PC22 High RPS Case
SWG – 10/26/2015
WECC Staff
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
2
Overview
• Study Description
– Scope
– Input assumptions
– Study limitations
• Study Results
– Observations
– Details
• Generation
• Paths
• Other
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
3
Study Description
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
4
Study Description - Purpose
• Investigate the effects a significant increase in
renewable generation beyond state RPS
requirements
• Investigate system changes necessary to achieve
significantly higher levels of renewable
penetration across WECC, focusing on
penetration levels of ~50%
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
Phase 2: Flexibility Assessment
Assess the ability of western generator fleet to
accommodate high renewable penetration while
maintaining reliable operations
Study goals:
• Quantify the size, magnitude and duration of operating
challenges resulting from high renewable penetration
• Investigate potential flexibility solutions, including:
• Renewable dispatch as an operational strategy
• Regional coordination
“Institutional”
solutions
• Flexible supply and demand-side resources
• Energy storage
“Physical”
solutions
• Transmission
• Learn about flexibility modeling and planning
5
Regional Approach
CANADA
Study focuses on five regions
• Explicitly control interactions
between regions through
modeling of interties
NORTHWEST
Regions generally share
characteristics appropriate
for a resource planning
study:
• Similar weather and load
patterns across the region
• Limited internal transmission
constraints
BASIN
ROCKY
MOUNTAIN
CALIFORNIA
DESERT SOUTHWEST
• Some degree of regional
coordination already
• Limited reliance on other regions
6
7
PC22 Study Description - Assumptions
60%
60%
Renewable Penetration (% of Load)
50%
50%
50%
41%
40%
40%
40%
40%
Wind
40%
Solar Thermal
30%
30%
Solar PV
30%
Hydro
20%
Geothermal
20%
Biomass
10%
10%
0%
0%
WECC-US
Basin
California
Northwest
Rockies
Southwest
Goal is to develop a plausible case in which flexibility assessment will
reveal novel planning challenges
Case achieves 41% of supply interconnection-wide (43% of sales)
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
8
Study Qualifications
• Constraints: Other operating constraints and nomograms were not
modified.
• Flexibility Reserves: The flexibility reserve adders for each reserve
area are derived from the loads and amount of variable
generation. The flexibility reserve adders were not recalculated for
this study.
• Resource Adequacy: A check of the peak planning reserve margins
was not done.
• System Stability: Tests of system stability were not conducted.
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
9
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
10
Generation Comparison
Annual Generation by Category (MWh)
2024 PC1 v1.5
2024 PC22 High RPS
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
0
W
E
S
T
E
R
50,000
N
E
L
E
C
100,000
T
R
I
C
I
T
Y
150,000
C
O
O
R
200,000
D
I
N
A
T
I
250,000
N
G
C
O
300,000
U
N
C
I
L
11
Difference in Annual Energy - WECC
Annual Energy Difference (MWh): 2024 PC1 v1.5 vs 2024 PC22 High RPS
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
(80,000)
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
(60,000)
E
L
E
(40,000)
C
T
R
I
C
(20,000)
I
T
Y
0
C
O
O
20,000
R
D
I
N
A
40,000
T
I
N
G
60,000
C
O
U
80,000
N
C
I
L
12
Annual Generation by Category (MWh)
Category
2024 PC1 v1.5
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
== Total ==
E
S
T
E
R
N
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
I
Difference
238,955,786
3,592,412
227,755,474
2,637,910
56,254,786
278,957,656
51,794,128
818,909
3,365,280
17,916,707
19,581,287
31,937,139
4,360,054
38,182,163
74,232,546
1,050,342,237
238,905,042
3,243,972
181,577,487
2,285,405
48,073,139
220,095,040
42,247,170
363,146
3,295,554
17,543,250
18,647,678
30,708,240
4,333,576
98,897,763
140,845,242
1,051,061,705
(50,744)
(348,440)
(46,177,988)
(352,504)
(8,181,647)
(58,862,616)
(9,546,958)
(455,762)
(69,726)
(373,457)
(933,608)
(1,228,899)
(26,478)
60,715,600
66,612,697
719,468
22,843
1,730
363
357,799
15,426,008
5,364,720
18,771
1,445
294
32,655,062
15,036,298
5,364,720
(4,072)
(285)
(69)
32,297,263
(389,711)
0
Variable Production Cost (M$)
CO2 Cost (M$)
CO2 Amount (MMetrTn)
Dump Energy (MWh)
Pumping (PL+PS) (MWh)
Exports (MWh)
W
2024 PC22 High RPS
T
Y
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
I
N
G
C
O
U
N
C
I
L
13
Generation Change by State and Fuel
