Update on WECC –Scope, Efforts 2017 Study Program · Update on WECC –Scope, Efforts & 2017...

Update on WECC – Scope, Efforts & 2017 Study Program

Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC)11‐04‐2016

Vijay A Satyal PhDSr. Policy Analyst, Reliability Planning

W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L

Overview

• Reliability context

• WECC Planning Efforts and Tools

• 2026 Common Case initial results

• Uncertainty Drivers‐ Retirements, RPS, CPP

2


WECC’s Role & Public Interest

• Electric Reliability Organization (ERO)• 501c(4) – public interest dimension

• Key Drivers to public‐interest concerns:– Future makeup of the grid– Changes in consumer & rate‐payer sentiments– Evolving technologies and regulations– Operational and physical infrastructure upgrades

3


Four Interconnections4


Multiple Choice Quiz – Problem #1

Almost all power consumed in the Western Interconnection is generated when it is produced.

A. TrueB. False


5

Multiple Choice Quiz – Problem #1

Almost all power consumed in the Western Interconnection is generated when it is produced.

A. TrueB. False

Although battery and other types of energy storage are being introduced into the power system, this type of technology accounts for a very small portion of the energy supplied to load.


6

Multiple Choice – Question #2

• On average, a transmission line in the Western Interconnection unexpectedly goes out of service every:A. Four daysB. Four hoursC. Two weeksD. One hour


7

Multiple Choice – Question #2

• On average, a transmission line in the Western Interconnection unexpectedly goes out of service every:A. Four daysB. Four hoursC. Two weeksD. One hour


8

What we take for granted?!9


An Evolving Industry

• Low‐Carbon & Distributed Generation Policies– Regional Haze Regulations– Low‐Carbon Policies (CO2‐ State Legislatures, EPACPP)

– State Renewable Portfolio Standards, EE programs• Changing Resource Mix

– Renewables (Utility scale & non)– Retirements

• Storage Technologies

10


The Evolving Grid ….

Traditional Baseload

Distributed Sources Of Generation

The Western Interconnection12


What do we really mean by evolving?13


Evolving Resource Mix‐ 214


Inter‐dependent resource mix15

HYDROHYDRO

WINDWIND

COAL

COAL

143

41

26

93 4

CoalNuclearGasHydroWindSolarOther

2014 Capacity: 100% = 284 GW

What kind of Resource Mix Planning does WECC Do?

Assess Potential Future Reliability Risks

Collaborate With Stakeholders on Data, Modeling and Risk

Assessment

Provide Objective Data for Western

Interconnection

• Year 10 Study Cases• Year 20 Study Cases

• Common Case Development

• Study Program Development

• WECC Usage• Stakeholder Usage

16


What Is the Common Case?

Data Set

2026 Common Case

Loads

Resources

Transmission

Model

17


• Production Cost Model (PCM)

• Security Constrained Economic Dispatch (SCED)

• Resource dispatch for each of the 8,760 hours in the study year

WECC’s view of the most likely combination of loads, resources and transmission topology 10

years in the future

Where Does the Data Come From?18

Resource Portfolio

Studies Work Group

LoadsData Work Group Transmission

NetworkStudies Work

Group

Common Case

WECC Staff

Debugging/ValidationDWG/MWG/SWG/Staff

Modeling Capabilities

Modeling Work Group

Study Case Analysis and Reporting

L&R Submittals

Utility IRPs Resource Planners

Work Group ParticipantsWREZ Tool

NREL Meso‐scale Data

Data Review and Validation

Data Work Group

WECC Staff

L&R Submittals

DSM Task Force

RPCG Common Case Transmission Assumptions

WECC Power Flow Case

Common Case Use in Other Studies

Common Case

Internal Studies

Year 10 (PCM) Studies

Year 20 (CapEX) Studies

External Studies

Regional Studies

Regulatory Evaluations

19


WECC Studies Based On the Common Case

20


2026 Common Case

Year 10 (PCM) Study Cases• Sensitivity Cases• Policy‐Related Studies (coal retirement, high renewables, energy efficiency)

• Storage Studies• Transmission Cases• Probabilistic Cases

Year 20 (CapEx) Study Cases• Reference Case• WECC Scenarios• Coal Retirement• Energy‐Water‐Climate Change Scenario

• High DER

Annual Energy Breakdown21


2026 Common Case Results Compared to 2024 Common Case

22


Summary Results

• No unserved load• Loads down ~5% compared to 2024 Common Case

• Resource mix changes compared to 2024– Less coal, nuclear and gas–More solar, geothermal and DR, DG and EE

• Some high transmission utilization

23


Transmission Utilization

Terminology

“Congestion”Negative

Connotation

Some Paths Designed for High

Utilization

Utilization Metrics

U75: % of hours flows are 75% or more of path

rating


rating


rating

“Most Heavily Utilized”

