Transcript Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study Overview

Eastern Wind
Integration and
Transmission Study
Overview
January 28th
Webinar
Dave Corbus
National Wind Technology Center
National Renewable Energy Lab
Eastern Wind Integration& Transmission Study
Objectives
• Evaluate the power system impacts and transmission
associated with increasing wind capacity to 20% and 30% of
retail electric energy sales in the study area by 2024 ;
•
Impacts include operating due to variability and uncertainty of wind; reliability
• Build upon prior wind integration studies and related
technical work;
• Coordinate with JCSP and current regional power system
study work;
• Produce meaningful, broadly supported results through a
technically rigorous, inclusive study process.
Region Definition
Study area includes:
• PJM
• Midwest ISO
• Mid-Continent
Area Power Pool
• Southwest
Power Pool
• TVA
• New York ISO
• ISO New
England
• Other interested
parties
Project Organization
DOE
Sponsor
NREL
Project
Manager
Technical
Review
Committee
AWS Scientific
Wind
Modeling
EnerNex Team
EnerNex/MISO/Ventyx
Project Team - Analysis
Stakeholders
Key Issues & Questions include
• What system operational impacts and costs
are imposed by wind generation variability
and uncertainty?
• What are the benefits from long distance
transmission that accesses multiple wind
resources that are geographically diverse?
• What are the benefits from long distance
transmission that move large quantities of
remote wind energy to urban markets?
• How do remote wind resources compare to
local wind resources?
Key Issues & Questions include
• How much does geographical diversity help
reduce system variability and uncertainty?
• What is the role and value of wind
forecasting?
• What benefit does balancing area
cooperation or consolidation bring to wind
variability and uncertainty management?
• How does wind generation capacity value
affect reliability?
Joint Coordinated System Plan (JCSP)
• The 2007/2008 Joint Coordinated System plan
included MISO, PJM, SPP,TVA, MAPP,
NYISO,ISO-NE plus other interested parties
• The JCSP performed a long term planning
study incorporating both economic (2024) and
reliability (2018) analysis of system
performance for the combined JCSP areas
• The EWITS uses some of the model
assumptions including the generation
expansion (EGEAS modeling)
• Final summary report in progress
Wind Integration Methods
& Best Practices
• Capture system characteristics and response through
operational simulations and modeling;
• Capture wind deployment scenario geographic diversity
through synchronized weather simulation;
• Match with actual historic utility load and load forecasts;
• Use actual large wind plant power statistical data for shortterm regulation and ramping;
• Examine wind variation in combination with load variations;
• Utilize wind forecasting best practice and combine wind
forecast errors with load forecast errors;
• Examine actual costs independent of tariff design structure.
• Examine impacts of BA consolidation and fast markets.
Key Tasks- Eastern Wind Integration &
Transmission Study
• Mesoscale modeling
• Transmission Study
• Integration Study
Key Tasks - Mesoscale Modeling
– Identify wind sites
– Develop high quality wind resource
data sets for the wind integration
study area
• Mesoscale modeling
• 3 years of time series data (2004-2006)
• 10-minute data at 2 km spatial resolution
– Develop wind power plant outputs
Mesoscale Grids
579 GWs of Wind Sites from Wind Site
Selection process for EWITS
Offshore Wind
• Great resource
• Well correlated with
load and close to
load centers
• More expensive!
