pdwg 2019-20 work plan v2.2 2019-20 work... · web viewwecc receives data used in its analyses from...

PCM Data Work Group (PDWG) 2019-20 Work PlanPDWG

Version 2.1—September 12, 2019

Revision History

Date Version Author Comments8/4/2019 1.0 J. Austin

8/9/2019 Jan Strack

8/9/2019 Yi Zhang

8/27/2019 2.0 PDWG

9/12/2019 2.1 Byron Woertz Conform to WECC template; miscellaneous comments

Table of ContentsRevision History......................................................................................................2Purpose...................................................................................................................5Overview..................................................................................................................6Round Trip..............................................................................................................8Primary Responsibilities of the PDWG...................................................................9Scope of Work.......................................................................................................10

Transmission...................................................................................................................11Transmission Wheeling Rates.........................................................................................12Coincident Energy Shapes Year.....................................................................................14Hydro Data..................................................................................................................... 14WECC L&R – Loads (March 30, 2018)...........................................................................15Energy Efficiency............................................................................................................16Demand Resources.........................................................................................................16Distributed Generation...................................................................................................17Thermal Plant Data.........................................................................................................17

Startup Costs...............................................................................................................17Up\ Down Time............................................................................................................18Plant Ramp Rate..........................................................................................................18Plant Outage Rates......................................................................................................19Plant Heat Rate Curves...............................................................................................21Pmin/Pmax...................................................................................................................21Station Service............................................................................................................22

Fuel Prices......................................................................................................................22Natural Gas................................................................................................................. 23Coal ......................................................................................................................... 23Uranium and other fuels.............................................................................................24

Deflator \ Inflator Rates..................................................................................................24Wind and Solar Shapes...................................................................................................24Emission Prices (CO2).....................................................................................................25Other Prices....................................................................................................................26Validation of the ADS 2030 PCM Case Data and Parameters........................................27

PDWG 2019-20 Work Plan

4


PurposeConsistent with the WECC Board of Directors approval of the Anchor Data Set (ADS) proposal in 2016, the ADS was established to use consistent processes and protocols for gathering and utilizing planning data. This data, including reviews for consistency and completeness, is used to generate production costs, power flows, and dynamic models with a common representation of the loads, resources, and transmission across the Western Interconnection 10 years in the future. Ultimately, the ADS is defined as a single, coordinated data source to be developed from planning data with added topology covering Western Regional Planning Groups’ (RPGs’) Transmission System Plans (TSPs).

Using consistent data for building the power flow (PF) and production cost model (PCM) utilizes only the fixed data depicting the power system, including network generators, other system elements and the transmission topology, the static view modeled in the PF representing a single hour dispatch. Although, the PCM starts with the PF for the network definition, it also simulates economic hourly dispatch, typically for a year. To create the hourly dispatch for the Western Interconnection, hourly energy data and variable O&M costs are needed to enable the Security Constraint Economic Dispatch. However, such data is deemed confidential and been referenced as “other data”.

1. The Anchor Data Set (ADS) is designed to promote consistency among the data used in reliability assessment models (production cost model and power flow/stability models). This aspect of the data covers network topology, classified by the Federal Energy Regularity Commission (FERC) as Critical Electrical Infrastructure information (CEII), covering the critical electric infrastructure.

2. The ADS “other data” posted by WECC in public domain is developed by the Production Cost Model Data Work Group (PDWG). PDWG develops proxy data, using data from public sources, that replaces unattainable, sensitive and confidential data, covering the following:a. Dispatchable/must-run unit designationsb. Minimum and maximum output levels for dispatchable unitsc. heat rate curves, d. plant ramp rates (up and down)e. plant start-up times and minimum down timesf. startup costsg. variable O&M costsh. opportunity costs (if any)i. Forced Outage Rates (FOR)j. planned maintenance periodsk. forecast fuel pricesl. hourly shapes for energy efficiency (EE) programsm. distributed generation (DG) and hourly output profiles for non-dispatchable DGn. wind resources and hourly output profileso. solar resources and hourly output profiles

5


p. run-of-river hydro resources and hourly production profiles,q. storage hydro resourcesr. pumped storage resourcess. battery storage resourcest. other data.