U75 > 50% OR

U90 > 20% OR

U99 > 5%

24


2026 Common Case Transmission Utilization

25


P45 SDG&E‐CFE

P60 Inyo‐Control

Most Heavily Utilized Paths

P52 Silver Peak‐Control


U75 U90 U99

P60 Inyo‐Control 54.7% 26.9% 0.0%

P52 Silver Peak‐Control 42.9% 26.6% 0.0%

P80 Montana Southeast 46.5% 18.7% 1.8%

P83 Montana Alberta Tie 26.2% 17.8% 0.1%

P45 SDG&E‐CFE 15.5% 11.9% 9.8%

P25 PacifiCorp/PG&E 7.5% 4.4% 2.8%

P83 Montana Alberta Tie

P80 Montana SoutheastP25 PacifiCorp/PG&E

2026 Common Case Transmission Utilization

26


P45 SDG&E‐CFE

P60 Inyo‐Control


P52 Silver Peak‐Control


U75 U90 U99

P60 Inyo‐Control 115 kV Tie 54.7% 26.9% 0.0%P52 Silver Peak‐Control 55 kV 42.9% 26.6% 0.0%P45 SDG&E‐CFE 15.5% 11.9% 9.8%

General Observations

• Additional retirements of coal‐fired units 2016‐2025– 2026 Common Case: 6,884 MW– 2024 Common Case: 6,496 MW

• Shutdown of Diablo Canyon• Reduced load forecast for 2026

– 2026 Common Case: 994,127 GWh– 2024 Common Case: 1,049,168 GWh

• CO2 emissions reduced 12% compared to 2024 Common Case

27


Uncertainty Drivers


29


FERC order 1000 – Implications for Communication and Access

Retirements 2012 – 2025 by region30


AB AZ BC CA CO ID MT MX NE NM NV OR SD TX UT WA WYTotal Energy Estimate (GWh) 13,441 12,750 3,750 121,170 8,411 4 1,747 249 1,086 8,315 13,064 5,152 180 3,001 78 11,402 5,425

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Energy Estim

ate (GWh)

Grand Total of Annual Energy Estimate (GWh) by Region

Retirements ‐131


AB AZ BC CA CO ID MT MX NE NM NV OR SD TX UT WA WY2021‐2025 1,063 2,749 172 28,336 771 0 701 78 1,086 1,402 3,585 237 0 2,997 0 5,111 2,8982018‐2021 6,170 5,387 1,097 46,346 386 0 0 0 0 320 3,726 4,889 0 4 0 5,431 2,3702015‐2017 0 1,868 2,481 29,558 5,910 4 1,046 171 0 6,398 2,540 27 0 0 0 0 02012‐2014 6,207 2,746 0 16,930 1,344 0 0 0 0 196 3,213 0 180 0 78 861 156

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Energy Estim

ate (GWh)

Totals of Energy Estimate Retirements for each region broken down by years

Grand totals for 2012‐2025 by summary type

32


103,151

64,615

19,973

5,024 4,660 4,069 3,723 1,764 940 440 419 399 490

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Energy Estim

ate (GWh)

Retirement Totals for 2012 ‐ 2025 by Summary Types

2016 Program

• Summary of 10‐year Studies

33


Case ID Case Summary Requester(s) Common Case and Sensitivities

2026 PC01 2026 Common Case WECC 2026 PC02 Increased Load PG&E2026 PC03 Decreased Load PG&E2026 PC04 Increased Hydro PG&E 2026 PC05 Decreased Hydro PG&E2026 PC06 Increased Natural Gas Price PG&E 2026 PC07 Decreased Natural Gas Price PG&E 2026 PC08 Increased CO2 Price PG&E2026 PC09 Decreased CO2 Price PG&E 2026 PC10 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Retirement CAPUC & PG&E

Policy Drivers on Resource Mix and High DER Future2026 PC11 Coal Retirement / Low Carbon Future CREPC/WIRAB

2026 PC12 High Renewables with 50% CA RPS and CPP via targeted CO2 prices

CREPC/WIRAB; PG&E; SCE

2026 PC 13 Double EE per SB 350 PG&E

2026 PC 14 Probabilistic assessment of any of the above studies: 2026 PC10/PC12/PC13 WECC Staff Proposal

2026 PC 15 High DER Future CREPC /WIRAB; PG&E and Strategen

Storage Studies

2026 PC 16 Pump Storage in OR/WA near AC‐DC interties with High Renewables penetration

Clean Power Development

2026 PC 17 Compressed Air Energy Storage (1200 MW) at IPP STS’s Delta (UT) and Zephyr Wind Project (WY). Burbank and DATC

2026 PC 18 Double CAES storage capacity (PC 17) Burbank and DATC2026 PC19 Double battery storage in CA (1300 to 2600 MW) PG&E2026 PC20 High Storage case assessment (PC 18 and PC 19) Burbank, DATC, PG&E

Transmission Changes

2026 PC 21 Use existing grid (less specified CCTA projects) and add wind in NM (2500 MW) and WY (2250 MW). SDG&E

2026 PC 22 Examine North‐South flows with increased RE in Southern CA and Southwest (AZ, NV, NM) Pacific Gas & Electric

2026 PC 23 Examine North‐South flows with increased RE in N. CA and NW (OR, WA, MT), followed by expansion case with high hydro conditions.

