Transmission Expansion Plan to Minimize Congestion Between Arizona, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
transmission expansion plan to minimize congestion
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Transmission Expansion Plan to Minimize Congestion Between Arizona, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jul 28, 2023 303 likes •733 views

California Independent System Operator Transmission Expansion Plan to Minimize Congestion Between Arizona, Nevada, and California Jeff Miller California ISO January 18, 2005 California Independent System Operator Methodology PLEXOS

slide-1
SLIDE 1

California Independent System Operator

Transmission Expansion Plan to Minimize Congestion Between Arizona, Nevada, and California

Jeff Miller California ISO January 18, 2005

slide-2
SLIDE 2

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

2

Methodology

  • PLEXOS Production Cost Program

– Conducts an hour by hour simulation for an entire year – Models the full network using a DC powerflow

  • Assumes that the nonlinear system is linear
  • No vars, just MW so all ratings are in MW
  • Voltage and stability limits have to be translated to MW limits

– Goal is to minimize production cost (fuel and variable O&M)

  • Many simplifying assumptions - no wheeling rates, no

losses, no unit commitment

  • To ease analysis, chronological line flows are reordered by

magnitude to create flow duration curves

slide-3
SLIDE 3

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

3

What Can We Learn From Flow Duration Curves

  • Able to view an entire year of operation rather

than a snapshot like in a power flow case

  • Provides useful insight into the ratings that

planners study and achieve

  • Provides useful insights into the interaction

between different projects and different interfaces (i.e., the effect on WOR of an increase in EOR)

  • Useful for planning projects (line ratings, series

comp levels, etc.)

  • Helps in understanding economic study results
slide-4
SLIDE 4

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

4

Northern California IPP DC DC Intertie

DC 500 kV 345 kV 230 kV

Mexico Nevada Arizona Southern California

Palo Verde West West

  • f

River East

  • f

River

slide-5
SLIDE 5

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

5

Assumptions

  • 2008 SSG-WI assumptions with increased

renewables in California

  • Path 49 Upgrades

– Palo Verde-Devers #1 Series Capacitors Upgraded – Hassayampa-North Gila-Imperial Valley Series Capacitors Upgraded – 2nd Devers 500/230 kV Transformer added – SVC added at Devers

  • Miguel-Mission 230 kV line added
  • East of River limited to 8,055 MW
  • West of River Unconstrained
slide-6
SLIDE 6

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

6

Assumptions (continued)

  • Palo Verde West limited to 3600 MW
  • All 500 kV line ratings are respected
  • Mohave out of service
  • Mountainview, Palomar, and Otay Mesa in-

service

  • Additional renewables in California to meet

Renewable Portfolio Standard of 20%

slide-7
SLIDE 7

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

7

Sequence Studied

  • Step 1: Add EOR 9000 project (Mead-

Perkins and Navajo-Crystal Upgrade)

  • Step 2: Add Moenkopi-Eldorado series

capacitor upgrade

  • Step 3: Add Palo Verde-Devers #2
slide-8
SLIDE 8

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

8

Northern California IPP DC DC Intertie

DC 500 kV 345 kV 230 kV

Mexico Nevada Arizona Southern California

Palo Verde West West

  • f

River East

  • f

River Today’s Limits

slide-9
SLIDE 9

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

9

Northern California IPP DC DC Intertie

DC 500 kV 345 kV 230 kV

Mexico Nevada Arizona Southern California

Palo Verde West West

  • f

River East

  • f

River June 2006 Limits After Path 49 Upgrades

slide-10
SLIDE 10

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

10

Step 1 - Implement EOR 9000

  • Increased capability of Mead-Perkins from

1238 MW to 1905 MW

  • Increased capability of Navajo-Crystal from

1411 MW to 1808 MW

  • Increased East of River path rating from

8055 MW to 9300 MW

slide-11
SLIDE 11

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

11

EOR Flow - Before and After Upgrade

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

East of River

slide-12
SLIDE 12

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

12 WOR Flow - Before and After Upgrade

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

West of River

slide-13
SLIDE 13

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

13 PV West & PV Devers Flow - Before and After Upgrade

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Palo Verde West

slide-14
SLIDE 14

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

14 Perkins to Mead Flow - Before and After Upgrade

  • 500

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Perkins-Mead 500 kV

slide-15
SLIDE 15

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

15 Navajo to Crystal Flow - Before and After Upgrade

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Navajo-Crystal 500 kV

slide-16
SLIDE 16

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

16 Moenkopi to Eldorado Flow - Before and After Upgrade

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Moenkopi-Eldorado 500 kV

slide-17
SLIDE 17

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

17

W ith u p g ra d e

  • S

C IT v s . E O R

2 4 6 8 1 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 E a s t o f R iv e r Southern California Import

SCIT Nomogram Flows

slide-18
SLIDE 18

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

18

EOR 9000 Observations

  • EOR flows increase by approximately 1000 MW

to 9000 MW

  • WOR reaches 11,800 MW
  • PV West is heavily congested (30% of the time)
  • Perkins-Mead remains congested even after the

upgrade to 1905 MW (8% of the time)

