Studies Subcommittee Meeting PC19 and PC20 Study Results Colby - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
studies subcommittee meeting
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Studies Subcommittee Meeting PC19 and PC20 Study Results Colby - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jun 16, 2023 213 likes •599 views

1 Studies Subcommittee Meeting PC19 and PC20 Study Results Colby Johnson, Staff Engineer W E C C E S T E R N L E C T R I C I T Y O O R D I N A T I N G O U N C I L 2 Overview PC19 Double Battery

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Studies Subcommittee Meeting PC19 and PC20 Study Results

Colby Johnson, Staff Engineer

W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

1

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Overview

  • PC19 – Double Battery Storage in California

– Input Assumptions – Results – Observations

  • PC20 – High Storage Case

– Combines PC19 and PC18 (Double CAES Capacity) – Input Assumptions – Results – Observations

2 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-3
SLIDE 3

2026 PC19 Double Battery Study Results

W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Modeling Logic

4 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

Scope

  • Scope
  • Key Questions

Assumptions

  • Increased Battery

Storage Capacity in California Results

  • Generation Mix
  • Path Utilization/Flows

Production Cost Model

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Study Description – Input Assumptions

  • Study Requestor: Pacific Gas & Electric
  • Changes from 2026 Common Case:

– Generation:

  • Double Battery Storage Capacity in California

– PG&E Bay/Valley, SCE, SDG&E

  • “Generic” Storage in California

– Energy Storage (ES) 2HR, 4HR, 6HR Units – 1410 MW Capacity >> Increase to 2820 MW

– Transmission:

  • No changes

– Load:

  • No changes

5 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Input Assumptions Map: PC19

6 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

 Double Battery Storage Capacity in California  1410 MW >> 2820 MW  PG&E Bay/Valley, SCE, SDG&E

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Key Questions

  • How does the system respond to the change

in generation?

– i.e. resource mix, production cost, CO2 emissions

  • How does the system respond to the change

in transmission?

– i.e. impact to flow, path utilization,

7 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Results for PC 19

8 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Generation Change – Resource Mix

9 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

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

Annual Generation by Category (GWh)

2026 WECC v2.0 PC19 - Double Battery

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Generation Change Annual Energy Difference

10 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

(200) (100) 100 200 300 400 500 600 Conventional Hydro Energy Storage Steam - Coal Steam - Other Nuclear Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine IC Other DG/DR/EE - Incremental Biomass RPS Geothermal Small Hydro RPS Solar Wind

Annual Energy Difference (GWh): 2026 WECC v2.0 vs PC19 - Double Battery

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Production Cost, C02, and Dump Energy

11 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

WECC Annual Generation by Category (MWh)

Category 2026 WECC v2.0 PC19 - Double Battery Difference Percent Change Conventional Hydro

235,273,594 235,265,368 (8,226) 0.00%

Energy Storage

4,194,194 4,692,921 498,727 11.89%

Steam - Coal

186,577,471 186,447,138 (130,333)

  • 0.07%

Steam - Other

1,739,933 1,740,808 875 0.05%

Nuclear

39,726,723 39,726,723 0.00%

Combined Cycle

268,033,960 267,985,050 (48,910)

  • 0.02%

Combustion Turbine

53,650,702 53,831,054 180,352 0.34%

IC

2,011,189 1,996,860 (14,329)

  • 0.71%

Other

0.00%

DG/DR/EE - Incremental

30,536,538 30,536,538 0.00%

Biomass RPS

22,782,596 22,867,261 84,665 0.37%

Geothermal

31,522,503 31,522,441 (62) 0.00%

Small Hydro RPS

2,796,030 2,797,337 1,307 0.05%

Solar

37,423,166 37,434,911 11,745 0.03%

Wind

92,514,949 92,522,375 7,426 0.01%

== Total ==

1,008,783,548 1,009,366,786 583,238 0.06%

Other Results

  • Var. Prod. Cost (M$)

17,132 17,132 0.00%

CO2 Cost (M$)

1,968 1,971 3 0.15%

CO2 Amount (MMetrTn)

320 320 (0)

  • 0.01%

Dump Energy (MWh)

320,850 301,679 (19,170)

  • 5.97%

Pumping (PL+PS) (MWh)

13,614,121 14,195,585 581,464 4.27%

Exports (MWh)

0.00%

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Generation Change Total by Subregion

12 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

  • 1,200
  • 1,000
  • 800
  • 600
  • 400
  • 200

200 400 600 800 1,000

Alberta British Columbia Basin California/MX Desert Southwest Northwest Rocky Mountain

Change (GWh) by Subregion - 2026 WECC v2.0 vs. PC19 - Double Battery

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

IGS assigned to CA

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Battery Unit Performance Annual Duration

13 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Battery Performance Continued Example: August 8-9, 2026

14 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

1 1 2 2 3 3

  • Coincident peaks and valleys. When LMP is low, the unit will typically charge. When

LMP is high, the unit will typically generate.

