fso smart grid overview july 23, 2009 environmental impacts of smart grid & challenges of...
TRANSCRIPT
FSO Smart Grid Overview July 23, 2009
Environmental Impacts of Smart Grid & Challenges of Connecting Electric Vehicles
September 27, 2011
Steve Bossart, Project Management Center
2
Topics
• Case for modernization
Main topics• Environmental impacts • Electric vehicles
Other topics• Field projects• Metrics & benefits• Smart Grid maturity model• Smart Grid organizations• Barriers and challenges
3
Case for Grid Modernization
4
4 4
Why Modernize the Grid?
• Today’s grid is aging and outmoded• Unreliability is costing consumers billions of dollars• Today’s grid is vulnerable to attack and natural disaster• An extended loss of today’s grid could be catastrophic to
our security, economy and quality of life• Today’s grid does not address the 21st century power
supply challenges• Adverse trends associated with the grid
- Costs, reliability, peak loads, asset underutilization, TLRs, grid divorce
• The benefits of a modernized grid are substantial
5
Value Proposition Cost to Modernize• $338-$476B over 20 years
– $ 82-90 B for transmission – $232-$339 B for distribution– $24-46 B for consumer
• $17-24 B per year
Benefit of Modernization• $1,294 – $2,028 Billion• Overall benefit-to-cost ratio
of 2.8 to 6.0
5
EPRI, 2011
Previous StudiesBenefit to Cost Ratio for West Virginia of 5:1Benefit to Cost Ratio for San Diego of 6:1Benefit to Cost Ratio for EPRI (2004) 4:1-5:1
$165 B Cost$638 - $802 B Benefits
EPRI Report: http://www.smartgridinformation.info/pdf/3272_doc_1.pdf
6
6
Today’s grid - status quo is not an option
• Aging– 70% of transmission lines are 25 years or older– 70% of transformers are 25 years or older– 60% of circuit breakers are 30 years or older
• Outmoded – Designed in the 50s and installed in the 60s and 70s,
before the era of the microprocessor.
• Stressed– Never designed for bulk power shipments– Wholesale power transactions jumped 300% from
2000 to 2005. Insight Magazine, Oct. 2005
7
What’s Different with Smart Grid
• Consumer engagement with resources to solve power issues locally
• Two-way power flow in Distribution• Two-way communications • Integration of Distributed generation and storage • Imperative to transform from passive to active
control in Distribution• Move from radial to network Distribution system• New ways for Distribution to become a
Transmission resource• Potential to transform transportation sector
8
Environmental Impacts of
Electric Power System & Transportation Sector
Enabled by Smart Grid
9
9
Environmental Impacts
ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEM• Carbon dioxide• Nitrogen oxides• Sulfur dioxide• Particulate matter• Air toxics (e.g., mercury)• Fly ash and bottom ash
• Polychlorinated biphenyls• Other transformer oils
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR• Carbon dioxide• Nitrogen oxides• Hydrocarbons• Carbon monoxide
10
EIA Pollutant DataUnder a “Business As Usual” Scenario
Electricity Production (Million Tons) 2008 2020 2030
CO2 2300 2500 2700
SO2 7.6 4.2 3.7 NOX 3.3 2.0 2.1
Transportation Sector (Million Tons) 2008 2020 2030
CO2 1900 2000 2100
HC 12.8 13.5 14.1
CO 98.3 103.5 108.6
NOX 6.4 6.7 7.1
11
Grid Features Enabled by Smart Grid That Impact Environmental Emissions
• Demand Response• Electric Vehicles• Variable Renewables • Distributed Energy Resources• Transmission and Distribution Systems• Energy Storage• Customer Systems• Outage Management• Improved Operations and Maintenance
12
Some Smart Grid Operational Practices That Impact Environmental Emissions
• Conservation• Load changes
– Demand response– Demand dispatch
• Efficiency– Generation– T&D– End-use devices
• Dispatch of generation & storage – Central, distributed, & consumer– Fossil fuel, nuclear, variable renewables, hydro– Baseload & peaking
• Electric vehicle charging
13
Demand Response• Shift load to different time or eliminate or reduce load • Load types include climate control, lighting, hot water,
refrigeration, laundry, EV charging, industrial processes• Using demand response for regulation may reduce
emissions (ORNL, 2000)– More closely match load and generation
• Predict annual growth rate of 1.07% from 2008-2030 (EIA)
EE programs could reduce growth rate to 0.83% (EPRI)• Predict annual growth rate for peak demand of 1.5% from
2008-2030 (EIA)
EE/DR could reduce peak demand growth rate to 0.83% (EPRI)
14
Impact of Peak Demand Reduction by DR 2030
EPRI (2008)
15
16
Electric Vehicles
• Includes plug-in hybrid and all-electric vehicles
• Reduces transportation emissions from gasoline & diesel fuels while reducing import of crude oil
• During EV charging, electric power system emissions will depend on generation mix
• Plug-in electric vehicles will increase demand for electricity
17
Annual GHG Emissions Reductions from PHEVs in the Year 2050
“Well to Wheels Study”
EPRI (2007)
