PG&E Demonstration A Dynamic Integration Capacity Revised Plan Overview

Transcription

1 PG&E Demonstration A Dynamic Integration Capacity Revised Plan Overview ICAWG Meeting 9 June 2016 READ AND DELETE For best results with this template, use PowerPoint

2 Demo A Requirements Requirements as described by May 2nd ACR a) Demonstration A Learning Objectives b) ICA Baseline Requirements and Conformance c) Tools Used to Prepare ICA d) Schedule/Gantt Chart e) Additional Resources f) Monitoring and Reporting Progress and Results g) Availability of Project Files h) Comparative Evaluation and Benchmarking i) ORA Success Metrics for ICA Evaluation 2

3 (A) Demo A Objectives Study reverse flow at T&D interface DER Capacity with and without limiting reverse power beyond substation busbar Diverse Locations Evaluate two DPAs (one urban and one rural) covering broad range of electrical characteristics Incorporate Portfolios and New Technology Methods for evaluating DER portfolios, CAISO dispatch, and Smart Inverters Consistent Maps and Outputs Consistent and readable maps to the public with similar data and visual aspects Computational Efficiency Evaluate methods for faster and more accurate update process that works for entire service territory Comparative Analysis Benchmark for consistency and validation across techniques and IOUs Locational Load Shapes Utilize Smart Meters for localized load shapes Future Roadmap Determine roadmap and timelines for future ICA achievements based on demonstration learnings 3

4 (B) ICA Baseline Requirements and Conformance Below is simplified chart similar to what ORA displayed in ICA Workshop The goal is to explore and determine best approach for ICA calculations by exploring both iterative and streamlined techniques Simplified ICA Process Diagram Substation Limit Data Sources AMI/ SCADA Circuit Data Parse and Compile Data Perform Baseline Power Flows ICA Calculations Thermal Protection Power Quality Reliability/ Safety Feeder Limit Line Section Limits Node Limits Geospatial Results Tabular Results Iterative Power Flow Approach Streamlined Approach Thermal Algorithms Initialize DER Set DER Size Perform Power Flow Violation of Criteria? Adjust DER Size Record Values Power Flow Data Protection Algorithms Power Quality Algorithms Reliability Algorithms Minimum Record Values 4

5 (B) ICA Baseline Requirements and Conformance (cont.) For PG&E, most of the requirements are met already since ACR used PG&E methodology as baseline for Demos Goal is to meet objectives of ACR while exploring best approach to do so Modifications and enhancements in baseline methodology to be explored in Demo Expanded hours of analysis past the 288 hours in initial filing Expanding interdependence of feeders in analysis Expanding analysis to load modifying resources (i.e. EE and DR) Expanded portfolio analysis (i.e. load control/ev combined with solar and storage) Expanding reach of analysis to single phase line sections Expanding criteria evaluated as listed in Table 2-4 of PG&E s DRP Breaking out ICA values by criteria and hour 5

6 (C) Tools Utilized PG&E moved away from in house distribution planning tools in 2011 Enhanced Load Forecasting with hourly shapes and geospatial forecasting - Load profiles for every distribution feeder - LoadSEER developed by Integral Analytics Geospatial Distribution Feeder Models - Simulate power flow effects on distribution lines granular down to final line transformers - CYMDIST by CYME International Current development in EPIC 2.23 to more tightly integrate the two tools for more robust and efficient analyses 6

7 (D) Schedule/Gantt Chart 2016 January February March April May June July August September October November December Revised Plan Status Report Final Report (1) Reverse Flow at T&D Interface (1.1) Initial Tx Hosting Capacity Discussions (1.3) Reverse Flow Evaluation (1.4) Discussion on Tx ICA (2) Select DPAs (3) DER Portfolios (3.1) Evaluate Base Portfolios (3.2) Other Portfolios / Tech. (4) Maps and Outputs (4.1) Align on Output (4.2) Adjust Maps (5) Evaluation and Computational Efficiency (5.1) Review ICA Scripts (5.2) (5.3) Iterative Evaluation (5.6) Adjust Scripts for Ruling Objectives (5.4) Streamlined Evaluation (5.5) Blended Evaluation Computational Efficiency Analysis (7) Smart Meter and SCADA Load Shapes (6) Comparative Analysis (8) Future Roadmap

8 (E-H) Additional Requirements (e) Resources Utilizing and coordinating with EPIC 2.23 which was intended to enhance PG&E distribution planning tools for DER planning Additional Resources may be needed depending on scope of map publication since PG&E does not currently have similar ESRI online portal as other IOUs (f) Monitoring and Reporting Progress and Results Monthly ICAWG meetings June revised filing Q3 status report Q3 technical assumptions report Q4 final report (g) Availability of Project Files Open to discussion, but needs to involve NDAs if specific IOU circuit and/or granular load data is desired (h) Comparative Evaluation and Benchmarking Details to be covered later with ICAWG in this meeting 8

9 (I) ORA Success Metrics for ICA Evaluation 1. Accurate and meaningful results 2. Transparent methodology 3. Uniform process that is consistently applied 4. Complete coverage of service territory 5. Useful formats for results 6. Consistent with industry, state, and federal standards 7. Accommodates portfolios of DER on one feeder 8. Reasonable resolution (a) spatial, (b) temporal 9. Easy to update based on improved and approved changes in methodology 10. Easy to update based on changes in inputs (loads, DER portfolio, DER penetration, circuit changes, assumptions, etc.) 11. Consistent methodologies across large IOUs 12. Methodology accommodates variations in local distribution system, such that case by case or distribution planning area (DPA) specific modifications are not needed 9

10 Area Selection Two main factors are considered for areas 1. Diversity in characteristics with one urban and one rural 2. Overlap with other Demo Areas for coordinated learnings Urban DPA Location Substations 10 Feeders 43 Customers 57,000 Recent Historical Peak Rural DPA Location Substations 4 Feeders 20 Customers 13,000 Recent Historical Peak Chowchilla Madera County (Rural) 155 MW Chico Butte County (Urban/Suburban) 235 MW Customer Type ~ Residential/ 5% Agricultural / 15% Commercial & Industrial Customer Type ~ Residential/ 3 Agricultural / Commercial & Industrial 10

11 Characteristic Variation of Circuits within DPAs Charts are statistical variation of different circuits characteristics between both Chowchilla and Chico DPAs Across these general key characteristics Chico and Chowchilla have a good spread compared to the system set 11

12 Chico DPA (Aggregate) Demand Profile Charts are statistical aggregate profiles from analyzing Smart Meter data and aggregating to DPA Profile shows larger degree in profile variation in summer versus smaller variation in winter Characteristic of residential evening peak driven by hot temperatures 3 3 Load Profile Probability Chart Percentile January May July October th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th 95th 12

13 Chowchilla DPA (Aggregate) Demand Profile Charts are statistical aggregate profiles from analyzing Smart Meter data and aggregating to DPA Profile shows larger degree in profile variation in throughout year with biggest in summer Has really low daytime loading around 3 3 Load Profile Probability Chart Percentile January May July October th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th 95th 13