Pacific Gas & Electric

2026 PC 24 Compare 2026 PC 12 with the decommissioning vs. retaining of Eldorado‐Moenkopi 500 kv Hualapai Tribe

2016 Program

• Summary of 20‐year Studies

34


Case ID Case Summary Requester(s)

2036 PC 1 2036 Reference Case WECC

2034 PC 2 SPSG Scenario 2 – Aggressive policies to reduce GHG and promote technological innovation. SPSG

2034 PC 3 SPSG Scenario 3 – Slow growth with focus on consumer costs SPSG

2034 PC 4 SPSG Scenario 4 – Slow growth with focus on low‐hanging fruit clean energy investments. SPSG

2034 PC 5 High DG case SPSG

2034 PC 6 Coal retirements or low‐carbon pathway with electrification of infrastructure. SPSG

2034 PC 7 SPSG Energy‐Water‐Climate Change (EWCC) Scenario

SPSG

Planning Studies‐ TEPPC 2016 Program?

• Uniqueness of the 2016 TEPPC Study Program– 5 Storage Studies– 4 Transmission Flow Studies– 4+ Resource Mix Studies with CPP‐like targets

• Collaborative effort with stakeholders

• Probabilistic and Uncertainty Modeling– Uncertainty in validation of load forecasts accuracy – Changing land use/environmental regulatory factors

35


What does this mean?

• FERC Order 1000 – Public Policy Considerations

• RPS Projections – Bundled RPS or ....?

• CPP / Haze Regulations

• WECC’s efforts to respond/adapt

36


Distributed Solar PV‐ Exponential Rate37


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

US SOLAR GENERATION (2004‐2014)(BILLION KWH‐ EIA AEO 2015)

Changing Resource Mix ImplicationsMore pressure on traditional base load resources

– Coal plants– Nuclear retirements

Expansion of Variable Energy Resources

– Behind the meter– Utility scale solar– Wind

Natural gas transitioning from supplemental to primary fuel

– CCGT– CT/Aero‐derivatives

38


• Loss of storable fuel supply• Loss of inertia and other essential

reliability services

• Lack of visibility• Increasing flexibility needs• More weather dependency• Contribution to peak load

• Reliance on “just in time” delivery• Infrastructure adequacy and security• Unclear “firmness”

Evolving WECC Efforts

• Round Trip Functionality (PCMPF)

• Uncertainty Based Assessment – Are new investments in Storage projects an altercation to new investments in transmission projects?

– Make WI studies more relevant and yet “non‐project/cost‐benefit oriented.”

• Loss‐of‐Load Probability (2026 C Case)

39


Round Trip Functionality

Definition: The ability to export an hour of output from a Production Cost Model (PCM) run using GridView and solve that hour in a Power Flow (PF) using the PSLF

power flow software.

40


Create Common Case•Loads•Resources•Transmission

Export One Hour•One Specific Hour•Ensure Quality

Import to Power Flow Program•Audit Data•Resolve Issues

Solve in Power Flow•Adjust Resources•Adjust Transmission•Turn on Controls•Convert Back to Original Form

Contact

Vijay Satyal PhDSr. Policy Analyst , Reliability Planning

[email protected](801) 883‐6847

41


RE Policy – Key Variables

• NIMBY• BANANA• Fear of unknown

• Reliability• Rate‐payer concerns

•Mandates

• Tax credits/grants

• ROI – assured returns

•Maturity• Performance• Data

TechnologyIncentives

/ Economics

Socio‐cultural / Human

Dimension

RegulatioryFramework (or lack of)

2026 Common Case CO2 Emissions Compared to CPP Target

Qualifications• The 2026 Common Case is used for production cost

modeling—different from State CPP compliance• Emissions data is a byproduct of the simulation–dispatch

assumptions do not capture compliance obligations or other environmental regulation impacts

Methodology• 2026 Common Case emissions are compared to the CPP

Interim Target 2 (2025‐2027).• Only EPA‐eligible Electric Generating Units (EGU) were

selected • Results factor in planned retirements unrelated to CPP

compliance.

43


2026 Projected % Compliance Gap for Interim Target 2 (2025‐2027)

44


‐80.00%

‐60.00%

‐40.00%

‐20.00%

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

AZ CA CO ID MT NM NV OR UT WA WY WesternUS States

% of W

estern US States Com

pliance Gap

Compliant Mass Gap % Non‐Compliant Mass Gap %

Findings

• Based on the 2026 Common Case simulation, CO2 emissions for all Western states would be 4% below the Interim Target 2

• Four “Not‐In‐Compliance” states would need a 22% reduction in CO2 emissions to meet Interim Target 2.

• WECC plans an additional quality check.

45


Update on WECC –Scope, Efforts 2017 Study Program · Update on WECC –Scope, Efforts & 2017...

Documents

Transcript of Update on WECC –Scope, Efforts 2017 Study Program · Update on WECC –Scope, Efforts & 2017...