# Presentation: 795021

## Rocky Mountain StatesSub-Regional  Transmission Planning

- September 26, 2003

## Background Information and Work Completed to date

- WGA Report
- Formation of SSG-WI
- SSG-WI Study Results
- SSG-WI 2008 Case
- SSG-WI 2013 Case

## WGA Report

- Bryce Freeman

## Formation of SSG-WI (Bayless)

- SSG-WI was formed by the three proposed RTOs to address seams issues and is intended to cover the entire Western Interconnection
- Purpose: To provide a planning forum to further the development of a robust West-wide interstate transmission system that is capable of supporting a competitive and seamless West-wide wholesale electricity market.
- Currently conducting production cost studies to identify potential economic system upgrades

## Seams Steering GroupWestern Interconnection (SSG-WI)

- SSG-WI Planning was formed to develop a robust, West-wide interstate transmission system to support a competitive and seamless wholesale electricity market, covering the three western RTOs (RTO West, WestConnect and the California ISO.)
- PacifiCorp served as the modeling staff to SSG-WI Transmission Planning
- Currently concluding production cost studies at the node (bus) level
- The studies identify
- Congestion and congestion costs in the West
- Potentially economic upgrades to the system
- Results to be filed in October with WGA and FERC

## Overview

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

**Overview**

- Study Scope
- Evaluate Transmission Projects
- 2008 Case - Short term assessment
- 2013 Case - long enough time to allow for new transmission
- Simulation Results
- Mitigate Uneconomic Transmission
- Assessment of Transmission Added
- Provide Policy Makers with Information concerning Transmission
- Identify potential Transmission Additions for Generation Developers Report Requirements
- Next Steps

## SSG-WI Planning:Two Time Frames

- 5 Years Out (2008)
- Purpose is to identify uneconomic congestion so that sub-regional entities can develop fixes. One scenario was studied; only generation well under construction.
- 10 Years Out (2013)
- Purpose – To provide Energy Policy decision makers with insights into the transmission impacts of their decisions. Three generation development scenarios were studied (coal, gas, and renewable)

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## SSG-WI Studies

**SSG-WI Studies**

## Scenarios Included in Study

***6 Gas/Hydro Sensitivities***

***Generation***
***Under***
***Construction***

**High Hydro**

**Average Hydro**

**Low Hydro**

**High Gas**

**Average Gas**

**Low Gas**

- 

- 

- 

***2008 &2013 Simulation***

- 

- 

- Extra in the
- 2008 Case

- 

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Average Annual Load Growth Rate