Entities that have some of this data may consider the data to be commercially sensitive or otherwise confidential.

This Work Plan is intended to provide more details on how and what will be covered by PDWG for building the 2030 ADS PCM dataset.

OverviewPDWG is one of the three organized working groups of the Data Subcommittee (DS), under the Reliability Assessment Committee (RAC). PDWG is responsible for:

1. the development of PCM data not otherwise originating with the power flow data development process; and

2. verification of PCM data.

This data is intended to be used to support reliability assessments, the Anchor Data Set (ADS) and other production cost models as needed by WECC stakeholders.

PDWG was instrumental in developing the first version of the 2028 ADS PCM dataset; the final version was posted by WECC on June 30, 2019.

Starting from the WECC 2028HS1 PF case, PDWG developed other data necessarily to simulate economic hourly dispatch of generation within the western interconnection. This other data is developed from publicly available sources. This information was collected by WECC, WECC committees and task forces, as well as by stakeholders, and members of PDWG. PDWG is taking on these responsibilities under the auspices of the RAC DS.

The PCM database describes information used to model the economic dispatch of an interconnected Bulk Electric System, such as the Western Interconnection. Studies based on the PCM database use generator locations, load allocation across buses, transmission topology information, among other things, from the interconnected network power flow case. This modeling information describes how the hardware in the system behaves given certain system conditions.

Power flow loads represent a single instant-in-time (typically, data submitters’ respective peak summer loads are aggregated to create a non-coincident summer peak load). PDWG, uses monthly peak and energy load forecasts provided in the L&R submittals to WECC, in combination with hourly load profiles from FERC 714 data, to develop 8760-hour coincident load forecasts for the different Balancing Authority Areas (BAAs) modeled in the PCM. Area loads are distributed to the bus level through the use of distribution load factors in the ADS reference power flow case. The PDWG will validate

6


the area hourly forecast to identify and address any anomalies. This is one example of how PDWG “develops” data that will be used in the PCM hourly dispatch.

A PCM simulation produces economic dispatch information. The economic dispatch is designed to serve all modeled loads through the dispatch of generation based on variable operating costs and is subject to generator operating parameters and transmission system constraints. Accordingly, the PCM must include transmission system parameters (impedances and facility ratings), load forecasts, fuel prices, and generator operating parameters.

PDWG members, with the help of stakeholders and subject matter experts, develop “proxies” for data that is unattainable, sensitive or confidential. Such data includes heat rate curves, plant ramp rates (up and down), minimum up- and down-times, start-up times, startup costs, Forced Outage Rates (FOR) and planned maintenance periods. In addition, PDWG develops forecast fuel prices, hourly shapes for energy efficiency (EE) programs, additional achievable energy efficiency (AAEE), non-dispatchable distributed generation (DG), wind resources, solar resources, run-of-river hydro resources, and other non-dispatchable resources. The RAC, with support from its subcommittees and working groups, oversees the relevant ADS processes that involve stakeholder input and creation of the ADS-related year-10 PF and PCM datasets.

The ADS is also intended to reflect Regional Planning Groups’ (RPG) Transmission Service Providers’ (TSP) requirements and applicable state and federal statutory public policy requirements such as Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), Regional Haze Programs, and Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS) and any greenhouse gases (GHGs) emission constraints. The ADS also creates a common representation of the loads, resources, and transmission topology. Two key controversies surround these data:

1. RPGs’ Transmission System Plans are not necessarily incorporated in WECC power flow cases compiled from data submitted by Data Submitters. The reason for this is that not all four RPGs operate under consistent rules; Balancing Authority Areas (BAAs) outside of CAISO may not fully coordinate their local transmission planning with their respective RPG’s regional planning.

