TEAC5

TEAC5

October 15, 2001

Sheraton Hotel

Framingham, Massachusetts

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 2

TEAC5 Agenda

• Welcoming Remarks

• TEAC Process

• MARS Results

• DSM/Resource Addition Impacts on Congestion

• RTEP02 Work Plan

• Status of Active Transmission Studies

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 3

TEAC Process

• Beginning RTEP02 Effort• Continuation of [email protected]

• ISO web site for postings

• Plan meetings every six weeks

Sub-Area Resource Adequacy Assessment using GE MARS

Presentation to TEACOctober 15, 2001

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 5

Presentation Overview

• Objectives of the Assessment• Why we need to use GE MARS• Comparison of GE MARS and ABB Westinghouse • Cases Studied and the Results• What’s Next?

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 6

Objectives of the Assessment

• To assess the reliability of the New England bulk power generation system taking into account internal transmission limits.

• The assessment covers the 2002 through 2006 time period with assumptions that are consistent with the 2001 Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP01)

• The results supplement RTEP01.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 7

Why we need to use GE MARS

• Traditionally generation reliability analyses were conducted using a single-bus methodology (ABB Westinghouse Program).

• NEPOOL generation interconnection standards required the full integration of generating resources.

• With the advent of deregulation, NEPOOL modified its rules to allow for a Minimum Interconnection Standard.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 8

• Less stringent interconnection standard coupled with market forces has promoted the installation of merchant generation and many such units will be added to the NEPOOL system during 2002 to 2006.

• Many of these generation units are in regions in which existing transmission facilities are inadequate to handle the additional supply.

• It has become necessary to model the transmission limits on the bulk power system using a multi-area model, hence the use of GE MARS.

Why we need to use GE MARS

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 9

Comparison of Westinghouse and MARS

• Program Basics

– Westinghouse is a Single Area program whereas MARS is a Multi-Area program.

– Westinghouse uses probabilistic calculations to capture the random nature of loads and unit availability whereas MARS uses a sequential Monte Carlo simulation.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 10


• Load Representation– Westinghouse load model is probabilistic and uses

distributions of daily peak loads for a week, explicitly taking into account load uncertainty. The load model is developed from only weekday peaks and excludes weekend loads. This assumes that weekend loads will contribute negligibly to the system risk.

– The MARS load model is chronological. Chronological hourly load data(8760/8784 hours) must be input in standard EEI format.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 11


• Mars can include the effects of load uncertainty through the use of load multipliers. Load multipliers are per unit multipliers used for computing the loads for which to calculate the reliability indices. Each per unit multiplier represents a load level (up to ten can be represented in MARS), which is assigned a probability of that load level occurring. The mean or 1.0 multiplier, represents the forecast peak load and the cumulative probabilities of a normal distribution define the probabilities for each multiplier. The multipliers are allowed to vary by month.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 12


• Maintenance Scheduling

– Both programs have options for user specified or automatic maintenance scheduling.

– For automatic maintenance scheduling, Westinghouse schedules maintenance in such a way as to levelize the weekly reliability throughout the year. MARS schedules maintenance to levelize reserves on either an area, pool or system basis.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 13


• Simulation of Unit Outages

– In Westinghouse the expected amount of unavailable capacity on the system as a result of forced outages is the product of the capacity and forced outage rate of each individual unit summed for all units that are available to the system to serve load.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 14


– Since MARS is based on a sequential Monte Carlo simulation, it uses state transition rates to model the random forced outages of units. From the transition rates for a unit, the program calculates 2 primary quantities that are needed to model the random forced outages of the unit: the average (mean) time that the unit resides in each capacity state, and the probability of the unit transitioning from each state to each other state. Each time a unit changes capacity states, 2 random numbers are generated. The first is used to calculate the amount of time that the unit will spend in the current state. It is assumed that the time in a state is exponentially distributed. The second random number is combined with the state transition probabilities to determine the state to which the unit will transition when it leaves its current state.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 15


• Daily LOLE Computation

– In Westinghouse the system margin density is generated for each week of the year by combining the load density for the week with the corresponding available capacity density. The negative portion of the margin density represents the average daily LOLE for the week. The program calculates and outputs the LOLE for 13 four week periods during the year and for the full year.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 16


– In MARS daily LOLE is calculated for the hour at which the Pool peaks and each sub-area’s LOLE is calculated at that hour. The reliability of the pool as a whole is determined by the reliability of the individual sub-areas in the pool. In other words if a sub-area is experiencing a loss of load for the hour that the pool peaks, the pool itself is considered to be in a loss of load state.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 17

Cases Studied using GE MARS(using RTEP01 assumptions)

• Single Area Case

• Base Case

• NB 700 MW Case

• NB and HQ Import Case

• Cross Sound Cable Import and Export Cases

• Attrition Cases

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 18

Summary of GE MARS Results

• The reliability of the NEPOOL System decreases when internal transmission limits are reflected in the reliability assessment. This indicates the existence of internal transmission constraints.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 19

• From an import perspective, the SWCT Import Interface is the most constraining. This interface limits the amount of power that can flow into the SWCT and NOR sub-areas.


ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 20

• From an export perspective, the SEMA-RI Export limit is the most constraining, indicating locked in generation behind this interface.

• NEPOOL reliability would significantly deteriorate if the 14 “high environmental impact” plants or an equivalent amount of other generation were to become unavailable starting from Year 2002.

• The Cross Sound Cable could provide increased system reliability.


ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 21

MARS Single-Area Results (LOLE in Days Per Year)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006LOLE 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 22

MARS Sub-Area Results - Base Case (LOLE in Days Per Year)

Sub- Area 2002 2003 2004 2005 20061 BHE2 ME3 S-ME4 NH5 VT6 BOSTON 0.0037 CMA-NEMA8 W-MA9 SEMA

10 RI11 CT 0.009 0.008 0.014 0.031 0.03712 SWCT 0.135 0.104 0.141 0.202 0.28113 NOR 0.133 0.105 0.145 0.215 0.293

NEPOOL 0.142 0.109 0.148 0.216 0.298

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 23

MARS Sub-Area Results - NB 700 MW Import (LOLE in Days Per Year)


10 RI11 CT 0.009 0.008 0.014 0.031 0.03712 SWCT 0.135 0.104 0.141 0.202 0.28113 NOR 0.133 0.105 0.145 0.215 0.293

NEPOOL 0.142 0.109 0.148 0.216 0.298

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 24

MARS Sub-Area Results - NB and HQ Import (LOLE in Days Per Year)


10 RI11 CT 0.009 0.008 0.014 0.031 0.03712 SWCT 0.135 0.104 0.141 0.202 0.28113 NOR 0.133 0.105 0.145 0.215 0.293

NEPOOL 0.142 0.109 0.148 0.216 0.298

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 25

MARS Sub-Area Results - Cross Sound Cable Export (LOLE in Days Per Year)


10 RI11 CT 0.031 0.035 0.054 0.101 0.10612 SWCT 0.152 0.126 0.163 0.245 0.33013 NOR 0.153 0.131 0.182 0.274 0.352

NEPOOL 0.164 0.135 0.187 0.280 0.357

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 26

MARS Sub-Area Results - Cross Sound Cable Import (LOLE in Days Per Year)


10 RI11 CT 0.002 0.003 0.008 0.00912 SWCT 0.129 0.098 0.128 0.178 0.25013 NOR 0.126 0.098 0.131 0.186 0.258

NEPOOL 0.136 0.101 0.134 0.187 0.263

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 27

MARS Sub-Area Results - Attrition Cases (NEPOOL LOLE in Days Per Year)

Case 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006High Attrition (100%)_Base Case 27.340 14.381 17.168 31.009 43.110High Attrition (100%)_NB 700 27.000 14.289 17.110 30.988 43.004High Attrition (100%)_NB and HQ 26.634 14.229 17.083 30.886 42.65650% Attrition_Base Case 4.249 2.692 3.279 4.748 6.79050% Attrition_NB 700 4.249 2.692 3.279 4.744 6.78950% Attrition_NB and HQ 4.249 2.692 3.279 4.711 6.77225% Attrition_Base Case 0.329 0.212 0.343 0.495 0.65725% Attrition_NB 700 0.329 0.212 0.343 0.495 0.65625% Attrition_NB and HQ 0.329 0.212 0.343 0.495 0.656

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 28

What’s Next?

• Further work on understanding the differences between the GE MARS and ABB Westinghouse Models.

• Policy issues concerning the need for a sub-area reliability criterion will need to be addressed.

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 29

DSM Impacts on Transmission Congestion


ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 31

Transmission Congestion

Congestion is caused by:- Imbalance in the location of supply vis-a-vis demand

- Demand for electricity is a function of many factors:- Customer type- Day of the week- Hour of the day- Season of the year- Weather- etc.

