B.K. Ketineni and Elena Melloni Purpose of the study To analyze - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Significant Electrification Assessment

January 15, 2020

B.K. Ketineni and Elena Melloni

2

Purpose of the study

To analyze potential risks to the Western Interconnection’s reliability as electric load in the West transforms and grows through 2028.

3

Assumptions

▪ 2028 ADS PCM Phase 2 V2.0

• CAISO 50% RPS resources

▪ No additional resources were added ▪ Dispatchable load is modeled as behind-the-meter hourly generators (DER-EV)

NREL provided the electrification forecast data by state in the U.S. Below is a sample of load data: There was no electrification forecast data for provinces in Canada, so it was assumed that British Columbia had the same load growth rate as Washington state and Alberta had the same rate as Montana.

4

Assumptions

Hour Area 1 2028 Static Load (MW) Area 1 2028 Flexible Load (MW) Area 1 2028 Total Load (MW) 1 11052.57 88.11 11140.68 2 10835.82 78.96 10914.78 3 10758.95 61.69 10820.64 4 …

5

Electrification Forecast

Slow Technology Advancement Moderate Technology Advancement Rapid Technology Advancement Reference Customer Adoption Reference Adoption, Slow Technology Advancement Reference Adoption, Moderate Technology Advancement Reference Adoption, Rapid Technology Advancement Medium Customer Adoption Medium Adoption, Slow Technology Advancement Medium Adoption, Moderate Technology Advancement Medium Adoption, Rapid Technology Advancement High Customer Adoption High Adoption, Slow Technology Advancement High Adoption, Moderate Technology Advancement High Adoption, Rapid Technology Advancement

▪ System energy increased by 20%, when compared to the original ADS PCM case. ▪ System peak increased by 8%, when compared to the original ADS PCM case.

6

Electrification Forecast

200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 High Slow Scenario ADS Ph2 v2.2

Energy (GWh) Scenarios

Total System Energy (GWh)

23500 24000 24500 25000 25500 26000 26500 27000 27500 High Slow Scenario ADS Ph2 v2.2

Peak Energy (MW) Scenarios

Total System Peak (MW)

7

Resource Adequacy Results : Unserved Energy

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Unserved Energy (GWh) Sensitivity Cases

Total Unserved Energy (GWh)

8

Unserved Energy

100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000

Conventional Hydro Energy Storage Steam - Coal Steam - Other Nuclear Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine IC Other DG/DR/EE Biomass RPS Geothermal Small Hydro RPS Solar Wind

Annual Generation (GWh) Generation Portfolio

Annual Generation by Category (GWh)

2028 HighSlow-With 0$ DER-EV 2028 HighSlow-With 200$ DER-EV

9

Inter-Regional Transfers

Original ADS PCM Case Adjusted Electrification Scenario Case

10

Path Utilization

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Percent of the Year Transmission Paths

Path Utilization for High Customer Adoption and Slow Technology Advancement Scenario

U75 U90 U99

11

System Spillage

17929 17373 16366 195 201 2057 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 HighSlow - 200$ DER EV HighSlow - 100$-DER EV HighSlow - 75.09$ DER EV High Slow- 0$ -DER EV High slow_no DER EV Ph2ADS v2.0

Total System Spillage (GWh)

▪ PCM – high customer adoption, slow technology advancement had the highest load ▪ Peak hour was exported

• August 13, 2028 at 6pm PST

▪ Load and generation updated in the 28HS1 power flow case to match exported values

12

Stability Analysis

▪ Total load: 189.2 GW ▪ Original 28HS1 PF 185.4 GW. ▪ Increased load by almost 3.8 GW. ▪ 1 overload on a major path

• Path 45 – same was seen in PCM results

▪ 18 lines over 100kV overloaded – 5 in original 28HS1 ▪ Low voltage issues in 1 area in the north

13

Stability Results

▪ Composite Load Models

• Base scenario generated at 6pm
• Commercial Energy Efficiency (CEE) scenario with

increased power electronic drives and loads in commercial buildings

• 20% of residential EVs added to CEE scenario

14

Dynamics

(a) Base (b) Commercial EE (c) Commercial EE + EVC

▪ 7 Standard Disturbances

• The Brownlee-Hells Canyon outage had 4.34 MW of

load tripped in the base scenario, 6.12 MW of load tripped in the CEE scenario, and 6.52 MW of load tripped in the CEE and 20% EV increase scenario

• No load was shed for any of the other disturbances in

the three scenarios.

▪ Voltage violations only occurred at either end of the PDCI during the loss of the bi-pole PDCI. ▪ Voltage violations occurred on one bus in northern California during the Midway-Diablo

• utage causing the bus to be below its limit.

15

Stability Results

16

Frequency Response Results

59.84 59.86 59.88 59.9 59.92 59.94 59.96 59.98 60 60.02 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Frequency (Hz) Time (s)

Frequency Response during the DPV outage on a 500kV bus

Original ADS Base Scenario CEE Scenario 20% EV Scenario

▪ Post-transient simulation for DPV

• All buses less than 5% deviation from initial

voltages

▪ Post-transient simulation for loss of PDCI

• All buses less than 5.2% deviation from initial

voltages

▪ Contingencies

• No major issues to report, no cascading RAS,

relay actions etc.

• Total of 5.2% unsolved contingencies

17

Stability Results

▪ 0.187% of unserved energy compared to the total load growth due to electrification. ▪ Modeling 1.62% of total load as DER-EV reduces unserved energy by 50%. ▪ 3.8 GW increase in PF load causes one major path overload, and low voltages in one area. ▪ No major instability issues after disturbances and contingencies were run.

18

Conclusions

▪ Study a winter scenario case where heat pumps will increase electrification in the north and change path flows ▪ Studying different resource portfolios ▪ Modeling DER-EV as dispatchable load.

19

Recommendations

Contact:

B.K. Ketineni bketineni@wecc.org Elena Melloni emelloni@wecc.org

20

▪ Request approval of the 2019 Significant Electrification Study Program Assessment Report

21

Approval Item

22

Load Gen Balance: ADS Case

23

Load Gen Balance: Electrification Scenario with No Dispatchable DER-EV

24

Load Gen Balance: Electrification Scenario with Dispatchable DER-EV at $ 0/MWh