Competitive Path Assessment for MRTU Competitive Path Assessment for - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

California Independent System Operator Corporation

Competitive Path Assessment for MRTU Competitive Path Assessment for MRTU Preliminary Results for Spring and Summer Preliminary Results for Spring and Summer Seasons Seasons

Richard Wu Richard Wu Department of Mark Department of Market Monitoring et Monitoring California In California Independent System Oper dependent System Operator ator October 24, 2007

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

2

Meeting Agenda Meeting Agenda

• Overview

Overview

• The Feasibility Index Approach

The Feasibility Index Approach

• The Simulation Model

The Simulation Model

• Candidate Path Selection

Candidate Path Selection

• Supporting Data

Supporting Data

• Scenarios and Supplier Combinations

Scenarios and Supplier Combinations

• Preliminary Results and Discussion.

Preliminary Results and Discussion.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

3

Overview of CPA Overview of CPA

• Use a three piv

Use a three pivotal supplier fr

• tal supplier framework to as

amework to assess sess competitiveness. competitiveness.

– Test whether transmission constraints are competitive when up to three potentially pivotal suppliers’ capacity is removed from the market.

• Process for com

Process for competitive path de petitive path determination: termination: – Existing branch groups are ‘grandfathered’ competitive. – Non-candidate, non ‘grandfathered’ paths are not competitive by default. – Candidate paths tested for competitiveness using FI method. – Test across four seasons, load & hydro scenarios, potentially pivotal supplier combinations. – Physical infeasibility (FI < 0 on candidate path) in any hour results in failure of competitive test for candidate path.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

4

Review of General Methodology Review of General Methodology The Feasibility Index Approach The Feasibility Index Approach

• Feasibility Index (FI) –

Feasibility Index (FI) – tests whether load can be tests whether load can be served without flow violations served without flow violations on candidate paths

• n candidate paths

when supplier’s capacity is withheld when supplier’s capacity is withheld.

– Soft constraints on all non-grandfathered paths. – Run simulation to meet CAISO load with 1, 2, or 3 potentially pivotal suppliers’ capacity removed. – Measure Feasibility Index of candidate paths: FI = (Path Limit – Path Flow) / Path Limit. – FI < 0 means congestion could not be relieved on that path when capacity was withheld => path is not competitive.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

5

Review of General Methodology Review of General Methodology Simulation Setup Simulation Setup

• Simulation Features

Simulation Features: – 24 hour Unit Commitment and Economic Dispatch based on DC-OPF algorithm – Co-optimization of energy market and upward AS market – Load curtailment with a penalty price of $1MM/MWh. – Transmission constraints violated with penalty price of $50k/MW. – No transmission contingency or unit outages considered.

• Simulation Scenario

Simulation Scenarios: s: – Various system conditions for one day in each season – High, Medium, and Low load & hydro scenarios for each day – 44 withdrawn supplier combinations considered

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

6

Candidate Path Se Candidate Path Selection lection

• Set of candidate paths determined by the historical frequency of

Set of candidate paths determined by the historical frequency of real-time mitigation of congestion on a constraint. real-time mitigation of congestion on a constraint.

• If real-time congestion is mitigated in more that 500 hours in the

If real-time congestion is mitigated in more that 500 hours in the prior 12 months, constraint is a “candidate” prior 12 months, constraint is a “candidate” path. path.

• Hours of congestion mitigation counted using real time out-of-

Hours of congestion mitigation counted using real time out-of- sequence dispatches and real time RMR dispatches. sequence dispatches and real time RMR dispatches.

• Data used in calculation were updated to reflect more recent

Data used in calculation were updated to reflect more recent system conditions: July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. system conditions: July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007.

• These data, and the list of candidate paths, will be updated prior

These data, and the list of candidate paths, will be updated prior to the final release of results. to the final release of results.

• Two groups of candidate paths were identified

Two groups of candidate paths were identified

– 24 “aggregated” candidate paths that are composed of multiple transmission segments based on nomograms. – 84 “single” candidate paths that are composed of single transmission segments. – See white paper at http://www.caiso.com/docs/2005/07/01/200507011120583480.html for full list.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