2. Data developed for inclusion in the ADS may be transmitted to WECC via BAAs, Transmission Providers (TPs), and/or Planning Coordinators (PCs) pursuant to (but not limited to) these organizations’ unique interpretations of what is needed to satisfy the applicable NERC MOD-031 and MOD-032 reliability planning standards. Some Data Submitters believe only existing and approved resources should be included, leading to a dataset lacking all planned resources.

Planned resources may be identified to comply with state and federal statutory public policy requirements such as Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), Regional Haze Programs, Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS) and greenhouse gases (GHGs) emission constraints. Planned resources may be included for other reasons; for example, to meet applicable Resource Adequacy (RA) requirements or to minimize the overall costs of serving load,

7


The reasons some organizations choose to exclude this information are as follows:

1. Location and specific technology are not known with certainty.2. Including the planned generation could mask reliability issues that would become

apparent if the generation doesn’t develop as planned.

The reason other organizations choose to include this information is that not doing so could mask reliability issues that would become apparent if the generation does develop as planned.

Round TripThe method for uploading transmission topology, generator location data, bus-level load distributions, and other data ultimately necessary to export an hour from the ADS PCM for purposes of creating an ADS power flow/stability case, requires using the “round trip” process (integral to building the ADS). This entails developing and ensuring interoperability of the network elements between the power flow “seed case” and the starting point PCM case. The “ADS 2030” database will be initiated using the ADS 2028 Seed Cases (power flow and PCM) that (i) preserves the generator mapping/name matching in the PCM, and (ii) allows for capturing the regional planning groups’ transmission plans and generator mapping/name matching.

Since organizations (e.g., the regional planning groups) may have different study years and different forecasts, the following should be used to guide development of the datasets:

Data should be collected in modular blocks reflecting different assumptions to meet different needs;

The databases must provide an accurate representation of the existing grid; Accurate data is critical to model validation and development of model parameters; Backcast capability should be supported; and It should be easy to determine what changes to the existing grid were made to

arrive at any future view.

The production cost model simulates the system across all hours of a year. The status of equipment and settings in the PCM may be different from the imported power flow case, but the PCM must have the same topology as the power flow “seed case”.

The ADS process calls for fundamental change and closer coordination among the regional planning groups and their respective WECC Data Submitters. Major benefits to cooperative development include:

Engaging RPGs’ support for data development (e.g., resource mapping/name matching);

Receiving RPGs’ feedback on their respective systems (e.g., topology and related data, review L&R balance, imports\exports, etc.); and

Receiving RPGs’ feedback on dispatch (e.g., plant performance, path flows).

8


Primary Responsibilities of the PDWGFor data not originating from the power flow process, collect and verify the existing infrastructure information, supplemental to the SDWG collection process, for:

Generators

o Incremental additions: technology definition, working with the regional planning groups on generator mapping/name matching information

o Plant retirements; latest information from State Government Agencies, National Labs, Regions, etc.

Data necessary for hourly economic dispatch:

o Generator operating parameters, unit commitment information (e.g., Pmax, Pmin, ramp rates, startup costs, etc.)

o Transmission operating parameters - Nomogram definitions, Path Ratings

o Loads, detailed information on elements typically netted from Loads: EE, DG, Small Hydro, Pumps, Station Service loads separately modeled in PF and/or PCM, etc.

Forward-looking information on

o Fuel price assumptions

o Emissions prices to the extent such prices affect generator dispatch

o Wheeling costs

Energy data and assumptions (e.g., deciding on the coincident year for energy profiles)

o Load profiles (based on WECC member reporting, regions’ reporting)

o RPS Resources (e.g., wind and solar hourly profiles)

o DER, EE & DSM hourly profiles

Assist in the validation process of newly created ADS case studies.

Maintain and improve “round trip” capabilities between the power flow base case and PCM.

In addition to supporting development of the PCM components of the ADS, the PDWG will coordinate with other RAC committees as follows:

1. Collaborate on developing the data needed to support the Studies Subcommittee (StS’s) annual study program (e.g., develop “other than average conditions” data). PDWG will "actively coordinate with the Studies Subcommittee and Scenario Development Subcommittee to assist with the development of studies and scenarios".

