2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Scenario Reliability Self-AssessmentsRFCIntroductionAll RFC members are affiliated with either the Midwest ISO (MISO) or the PJM Interconnection(PJM) Regional transmission organization (RTO) for operations and reliability coordination.Ohio Valley Electric Corporation (OVEC), a generation and transmission company located inIndiana, Kentucky and Ohio, is not a member of either RTO and is not affiliated with theirmarkets; however, OVEC’s Reliability Coordinator services are performed by PJM. Also, MISObegan operation of its Ancillary Services Market (ASM) on January 6, 2009, which includedoperation as a single Balancing Authority. 92RFC does not have officially-designated subregions. About one-third of the RFC load is withinMISO and nearly all remaining load is within PJM, except for about 100 MW of load within theOVEC Balancing Authority area. From the RTO perspective, approximately 60 percent of theMISO load and 85 percent of the PJM load is within RFC. The PJM RTO also spans into theSERC Region, and the MISO RTO also spans into the MRO and SERC Regions. The MISO andPJM RTOs each operate as a single Balancing Authority.For this special scenario analysis assessment, RFC has relied solely upon the recently completed2008 Joint Coordinated Study Plan (JCSP) for data and results, since the JCSP study areaincluded both MISO and PJM (i.e. all of the RFC footprint) and most of the EasternInterconnection within the United States The JCSP effort was an initial collaboration of ISOsand RTOs (including MISO and PJM) within the Eastern Interconnection on a conceptual studyto examine the effects of integrating large amounts of wind generation into the bulk electrictransmission system between 2008 and 2024. This assessment report represents only the dataand results for the RFC footprint. The JCSP effort produced two analyses and two reports. Thefirst analysis was an economic study using 2008 and 2024 as the study years. The JCSPeconomic study developed and analyzed the costs and benefits of conceptual transmissionoverlays for the two scenarios. The second study was a reliability analysis focusing on the studyyear 2018 and its objective was to assess the steady-state performance of the projectedtransmission system in 2018. The study scope was limited to monitoring transmission facilitiesoperated 200 kV and above for steady-state thermal and voltage criteria violations under basecase and contingency conditions. This assessment uses only the JCSP economic study results.The JCSP economic effort studied two cases, a Reference Scenario Case and a 20 percent WindEnergy Scenario Case. This RFC Scenario Assessment uses slightly modified JCSP ReferenceScenario data for 2018 as the RFC Reference Case. The generation data includes the expectedfuture generation in RFC that was included in the NERC 2008 Long-Term Reliability Assessmentthrough 2017 with additional generation in 2018 to match the requirements in the JCSP analysisfor planned generation. The demand and energy data is identical to RFC’s 2008 NERC Long-Term Reliability Assessment through 2017, with the 2018 demand and energy data equal to theJCSP demand and energy data for 2018. The JCSP Reference Scenario also includes92 More information is available at: http://www.midwestmarket.org/publish/Folder/469a41_10a26fa6c1e_-741b0a48324a.2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment Page 119
Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmentstransmission system facility additions needed to accommodate this expected new generation,including the wind generation. On average for the JCSP Reference Scenario, about 5 percent ofthe energy use in the Eastern Interconnection was assumed to be generated from wind. The windgeneration sited within the RFC footprint amounts to about 4 percent of the energy needs in 2018in this Reference Case.The RFC Scenario Assessment also uses the 20 percent Wind Energy Scenario as described inthe JCSP study for its Scenario Case. This case assumes that the entire Eastern Interconnectionstudy area would meet 20 percent of its energy needs using wind generation by the year 2024.This scenario also identified a conceptual transmission overlay to accommodate this futurescenario. In this scenario, large amounts of wind generation were sited in the western part of theEastern Interconnection (specifically in the MRO and SPP footprints) where there are superiorinland wind resources. This wind siting assumption creates a west-to-east power flow biasthrough the Eastern Interconnection. The wind generation sited within the RFC footprint adds upto about 12 percent of the RFC energy needs in 2018 for this scenario. When the amount of windgeneration that is expected to be imported into the RFC Region is included, approximately 14percent of the forecast energy needs in 2018 would be met by wind resources. However, theenergy from many wind resource sites in western areas of RFC (in MISO) would be imported tothe eastern areas of RFC (to PJM), which is consistent with the west-to-east power flow bias inthis scenario.The Reference Case includes 15,000 MW of nameplate wind generation by 2018. The WindScenario Case associated with this Reference Case includes 40,600 MW of nameplate windgeneration in 2018 (25,600 MW of additional nameplate wind generation compared to theReference Case).In the study, large amounts of wind generation are conceptually being sited in the western part ofthe Eastern Interconnection (specifically in the MRO and SPP footprints) where there aresuperior inland wind resources to more economically serve load on the east coast of the UnitedStates This wind siting assumption creates a west-to-east power flow bias through the EasternInterconnection and through RFC. Also, many new transmission lines that would be routedthrough RFC would need to accommodate this large transfer of power.The JCSP Reference Scenario calculated the amount and sites for wind generation based uponmeeting existing Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) incremental requirements as of January 1,2008. Figure 1 below shows those RPS assumptions. After January 2008 (which was notincluded in the study), the state of Michigan now has an RPS mandate of 10 percent by 2015,Ohio has an RPS mandate of 25 percent by the year 2025, and West Virginia has introduced abill for an RPS of 10 percent by the year 2015, escalating to 20 percent by 2020, and then 25percent by the year 2025.Page 1202009 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:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73: Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmen
Page 164 and 165: Regional Reliability Scenario Self-
Page 172 and 173:
Regional Reliability Scenario Self-
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?