Annual Gen Change (GWh) 2024 PC1 v1.5 vs 2024 PC22 High RPS
25,000
20,000
Conventional Hydro
Energy Storage
15,000
Steam - Coal
IGS
assigned to
Steam - Other
10,000
Nuclear
Combined Cycle
5,000
Combustion Turbine
IC
0
Other
Biomass RPS
-5,000
DG/DR/EE - Incremental
Geothermal
-10,000
Small Hydro RPS
Solar
-15,000
Wind
-20,000
AB
W
E
S
AZ
T
E
R
BC
CA
N
E
CO
L
ID
E
C
MT
T
R
MX
I
C
NE
I
T
NM
Y
NV
C
O
OR
O
R
SD
D
TX
I
N
UT
A
T
WA
I
N
WY
G
C
O
U
N
C
I
L
14
Annual Generation Breakdown PC22
Combustion Turbine
4.0%
IC
0.0%
Other
0.3%
DG/DR/EE - Incremental
Biomass RPS
1.7%
Geothermal
1.8%
2.9%
Small Hydro RPS
0.4%
Combined Cycle
20.9%
Solar
9.4%
Nuclear
4.6%
Steam - Other
0.2%
Wind
13.4%
Steam - Coal
17.3%
Conventional Hydro
22.7%
Energy Storage
0.3%
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
WECC 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
16
Utilization Ratings
• Congestion vs Utilization
– Some lines are designed to be congested
• “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% of
the path limit
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
17
Most Heavily Utilized Paths - PC1_1_5
Percent of Hours
U75
U90
U99
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Most Heavily Utilized Paths - PC22 High RPS
U75
60%
U90
U99
Percent of Hours
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
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
18
Results – Changes in Transmission Utilization
Most Heavily Utilized Paths
P83 Montana Alberta Tie Line
Path
75%
90%
99%
P83 Montana Alberta Tie Line
48.33%
37.40%
30.99%
P52 Silver Peak-Control 55 kV
33.38%
23.39%
0.00%
P77 Crystal-Allen
P45 SDG&E-CFE
56.56%
20.26%
21.62%
17.14%
4.18%
15.36%
P60 Inyo-Control 115 kV Tie
36.98%
17.09%
9.14%
22.81%
14.59%
10.33%
22.15%
11.67%
7.46%
19.85%
15.03%
9.59%
9.54%
5.70%
6.64%
12.22%
7.79%
5.46%
P31 TOT 2A
P52 Silver Peak-Control
P60 Inyo-Control
P77 Crystal-Allen
P15 Midway-LosBanos
P15 Midway-LosBanos
P47 Southern New Mexico
(NM1)
P47 Southern New Mexico P26 Northern-Southern
California
P31 TOT 2A
P26 Northern-Southern California
P45 SDG&E-CFE
P01 Alberta-British Columbia
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
19
Path 83
N -> S
WECC P83 Montana Alberta Tie Line
400
Megawatts
300
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
2024CC-V1.5
PC22 High RPS
2024 Max
2024 Min
PC22 High RPS Hourly Flow (MW)
P83 Montana Alberta Tie Line
-1660 GWh
400
200
0
-200
-400
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
20
Path 45
N -> S
WECC P45 SDG&E-CFE
600
Megawatts
400
200
0
-200
-400
-600
-800
-1000
2024CC-V1.5
PC22 High RPS
2012
2024 Max
2024 Min
600
400
200
0
-200
-400
-600
-800
-1000
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
21
Path 26
Megawatts
N -> S
WECC P26 Northern-Southern California
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
-1000
-2000
-3000
-4000
2024CC-V1.5
PC22 High RPS
2012
2024 Max
2024 Min
PC22 High RPS Hourly Flow (MW)
P26 Northern-Southern California
15245 GWh
6000
4000
2000
0
-2000
-4000
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
22
Generation Mix
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
WECC Peak Week
WECC Load/Gen Balance Snapshot - 2024 PC22 High RPS
MW
DG/DR/EE
200,000
Other
180,000
Combustion Turbine
Steam - Other
160,000
Combined Cycle
140,000
Biomass RPS
Geothermal
120,000
Small Hydro RPS
100,000
Hydro+ES
80,000
Solar
60,000
Wind
Steam - Coal
40,000
Nuclear
20,000
Demand
0
7/22/2024
W
E
Dump
7/23/2024
S
T
E
R
7/24/2024
N
E
7/25/2024
L
E
C
7/26/2024
T
R
I
C
7/27/2024
I
T
Y
7/28/2024
C
O
7/29/2024
O
R
D
I
7/30/2024
N
A
T
7/31/2024
I
N
G
C
O
U
N
C
I
L
24
WECC Early April
WECC Load/Gen Balance Snapshot - 2024 PC22 High RPS
MW
DG/DR/EE
140,000
Other
Combustion Turbine
120,000
Steam - Other
Combined Cycle
100,000
Biomass RPS
Geothermal
80,000
Small Hydro RPS
Hydro+ES
60,000
Solar
Wind
40,000
Steam - Coal
Nuclear
20,000
Demand
0
4/8/2024
W
E
Dump
4/9/2024
S
T
E
4/10/2024
R
N
E
4/11/2024
L
E
C
4/12/2024
T
R
I
C
4/13/2024
I
T
Y
4/14/2024
C
O
4/15/2024
O
R
D
I
4/16/2024
N
A
T
4/17/2024
I
N
G
C
O
U
N
C
I
L
25
Observations
• Study had no unserved load
• Variable Production Cost Decreased
• Transmission Congestions increased significantly
throughout the west
• Transmission Congestion resulted in a large
amount of dumped energy that would have
otherwise been selected as the least cost
resource
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
26
WECC
Dan Beckstead
Staff Engineer
dbeckstead@wecc.biz
801-819-7656
Contact
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