Gate 3 Constraint Report Results Overview Customer Connections - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Gate 3 Constraint Report Results Overview

Customer Connections Forum 16 April 2013

Introduction

• Studies for the Gate 3 constraint

reports have been completed following the publication of a final tie-break decision by the SEM Committee.

• High-level results are available.
• There are some general trends

that have been observed in the results.

• Work is now in progress to produce

and issue the detailed Gate 3 constraint reports.

2

Assumptions

3

Scenarios

• Two scenarios covered:

– 33% uptake of Gate 3

• This is achieved by derating all Gate 3

projects to 33% of their MEC. – 100% uptake of Gate 3

• The build-out rate is the same for both

scenarios.

4

Build-out rate

• A methodology was developed in conjunction with

IWEA to take account of factors other than shallow connection leadtimes.

• The data was based on survey responses from Gate

3 developers (70% response rate)

• Methodology takes account of:

– planning permission status – location with respect to environmentally designated areas – project size – shallow connection leadtime

• Pre-Gate 3 is assumed to connect as per their

target connection dates

5

1934 2112 2116 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 45 333 466 1369 1662 3385 3545 3999 553 607 761 839 961 1012 1122 1306 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Installed Wind Capacity (MW) Year Pre Gate 3 Gate 3 Northern Ireland

Build-out rate: 100% Gate 3

6

Large projects with planning assumed to connect ~4 years from offer acceptance Projects without planning take an extra 2 years

1934 2112 2116 2564 2564 2564 2564 2564 15 110 154 452 549 1117 1170 1320 553 607 761 839 961 1012 1122 1306 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Installed Wind Capacity (MW) Year Pre Gate 3 Gate 3 Northern Ireland

Build-out rate: 33% Gate 3

7

Average installation rate in Ireland of ~275MW/year

Northern Ireland

8

• We have an All-Island model based on SONI’s

wind and network build out data.

• There is a consultation in Northern Ireland on

their connection process.

• Northern Ireland constraint reports are not being

published at this stage.

Interconnection

• We don’t model imports.
• Both Moyle and EWIC export capacities are

derated by 20% to account for trading imperfections etc.

• The model will export to avoid curtailment up to

80% of the interconnectors’ capacity. This will be included in the reports.

• The Moyle export capacity reduces from 250MW

to 80MW in 2017.

9

100 200 300 400 500 600 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Interconnector Export Capacity

EWIC Moyle

Operational rules

• SNSP limit increases from

50% to 75% over study period.

• Reserve (POR) is modelled.
• Regional constraints modelled:

– At least 2 sets in Dublin until 2016 (inclusive) – At least one set on in Cork during the daytime until 2018 (inclusive)

• System constraints modelled:

– 5 set rule in Ireland at all times + Sealrock and Peats – 3 sets in Northern Ireland before NS2, 2 sets afterwards

10

40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

SNSP Limit

High level results

11

Overall 33% Gate 3 results

12

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Reduction as a % of available energy Combined Curtailment and Constraint Curtailment Constraint

Overall 100% Gate 3 results

13

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Reduction as a % of available energy Combined Curtailment and Constraint Curtailment Constraint

Comparison with PGOR results

14

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 100% Gate 3: G3CR 100% Gate 3: PGOR 33% Gate 3: G3CR 33% Gate 3: PGOR Comparable results to the PGORs with explainable differences e.g. the wind’s build-out rate

Detailed results

15

Interconnection results

• The model assumes that the interconnectors can

be used to export wind up to the interconnector’s derated capacity.

• This wind would otherwise be curtailed.
• The following slides provide some perspective
• n how the interconnector exports are

influencing results.

16

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Exports (GWh) EWIC Moyle

Interconnection results: 33% Gate 3

17

This corresponds to ~2% of total wind production Curtailment would be of the

• rder of 4%

without exports

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Exports (GWh) EWIC Moyle

Interconnection results: 100% Gate 3

18

This corresponds to ~6% of total wind production Curtailment would be of the

• rder of 17-18%

without exports in this scenario

Detailed results

• The following slides focus on parts of the

network that have high levels of constraints for some individual windfarms.

• Individual windfarms with high constraints are

mainly located in: – Donegal – Southwest (110kV and 220kV) – Mayo

19

Donegal constraints

• Donegal is a constraint group today.
• Contingencies on lines south of Cathaleen’s Fall affect all nodes

in Donegal.

• It was assumed that these constraints would migrate northward

as uprates were completed.

20

Donegal constraints

32MW 97MW 15MW 120MW 91MW 85MW 62MW 47MW 105MW 8MW

Pre-RIDP 1-5%

660MW in total

Donegal constraints

• Our studies indicate that the constraint group may not get

smaller.

