Load Forecast Uncertainty Kick-Off Discussion. February 13, 2013 LOLEWG Item-3

Similar documents
LOLE Fundamentals Loss of Load Expectation (LOLE) Fundamentals

MISO LOLE Modeling of Wind and Demand Response. Item-9b LOLE Best Practices Working Group July 26-27, 2012

April 27, Ms. Mary Jo Kunkle Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission 6546 Mercantile Way P.O. Box Lansing, MI 48909

Report to the NYISO Load Forecasting Task Force

Independent Load Forecast Update

2016 Probabilistic Assessment. December 5, 2016 Southwest Power Pool

NERC Probabilistic Assessments Overview & Future Improvements

Evolution of the Grid in MISO Region. Jordan Bakke, David Duebner, Durgesh Manjure, Laura Rauch MIPSYCON November 7, 2017

Capacity Accreditation and External Resource Zones 06/30/2016

LOADS, CUSTOMERS AND REVENUE

ERCOT Public LTRA Probabilistic Reliability Assessment. Final Report

August 15, Mary Jo Kunkle Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission 7109 West Saginaw Highway Lansing, Michigan, 48917

NPCC 2018 Québec Balancing Authority Area Interim Review of Resource Adequacy

2012 Probabilistic Assessment

ICA Demand Curve Analysis

Impacts of Demand Side Management on Bulk System Reliability Evaluation Considering Load Forecast Uncertainty

MISO South Local Resource Zones (LRZ) Discussion. LOLE Working Group 5/8/2013

Business Practice Manual RESOURCE ADEQUACY Planning Years 2013 and beyond

Standard BAL-502-RFC-02

NPCC 2015 Québec Balancing Authority Area Interim Review of Resource Adequacy

Reliability Modelling: Review Process & Methodology

Governance and Technical Demand Curve Parameters. May 4, 2018

Midwest ISO Resource Adequacy Overview ATC Network Customer Meeting. Kevin Larson Sr. Manager Resource Adequacy October 20, 2010

Review of Interconnection Assistance Reliability Benefits. May 12, NPCC CP-5 Working Group

Exhibit No. JM-1 Updated Vol.II, pages 2-98 through ELECTRIC ENERGY AND DEMAND FORECASTS

Planning Year Loss of Load Expectation Study Report. Loss of Load Expectation Working Group

Load Forecasting: Methods & Techniques. Dr. Chandrasekhar Reddy Atla

Standard BAL-502-RF-03

Ensuring Resource Availability meets Need (RAN) in MISO. MRO Spring Reliability Conference May 23, 2018 Kevin Vannoy, Director Market Design

Uncertainty in transport models. IDA workshop 7th May 2014

A Revised Resource Adequacy Standard for the Pacific Northwest. NERC LOLE Work Group November 7-8, 2011 Austin, TX

Optimizing the Generation Capacity Expansion. Cost in the German Electricity Market

Capacity and Flexibility Needs under Higher Renewables

APRIL 23, Capacity Value of Wind Assumptions and Planning Reserve Margin

Revision confidence limits for recent data on trend levels, trend growth rates and seasonally adjusted levels

Resource Availability and Need

Coordinated Planning / Deliverability Studies

Managers require good forecasts of future events. Business Analysts may choose from a wide range of forecasting techniques to support decision making.

Using GE-MARS to estimate resource need for 33% RPS scenarios. January 2012

CHAPTER 3 FORECASTS. Figure 3-1: Historical Load Retail Sales Historical Load - Retail Sales

NPCC 2018 Ontario Comprehensive Review Of Resource Adequacy FOR THE PERIOD FROM 2019 TO 2023 APPROVED BY THE RCC ON DECEMBER 4, 2018

RRS Education Session #1

Gas Analysis. Contents. 1. Analytical Models APPENDIX L. 1. Analytical Models... L Analytical Results... L-9

Renewable Integration Impact Assessment (RIIA)

IMO Year 2003 Comprehensive Review of Ontario Resource Adequacy

A simple model for low flow forecasting in Mediterranean streams

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION AND REVIEW, NOT TO BE CITED OR QUOTED

ADEQ/APSC Comments of MISO 7/21/2014

Discussion Paper: Alberta Capacity Market Resource Adequacy

ICA Demand Curve Development:

Choosing the Right Type of Forecasting Model: Introduction Statistics, Econometrics, and Forecasting Concept of Forecast Accuracy: Compared to What?

