A Case Study: Optimal Wholesale Power Buying in ERCOT

Similar documents
California Independent System Operator Corporation. California ISO. Import resource adequacy. Department of Market Monitoring

The South-central Partnership for Energy Efficiency as a Resource SPEER. SPEER Incremental Demand Response Report

ERCOT in 2018: Challenges & Opportunities

Power Markets and Renewables Deployment in Developing Countries

Electricity market design with thoughts for New Zealand. Peter Cramton University of Cologne and University of Maryland 12 February 2018

Permian Electricity Market Review & Procurement Strategy

California ISO 2009 Annual Report on Market Issues and Performance

Game-Based Simulation of Gas-Fired Generation Mix With High Renewable Energy Shares

The Texas Experience: Implications of 8,000+ MW Wind Generation Resources In ERCOT. David Campbell CEO, Luminant 2009 Summer Seminar August 3, 2009

Renewables and electricity market design

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. The following members of the Department of Market Monitoring contributed to this report

Recent Development in Reliable Energy Market in the US and Singapore

ERCOT ISO: Current Market and Trends in Future Market Design

Potential Methodology to Account for OFO Penalties Incurred due to Real-time Energy Dispatches

Single Schedule Market Pricing Issues

Intelligent Efficiency It s Different in Texas. Prepared for:

Outline of Talk. Dynamic vs. Time-of-use pricing. Dynamic vs. Time-of-use pricing

Market Monitoring Dr. Robert Sinclair Georgian Energy Policy Delegation

Energy Marketplace. Nicolé K. Grottoli. Market Overview Course. Senior Market Trainer, Market Training, NYISO. March 8, 2018 Rensselaer, NY 12144

Managing Flexibility in MISO Markets

Markets Report. Jennifer Warner-Freeman Senior Economist, Market Analysis January 22, PJM 2018

Two Settlement PJM /06/2016

Demand-Side Resources and Electricity Markets

ISSUE to

The Energy-Smart Pricing Plan SM (ESPP) Real-Time Pricing for Residential Customers. Lawrence Kotewa Senior Engineer and Project Manager

The Influence of Demand Resource Response Time in Balancing Wind and Load

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. The following members of the Department of Market Monitoring contributed to this report:

The effect of variability mitigating market rules on the operation of wind farms

Markets Report. Jennifer Warner-Freeman Senior Economist, Market Analysis March 19, PJM 2018

Upcoming CPES Meetings

System market power. Department of Market Monitoring. Market Surveillance Committee Meeting General Session June 7, 2018

PJM Wholesale Markets. Hisham Choueiki, Ph.D., P.E. Ohio PUC Staff October 20-24, 2014 Tbilisi, Georgia

Price Formation. PJM Market Participants February 14, Joe Bowring Catherine Tyler

ERCOT Changes and Challenges

Day-Ahead Energy Market

The Potential Impact of Solar PV on Electricity Markets in Texas SEIA and the Energy Foundation June 19, 2012

Competitive Markets 1

Report to the Texas Senate Committee on Business & Commerce

Fixed / Price Sensitive Demand Bids, Load Response, Virtual Bidding & Pump Storage Optimizer in the Day Ahead Market

California ISO. Q Report on Market Issues and Performance. February 10, Prepared by: Department of Market Monitoring

The consumer and societal benefits of wind energy in Texas

Turkey Power Information Service (TPIS)

Influence of Natural Gas Price and Other Factors on ISO-NE Electricity Price

2001 Annual Report on the New York Electricity Markets

Day-Ahead and Real Time prices of delivery of electricity. 7 août Arbitrage Strategy of the spread between the Day-Ahead and Re

Retail-Level Transactive Control Linked to Wholesale LMPs

This appendix summarizes the data that was provided to GE for use in this project.

Successful Renewable Energy Development in a Competitive Electricity Market: Texas

Mandatory Real-Time Pricing: What California Can Do to Reduce the Cost of the Summer of 2001

Energy Market Update. April 8, Kevin Krcil Chris Dubay

FERC Order 764 Settlements

Lessons from California The Role of Demand Response

2013 Integrated Resource Plan

Draft Whitepaper to Platte River Board of Directors

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. The following staff members of the Department of Market Monitoring contributed to this report:

Power Options. For Oregon Customers. Choosing an Electricity Service Supplier About transition adjustments... 7

Relations in regulated and non-regulated market segments and their impacts on retail prices

The Role of Energy Storage with Renewable Electricity Generation

NYISO Markets. New York s Marketplace for Wholesale Electricity

INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATORS (VI + Access Rules vs. ISO vs. ITSO)

Lessons Learned from Market Monitoring in North American Electricity Markets

A Capacity Market that Makes Sense

BACKGROUNDER on the first fully functioning regional transmission organization in the United States: PJM Interconnection

Integration of Renewable Generation in ERCOT

A Brief Introduction to EIM Bidding and Market Design 9/7/2017

Energy & Reserve Pricing Solution Overview PJM 2014

California ISO. Q Report on Market Issues and Performance. November 1, Department of Market Monitoring

Pricing Behavior in the Balancing Market. Alan Isemonger Manager, Market Information

Highlights from the Quarterly Report on the New York ISO Electricity Markets Third Quarter of 2017

Demand Response Triggers

Melbourne Renewable Energy Project. PPA Masterclass

The economic benefits of wind energy in the Southwest Power Pool

Mexican Electricity Reform

Denton s Renewable Energy Plan: Can We Green It Up?