**    ****Growth 2002-2011     **

- Smr Peak

- Wntr Peak

- Energy

- 1.6%

- 1.9%

- 1.9%

- 1.6%

- 1.4%

- 1.7%

- 2.6%

- 2.5%

- 2.2%

- 3.0%

- 2.7%

- 2.7%

- 1.5%

- 2.0%

- 0.9%

- 8.3%

- 9.8%

- 7.5%

- 2.0%

- 2.1%

- 1.8%

**WECC Total System**

- Canada

- NWPP-US

- RMPA

- Az-NM-S.Nv

- California

- Mexico-CFE

- Total

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Loads by WECC Region

**15,469**

**63,718**

**126,924**

**136,889**

**245,817**

**280,018**

**Loads by WECC Region**

- NWPP-Canada

- NWPP-US

- RMPA

- AZ, NM & S. NV

- California

- Mexico - CFE

- Summer: 56,981
- Winter: 42,547

***Annual GWh with Summer & Winter Peaks - 2008***

- Summer: 16,132
- Winter: 20,233

- Summer: 36,683
- Winter: 43,038

- Summer: 10,846
- Winter: 9,835

- Summer: 29,585
- Winter: 20,194

- Summer: 2,773
- Winter: 2,100

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## 2000 & 2013 Peak Loads

**2000 & 2013 Peak Loads**
**Annual Peak Loads in MW**
**on Existing Transmission System**

- Snake

- CHB

- Snake

- JB

- Utah

- N.
- NV

- Central
- CA

- British
- Columbia

- Alberta

- WA

- Mid-C

- E. WA/
- W. MT

- Oregon

- MT

- ID

- SE
- ID

- Colorado

- Northern
- California

- Arizona

- NM

- S.
- NV

- Southern
- California

- WY

- Mexico

**LEGEND**
**2008**
**2013**

## Slide 13

## 2013 Incremental

- JB

- Snake

- CHB

- Colstrip

- Alberta

- WA

- Oregon

- MT

- ID

- Utah

- WY

- Colorado

- Mexico

- AZ

- NM

- Snake

- Oregon

- Alberta

- WA

- MT

- Colstrip

- ID

- JB

- Utah

- WY

- Colorado

- CHB

- Mexico

- AZ

- NM

**2013 Incremental**

**Renewables**

**Total **

**MWs **

**= 66,793**

**On Existing Transmission System**

- JB

- Colstrip

- Alberta

- WA

- Oregon

- MT

- Snake

- ID

- Utah

- WY

- Colorado

- CHB

- Mexico

- AZ

- NM

## Western Interconnection

**GWh by Energy Source**** **

**Western Interconnection**

## SSG-WI Hydro Modeling

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Gas Prices

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Geothermal

**Geothermal**

- Western Resource Advocates

- 79MW

- 585MW

- 480MW

- 913MW

- 450MW

- 262MW

- 200MW

- 62MW

- 204MW

- 100MW

- 50MW

## Solar

**Solar**

- Western Resource Advocates

- 1043MW

- 222MW

- 58MW

- 53MW

- 459MW

- 371MW

- 278MW

## Wind

**Wind**

- Western Resource Advocates

- 1700MW

- 1200MW

- 1000MW

- 800MW

- 6900MW

- 3700MW

- 500MW

- 900MW

- 150MW

- 1250MW

- 300MW

- 2800MW

## Results

## Results Summary 2008

- Existing WECC Transmission Costs
- WECC 2008 Case shows some bottle-necked inexpensive resources - ~$110 million VOM savings, and ~$600 million net benefit
- Resource Development
- New resources are mostly gas-fired CCCTs
- Capacity by fuel type is shifting toward gas, the % change in energy is greater than the rate of capacity increase
- Total VOM Cost Estimates
- More sensitive to gas scenario than hydro scenario
- In 2008, for every $1/MMbtu change in gas price, fuel costs in the Western Interconnection change ~$2 billion

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Expansion Values - Shadow Prices - 2008

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Transmission Paths Definition

**Transmission Paths Definition**

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Slide 25

## Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Perceived Transmission Needs

**Criteria used for First Iteration Incremental Increase**** **
- Added capacity to paths so they would operate below their capacity limit at least 75% of the time.
- Blocks of capacity additions:
- 				1000 - 1500 MW required  500 kV transmission
- 			   500 - 1000 MW required 345 kV transmission
- Sufficient transmission was added so reliability criteria could be met, however, power flow or stability studies will be required to verify performance
- In many cases the transmission added was not on the congested path, rather on another path that would be more effective in alleviating the congestion.
**Criteria used for Second Iteration Incremental Increase **
- Used Shadow Pricing - path total Expansion Value of $40,000 or greater to further refine Transmission configuration
**Weighed cost & benefit of the first two iterations to choose final**

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Background map courtesy of Western Electricity Coordinating Council

**Background map courtesy of Western Electricity Coordinating Council**

## 2013 Case Results

## Overview of 2013 Results

-  Changes in Load & Generation Locational Marginal Price (only   energy market clearing price is estimated)
- Estimates of Net Benefits
-  To Loads
-  To Generators
-  Areas
-  Congestion that remains on Expanded System
- Compare savings & cash flows to Capital expenditures 2008-2013

**Overview of 2013 Results**

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## VOM

## Slide 32

## LMP

## 2013 LMP Prices - 2003$

_**John Day**_
**35.2****/33.4****/33.8**

_**Jim Bridger**_
**34.6****/24.3****/33.4**

_**Craig**_
**35.1****/28.8****/33.4**

_**Four Corners**_
**35.3****/33.1****/33.9**

_**Harquaha**_
**35.6****/34.8****/35.2**

_**Westwing**_
**35.4****/34.5****/35.0**

_**Tesla**_
**36.3****/35.9****/35.8**

_**Adlanto**_
**36.1****/32.6****/35.5**

_**Meguel**_
**37.0****/36.6****/36.1**

**Clearing Prices****(Energy Only)**
**$/MWH**
**(AW-MG)**
**2013 Gas LMP**
**2013 Coal LMP**
**2013 Renewable LMP**

**2013 LMP Prices - 2003$**

_**Tracy**_
**36.1****/38.1****/33.3**

_**Crystal**_
**35.4****/34.5****/35.0**

_**Langdon**_
**34.6****/33.0****/33.5**

_**GM Schrum**_
**35.2****/33.1****/33.9**

_**Colstrip**_
**34.6****/26.0****/28.5**

_**Wyodak**_
**34.6****/25.5****/32**

_**Mona**_
**35.2****/30.2****/33.6**

_**Midpoint**_
**35.2****/33.7****/33.6**

_**Monroe**_
**35.2****/33.1****/33.9**

_**Luna**_
**36.3****/36.4****/35.2**

_**Capt Jack**_
**35.2****/33.9****/33.7**

## Price Difference Vs. Gas (Marginal Generator)

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Congestion

## Path Expansion values 

**Path Expansion values **
**The Gas Scenario has the lowest Expansion Values as the VOM differences between CCCTs in different areas tend to be low.**
**The Renewable Scenario has more remote low cost generators and higher Expansion Values.**
**The Coal Scenario has the highest Expansion Values, due to the quantity of remote MWhs trying to move.**

