two SASMs in October, no AS insufficiency – Two unique.
Commercial Operations Subcommittee Update to TAC September 7, 2012 Harika Basaran, COPS Chair 2012 Jim Lee, COPS Vice Chair 2012.
GTBD Forecasting Using SCED to Produce Projections of Future LMPs Floyd J. Trefny February 17, 2011.
Managing of Limits during Loss of Analysis Tools/ EMS April 23, 2014.
Outage Scheduler Transition Plan Kenneth Ragsdale NATF.
1 Tests for Reasonable LMPs & Price Validation Tool Overview October 27, 2009 NATF.
February 5, 2008 TPTF 168 Hour Test Follow up discussion.
CMWG NATF 11/02/2010- CCT/DME update + Outages in the CRR Model follow-up Steve Reedy – Market Design and Analysis 1.
ERCOT Guideline for Interim Updates to the Network Operations Model Excerpted from the “Modeling Expectations” whitepaper D.W. Rickerson.
MISUG Meeting Materials ERCOT 9/07/ MISUG Agenda 9/07/ Antitrust AdmonitionJ. Lavas9:30 a.m. 2.IntroductionJ. Lavas9:35 a.m. 3. Follow up.
Scheduling and Operating Transmission Devices in the Nodal Environment.
Model load frequency Discussion John Adams January 5, 2010 Nodal Advisory Task Force.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Rob Bevill January 5, 2012.
1 WMS Report TO TAC April 2007 (which is in March)
Texas Nodal 1 Nodal Operations Model Posting NATF Sep 29, 2009 Matt Mereness, ERCOT.
February 27, 2014 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Update to RMS Kathy Scott March 4, 2014 TAC Update to RMS 1.
CMWG Update to WMS M Wagner Edison Mission Marketing & Trading.
TAC December 3, 2009 Meeting Update 1. TX Nodal Implementation 2 PhaseWhenScopeStatus 2.1: Market Connectivity MILESTONE COMPLETE Oct. 28MP interface.
ERCOT Transmission Planning Process Overview and Recommendations November 6, 2002.
Texas Nodal © Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Verifiable Costs Process Settlement and Data Aggregation Working.
2% Shift Factor dispatchable rule discussion and alternatives for the 2% rule Kris Dixit 1.
1 Project Prioritization Review May 14, Approved Revision Requests “Not Started” – Planned to Start in Future Months Revision Request Target Start.
1 Nodal Stabilization Market Call December 16, 2010.
Transition Plan Network Operations Model Change Requests 5/26/2010.
COPS JULY 2013 UPDATE TO TAC 07/02/2013 Harika Basaran, Chair Jim Lee, Vice Chair.
Day-Ahead Market Discussion/Clarification TPTF April 24, 2006.
1 Market Trials Update NATF January 5, 2010.
Congestion Management Work Group 2008 Overview CMWG Marguerite Wagner, Reliant Energy Inc.
Texas Congestion Management Work Group Update For WMS Marguerite Wagner, PSEG Texas.
EDS 3 Release 5 SCED Testing Update - TPTF Daryl Cote August 28, 2007.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal EDS4 - Approach 11/28/2007.
PRS Workshop- NPRR755/NOGRR154 WAN communications of Critical Market Data and Agency-Only QSE Feb 29, 2016.
MISUG Meeting Materials ERCOT 7/26/ MISUG Agenda 1.Antitrust AdmonitionJ. Lavas9:30 a.m. 2.IntroductionsJ. Lavas9:30 a.m. 3.Market Data Transparency.
Texas Nodal Program ERCOT Readiness & Transition (ERT) Supplemental Information TPTF January 12, 2009 Kevin Frankeny.
Market Trials Update NATF March 2,
Calculating CRR Auction Portfolio Exposure:
ERCOT CRR Update to CMWG
PMI-SVC Scheduling Forum
Presentation transcript:

Stability Limit Management Chad Thompson Manager, Operations Support Planning Working Group Meeting ERCOT Public January 20, 2016

Issues Transparency in Planning Studies with regards to stability limits Deliverability issue currently at PLWG Weak Grid shift factor issue currently at CMWG ($$) Policy discussion of what should happen with an FIS, and the operational expectations of new generation sites

