ERSTF Loads and Resources Balance

Transcription

1 ERSTF Loads and Resources Balance Clyde Loutan, Senior Advisor Renewable Energy Integration, CAISO EPRI Dallas Regional Office Las Colinas Tower II February 3 & 4

2 Loads and Resources Team Subgroup Lead Company Clyde Loutan CAISO Subgroup Members Amir Najafzadeh NERC Brendan Kirby Kirby Consulting Dave Devereaux IESO Ed Scott Duke Energy Jay Ruberto First Energy Layne Brown WECC Michael McMullen MISO Michael Milligan NREL Noha Abdel-Karim NERC Pooja Shah NERC Ron Carlsen Southern Company Todd Lucas Southern company Tom Siegrist Brickfield, Burchette, Ritts & Stone, P.C. Dariush Shirmohammadi California Wind Energy Association Aidan Tuohy EPRI 2

3 CAISO: 1-Hour Upward Ramping Needs 8,000 Maximum 1-Hour Upward Ramps 7,000 6,000 5,000 MW 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011_1h 3,935 3,630 3,271 2,897 2,951 2,637 3,137 2,933 3,004 3,514 3,746 4, _1hr 3,875 3,394 3,428 2,959 2,736 2,606 2,695 2,766 3,143 3,240 5,358 4, _1hr 4,524 3,557 3,224 2,893 3,072 3,401 2,723 2,380 2,964 3,406 3,759 4, _1hr 3,862 3,374 3,064 3,653 2,527 3,128 2,446 2,320 2,848 3,012 3,192 4, _1hr 5,790 6,545 6,298 5,459 4,515 4,220 3,976 4,774 5,999 6,084 6,794 7,420 3

4 CAISO: 3-Hour Upward Ramping Needs Maximum 3-Hour Upward Ramps 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 MW 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011_3hr 6,766 6,067 5,688 5,942 6,732 7,822 7,702 7,251 6,767 6,433 7, _3hr 7,173 7,028 5,774 6,278 5,543 6,367 7,410 6,591 6,422 6,062 7, _3hr 7,171 6,736 5,881 6,096 8,745 6,426 6,024 6,591 6,609 7,355 8, _3hr 6,170 5,755 5,363 6,394 6,177 6,559 5,879 7,862 5,952 5,844 6, _3hr 15,048 14,100 11,332 11,022 10,769 10,390 12,143 14,174 12,509 15,190 17,179 4

5 CAISO: 1-Hour Downward Ramping Needs 0 Maximum 1-Hour Downward Ramps -1,000-2,000-3,000 MW -4,000-5,000-6,000-7,000-8,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011_1h -2,823-2,939-2,751-2,758-3,374-3,771-3,994-3,920-4,758-3,267-2,719-3, _1hr -3,118-7,240-2,940-3,056-3,458-3,457-4,049-3,919-4,220-3,972-4,547-3, _1hr -3,236-2,663-3,004-3,194-4,043-3,820-4,398-4,140-3,926-3,026-2,849-3, _1hr -2,506-2,510-2,601-3,554-4,170-3,728-3,826-3,830-4,248-3,453-2,426-2, _1hr -4,014-4,078-5,344-4,593-4,901-4,672-4,955-5,316-5,659-4,997-4,638-4,590 5

6 CAISO: 3-Hour Downward Ramping Needs 0 Maximum 3-Hour Downward Ramps -2,000-4,000-6,000 MW -8,000-10,000-12,000-14,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011_3hr -7,091-7,118-6,711-6,690-8,276-9,248-10,362-9,919-11,684-8,162-6,900-8, _3hr -7,083-7,363-6,900-7,472-8,472-7,734-9,804-10,775-10,195-10,256-6,865-7, _3hr -7,600-6,794-6,806-7,769-9,908-10,357-10,023-10,438-10,136-6,765-6,643-7, _3hr -6,258-6,263-6,350-9,330-10,538-9,395-9,813-10,128-10,981-8,996-6,346-7, _3hr -8,815-9,106-9,086-9,418-12,068-10,684-11,676-12,871-13,143-10,223-8,541-9,572 6

7 BC Hydro 1-Hour Ramps 7

8 BC Hydro 3-Hour Ramps 8

9 Duke Energy Florida (DEF) 9

10 Duke Energy Carolinas (DEC) 10

11 Duke Energy Progress (DEP) 11

12 Southern Company Measure 6 Ramping Capability Measures The historical and projected maximum one-hour up, one-hour down, three-hour up, and three-hour down net load ramps (actual load less production from VERs) using one minute data. Year One-hour Up One-hour down Three-hour Up Three-hour Down Year Wind Capacity, MW PV, MW

