MARAMA 2012 Monitoring Committee Workshop

Transcription

1 MARAMA 2012 Monitoring Committee Workshop Mike Kormos Senior Vice President Operations PJM Interconnection September 18,

2 26% of generation in Eastern Interconnection 28% of load in Eastern Interconnection 19% of transmission assets in Eastern Interconnection PJM as Part of the Eastern Interconnection KEY STATISTICS PJM member companies 750+ millions of people served 60 peak load in megawatts 163,848 MWs of generating capacity 185,600 miles of transmission lines 65,441 GWh of annual energy 832,331 generation sources 1,365 square miles of territory 214,000 area served 13 states + DC Internal/external tie lines % of U.S. GDP produced in PJM As of 1/4/

3 The History of PJM 3

4 PJM in the World State Grid Corp. of China 900,000 MW Installed Capacity 44,169 miles transmission (330kV +) RAO UES of Russia PJM Midwest ISO Power Grid Corp. of India EDF (France) Tokyo Electric 211,000 MW Installed Capacity 94,747 miles of transmission (220kV +) 185,600 MW Installed Capacity 214 Interties 1,365 Generating Units 65,440 miles of transmission 159,000 MW Installed Capacity 57,453 miles of transmission 68,000 MW Installed Capacity 23 Interties 1,000 Generating Units 117,228 miles of transmission (220kV+) 83,000 MW Installed Capacity 41 Interties 608 Generating Units 30,162 miles of transmission 68,000 MW Installed Capacity 3 Interties 147 Generating Units 43,857 miles of transmission As of March 2011 National Grid (England & Wales) 68,000 MW Installed Capacity 2 Interties 212 Generating Units 14,552 miles of transmission 4

5 Annual Billings $40 $35 $35.9 $30 $25 Billions $20 $15 $10 $5 $

6 PJM s Role as a Regional Transmission Organization Air Traffic Controllers for the Transmission Grid Stock Market for Electricity Match generation to load Energy Market Pricing 6

7 August 14 th 2003 The Blackout 10/1/ PJM 7 7

8 Phase 1, item A: 1:31:34 PM ONTARIO Transmission Lines Eastlake Generator trips off-line 2 1A 765 kv 500 kv 345 kv 230 kv Impacts flows reactive support (voltage) 1 Contingency analysis not re-run What if study 10/1/ PJM 8 8

9 Phase 1, item B: 2:02 PM ONTARIO Loss of a 345 kv Transmission pathway 1B First Energy (FE) and MidWest Independent System Operator s (MISO) monitoring systems are failing 10/1/ PJM 9 9

10 (3:05:41) Loss of the Harding-Chamberlin 345 kv line tree contact FE and MISO operators not aware of line loss 10/1/ PJM 10 1

11 (3:05:41) (3:32:03) Loss of the Hanna - Juniper 345 kv line tree contact FE and MISO operators not aware of both line losses 10/1/ PJM 11 1

12 (3:05:41) (3:32:03) Loss of the South-Canton - Star 345 kv line tree contact (3:41:35) FE has emergency indicator 10/1/ PJM 12 1

13 (4:05:57.5) Loss of the Sammis - Star 345 kv line 10/1/ PJM 13 1

14 Phase 4 Begins: 4:05:57.5 p.m. Remaining paths 4A 10/1/ PJM 14 1

15 Phase 4: 4:08:59 4:09:07 p.m. ONTARIO Two more 345 kv lines trip 4D 4C 4B 10/1/ PJM 15 1

16 Phase 5: 4:10:36 4:10:37 p.m. 5A Three more 345 kv lines in MI, OH, PA and 20 generators trip 10/1/ PJM 16 1

17 Phase 5: 4:10:37.5 4:10:38.6 p.m. 5B 5C Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland load pocket 10/1/ PJM 17 1