Background Increasing use of Generic Transmission Constraints Increase in N-1 / N-1-1 stability issues identified in Full Interconnection Studies (FIS) due to turbine control instability These stability issues can not be explicitly modeled in ERCOT systems

ROS Recap The FIS is just one checkpoint in the resource commissioning process No requirements to address (or fix) issues identified in the FIS –Thermal = “OK” –Non-Thermal = “Not OK” –FIS not always complete until just before commissioning begins GTCs end up created near (or during) commissioning Increased GTC use poses situational awareness risk

So… If an FIS identifies a stability problem, are there (or should there be) provisions to mitigate the stability issues laid out in the FIS before the generator begins commissioning? –Who is on the hook? Why would/should an FIS be approved if a proposed facility introduces stability issues? What can be done to strengthen the interconnection process?

Appendix Commissioning Timeline GTC Development Resources

Generation Interconnection Process

The Challenge of a GTC Complexity –PI displays / ad-hoc operator tools –Multi-limit tables –Monitoring medium (VSAT, TSAT, EMS, etc) Situational Awareness –SCED and constraint visibility Operator Training Market Impacts –Getting GTC modeled in time for CRR auctions –GTC considerations in DAM prior to implementation in the network model

Development of a GTC The development of a new GTC is a muli- step process Typically takes a minimum of one month to implement –Can take more depending on the nature and complexity of the underlying stability problem

Phases of GTC Development 1.Identification and Scope 2.NOMCR Submission 3.Development of Real-time Situational Awareness Tools 4.Development of GTC Documentation 5.Market Notice and Implementation 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Phases of GTC Development Stability studies conducted by ERCOT Planning identify type and scope of the stability problem requiring the GTC Based on the study results… –The lines comprising the interface covered by the GTC are identified –It is determined whether the stability limit can be calculated in real-time using VSAT/TSAT or if a static table of values will be needed 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Phases of GTC Development A NOMCR is submitted to create the GTC in the ERCOT network operations model Time from submission to implementation is typically 3-4 weeks ERCOT cannot enforce the GTC until it is added to the model 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Phases of GTC Development If the stability limit for the GTC can be calculated in real-time, a new VSAT/TSAT case must be developed –Once created, the case is tested using offline studies and validated against the existing planning studies –PI tags must be created to allow for data capture and analysis –Control room VSAT tools must also be updated to include the new GTC 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Phases of GTC Development If the stability limit for the GTC must be set using a static table: –An automated PI display tool must be developed to alarm operators when the limit must be updated in real-time to a new value on the static table –Displays vary in complexity. Some have had to monitor flows, breaker, and disconnect statuses for as many as 20 lines. All are based on significant amounts of Visual Basic code 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Display Examples 1826 Lines of Code

Display Examples 2259 Lines of Code

Display Examples 4303 Lines of Code

Phases of GTC Development Development time for situational awareness tools varies depending on the complexity of the GTC –Can be started before, but cannot be finished until after, GTC is added to the ERCOT model ERCOT operator crews must also be trained on any new tools that are developed 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Phases of GTC Development A report is generated describing –The underlying stability issue that led to the creation of the GTC –The methodology for calculating the GTC in real- time –Any static tables or the results of any offline stability studies that will be used to set the limit in real-time ERCOT cannot begin enforcing the GTC until this report has been completed and posted to the MIS secure area 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Phases of GTC Development Once the GTC has been fully developed –Information is provided to Market Operations Support to ensure the GTC is accurately represented in CRR auctions and the Day Ahead Market (DAM) –A market notice is issued describing the new GTC. Depending on the timing of the notice, an OCN may also be issued –ERCOT Operations will begin enforcing the GTC in real-time 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Timing of GTC Development The implementation of the NOMCR is typically the longest part of the GTC process at 3-4 weeks However, this is not always the case Some GTCs require the development of complex situational awareness tools that must be accompanied by extensive operator training 1. Identification /Scope 2. NOMCR 3. Situational Awareness Tools 4. GTC Documentation 5. Market Notice/ Implementation

Resources Resource Interconnection Handbook eg/Resource%20Interconnection%20Handb ookv1.pdf GTC Methodology ERCOT MIS under Grid  Transmission  Generic Transmission Limits