1. administrative items spp 2. stakeholder web ... · ersc agenda 1. study overview study status...
TRANSCRIPT
Southwest Power Pool, Inc. ENTERGY REGIONAL STATE COMMITTEE MINIMIZING BULK POWER COSTS STUDY
STAKEHOLDER MEETING
Face-to-face & Web-conference Hyatt Regency DFW – DFW Airport, TX
Room: Maverick
• A G E N D A •
July 20, 2011 2:00 – 4:00 P.M. CT
1. Administrative Items ........................................................................... SPP
2. Stakeholder Web-Presentation ........................................................... ABB
Relationship-Based • Member-Driven • Independence Through Diversity
Evolutionary vs. Revolutionary • Reliability & Economics Inseparable
ERSCERSC
ABB Inc. , Electric System Consulting Dept.
MBPC Study – Stakeholder UpdatePreliminary & Partial Results for Review & Discussion
Entergy Regional State Committee (ERSC)Entergy Regional State Committee (ERSC)Southwest Power Pool (SPP)
July 20, 2011y
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 1
ERSC Agenda
1. Study OverviewStudy StatusStudy Approach
2. 2013 Results for Western Region - Production Costing & Power FlowFlow
3. 2013 Results for WOTAB Region - Production Costing & Power FlowFlow
4. 2013 Results for DSG Region - Production Costing & Power Flow
5. 2013 Preliminary results for Amite South6. Next Steps7. Q&A
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 2
ERSC Study Status
2013 analyses completed for Western, WOTAB and DSG study regions
2013 preliminary analysis for Amite South study region
2022 reference cases (both production cost and power flow) completedp ) p
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 3
ERSC
Study MethodologyStudy Methodology
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 4
ERSC Study Approach - Overview
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 5
ERSC Study Procedure
fCase Name DefinitionCase_0 Reference case
Case_1 No nomogram(s) on study units; _ g ( ) y ;Study units available for dispatch
Case_2 Case_1 +No transmission limits in study region for production costing analysis
Case_3 Case 0 + No nomogram(s) on study units +Study units turned off
Case_4 Case_3 +No transmission limit in study region for productioncosting analysisg y
Case_5A Case_3 with Transmission Solution
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 6
ERSC Adjusted Production Cost
Entergy Footprint’s Adjusted Production Cost =
Entergy Footprint’s units production cost +
Energy Import to Entergy Footprint’s cost
Energy Import Cost = (hourly import flow * hourly simple average gy p ( y p y p garea LMP of both sending and receiving
ends)
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 7
ERSC Cost Benefit Range Estimation
Estimate cost-benefit of transmission solutions by comparing the annual d ti t i i t th li d it l t fproduction cost savings against the annualized capital costs of new
transmission. This will be used as a guideline in selecting cost effective transmission solution
Annualized capital cost = Transmission solution capital cost * Carrying Charge
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 8
ERSC
2013 Western Region Analysis2013 Western Region Analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 9
ERSC Western Region Analysis – Case List
The following cases were simulated:
Case Name DefinitionCase Name Definition
West_0 Reference case
West_1 Same as West_0 with Western region nomogram(s) off (study units available for dispatch)
West_2 Same as West_1 with no Western area transmission limits and no limits on 8 tie‐lines between Western &
d lWOTAB in production costing analysisWest_3 Same as West_0 with Western study units turned off
West_4 Same as West_3 with no Western area transmission limits and no limits on 8 tie‐lines between Western & WOTAB in production costing analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 10
ERSC Western Region Analysis – Dispatch
Production costing and power flow analysis performed in parallel
Western Region generation dispatch and import at Entergy System peak load hour (Aug. 26, 2013 @ 3 pm) are shown below:
West 0 West 2 West 3 West 4 West_0 West_2 West_3 West_4
Total Generation 712 850 451 483
Lewis Creek 468 520 0 0
Frontier 245 330 281 330
Pelican Road 0 0 170 153
Import into Western 1270 1125 1546 1513Import into Western 1270 1125 1546 1513
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 11
ERSC Western Region Analysis – Power Flow
Steady-state performance was evaluated to determine the impact of displacing the high cost units in the Western study regionregion
Several problems were noted with the displacement of the Western region study units in Cases West 3 and West 4Western region study units in Cases West_3 and West_4
Voltage collapse for selected double contingencies:
f GAlso voltage collapse for several G1N1 contingencies
Initial solutions were developed based on SPP-ICT and E t i t t iti t th lt ll bl dEntergy input to mitigate the voltage collapse problems and power flow analysis was repeated
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 12
ERSC Western Region Analysis – Power Flow (Contd.)