13 Southern Company 13

14 Southern Company 14 Todd Lucas

15 PJM 15

16 PJM 16 Ken Schuyler

17 17

18 NERC ERSTF: Data Request Responses, Measure 3&1 Julia Matevosyan, PhD Sr. Planning Engineer Resource Adequacy ERCOT

19 Measure 3, summary BA/ISO NSG, , % penetration NSG , % penetration Inertia Trending down? ERCOT 11, % 21,130 75% Yes ISO NE 3,155* 10% 5,591* 22.5% Yes IESO 4,075* 16.3% 5,607* 22% Somewhat MISO 9,653 16% 13,028 21% Somewhat BC Hydro % % No (too little NSG) Southern BA % 2, % No (new NSG is mainly PV) Duke: DEF 0 0% 0 0% No (No NSG) Duke: DEC 136 N/A 232 N/A No (too little NSG) Duke: DEP 320 N/A 495 N/A No (too little NSG, PV) * Includes HVDC import and renewables

20 Historic SIR and Future Projections, ERCOT Example 3.4 x 105 Kinetic energy, MWs at max wind penetration, historic at max wind penetration, projected based on SGIAs at max wind penetration, projected based on SGIA&FCs Installed Capacity, MW ,116 9,452 10,034 10,570 11,066 19,443 20,630 21,130 Max P wind /P load 25.5% 27.4% 29.8% 35.8% 39.4% 69% 73.2% 75% P wind, MW 6,483 6,772 7,247 8,773 9,699 17,041 18,082 18,520 P wind /P wind_inst 71% 72% 72% 83% 88% 88% 88% 88% P load, MW 25,427 24,745 24,328 24,488 24,617 24,700 24,700 24,700

21 ISO NE 4

22 IESO Date HE max(γ(t)) 11.2% 2011/11/ % 2012/03/ % 2013/11/ % 2014/04/10 6 Installed Capacity (HVDC line Capability included), MW * Max P wind /P load 11.2% 14.3% 14.6% 16.3% 22% 22% 22% P wind (HVDC Imports included), MW P wind /P install 62% 87% 90% 72% 72% 72% 72% P load, MW Minimum Market Demand

23 MISO Installed Capacity of Wind MW 10,628 12,270 13,035 13,726 15,476 17,001 18,526 Load MW 49,190 40,191 47,263 59,119 59,711 60,308 60,911 Wind MW 7,665 9,906 9,705 9,653 10,883 11,956 13,028 Max Pwind/Pload 16% 25% 21% 16% 18% 20% 21% Wind Production in % of Installed Capacity 72.12% 80.73% 74.45% 70.32% 70.32% 70.32% 70.32% Max Load MW 100,795 94,468 92, ,318 48,827 48,352 47,883 6

24 BC Hydro Installed Capacity (Wind Turbine), MW Non-synch gen penetration peak, ɣ(t max ) Historical Projection % (Apr) 5.96% (Nov) 8.86% (Apr) 13.21% (Sep) 8.80% 8.80% 12.05% P wind, MW Wind production in % of 81% 78% 85.0% 69.0% 69.0% 69.0% 69.0% installed capacity, ɳwind(t max ) BCH Load, MW N/A N/A N/A (excluding import/export) P load, MW Net Load, MW

25 Duke: DEP Historical and Projected NSG Installation and penetrations at ϒ(tmax) PV Installed cap ϒ(tmax) PV ϒ(tmax) 69.38% 69.05% 69.63% 69.58% 9

26 Southern BA Installed Capacity Nonsynch, MW Non-synch. gen. penetration peak 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 1.1% 1.1% 1.8% 1.8% Installed Capacity Wind, MW P wind, MW Wind production in % of installed capacity 0.0% 0.0% 21.8% 50.0% 50.0% 49.7% 49.7% P load, MW

27 Questions How difficult for a BA to gather this data? How difficult would it be for a BA to continue tracking this data? Did you see any benefit in collecting this data? 11

28 Measure 1&2 WECC Date WSM Cases System MVA SIR, MWs Average H Comment 1-Jul , , WECC Peak 2-Nov , , WEC Min early Nov, , , WECC Base Cases 19-Nov , , HS4A1 253, , Heavy Summer 2015 HWA1 228, , Heavy Winter 12

29 Measure 1, WECC 13

30 Will IFRO capture decreasing SIR? CB R adjustment ratio, is statistically determined ratio between Point C and Point B frequency deviations. Higher CB R will result in higher IFRO Even if system frequency response is unchanged, but system inertia is getting low, the difference between Point C and Point B is increasing. This will result in higher IFRO for next year Disadvantage of this metric: it s reactive, historic trending and look ahead measure is needed to introduce proper incentives for the right resources. 14