9


2. Collaborate with other RAC work groups to ensure that WECC collects the data necessary to support the production cost model.

a. Develop processes to combine the data of the Interconnection-wide case created by the SDWG and the production cost data developed by PDWG, and to support development of the ADS.

b. Coordinate with other WECC Committees to develop consistent assumptions that lead to consistent data:

i. Ensure interchangeability of data between the power flow and PCM databases

ii. Ensure that there is consistent data representation in both power flow and PCM software programs.

c. Provide a forum for discussing issues related to PCM data collection.

Scope of WorkPDWG works closely with other RAC work groups in study case preparation and analysis. The Matrix below defines the scope of work for the PDWG that covers building the 2028 ADS PCM Dataset. This Matrix was presented at the ADSTF meeting held Nov 1-2, 2017 and was posted for review and comments.

10

Data Element Description Updates for 2028 ADS

Updates for 2030 ADS

Priority

Transmission 1. Topology2. Path Ratings3. Incremental

Transmission4. Nomograms

Transmission facilities used in the PCM

Transmission used the WECC 2028 HS1 PF

SDWG Start with the

WECC 2030 hs1 power flow case. Map resources consistent with resources in the one-hour PF export from 2028 ADS PCM

Add Regional Planning Groups’ (RPGs’) Transmission Plans

PDWG Validate Path

definitions & Ratings, and branch ratings in PCM

Add nomograms as necessary

High

Transmission Wheeling Rates

Wheeling Rates” cover utility tariffs, the cost of transporting power over transmission lines.The ADS regions are defined at an operational level, and

1. Applied “export wheeling charge” to every BA with the following exceptions:

2. Trading hubs are free of export

Jin - ABB, recommended previously to use a graduated schedule when the flows reach an agreed to % of total, then apply the wheel (e.g., apply a wheel

High




Priority

in most cases those definitions correspond to the balancing authority (“BA”) boundaries. At the balancing authority level, some of the distributed load centers or Load Serving Entities (LSE) are consolidated to model the operational aspects associated with a BA, such as wheeling tariffs and reserve requirements. Wheeling rates or tariff rates are associated with the cost to deliver energy over transmission.Typically wheeling rates apply to the non-firm power transfers as firm transfers are considered to be sunk costs. The objective is to update wheeling rates for the 2030 ADS PCM dataset.

wheeling charges3. Firm transmission

rights are free of pancaked charges along the way. If there is firm transmission right, wheeling charges are “exempted”.

4. No wheeling charge for remote generators; all remote generators have firm transmission rights or associated transmission.

5. “Contract paths”6. “Path-based free-

wheeling”7. If the associated

contracts are unknown, apply wheel to flows in exceedance of 90%.

rate when the flow exceed at 90% of line\path capacity.

12




Priority

Modeling full ratesWheeling rates should be used to cover non-firm transactions, whereas, previously in the TEPPC database they were applied as flat rates on all transfers resulting in double-dipping. Firm transactions are associated with rights that have sunk costs and should not be charged wheeling rates. Most WECC paths are fully committed; the non-firm piece constitutes a small percentage of total flows on the transmission, about 10%.

13




Priority

Coincident Energy Shapes Year

The 2028 ADS PCM used year 2009 for the coincident Energy Shapes (approved November 30, 2017

1. Preliminary discussions favored continuing to use year 2009 shapes

2. Less work involvedNeed to revisit latest work on Hydro-temperature; wind-temperature coloration

High

Hydro DataHydro data was developed using 2009 shapes, however, supplemented with 2008 (Jun-Aug) shapes for Core Columbia projects (approved November 30, 2017)

1. Preliminary discussions favored continuing to use year 2009

2. Less work involved3. Need to revisit

latest work on Hydro-temperature; wind-temperature coloration

High(Low for

sensitiv-ities)

WECC L&R – Loads (March 30, 2018)

Data received March 30, 20181. Loads (BAA –

forecast Monthly peak and energy) + year 2009 FERC-714 hourly shapes

2. Native Loads (conforming), medium loads, 1 in

1. Started with using the L&R loads submitted in March 2017, except for California; used the California Energy Commission (CEC)’s “preliminary” 2018-2028 forecast.