7

Aggregated Can Aggregated Candidate Paths didate Paths

Operating Operating Procedure Procedure Zone Zone Constraint Constraint Maximim Mitigation aximim Mitigation Hours for Qualification Hours for Qualification T-126 NP26 Monta Vista - Jefferson 1,631 T-126 NP26 Ravenswood to San Mateo 1,631 T-133 NP26 Contra Costa 230kV Import 570 T-133 NP26 Moss Landing to Metcalf 570 T-133 NP26 Pittsburg (XFMR) 562 T-133 NP26 Pittsburg to San Mateo E. Shore 562 T-133 NP26 Ravenswood Cutplane 570 T-133 NP26 Tesla Banks 4 & 6 570 T-133 NP26 Tesla to Delta Switchyard 588 T-133 NP26 Tesla to Pittsburg 563 T-133 NP26 Vaca Bank & Tesla Bank 6 570 T-138 NP26 Humboldt Constraint and Banks 7,611 T-132 SP26 ElCentro 230/161 kV Bank 2,599 T-132 SP26 Imperial Valley Bank 2,599 T-132 SP26 Miguel 500/230 kV Banks 2,599 T-132 SP26 Miguel Max Import Constraint 2,599 T-132 SP26 San Diego Import (LNXFMR) 2,599 T-132 SP26 SDG&E CFE Import 2,599 T-132 SP26 Victorville-Lugo (HA-NG) 2,599 T-137 SP26 Serrano Bank 807 T-144 SP26 South of Lugo 1,253 T-159 SP26 Vincent Bank 1,077

• See white paper

See white paper for lis for list of lines t of lines associated w associated with associated aggre ith associated aggregated gated candidate paths and candidate paths and list of list of individual l individual lines that ines that are candidates are candidates and are not and are not associated w associated with aggregated candida ith aggregated candidate paths. te paths.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

8

Load and Hydro Sce Load and Hydro Scenario Selection nario Selection

• Three Scenarios: high / medium /

Three Scenarios: high / medium / low low

– Load Scenarios: using 2006 as the base year, choose representative load days on cumulative load duration curve – Hydro Scenarios: choose the 95th percentile day from seasonal hydro production duration curves from 2002- 2006 – Dates identified for Load and Hydro scenarios in Release 2 are identical to those identified for Release 1. – Data will be updated prior to final release of CPA prior to MRTU go-live to reflect 2007 data.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

9

Withheld Supplier Combinations Withheld Supplier Combinations

• Single Pivotal

Single Pivotal Suppler Withheld Suppler Withheld

– Identify SCs who are net sellers w/ more than 1000 MW of installed capacity in CAISO control area: 8 identified.

• Two and Three Piv

Two and Three Pivotal Suppliers Wi

• tal Suppliers Withheld

thheld

– Identify top 3 SCs in NP26 and top 3 SC’s in SP26 in terms of installed capacity. – All combinations of any two or three of these 6 SC’s were used in simulation.

• Number of Simulat

Number of Simulations Run ions Run

– Supplier combinations – 44 (incl. no suppliers withheld). – Load scenarios – 3. – Hydro scenarios – 3. – Seasons – 4. – Total number of simulations: 44 x 3 x 3 x 4 = 1,584 – Total number of hours simulated: 1,584 x 24 = 38,016

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

10

Supplier Portfolios by Zone Supplier Portfolios by Zone

• Top 3 Suppliers have 11,505 MW of capacity

Top 3 Suppliers have 11,505 MW of capacity

• Top 3 Suppliers in NP26 have 7,714 MW of capacity

Top 3 Suppliers in NP26 have 7,714 MW of capacity

• Top 3 Suppliers in SP

Top 3 Suppliers in SP26 have 8,397 MW of capacity 26 have 8,397 MW of capacity

Supplier CAISO Zone Installed Capacity (MW) Percent of Zonal Capacity S1 NP26 4,182 15% SP26 751 3% S2 NP26 114 0% SP26 3,876 15% S3 SP26 2,582 10% S4 NP26 600 2% SP26 1,939 8% S5 NP26 2,347 9% S6 NP26 1,185 4% SP26 708 3% S7 SP26 1,148 5% S8 NP26 1,036 4%

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

11

Supporting Data Supporting Data

• Net

Network Topo work Topology: logy: CRR FNM CRR FNM – Incorporated the CRR FNM model DB18 subversion B (August 2007). – The model reflects the latest updates on network topology, constraint/interface definition and limits, Load distribution factor, etc.

• Supply

Supply: Imports a : Imports and Expo nd Exports rts – Tie points were mapped to new FNM. – Using new southern PTO network to model imports/exports from southwest. – Two part bids same as in Release 1: $0 for aggregate HA schedule and remaining 9 segments use quantity weighted average prices from historical imbalance market.

• Supply

Supply: Gas Fired : Gas Fired Resourc Resources es – Updated generator resources lists and operation characteristics. – gas price updated from July 2006 to June 2007. – Marginal cost offers based on unit heatrates.

• Supply

Supply: Hyd : Hydroelectric Resou roelectric Resources rces – Updated generator resources lists and operation characteristics. – Two segment bids - historical HA schedule bid at $0/MWh and remaining output based

• n weighted average bid price from historical imbalance bids from selected hydro

scenario days.

