Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byLinda Robertson Modified over 9 years ago
1
1 ERCOT Load Profile Transition Option 1 – 4 Analysis August 21, 2006
2
2 Analysis Methodology New profiles were simulated using the latest LRS results (reflecting 2006 AV Profile ID assignments) and were compared to current profiles for 2005 Data Aggregation process was approximated using a SAS program in conjunction with usage records pulled for 2006 Annual Validation –Usage and profile data were structured to facilitate making multiple data aggregation runs over the April 1 – October 31 time period –Code was written to approximate both Initial and Final settlements for all transition options being considered for all 6 Profile Types –May 1 transition date was assumed in all cases –Profiles were adjusted as needed to properly reflect the way a specific transition option would be implemented –New profiles were considered to be loaded and available for settlement as needed back to January 1 of the transition year; old profiles were considered to be loaded and available through December 31 of the transition year –Code was benchmarked against production settlement runs to confirm that reasonably accurate approximations were incorporated
3
3 Description of Option 1- Direct Cutover –Start posting and using new profiles beginning on the transition date with no adjustments –Continue the settlement process with no changes to the current settlement system following all current rules for data aggregation
4
4 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Residential Group Initial and Final Residential load aggregated using old profiles Old Old + New % Difference
5
5 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Residential Group Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference Residential load aggregated using old profiles Option 1 Residential load aggregation with a May 1 transition date
6
6 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Residential Group Initial and Final Residential load would be overstated for both initial and final settlement by as much as 20% for about the first month after the transition date Residential load would be understated by about 5% for about 2 weeks prior to the transition date for final settlement Old Old + New % Difference
7
7 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Business Group Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference Business load aggregated using old profiles
8
8 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Business Group Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference Business load aggregated using old profiles Option 1 Business load aggregation with a May 1 transition date
9
9 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Business Group Initial and Final Business load would be significantly understated by as much as 50% for initial settlements for about the first month after the transition date Business load would be significantly overstated by as much as 40% for final settlements for about the first month prior to the transition date and as much as 30% for the first month after the transition date Old Old + New % Difference
10
10 Option 1 – Direct Cutover Profile Total Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference Total profiled load would be understated by as much as about 20% for initial for about the first month after the transition date Total profiled load would be overstated by about 15% for final settlements for about the first month prior to the transition date and understated by about 15% following the transition date
11
11 RES Base RES Option 1 Ratio Diff Option 1 – Direct Cutover Profiled Load Ratio Share Initial and Final Substantial distortion in the Residential percentage of load occurs during the transition period both at initial and final settlement Note : Business percentage of load = (100 – residential percentage of load)
12
12 Pros and Cons Option 1 – Direct Cutover –Pro: No system changes required either at ERCOT or in shadow settlement systems –Con: Significant contribution to UFE –During the transition period UFE allocation will reduce the miss-statement of Business load, but will increase the miss- statement of Residential load for all settlements –IDR ESIIDs will be allocated UFE caused by the transition even though they are not involved in the profile changes Significant differences will occur between initial and final settlement … scheduling that’s right for one will be wrong for the other QSEs/CRs with large proportions of Business load will be affected most dramatically
13
13 Description of Option 4a-c – Graduated Option –Transition from old to new profiles over a selected number of days –Transition profile = p × old profile + (1 – p) × new profile, Where p = percent of days through transition period
14
14 Option 4a – Graduated Option 50 Day Transition Residential Group Initial and Final Residential load would be overstated for both initial settlement by as much as 10% for about the first two months after the transition date Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Residential load at final settlement Old Transition Profile % Difference
15
15 Option 4a – Graduated Option 50 Day Transition Business Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Business load would be understated for initial settlement by as much as 30% for about the first three months after the transition date Transition impact would be largely eliminated for Business load at final settlement
16
16 Option 4a – Graduated Option 50 Day Transition Profile Total Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Total profiled load would be understated for both initial settlement by as much as 10% for about the first three months after the transition date Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for total profiled load at final settlement
17
17 Option 4a – Graduated Option Profiled Load Ratio Share Initial and Final RES Base RES Option 4a Ratio Diff Substantial distortion in the Residential percentage of load occurs during the transition period at initial settlement only Note : Business percentage of load = (100 – residential percentage of load)
18
18 Pros and Cons Option 4a – Graduated Option 50 Day Transition –Pro: No system changes required either at ERCOT or in shadow settlement systems Eliminates the large load swing at the transition date present in Option 1 –Con: ERCOT will have to calculate old, new and transition forecast and backcast profiles for the entire transition period Somewhat significant contribution to UFE at initial settlement over a three- month time period Somewhat significant differences will occur between initial and final settlements for business load QSEs/CRs with large proportions of Business load will be affected most dramatically QSEs/CRs will have to adjust their forecasts/schedules to implement the old-to-new transition if they generate their own forecasts CR product offerings will be more difficult to price Transition impacts will extend into the summer months
19
19 Option 4b – Graduated Option 100 Day Transition Residential Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Residential load at both initial final settlement
20