18
Carbon Footprint by Vehicle Type
Source: (ICF, 2010)
19
Variable Renewables & Energy Storage • Environmental impacts must consider:
– Generation/storage mix used to meet demand when power output from variable renewables cannot meet demand
– Distance between variable renewables/storage and load
– Need for ancillary services to maintain grid stability (volt/VAR, frequency regulation, load following)
– Power losses during storage
– Serving baseload, peak load, or both
20
CO2 Impact of Smart Grid Enablement of Renewable Resource Deployment 2030
Source: EPRI (2008)
21
Gas25%
Nuclear17%
Renewables14%
Oil1%
Coal43%
Gas21%
Nuclear20%
Renewables9%
Oil1%
Coal49%
5,150 BkWh / Year69% Fossil Energy
+ 25%
Electricity Demand 20084,107 BkWh / Year71% Fossil Energy
2,357 mmt CO2 2,526 mmt CO2
Electricity Demand 2035
United States
Coal could shift toward clean coal with CCS?Natural gas from Marcellus and other shale gas? Permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel?Renewables includes hydro at about 7%Continued reduction in cost for variable renewables?Incentives favoring investments in technologies with GHG reduction?
22
Study by Carnegie Mellon UniversityThermal Plant Emissions Due to Variable Renewable
+
+
+
1
2
n
=
Firm PowerVariable PowerCompensating Power
Time
Power
Gas
Wind
Does operating one or more gas turbines to fill in variable wind or solar power result in increased NOx and CO2 emissions compared to full-power steady-state operation of natural-gas turbines?
23
Results
• The results of CMU’s analysis demonstrates that CO2 emissions reductions from a wind (or solar PV) plus natural gas system are likely to be 75-80% of those presently assumed by policy makers.
• Nitrous oxide reduction from such a system depends strongly on the type of NOx control and how it is dispatched. – For the best system examined, NOx reductions with
20% wind or solar PV penetration are 30-50% of those expected.
– For the worst, emissions are increased by 2-4 times the expected reductions with a 20% RPS using wind or solar PV.
24
Transmission and Distribution Systems
• Power loss increases with distance
• Power loss associated with voltage transformation
• More generation is needed to offset T&D losses
• Typical losses on U.S. T&D system is about 6-7%
• Transmission congestion can be relieved with DER
• Low-loss conductors & superconductors
25
Impact of Reduced Line Losses Voltage Reduction 2030
Energy Savings Corresponding to Reduced Line Losses
Baseline Residential Retail Electricity Sales, 2030 [billion kWh]: 1,737
U.S. Distribution Substations: 2,179 U.S. Distribution Substations Serving Predominantly Residential Circuits: 1,525 Ratio of Residential Electricity Sales per Residential Distribution Substation:
Billion kWh / Res. Distribution Substation 1.14
Ratio of Load Reduction to Voltage Reduction:
(1% reduction in voltage yields 0.8% reduction in load) 0.8
Average Percent Voltage Reduction: 1% 2% 3% 4%
Market Penetration Effect, 2030 [billion kWh]
25% of Res. Dist. Substations (381): 3.5 7 10.4 14
50% of Res. Dist. Substations (762): 7 14 20.8 28
Source: EPRI (2008)
26
Customer Systems
• Demand response requires smart appliances and customer interface (e.g., HAN, in-home displays, programmable thermostats)
• Encourages conservation (i.e., Prius effect)• Efficient appliances (i.e., EnergyStar)• Customer-owned generation and storage
– Electric vehicles – Photovoltaic
• Different classes of customers– Residential, commercial, industrial, agriculture– Industrial parks, universities, manufacturing – Potential microgrid and CHP applications
27
Improved Operations and Maintenance
• Reduced vehicle miles– Condition-based maintenance– Remote meter reading
• Generation dispatch considering cost & emissions– Generation type– Distance from generation to load– Charging storage and electric vehicles
28
Outage Management
• Less vehicle miles– Reduced outages, duration, and extent– Knowledge of location and cause of outage– Better planning
29
Reduction in Electricity Use from Smart Grid
Mechanism
Reductions in Electricity Sector Energy and CO2
Emissions*
Direct (%)Indirect
(%)Conservation Effect of Consumer Information and Feedback Systems 3 -Joint Marketing of Energy Efficiency and Demand-Response Programs - 0Key Enabling Technology: Disaggregation of Total Loads into End Uses - - Deployment of Diagnostics in Residential and Small/Medium Commercial Buildings 3 -Measurement & Verification (M&V) for Energy Efficiency Programs 1 0.5Shifting Load to More Efficient Generation <0.1 -Support Additional Electric Vehicles and Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles 3 -Conservation Voltage Reduction and Advanced Voltage Control 2 -Support Penetration of Renewable Wind and Solar Generation (25 percent renewable portfolio standard [RPS]) <0.1 5Total Reductions 12 6*Assumes 100 percent penetration of the smart grid technologies.