Deep Water Wind Turbine Development
Current Technology
Supply v. CF
Size Distribution
• Maximum onshore plant sizes were
normally distributed between 100 MW and
1000 MW
• Additional “mega” sites (>1000MW)
Plant Size Distribution
300
200
150
100
50
Rated Capacity (MW)
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
0
100
Number of Sites
250
Power Conversion Testing
Approach
• Power conversion takes into account
–
–
–
–
Turbine power curve for site IEC class
Air density, turbulence
Wake and non-wake losses
Time filtering to replicate the “spatial smoothing”
of the output of a real wind plant
Validation Sites
State
Rated Capacity
(MW)
Turbine Type
Hub Height
(m)
Blue Canyon I
Oklahoma
74.25
NM72 (1.65MW)
67 m
Lake Benton
Minnesota
103.5
Zond 750
51.2 m
Storm Lake I
Iowa
112.5
Zond 750
63 m
Plant Name
Validation Example
Diurnal Patterns
Storm Lake - 65M - Z750
Blue Canyon I - 65M
0.45
0.4
0.4
0.35
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
MOD
0.15
OBS
Capacity Factor
Capacity Factor
0.5
0.45
0.3
0.25
0.2
MOD
0.15
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.05
OBS
0
0
0
5
10
15
Local Time of Day
20
25
0
5
10
15
Time of Day
20
25
Validation Example
Mean Ramps
Storm Lake - 65M - Z750
0.16
0.14
0.14
0.12
0.12
0.10
0.08
MOD
0.06
OBS
0.04
0.02
0.00
Mean Absolute Deviation
Mean Absolute Deviation
Blue Canyon I - 65M
0.10
0.08
0.06
MOD
0.04
OBS
0.02
0.00
0
50
100
Time Lapse (Minutes)
150
200
0
50
100
Time Lapse (Minutes)
150
200
Mesoscale Output/
Power Conversion
47.02225
DATE
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
20040101
….
-68.80990
TIME
0010
0020
0030
0040
0050
0100
0110
0120
0130
0140
0150
0200
0210
80M SPEED
4.89790
4.94108
4.81025
4.89001
4.55865
4.70651
4.84289
4.85045
4.76209
4.74387
4.89790
4.93185
4.87496
DIRECTION
270.09622
268.34360
267.33597
267.15210
265.43286
265.82401
269.14575
266.78668
266.21219
263.26474
260.24161
256.34119
252.86868
DENSITY
1.25625
1.25527
1.25509
1.25468
1.25415
1.25480
1.25461
1.25462
1.25440
1.25424
1.25384
1.25321
1.25324
TKE
0.03305
0.02336
0.01175
0.00649
0.00473
0.00252
0.00214
0.00247
0.00268
0.00220
0.00246
0.00351
0.00413
Why 20% and 30% Wind?
Regional Wind Requirements
reference
20% Wind
30% wind
100,000
90,000
80,000
(MW)
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
MISO
and
MRO
SPP
Enterg
y
TVA
PJM
SERC NYISO NEISO
IESO
0
0
0
27,000 5,000 3,000 12,000
0
reference 16,000
20% Wind 50,000 11,000 13,000 20,000 63,000 46,000 13,000 12,000 12,000
30% wind 75,000 18,000 20,000 30,000 95,000 68,000 19,000 18,000 18,000
Scenario Development and Siting
• Four Different Scenarios
– Three 20% and one 30% wind scenarios
• Scenario that emphasizes development of local resources with
lower capacity factors
• Scenario that emphasizes high capacity factor wind
development in the Midwest with larger transmission
component
• All of four scenarios require a lot of wind and
transmission!
– Some offshore wind required
• NREL/AWS provided 700 GWs of wind plants and
wind sites for the scenarios were picked from these
– Scenario sites were selected from the “Superset” of 700
GWs of sites
Four EWITS Scenarios
• Scenario 1, 20% wind penetration – “Lowest Cost
Wind”: Utilizes high quality wind resources in the
Great Plans, with other development in the east
where good wind resources exist. Total capacity
in MISO, MAPP, and SPP is approximately 185
GW
• Scenario 2, 20% wind penetration – “Hybrid, with
Offshore”: Some wind generation in the Great
Plains is moved east, with capacity increased in
PJM, NYISO, and ISO-NE. Some offshore
development in the Northeast and Mid-
Atlantic.
Four EWITS Scenarios
• Scenario 3, 20% wind penetration – “Load-weighted
Wind Development, Aggressive Offshore”: More wind
is moved east toward load centers, necessitating even
more utilization of off-shore resources.
• Scenario 4, 30% wind penetration – “Aggressive Onand Off-shore”. Meeting the 30% energy penetration
level uses a substantial amount of the higher quality
wind resource. Lots of offshore is needed to reach
the target energy level, and the capacity in MISO,
MAPP, and SPP goes back up to 188 GW.
