1 / 28

“DRAFT” RMATS 2008 Base Case (To be presented at the RMATS Stakeholders Meeting)

“DRAFT” RMATS 2008 Base Case (To be presented at the RMATS Stakeholders Meeting). March 17, 2004. Overview. Modeling Approach Purpose & Scope – Base Case Key Assumptions Base Case Results. Modeling Approach. Modeled with ABB Market Simulator Production cost model

phyllis-mcneil
Download Presentation

“DRAFT” RMATS 2008 Base Case (To be presented at the RMATS Stakeholders Meeting)

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. “DRAFT” RMATS 2008 Base Case (To be presented at the RMATS Stakeholders Meeting) March 17, 2004

  2. Overview • Modeling Approach • Purpose & Scope – Base Case • Key Assumptions • Base Case Results RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  3. 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 (LMPs) • Hourly resolution • LP dispatch optimization is based on: • Treatment of hydro and wind generation • Single test year – 2008 RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  4. LMPs: Marginal Costs at the Nodal Bus Level • The cost of delivering the next 1 MW of power to a particular location, or the savings from reducing load by 1 MW at that location (sometimes called shadow price) • In concept, transmission congestion (bottlenecks) an losses cause differences in marginal prices at the nodal/bus level • LMPs are calculated separately for loads and generation • LMPs tend to decrease as relatively low cost resources are added • High wind capacity sensitivity is an example • Targeted transmission investments levelize/stabilize marginal prices because congestion is relieved but the investment cost may outweigh the benefit RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  5. Modeling Limitations • Modeling assumes a single, seamless west-wide market with no rate or loss pancaking • LP optimizes dispatch on a west-wide basis (perfect knowledge) • Not modeled: • Must-run generation • Unit commitment • Transmission wheeling and loss charges • Generator forced outages • Contractual / tariff constraints • Bid behavior • Sub-hourly operations • Actual heat rate curves- approximate only RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  6. Implications of Modeling Approach • Tends to make fuller, more optimal use of transmission than operations currently allow • Analogous to a seamless, single RTO world • Tends to mask the tariff and contractual constraints of today • Makes wind appear more economic because fewer constraints lead to greater dispatch • Fifteen percent planning margin used may be conservative • Margin is calculated off nameplate • Covers generator forced outages and operating reserves that ABB MS does not model RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  7. Base Case Objectives • Focus on congestion and congestion costs • Assess the current system • Include 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 Base Case Runs * 2013 loads applied to 2008 resources and transmission RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  8. Key Assumptions

  9. Key Assumption Summary http://psc.state.wy.us/htdocs/subregional/home.htm RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  10. System “Balloon” Diagram RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  11. Loads – 2008 Base Case Based on WECC L&R Forecast issued in 2003, with updates for Rocky Mountain States Annual GWh with Coincidental Summer & Winter Peaks (GW) Mexico - CFE Summer: 2.5 Winter: 2.2 NWPP-Canada Summer: 16.6 Winter: 20.3 14,425 California 130,743 Summer: 58.4 Winter: 44.8 NWPP-US 309,324 165,719 Summer: 24.1 Winter: 30.8 156,763 143,595 AZ, NM & S. NV Rocky Mt. States Summer: 31.2 Winter: 24.7 Summer: 24.6 Winter: 21.4 Load: 920,569 GWh Summer Peak: 157 GW RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  12. Resource Additions- 2008 Base Case Incremental Additions 2008 Rocky Mountain Area Total Resources (MW) Total Capacity 29,121 MW • All plants in service by2006 • Does not include additional wind capacity of 1750 MW RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  13. Hydro, DSM, Wind – 2008 Base Case • Hydro • Hydro generation is simulated for median water conditions • Used SSG-WI hourly shapes for Canada and the Northwest • DSM • For the 2008 Base Case, efficiency and DSM programs are decremented against loads in the WECC forecast • Wind • High wind sensitivity - added 1742 MW nameplate to the 508 MW in the base case, bringing the total to 2250 MW of wind in the Rocky Mountain Area • Did not consider transmission impacts other than on monitored interfaces (feasibility may require significant transmission additions) RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  14. Base Case Results

  15. Base Case Observations • The top 5 congested paths in the Rocky Mountain sub-region are also export-related paths: • Idaho to Montana • TOT 2C • Bridger West • IPP DC • TOT 3 RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  16. LMP PricesAverage Annual RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  17. No congested paths! January 2008 Monthly Average LMP$4 Gas RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  18. June 2008 Monthly Average LMP$4 Gas Congested Paths: Northwest to Canada Idaho to Montana Bridger West COI Significant N-S Congestion RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  19. June 12, 2008 hr 06$4 Gas Significant S-N Congestion RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  20. June 12, 2008 hr 12$4 Gas Significant N-S Congestion RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  21. June 12, 2008 hr 15$4 Gas Significant N-S Congestion RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  22. Key RM Transmission Constraints$4 gas, 2008 loads, base wind * $4 Gas- H load- $26,325; 12% RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  23. Key Transmission Constraints $4 gas, 2008 loads, base case wind Top Congested Paths RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  24. Western Interconnect Impact for 2008$4 gas, 2008 loads, high wind RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  25. Evaluation of PotentialSolutions

  26. Idaho to Montana($4 gas, 2008 loads, base case wind)Potential solution • Potential Solution • Added phase shifter at Peterson Flats to Amps • Results • System-wide “VOM” cost decreases by ~$5 million in 2008 • Decreases binding congestion to 1% from 5% of the time • Path loading increases by 1,673 MWh 1,102,119 MWh BEFORE 5% S N 1,103,792 MWh AFTER 1% S N RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  27. IPP DC($4 gas, 2008 loads, base case wind)Potential solution • Potential Solution • Increased line rating by 500 MW NE to SW (Forward limit ~ 2400 MW) • Results • System wide “VOM” cost decreases by ~$4.6 million • Line loading increases by 2,863,577 MWh • Decreases binding congestion to 57% from 72% of the time BEFORE 72% 14,952,799 MWh NE SW 57% 17,816,376 MWh AFTER NE SW RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

  28. SW Wyoming to Bonanza($4 gas, 2008 loads, base case wind)Potential solution • Potential Solution • Increased line rating by 100 MW (increase line limit to 300 MW from 200MW); this can be accomplished by adding a transformer and possibly line compensation. • Results • System wide cost decreases by ~$4.3 million; hydro model does not allow hydro redispatch. • Line loading increases by 7,170 MWh • Alleviates binding congestion, which now occur 3% of the time 909,604 MWh BEFORE 3% N S AFTER 902,434 MWh N S RMATS 2008 Base Case- March 17, 2004

More Related