MISO SPP Interregional Stakeholder Advisory Committee. April 8 th, 2014 Carmel, IN

Transcription

1 MISO SPP Interregional Stakeholder Advisory Committee April 8 th, 2014 Carmel, IN 1

2 Agenda Introductions Discussion on Draft Coordinated System Plan (CSP) Study Scope Lunch Continue Discussion on Draft CSP Study Scope Discussion of Proposed Timeline & Next Steps Adjourn 2

3 COORDINATED SYSTEM PLAN STUDY SCOPE DRAFT 3

4 Scope Overview Draft scope presented for stakeholder review SPP & MISO staff initial recommendation IPSAC review and comment Staff refinement of the scope JPC approval 4

5 Study Purpose and Drivers Joint Operating Agreement (JOA) that requires a periodic coordinated system plan study Developed to meet Order 1000 interregional requirement Jointly evaluate seams issues and identify transmission solutions that efficiently address identified issues to the benefit of both regions Economic congestion Assessment of potential reliability violations Provide a common forum for stakeholders to participate in the identification and evaluation of transmission solutions in an open and transparent manner 5

6 Input from Stakeholders on Scope Stakeholder provided potential issues Congestion Integration of Integrated System & MISO South SPP market operation Real time operational issues Reliability issues Public policy requirements Proposed stakeholder issues taken into consideration during scope development 6

7 Task Scope Development Develop scope document Develop detailed schedule Congestion Issues Identification and Verification Future and Model Development Projected Congestion Analysis using BAU Future Historical Congestion Analysis Congestion Transmission Solution Development and Evaluation Solution Development Solution evaluation, robustness testing, reliability analysis, and interregional cost allocation Draft Coordinated System Plan Report Congestion Regional Transmission Justification and Cost Allocation (if needed) Regional transmission evaluation and justification Regional cost allocation and review Coordinated Reliability Assessment Perform reliability assessment using jointly developed powerflow models Identify potential reliability project alternatives 7

8 CONGESTION ISSUES IDENTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION 8

9 Joint Future Development Proposed Joint Future based off MISO and SPP Business as Usual Future (BAU) MISO 2015 MTEP BAU captures all current policies and trends in place at the time of futures development and assumes they continue, unchanged, throughout the duration of the study period. SPP 2015 ITP10 BAU (F1) utilizes inputs provided by SPP stakeholders to develop the modeling inputs based on the assumption that policy requirements will remain constant. Additionally two sensitivities will be performed on the preferred solutions to evaluate impacts of congestion on the two regions Price on carbon emissions High natural gas price forecast 9

10 Regional BAU Future Major Assumptions Regional BAU Futures Demand and Energy Growth Retirements Natural Gas Price RPS (10 year incremental GW) CO₂ DSM (annual reduction in year 10 for EE/DR) MISO 0.8% 12.6 GW Coal $4.30 (2014 $) 3.6 GW wind/ 1.1 GW Solar None 6,000 GWh/ 12 MW SPP 1.3% < 1 GW Coal $5.41 (2014 $) 3.3 GW Wind/ 20.5 MW Solar None Embedde d in Load 10

11 Joint Economic Model Development Foundation: Ventyx Powerbase data Updated with each RTO s modeling assumptions Model years: 2019 & 2024 Modeling Footprint MISO, SPP, AECI, Manitoba, MRO, PJM, SERC, & TVA SPP footprint will include the Integrated System WAPA, Basin, and Heartland with their projected integration of October

12 Joint Economic Model Development Contd. Source Topology Generation Hurdle Rates MISO SPP Both MISO, PJM, SERC, TVA, Manitoba SPP, WAPA, Basin, Heartland AECI region will be enhanced from MISO to include AECI s firm construction plan and any updates in the ITP10 MISO, all other regions SPP, Integrated System, AECI MISO PJM, MISO TVA, MISO MHEB, AECI TVA, TVA PJM, PJM SERC, SERC TVA, SERC AECI MISO SPP, MISO AECI, SPP AECI MISO s modeling of external areas is largely based on the Eastern Reliability Assessment Group (ERAG) Multi Regional Modeling Working Group (MMWG) series models. 12

13 Joint Economic Model Development Contd. Load Forecasts 50/50 case Load shape profiles from same year as wind profiles to ensure synchronization Demand Response and Energy Efficiency will be modeled consistent with how each planning region models it in their respective Business as Usual Futures. 13

14 Joint Economic Model Development Contd. Generation Existing resources come from MTEP 15 and ITP10 for respective regions Retirements based on each RTO s BAU assumptions New generation (including siting) will come from each RTO s BAU expansion plan Hourly profiles for renewables will be developed using data from NREL and will be time synchronized with load shapes. Integrated System and AECI resource plan will come from ITP10; all other external regions from MTEP15 expansion plan 14

