Integrating Southwest Power Pool Wind to Southeast Electricity ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The polynomial shown in Equation 3 is the curve fit shown as the smoothed line in Figure 3-11. Equation 3 - Sample calculation of hour-head wind standard deviation With this equation, the expected standard deviation for the forecast error is calculated based on the previous hour’s production (persistence forecast). This component helps to insure the system is positioned with enough maneuverability to cover the probable forecast error and divided as 1 sigma assigned to spinning reserves and 2 sigma assigned to non-spin/supplemental reserves. Equation 4 shows the function for the spinning reserves. The equation for nonspinning/supplemental reserves is the same except that 2 * sigma is used. Equation 4 - Calculation of spinning reserves requirement To calculate the total reserve requirement, each of these three components, regulation, spin and non-spin, are added arithmetically. Results The method described above was applied to each of the scenarios defined for this study. The details of those scenarios are documented in chapter 4, but Table 3-4 shows a summary of the wind variability allocations to regions by scenario for reference. Table 3-4 Balancing responsibility by scenario Scenario Description 1 SPP manages intra-hour variability for all wind 2 3 & 4 Each region manages intra-hour variability for the wind assigned to their region All regions are combined into a single super-region and intra-hour variability is managed jointly 3-12
Table 3-5 shows the contingency reserve values used for each of the regions as modeled for the scenarios. For scenarios 3 and 4 where the regions in effect operate as a single balancing area, the contingency reserve was assumed to be the highest value from each of the regions. Here, only the single largest contingency is counted towards contingency reserve across the entire footprint; this reduction is not due to wind but the fact that only one contingency is now examined. Another approach would have been to count the two largest contingencies, as there would be a higher probability of multiple simultaneous outages. This would tend to lessen the aggregation benefit as the reduction in the aggregate reserve requirement would be less. Table 3-5 Contingency reserves Scenario Area Spin Non-spin SPP 800 800 1 and 2 Entergy Southern 1020 650 1020 600 TVA 300 1300 3 and 4 All 1020 1020 For all scenarios, a load regulation requirement of 1.5% of the hourly load was included in the total regulation requirement (load and wind). Figure 3-12 shows the average regulation (load and wind) for all scenarios (with the bars representing maximum). Figure 3-13 and Figure 3-14 show the average total reserves (regulation, spin and supplemental) without and with contingency reserves included, respectively. The whiskers on the plots show the maximum values. In scenario 1, SPP receives the greatest possible wind aggregation benefit since all of the wind is aggregated into a single pool. However, SPP only benefits there are no load aggregation benefits in this scenario since the regional loads have not been combined. In scenario 2, there are slightly less wind aggregation benefits because the wind has been allocated to the individual regions for balancing. Since the wind is being netted with a much larger pool of load the net regulation for the overall footprint is decreased. The reduction in regulation is offset by a higher spin and supplemental to make the total reserves nearly the same for scenarios 1 and 2. Regulation is reduced in the footprint by 206 MW while spin and supplemental are increased by 118 MW and 235 WM, respectively, leading to a 147 MW increase in total reserves for the footprint in scenario 2. Scenarios 3 and 4 are identical for the reserve requirements and are labeled as scenario 4 on the graphs. These scenarios see a reduction in regulation and total requirements due to the aggregation of all load and wind into a single balancing area. The overall footprint regulation requirement is reduced about 190 MW over scenario 2 and 395 MW over scenario 1. The wind related spin and supplemental components of the reserves are based on the aggregated wind making these components the same for scenarios 1 and 4. There is a reduction of 118 MW and 235 MW for spin and supplemental from scenario 2 to 4. The reduction in total reserves is 542 MW in the same scenarios. 3-13
Page 1: DOE: Integrating Southwest Power Po
Page 4 and 5: DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITA
Page 6 and 7: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This DOE-funded p
Page 8 and 9: Summary of average regulation requi
Page 10 and 11: generation in the 2022 Non-RES case
Page 12 and 13: System and Cost Impacts of High Win
Page 14 and 15: Figure 6-6: Individual Coal Capacit
Page 17 and 18: 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Proje
Page 19 and 20: 2 REPRESENTATION OF TRANSMISSION NE
Page 21 and 22: participants the possibility of a r
Page 23: assumption is affecting specific di
Page 26 and 27: Table 3-1 Wind energy targets for e
Page 28 and 29: site selection could have congregat
Page 30 and 31: Wind Production (MW) Wind Productio
Page 32 and 33: Wind Delivery (MW) 12000 10000 8000
Page 34 and 35: 1. Regulation is required to cover
Page 38 and 39: Regulation (MW) Figure 3-12 Summary
Page 41 and 42: 4 HIGH WIND TRANSFER SCENARIO DECRI
Page 43 and 44: 5 HIGH WIND TRANSFER CASE RESULTS T
Page 45 and 46: decreasing smaller amounts. It is i
Page 47 and 48: Coal 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 GasOil 0.7
Page 49 and 50: Figure 5-3 Average hourly generatio
Page 51 and 52: Figure 5-6: Average hourly generati
Page 53 and 54: SBA. More details on these types of
Page 55 and 56: Figure 5-8: Total production costs
Page 57 and 58: The flow chart shown in Figure 5-9
Page 59 and 60: Table 5-10 shows the difference in
Page 61 and 62: more likely to be turned off during
Page 63 and 64: Figure 5-13: Average Regulation up
Page 65 and 66: Figure 5-16: Average Spinning reser
Page 67 and 68: Figure 5-18: SBA Capacity Factors b
Page 69 and 70: Figure 5-20: Capacity Factors for S
Page 71 and 72: Unit Startups Changing the balancin
Page 73 and 74: Gas Price Sensitivity Case Results
Page 75 and 76: 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED NEXT
Page 77 and 78: generation characteristics across r
Page 79: overstates the ability of the syste
Page 82 and 83: Figure 6-2: Individual coal capacit
Page 84 and 85: in the 22% to 50% in Scenario 2. Th
Page 86 and 87:
Figure 6-8: individual coal capacit
Page 88 and 89:
able to carry some of the reserve t
Page 90:
Export Control Restrictions Access
show all

Integrating Southwest Power Pool Wind to Southeast Electricity ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?