  • #1: Aug 8 @ 3AM, #2: Aug 8 @ 1:00 P.M.
  • #3: Aug 9 @ 5AM, #4 (unlabled): Aug 9 @ 12:00 P.M. (noon)

1’ 1’ 2’ 2’ 3’ 3’

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Results – Most Heavily Utilized Paths

  • “Most Heavily Utilized” = A path that meets

any one of the following criterion (10-year plan utilization screening):

– U75 > 50% – U90 > 20% – U99 > 5%

  • Uxx = % of year that flow is greater than xx%
  • f the path limit

15 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-16
SLIDE 16

2026CC V2.0 LA Path Utilization

16 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Percent of Hours

Most Heavily Utilized Paths - 26PC1_V2_0_LA 2026CC V2.0 Look-Ahead

U75 U90 U99

slide-17
SLIDE 17

PC 19 Path Utilization

17 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Percent of Hours

Most Heavily Utilized Paths - 26PC19 Double Battery

U75 U90 U99

Path U75 Change U90 Change U99 Change P77 +9.5% +9.8% +0.5% P83

  • 3.6%
  • 3.3%

0% P29 +21% +15% +11% P45

  • 0.13%
  • 0.08%
  • 0.26%
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Path Utilization Magnitude Change

18

  • 10,000
  • 5,000

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 P77 Crystal-Allen P83 Montana Alberta Tie Line P52 Silver Peak-Control 55 kV P29 Intermountain-Gonder 230 kV xy WY-UT P45 SDG&E-CFE P60 Inyo-Control 115 kV Tie P66 COI xy WA-BC East P36 TOT 3 P26 Northern-Southern California P24 PG&E-Sierra P03 Northwest-British Columbia P76 Alturas Project xy WA-BC West

Net Annual Flow (GWh) - 26PC1_V2_0_LA vs 26PC19

26PC1_V2_0_LA 26PC19

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Observations

  • Generation and Energy Changes:

– Increased Generation:

  • ~12% Energy Storage
  • < 1% Combustion Turbine and Biomass

– Decreased Generation:

  • Unremarkably Decreased
  • < 1% Coal and Combined Cycle
  • Transmission Changes:

– 3%-10% increased utilization on Paths 77 and 83

  • Production Cost and Other Changes:

– 6% reduction in dump energy

19 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-20
SLIDE 20

2026 PC20 High Storage Study Results

W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Study Description – Input Assumptions

  • Study Requestor: Pacific Gas & Electric, DATC, Burbank
  • Changes from 2026 Common Case:

– Generation:

  • Double CAES (Compressed Air Energy Storage) Capacity

– 1,200 MW >> 2,400 MW

  • Add Pathfinder Wind Project

– 3,000 MW wind facility in SE Wyoming

  • Double California Battery Storage Capacity

– 1410 MW >> 2820 MW

– Transmission:

  • Add 3,000MW Zephyr HVDC from SE Wyoming to central UT

– Load:

  • No changes

21 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Input Assumptions Map: PC20

22 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

 Double Battery Storage Capacity in California  Add 3,000 MW wind facility in SE Wy.  Add 2,400 MW CAES facility in Cent. Ut.  Add 3,000 MW branch between SE Wy. to Cent. Ut.

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Results for PC20

W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Generation Change – Resource Mix

24 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

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

Annual Generation by Category (GWh)

2026 WECC v2.0 PC20 - Double Battery Double CAES

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Generation Change Annual Energy Difference

25 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

(15,000) (10,000) (5,000) 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Conventional Hydro Energy Storage Steam - Coal Steam - Other Nuclear Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine IC Other DG/DR/EE - Incremental Biomass RPS Geothermal Small Hydro RPS Solar Wind

Annual Energy Difference (GWh): 2026 WECC v2.0 vs PC20 - Double Battery Double CAES

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Production Cost, C02, and Dump Energy

26 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

WECC Annual Generation by Category (MWh)

Category 2026 WECC v2.0 PC20 - Double Battery Double CAES Difference Percent Change Conventional Hydro

235,273,594 235,247,771 (25,822)

  • 0.01%

Energy Storage

4,194,194 7,018,392 2,824,198 67.34%

Steam - Coal

186,577,471 186,056,330 (521,141)

  • 0.28%

Steam - Other

1,739,933 1,575,399 (164,533)

  • 9.46%

Nuclear

39,726,723 39,726,723 0.00%

Combined Cycle

268,033,960 255,015,068 (13,018,892)

  • 4.86%

Combustion Turbine

53,650,702 52,101,919 (1,548,784)

  • 2.89%

IC

2,011,189 1,962,250 (48,939)

