Integrating Southwest Power Pool Wind to Southeast Electricity ...

B
INDIVIDUAL GENERATING UNIT START-UPS
Figure 6-9 shows a scatter plot of number of starts for each Entergy CC unit for the various
scenarios against the number of starts for Scenario #1. It can be seen that, in general, CC starts
increase in Entergy when wind is added as more cheap, but variable, energy is available from the
wind without any requirement to maintain reserve for the wind. As the level of cooperation in
reserve sharing and scheduling/balancing increase from Scenarios 2-4, however, the number of
CC starts increase. In Scenario #2 there are fewer starts than in Scenario #1 as some of the CCs
have to be held online to provide some portion of the additional reserves to cover Entergy’s
portion of the wind. The number of CC starts progressively increases in Scenario #3 and
Scenario #4, where Entergy CCs are used extensively to provide reserve, but the amount of spin
reserve decreases significantly because of the shared contingency requirement across the
footprint.
Figure 6-9
Individual Startups for CCs in Entergy
Figure 6-10 shows a scatter plot of number of starts for each TVA CC unit for the various
scenarios against the number of starts for Scenario #1. TVA can be seen to have a reduced
number of starts for all CCs in all scenarios compared to Scenario 1 in general; however as with
other results, there are certain units which do not follow this pattern, as their characteristics
assumed in this model mean they are used differently. Scenario 2 can be seen to reduce the
number of starts the most as CCs are kept online to provide the increased reserves that TVA
must supply for the wind in this scenario. The number of starts decrease further in Scenario #3
as scheduling is shared across the footprint and less expensive resources (as modeled here) are
B-1