1 / 23

Cost Effective Interconnection Policies

Cost Effective Interconnection Policies . The Wind Coalition: Membership. Member Directory

moral
Download Presentation

Cost Effective Interconnection Policies

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. Cost Effective Interconnection Policies

  2. The Wind Coalition: Membership • Member Directory • AES Wind Generation | Acciona | Apex |  Blattner Energy, Inc. | BP Alternative Energy North America | Clean Line Energy | Clipper Windpower | Duke Energy | Edison Mission Energy | ENEL | enXco | E.ON | Exelon  | Electric Power Engineers, Inc |  Gamesa Energy | GE Energy | EDPR | Iberdrola Renewables | Infinity Wind | Invenergy | Nobel Environmental Power | Novus Windpower| Pattern | RES Americas | Shell Wind Energy | Stahl, Bernal & Davies | Siemens |Third Planet | TradeWind Energy, LLC | Vestas-Americas, Inc.| Wind Capital Group • Non-Profit Members: • AWEA | Environmental Defense Fund | Public Citizen | TREIA

  3. This is not a comprehensive presentation of all of the issues that Wind Developers have in regard to this topic. The presentation may not reflect the individual position of all members.

  4. Wind Developers Perspectives • Current Interconnection Process Experiences Discussion • Developer’s choice of interconnection point vs. SPP mandate • Existing process for interconnection and issues for developers (areas of high wind interest)

  5. Goal: Improving GI process • A Change to the process should: • Comport to the FERC requirements for access to the grid. • Facilitate cost effective solutions for interconnection by considering costs to all SPP customers including Generator Owners, Transmission Owners and end users. • Strike a balance between costs and benefits. • Improve and speed up the interconnection process. • Not unreasonably restrict access to the grid. • Not be about cost shifting but cost effectiveness.

  6. Important questions for developers • How will restrictions for points of interconnection impact access to the grid? • If policies impact current lines what are the benefits to the generators? • What factors determine whether a designated point of interconnection must be used AND at what point during the GI process should this be determined?

  7. Important Questions • How will the process of choosing hubs be done and what criteria will be used? • How will the problems resulting from forcing generator lead lines in to one hub be addressed? • If and when will a collector concept be addressed? • What is the process and timeframe for challenging an SPP mandate to interconnect at a designated point of interconnection?

  8. Planning for success • Designating hubs must be coupled with a workable plan of access such as a collector system concept. • Planning in the ITP 10 could be helpful for high voltage new lines. • Advance notice of hub locations would be beneficial so that developers can plan development with the point of interconnection understood. • Consideration should be given to the most cost effective locations of hubs giving consideration to the queue and other factors.

  9. Important Access Issues • The limitation of points of interconnection will intensify the problem of access to the grid. • Wind Developers do not have rights of condemnation and without additional means of accessing the designated points, access could be effectively prohibited.

  10. Important Access Issues: ROW • Example hub with proposed lines illustrating ROW issues for not only developers but TOs also

  11. Increasing costs of Interconnection • Greater distances between access points will significantly increase the costs of interconnection and result in longer radial generator tie lines with greater impact on landowners and land use. • SPP estimates that the additional cost per generator could be as much as $16 million for generator leads.

  12. Important Access Issues Continued: Example Hub Less than a mile Generator Leads 20 miles

  13. Costs/Benefits • The AGCTF white paper proposes that some of the added costs would be offset by treating the designated hub as a transmission asset subject to Highway/Byway funding • However, the proposal requires this forced interconnection point to existing substations that have not been H/B funded. • In these cases there may be significant added cost but no offsetting economic benefit to the generator

  14. Addressing Access is Critical • Limiting hub access will result in multiple easement requests. • Generator owners who are not also transmission owners do not have condemnation authority. • The access issue needs to be solved if the policy of limiting hub access is adopted; otherwise there is an effective denial of access to the transmission system as well as a policy that is potentially discriminatory.

  15. Why we need to think about a collector system. • How to wire your home without even trying…

  16. Collector Systems • Collector lines should be necessary components of a designated hub system where multiple generation interconnections are expected. • Such systems could be planned with Designated Hubs in the ITP process. • One of the ways for funding collector lines could be through a subscription.

  17. Benefits of a Collection System • Collectors lines would: • Reduce the miles of generator leads necessary to interconnect to the transmission system. • Reduce land use necessary for interconnection. • Decrease the overall cost of interconnecting multiple generators-benefiting end use customers. • Allow effective use of ROW for the land around the designated substation.

  18. Benefits of a Collection System Continued • Collectors lines would: • Allow effective planning of the underlying transmission system, • Increases the reliability of the nearby system, which benefits both the generator and the transmission owner. • Possibly reduce the need for reactors on the high voltage lines if the lower voltage collector lines were networked into the transmission system (a main concern for the high voltage lines).

  19. Example Illustrating a Hub Policy WITHOUT a Collector System Transmission Line Hub

  20. Example Illustrating a Hub Policy WITHOUT a Collector System Proposed line Transmission Line Hub • ROW issues increase as generators and new lines compete for access into hub. Proposed line

  21. Example Illustrating a Hub Policy WITH a Collector System Transmission line Hub Hub

  22. Benefits of Collector Lines • Replacing multiple long generator leads with shorter leads interconnecting with a collector line would often be more cost effective, utilize less land and help address the interconnection into a designated hub facility. • Can be necessary in cases of high generation where available interconnection access is restricted

  23. Thank you! Thank You!

More Related