E N D
1. Wind Integration: What Have We Learned? Michael Milligan
Consultant
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Planning for Wind Workshop
NW Power & Conservation Council
Portland, OR
Dec 5, 2003
2. Utility Wind Interest Group Interest in UWIG has surged as more utilities have evaluated/adopted wind
Clearing house for operational issues, solutions, etc.
www.uwig.org
4. Brief Outline Planning horizon
Geographic benefit/reliability
Operational horizons
Load following
Reserve allocation based on reliability modeling
Overview of CA Renewable Portfolio Standard Integration Study
Capacity value
Regulation
Load following
Summary of Operations Studies
5. Geographically Disperse Wind Development Two projects:
Joint project with Minnesota Department of Public Service (Commerce)
Joint project with Iowa Wind Energy Institute
8. Modeling Methods Minnesota: Dynamic fuzzy search to maximize system reliability
Iowa: Dynamic fuzzy search to maximize two separate objective functions
Economic benefit
System reliability
Corroboration of the economic benefit results with a genetic algorithm
9. Genetic Algorithm and Fuzzy Search Results: Economic Sites
10. Tradeoff: Reliability vs. Economics
11. Iowa Load Following Study 8 wind scenarios
Wind capacity
800 MW
1,600 MW (22.7% of peak load)
Scenario 1
1,300 MW at one site
All other scenarios
Geographic spread based on optimal locations
12. How Does Wind Affect 1-Hour Load Following?
13. Variability of Load Following With/Without Wind
14. Largest Single-hour Difference at 800 MW Penetration
15. Largest Single-hour Difference at 1600 MW Penetration
16. Load Following Allocated to Wind
17. Imbalance Impact of Wind Increases with Penetration
18. Iowa Load Following Conclusions Geographically disperse wind causes an increase in the standard deviation of load following requirements of about 2.5% of rated capacity at 22.7% penetration rate with a backward-looking analysis
Geographically disperse wind causes an increase in the standard deviation of imbalances of about 4% of rated capacity with a simple wind forecast at 22.7% penetration rate
Results will depend on wind regime, loads, and would be expected to differ in other situations
19. Reliability-based Reserve Allocation Examine how much of the fraction of operating reserve that should fall on a wind power plant
Method should be based on reliability theory and practice, and take probability of various system failures into account
Should provide market signals that encourage reliability and accurate wind forecasts
Strbac/Kirschen (Electricity Journal, October 2000) model fulfills these goals, except doesnt consider wind Milligan (AWEA/EWEA 2001) adapts to wind
I use 1-hour wind forecast errors as outage rates for system reliability calculations
21. Effect of Geographic Diversity
22. Implications Worse-case scenario analyzed shows the reserve allocation at about 5.5% of rated capacity of the wind plant
Average is less than 1% of wind capacity
Improvements in forecast will reduce winds risk
Wind does contribute to EUE (risk)
but at a very low rate relative to rated capacity
Geographic dispersion reduces composite forecast error and reserve allocation
23. California RPS Integration Study Project Team Primary investigators in Methods Group:
David Hawkins, California ISO
Brendan Kirby, ORNL
Yuri Makarov, California ISO
Michael Milligan, NREL
California Wind Energy Collaborative
Kevin Jackson
Henry Shiu
25. Identify significant characteristics of Californias load and installed renewable and conventional generators.
Define and implement methodologies for evaluating the capacity credit for renewables.
Provide a comparison of the capacity credit between various renewable and conventional generators.
Define and implement methodologies for evaluating integration costs.
Provide a comparison of the magnitude of load following and regulation services for various renewable and conventional technologies.
The final report documenting the one year analysis results of existing generation resources has been released for public comment.
26. Data Processing OASIS: Open Access Same-Time Information System
CAISO Power Information (PI) system
Error removal
Data storage error
Results from PI system data compression
The standard deviation of data storage error is 160 MW or 0.6% of the average annual load.
27. CC12CC12
28. Regulation Cost Results Used ORNL method, CA regulation prices
A negative price means there is a cost imposed on the system.
A positive price means there is a benefit provided to the system.
The baseline for comparison is a generator with constant output and a regulation price of zero.
Caution: regulation is a capacity service; cost in $/MWh as a convenience
29. Load Following Analysis Deviations between the scheduled generation and the actual load requirements are compensated through purchases from the CAISO supplemental energy market.
The system operator must compensate for aggregate scheduling error, individual errors must be viewed in the context of the full system.
Market participants provide CAISO with bids for the hour ahead energy market and create the stack of available generators.
The purpose of the load following analysis was to determine if the renewable generators affected the size or composition of the stack and therefore changed the cost for the load following service.
30. Scheduled Hour Ahead Load
32. California Preliminary Conclusions Capacity credit for wind is low but non-zero
Phase II will examine higher penetration, newer technology, and different locations
Regulation impact of wind is small
Because of data storage error these results are not precise, but the regulation cost adders should be used until more accurate results can be obtained in Phase II
Will examine this issue in Phase II
Load following impact has negligible impact on supplemental energy stack at this penetration
No cost adders for wind can be justified at this time
33. Other Results Penetration calculated as (wind rated capacity) / (system peak)Penetration calculated as (wind rated capacity) / (system peak)