2. The 2028 ADS PCM

1. Update consistent with March 2020 L&R submittal

2. Need to wait until March, 2020 to start

High

14




Priority

2 year loads were modified to reflect the WECC L&R loads, submitted in March, 2018 to reflect the same vintage load forecast for the entire Western Interconnect

3. DS approved November 30, 2019

15




Priority

Energy EfficiencyRecent surveying of EE programs by LBNL led to the discovery that all but one LSE nets EE from their loads; IPC develops their load forecast through an econometric regression that implicitly captures some future energy efficiency program activity, but not all of it.

DS approved as described, November 30, 2017

Update consistent with March 2020 L&R submittal

High

Demand ResourcesContinue to use the latest DR values for “place holder” that were submitted for the Common Case, Summer 2017 (approved November 30, 2019)

Update consistent with March 2020 L&R submittal

High

Distributed Generation

DG is also referenced as behind the meter PV (BTM PV) – mostly large-scale photovoltaic generation that is connected behind an end-user load meter. For

Approved November 30, 2019

1. Update consistent with CEC Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR 2020) assumptions

2. [What about areas outside of California? ] Are we

High

16




Priority

California, use behind-the-load meter generation assumptions developed by the CEC in their new 2018-2028 Load forecast. For other states model programs that reflect current policies and utility plans (RPS, DG, EE, etc.)

going to hire an entity to assemble future DG impacts for states/provinces outside of California?]

17




Priority

Thermal Plant Data

Startup CostsContinued to use Intertek-APTECH estimates for plant startup costs, escalated, using the CEC deflator seriesDS approved as described, February 7, 2018

It’s been a long time since the Intertek-APTECH study…need to review potential other sources for confirmation.

High

Up\ Down TimeAdjusted APTECH engineering recommended “Outage Duration” and/or “Min Down” such that “Outage Duration” is greater than or equal to “Min Down” Coal plant outage duration was adjusted to 48 hours from 38 hours.DS approved as described, February 7, 2018

It’s been a long time since the Intertek-APTECH study…need to review potential other sources for confirmation.

High

Plant Ramp RateUpdated the ramp rates using CAISO methodology (used in

It’s been a long time since the Intertek-APTECH study…need

High

18




Priority

ISO LTPP Study) that involved using confidential bid data, however, aggregated to avoid confidentiality problems. It is assumed that units outside CAISO are consistent for similar technology units in CAISO.DS approved as described, February 7, 2018

to review potential other sources for confirmation.

19




Priority

Plant Outage RatesUsed CEMS data to calculate FOR & Maintenance Rates for coal-fired plants in the 2028 ADS PCM dataset. The CEMS method allows for using unit-specific plant FOR and Scheduled Maintenance Durations from publicly-available data.1. For coal-fired plants

use values developed by ATC, as described under “Analysis”, that have been calculated using 14 years of hourly CEMS data (2002-2015) and are now available for implementation.

2. For gas-fired plants continued using Generator Availability Data System (GADS) data

Update with GADS latest data.

High

20




Priority

3. DS approved as described, February 7, 2018

21




Priority

Plant Heat Rate Curves

Continued use of heat rate curves developed in 2016, by the CEC, using an algorithm approved by the PDWG.Used CEMS hourly data from years 2010 – 2014, scrubbed based on assumptions determined by the PDWG Task Force.DS approved as described, February 7, 2018

Consult with CEC about the need to use more recent CEMS data. There has been definite change in thermal usage since 2010 – 2014.Identify plant technology and dispatch type for all existing resources?

???

