2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Scenario Reliability Self-AssessmentsScenario Case was about 325 MW higher than the Reference Case while the overall peakdemand forecast was about 120 MW higher than the Reference Case. The primary driver forthese differences was the economic downturn experienced at the end of 2008 and continuing into2009. The Reference Case incorporated this new economic information while the Scenario didnot.The second assumption difference was in the capacity resources recorded throughout the studyperiod. The Reference Case included resources from the 2009 Gold Book that had met specificmilestones as Future Planned resources. Other resources that had not met these milestones,particularly those resources with anticipated in-service dates well into the 10 year study period,were included in the Conceptual category. The Scenario Case included those same resourcesthat met the specific milestones but none that were categorized as Conceptual.Since the Reserve Margin for 2018 is well above the historical requirement prior to the studyaddition of 8000 MW of wind, the amount of internal and external resources required to meetcriteria is not affected by the level of additional wind resources studied. Also, the windresources being studied will not replace any existing resources in the New York Control Area.They may, however, displace the dispatching of existing higher-cost generation.From a resource adequacy perspective, the Scenario Case represents a much more reliablesystem – nominally a 50 percent reserve margin vs. a nominally 30 percent reserve margin.Operationally though, wind presents unique operational characteristics due to its variability, asdescribed elsewhere in this report.The peak demand forecast would need to increase by nearly 25 percent before the ReserveMargin is reduced to 18 percent, the maximum historical value required by the New YorkControl Area.Both the Reference Case and the Scenario Case assumed the same retirements (1093 total MW).There was no impact on reliability due to these retirements.There is no difference in deliverability of resources between the Scenario Case and theReference Case as measured by LOLE. In fact, the beginning assumption is that additionalresources would reduce LOLE. As described above in the transmission study, some amount ofthe wind capacity is “bottled” but that portion which is deliverable from an energy perspectivedisplaces higher cost generation which is primarily gas followed by oil and then coalAs part of its interconnection process all wind plants are subjected to voltage testing. If issues areidentified, the developer is required to install system upgrade facilities such as capacitor banksand SVC to address any issues identified in the interconnection study. As noted above, theNYISO has modified its market rules to accommodate new types of technologies such as flywheels in order for them to participate in the regulation market which one of the NYISO’sancillary services. In addition, the NYISO can increase its procurement of regulation MW ifneeded to meet reliability criteria.As described throughout this document there have been a number changes to the NYISO’smarket structure to address the issues with integrating significant amounts of wind and other2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment Page 99
Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmentsrenewable generation. The NYISO would address changes in ancillary service requirements, ifrequired, to implement 8,000 MW of wind.The addition of 8000 MW wind in 2018 would increase fuel diversity in New York. The windresources would displace fossil-fired generation, which could have a positive benefit to NewYork when considering potential fuel supply vulnerability issues.Region DescriptionThe New York Control Area is a single state ISO (NYISO) formed as the successor to the NewYork Power Pool – a consortium of the eight investor-owned utilities, in 1999. The NYISOmanages the New York State transmission grid encompassing approximately 10,892 miles oftransmission lines over 47,000 square miles and serving the electric needs of 19.2 million NewYorkers. New York experiences its peak load in the summer period, with the current all-timepeak load of 33,939 MW set in 2006. (http://www.nyiso.com).Page 1002009 Scenario Reliability Assessment
Page 1 and 2:
2009 Scenario ReliabilityAssessment
Page 3 and 4:
Table of ContentsTable of ContentsN
Page 5 and 6:
Executive SummaryTransmission Criti
Page 8 and 9:
Background Information for this Rep
Page 10:
Scenario Reliability Assessment Sum
Page 13 and 14:
Scenario Reliability Assessment Sum
Page 16 and 17:
Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmen
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53: Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmen
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Regional Reliability Scenario Self-
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
About This Reporto Nuclear scenario
Page 182 and 183:
Joint Coordinated System PlanThemat
Page 184 and 185:
Joint Coordinated System Plan2009 S
Page 186 and 187:
Scenario LetterScenario LetterDecem
Page 188 and 189:
Scenario LetterIn an effort to add
Page 190 and 191:
Scenario Letterd) Provide a table,
Page 192 and 193:
Reliability Assessment Subcommittee
Page 194 and 195:
Reliability Assessment Subcommittee
Page 196:
the reliability of theto ensurebulk
show all

2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?