VALUE OF YOUR WIND PPA

Analysis of Potential Impacts of CO 2 Emissions Limits on Electric Power Costs in the ERCOT Region

Question: Were customers with utilities affected? Or, more importantly, will they pay for January in the future?

Demand Response Potential in ISO New England s Day- Ahead Energy Market

All NEMO s proposal for harmonised maximum and minimum clearing prices for Single Day Ahead Coupling in accordance with Articles 41(1) of Commission

Directed Contracts Implementation

Markets Report. Paul M. Sotkiewicz, Ph.D Chief Economist, Markets MC Webinar March 23, 2015 PJM 2015

Better Markets, Better Products, Better Prices

Gas Prices and Offer Price Flexibility in Other ISO/RTO Markets

Market Power Mitigation and Load Pricing

Roadmaps for Demand Response & Storage

PJM ARR and FTR Market

Wholesale Electricity Markets. New England Independent System Operator. Commissioner Mark Vannoy Maine Public Utilities Commission

Competitive Markets. Facilitated Dialogue: Market Restructuring & Renewable Energy. June 10-12, 2013 Mexico City, Mexico. Hisham Choueiki, Ph.D., P.E.

SPEER Review of the Texas IOU Energy Efficiency Programs

Response ELECTRICITY MARKET DESIGN AND THE GREEN AGENDA

Estimating the Economically Optimal Reserve Margin in ERCOT

The Impacts of the Green Communities Act on the Massachusetts Economy:

Capacity Performance FAQ Response

Calculation of Demand Curve Parameters

Report on Performance of the California ISO s Local Market Power Mitigation Mechanism

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

The Critical Role of Transmission in Clean Power Plan Compliance

Energy Market Overview

Performance Incentive Mechanisms & Multi-Year Rate Plans

Special Case Resources: Evaluation of the Performance and Contribution to Resource Adequacy

Transcription:

A Case Study: Optimal Wholesale Power Buying in ERCOT Abstract With over 150 Retail Electric companies, IOUs, munis, and co-ops, Texas has the most dynamic and competitive retail power market in the United States. A critical challenge for these providers is minimizing the cost of power purchases, while also mitigating risk. This case study uses actual data from June December, 2011 to analyze the cost and risk profiles of the following three buying strategies: Day-Ahead buying Real Time buying Risk-Adjusted buying using Genscape s PowerBuyer service The analysis shows that the Day Ahead and Real Time markets present difficult tradeoffs between savings and risk, but a disciplined program of Risk-Adjusted buying enables power buyers to benefit from significant cost savings available in the Real Time market, while avoiding most of the associated risk. Background Lone Star Power In order to illustrate the impact of various power buying strategies, we ll use a hypothetical company Lone Star Power with 30,000 residential customers and 500,000 MWhs of load for 2011. For simplicity, we ll assume that all of Lone Star s load resides in ERCOT s North zone and use only on-peak days (M-F, excluding holidays). Lone Star Power is a risk-averse organization, and hedges most of their short-term price risk through power purchase agreements and term contracts which approximate their load obligation and settle against the dayahead market. Each day, Lone Star uses a supplier to forecast their next-day s load based on forecasted weather. The following chart shows Lone star s ERCOT load during the 6-month study period. As illustrated below, demand fluctuates seasonally and is highest in peak summer periods. For a free trial of Genscape s ERCOT PowerBuyer, contact Susan Frockt: 502-292-4659, sfrockt@genscape.com 1

The daily load forecast for tomorrow is then bid into ERCOT s Day-Ahead Market. For years, this buying strategy has served Lone Star Power well but with increased competition, the executive team at Lone Star is evaluating whether there are other strategies for bidding load that can reduce their costs and manage risks. Options for Bidding ERCOT Load ERCOT provides its members with two markets in which to bid their daily load the Day Ahead and Real Time markets. Day Ahead Market (DAM) Any load hedged with term/supply agreements is automatically bid into the DAM against which these contracts settle. Incremental load requirements may be bid in to the DAM as firm quantities or price-sensitive bids. Because the DAM closes shortly after bids are submitted, participants have good visibility into where DAM prices will clear, and DAM prices are not impacted by events which transpire after the 10am market close. The tradeoff for low risk is that DAM prices average more than 10% higher than in the RT. Real Time Market (RT) - Conversely, bidding incremental load in ERCOT s RT market results in lower costs for most hours, and lower overall average costs, but exposes buyers to the risk of price spikes which can reach $3,000/MWh, as occurred several times during the summer of 2011. Most customers have risk policies that limit their exposure to the RT market. Over the study period, Day Ahead Market costs averaged $59.21 (simple average of all hours), vs. $53.18 in the Real Time market. During the 6 month analysis period, DAM prices were higher than RT prices for 20 of 28 weeks, but in 3 of the 8 weeks in which the RT was higher, the difference exceeded $200,000. The histogram below illustrates the frequency of hours in which prices fell within each price range along the bottom X axis. As the chart below illustrates, RT prices are more tightly clustered around the average on the left of the line, but importantly, RT prices extend to the cap (rightmost bucket) of $3,000 7 times during the period while DAM prices never hit the cap. For a free trial of Genscape s ERCOT PowerBuyer, contact Susan Frockt: 502-292-4659, sfrockt@genscape.com 2