PNNL (2010)Reduce CO2 emissions by 442 million metric tons by 2030
30
Smart Grid Energy Savings and Avoided CO2 Emissions
EPRI, 2008
31
Some References on Environmental Impact of Smart Grid
• EPRI. “Environmental Assessment of Plug-In Hybrid EVs,” Palo Alto, CA, 2007
• EPRI. “The Green Grid: Energy Savings and Carbon Emissions Reductions Enabled by a Smart Grid,” Palo Alto, CA, June 2008
• PNNL. “The Smart Grid: An Estimation of the Energy and CO2
Benefits,” January 2010
• NETL, “Environmental Impacts of Smart Grid”, DOE/NETL-2010/1428, January 10, 2011
32
Electric Vehicles
33
Challenges of Electric Vehicle Charging• Cul-de-sac factor• Transformer overload• Mobility of load• Billing• Gas tax recovery• Carbon credits• Helpdesk support• Data security and privacy• Installation model• Messaging and education
Reference: Public Utilities Fortnightly, June 2011, Top 10 EV Challenges
34
PEVs and Emissions
Public Utilities Fortnightly, June, 2010
35
Electric Vehicle Charging• Assume all U.S. passenger vehicles excluding cars
and trucks are converted to plug-in electric vehicles• Electricity to charge 130 million PEV would be 13% of
U.S. electricity consumption (3,723 TWh)
• PNNL - Up to 84% of vehicles could convert to PHEV without additional electric infrastructure
• ORNL - By 2020, 10% PEV penetration would increase electricity by 1-2% and
– By 2030, 25% PEV penetration would increase electricity by 2-5%
Plugging In, Public Utilities Fortnightly, June 2010
36
Metrics for Best In-Class Alternative Vehicles
Vehicle TypeUrban Gasoline
VehicleChevy Cruze
Urban Electric Vehicle
Chevy VoltHonda Civic
GX
Fuel Gasoline Gasoline Battery Battery/Gasoline Natural Gas
Fuel Economy
32 MPG 40 MPG 163 MPG-e168 MPG-e
electric50 MPG gas
36 MPG-e
Urban Range 408 mi 450 mi 127 mi 450 mi 250 mi
Fuel cost per mile
$0.09/mi $0.07/mi $0.05/mi $0.019/mi $0.026/mi
SourceICF
InternationalEV Lit Review
TableICF
InternationalEV Lit Review
TableEV Lit
Review Table
37
Trip Distance vs. Average Fuel $/Mile
Trip distance vs. average fuel $/mile* for 3 vehicles
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Trip Distance (miles)
Fuel
$/m
ile
Chevy Volt (gas and electric vehicle, 340 mile range)
Chevy Cruze (all gas vehicle, 450 mile range)
Nissan Leaf (all electric vehicle, 100 mile range)
Chevy Volt switches fuel source from battery to gasoline after 40 miles
*Assumptions: $2.60/gal gasoline, $0.10/kWh
38
Trip Distance vs. Total Cost Per Mile
Trip distance vs. total $/mile* for 5 scenarios
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Trip Distance (miles)
Tota
l $/m
ile
Chevy Volt WITHOUT $7,500 federal tax credit (gas and electric vehicle, 340 mile range)
Chevy Cruze (all gas vehicle, 450 mile range) – no applicable tax credit
Nissan Leaf WITH $7,500 federal tax credit
Chevy Volt switches fuel source from battery to gasoline after 40 miles
*Assumptions: $2.60/gal gasoline, $0.10/kWh, 100,000 mile vehicle life with no major maintenance/repairsMSRP Chevy Volt: $41,000; MSRP Nissan Leaf: $32,780; MSRP Chevy Cruze: $17,000
Federal tax credit of $7,500 applicable to Volt and Leaf
Chevy Volt WITH $7,500 federal tax credit
Nissan Leaf WITHOUT $7,500 federal tax credit (all electric vehicle, 100 mile range)
39
Capital, “Fuel”, and Total Cost
Capital Cost $/mile
Average $/mile fuel expense TOTAL cost $/mile
Chevy Volt(PHEV) $0.335/mile Variable: $0.02 -
$0.048/mileVariable: $0.355 -
$0.383/mile
Nissan Leaf (PEV) $0.252/mile $0.012/mile $0.264/mile
