2017 Study Program PC02: High Wind

Transcription

1 2017 Study Program PC02: High Wind Bhavana Katyal

2 2 PC02: Modeling Logic Production Cost Model Scope Scope Key Questions Assumptions Increased Wind Generation Results Generation Mix/ Curtailment Dump Energy Path Utilization/Flows

3 3 PC02: Purpose Purpose To study the effect of addition of 130 TWh in wind generation on generation and key path flows. These study case was derived from the 2026 Common Case version 2.0.

4 4 PC02: Scope Study Requestors: CREPC/WIRAB, PG&E Changes from 2026CC as specified by study requestors: Addition of 130 TWh wind in AB, MT, WA-OR, WY, CO, NM No other changes were made to CC2.0. Key Questions: How does the system respond to addition of increased wind? Effect of curtailment due to increase in wind Dump energy Utilization impacts on key paths

5 5 PC02: Additional Wind Mix New Wind Generation 23% 8% 8% 30% 8% 23%

6 6 Generation: PC02 vs. CC2.0 GWh

7 7 Change in Generation: PC02 vs. CC2.0 GWh

8 8 Generation by Subtype & Sub region: PC02 Vs. CC2.0 GWh 300,000 Comparison by Subregion - Case_1 (2026 WECC v2.0) vs. Case_2 (2026 WECC v2.0 HighWind) 250, , , ,000 50,000 0 Case_1 Case_2 Case_1 Case_2 Case_1 Case_2 Case_1 Case_2 Case_1 Case_2 Case_1 Case_2 Case_1 Case_2 Alberta British Columbia Basin California/MX Desert Southwest Northwest Rocky Mountain Wind Solar Small Hydro RPS Geothermal DG/DR/EE - Incremental Biomass RPS Other IC Combustion Turbine Combined Cycle Nuclear Steam - Other Steam - Coal Energy Storage Conventional Hydro

9 9 Change in Generation by Region and Subtype : PC02 vs. CC2.0 GWh

10 10 Dump Energy: PC02 vs. CC2.0 GWh

11 11 Other results: PC02 vs. CC2.0 CC2.0 PC02 Change Change % Var. Prod. Cost (M$) 17,395 13,173 (4,222) -24% CO2 Cost (M$) 2,267 1,200 (1,067) -47% CO2 Amount (MMetrTn) (60) -19% Dump Energy (GWh) ,046 28, %

12 12 PC02: Load/Generation Balance Heavy Summer

13 13 PC02: Load/Generation Balance Heavy Winter

14 14 PC02: Load/Generation Balance Spring

15 15 PC02: Most Heavily Utilized Paths Uxx = % of year that flow is greater than xx% of the path limit. U75 > 50%; U90 > 20%; U99 > 5%

16 16 PC02: Heavily Utilized Paths New Wind Generation

17 17 PC02: Most heavily utilized paths Path Name 99% Limit 90% Limit 75% Limit P36 TOT % 51.38% 63.89% P47 Southern New Mexico (NM1) 26.11% 33.92% 43.73% P48 Northern New Mexico (NM2) 17.99% 23.82% 30.33% P18 Montana-Idaho 12.27% 18.04% 29.32% P37 TOT 4A 9.44% 20.49% 35.63% P22 Southwest of Four Corners 7.40% 33.62% 52.61% P23 Four Corners 345/500 Qualified Path 6.66% 12.15% 26.60% P80 Montana Southeast 6.14% 11.61% 20.42% P28 Intermountain-Mona 345 kv 0.00% 29.12% 35.72% P83 Montana Alberta Tie Line 0.00% 48.89% 55.59%

18 18 Utilization Change: PC02 vs. CC2.0

19 19 Change in Net Flow: PC02 vs. CC2.0

20 20 PC02: Utilization of key paths identified by requestors Path Name 75% Limit 90% Limit 99% Limit P08 Montana to Northwest 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% P26 Northern-Southern California 4.10% 1.35% 0.53% P46 West of Colorado River (WOR) 2.48% 0.39% 0.03% P49 East of Colorado River (EOR) 0.43% 0.00% 0.00% P65 Pacific DC Intertie (PDCI) 8.07% 5.59% 0.00% P66 COI 19.38% 10.21% 0.00%

21 21 PC02: Observations Reduction in base load dispatch of coal and natural gas and high utilization of wind. Lower production cost and lower CO2 vs. CC2.0. Higher utilization on certain paths. No significant utilization on requested key paths

22 22 Utilization Ratings Congestion vs Utilization Some lines are designed to be highly utilized. Most Heavily Utilized = A path that meets any one of the following criterion (10-year plan utilization screening): U75 > 50% U90 > 20% U99 > 5% Uxx = % of year that flow is greater than xx% of the path limit

23 23 CC2.0: Most heavily utilized paths

24 24 PC02: Annual Generation by Category