A Better Way? Ideally, companies like Lone Star would have a tool to identify specific hours in which the RT market offers maximum savings opportunity and minimal risk. Genscape s PowerBuyer service was designed specifically for this purpose. It provides daily forecasts of hourly prices for both the DAM and the next-day RT markets, based on rigorous fundamental analysis of all market drivers including weather/demand, wind generation, generation outages, fuel prices, transmission constraints and congestion risks. In addition to hourly DAM & RT price forecasts, the PowerBuyer service provides an estimate of upside risk in the RT market using a model scenario with 1,000 MWs of additional demand. For every hour, the PowerBuyer report provides a Risk Adjusted Market Call indication of the optimal market (DAM or RT) based on a combination of price forecast and RT risk. For example, if the DA forecast is $46 and the RT forecast is $35 with low risk, the RT market will be indicated. Conversely, if the DA is below the RT or above but within a narrow risk-based range and the RT upside risk is elevated, the DA market will be indicated. By following this Risk-Adjusted Buy strategy, Lone Star Power can identify hours in which the RT market provides the most attractive combination of high savings and low risk. Over the study period, Lone Star Power would have saved over $15 for every hour bid into the RT market based on PowerBuyer Risk Adjusted Market Call compared with their previous DAM-only strategy. Seasonal Analysis As anyone experienced with the ERCOT market knows, the high demand and volatile prices during peak summer periods can make or break a retailer like Lone Star Power. As the chart below clearly indicates, the combination of higher volume and higher prices during peak summer periods cause weekly power costs to jump from below $500,000 to over $3M. Effective strategies to manage costs during such volatile periods are critical to Lone Star Power s overall financial performance. For a free trial of Genscape s ERCOT PowerBuyer, contact Susan Frockt: 502-292-4659, sfrockt@genscape.com 3

During the 8-week period from July 13-September 6 th when ERCOT load and prices were highest, Genscape s PowerBuyer product excelled saving an average of $53.57 per MWh moved from the DAM to RT and saving money in 6 of the 8 weeks. During this period, the PowerBuyer service successfully identified elevated RT risk and recommended the DAM for fully 67% of hours in which the RT market settled over the DA market by greater than $50. Outside of the 8-week peak summer period, the gains available with PowerBuyer were less dramatic, but still significant and consistent. Over the 21-week non-peak period, each MWh indicated by PowerBuyer for purchase in the RT would have saved $2.34. Clients using this strategy would have saved money 17 of the 21 weeks using the PowerBuyer risk-adjusted buying strategy. The Bottom Line If Lone Star Power had no limit on their ability to bid load into the RT market, and used PowerBuyer to determine the optimal market for each hour, they would have saved $2.94M (14.5%) vs. a DAM-only strategy over the 6- month study period. Such a strategy would have seen 50.2% of all MWhs bid into the RT, which may exceed the risk guidelines for many utilities and retailers. In a more realistic scenario, we ll assume that Lone Star moves only 15% of their load into the RT using Genscape s PowerBuyer service, and continues to bid the remaining 85% into the DAM. Under such a scenario the following benefits would be recognized: Average savings of $15.34 per MWh bid into the RT 23 up weeks (avg $48K savings) and 6 down weeks (avg $32K loss) Cumulative savings of $913,595 vs. DA only strategy For a free trial of Genscape s ERCOT PowerBuyer, contact Susan Frockt: 502-292-4659, sfrockt@genscape.com 4

Summary For utilities and retailers like Lone Star Power who bid their load into ERCOT s Day Ahead Market every day, this case study illustrates that there is significant opportunity to benefit from limited exposure to the Real Time Market. With a service such as Genscape s PowerBuyer, which identifies the precise hours of maximum RT savings and minimal risk, net savings of up to 14.5% can be realized vs a Day Ahead only strategy. In ERCOT s highly competitive market, this savings may represent the difference between profit and loss or customer rates going up or down. The ERCOT market is dynamic, and the results obtained during the June-December 2011 period should not be taken as indications of future results. For a free trial of Genscape s ERCOT PowerBuyer, contact Susan Frockt: 502-292-4659, sfrockt@genscape.com 5