• Supply

Supply: Other (QF : Other (QF, Cogen , Cogen, Biomas, , Biomas, Nuclear) Nuclear) – Constrained on at historical metered output and $0 price (from identified load scenario days)

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

12

Supporting Data Supporting Data

• Demand

Demand

– Zonal hourly energy demand from selected load scenario days – Load distribution factors from CRR FNM. – System and SP26 Operating Reserve requirements are 7% of load. – Regulation Up requirement is 400 MW.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

13

Results and Disc Results and Discussion ussion

• Competitive Path Designation Criteria

Competitive Path Designation Criteria

– For each simulation run (season/hydro/load/supplier withholding scenario), the FI is calculated for each candidate path for each simulated hour. – If supply cannot meet load in an hour, the FIs for all candidate paths within the zone where load was curtailed are NOT set to an artificial negative value – If the FI for a candidate path is negative in any hour, that candidate path is non-competitive for that season.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

14

Results – Results – Winter Simulations Winter Simulations

• 2 of 24 aggregated candidate paths failed the competitiveness test:

2 of 24 aggregated candidate paths failed the competitiveness test: all in NP26. all in NP26.

• No single candidate paths failed the test.

No single candidate paths failed the test.

• No load is curtailed.

No load is curtailed.

Candidate Path Candidate Path Minimum inimum FI FI Hours w/ Hours w/ FI < 0 FI < 0 Percent of Percent of Hours w/ FI < Hours w/ FI < NP26 NP26 Tesla to Pittsburg

• 0.10

115 1.2% Vaca Bank & Tesla Bank 6 0.00 1 0.0%

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

15

Results – Results – Spring Simulations Spring Simulations

• 13 of 24 aggrega

13 of 24 aggregated candidate pa ted candidate paths failed ths failed the the competitiveness competitiveness test: 1 i test: 1 in SP26 and 12 in NP26. n SP26 and 12 in NP26.

• One of 84 si

One of 84 single candidate paths f ngle candidate paths failed the test ailed the test.

• Six cases

Six cases with drop load: Lo with drop load: Low Hydro High Hydro High Load with three o Load with three of f the larger suppl the larger suppliers withd iers withdrawn. rawn.

Candidate Path Candidate Path Minimu Minimum m FI FI Hours w/ Hours w/ FI < 0 FI < 0 Percent of Percent of Hours w/ FI < Hours w/ FI < NP26 NP26 Contra Costa 230kV Import

• 0.60

474 5.0% Humboldt Bank

• 0.03

38 0.4% Monta Vista - Jefferson

• 0.38

441 4.6% Moss Landing to Metcalf

• 1.16

80 0.8% PITSBRG_XFMRBG

• 0.27

543 5.7% Ravenswood Cutplane

• 0.05

37 0.4% Ravenswood to San Mateo

• 0.22

427 4.5% Tesla Banks 4 & 6

• 0.26

146 1.5% Tesla Banks 6 & 4

• 0.12

82 0.9% Tesla to Delta Switchyard

• 0.16

107 1.1% Tesla to Pittsburg

• 0.68

603 6.3% Vaca Bank & Tesla Bank 6

• 0.41

217 2.3% SP26 SP26 Imperial Valley Bank

• 0.03

6 0.1% Single Candidate Pa Single Candidate Path th Jefferson - Martin 230kV Cable

• 0.11

28 0.3%

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

16

Results – Results – Summer Simulations Summer Simulations

• 14 of 24 aggregated candidate paths failed the competitiv

14 of 24 aggregated candidate paths failed the competitiveness test: eness test: 4 in SP26 and 10 in NP26. 4 in SP26 and 10 in NP26.

• One of 84 single candidate paths failed the test.

One of 84 single candidate paths failed the test.

• Load is curtailed in high load scenarios across 19 different cases, 18

Load is curtailed in high load scenarios across 19 different cases, 18

• f which have three supplier withdrawn from the market.
• f which have three supplier withdrawn from the market.

Candidate Path Candidate Path Minimu Minimum m FI FI Hours w/ Hours w/ FI < 0 FI < 0 Percent of Percent of Hours w/ FI < Hours w/ FI < NP26 NP26 Contra Costa 230kV Import

• 0.44

504 5.3% Monta Vista - Jefferson

• 0.16

120 1.3% Moss Landing to Metcalf

• 0.99

159 1.7% PITSBRG_XFMRBG

• 0.18

328 3.5% Ravenswood to San Mateo

• 0.04

38 0.4% Tesla Banks 4 & 6

• 0.13

97 1.0% Tesla Banks 6 & 4

• 0.01

3 0.0% Tesla to Delta Switchyard

• 0.02

5 0.1% Tesla to Pittsburg

• 0.52

625 6.6% Vaca Bank & Tesla Bank 6

• 0.28

281 3.0% SP26 SP26 MIGUEL_MAXIMP_LNXFMRBG

• 0.17

27 0.3% SDGEIMP_LNXFMRBG

• 0.31

38 0.4% SDGE_CFEIMP_BG

• 0.27

30 0.3% Imperial Valley Bank

• 0.07

9 0.1% Single Candidate Pa Single Candidate Path th Encina - Penasquitos 138 kV 0.00 2 0.0%

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

17

Results – Results – Fall Simulations Fall Simulations

• 3 of 24 aggregated candidate paths failed the competitiveness test:

3 of 24 aggregated candidate paths failed the competitiveness test: all in NP26. all in NP26.

