2016 Distributed Energy Resources (DER) that participate ...

2016 Distributed Energy Resources (DER) that participate in

PJM Markets as Demand Response

PJM Demand Side Response Operations

February, 2017

2016 Distributed Energy Resources (DER) in PJM Demand Response Markets

PJM © 2017 www.pjm.com 2 | P a g e

This page intentionally left blank

http://www.pjm.com/



For the purposes of this report PJM will refer to behind the meter devices capable producing electricity in Demand Response

as “DR DER”.

Demand Response from DER in Capacity Market Figure 1:

DER participation in the Capacity Market as Demand Response, represented here both in MW volume and as a percentage of overall

Demand Response volume, showed steady growth through 15/16 DY and then dropped by almost 50% in16/17 DY.

Observation: Based on discussions with CSPs, PJM believes the drop in 16/17 DY was due to U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit issuing a mandate (May 1, 2015) vacating specific RICE NESHAP and NSPS provisions for Emergency Engines with

the further guidance released by the EPA on April 15, 2016.

Note: Analysis includes all Load Management Products. DER MWs are included in All DR MWs.

DR DER Registered MW Capability (16/17 DY) Geographical Distribution by EDC Size Figure 2:

1,117

1,778

1,419

1,809

2,142

2,675

1,156

12%

15% 17%

20%

23% 23%

12%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

DY 10/11 DY 11/12 DY 12/13 DY 13/14 DY 14/15 DY 15/16 DY 16/17

DER

% o

f To

tal D

R

No

min

ate

d M

Ws

Delivery Year

Nominated DER MWs DER % of Total DR

594

435

128

153

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

East West

DER

MW

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

n

Geographical Hub

Small EDC Large EDC

http://www.pjm.com/



Geographical distribution of MW volume of DER participation in PJM Market as Demand Response shows the East with 722 MWs and

the West with 588 MWs. Distribution by EDC shows Large EDCs make up 1,029 MWs whereas Small EDCs account for 281 MWs.

Notes:

1) “East” includes following companies: Atlantic City Electric, Baltimore Gas and Electric, Delmarva Power and Light, Jersey Central Power and Light,

Metropolitan Edison, PECO Energy, Pennsylvania Electric, PPL Electric Utilities, Potomac Electric Power, Public Service Electric and Gas, Rockland

Electric, UGI, Virginia Electric and Power, and Virginia Electric and Power. “West” includes: Allegheny Power, American Electric Power, American

Transmission Service Inc (FE), Commonwealth Edison, Dayton Power and Light, Duke Energy Ohio and Kentucky, Duquesne Light, and East Kentucky

Power Cooperative.

2) EDC size classification is determined according to the following criteria: “Large” are those EDC’s with greater than 4 million Mwh per year; “Small” are

those EDCs with less than or equal to 4 million Mwh per year.

3) Values are Nominated MWs for Load Management products and CSP reported load reduction MWs for economic participation. Locations that participate

in both Load Management and Economic are included only once using the nominated values.

DR DER Registered MW Capability (16/17 DY) by Zone Figure 3:

Note: Values are Nominated MWs for Load Management products and CSP reported load reduction MWs for economic participation. Locations that participate in

both Load Management and Economic are included only once using the nominated values.

68 38

13 39

119 36

16 7

14 324

8 44

227 56

104 66

128 2

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

PSEG

PPL

PEPCO

PENELEC

PECO

METED

JCPL

DUQ

DPL

DOM

DEOK

DAY

COMED

BGE

ATSI

APS

AEP

AECO

PJM

Zo

ne

DER MW

http://www.pjm.com/



DR DER Registered MW Capability (16/17 DY) from Non-retail and Retail Behind the Meter Figure 4:

Generation (BTMG)

DER position (DY 16/17) MWs # Locations

Retail BTMG 1,138 1,293

Non-retail BTMG 172 18 Grand Total 1,310 1,311

DER participation as Demand Response in the Capacity Market shows a significant MW volume and number of locations with Retail

BTMG as contrasted with the volume and number of locations with Non-retail BTMG. Non-Retail usually indicates generation

resources at a Municipal or Cooperative Electrical Area. Retail usually indicates generation that is not behind a Muni/Coop.

Note: Values are Nominated MWs for Load Management products and CSP reported load reduction MWs for economic participation. Locations that participate in

both Load Management and Economic are included only once using the nominated values.