• We believe curtailment may be binding before constraints bind.
• For example, it may take 450MW of Donegal wind to trigger

constraints but curtailment could bind at 400MW.

• The constraints are relieved when RIDP is implemented

(assumed to be 2020).

22

110kV Southwest constraints

• Some constraints appear in the Southwest

110kV system in 2013/14 coinciding with wind connecting in North Kerry / West Limerick.

• These constraints are relieved when the wind on

temporary connections transition to the 220kV system for their permanent connection in 2015.

• We didn’t see this as a constraint group based
• n the Constraint Group criteria.

23

North Kerry/West Limerick 110kV constraints

24

191MW 23MW 92MW 52MW 179MW

The main binding constraint is Tarbert- Trien 110kV line

• verloading for the

loss of Clashavoon- Clonkeen 110kV Clahane-Tralee 110kV can also overload for the loss of Tarbert- Trien 110kV but this happens less often Moving the Southwest temporary connections to their permanent connection on the 220kV system alleviates these constraints

Athea, Dromada, Trien 8-12% Clahane 6-8%

537MW in total

• n this section of

110kV

220kV Southwest constraints

• The Southwest becomes a constraint group

when the 220kV stations are built.

• Non-firm wind is constrained before other wind.
• Constraints become relatively high once all the

Gate 3 wind connects in 2018 and before the Southwest reinforcements are completed in 2019.

25

Southwest 220kV constraints

26

261MW 270MW 370MW The loss of Moneypoint- Kilpaddoge 220kV

• verloads Tarbert-

Prospect 220kV. The completion of an additional HV line in the Southwest is required to alleviate this constraint group.

G3 Non-firm 4-14% G3 Partially-firm 8%

900 MW in total

• Indicative route for the

purposes of this presentation

Mayo constraints

• Relatively high constraints begin appearing in

2016 when a large amount of wind is assumed to connect on the 110kV system.

• The constraints are relieved in 2018 when it is

assumed that the Castlebar-Moy 110kV line is completed.

• Constraints appear to be largely driven by

uprate outages.

27

West 110kV constraints

28

198MW 30MW 6MW 77MW A combination

• f uprate
• utages and

high amounts of wind connecting

• n the 110kV

system drive constraints in this area. Constraints are reduced once lines are uprated and Castlebar- Moy 110kV is built The loss of Bellacorrick- Castlebar 110kV

• verloading

Moy-Glenree 110kV line is the most common constraint.

Sligo, Cunghill, Glenree ~13% Bellacorrick, Tawnaghmore, Moy 5-13%

35MW

• Indicative route for the

purposes of this presentation

Sensitivity studies

• We carried out some sensitivity studies to try

and answer some questions that we anticipated might be asked:

– What are the underlying constraints if curtailment is removed? – Discrepancy between study results and curtailment that is currently experienced – Impact of restricted coal running (Moneypoint has a min gen of 99MW per set)

29

How would imports effect curtailment?

• We modelled a 2013 case with flat-out imports
• n both interconnectors.
• There is ~340MW more wind in the 2013 case

compared to today’s wind but the results should give some insight into how imports could effect curtailment and go some way toward explaining how curtailment levels today compare to results from our base case.

• The results indicate curtailment in the order of 4-

5% compared to <0.5% in the 2013 base case.

30

Effect of Moneypoint not running

• A sensitivity case was studied to investigate the

effect that not running Moneypoint would have

• n curtailment.
• Bearing in mind that there are minimum

generation requirements on the system, not running Moneypoint can act to increase curtailment since its sets have relatively low min gens.

• Results indicate if CCGTs are ran in place of

Moneypoint, overall curtailment increases by~1% in the 2020 33% Gate 3 case.

31

Minimised curtailment

• Another sensitivity case was studied to

investigate the underlying constraints on the system if curtailment was minimised.

• Curtailment was minimised by artificially

increasing interconnection

• Results indicate overall constraints in this case

are <1% for the 100% Gate scenario in 2020

32

Observations on constraint results

• Average levels are low for all years.
• There are some nodes that will have high

constraints: – During uprate outages – Until uprates or new builds are delivered – Inside a constraint group

33

Observations on curtailment results

• High levels of curtailment if all of Gate 3

connects.

• Low levels of curtailment in the 33% Gate 3 case

assuming: – Exporting of excess wind on the EWIC and Moyle – DS3 can deliver 75% SNSP – No additional operational constraints to those modelled in the study

34

Overall 33% Gate 3 results

35

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Reduction as a % of available energy Combined Curtailment and Constraint Curtailment Constraint

Overall 100% Gate 3 results

36

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Reduction as a % of available energy Combined Curtailment and Constraint Curtailment Constraint