18 Summary at 4:10:38.6 p.m. Power swings 10/1/ PJM 18 1

19 Phase 5: 4:10:39 p.m. 5D Two more 345 kv lines in PA trip 10/1/ PJM 19 1

20 Phase 5: 4:10:44 p.m. 5E 10/1/ PJM 20 2

21 Phase 5: 4:10:39-4:10:45 p.m. 5F 10/1/ PJM 21 2

22 Phase 5: 4:10:43 4:10:45 p.m. North of Lake Superior 5G 5G 10/1/ PJM 22 2

23 Phase 6: 4:10:46 4:13 p.m. 10/1/ PJM 23 2

24 End of the Cascade Area affected by blackout pockets of generation and load remain on 10/1/ PJM 24 2

25 PJM 500 kv Voltages (cont d) Voltage (kv) :11: % Drop from 16:09: :11: % Drop from 16:09:00 Branchburg Doubs Keystone Alburtis :11: % Drop from 16:09: :11: % Drop from 16:09: :05 16:06 16:07 16:08 16:09 16:10 16:11 16:12 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:16 Note: Time stamps on voltage data may not match exactly with equipment outage times Time (EDT) 25

26 26

27 Blackout Causes TRAINING TOOLS TREES Items of Interest Frequency Realism Effectiveness Real Time Analysis of N-1 Operator & Crisis Friendly Inquisitive Operations Frequency Regulatory Support Inspection 2007 PJM 10/1/2 27 2

28 Current Industry Challenges 10/1/ PJM 28 2

29 Installed Capacity in PJM (MW) Coal, 75,267 MW, 41% Gas, 50,525 MW, 28% Solar, 40 MW, 0% Solid Waste, 705 MW, 0% Wind, 4,996 MW, 3% Hydroelectric, 8,047 MW, 4% Oil, 11,217 MW, 6% Wind Nameplate = MW/13% Solar Nameplate = 15.3 MW/38% Nuclear, 33,146 MW, 18% Source: Third Quarter 2011 State of Market Report 29

30 Coal Plant Retirements Over 16,000 MW of Pending Deactivations (~13,500 MW since 11/2011) 30

31 Transitioning Fuel Mix 31

32 , World Gas Fields by Recoverable Reserves (TCF) Transitioning Fuel Mix Do the math: Annual US natural gas usage is ~20 TCF; Marcellus could contain 30 years of natural gas supply! Source: EIA, CHK estimates, et al 32

33 Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) WA: 15% x 2020* OR: 25% x 2025 (large utilities)* 5% - 10% x 2025 (smaller utilities) MT: 15% x / December 2011 ND: 10% x 2015 MN: 25% x 2025 (Xcel: 30% x 2020) VT: (1) RE meets any increase in retail sales x 2012; (2) 20% RE & CHP x 2017 MI: 10% & 1,100 MW x 2015* SD: 10% x 2015 WI: Varies by utility; ~10% x 2015 statewide NY: 29% x 2015 NV: 25% x 2025* CO: 30% by 2020 (IOUs) 10% by 2020 (co-ops & large munis)* IA: 105 MW OH: 25% x 2025 IL: 25% x 2025 WV: 25% x 2025* IN: 15% x CA: 33% x UT: 20% by 2025* KS: 20% x 2020 VA: 15% x 2025* MO: 15% x 2021 AZ: 15% x 2025 OK: 15% x 2015 NC: 12.5% x 2021 (IOUs) 10% x 2018 (co-ops & munis) NM: 20% x 2020 (IOUs) 10% x 2020 (co-ops) ME: 30% x 2000 New RE: 10% x 2017 NH: 23.8% x 2025 MA: 22.1% x 2020 New RE: 15% x 2020 (+1% annually thereafter) RI: 16% x 2020 CT: 27% x 2020 PA: ~18% x 2021 NJ: 20.38% RE x ,316 GWh solar x 2026 DC MD: 20% x 2022 DE: 25% x 2026* DC: 20% x 2020 TX: 5,880 MW x 2015 PR: 20% x 2035 HI: 40% x 2030 Renewable portfolio standard Renewable portfolio goal Solar water heating eligible Minimum solar or customer-sited requirement * Extra credit for solar or customer-sited renewables Includes non-renewable alternative resources 29 states + DC and PR have an RPS (8 states have goals) 33