Pmin/PmaxWith consideration of “Round Trip”, the use of Pmin\Pmax values are as follows: Power flow export hour -- use values from the reference power flow casePCM – Pmin/Pmax should not exceed values in reference power flow case”DS approved as described, February 7,

Modify to line up with power flow. Coordinate w/SDWG

High

22




Priority

2018

23




Priority

Station ServiceFor Short term solution, PDWG recommended used: PCM: SS values = 0

Round-trip: export hour, use SS values from the reference power flow case. This will require post processing, using a spread sheet.

DS approved as described, February 7, 2018

Modify to line up with power flow.

High

Fuel Prices

Natural GasNatural Gas Prices – developed using the CEC annual burner tip prices and the Northwest Power Conservation Council’s (NPC) monthly shapes. Other fuel Prices – Annual Energy Outlook 2017 forecast, reviewed and discussed

Update with more current fuel data.

High

24




Priority

by PDWG on January 16, 2018”DS approved as described, February 7, 2018

25




Priority

CoalUse start fuel for coal as defined in EIA 860Coal prices – developed by the California Energy Commission (CEC) reviewed and discussed by PDWG on January 16, 2018DS approved as described, February 7, 2018


High

Uranium and other fuels

Other fuel Prices – Annual Energy Outlook 2017 forecast, reviewed and discussed by PDWG on January 16, 2018”DS approved as described, February 7, 2018


High

Deflator \ Inflator Rates

Used CEC Deflator Series IEPR 2017, based on GDP deflator series, developed using Moody Analytics dataDS approved as described, February 7, 2018

Update using the CEC latest Deflator Series

High

26




Priority

Wind and Solar Shapes

PDWG developed plant specific hourly shapes using the NREL synthetic wind data for year 2009, with the caveat of correcting wind shapes for wind profiles with CF > 50%.”DS approved as described, February 28, 2018

Continue to use shapes from year 2009.Some units do not have shapes…recalculate some wind & solar

Medium

Emission Prices (CO2)

Implemented $44.30/metric ton CO2 (2018 dollars) for California supply, in the 2028 ADS PCM dataset: 1. This is the mid-

range price for CO2, developed by the California Energy Commission for IEPR 2017, for year 2028.

2. This results in unspecified import CO2 fee to California of


High

27




Priority

$18.96/MWh, as specified in ARB

3. DS approved as described, February 28, 2018

28




Priority

Other Pricesa. “Variable O&M

price” for transmission- and distribution-connected solar PV.

b. Opportunity costs for transmission- and distribution-connected solar PV (e.g., value of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs))

c. “Variable O&M price” for wind resources.

d. Opportunity costs for wind resources (e.g., foregone Production Tax Credits (PTCs) for the subset of wind resources eligible for PTCs, RECs)5. The

Initial assumptions in the 2028 ADS PCM were the following, however modified as hydro outside of CA was cycling for because of the negative pricing below:Tier 1) -$25/MWh curtailment (GV uses dispatch cost for curtailment cost) price for grid connected renewable variable resources wind and solar.Tier 2) -$45/MWh curtailment\dispatch cost for Federal Columbia River Power System hydro projects that cannot be curtailed.Note: Behind the Meter PV is not curtailable.Variable operations and maintenance costs for wind and solar are

Revisit current assumptions in the 2028 dataset

High

29




Priority

start-up costs and start-up times for geothermal resources.

e. “Variable O&M price” for geothermal resources.

f. Opportunity costs for curtailing hydro generation

assumed to be zero.” DS approved as described, February 28, 2018

Validation of the ADS 2030 PCM Case Data and Parameters

Partner with Regions to validate

WECC receives data used in its analyses from a wide variety of sources. WECC strives to source its data from reliable entities and undertakes reasonable efforts to validate the accuracy of the data used. WECC believes the data contained herein and used in its analyses is accurate and reliable. However, WECC disclaims any and all representations, guarantees, warranties, and liability for the information contained herein and any use thereof. Persons who use and rely on the information contained herein do so at their own risk.

30


31

pdwg 2019-20 work plan v2.2 2019-20 work... · web viewwecc receives data used in its analyses from...

Documents