EWITS Scenario Installed Wind Capacity by Region
100000
90000
80000
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Installed Capacity (MW)
70000
Scenario 4
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
MISO/MAPP
SPP
TVA
SERC
Region
PJM
NYISO
ISO-NE
20% wind Scenarios
1: Lowest Cost Wind
2: Hybrid w/Offshore
3: Load-weighted Wind
Development, Aggressive Offshore
Region
Total (MW)
Offshore
(MW)
Total (MW)
Offshore
(MW)
Total (MW)
Offshore (MW)
MISO/MAPP
120,075
-
86,306
-
57,885
-
SPP
66,576
-
69,804
-
39,328
-
TVA
1,247
-
1,247
-
1,247
-
SERC
1,009
-
5,009
4,000
5,009
4,000
PJM
22,669
-
33,192
5,000
78,736
39780
NYISO
7,742
-
16,507
2,620
23,167
9,280
ISO-NE
4,291
-
13,837
5,000
24,927
11,040
223,609
-
225,902
16,620
230,299
64,100
Total Capacity
30% Wind Scenario
4: Aggressive On- and Off-shore
Region
Total (MW)
Offshore (MW)
MISO/MAPP
120,313
-
SPP
69,309
-
TVA
1,247
-
SERC
5,009
4,000
PJM
97,736
54,780
NYISO
23,167
9,280
ISO-NE
24,927
11,040
337,708
79,100
Total Capacity
Scenarios and Siting
Things to keep in mind during the study
• How much capacity can be reasonably
exported (imported) at each area?
• Assume constant energy between scenarios
rather than constant number of plants:
– Typical Great Plains capacity factor/Ohio C.F.=
45/30 = 1.5
– ~Roughly 2 MW of wind in Great Plains produces
the same energy as 3 MW of wind in Ohio.
EWITS Scenario 1 Generation Siting
EWITS Scenario 2 Generation Siting
EWITS Scenario 3 Generation Siting
EWITS Scenario 4 Generation Siting
Key Tasks- Develop Transmission Plan
– JCSP reference future
and 20% wind and
30% wind scenarios
• Builds on JCSP work
– Analyze different
transmission
alternatives for
different wind
scenarios
• 765 AC and HVDC
• High in-state wind
versus high wind
exports
Develop Preliminary Transmission Plans
• Use JCSP 20% wind scenario
transmission overlay as the starting
point to develop initial plans for EWITS
four scenarios
• Determine type, size and route of
transmission lines
• Determine costs and land requirements
• Determine potential substation and DC
terminal locations
Scenario 1
20% Lowest Cost Wind
Scenario 1 Constrained Case Annual Gen Weighted LMP
Scenario 1 Constrained Case Annual Load Weighted LMP
Scenario 1 Generation Difference: Copper Sheet Minus Constrained Cases
Scenario 1 Top 24 Interfaces with Largest Annual Energy Difference
Scenario1
INTERFACE
AMRN - IN
IN - OH
OH - EPJM
AMRN - IOWA
SPP - SPS
SPP - EES
TVA - EES
WAPA - MINN
ISONE - NYISO
SOUTHERN - TVA
ATC - AMRN
MINN - ATC
AECI - SPP
NYISO - PJM
IESO - NYISO
MICH - IN
AMRN - AECI
AMRN - TVA
SPP - AMRN
WAPA - IOWA
MINN - IOWA
MICH - IESO
IOWA - SPP
AECI - EES
Coppersheet Minus Constrained
Additional Transfer
Total Positive
Total Negative
Needed to Deliver 80%
Energy (GWh)
Energy (GWh)
Energy (MW)
252,464
-17
28,856
185,865
0
20,843
180,721
-12
18,662
0
-131,654
15,173
248
-91,858
13,482
104,579
-3
12,551
95
-81,698
10,173
67,140
-11
9,243
368
-63,842
9,128
1
-76,910
9,045
76,404
-1
8,771
74,025
0
8,647
13
-68,241
8,565
876
-60,431
8,457
43,378
-11
4,971
160
-38,925
4,937
386
-24,081
4,585
39,604
0
4,571
37,948
-3
4,556
30,887
-6
4,343
29,318
-111
4,102
27,567
-479
4,070
1,594
-20,964
3,978
31,911
0
3,607
Joint Coordinated System Plan Overlay – 20% Wind Scenario
4. Wind Integration Study
• Evaluate operating impacts
– Regulation
– Load Following
– Unit Commitment
• Evaluate reliability impacts (ELCC/LOLP)
• EWITS is first and foremost a wind
integration study
– What are the integration costs and issues for 20
and 30% wind?
