1 / 41

The FERC SMD and the Midwest Electricity Markets

The FERC SMD and the Midwest Electricity Markets. IEEE PES – Chicago Chapter Chicago, IL - January 8, 2003 Roberto F. Paliza, Ph.D. Agenda. FERC SMD Focus is in the RTM, DAM, and FTRs What is missing in the SMD? Inter-ITP coordination Midwest Markets Initiative MISO-SPP

pules
Download Presentation

The FERC SMD and the Midwest Electricity Markets

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. The FERC SMD and the Midwest Electricity Markets IEEE PES – Chicago Chapter Chicago, IL - January 8, 2003 Roberto F. Paliza, Ph.D. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  2. Agenda • FERC SMD • Focus is in the RTM, DAM, and FTRs • What is missing in the SMD? • Inter-ITP coordination • Midwest Markets Initiative • MISO-SPP • MISO-PJM-SPP joint and common market Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  3. FERC SMD • Sets the direction for the design and implementation of wholesale markets. • Defines the desired end state for these markets. • Does not provide solution for transitional issues although establishes principles to be followed. • Provides flexibility in regards to timing of the implementation and in accommodating regional differences. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  4. Basic Elements of the SMD From an operational perspective: • Real-time market • Day-ahead market • Ancillary services market • Congestion revenue rights market • Market power monitoring & mitigation • Capacity requirement • Markets administered by RTOs/ITPs Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  5. ITP Market Operations ITP Functions Market Support Market Inputs Cover Imbalances Generator Bids Ensure Reliability Real-Time Balancing Bid based Security- Constrained Dispatch Buy and Sell In Spot Market Load Bids Buy Through Congestion Bilateral Schedules Congestion Redispatch Calculate Nodal Prices Hedge Congestion Self Schedules Transmission Rights RTO Market Settlements At Nodal Prices Market-Driven Decisions $$$ Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  6. The Real-time Market (RTM) • RTOs will ensure that all market participants have equal access to the spot market. • RTM main component is a bid-based security constrained dispatch (5 min cycle). • RTM is a voluntary market. • Market participants can submit: • Bilateral schedules, • Self-schedule, or • Bid into the real-time market Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  7. Example1: Economic Dispatch Least expensive generators are dispatched I need MWs. Sale goes to the MW lowest bidder with capacity. 300 MWs @ $10 $10 Going once.... Load Capacity 499 MWs 300 MWs 199 MWs @ $15 MW $15 Capacity RTO $15 200 MWs MW LMP for all settlement nodes is $15 Not Dispatched $20 Capacity 200 MWs Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  8. Example2: Economic Dispatch Highest Cost Generator Sets Price I need MWs. MW Sale goes to the $10 300 MWs @ $10 lowest bidder with capacity. Going once.... Capacity Load 300 MWs 599 MWs MW $15 200 MWs @ $15 Capacity 200 MWs RTO $20 MW LMP for all settlement nodes is $20 $20 99 MWs @ $20 Capacity 200 MWs Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  9. If There is Congestion • Delivery limitations prevent use of “next least-cost generator” • Higher cost generator closer to load must be used to meet demand • Cost to operate more expensive generation are translated into transmission congestion costs in LMP calculation • Nodal pricing results in cost causation for congestion pricing to market participants Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  10. Real-time Market Settlements • All real-time injections, withdrawals and transmission congestion will be settled at LMP prices determined by the real-time dispatch. • The difference in LMP prices across the grid will reflect congestion and incremental cost of losses. • Loads have the choice to settle at nodal or zonal prices. • Generators may self-schedule but only accepted schedules will settle at LMP prices. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  11. LMP Definition Cost of supplying next MW of load at a specific location, considering generation marginal cost of energy, cost of transmission congestion, and losses LMP Marginal Energy Component (EC) Marginal Congestion Component (MCC) Marginal Loss Component (MLC) = + + Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  12. The Day-ahead Market (DAM) • DAM main component is a bid-based security constrained unit commitment. • It is a voluntary market and is financially binding. • DAM main function is to provide certainty for Market Participants (MPs). • In the DAM, participants will be able to: • Buy/sell energy and self-schedule generation. • Submit bilateral transactions. • Submit virtual bids. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  13. Day-ahead Market Settlements • Process is very similar to RTM settlement for energy, congestion, and losses. • RTM settles deviations with respect to DAM schedules. • FTRs are settled based on the DAM hourly prices. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  14. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  15. Day-ahead Reliability Check • Check is performed after DAM closes and it focuses on: • Evaluating overall resource adequacy. • Evaluating reserve adequacy. • Evaluating transmission reliability. • Reliability Commitment: Units are committed/de-committed to satisfy reliability criteria. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  16. Financial Transmission Rights FTR is a financial instrument that entitles holder to a stream of revenues (or charges) based on the DA hourly energy price differences across the path or shadow price of a flowgate. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  17. FTR Characteristics • MPs will be able to acquire point-to-point (PTP) and flowgate (FGR) transmission rights to hedge congestion charges. • PTPs and FGRs will be financial. • PTP is a full hedge between source and sink while FGR is a full hedge for a specific constraint only. • PTPs will be available in the form of obligations and options and FGRs will be available as options. • Awarded PTPs and FGRs will be simultaneously feasible. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  18. Energy Delivery = 100 MWh FTR = 100 MW Bus B Bus A Source (Sending End) Sink (Receiving End) Example: Delivery with FTR LMP $15 LMP $20 Congestion Charge = 100 MWh * ($20-$15) = $500 FTR Credit = 100 MW * ($20-$15) = $500 Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  19. PTP Rights Characteristics • Obligations can have a zero, positive, or negative value. • Options can only have a zero or positive value. • It is a perfect hedge against congestion costs as long as: • Schedule is between specified source and sink. • Schedule is equal or less than the FTR amount. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  20. FGR Rights Characteristics • FGR owner gets paid the constraint shadow price of that flowgate. • FGRs are proposed as options and only hedge the specified flowgate. • Available as PTDF (monitored element) and OTDF (monitored/contingency pair) flowgates. • Place responsibility for assessment of shift factors and the number of FGRs required to hedge a transaction on the market participant. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  21. Priorities and FTRs • SMD proposes when transmission is tight, participants with FTRs have scheduling priority. • How about curtailment priorities? • Current LMP markets do not have this physical characteristic. • Many comments have been submitted on this subject. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  22. Acquiring FTRs • Allocation • Is based on existing contracts. • Is a conversion process from physical to financial. • FTR Auction -- administered by the ITP • MPs can purchase “left over” capability. • It may be used as the primary way to assign FTRs. • MPs can reconfigure FTRs. • Secondary market -- bilateral trading • ITPs will facilitate the secondary market. • FTRs that exist are bought or sold. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  23. What Is Missing in the SMD? From an operations perspective: • SMD embraces the goal of seamless markets but no approach is suggested. • FERC has taken a significant step forward in developing the SMD but the next step – coordination of these markets - is also a very important one. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  24. Inter-ITP Coordination • Types of ITP coordination under SMD: • LMP market and non-market coordination • LMP market and other LMP markets • Reliability backstop process • One stop shopping desired features: • Common business practices • Common user interface • Availability of CRRs that expand several ITPs Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  25. Transitional Issues • SMD calls for conversion of all transmission service to SMD. However, if grandfather contracts do not convert to the SMD tariff, another level of complexity will be created • Will require that ITPs support physical service in all of their markets (RTM, DAM, FTR). • Certain special provisions of these grandfather contracts may be difficult to honor/administer by the ITP under LMP. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  26. Transitional Issues • Initial allocation of CRRs • May prove to be very contentious specially in places where the system is oversold. • Availability of FTR options will add another layer of complexity. • Modeling of FTRs in the allocation process needs to be consistent with settlements of these rights. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  27. Inter-ITP Coordination Elements • Honor external constraints in the same way as internal constraints are respected. • Treatment of resources in a multi-market environment • Bidding, control, scheduling, settlement… • Ancillary services • Parallel flow agreement that includes: • Definition and calculation of parallel flow • Agreement on usage and compensation • Convergence of LMP prices at the seams. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  28. Reliability Backstop Process • NERC TLR is the reliability backstop process in the eastern interconnection • Relies on a central database of “tagged” transactions • Relies on a single transmission model for impact calculation and curtailments • Input data and results are available to all SCs • Equivalent capability needs to be provided under SMD • May require policy changes by NERC Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  29. One-stop Shopping • Market participants do business over large geographical areas • Establishment of a single network access service will enable development of large markets • Requires compatible market rules • Timings, scheduling practices, market protocols and procedures, settlements…… • Development of a single user interface is a must. • Support for CRRs across several ITP regions. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  30. The Obvious Fix • Creation of a single market run by a single market operator • Single RTM, DAM, and FTR markets • Is this feasible over a very large area? • Eastern Interconnection • MISO-PJM-SPP • What is the criteria for determining the appropriate size of a single market? Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  31. Managing Seams • Type of seams: • Manageable. • Unmanageable (e.g. unable to control internal constraints). • A couple of factors to consider to manage seams: • Proper grouping of constraints & resources. • Internalize as much loop flow as possible. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  32. The Midwest Markets • Dec 2003 is the target date for MISO-SPP market operation. • It is a staged project. • Functionality to be provided in the first stage is based on RTM, DAM with no SCUC, FTR market, and Market Power Mitigation. • Full SCUC and Ancillary Services market will be added in future stages. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  33. FUNCTIONAL AREAS SUPPORTING PROCESSES • FTRs • (A financial contract that entitles holder to a stream of revenues – or charges - based on the hourly energy price differences across the path) • Request processing • Simultaneous feasibility testing • Approval processing P u b l i s h M a r k e t D a t a Settlements & Billing State Estimator Process • Day Ahead Market • (Based on scheduled hourly quantities and day-ahead hourly prices) • SCUC for reliability commitment only • Security Constrained Economic Dispatch • LMP calculation using generation offers, demand bids, and bilateral transaction schedules. • Real-Time Energy Market • (Based on actual hourly quantity deviations from day-ahead schedule hourly quantities and real-time prices) • Security Constrained Economic Dispatch • LMP calculation using real-time SE values Participant Readiness • Communications Plan • Define Membership Requirements • Manage Customer Registration • Manage Customer Relations • Manage Training • Perform Market Trials MISO Markets Initial Functionality Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  34. The Midwest Markets • Significant challenges: • No experience operating as a pool. • Many control areas of all sizes. • Allocation of transmission rights in areas where system is overbooked. • Coordination with PJM and other neighboring entities. • Resolution of WI and MI hold harmless provisions. • Aggressive timeline. • MISO-SPP merger needs to be completed. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  35. MISO-PJM-SPP Territory Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  36. A Joint and Common Wholesale Energy Market The goal is to develop a common single wholesale market with a “one-stop shop” that meets the needs of all customers and stakeholders using the electric grid in the 26 states served by them. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  37. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  38. Schedule • May 2003 – AEP & DPL in PJM market • Oct 2003 – Dominion in PJM market • Dec 2003 – ComEd & IP in PJM market • Dec 2003 – MISO-SPP market operation • October 2004 – MISO-PJM-SPP market is implemented with one-stop shopping Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  39. Current Activities • MISO and PJM have chosen to resolve seams without implementing the single market. • MISO is also working on its LMP market and the integration of Grid America and TransLink while PJM is focused on the expansion of its markets in AEP & DPL areas. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  40. Market Participants Internet or VPN Access RTOSpecific RTOSpecific Common Market Interface RTO Functions (Transmission Reservation, Energy Market, Settlements & Billing ) RTO Functions (Transmission Reservation, Energy Market, Settlements & Billing ) RTOPortals RTOPortals RTO Data Repository Settlements & Billing Planning Scheduling Operations Market Model for RTO Coordination Data Transport Data Transport Data Transport Regional Entity Regional Entity Regional Entity Control Area Control Area Control Area ITC ITC ITC Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

  41. Implementation of the SMD Markets in the Midwest • Proper solution to the coordination between MISO and PJM, and between these RTOs and the Independent Transmission Companies in their footprints, is the key to a successful implementation of the SMD markets in the Midwest. Paliza Consulting, LLC. roberto@palizaconsulting.com

More Related