- Supply of electricity may be available, but- transmission may not be sufficient to transport to demand- fewer suppliers that can deliver increases market concentration- increased concentration leads to ability to influence prices

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 32

Demand is Determined by Aggregate Customer Actions

Most Demand is InelasticGeneration is required to supply any and all demandCustomers have unlimited “call option” for power

- Limited ability to shape customer demand- Customer perceived Value Of Lost Load (VOLL) is high- Large classes of consumers need and expect supply certainty

ButSome customers have flexibility

- Short notice ability to change consumption- Day-ahead ability to change consumption

Change in consumption- Reduce kWh consumption- Self generation

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 33

DSM Alternatives

There are two primary DSM alternatives- Customer reduction in consumption

- Conservation- Real Time Response

- Customer self-generation- Cogeneration / self serving generation- Utilization of unused standby resource

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 34

DSM Cost Assumptions

Cost Assumptions for DSM can be handled in several ways- Conservation and Customer Self Generation

- Economic value is internalized by customers- No explicit assumptions- Effect is seen through reduced demand from LSEs

- Price Responsive DSM- Need a strike price (dispatch price) for responsiveness- Use of standby resources may be relatively inexpensive- Use of routine “price responsive” DSM may be inexpensive- Extraordinary “price responsive” DSM may be expensive- Study assumed $140/MWh for price responsive DSM

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 35

DSM Alternatives Investigated

Two cases investigated:- General Conservation

- All loads reduced by 1.4 percent- Equal conservation throughout New England - Approximately one year load growth delay- Could be Fluorescents, Fuel Cells or Cogeneration

- Price Responsive DSM- Resources located in NOR, SWCT, CT, BOST- 500 MW total (125 MW in each Sub-area)- Could be demand reduction- Could be use of standby emergency generators

CMS assumed in place at the start of 2002

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 36

RTEP Sub- Areas and “Price Responsive” DSMNB

NH

BHEMES-ME

BOSTON

RI SEMA

336

CT

SWCTNOR

CMA/NEMA

W-MA

VT

NY

New England Interfaces

125 MW DSM

125 MW DSM

125 MW DSM

125 MW DSM

NY-NE - 1400w/o Cross

Sound Cable

SEMA - 1000

Norwalk-Stamford - 1100

Surowiec South - 1150ME-NH -1400

North-South - 2700

Boston - 3600

SEMA/RI - 1600

NBOrrington South - 1050

NB-NE - 700HQHighgate - 225 Phase II - 1500

CSC -330

S-MELoad 5751493 MW

MELoad 11561093 MW

BHELoad 376874 MW

SEMALoad 23293346 MW

RILoad 20585419 MW

W-MALoad 20413654 MW

CMA/NEMALoad 1548

243 MW

Peak Load and Installed Capacity MW by Area - 2006

VTLoad 1353

879 MW

NY

NHLoad 19143590 MW

BOSTONLoad 52573984 MW

CTLoad 33194359 MW

SWCTLoad 26622112 MW

NORLoad 1129

463 MW Under Construction

Other Studies Required

RTEPLoad

Capacity

KEY:Connecticut - 2500Regional Transmission Expansion Plan Sub-area

Priority Studies Required

South West CT - 1700

East-West - 2150

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 38

Conservation Results

Because loads are reduced by one year’s load growth- Congestion is “delayed” by one year- Effect is seen across all RTEP zones

Static analysis did not consider- Delay of resource additions in response to conservation - Accelerated unit retirements due to reduced growth

Conservation may delay the need for generation or transmission improvements

Need to separate cost reductions due to fewer kWh sales and the impact on transmission congestion

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 39

Difference in Total LSE Expense Cost – Conservation Case

Total cost to LSEs is reduced $530 Million from lower sales

BH

E

CM

AN

ME

NO

R

SE

MA

SW

CT

WE

MA

2002

20050.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

An

nu

al

Ch

an

ge

in

LS

E E

xp

en

se (

$Mil

lio

n)

Effect of Conservation on Total LSE Expense(Congestion and Energy) - Fuel Cost Based Bids

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 40

Difference in Congestion Cost – Conservation Case

Total congestion is reduced $165 Million compared to the results of the reference case where generators are assumed bidding in at approximately fuel cost (Case 1A).