Results showed thermal overloads on several transmission facilities such as:
Jacinto-Splendora 138 kV line
Eastgate – Dayton 138 kV line
Dayton – New Long John 138 kV line
Lewis Creek 230/138 kV transformer
Lewis Creek – Peach Creek 230 kV line
Peach Creek – Jacinto 230 kV line
Several other facilities within and outside Western
Also several voltage violations within and outside WesternAlso, several voltage violations within and outside Western
Incremental solutions were developed and tested based on SPP-ICT and Entergy input to resolve Western region violations
Mitigation of violations outside Western study region will be done later© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 13
ERSC Western Region Analysis – Power Flow (Contd.)
Preferred transmission solution set for 2013:Facility
Cypress - Jacinto 230 kV with 70% Series CompensationJacinto - Porter 230 kV2nd 230/138 kV auto-transformer at Porter Cut-in existing Jacinto-Splendora 138 kV line at Cleveland Orange County ProjectOrange County Project Navasota - Sota Terminal Equipment upgradeRe-conductor Grimes-Mt. Zion-Huntsville 138 kV 3rd 345/138 kV auto-transformer at Grimes Upgrade terminal equipment for Leach - Toledo 138 kVRe-conductor Sabine - Port Neches 138 kV (line 515 & 516) Upgrade Cleveland - Jacinto 138 kV Porter-Oakridge 138 kV reconductorTotal $ 314,509,906
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 14
ERSC Western Region Analysis – Power Flow (Contd.)
Upgrade terminal equipment on Leach – Toledo
Upgrade 138 kV line from Grimes
– Mt. Zion ‐Huntsville
Bend
Grimes
New 230 kV line from Cypress to
Cypress
JacintoLewis Creek
Cypress to Jacinto
Bring Jacinto –
Orange County Project
Add 3rd 345/138 kV transformer at
Grimes
New 230 kV line from
Bring Jacinto Splendora 138 kV into Cleveland
Upgrade terminal equipment on Navasota ‐ Sota
Porter Jacinto to PorterAdd 2nd 230/138
kV transformer at Porter
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 15
ERSC
2013 WOTAB Region Analysis2013 WOTAB Region Analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 16
ERSC WOTAB Region Analysis – Case ListThe following cases were simulated:
Case Name Definition
WOTAB_0 Reference case
WOTAB_1 Same as WOTAB_0 with Western and WOTAB region nomogram(s) off (study units available for dispatch)
WOTAB 2 Same as WOTAB 1 with no Western and WOTABWOTAB_2 Same as WOTAB_1 with no Western and WOTAB transmission limits in production costing analysis
WOTAB_3 Same as WOTAB_0 with Western and WOTAB study units turned off
WOTAB_4 Same as WOTAB_3 with no Western and WOTAB transmission limits in production costing analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 17
ERSC Power Flow Analysis for WOTAB
Steady-state performance was evaluated to determine the impact of displacing high cost units in Western and WOTAB study regionsstudy regions
Several problems were noted with the displacement of high cost units in cases WOTAB 3 and WOTAB 4cost units in cases WOTAB_3 and WOTAB_4
Voltage collapse for several contingencies
f GAlso voltage collapse for several G1N1 contingencies
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 18
ERSC WOTAB Region Analysis – Power Flow (Contd.)
Also, results showed large pre- and post-contingency thermal overloads on several transmission facilities such as:
Cypress 500/138 kV transformer
Nelson 500/230 kV transformer
Grimes 345/138 kV transformers
China-Amelia 230 kV line
Helbig – McLewis 230 kV line
Hartburg – Inland 230 kV lineg
Several other facilities within and outside Western & WOTAB
Also several voltage violations within and outside Western & WOTABAlso, several voltage violations within and outside Western & WOTAB
Incremental solutions were developed and tested based on SPP-ICT and Entergy input to resolve Western and WOTAB region violations
Mitigation of violations outside these study regions will be done later© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 19
ERSC WOTAB Region Analysis – Power Flow (Contd.)
