2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Scenario Reliability Self-AssessmentsFigure RFC-9: Projected 2017 Ramp Requirement for RFCUsing Data from Figure 7Table RFC-3 summarizes the differences in ramp requirements between the 2008 peak week andthe 2017 projected peak. Both the amplitude (average positive/negative ramp and maximumpositive negative ramp) and volatility (number of sign changes) increase with the additional levelwind generation. These changes indicate that operators may need to more closely monitor thesystem.Table RFC‐3: RFC Weekly Ramp RequirementComparison2008 2017Average Negative Ramp (MW) ‐4534 ‐5610Average Positive Ramp (MW) 4691 5330Number of Hours Positive 82 86Number of Hours Negative 86 82Number of Sign Changes 16 32Maximum Positive Ramp (MW) 8600 13238Maximum Negative Ramp (MW) ‐11329 ‐208602009 Scenario Reliability Assessment Page 131
Scenario Reliability Self-AssessmentsNeed for Accurate Day-Ahead and Hourly Wind ForecastingPredicting, with reasonable confidence, the output level of wind generation for a future timeperiod (e.g. day ahead, hour ahead, etc.) is limited, at best. Because wind generation is driven bythe same physical phenomena as weather, the uncertainty associated with the prediction of windgeneration level at some future hour (even the next hour) may be significant. For example, inFebruary 2008 in Texas, the forecast quantity of wind generation output could not be met due toan unexpected drop in the wind. As wind generation penetration levels increase, the forecastaccuracy becomes essential to operate a reliable system. Additionally, accurate wind forecastsand timely updates are necessary in order to incorporate wind generation into the Day Aheadmarkets.The Midwest ISO uses a centralized wind forecasting program in its market footprint to capturereliability and economic aspects of integrating wind into the Day Ahead and Real Time Markets.The program uses a Multi Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model to come up with its bestestimate for each node, zone, Region and Midwest ISO total. PJM also is implementing anRTO-wide wind forecasting program. Also, because of the larger system size of RTOs, theoverall effects of a sudden drop in wind generation may be minimal.Need for Additional Operating ReservesContingency reserves may need to increase with large quantities of wind generation online. Thisis due to the variability of wind generation output, which may result in an inadequate amount ofcontingency reserves. This concern would dictate that the operating entity take a conservativestance, and therefore may require more contingency reserves be available in the day-aheadmarket. The variability and ramping characteristics of wind turbine output may also requireadditional spinning and contingency reserve margins, both positive and negative. The preciseamount changes day to day depending on the quality of Regional wind prevalence. These factorswould dictate that day-ahead ancillary service markets must be closely coordinated with windforecasts and real-time monitoring of wind output.Acceleration of Baseload Unit RetirementsExisting baseload generating units provide dependable operational reserve margins and reducemarket price volatility, precisely the characteristics needed in an environment striving toaccommodate large-scaled wind power integration. Many baseload units are located where theirdynamic reactive capabilities are also crucial to voltage regulation and local system reliability.However, when wind generation penetration reaches a level where many of these older and lessefficient baseload fossil-fueled units become sporadically dispatched day-in and day-out, theirowners may contemplate an accelerated retirement of these units. This accelerated retirementmay increase the need for additional operating reserves, as mentioned above.Reliability Assessment AnalysisA resource adequacy assessment of the reference and Scenario Cases would demonstrate thatRegional reliability criterion is expected to be met since the JCSP study included an assumedamount of capacity additions necessary to meet the reserve criterion as determined in studiesPage 1322009 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:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85: Scenario Reliability Self-Assessmen
Page 164 and 165: Regional Reliability Scenario Self-
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?