BH

E

CM

AN

ME

NO

R

SE

MA

SW

CT

WE

MA

2002

2005-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0A

nn

ua

l C

ha

ng

e i

nC

on

ge

stio

n (

$Mil

lio

n)

Effect of Conservation on CongestionFuel Cost Based Bids

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 41

The impact of DSM in SWCT / NOR suggests that the average annual energy cost savings of $52 Million is attributed to 250 MW of DSM within the SWCT / NOR sub-areas. These savings are probably sufficient to induce not only DSM, but also new generating resources.

Effect of price responsive DSM in CT and BOST was negligible

Location of price responsive DSM is important

“Price Responsive” DSM Results – NOR and SWCT

Year NOR SWCT Combined NOR SWCT Combined

2002 13.8 38.4 52.2 5.6 18.5 24.1 28.1

2003 24.2 60.1 84.3 12.7 32.7 45.4 38.9

2004 36.3 88.2 124.5 19.1 47.2 66.3 58.2

2005 43.8 105.6 149.4 25.8 62.7 88.5 60.9

2006 54.9 130.8 185.7 33.1 79.7 112.8 72.9

Total 173 423.1 596.1 96.3 240.8 337.1 259

Case 1A Price Responsive DSM DSM EffectAnnual Congestion Cost ($Million)

RTEP02 Work Plan


ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 43

Building on the RTEP01 Process

• RTEP02 will be a follow-up to the RTEP01 recommendations

• ISO-NE seeking TEAC Input

• Several Work Streams

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 44

Short-Term Upgrades

• SWCT to address the reliability concerns

• SEMA/RI to address locked in generation

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 45

Reliability Analysis -MARS

• 2003 - 2012 Time Frame

• Assumptions on New Units/Retirements

• Load Forecast by Sub-Area

• Update Transfer Limits

• Run Cases

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 46

Congestion Mitigation

• Determine economic benefits to improvements over RTEP01 Base Case– SEMA/RI Export– Maine Export– SWCT Import– Boston Import

• Screen Recommendations

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 47


• Conceptual Upgrade Studies

– Transfer Limit Improvements

– Cost Estimates

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 48


• Refine Congestion Estimates based on transfer Limits from Conceptual Studies

• Base Cost Benefit Analysis• Emission Impacts of Upgrades• SCED Analysis• Screen for Market Responses• Formulate Recommendations• RFP Process - TBD

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 49

Revisit RTEP01 Assumptions(2002 -2006)

• Fuel Cost Estimates

• New Units

• Transmission Upgrades

• Load Forecast

• Update Congestion Estimates as Required

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 50

RMR Issues

• Examine History and Costs– Confidentiality Issues

• Determine Root Causes

• Screen for Sub-Area Transfer Problems

• Determine if Studies are Warranted

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 51

RTEP01 Section 6 Studies

• Complete as per Revised Schedule– Track progress– Periodic Reports to TEAC

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 52

HQ Phase II Limits

• ISO-NE Participating in NPCC CP10 Process

• Updates to TEAC

Status of Active Transmission Studies


ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 54


• Bangor Hydro Electric Downeast Transmission Reliability Improvement Assessment (Line 61) - Study results under technical review; completion expected March 2002

• Central Maine Power Autotransformer Reliability

Assessment - Study in progress; completion expected December 2001

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 55


• MEPCO Corridor SPS Design - Study in progress; completion expected December 2001

• Section 396 SPS Arming or Removal Study - Study in progress; delayed completion expected December 2001

• Maine-New Hampshire 345 kV Voltage Regulation -Short –term solutions (Part 1): Scope under technical review/revision; preliminary analysis has been performed; completion expected December 2001

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 56


• Greater Metro West Transmission Supply Study -

Study in progress; completion expected Fall 2001• Northeast Massachusetts (“NEMA”) Import Capability

Enhancement - Study scope revised based on recent meeting, study not yet started. Schedule under review.

• Southeastern MA/RI Export Capability Enhancement -Stability and Thermal limit benchmarking in progress; completion expected late 2001

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 57


• Northwest Connecticut Area Import Capability Enhancement - Study effort complete; approved by NEPOOL RC

• Southwest Connecticut (SWCT), including Norwalk-Stamford - Study scope revised, detailed design and analysis work in progress; completion expected December 2001

ISO-NE TEAC5 10/15/01 58


• Middletown, Connecticut Area Import Capability Enhancement - Analysis complete, studies and design under technical review. Schedule under review.

• Eastern Connecticut Area Import Capability Enhancement - Analysis complete, studies and design under technical review. Schedule under review.

• East-West Oscillation Analysis - Study in progress; completion expected December 2001

Date post:	14-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	avalon
View:	35 times
Download:	0 times

TEAC5

Documents