PJM Manual 20: PJM Resource Adequacy Analysis Revision: 08 Effective Date: July 1, Prepared by Resource Adequacy Planning

May 4, 2017 PLANNING COMMITTEE. Dear Committee Members:

Load Modifying Resources. Capacity Instruments affecting Resource Availability and Need

Background: ERCOT studies in 80 s and 90 s using NARP (N Area Reliability Program): o Small model in which each node represented a major load center

APPENDIX I PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN STUDY

Deleted: RFC-02 12/04/08

Business Quantitative Analysis [QU1] Examination Blueprint

PJM Manual 20: PJM Resource Adequacy Analysis Revision: 0910 Effective Date: July 1, 2017March 21, Prepared by Resource Adequacy Planning

Forecasting Construction Cost Index using Energy Price as an Explanatory Variable

Integrated Resource Plan. Appendix 2A Electric Load Forecast

LOLE is expressed as hours per year with the usual target criteria being (0.1 days/year) or 1- day in 10-years MISO Tariff: Module E-1 - The

EIPC Interconnection-wide Webinar and Stakeholder Discussion. November 17, 2015

CALMAC Study ID PGE0354. Daniel G. Hansen Marlies C. Patton. April 1, 2015

Forecasting Methods. Presented by: Douglas J. Gotham State Utility Forecasting Group Energy Center Purdue University

Variable Selection Of Exogenous Leading Indicators In Demand Forecasting

NPCC 2015 Ontario Comprehensive Review Of Resource Adequacy FOR THE PERIOD FROM 2016 TO 2020 DECEMBER 2015

2018 PJM RESERVE REQUIREMENT STUDY - DETERMINATION OF THE PJM INSTALLED RESERVE MARGIN AND FORECAST POOL REQUIREMENT FOR FUTURE DELIVERY YEARS

Resource Adequacy Modeling update. Technical Workgroup #4 June 14, 2018 AESO External

2011 Probabilistic Assessment. 11JAN12 Interregional Coordination

Statistics, Data Analysis, and Decision Modeling

Portland General Electric 2016 Integrated Resource Plan. OPUC Public Meeting December 20, 2016

Vector Space Modeling for Aggregate and Industry Sectors in Kuwait

Short-Term and Medium-Term Load Forecasting for Jordan's Power System

MOD Demand and Energy Data

FINAL PROJECT REPORT PROBABILISTIC TRANSMISSION CONGESTION FORECASTING

Life Cycle Assessment A product-oriented method for sustainability analysis. UNEP LCA Training Kit Module f Interpretation 1

Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study

Methodology to Perform Long Term Assessments

2010 Loss of Load Expectation Report PUBLISHED: 10/01/2010 LATEST REVISION: 10/08/2010

Keith Beall; Edith L. Bandy;

QUÉBEC CONTROL AREA 2004 INTERIM REVIEW RESOURCE ADEQUACY

Summer 2017 PJM Reliability Assessment

Technical note on seasonal adjustment for Gross domestic product (Agriculture)

1.3 Planning Assumptions and Model Development

Alberta Capacity Market

PJM Resource Adequacy Analysis

MTEP18 Transfer Analysis Scope. PSC June 12 th 2018

Summer 2017 Capacity Assessment

NPCC 2017 Québec Balancing Authority Area Comprehensive Review of Resource Adequacy

Technological Diffusion News

Appendix C. Regulatory Compliance Matrix DRAFT 2018 OR IRP

June 5, 2018 MEMORANDUM. Council Members. John Fazio, Senior Systems Analyst. SUBJECT: Briefing on Adequacy Analysis and Report BACKGROUND:

Summer 2018 Capacity Assessment

The FORESCENE Scenario Modelling Workshop

Appendices. New York Control Area Installed Capacity Requirement. December 2, For the Period May 2017 To April 2018

Methods for Forecasting Energy Supply and Demand

Forecasting State Energy and Capacity Needs

Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee

Linear, Machine Learning and Probabilistic Approaches for Time Series Analysis

Transcription:

Load Forecast Uncertainty Kick-Off Discussion February 13, 2013 LOLEWG Item-3

LFU Overview Load Forecast Uncertainty (LFU) is the amount of load variance modeled within the Loss of Load Expectation (LOLE) software which determines the Planning Reserve Margin (PRM) LFU is not the uncertainty of any given load forecast but the amount by which an aggregate 50/50 forecast will deviate 2

