FLO International FLO LO Training San José, Costa Rica -Agosto 2006.
COAL BY WIRE & MISO - Purdue University€¦ · DuneDune AcresAcres ‐ ‐MichiganMichigan...
Transcript of COAL BY WIRE & MISO - Purdue University€¦ · DuneDune AcresAcres ‐ ‐MichiganMichigan...
1
Indiana Center for Coal Technology ResearchCCTR Basic Facts File # 11
Brian H. Bowen, Marty W. Irwin, Devendra CanchiThe Energy Center at Discovery Park
Purdue UniversityCCTR, Potter Center, 500 Central Drive
West Lafayette, IN 47907-2022http://www.purdue.edu/dp/energy/CCTR/
Email: [email protected]
February 8, 2008
COAL BY WIRE & MISO
22
Transport Coal to Power Plants orGenerate Power at Coal Mines?
Coal By Wire (Generation at Mine Mouth) Avoids Coal Shipment Costs
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
33
Transmission Load Carrying Capability
Coal by wire will require increased transmission
Increasing the generation capacity at any existing coal fired power plant will be
constrained by the load carrying capability of the existing transmission lines
If the existing lines have high load factors then it might be necessary to consider building more
transmission capacity
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
44
Indiana’sPower Grid
765 kV & 345 kV
Transmission lines criss-cross the state
Indiana’sSouth WestMining Region
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
5
Line Load CarryingCapability & Congestion
• An electricity network has a limited transmission capacity
• Congestion arises due to lack of transmission capacity to accommodate all power flows
• When an interconnection becomes congested, power flows have to be curtailed to relieve the load
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
6
The Midwest IndependentSystem Operator, MISO
“The Midwest ISO is committed to reliability, the nondiscriminatory operation of the bulk power
transmission system, & to working with all stakeholders to create cost-effective &
innovative solutions for a changing industry”
http://www.midwestiso.org/home
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
7
About the Midwest ISO, MISO
The Midwest ISO: (1) Ensures reliable operation of & equal access to
93,600 miles of interconnected, high-voltage power lines in 15 U.S. states & the Canadian province of Manitoba
(2) Manages one of the world's largest energy markets, clearing more than $2 Billion in energy transactions monthly
(3) Approved as the nation's first regional transmission organization (RTO) in 2001
(4) Is a non-profit 501(C)4 organization & governed by an independent Board of Directors, headquartered in Carmel IN. Operations centers Carmel IN & St.Paul MN
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
8
14 MISO States (+ Manitoba)
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
9Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
9Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
9
NERC Map, North American Electric Reliability Corporation & its 8 Regions
The NERC was established at
federal level to ensure reliability
of electricity supplies
1010
US Department of Energy (DOE) Congestion Areas of Concern
Source: NATIONAL ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION CONGESTION STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARYAUGUST 2006, U.S. Department of Energy
These are areas where a large-scale congestion problem exists or may be emerging, but more information & analysis appear to be needed to determine the magnitude of the problem & the likely relevance of transmission expansion & other solutions.
