2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment - NERC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Regional Reliability Scenario Self-AssessmentsDeveloping a dynamic scheduling system consisting of standard protocols andcommunication infrastructure that would allow access to resources across multipleBalancing Authorities, subject only to transmission constraints. 115Potential Operational Issues Lessons-LearnedOperational issues vary significantly depending on the size of the BA, the mix of generation,penetration of wind, geographic dispersion of wind, market structure, and performance of windplants. There are many and varied methods to mitigate the reliability and operational impacts ofvariable generation. However, these methods all focus on reducing the uncertainty of variablegeneration and accessing flexibility in the existing generation. This can be accomplishedthrough: Larger balancing areas (actual or virtual) Better wind forecastingGeographically dispersing wind generation over a larger areaIncreasing the amount of flexible generation (ramping capability, increased regulationrequirements, decreasing minimum points for fossil power plants, increased need for faststart from cold conditions for fossil power plants)Ability to access flexible generation, including bi-lateral agreements between utilities ormarketsRules and technology that allow for operational flexibility in near real-time throughdynamic scheduling, intra-hour re-dispatch, and ancillary service marketsOperational Limits and ConditionsAt high levels of variable generation — specifically wind — it is possible that ramp controls orgeneration caps may be necessary. The extent to which ramp or other operational limits arenecessary would depend in large part on the other mitigation methods detailed above,transmission system additions, and the future technologies that enable more flexibility in theload.Reliability Assessment AnalysisWECC constructed this scenario to meet the required study goals and it is not directlycomparable to the Long-Term Reliability Assessment case. Renewable resources were distributedacross WECC based on areas of high resource potential, as consistent with existing Western RPSrequirements. However, no attempt was made to simulate the assignment of any particularresource or set of resources to any particular LSE or Region. Using a different set of assumptionsthe results could be, and should be, vastly different.Given that the Long-Term Reliability Assessment is based on utility-submitted resources and thescenario is designed to meet resource adequacy margin targets, the meaning and value of acomparison of this type is not clear. The differences are entirely a function of the study processand not of any inherent characteristics of the resources involved or of utility plans.WECC does not currently do LOLE, EUE, etc., studies. It assesses resource adequacy againsttarget reserve margins.115 http://www.columbiagrid.org/ji-nttg-wc-overview.cfm2009 Scenario Reliability Assessment Page 173
Regional Reliability Scenario Self-AssessmentsWECC did not do a Scenario Case for any year except 2017. The 2017 study is designed to meetthe required target reserve margin.Table 4 below shows the type of renewable resources, and the amount of capacity that was addedto meet the 15 percent renewable energy requirement.Table WECC-4: Resource Type and LocationLocationBiomassResources(MW)GeothermalResources(MW)SolarResources(MW)WindResources(MW)Canada 48 0 0 1,803Northwest 148 430 0 5,247Southwest 0 0 3,034 2,930Basin 73 2,140 1,358 551Rockies 76 0 239 3,981Cal./Mex. 574 2,221 1,810 3,847Total 918 4,792 6,441 18,359This question is not applicable, given that resources were added to meet the described scenariorequirement. It is meaningless to compare the results from the Long-Term Reliability Assessmentand the scenario. The Long-Term Reliability Assessment and the scenario look at resourceschosen by different processes and designed for different purposes.The target reserve margin used by WECC is designed to cover a 1-in-10 weather-driven loadevent defined by balancing area and aggregated by Region in WECC.For the scenario study, a meso-scale model was used to create energy curves that represent theexpected energy available from wind and solar resources. For wind, the three-year (2004‐2006)data set is comprised of over 30,000 2km by 2km squares, each with a time resolution of 10minutes and 1 hour. The solar data set is over the same three-year period, but at a resolution of10 km and 15 minutes and 1 hour. The primary strength of the meso‐scale model is its use oftime synchronized data. This data would show the effects of geographical diversity on netgeneration within a Region as well as within WECC as a whole. 116Energy-only and transmission-limited resources are not included in the scenario or the 2008Long-Term Reliability Assessment studies.Known unit retirements are recognized in the resources counted in both the Long-TermReliability Assessment and the renewable scenario. Neither the Long-Term ReliabilityAssessment nor the scenario explicitly examines the effect of currently-unknown resourceretirements.116 Additional detail is available in: http://www.wecc.biz/documents/library/TEPPC/TEPPC-15-Renewable_Energy_Generation_Paper_9-12-08.pdfPage 1742009 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:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127: 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?