1 / 33

Base Case Draft – For Comment Rocky Mountain States Sub-Regional Transmission Study

Base Case Draft – For Comment Rocky Mountain States Sub-Regional Transmission Study. December 9, 2003. Report Overview. Objectives Modeling approach and limitations Key assumptions Draft base case results. Base Case Objectives.

ward
Download Presentation

Base Case Draft – For Comment Rocky Mountain States Sub-Regional Transmission Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Base CaseDraft – For CommentRocky Mountain StatesSub-Regional Transmission Study December 9, 2003

  2. Report Overview • Objectives • Modeling approach and limitations • Key assumptions • Draft base case results Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  3. Base Case Objectives • Focus on congestion issues that impact serving load in the RMATS sub-region • Assess the current system • Existing system, plus new, viable investment already in progress • Identify incidence and duration of congestion • Estimate the resulting congestion costs • Include several load, gas price, and hydro sensitivities • Review plant performance • Illuminate opportunities for cost-effective projects • Estimate the incremental value of expansion on congested paths • Identify potential modeling modifications Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  4. Modeling Approach • Modeled with ABB Market Simulator • Production cost model • West-wide scope with a particular focus on the RMATS region • Detailed transmission representation • Calculates nodal / bus prices • LP dispatch optimization is based on: • Variable O&M • Fuel cost • Transmission constraints • Impact of hydro and wind generation • Treated as a fixed dispatch to the system • After hydro and wind dispatch, the net load is passed to thermal dispatch • LMP differences are dampened as hydro is included • Single test year – 2008 • Existing system with incremental resources and transmission • All results presented in 2004 nominal dollars • Sensitivities to come (January): loads, gas prices, hydro conditions Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  5. Modeling Limitations • Modeling assumes a single, seamless west-wide market with no rate or loss pancaking, and no contractual impediments to trade • Not modeled: • Must-run generation • Unit commitment • Transmission wheeling and loss charges • Generator forced outages • Contractual / tariff constraints • Bid behavior Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  6. Key Assumptions

  7. Base Case Assumptions Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  8. System “Balloon” Diagram Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  9. Loads by Western Interconnect Region- 2008Based on 2003 Load Forecast Annual GWh with Coincidental Summer & Winter Peaks (GW) Mexico - CFE NWPP-Canada Summer: 2.5 Winter: 2.3 Summer: 16.6 Winter: 20.3 14,425 California 130,743 Summer: 58.4 Winter: 57.0 309,324 NWPP-US 177,493 Summer: 25.9 Winter: 32.5 136,828 144,990 RMATS AZ, NM & S. NV Summer: 23.4 Winter: 20.3 Summer: 29.3 Winter: 26.5 Load: 913,803 GWh Summer Peak: 156 GW Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  10. Loads by RMATS Area - 2008 Based on 2003 Load Forecast Annual GWh with Non-Coincidental Summer & Winter Peaks (MW) Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  11. RMATS Resources Additions 2008 RMATS Resource Allocation Total Capacity 30,024 MW Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  12. Generation Capacity by Fuel Type (MW)- 2008 WI Total: 201,799 MW RMATS Total: 30,024 MW Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  13. Capacity Factors By Fuel Western Interconnect RMATS Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  14. Renewable Resources 2008 Wind Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  15. Hydro Generation Is Consistent with SSG-WI Sensitivity (January) Current Run Sensitivity (January) Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  16. Western Interconnect - Net Position Nameplate – Load (MW) Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  17. RMATS- Net Position Nameplate – Load (MW) Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  18. Gas Prices • Base case assumptions: • The 2008 US Average Wellhead will be set at $4.00 / MMBtu and at $5.00 / MMBtu for a sensitivity • The basis differential will be set to match the 5th Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan • Currently, 2008 Henry Hub Gas Future Price $4.70/MMBtu range (nominal $) Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  19. Typical Thermal Resource Values Are Used Per Generation Technology / Age Note: - KLG Judgement Peakers Cycling plants Aero-derivitives, Optimized for SC Larger Units, Optimized for CC Combined Cycles For peakers, it is assumed that the maintenance is deferred until a set number of hours is reached. Baseload plants are assumed to be staffed & running. Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  20. Maintenance Outages Values consistent with SSG-WI study (% year, very approximate) Combined Cycle 7% CT 7% Coal Plant 10% Steam Oil/Gas 10% Nuclear 12% Geothermal 10% Wind* 14%* *Built into provided spread sheet that was provided to modelers for hourly pattern. Most likely maintenance outages. Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  21. Draft Base Case Results

  22. Draft Base Case Results • Determined location of expected loads and resources • “New” 2008 resources in RMATS are mostly gas-fired CCCTs in a region where the dominant capacity by fuel type is coal • Defined the boundaries of transmission usage and their associated costs • Area LMPs show transmission limitations and development opportunities. See chart on page 24. • Top 5 congested paths: • Idaho – Montana • IPP DC line • TOT 2C • Combined PACI and PDCI • Brownlee East • See charts on pages 27-31 Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  23. Draft Base Case Results (continued) • Clearing prices seen in certain RMATS areas signal the need for increased transmission to alleviate transmission congestion and levelize / stabilize the prices: (See table on page 26) • Lowest LMP for load average prices were at WAPA LC and Yellow Tail • Lowest LMP for generator average prices were at WAPA LC, IPP, Bonanza, Utah South, COw, BDVw, LRS Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  24. Idaho - Montana Duration Curve Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  25. IPP DC Duration Curve Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  26. TOT 2C Duration Curve Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  27. Combined PACI & PDCI Duration Curve Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  28. Brownlee Duration Curve Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  29. RMATS Interface Path Expansion Values • “Expansion values” represent the value of the next MW of additional transmission capacity • Calculated as: • The difference in marginal nodal / bus price at each end of the path • Over a 1-year period (2004$) • “Expansion values” represent the value of the next MW of additional transmission capacity • Calculated as: • The difference in marginal nodal / bus price at each end of the path • Over a 1-year period (2004$) Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  30. Base Case Next Steps • RMATS participants to provide comments on this draft • Obtain additional information on nomograms and new paths to monitor • Get final consensus on transmission additions • Finalize gas price assumptions • Clarify wind shaping assumptions • Run gas price, load and hydro sensitivities (January) • Finalize and present base case Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  31. Appendix

  32. 2008 LMP Prices Clearing Prices $/MWH Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

  33. Western Interconnect Expansion Values Yellow highlighting indicates RMATS interfaces All monetary amounts in nominal 2004 $ Draft - For Comment 2008 Base Case

More Related