15 Joint Economic Model Development Contd. Fuel Prices Coal, Oil, & Uranium fuel prices provided by Ventx Natural gas will come from the MTEP 15 BAU Future Nominal Henry Hub Forecast Price: 2019 = $5.19 and 2024 = $6.50 (Source: Bentek Forecast) Constraint Assessment NERC book of flowgates will be the starting point MISO & SPP will evaluate additional flowgates in the current MTEP and ITP10 models Constraint assessment will be performed to identify any additional flowgates beyond those previously identified Stakeholder input will be requested on identification of congested flowgates to monitor 15

16 Congestion Analysis Historical Identify congested flowgates based on historical TLR congestion March 1, 2012 March 1, 2014 Refreshed after 6 months of SPP market experience Projected 2019 & 2024 Promod BAU simulations Flowgates ranked on following indicators Binding hours number of hours in a year the flowgate is binding Shadow price Reduced production cost for 1 MW increase of thermal rating on the flowgate Congestion costs flowgate shadow price times MW flow on the flowgate 16

17 CONGESTION TRANSMISSION SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT & EVALUATION 17

18 Solution Identification Solution development guided by the congestion analysis and the issues submitted by stakeholders Solutions are not limited to tie line projects Solutions solicited through the IPSAC Transmission solutions proposed by RTO staffs and stakeholders 18

19 Solution Evaluation Preliminary analysis for screening Proposed projects evaluated to determine Adjusted Production Cost (APC) benefit Benefit to Cost ratio (B/C) developed 20 year present value calculation utilizing 2019 & 2024 year simulations Cost utilizing an average carrying charge rate 8% discount rate Projects must provide benefit to both SPP & MISO 19

20 Sensitivities Preferred solutions evaluated utilizing two sensitivities High gas price Carbon price Assumptions for the sensitivities will be reviewed with the IPSAC Not yet developed 20

21 Interregional Cost Allocation Interregional cost allocation methodology specified in the SPP MISO JOA Note that each RTO s respective Order 1000 interregional cost allocation proposals pending at FERC Cost allocated according to APC benefits Projects addressing economic congestion 21

22 Interregional Project Requirements for Interregional Cost Allocation Cost of at least $5,000,000 Provide benefits to both RTOs At least 95% 5% Address economic congestion No interregional B/C ratio requirement Regional requirements Projects can be included in the CSP report without meeting the requirements for cost allocation 22

23 COORDINATED RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT 23

24 Regional Reliability Projects Review Discuss proposed reliability projects identified in respective MTEP and ITP regional transmission planning processes located near the MISO SPP seam Determine if there are interregional alternatives to the currently proposed regional solutions 24

25 Steady State Assessment Steady state reliability assessment using jointly developed power flow models consistent with reliability processes used by each region System intact and N 1 steady state assessment For identified issues evaluate potential transmission solutions to address issues 25

26 Reliability Assessment for Interregional Projects Identified to Address Congestion Evaluate interregional projects identified to address congestion to ensure they do not create reliability issues May result in project modification or identification of additional facilities to mitigate the projected reliability issue(s) 26

27 REGIONAL REVIEW 27

28 Regional Analysis If interregional projects are identified, JPC may recommend projects to the respective RTO s regional process for review and possible Board approval Regional review will be performed consistent with the Tariff provisions of the respective regions Must be completed within 6 months of Interregional Projects recommended from JPC, unless there is agreement through the JPC for an alternative timeline Final report will be produced to include study results 28

29 STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT & COMMUNICATION PLAN 29

30 Stakeholder Communication CSP Study data and information shared via the IPSAC Regional exploder Website posting Additional coordination through regional stakeholder groups 30

31 IPSAC Review Multiple review and comment opportunity throughout the CSP study study scope and analysis approach joint planning models and input assumptions identified seams transmission issues or opportunities proposed transmission solutions and alternatives recommendation on transmission solutions CSP report 31

32 SCHEDULE & NEXT STEPS 32

33 Task Schedule Status Scope Development February April 2014 Develop scope document Develop detailed schedule Congestion Issues Identification and Verification March September 2014 Future and Model Development March June Projected Congestion Analysis using BAU Future July September Historical Congestion Analysis September October Congestion Transmission Solution Development and Evaluation October 2014 June 2015 In Progress In Progress Solution Development Solution evaluation, robustness testing, reliability analysis, and interregional cost allocation Draft Coordinated System Plan Report October January February June Congestion Regional Transmission Justification and Cost Allocation (if needed) June 2015 Dec 2015 Regional transmission evaluation and justification Regional cost allocation and review June December Coordinated Reliability Assessment August 2014 June 2015 Perform reliability assessment using jointly developed powerflow models Identify potential reliability project alternatives 33

34 Next Steps Stakeholder comments on draft scope document due by: April 25, 2014 Updated scope document will be posted with today s meeting materials taking into consideration stakeholder feedback Targeted next IPSAC meeting in August Final date and location to be communicated to stakeholders as we get closer to the date Focus will be to present an update on the historical and projected congestion analysis 34