34 Proposed Renewable Generation in PJM As of January 4,

35 New Resources in PJM Planning Queues (Active and Under Construction) Solar, 3,883 MW, 5% Storage, 145 MW, 0% Wind, 39,459 MW, 45% Combined Cycle, 27,365 MW, 32% Diesel, 301 MW, 0% Hydro, 406 MW, 0% Combined Turbine, 3,073 MW, 4% Nuclear, 6,177 MW, 7% Steam, 6,055 MW, 7% State of Markets Report As of September 30,

36 The Fine Print on Renewables Wind is coming, but not on the peak hours. (13% available at the time of peak) Energy storage is needed to ensure renewables achieve their potential. 36

37 Integrating New Infrastructure Intermittent Wind Generation 37

38 PJM Load and Wind Resources April 7, Load MW Wind MW Locational marginal Price- $/MWh PJM-RTO Chicago 38

39 Comparison of Wind with Solar PV 4.6 MW TEP Solar Array (Arizona) kw Seconds since 00:00:00 Jan 1, kw (b) Source: Carnegie Mellon University 39

40 Smart Grid Consumer Devices Energy Users Energy Providers Distribution Network Operations Transmission 40

41 18,000 16,000 14,000 Offers of Demand Resources Strengthening Responsive Load Energy Efficiency RPM and FRR DR Interruptible Load for Reliability Active Load Management 12,000 10,000 Prior To RPM Implementation RPM Implementation 8,000 6,000 4,000 2, / / / / / / / / / /

42 Four Trends to Watch 42

43 PJM s Control Room 43

44 PJM AC² Objectives Construct second data and control center Implement parallel systems High availability Geographically diverse Secure Dual Hot Site Re-architecture of major applications Migrating to a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) 44

45 Member Company Using etools Internet Private Network AC¹ Jefferson Control Center ESB HSB AC² Milford Control Center PJMnet Member Company EMS Member Company EMS 45

46 AC 2 - Key New Technologies Cognitive Task Analysis Improving dispatcher actions and workflow Visualization Assimilating vast data visually Intelligent Event Processing process and report events using data correlation and pattern recognition Web Services / SOA new architecture for core systems Virtualization logically and dynamically deploy processors Generation Control Algorithm achieve greater dispatch control and efficiencies 46

47 Multiple Interface Complexity Energy Mgmt System SCADA, Network Applications, AGC Market Mgmt System Dispatch Management Tool emkt & eftr esuite emtr 47

48 UE&V - A Common User Interface Engy Mgmt Task Based System SCADA, Network Applications, AGC Market Mgmt Personalization Customization Navigation Security AC2 Technology System Dispatch Management Tool emkt & eftr esuite Single Sign On emtr 48

49 Intelligent Event Process (IEP) Design Concept PJM Rules UI IEP Procedures Data 49

50 IEP Solution 50

51 Previously PJM operated with multiple applications. These applications communicate back and forth to send or receive data through various bridges. This process was working with over 500 bridges. To increase efficiency and accuracy, SOA was the solution of choice and was implemented as the first components of the Shared Architecture project. Former State: A Web of Data Bridges 51 51

52 AC² Web Services/SOA Conceptual Model Industry standard messaging architecture Business service focused Security built into the architecture Plug and play architecture for power systems 52

53 Generation Control Application Improved Dispatch Efficiency KL1 53

54 Slide 53 KL1 Cost savings being calculated won't have until tomoorow at the earliest Kirsten Lusska, 5/21/2009

55 PJM Integrating Grids & Markets Focus on three things 1. Keeping the Lights On 2. Fair and Efficient Markets 3. Infrastructure for the future 54