20 Option 4b – Graduated Option 100 Day Transition Business Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Business load would be understated for initial settlement by as much as 20% for about the first four months after the transition date Transition impact would be largely eliminated for Business load at final settlement
21
21 Option 4b – Graduated Option 100 Day Transition Profile Total Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Total profiled load at both initial final settlement
22
22 Option 4b – Graduated Option 100 Day Transition Profiled Load Ratio Share Initial and Final RES Base RES Option 4b Ratio Diff Some distortion in the Residential percentage of load occurs during the transition period at initial settlement only Note : Business percentage of load = (100 – residential percentage of load)
23
23 Pros and Cons Option 4b – Graduated Option 100 Day Transition –Pro: No system changes required either at ERCOT or in shadow settlement systems Eliminates the large load swing at the transition date present in Option 1 –Con: ERCOT will have to calculate old, new and transition forecast and backcast profiles for the entire transition period Somewhat significant differences will occur between initial and final settlements for business load QSEs/CRs with large proportions of Business load will be affected most dramatically QSEs/CRs will have to adjust their forecasts/schedules to implement the old-to-new transition if they generate their own forecasts CR product offerings will be more difficult to price
24
24 Option 4c – Graduated Option 150 Day Transition Residential Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Residential load at both initial final settlement
25
25 Option 4c – Graduated Option 150 Day Transition Business Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Business load would be understated for initial settlement by as much as 10% for about the first six months after the transition date Transition impact would be largely eliminated for Business load at final settlement
26
26 Option 4c – Graduated Option 150 Day Transition Profile Total Group Initial and Final Old Transition Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Total profiled load at both initial final settlement
27
27 Option 4c – Graduated Option 150 Day Transition Profiled Load Ratio Share Initial and Final RES Base RES Option 4c Ratio Diff Small distortion in the Residential percentage of load occurs during the transition period at initial settlement only Note : Business percentage of load = (100 – residential percentage of load)
28
28 Pros and Cons Option 4c – Graduated Option 150 Day Transition –Pro: No system changes required either at ERCOT or in shadow settlement systems Eliminates the large load swing at the transition date present in Option 1 –Con: ERCOT will have to calculate old, new and transition forecast and backcast profiles for the entire transition period Somewhat significant differences will occur between initial and final settlements for business load QSEs/CRs with large proportions of Business load will be affected most dramatically QSEs/CRs will have to adjust their forecasts/schedules to implement the old-to-new transition if they generate their own forecasts CR product offerings will be more difficult to price
29
29 Description of Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover ESIIDs having an actual meter reading (meter read spans trade day) available for settlement that starts before the transition date is settled with old profiles ESIIDs having an actual meter reading (meter read spans trade day) available for settlement that starts on or after the transition date is settled with new profiles ESIIDs settled with historical meter reads will be settled with old profiles if they will have an actual meter read spanning the trade day that starts before the transition date ESIIDs settled with historical meter reads will be settled with new profiles if they will have an actual meter read spanning the trade day that starts on or after the transition date
30
30 Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover Residential Group Initial and Final Old New Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Residential load at both initial final settlement
31
31 Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover Business Group Initial and Final Old New Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Business load at both initial final settlement
32
32 Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover Profile Total Initial and Final Old New Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Total profiled load at both initial final settlement
33
33 Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover Profiled Load Ratio Share Initial and Final RES Base RES Option 2 Ratio Diff No distortion in the Residential percentage of load occurs during the transition period Note : Business percentage of load = (100 – residential percentage of load)
34
34 Pros and Cons Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover –Pro: Eliminates the large load swing at the transition date present in Option 1 Virtually eliminates the profile transition impact for all trade days and settlements –Con: ERCOT will have to calculate and post both old and new forecast and backcast profiles for a significant length of time ERCOT and shadow system changes will be required to properly select the appropriate old or new profile to use For a given trade day following the transition date some ESIIDs will be settled with old profiles and the others would be settled with new profiles … the mix would change continuously over the transition period
35
35 Description of Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover ESIIDs are settled with old profiles for all Trade days occurring before the transition date ESIIDs are settled with new profiles for all Trade days occurring on or after the transition date
36
36 Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover Residential Group Initial and Final Old New Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Residential load at both initial final settlement
37
37 Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover Business Group Initial and Final Old New Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Business load at both initial final settlement
38
38 Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover Profile Total Initial and Final Old New Profile % Difference Transition impact would be almost completely eliminated for Total profiledl load at both initial final settlement
39
39 Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover Profiled Load Ratio Share Initial and Final RES Base RES Option 3 Ratio Diff No distortion in the Residential percentage of load occurs during the transition period Note : Business percentage of load = (100 – residential percentage of load)
40
40 Pros and Cons Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover –Pro: Eliminates the large load swing at the transition date present in Option 1 Virtually eliminates the profile transition impact for all trade days and settlements –Con: ERCOT will have to calculate and post both old and new forecast and backcast profiles for a significant length of time ERCOT and shadow system changes will be required to properly select the appropriate old or new profile to use