• No single candidate paths failed the test.

No single candidate paths failed the test.

• No load is curtailed.

No load is curtailed.

Candidate Path Candidate Path Minimum Minimum FI FI Hours w/ Hours w/ FI < 0 FI < 0 Percent of Percent of Hours w/ FI < Hours w/ FI < NP26 NP26 Contra Costa 230kV Import

• 0.16

296 3.1% Tesla to Pittsburg

• 0.17

523 5.5% Vaca Bank & Tesla Bank 6

• 0.02

2 0.0%

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

18

Results – Results – All Seasons All Seasons

• Aggregate Constraints:

Aggregate Constraints:

– 3 of 15 aggregated candidate paths in NP26 passed. – 5 of 9 aggregated candidate paths in SP26 passed. – All lines that comprise aggregate paths also pass.

• 82 of 84 single candidate paths passed the test.

82 of 84 single candidate paths passed the test.

Candidate Path Candidate Path Fall Fall Spri Spring ng Summer Summer Winter Winter All ll Candidate Path Candidate Path Fall Fall Spring Spring Summer Summer Winter Winter All ll NP26 NP26 SP26 SP26 Contra Costa 230kV Import Fail Fail Fail Fail Imperial Valley Bank Fail Fail Fail Humboldt Bank Fail Fail MIGUEL_MAXIMP_LNXFMRBG Fail Fail Monta Vista - Jefferson Fail Fail Fail SDGEIMP_LNXFMRBG Fail Fail Moss Landing to Metcalf Fail Fail Fail SDGE_CFEIMP_BG Fail Fail PITSBRG_XFMRBG Fail Fail Fail ElCentro 230 ElCentro 230/161 kV Ban /161 kV Bank Pa Pass ss Ravenswood Cutplane Fail Fail Mig Miguel 500/ uel 500/230 kV Ban 230 kV Banks ks Pa Pass ss Ravenswood to San Mateo Fail Fail Fail SOUTHLUGO_BG SOUTHLUGO_BG Pa Pass ss Tesla Banks 4 & 6 Fail Fail Fail Serra Serrano Bank no Bank Pa Pass ss Tesla Banks 6 & 4 Fail Fail Fail Victorville-Lugo (HA Victorville-Lugo (HA-NG)

• NG)

Pa Pass ss Tesla to Delta Switchyard Fail Fail Fail Tesla to Pittsburg Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Vaca Bank & Tesla Bank 6 Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Pittsburg to San Mateo_E. Shore Pittsburg to San Mateo_E. Shore Pass Pass Single Candidate P Single Candidate Path ath HUMB HUMBOLDT_BG OLDT_BG Pass Pass Jefferson - Martin 230kV Cable Fail Fail Vincent Bank Vincent Bank Pass Encina - Penasquitos 138 kV Fail Fail

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

19

Results – Results – Negative FI Distributio Negative FI Distribution

• Negative FI distributions by Hydro and

Negative FI distributions by Hydro and Load Load Scenarios in Summer and Spring Scenarios in Summer and Spring

High Medium Low High 911 53 129 109 1093 Medium 881 39 114 103 1034 Low 938 39 125 110 1102 273 2730 131 131 368 368 322 3229 Hydro Scenarios # of hours w/ negative FI in Summer Simulations Load Scenarios Total Total High Medium Low High 447 140 86 673 673 Medium 512 155 106 773 773 Low 561 167 92 820 820 1520 1520 462 462 284 284 2266 2266 Total Total # of hours w/ negative FI in Summer Simulations Load Scenarios Hydro Scenarios

California Independent System Operator Corporation

CAISO DMM/RW-JDMc 10/24/2007

20

Next Steps and Di Next Steps and Discussion scussion

• Next Steps

Next Steps

– Update resource ownership / control with tolling agreement (surveys already distributed to suppliers). – Update candidate path list. – Future Releases:

• Third round of preliminary results by December 15 with

conference call in January.

• Final path designations (for MRTU go-live) completed by

February 28.

• Discussion

Discussion

– Written Comments on Preliminary results: Send to Jeff McDonald (JMcDonald@caiso.com) by COB 10/31.

California Independent System Operator Corporation

Thanks! Question Thanks! Questions? s?