– How is other generation affected?
Production Simulation
Methodology
 Case comparison approach
– Actual wind vs. “ideal” wind
– Objective is to determine relative value of two
resources providing same amount of
annual/daily energy
 Issues
– Approach is established as best way to
accomplish objective
– Not been attempted on this scale before
Hourly Modeling
 Objective
– Chronological simulation of operational planning and power
system operation
– Mimic
• Day-ahead unit commitment and scheduling based on
load and wind generation forecasts
• Real-time operation with actual wind and load
 How do we simulate the Eastern Interconnection in 2024?
– Period-ahead planning (e.g. day-ahead unit commitment)
– Real-time operations (at minimum of hourly granularity)
– Operational structures
• Conventional control areas?
• Existing markets?
Hourly Modeling
 PROMOD capabilities
– Reserve modeling
• Types
• Treatment (e.g. variable by hour?)
– Commit based on forecast, simulation
based on actual quantities?
– Features for treatment of uncertainty?
 Modeling Transactions
– Day-ahead and “real time”
– Relevant program features
Intra-Hour Impacts
 Objective
– Determine operating reserves required to
manage control area with wind generation
– Feed requirements forward into hourly
modeling
 Variability of wind generation adds to
existing variability, increasing
requirements for RT ancillary services
 Analytical approach
– Based on high-resolution (< 10 min) load and
wind generation data
LOLP and ELCC Analysis
 Objective
– Determine contribution of wind generation to Eastern
Interconnection reliability
– Assess reliability value of transmission only(?)
 Issues
– Transmission overlay could have significant impact on existing
LOLE zones
– Transmission will serve as capacity resources for some zones; may
make some zones very reliable, such that ELCC of wind would be
minimal
 Predecessor tasks
– Requires PROMOD to determine new area import limits
– GE MARS model to be developed from PowerBase
– Resource constraints may necessitate staging
Reliability Analysis
 GE MARS
– Monte-Carlo based chronological reliability
simulation
– Now in use at MISO
 Objectives
– Calculate ELCC for wind generation based on
comparative LOLE cases
– Zone-by-zone basis
 Input data
– Network, resource, and load data input
developed from PowerBase
– Wind as load modifier
Downloading EWITS Wind Data
http://wind.nrel.gov/public/EWITS/
Download Time-series Data
All data (using ftp site)
EWITS ftp site (ftp://ftp2.nrel.gov/pub/ewits)
Instructions for ftp
Data for individual sites using interactive website
EWITS Interactive Website
Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQs) about time-series
data
EWITS FAQ
Downloading EWITS Wind Data
EWITS Interactive Website
/
Eastern Wind Integration
& Transmission Study
Schedule
• Nov 07 – Feb 08
Study Development
• March 2008
Award Wind Mesoscale
Modeling Contract
• July 2008
Award Wind Integration
Contract
• April – Oct 2008
Develop Wind Data Sets
• Sept 08 – June 2009
Evaluate Operating
& Reliability Impacts;
Develop Transmission Plan
• August 2009
Complete Study
Your Input is Important!
• EWITS Website - http://wind.nrel.gov/public/EWITS/
• Suggestions on questions to address in study
or other comments/input
• Contact Dave Corbus at [email protected] (303384-6966) or Matt Schuerger at
[email protected] (651-699-4971)