Preferred transmission solution set for 2013:
FacilityFacilityCypress - Jacinto 230 kV
Jacinto - Porter 230 kV
2nd 230/138 kV auto-transformer at Porter
Cut-in existing Jacinto-Splendora 138 kV line at Cleveland
Orange County Project (minus Hartburg - Chisolm Rd 230 kV)
Navasota - Sota Terminal Equipment upgrade
Re-conductor Grimes-Mt. Zion-Huntsville 138 kV
3rd 345/138 kV auto-transformer at Grimes
Upgrade terminal equipment for Leach - Toledo 138 kV
Re-conductor Sabine - Port Neches 138 kV (line 515 & 516)
Upgrade Cleveland - Jacinto 138 kV
Richard - Nelson 230 kV
Nelson - Sabine 230 kV
Hartburg - Sabine 500 kV
2nd Cypress 500/138 kV auto-transformer
Upgrade terminal equipment at Newton Bulk for Leach - Toledo 138 kVg
Tubular - Dobbin 138 kV upgrade
Upgrade Grimes - Walden (BENTWATER) 138 kV
Porter-Oakridge 138 kV reconductor
Addis - Tiger upgrade to 704 MVAg pg
Total $ 636,186,906
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 20
ERSC WOTAB Transmission Solutions
Upgrade Newton Bulk to Leach 138 kV line Leach
New 230 kV line from Richard to
138 kV line
Re‐conductor of Tubular to Dobbin
138 kV line
Newton Bulk
Nelson
Hartburg
DobbinCypress
Add 2nd 500/138 kV transformer at
Cypress
New 500 kV line from Hartburg to Sabine
Tubular
Richard
Nelson
SabineAddition of Addition of 2 (two)
500/230 kV transformers at
S bi
New 230 kV line from Nelson to
HartburgNew 500 kV New 500 kV Substation at Sabine
© ABB Group
July 20, 2011 | Slide 21
Sabine
ERSC WOTAB (Cont...)
Western Transmission SolutionsUpgrade terminal equipment on Leach – Toledo
Upgrade 138 kV line from Grimes
– Mt. Zion ‐Huntsville
Bend
Grimes
New 230 kV line from Cypress to
Cypress
JacintoLewis Creek
Cypress to Jacinto
Bring Jacinto –
Orange County Project
Add 3rd 345/138 kV transformer at
Grimes
New 230 kV line from
Bring Jacinto Splendora 138 kV into Cleveland
Upgrade terminal equipment on Navasota ‐ Sota
Porter Jacinto to PorterAdd 2nd 230/138
kV transformer at Porter
© ABB Group
July 20, 2011 | Slide 22
22
ERSC
2013 DSG Region Analysis2013 DSG Region Analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 23
ERSC DSG Region Analysis – Case ListThe following cases were simulated:
Case Name DefinitionCase Name Definition
DSG_0 Reference case
DSG_1 Same as DSG_0 with DSG region nomogram(s) off (study units available for dispatch)
DSG_2 Same as DSG_1 with no DSG area transmission limits and no limits on 9 tie‐lines between DSG & Entergy f d lfootprint in production costing analysis
DSG_3 Same as DSG_0 with DSG study units turned off
DSG_4 Same as DSG_3 with no DSG area transmission limits and no limits on 9 tie‐lines between DSG & Entergy footprint in production costing analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 24
ERSC DSG Region Analysis – Power Flow
Steady-state performance was evaluated to determine the impact of displacing the high cost units in the DSG study region
Several problems were noted with the displacement of the DSG region study units in Cases DSG_3 and DSG_4
Results showed thermal overloads on several transmission facilities such as:
Snake Farm – Labarre 230 kV (146%)
Prospect – Goodhope 230 kV (120%)
Valentine – Clovelly 115 kV (133%)
Tezcuco – Waterford 230 kV (119%)
Waterford – Gypsy 230 kV (108%)
Several other facilities within and outside DSG
Also, several voltage violations within and outside DSG© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 25
ERSC DSG Region Analysis – Power Flow (Contd.)