Chevy Cruze
(gasoline)$0.17/mile $0.065/mile $0.235/mile
40
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Smart Grid Activities
41
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act • Smart Grid Investment Grants (99 projects)
– $3.4 billion Federal; $4.7 billion private sector– 877 PMUs covering almost 100% of transmission– 200,000 smart transformers– 700 automated substations– 40 million smart meters– 1 million in-home displays
• Smart Grid Demonstration Projects (32 projects)– $620 million Federal; $1 billion private sector– 16 storage projects– 16 regional demonstrations
Current Smart Grid Activities
42
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
• Additional ARRA Smart Grid Activities– Interoperability Framework by NIST ($10M)– Transmission Analysis and Planning ($80M)– State Electricity Regulator Assistance ($50M)– State Planning for Smart Grid Resiliency ($55M)– Workforce Development ($100M)
• DOE Renewable & Distributed Systems Integration (9) • EPRI Smart Grid Demonstrations (12 projects)
• Smart Grid System Report to Congress– http://www.smartgrid.gov/resources
Current Smart Grid Activities (continued)
43
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Metrics
44
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
44 44
Smart Grid Metrics
Reliability• Outage duration and frequency, momentary disruption, power qualitySecurity• Ratio of distributed generation to total generationEconomics• Electricity prices & bills, transmission congestion costs, cost of outagesEfficient• T&D electrical losses, peak-to-average load ratioEnvironmentally Friendly• Ratio of renewable generation to total generation, emissions per kwhSafety• Injuries and deaths to workers and public
Field Data Metrics Benefits Value
45
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Benefits Analysis Framework
Benefit CategoryBenefit
Sub-categoryBenefit
Economic
Improved Asset Utilization
Optimized Generator Operation (utility/ratepayer)Deferred Generation Capacity Investments (utility/ratepayer)Reduced Ancillary Service Cost (utility/ratepayer)Reduced Congestion Cost (utility/ratepayer)
T&D Capital SavingsDeferred Transmission Capacity Investments (utility/ratepayer)Deferred Distribution Capacity Investments (utility/ratepayer)Reduced Equipment Failures (utility/ratepayer)
T&D O&M SavingsReduced Distribution Equipment Maintenance Cost (utility/ratepayer)Reduced Distribution Operations Cost (utility/ratepayer)Reduced Meter Reading Cost (utility/ratepayer)
Theft Reduction Reduced Electricity Theft (utility/ratepayer)
Energy Efficiency Reduced Electricity Losses (utility/ratepayer)
Electricity Cost Savings
Reduced Electricity Cost (consumer)
Reliability
Power InterruptionsReduced Sustained Outages (consumer)Reduced Major Outages (consumer)Reduced Restoration Cost (utility/ratepayer)
Power QualityReduced Momentary Outages (consumer)Reduced Sags and Swells (consumer)
Environmental Air EmissionsReduced Carbon Dioxide Emissions (society)Reduced SOX, NOX, and PM-10 Emissions (society)
Security Energy SecurityReduced Oil Usage (society)Reduced Wide-scale Blackouts (society)
. *Methodological Approach for Estimating the Benefits and Costs of Smart Grid Demonstration Projects, EPRI, January 2010.
46
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Who are the Beneficiaries?
• Utilities (What’s in it for my shareholders?)• Consumers (What’s in it for me?)• Society (What’s in it for us?)
46
We get what we reward!