NERC Bandwidth Methodology - Background NERC Load Forecast Working Group (LFWG) developed Aggregated NERC projections Projections are the expected midpoint of future outcomes 50% probability that actual demand will be higher than the midpoint and a 50% probability that it will be lower than the midpoint. In addition, NERC also determined the amount by which the projection would vary at a given probability Upper and Lower 80% confidence bands around the NERC projections were used/provided 80% chance that future demand is within these bands 10% chance that future demand is below the lower band 10% chance that future demand is above the upper band These bandwidths explicitly address uncertainty from a statistical viewpoint 3

Megawatts NERC Bandwidth Methodology - Background 230,000 220,000 210,000 200,000 RFC - Summer Peak Demand 2010-2019 Projection 190,000 180,000 170,000 160,000 150,000 140,000 130,000 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 Year Actual or Projection 10% Low Band 10% High Band 4

NERC Bandwidth Methodology - Background 1996-2004 Regression models To determine the NERC aggregated projections Independent variables included U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), U.S. price of natural gas, population-weighted heating and cooling degree days, and U.S. price of electricity A Monte Carlo simulation model was used for estimating the energy and demand bandwidths This analysis incorporated uncertainty in 1. Economic variables 2. Uncertainty between the explanatory variables and load 3. Weather effects. 5

NERC Bandwidth methodology - Background 2005 2007 Regional and national bandwidths A univariate time series model for each region The regional projection of peak demand and net energy for load are modeled as a function of past demand and net energy The regional time series models are structured as a firstorder autoregressive process The current value of the time series is a linear function of the previous value and random shock/errors. Random errors are assumed to be normal and independently distributed, with mean of zero The variability observed in demand and energy is used to develop uncertainty bandwidths 6

NERC Bandwidth methodology - Background 2008-2011 For each region, an optimal model was estimated within a given list of time series models (used for energy, summer and winter peaks). This list of time-series models is comprised by ARIMA models, trend stationary models, and exponential smoothing methods. Best statistical model was chosen based on The Bayesian Information criterion(bic) test statistics Two unresolved issues Normality assumption on errors Model misspecification (small sample size, over fitting or non parsimonious model) To be addressed in the future updates 7

Bandwidth methodology NERC Load Forecasting Group disbanded since 2009. The 2009 analysis only included load data up through 2007 NERC Bandwidth s will no longer be updated Planning Year 2012 Planning Year 2013 Get the bandwidth data from NERC for three regions Collect LBA data Adjust bandwidths to MISO load Build Autoregression models ( similar NERC) Calculate the bands and LFU Develop the Bands and LFU 8

LFU Analysis Applied to PY 2009 (a test) Duplicate NERC s effort MISO re-calculated 2009 LFU using the same model and appropriate vintage data (1994 to 2007) Re-estimated LFU for PY 2009 would have been 4.10% LFU used in PY 2009 LOLE Model 4.04 % 9

MISO LFU Planning Year 2013 Planning Year LFU 2013 4.9% 2012 4.42% 2011 4.45% 2010 4.04% 2009 4.04% Last year, MISO received new data from the LBA s Hence revised MISO LFU is 4.9%. NERC LFWG did not publish the bandwidths in 2012 MISO used 2011 bandwidths to develop LFU for 2012 10

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 MW MISO Summer Peak Demand ( MW ) 140,000 130,000 120,000 110,000 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 Actual 10% Low Band 10% High Band 11

Local Resource Zones (LRZ) LFU Results for PY 2013 Aggregated the LBAs to get the Local Resource Zones (LRZs ) Load Planning Year Zones LFU 2013 Zone 1 6.2% Zone 2 5.9% Zone 3 5.9% Zone 4 5.7% Zone 5 8.0% Zone 6 5.8% Zone 7 8.6% 12

Planning Year 2014 Continue with NERC Bandwidth Methodology Planning Year 2014 Update data Build Autoregression models ( similar NERC) Develop the Bands and LFU 13

Planning Year 2014 Continue with NERC Bandwidth Methodology Calculate and share the results at upcoming LOLEWG meetings Share the input data that went into the analysis Allows transparency and data checking of the calculation Process Improvement Opportunities Stakeholders are encouraged to make presentations regarding different LFU approaches MISO will evaluate these alternative methods and report back to the stakeholders 14

Contact Info Maryam Naghsh-Nilchi (317) 249-2107 mnaghsh-nilchi@misoenergy.org Brandon Heath (651) 632-8473 bheath@misoenergy.org Davey Lopez (317) 249-5109 dlopez@misoenergy.org 15