1 / 12

RC Meeting August 28, 2009 Marianne Perben Senior Engineer, FCM & Tariff Administration

Forward Capacity Market (FCM) Zonal Issues Discussion. RC Meeting August 28, 2009 Marianne Perben Senior Engineer, FCM & Tariff Administration. Purpose of the Discussion. This discussion will primarily focus on the third item of the Issues List: Zonal Issues

sibley
Download Presentation

RC Meeting August 28, 2009 Marianne Perben Senior Engineer, FCM & Tariff Administration

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. Forward Capacity Market (FCM) Zonal Issues Discussion RC Meeting August 28, 2009 Marianne Perben Senior Engineer, FCM & Tariff Administration

  2. Purpose of the Discussion This discussion will primarily focus on the third item of the Issues List: Zonal Issues At the 08/04/09 RC meeting the ISO presented a potential methodology to identify “pure” capacity reliability zones Today, the ISO is providing an illustration of the application of such a methodology using FCA_2011_2012 data

  3. Definition of Capacity Reliability Zones • There are two approaches to the definition of capacity reliability zones • Top to Bottom approach • Review zones used in current ISO’s processes • Reliability zones, load zones, reserve zones, capacity zones, dispatch zones, RSP zones • Establish pros and cons of using each of them as a potential capacity reliability zone • Bottom to Top approach • Start with blank sheet of paper and identify “pure” capacity reliability zones

  4. Definition of Capacity Reliability Zones, cont. • The ISO reviewed both approaches and favored the second one • Technically more rigorous • Unbiased by market related or settlement/software related considerations • May offer a systematic approach to defining zones • For the purpose of this discussion, a “pure” capacity reliability zone is defined as a geographic region within which resources (new and existing) have a very high probability of substitutability

  5. General Methodology to Identify “Pure” Capacity Reliability Zones • In power system terms, a “pure” capacity reliability zone is a zone where all generators behave in a very similar way towards key system constraints • Consequently, the identification of such zones is a two-step process • Identify key system constraints • Group generation into zones based on key constraints identified in step 1

  6. Identification of “Pure” Capacity Reliability Zones • Step 1: Identification of Key System Constraints: • In this analysis, the ISO simulated the individual de-list of every generator in New England and gathered the critical flowgates that prevented some delists from occurring • For simplicity purposes, the impact of only one delist at a time was considered (did not model several sequential delist requests) • Around 60 key system constraints were identified • Some were regional • Some were very local • All system constraints were used to group generation

  7. Identification of “Pure” Capacity Reliability Zones, cont. • Step 2: Generation grouping • The ISO relied on clustering algorithms to group generators into zones (also called clusters) • All generators in the same cluster have similar or identical DFAXs on all critical flowgates • Two generators with substantially different DFAXs should belong to different clusters (distance between generators in a given cluster should be electrically small) • The distance function chosen for this analysis was the maximum of all absolute DFAX differences over all key constraints • Distance between Gen1 and Gen2 = Max. | DFAX1-DFAX2 | • The choice of a threshold is independent of the number of key constraints • The final clustering is independent of the choice of a reference for DFAX calculation

  8. Identification of “Pure” Capacity Reliability Zones, cont. • The clustering analysis was performed using two different distance thresholds • 20%: if the DFAX of two generators is more than 20% apart, generators are placed into two different clusters • 40%: if the DFAX of two generators is more than 40% apart, generators are placed into two different clusters • The clusters resulting from the generation grouping step were geographically mapped using PowerWorld • A larger threshold tends to make a regional cluster (cluster resulting from regional constraints) bigger • A larger threshold does not tend to affect very small, marginal clusters resulting from very local constraints

  9. Clustering Results with 20% Distance Threshold

  10. Clustering Results with 40% Distance Threshold

  11. Further Requirement Considerations • All internal and external transmission constraints were modeled in this analysis • Used updated network model topology created for FCA_2011_2012 and determined in accordance with Section 3 of Planning Procedure 10 • A transmission security based requirement could be determined for the previous clusters/zones • Assumptions used to set the transmission security based requirement should be the same as the assumptions used for the delist analysis performed to identify key constraints • The transmission security based requirement may be inferred directly from the delist analysis that is performed to identify key constraints • Depending on the DFAX differences between all buses within the clusters (and the distance threshold applied), analysis may identify a range of requirements for a given cluster

  12. Questions 12

More Related