47
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
DOE has supported development of a computational tool
Smart Grid Computational
Tool
Inputs Outputs
Assets, Functions, and Mechanisms
Impact Metric Results
Estimates and assumptions
Examples
AMI/Smart Meters, Automated Feeder and Line Switching
Annual Generation Costs, Number of Tamper Detections
Cost Parameters and Escalation
Factors
Discount Rate, Total Capital Cost, Inflation Rate,
Population Growth
Value of Service, Price of Capacity at Peak, Value of CO2
Sensitivity FactorsHigh and Low case
Value of CO2
Monetary Value of up
to 22 Benefits
NPV Analysis of
Project
Sensitivity Analysis of
Project
Analytics
48
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Observational Results• Utility workers (management, planners, designers, O&M)
Job impact, complexity, troubleshooting, business model
• Customers (residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural) Cost, comfort, convenience, involvement, understanding
• Regulators (Federal, state, and local) Used and useful, cost recovery, customer preferences
• Investors (IOU, municipalities, coops, …) Business case, risk
• Product and service providers Competition and market
49
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Smart Grid Organizations
50
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Some of the Smart Grid Working Groups
• NERC Smart Grid Task Force
• Federal Smart Grid Task Force
• Electricity Advisory Board
• GridWise Alliance
• Smart Grid Policy Center
• FERC NARUC Smart Grid Committee
• GridWise Architecture Council
• EPRI Smart Grid Advisory Group
• Smart Grid Interoperability Panel
51
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Smart Grid Maturity Model
52
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
What is the Smart Grid Maturity Model?
• SGMM is a • MANAGEMENT TOOL
• that provides a
COMMON FRAMEWORK for defining key elements of
SMART GRID TRANSFORMATION and helps utilities develop a
PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH and track their progress.
53
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
How is the SGMM Used?• SGMM is used to help organizations:
– Identify where they are on the smart grid landscape
– Develop a shared smart grid vision and roadmap
– Communicate using a common language
– Prioritize options and support decision making
– Compare to themselves and the community
– Measure their progress
– Prepare for and facilitate change
54
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
The model at a glance
6 Maturity Levels: Defined sets of characteristics and outcomes
8 Domains: Logical groupings of smart grid related capabilities and characteristics
175 Characteristics: Features you would expect to see at each stage of the smart grid journey
55
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Breaking new ground; industry-leading innovation
Optimizing smart grid to benefit entire organization; may reach beyond organization; increased automation
Investing based on clear strategy, implementing first projects to enable smart grid (may be compartmentalized)
Taking the first steps, exploring options, conducting experiments, developing smart grid vision
Default level (status quo)
Integrating smart grid deployments across the organization, realizing measurably improved performance
The Smart Grid Maturity Model – levels
Level Description
PIONEERING
OPTIMIZING
INTEGRATING
ENABLING
INITIATING
DEFAULT
56
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Eight SGMM domainsStrategy, Mgmt & Regulatory
SM
R
Vision, planning, decision making, investment process
Organization and Structure
OS
Culture, structure, training, internal communications, knowledge mgmt
Grid Operations
GO Grid reliability, security, safety,
observability, control
Work & Asset Management
WA
M
Mobile workforce, asset tracking & maintenance, GIS
Technology
TE
CH
IT architecture, standards, infrastructure, integration, tools
Customer
CU
ST
Customer role in energy use, cost, & source, advanced services
Value Chain Integration
VC
I
Demand & supply management, leveraging market opportunities
Societal & EnvironmentalS
E Conservation, sustainability, impact on environment
57
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Strategy, Management & Regulatory
Organization & Structure
Grid Operations
Work & Asset Management Technology Customer Value Chain
IntegrationSocietal & Environmental
Results
0
1
2
4
2
0 0 0
3
2
4 4
3 3
2 2
This is where we aspire to be in X years
NOTE: There is no “correct” target profile implied in the model; the optimal profile will vary by utility.
This is where we are today
58
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Some Barriers and Challenges
59
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Change Management
A significant change management effort is needed:• Why do we need to change?
• What is the vision?
• Who’s in charge?
• What is the value proposition?
• Consumer education, alignment, and motivation is critical• Metrics needed for accountability and to monitor progress• Active leadership by stakeholder groups needed
59
Move at the “Speed of Value”
60
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Technical Challenges
• Interoperability and scalability• Large number of consumers actively involved• Decentralized operations with 2-way power flow• Getting the communications right• “Future proofing” the technologies• Cyber Security• Conversion of data to information to action• Market driven
60
Where will we find the skilled resources to solve these?
61
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
Regulatory Challenges
• Time-based rates• Clear cost recovery policies• Policy changes that remove disincentives to utilities• Societal benefits included in business case• Increased utility commission workload• Consistency among state utility commissions• Potential cost of “carbon management”• Future proofing vs. stranded assets• Consumer privacy concerns• Least cost• Used and useful• New operating and market models
61
62
WV Military Affairs / Public Safety , November 20, 2008
ReferencesSmart Grid Implementation Strategy
www.netl.doe.gov/smartgrid/index.html
Federal Smart Grid Website
www.smartgrid.gov
Smart Grid Clearinghouse
www.sgiclearinghouse.org/