41
41 Questions?
42
42 Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts for all Options By Profile Group and Type Appendix
43
43 Option 1- Direct Cutover Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts By Profile Group and Type
44
44 Option 1 – Reshiwr Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference
45
45 Option 1 – Reslowr Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference
46
46 Option 1 – Bushilf Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference
47
47 Option 1 – Buslolf Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference
48
48 Option 1 – Busmedlf Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference
49
49 Option 1 – Busnodem Initial and Final Old Old + New % Difference
50
50 Option 4a – Graduated Option 50 Day Transition Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts By Profile Group and Type
51
51 Option 4a – 50 Day Transition Reshiwr Old Transition Profile % Difference
52
52 Option 4a – 50 Day Transition Reslowr Old Transition Profile % Difference
53
53 Option 4a – 50 Day Transition Bushilf Old Transition Profile % Difference
54
54 Option 4a – 50 Day Transition Buslolf Old Transition Profile % Difference
55
55 Option 4a – 50 Day Transition Busmedlf Old Transition Profile % Difference
56
56 Option 4a – 50 Day Transition Busnodem Old Transition Profile % Difference
57
57 Option 4b – Graduated Option 100 Day Transition Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts By Profile Group and Type
58
58 Option 4b – 100 Day Transition Reshiwr Old Transition Profile % Difference
59
59 Option 4b – 100 Day Transition Reslowr Old Transition Profile % Difference
60
60 Option 4b – 100 Day Transition Bushilf Old Transition Profile % Difference
61
61 Option 4b – 100 Day Transition Buslolf Old Transition Profile % Difference
62
62 Option 4b – 100 Day Transition Busmedlf Old Transition Profile % Difference
63
63 Option 4b – 100 Day Transition Busnodem Old Transition Profile % Difference
64
64 Option 4c – Graduated Option 150 Day Transition Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts By Profile Group and Type
65
65 Option 4c – 150 Day Transition Reshiwr Transition profile = p × old profile + (1 – p) × new profile, Where p = percent through transition period Old Transition Profile % Difference
66
66 Option 4c – 150 Day Transition Reslowr Old Transition Profile % Difference
67
67 Option 4c – 150 Day Transition Bushilf Old Transition Profile % Difference
68
68 Option 4c – 150 Day Transition Buslolf Old Transition Profile % Difference
69
69 Option 4c – 150 Day Transition Busmedlf Old Transition Profile % Difference
70
70 Option 4c – 150 Day Transition Busnodem Old Transition Profile % Difference
71
71 Option 2 – Consumption Start Date Cutover Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts By Profile Group and Type
72
72 Option 2 – Reshiwr Old New Profile % Difference
73
73 Option 2 – Reslowr Old New Profile % Difference
74
74 Option 2 – Bushilf Old New Profile % Difference
75
75 Option 2 – Buslolf Old New Profile % Difference
76
76 Option 2 – Busmedlf Old New Profile % Difference
77
77 Option 2 – Busnodem Old New Profile % Difference
78
78 Option 3 – Trade Day Cutover Review of Initial and Final Settlement Impacts By Profile Group and Type
79
79 Option 3 – Reshiwr Old New Profile % Difference
80
80 Option 3 – Reslowr Old New Profile % Difference
81
81 Option 3 – Bushilf Old New Profile % Difference
82
82 Option 3 – Buslolf Old New Profile % Difference
83
83 Option 3 – Busmedlf Old New Profile % Difference
84
84 Option 3 – Busnodem Old New Profile % Difference
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.