  • Moenkopi-Eldorado is heavily congested (35% of

the time)

slide-19
SLIDE 19

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

19

Northern California IPP DC DC Intertie

DC 500 kV 345 kV 230 kV

Mexico Nevada Arizona Southern California

Palo Verde West East

  • f

River 2008 Limits After EOR 9000

slide-20
SLIDE 20

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

20

Step 2 – Upgrade Moenkopi-Eldorado

  • Increase capability of Moenkopi-Eldorado

from 1645 MW to 2000 MW

slide-21
SLIDE 21

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

21 Moenkopi to Eldorado Flow - Before and After Upgrade

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Moenkopi-Eldorado 500 kV

slide-22
SLIDE 22

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

22 EOR Flow - Before and After Upgrade

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

East of River

slide-23
SLIDE 23

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

23 WOR Flow - Before and After Upgrade

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

West of River

slide-24
SLIDE 24

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

24 PV West & PV Devers Flow - Before and After Upgrade

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Palo Verde West

slide-25
SLIDE 25

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

25 Perkins to Mead Flow - Before and After Upgrade

  • 500

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Perkins-Mead 500 kV

slide-26
SLIDE 26

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

26

W ith u p g ra d e

  • S

C IT v s . E O R

2 4 6 8 1 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 E a s t o f R iv e r Southern California Import

SCIT Nomogram Flows

slide-27
SLIDE 27

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

27

Moenkopi-Eldorado Upgrade Observations

  • EOR flows increased from 9000 MW to

9300+ MW

  • WOR not significantly changed (11,800

MW)

  • Palo Verde West is heavily congested (35%
  • f the time)
  • Perkins-Mead is heavily congested (20% of

the time)

slide-28
SLIDE 28

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

28

Northern California IPP DC DC Intertie

DC 500 kV 345 kV 230 kV

Mexico Nevada Arizona Southern California

Palo Verde West East

  • f

River 2008 Limits After Moenkopi- Eldorado Upgrade

slide-29
SLIDE 29

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

29

Step 3 – Add Palo Verde-Devers #2

  • Add project line with 2338 MW rating and

associated upgrades

  • Increased EOR path rating by 1200 MW

(from 9300 MW to 10,500 MW)

  • Increased PV West by 1800 MW (from

3600 MW to 5400 MW)

slide-30
SLIDE 30

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

30 EOR Flow - Before and After Upgrade

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

East of River

slide-31
SLIDE 31

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

31 WOR Flow - Before and After Upgrade

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

West of River

slide-32
SLIDE 32

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

32 PV West & PV Devers Flow - Before and After Upgrade

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Palo Verde West

slide-33
SLIDE 33

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

33 Perkins to Mead Flow - Before and After Upgrade

  • 500

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % hours above Flow Flow (MW) No Upgrade With Upgrade

Perkins-Mead 500 kV

slide-34
SLIDE 34

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

34

W ith u p g ra d e

  • S

C IT v s . E O R

2 4 6 8 1 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 2 4 6 8 1 1 2 E as t o f R iv e r Southern California Import

SCIT Nomogram Flows

slide-35
SLIDE 35

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

35

Palo Verde-Devers #2 Observations

  • EOR flows increased from 9300+ MW to

10,500+ MW

  • EOR congestion increases from 5% to 10%
  • f the time even after rating increase
  • Palo Verde West is no longer congested
  • Perkins-Mead congestion is reduced (15%

to 20% of the time)

slide-36
SLIDE 36

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

36

Northern California IPP DC DC Intertie

DC 500 kV 345 kV 230 kV

Mexico Nevada Arizona Southern California

Palo Verde West East

  • f

River 2009 Limits After Palo Verde- Devers #2

slide-37
SLIDE 37

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

37

Overall Observations

slide-38
SLIDE 38

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

38

EOR 9000 Project Observations

  • The EOR 9000 project should be expanded to include the

upgrade of the Moenkopi-Eldorado 500 kV line

– Without this addition, the Moenkopi-Eldorado line would be very heavily congested – Without this addition, the economic studies indicate that an EOR rating of approximately 9000 MW could be utilized – With this addition, the economic studies indicate that an EOR rating of approximately 9500 MW could be utilized

  • The EOR 9000 project should investigate the potential for

increasing the capability of the Perkins-Mead line beyond the present plan for 1905 MW (2200 amperes)

slide-39
SLIDE 39

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

39

Palo Verde-Devers #2 Project Observations

  • The PVD2 project could potentially increase the utilization
  • f the EOR path by more than the proposed 1200 MW

rating increase (potentially as much as 2000 MW).

– Double line outage concerns (PV-Devers 1&2) may reduce PV West capability from 5400 MW to as low as 4500 MW and make this infeasible

  • The EOR 9000 project and the Palo Verde-Devers #2

project are complimentary and function well together

  • The addition of both the PVD2 project and the EOR 9000

project would eliminate the majority of the major path congestion in the STEP/SWAT area.

slide-40
SLIDE 40

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

40

EOR Path Rating Observations

  • A 9,000 MW EOR rating appears to be an

appropriate objective after the EOR 9000 project

  • With the addition of the Moenkopi-Eldorado

upgrade to the EOR 9000 project, a 9,500 MW EOR rating appears to be an appropriate objective

  • With the addition of the PVD2 project, a 11,500

MW EOR rating appears to be an appropriate

  • bjective(a 2,000 MW increase)
  • Qualification -- Achieving these path ratings may

prove to be technically infeasible or uneconomic

slide-41
SLIDE 41

California Independent System Operator

\CAISO\jmiller MSC Meeting, 1/18/2005

41

WOR Path Rating Study Observations

  • After the addition of the Path 49 upgrades, a 11,800 MW

WOR rating appears to be an appropriate objective (a 1,682 MW increase from the current 10,118 MW)

  • This 11,800 MW WOR path rating would also be

sufficient after the addition of the EOR 9000 project (with

  • r without the Moenkopi-Eldorado upgrade)
  • With the addition of the PVD2 project, a 13,800 MW

WOR rating appears to be an appropriate objective (a 2,000 MW increase from 11,800 MW)

  • Achieving these path ratings may prove to be technically

infeasible or uneconomic

slide-42
SLIDE 42

California Independent System Operator

Questions?