  • 2.43%

Other

0.00%

DG/DR/EE - Incremental

30,536,538 30,536,538 0.00%

Biomass RPS

22,782,596 22,793,199 10,604 0.05%

Geothermal

31,522,503 31,522,763 260 0.00%

Small Hydro RPS

2,796,030 2,793,025 (3,004)

  • 0.11%

Solar

37,423,166 37,423,366 200 0.00%

Wind

92,514,949 107,555,429 15,040,479 16.26%

== Total ==

1,008,783,548 1,011,328,172 2,544,624 0.25%

Other Results

  • Var. Prod. Cost (M$)

17,132 16,469 (663)

  • 3.87%

CO2 Cost (M$)

1,968 1,843 (124)

  • 6.33%

CO2 Amount (MMetrTn)

320 315 (6)

  • 1.76%

Dump Energy (MWh)

320,850 341,612 20,762 6.47%

Pumping (PL+PS) (MWh)

13,614,121 16,161,883 2,547,762 18.71%

Exports (MWh)

0.00%

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Generation Change Total by Subregion

27 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

  • 10,000
  • 5,000

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000

Alberta British Columbia Basin California/MX Desert Southwest Northwest Rocky Mountain

Change (GWh) by Subregion - 2026 WECC v2.0 vs. PC20 - Double Battery Double CAES

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

CAES assigned to CA

slide-28
SLIDE 28

CAES and Pathfinder Performance Annual Duration

28 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-29
SLIDE 29

CAES and Pathfinder Annual Performance Continued

29 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

Generally, when LMP is low, the storage units will typically charge/pump. When LMP is high, the units will typically discharge/generate. Low LMP also associated with times of high dump energy at Pathfinder Wind Project (0.1% dump versus total generation)

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Dump Energy Analysis

Generator Name Spill (MWh) Golden_Hills 72420.28922 PeetzTable2 29362.75228 RimRockEnergy 27500.11811 RpsCA-0935 26858.60681 Shiloh_III 22601.0749 Pathfinder Wind 15478.93896 CA-Valley2D 14942.61827 Solar_Owens2019 14086.64917 Solar_Owens2020 12788.21482 RpsCA-0946 12188.55573 ArlingtonWind 10339.04745 Solar_Owens2018 10316.07851 Solar_Owens2017 9158.581154 Wheat_Field 8832.109684 PebbleSprings 7027.369743 KlondikeWind3_1 2895.685135 MilfordWind1-1 2434.207185 HopkinsRidge1 2319.806442 RpsCA-0954 2241.050018 WindyFlats1 2011.547852 ImpValleySolar1-2 1677.941559 MilfordWind2 1610.936797 RpsCA-0078 1608.418152 MilfordWind1-2 1504.124342 AguaCalienteSolar 1352.850052 GlacierWind1 1246.496157 BigHorn1 1127.331985

  • Top 27 dumping units

– Wind – Solar – Some Hydro

  • Top dumping BAs:

30 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

Area % of total dump CISO 28.8% LDWP 19.7% NWMT 8.5% PSCO 8.7% BPA 32%

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Dump Energy Continued

  • Golden_Hills
  • Dumps when

LMP =$0/MWh

  • 5% Total

Generation

31 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Dump Energy Continued

  • Pathfinder Wind
  • Dumps when

LMP = $0/MWh

  • 0.1% Total

Generation

32 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Results – Most Heavily Utilized Paths

W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

33

slide-34
SLIDE 34

2026CC V2.0 LA Path Utilization

34 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Percent of Hours

Most Heavily Utilized Paths - 26PC1_V2_0_LA 2026CC V2.0 Look-Ahead

U75 U90 U99

slide-35
SLIDE 35

PC 20 Path Utilization

35 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

Path U75 Change U90 Change U99 Change P29 +74% +71% +68% P27 +58% +50% +44% P83

  • 1.2%
  • 1.3%

0% P77

  • 4.3%
  • 7.6%
  • 1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Percent of Hours

Most Heavily Utilized Paths - 26PC20 Double Battery Double CAES

U75 U90 U99

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Observations

  • Generation and Energy Changes:

– 67% increase in energy storage – 16% increase in wind generation – 9.5% and 4.9% reduction in Steam-Other (waste heat, oil distillate, etc…) and Combined Cycle respectively

  • Transmission Changes:

– Significantly increased path utilization on P27 and P29

  • Production Cost and Other Changes:

– 6.4% increase in dump energy

  • Zero dump from Gen. Storage and CAES units
  • Most dump from wind and solar units located in California and BPA

36 W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

slide-37
SLIDE 37

W

E S T E R N

E

L E C T R I C I T Y

C

O O R D I N A T I N G

C

O U N C I L

37

Colby Johnson Staff Engineer System Adequacy Planning cjohnson@wecc.biz 801-819-7662

Questions or Comments?