The DOE has identified four Congestion Areas of Concern:
New EnglandThe Phoenix – Tucson areaThe Seattle – Portland areaThe San Francisco Bay area
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
1111Source: NATIONAL ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION CONGESTION STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, AUGUST 2006, U.S. Department of Energy
DOE Congestion Areas of Concern
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
12
Congestion & PTDF
• In order to maintain reliability the North American Reliability Corporation, NERC, uses a parameter called the Power Transfer Distribution Factor (PTDF)
• The PTDF method prevents the dispatch of potentially congesting power-flow from occurring
• PTDFs are calculated at specific points on the transmission system. These points are called flowgates
• Flowgates (FG) are an essential element of the transmission system used for managing congestion
829 flowgates were used in the MISO 2006-2007 period of which 262 (32%) had previous history of congestion
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
13
Location of Top 10 Congested MISO Lines in 2005
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
14
Most Congested Flowgates (FG) in Indiana
Monitored Element Friendly Name BalancingArea
1st Year CongestionFG-Hr/Year
Apr 05 - Apr 06
2nd Year CongestionFG-Hr/Year
Apr 06 - Apr 07
MISO Ranking
2005-2006
MISO Ranking
2006-2007
Kokomo HP 230/138 kV XFMR (flo) Jefferson - Greentown 765 kV
CIN 132 1.5% 750 8.6%40 2
Miami Fort 345/138 kV XFMR (flo) East Bend - Terminal 345 kV
CIN 247 20 18 164New London - Webster 230 kV (flo) Jefferson - Greentown 765 kV
CIN 137 92 39 46Dune Acres -Michigan City 138 kV ckts1&2 (flo) Wilton Center - Dumont 765 kV
NIPS 241 107 19 44Culley - Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR
SIGE 539 284 11 13Culley - Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson - A.B. Brown 138 kV
SIGE 586 6.7% 84 1.0%9 51
A.B. Brown - Henderson 138 kV (flo) Culley - Grandview 138 kV
SIGE 220 6 21 367Culley - Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR
SIGE 164 33 27 111
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
15
Breed Power Station
New London ‐Webster 230 kV (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kVKokomo HP 230/138 kV XFMR (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kVNew London ‐Webster 230 kV (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kVKokomo HP 230/138 kV XFMR (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kV
Miami Fort 345/138 kV XFMR (flo) East Bend ‐ Terminal 345 kVMiami Fort 345/138 kV XFMR (flo) East Bend ‐ Terminal 345 kV
Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMRCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson ‐ A.B. Brown 138 kVA.B. Brown ‐ Henderson 138 kV (flo) Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kVCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR
Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMRCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson ‐ A.B. Brown 138 kVA.B. Brown ‐ Henderson 138 kV (flo) Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kVCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR
Dune Acres ‐Michigan City 138 kV ckts 1&2 (flo) Wilton Center ‐ Dumont 765 kVDune Acres ‐Michigan City 138 kV ckts 1&2 (flo) Wilton Center ‐ Dumont 765 kV
Indiana’s MostCongested Flowgates
Station StateWilton Center ILDune Acres INDumont INNew London INWebster INJefferson INGreentown INKokomo IN
Miami Fort OHEast Bend OHF. B. Culley INA.B. Brown INGrandview INHenderson KY
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
1616Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
16
MISO Modeling Process
Transmission expansions are considered for each of the following four design scenarios:(a)Reference Future(b)Environmental Future(c)Renewable Future(d)Limited Supply Future
1717Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
17
DOE NETL 2007, Coal Plant Total CostsSupercritical PC plant without CO2 capture $1,574/kWSupercritical PC plant with CO2 capture $2,868/kWIGCC (E-Gas) without CO2 capture $1,733/kWIGCC (E-Gas) with CO2 capture $2,431/kW
MISO Generation Prototype DataInputs to MISO’s 2007 Four Scenarios
Sources: MISO MTEP-08 Planning Process“Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, DOE NETL, April10, 2007
Seq = With sequestrationPC = Pulverized CoalIGCC = Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
MISO Data 2007
1818Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
1818Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
18
MISO’s Four Scenarios, 2008-2027
(a)
(d)
(c)
(b)
1919Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
1919Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
19
MISO 2008-2027, Four Futures ScenariosCumulative New Generation Capacity (MW)
Source: MISO – MTEP -08 Planning Process
(a) (b) (d) (c)
2020Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
2020Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
20
2007 Review of Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards
Source: http://www.ferc.gov/market-oversight/mkt-snp-sht/mkt-snp-sht.asp
2121Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
21
MISO & Indiana’s Proposed Expansions
Coal
CT
Wind
CC
(d) Limited Fuel Future
MW
Cap
acity
(a) Reference Future
(b) Environmental Future
(c) Renewable Future
Schafer
Schafer
Benton County
Montgomery County
CayugaGibson County
Vigo County
Edwardsport
Merom
Greenfield, Kosciusko County
Sugar Creek& Noblesville
Eagle Valley
GallagherSource: MISO- MTEP 08 Planning Process Generation Siting
2222Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
22
MISO Reference Future Scenario (a)Suggested Transmission, MISO Centric
Transmission Coloring
2323Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
23
MISO Reference Future Scenario (a)Suggested Transmission, Eastern Interconnect
Transmission Coloring
2424
Transmission Serving IndianapolisLoad Factors
25Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
25
11 22
3344 55
66
77
88
99
1010
1111
16THOMPS
16STOUT
16FRANCS 1212
Line DescriptionFrom Bus – To Bus
Total Energy flow in One Year (MWh)
Maximum Rated Energy Flow in One
Year (MWh)Rating (KV)
Average Load Factor
(%)
Max Hourly Load Factor
(%)1 16PETE-16THOMPS 5,289,636 8,374,560 345 63.2 84.42 16PETE-16FRANCS 4,910,507 8,374,560 345 58.6 76.83 16HANNA-16FRANCS 4,142,149 8,374,560 345 49.5 66.94 16STOUT-16THOMPS 2,403,381 8,374,560 345 28.7 45.45 16HANNA-16STOUT 551,997 8,374,560 345 6.6 22.66 16ROCKVL-16THOMPS 2,877,490 8,374,560 345 34.4 55.47 16GUION-16ROCKVL 989,454 8,374,560 345 11.8 28.28 08WHITST-16GUION 3,112,936 8,374,560 345 37.2 79.49 16HANNA-16SUNNYS 2,418,854 8,374,560 345 28.9 44.410 08GWYNN-16SUNNYS 868,739 8,409,600 345 10.3 22.411 05FALL C-16SUNNYS 1,560,777 8,374,560 345 18.6 45.512 05TANNER-16HANNA 1,021,208 8,374,560 345 12.2 58.6
Transmission Serving Indianapolis
2006 Load Factors
765 kV
345 kV
230 kV
MARION
HENDRICKS
HAMILTON
HANCOCK
MORGAN JOHNSON
SHELBYAll loading factors are based on PROMOD simulation using NERC and MISO 2006 event file under Security constrained Economic Dispatch
26
• Make the benefits of a competitive energy market available to customers by providing access to the lowest possible electric energy costs
• Provide a transmission infrastructure that safeguards local andregional reliability• Support state and federal renewable energy objectives by planning for access to all such resources (e.g. wind, biomass, demand side management).
• Create a mechanism to ensure investment implementationoccurs in a timely manner
• Develop a transmission system scenario model and make it available to state and federal energy policy makers to provide context and make informed choices
MISO’s 5 Guiding PrinciplesMISO’s 5 Guiding Principles
Source: Midwest ISO Board of Directors, Statement of Guiding Principles for the Midwest ISO Transmission Expansion Planshttp://www.midwestiso.org/page/Planning
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
27
AEP has its large generators located outside of its service area but in close proximity to the coal supplies. Its 765 kV transmission line takes AEP electricity north (Cincinnati dispatch)
NIPSCO has coal transported to its largest power plant which islocated in its northern Indiana service area but is outside the coal mining region
Examples of Indiana’s Shipmentsof Coal & Electricity
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
2828Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
28
2004 CoalConsumed
(MTons)
2005 CoalProduction
(MTons)
2004 Electricity Net Flow *
(GWh)
Indiana 73.7 34.5 -42.0Michigan 38.5 0.0 -6.6
Wisconsin 26.7 0.0 +33.3
Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_use/total/use_tot_in.htmlhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/coal.htmlhttp://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/coal/coaldistrib/d_mi.html
* Net interstate flow of electricity:-ve = net export+ve = net import
5MW for 1 year ≈ 42 GWh
Can Indiana Transmit More Electricity to MI & WI?
Michigan 2002 coal imports (MTons) from WY 12.87, MN 6.46,WV 3.62, KY 3.52, PA 1.01, CO 0.39, OH 0.26, VA 0.12
Wisconsin 2002 coal imports (MTons) from WY 21.80, MN 2.92,CO 1.50, IL 0.66, UT 0.66, PA 0.60, IN 0.39, KY 0.09
2929Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
2929Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
29
Increasing Indiana’s electricity exportswill depend on transmission capacity
Can Indiana Coal Be Used for Increased Export Power?
Wisconsin 2002 coal imports (MTons)from WY 21.80, MN 2.92, CO 1.50, IL 0.66, UT 0.66, PA 0.60, IN 0.39, KY 0.09
Michigan 2002 coal imports (MTons)from WY 12.87, MN 6.46, WV 3.62, KY 3.52, PA 1.01, CO 0.39, OH 0.26, VA 0.12
A Strengthened Transmission Infrastructure is required to enable more Indiana electricity
exports to go to neighboring states
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table26.html
3030Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
30
Indiana Coal & MISO Planning
Increased electricity transmission capacity will enable Indiana to transmit more export power
MISO maintains reliability & plans regionally