1. MRES Resource Operations in SPP
Austin Hoekman, PE
MECA Annual Meeting – Panel: Evolving Economic Dispatch
December 13, 2017

2. MRES Background Info
Pre-SPP Operations Review
SPP Commitment and Dispatch Overview
MRES Expectations vs Actual Resource Operations
Future Implications

3. Who is MRES? Joint-action agency headquartered in Sioux Falls, SD
60 member municipals in 4 state region: IA, MN, ND, SD
Locations scattered through MISO and SPP
Served through WAPA hydropower allocations and MRES resources
Diversified Resource Mix:

4. MRES Resource/Load Mix
SPP
Resources:
282 MW (MRES share) of Laramie River Station unit #1 (LRS1)
140 MW Exira Station
65 MW Watertown Power Plant
Loads:
33 member municipals – all within the SPP Upper Missouri Zone
MISO
86 MW of wind generation (5 sites)
32 MW at Point Beach Nuclear Plant
36 MW Red Rock Hydro Project currently under construction
27 member municipals in MISO in 7 different local balancing authorities (LBAs)

5. MRES Members and Resources
MISO
SPP

6. Pre-SPP Commitment and Dispatch
Hourly schedules in the WAPA BA balance resources and loads
Self commitment and dispatch based on MRES needs
Frequent coordination with WAPA UGPM and WAPA Dispatch/Reliability
Active bilateral marketing activities
Challenges balancing resources/loads and arranging deliveries for loads in MISO, sales, & purchases
Operating Reserves – Contractual with WAPA; MRES paid for operating reserve requirements and did not provide them from its resources.
MISO Market Participant since 2005 – daily operations for MRES resources, loads, and deliveries

7. SPP Commitment and Dispatch Overview
Efficient, market-based commitment and dispatch – no longer a need for daily bilateral marketing activities or self scheduling & dispatching resources
Resource offers and demand bids to SPP; SPP commits and dispatches resources optimally in its footprint for energy and operating reserves
Decoupling of generation to load dispatch/deliveries

8. SPP Resource Operations – Expectations vs Actual
LRS1 – baseload coal-fired power plant
MRES Expectations:
Energy and Operating Reserves dispatch from min to max load
On-peak: full load due to low variable cost
Off-peak: ramped down due to low loads, congestion and losses
Actual Operations:
Energy and Operating Reserves dispatch
On-peak: unit output anywhere from minimum to full load
Off-peak: unit is frequently cycled down to minimum load, production is often uneconomic
Operating Reserves: Operating reserves often offer more revenue than energy, however slow ramp rate limit the amount of operating reserves
At times it would be more economical take a short-term economic shutdown – creates additional challenges.

9. SPP Resource Operations – Expectations vs Actual
Exira Station – simple cycle gas-fired CT
MRES Expectations:
Energy and Operating Reserves dispatch
Summer months on-peak: SPP commitment during high load, summer peak hours
All other hours not expected to run
Actual Operations:
Energy and Operating Reserves dispatch – significantly more than expected!
Summer months on-peak : SPP commitment for energy and operating reserves – almost daily including weekend days
Winter and shoulder on-peak: Occasionally committed

10. SPP Resource Operations – Expectations vs Actual
Watertown Power Plant – fuel oil fired CT
MRES Expectations:
Commitment during emergency situations
Actual Operations:
Similar to MRES expectations

11. What does the Future Hold for SPP participants?
Low Energy Prices!!!
Wind generation abundance - existing and additions
Natural gas forwards near $3/mmbtu for foreseeable future
Flat load growth
Uptick in solar additions
Surplus of capacity & resources in SPP
Unknowns, but likely to impact future
Environmental Impacts/Retirement of baseload generation
Rate of solar adoption
Electric vehicles
Battery storage