MIC Market Assessment Expansion Working Group Overview of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Qualitative Reliability Assessment of Expanding the EIM to Day-ahead Market Services October 17, 2019 MIC Market Assessment Expansion Working Group Overview of Presentation Project Update Report Assumptions Market Design
Qualitative Reliability Assessment of Expanding the EIM to Day-ahead Market Services
October 17, 2019
2
potential reliability benefits and risks from expanding EIM to include day-ahead market services.
estimate cost savings.
3
conducted in a bilateral market and contrast that with how they would be conducted if taking day-ahead market services
analyzing examples: real or hypothetical. Using events in which the presence of market services may have provided reliability benefits or increased risks
4
5
Name Organization Robert Follini Avista Andrew Meyers Bonneville Power Administration Darren Lamb California ISO Jamie Austin PacifiCorp Charles Faust WAPA, Sierra Nevada Region Jason Smith Xcel Energy Michael Goggin Grid Strategies Angela Amos FERC, OEMR Ben Foster FERC, OEPI Dillon Kolkmann FERC, OEPI Jomo Richardson FERC, OER Monica Taba FERC, OER Layne Brown WECC Jennifer Gardner Western Resource Advocates Alaine Ginocchio WIRAB
Milestones from MIC 2019-2021 Work Plan ▪
▪ Outline prepared ▪ Draft report ▪
Working Group has to-date: ▪ Met regularly since February 2019 ▪ Developed a more detailed work plan ▪ Agreed to Draft Report Assumptions ▪ Agreed to Draft Market Design Assumptions ▪ Drafted and Prioritized Potential Risks and Benefits
6
7
8
▪ Qualitative analysis: No cost-benefit or economic analysis. ▪ Reliability in a general sense
between them
compliance with specific reliability standards, however, will not attempt to identify the specific reliability standards at issue
▪ Bandwidth of the market being analyzed: Addition of day-ahead market services to an existing EIM (EIM + DAMS). We are analyzing the reliability benefits/risks of the DAMS portion, this includes impacts on the EIM/real- time market.
9
10
1. Participants will be EIM Entities (BAs). 2. EIM Entities will participate in the day-ahead market while retaining their BA planning functions. Balancing Authority Area (BAA) boundaries and NERC-related compliance responsibilities will remain intact. 3. Control of transmission facilities will not be transferred to a market
4. Transmission costs will continue to be collected under each entity’s Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). 5. Integrated resource planning, resource adequacy procurement, and transmission planning and investment decisions will remain with each BA (and state/local regulatory authority). 6. Participating Entities will use existing infrastructure and market services offered by CAISO (with adjustments); the DAMS will be an additional market service layered on top of the EIM.
11
12
ensuring transmission and reliability constraints are not violated.
for the real-time dispatch, i.e., Security Constrained Economic Dispatch (SCED) optimization process.
13
6. An EIM + DAMS will utilize some form of Locational Marginal Pricing (LMP)-based congestion management over the entire CAISO and EIM + DAMS footprint. 7. There will be a Resource Sufficiency (RS) evaluation for entities participating in an EIM + DAMS in the day-ahead (DA) time
each participating BA to balance load and manage any contingencies in their BAA (no leaning). No assumption about specific scheme.
14
8. Transmission: An EIM +DAMS would complement the contract reservation regime and there will be a compensation/incentive scheme that provides adequate motivation to make enough transmission available to ensure adequate transmission capacity to satisfy minimum reliability requirements. No assumption about specific scheme. 9. An EIM + DAMS would supplement or operate along-side the bilateral market in the Western Interconnection.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
capacity to serve load and manage VER uncertainty
upon which direction failed
▪ Our Assumption: RS in an EIM + DAMS will continue to prevent leaning and avoidance of incurred costs of capacity, flexibility, or transmission ▪ RS in an EIM +DAMS may be a different flavor of existing EIM RS tests but we make assumptions about the specific scheme
an entity’s BA to will likely need to demonstrate a firm TX path from the Resource
▪ Without details of RS evaluation in the day-ahead time frame unable to assess reliability impacts
23
capacity
resources, and automated processes may improve the speed and quality of contingency response
24
25
26
market solutions to maintain system reliability.
27
28
29