Preferred transmission solution set for 2013:
FacilitySnakefarm - Labarre 230 kV
DSG Reliability Improvements: Phase 3
Valentine - Clovelly 115 kV line
Willow Glen to Conway 230 kV line
Third Adams Creek to Bogalusa 230 kV line
Total Cost: $115,015,000
Note:DSG Phase 3 improvements include the following facilities:
- Add 4.5mile, 230 kV circuit between Gypsy and Hooker 230 kVyp y
- Remove Waterford – Hooker 230 kV and Waterford – Gypsy 230 kV circuit #2
- Re-terminate reactor at Waterford 230 kV on the Union Carbide line
- Convert Waggaman substation to 230kV
- Remove existing Luling – Waggaman-9Mile 115 kV
- Add Waterford - Waggaman – 9Mile 230 kV line
- Upgrade Luling – American Cynamide 115 kV
- Upgrade Gypsy – Claytonia 115 kV
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 26
pg yp y y
- Re-configure Luling – Gypsy 115 kV
ERSC DSG Transmission Solutions
Bogalusa Add a new Bogalusa ‐ Adams Creek #3
Adams Creek
Conway 230 kV lineAdd a new Willow Glen –
Conway 230 kV line
Labare 230 kV line
Re‐conductor of Snake Farm to
Labare 230 kV line
Willow Glen
Snake Farm
Conway
DSG Phase‐3 upgrades
Labare
V l ti
upgrades
Clovelly
Valentine
Upgrade Valentine to Clovelly 115 kV
© ABB Group
July 20, 2011 | Slide 27
y
ERSC
2013 Amite South Analysis2013 Amite South Analysis
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 28
ERSC Amite South Region Analysis – Case List
Case Name Definition
• The following cases were simulated:
AMS_0 Reference case
AMS_1 Same as AMS_0 with nomogram(s) off (study units available for di t h)dispatch)
AMS_2 Same as AMS_1 with no AMS area transmission limits and no limits between AMS & Entergy footprint in production costing analysisanalysis
AMS_3 Same as AMS_0 with AMS study units turned off
AMS 4 Same as AMS 3 with no AMS area transmission limits and noAMS_4 Same as AMS_3 with no AMS area transmission limits and no limits between AMS & Entergy footprint in production costing analysis
ERSC Amite South Region Analysis – Power Flow
S d f l d d i h• Steady‐state performance was evaluated to determine the impact of displacing the high cost units in the AMS study regiong
• The case AMS_3 was found to result in un‐served load, possibly due to transmission constraints between AMS and rest of the system and unavailability of necessary generation inside AMS; No transmission analysis was performed with thisinside AMS; No transmission analysis was performed with this case
• Several problems were noted with the displacement of the AMS region study units in Cases AMS_4
ERSC Amite South Region Analysis – Power Flow (Cont’d)
• Results showed reliability concerns as under:Potential Voltage collapse for several facility– Potential Voltage collapse for several facility outages with or without additional generator outagesoutages
ERSC Amite South Region Analysis – Power Flow (Cont’d)
• Thermal Overloads such as:– Bogalusa – Franklin 500 kV (115%) for outage of Mcknt – Frklin 500 kV– Waterford – Gypsy 230 kV (123%) for loss of the other, parallel circuit– Waterford – 9Mile 230 kV (108%) for outage of Wesco – Prspct 230 kV
Tezcuco Waterford (132%) for outage of Waterford Gypsy 230 kV– Tezcuco – Waterford (132%) for outage of Waterford – Gypsy 230 kV –this facility showed a system intact loading of 105%.
– Raceland – Pardis 115 kV (115%) for the outage of Gypsy 230/115 kV transformertransformer
– Valentine – Clovelly 115 kV (128%) for outage of Wesco – Prspct 230 kV – this facility was loaded to 114% in the system intact condition
– Polscar –AAC‐Licar‐Bell He showed up to 109% loading for Tezcuco –Waterford 230 kV outage
– The loss of Wells – Webre 500 kV showed overload on Teche –Waxlake – El Passo – Bvista – Berwick – Ramos 138 kV (up to 134% on Teche – Waxlake section)
ERSC
Next StepsNext Steps
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 33
ERSC Next Steps
• Develop and Test Transmission Solution(s) for 2013 Amite South
St d WOTAB W t A it S th d DSG f 2022• Study WOTAB, Western, Amite South and DSG for year 2022
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 34
ERSC Q & A
Thank you!Thank you!
© ABB Group July 20, 2011 | Slide 35