DR DER Registered MW Capability (16/17 DY) Fuel Mix with Behind the Meter Generation Figure 5:

Fuel mix for behind the meter generation that participates in Capacity Market as Demand Response for DY 2016/17 predominantly

consists of diesel (74%) and natural gas (23%) which make up a combined 97% of the total fuel types.

http://www.pjm.com/



DR DER Registered MW Capability (16/17 DY) by Size and ratio of Size/Load Figure 6:

Total Nameplate DER MWs by Customer Load (PLC)

DER Nameplate/PLC

Ratio 0-1MW 1-5MW 5-10MW 10-25MW >25MW Grand Total

%

0-25% 4.3 18.5 20.4 30.6 36.1 110.0 8%

26-50% 11.1 61.2 35.8 62.9 61.1 232.2 16%

51-75% 18.4 57.0 32.5 19.4 20.0 147.3 10%

76-100% 25.3 69.3 13.0 46.8 74.7 229.1 16%

101-125% 27.4 49.1 32.0 69.8 67.2 245.4 17%

>125% 186.3 144.8 44.5 36.0 39.5 451.1 32%

Grand Total 272.8 400.0 178.1 265.5 298.6 1,415.0 100%

The Figure and Table above display DER capacity (as represented by the nameplate MWs) broken down by the size of the load (as

represented by peak load contribution or “PLC”) and the ratio of DER MW to the load MW. The ratio of DER MW output to load MW

provides an indication of how big the DER is relative to the load. For example, the 0-25% category represents DER output that is less

than 25% of the load. Said another way, if the DER is activated it can only offset less than 25% of the load. Each bar on the graph

represents the total amount of DR and broken out by the size of the load (as represented by the PLC). Approximately 49% of all

applicable locations have their DERs nameplate capacity sized to cover over 100% of the max load. Locations with DER less than

1MW (relatively small DER), had 78% (213/272 MW) of the DER MWs oversized relative to the load.

Note: “DER size” in this analysis is a DER nameplate capacity, “Load” is a Peak Load Contribution. DER Size/Load ratio illustrates DER generation capability relative

to the locations load.

-

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

450.0

500.0

0-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100% 101-125% >125%

DER

Siz

e M

W

(DER MW/Load MW) Ratio

>25MW

10-25MW

5-10MW

1-5MW

0-1MW

Load size buckets

Oversized

http://www.pjm.com/



DR DER Registered MW Injection Capability (16/17 DY) Figure 7:

Extracting the Nameplate Capacity MWs and load MWs from the previous figure (see Figure 6) for those locations sized to cover over

100% of max load, reveals that those DER are capable of potentially injecting an additional 252 MW into the grid. Most of these

locations have loads less than 10 MW.

Note: DER MWs for locations where Nameplate MWs exceed max load MWs

696

444

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Nameplate PLC

MW

252

http://www.pjm.com/



PJM Demand Response Economic Energy Settled MWhs Trend Figure 8:

While the total DR Economic Energy settled MWhs volumes declined over time, the share of DER participating as Demand Response

remained steady, thus, driving the DER/Total DR ratio up to 41% in 2016 meaning that 41% of settled DR MWhs were from DER

participation.

PJM Demand Response Synchronized Reserves Settled MWhs Trend Figure 9:

DR Synchronized Reserves settled MWhs trend showed steady growth over time for both DER and other resources participating as

Demand Response. Thus, the DER/Total DR SR ratio remained relatively steady.

Note: PJM finding are based on extrapolation of DR capability by load reduction method submitted by curtailment service provider. PJM does not know what load

reduction method was deployed in any given event.

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Sett

led

MW

hs

Total DR MWhs DER MWhs

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Sett

led

MW

hs

Total DR MWhs DER MWhs

http://www.pjm.com/



2016 PJM Demand Response Confirmed Synch Reserve Registrations Load Reduction Methods Figure 10:

Behind the meter generators represent only 12% of total Synchronized Reserves participating as Demand Response while the manufacturing sector leads with 72%.

http://www.pjm.com/



PJM Demand Response Regulation Settled MWhs trend for DER Figure 11:

Behind the meter battery storage technology experienced the largest growth in Demand Response Regulation settled MWhs in 2016,

followed by electrical water heaters which make up a majority of Rest of Regulation MWhs. At the same time behind the meter

generators showed a slight decline.

DR DER Registered Regulation Capability from Batteries by EDC size by Technology Figure 12:

There are two main battery storage technologies types currently in PJM Demand Response Regulations market – stationary

installations of lithium ion batteries and electric vehicle built-in batteries with their charging stations.

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

DR

Reg

ula

tio

ns

Sett

led

MW

Hs

Battery MWhs Generator MWhs Rest of DR Regulation MWhs

0.6

7.3

0.1

3.3

0.4 0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

EV Li-ion Unknown

Reg

ula

tio

n C

apab

ility

MW

s

Large EDC

Small EDC

71%

51% 67% 81%

92%

9% 12% 15%

4%

25%

34% 21%

10%

8%

http://www.pjm.com/

2016 Distributed Energy Resources (DER) that participate ...

Documents

Transcript of 2016 Distributed Energy Resources (DER) that participate ...