## Slide 38

## Resource Performance

## Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Gas Scenario

## Slide 44

## Gas Scenario

**Gas Scenario**

## Gas Scenario

## Delta:  (2008 Transmission, Generation & 2013 load)  VS.  ( 2013 Gas scenario)

**B.C. Hydro**

- LOAD:  $31.36

- Gen:      $

- 31.72

**Sandiego**

- LOAD:  $33.40

- Gen:      $33.95

**SOCOLIF**

- LOAD:  $33.02

- Gen:      $33.97

**PG & E**

- LOAD:  $32.69

- Gen:      $33.23

**Northwest**

- LOAD:  $31.48

- Gen:      $31.21

**WAPA R.M.**

- LOAD:  $31.03

- Gen:      $31.07

**WAPAU.M.**

- LOAD:  $30.57

- Gen:      N/A

**Montana**

- LOAD:  $30.82

- Gen:      $30.49

**Alberta**

- LOAD:  $30.92

- Gen:      $30.77

**Aquila**

- LOAD:  $31.35

- Gen:      $30.98

**PSCOLORADO**

- LOAD:  $32.21

- Gen:      $32.21

**LADWP**

- LOAD:  $32.97

- Gen:      $31.76

**ImperialCA**

- LOAD:  $32.36

- Gen:      $31.95

**Arizona**

- LOAD:  $31.96

- Gen:      $31.42

**New Mexico**

- LOAD:  $32.15

- Gen:      $31.49

**WAPA L.C.**

- LOAD:  $31.60

- Gen:      $31.66

**Mexico -C**

- LOAD:  $32.69

- Gen:      $32.51

**Idaho**

- LOAD:  $31.07

- Gen:      $30.74

**Sierra**

- LOAD:  $32.33

- Gen:      $32.27

**PACE**

- LOAD:  $31.47

- Gen:      $30.99

**Nevada**

- LOAD:  $31.90

- Gen:      $32.02

**LMP Costs **

**(2003$)**

** ****- 2013**

**   **

**SCENARIO**

-  (AW-AG)

**:**

**Gas**

**Legend**

- LOAD:   LMP Costs for the Load

- Gen:       LMP Costs for the Generator

## Coal Scenario

## Slide 49

## Coal Scenario

**Coal Scenario**

## Coal Scenario

**Coal Scenario**

## Slide 52

## Coal

**B.C. Hydro**

- LOAD:  $29.72

- Gen:      $

- 30.01

**Sandiego**

- LOAD:  $33.37

- Gen:      $33.77

**SOCOLIF**

- LOAD:  $33.01

- Gen:      $34.04

**PG & E**

- LOAD:  $32.59

- Gen:      $33.41

**Northwest**

- LOAD:  $30.00

- Gen:      $29.50

**WAPA R.M.**

- LOAD:  $24.48

- Gen:      $23.51

**WAPAU.M.**

- LOAD:  $22.35

- Gen:      N/A

**Montana**

- LOAD:  $24.39

- Gen:      $22.45

**Alberta**

- LOAD:  $29.60

- Gen:      $29.78

**Aquila**

- LOAD:  $29.67

- Gen:      $28.64

**PSCOLORADO**

- LOAD:  $25.64

- Gen:      $25.50

**LADWP**

- LOAD:  $31.16

- Gen:      $30.51

**ImperialCA**

- LOAD:  $32.04

- Gen:      $31.82

**Arizona**

- LOAD:  $31.03

- Gen:      $30.47

**New Mexico**

- LOAD:  $31.12

- Gen:      $29.62

**WAPA L.C.**

- LOAD:  $29.87

- Gen:      $30.15

**Mexico -C**

- LOAD:  $37.76

- Gen:      $37.80

**Idaho**

- LOAD:  $29.63

- Gen:      $24.63

**Sierra**

- LOAD:  $34.62

- Gen:      $35.22

**PACE**

- LOAD:  $27.85

- Gen:      $25.69

**Nevada**

- LOAD:  $30.93

- Gen:      $32.61

**LMP Costs **

**(2003$)**

** ****- 2013**

**   **

**SCENARIO**

-  (AW-AG)

**:**

**Coal**

**Legend**

- LOAD:   LMP Costs for the Load

- Gen:       LMP Costs for the Generator

## Renewable Scenario 

## Slide 55

## Renewable Scenario

**Renewable Scenario**

## Renewable Scenario

## Delta:  (2008 Transmission, Generation & 2013 load) VS. ( 2013 Renewable scenario)

## How to Apply Capital Costs?

## Generation Integration ~ 2m/mi

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Transmission Capital Costs

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Which is the appropriate cash flow to consider?

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Slide 63

## Tradeoff: Capital VS. Running Cost

**Tradeoff: Capital VS. Running Cost**

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Summary Comparison - Cost/ Benefits

- Transmission Capital Costs
- Generation Capital Costs
- VOM

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## Cost & Savings of the Three Scenarios

- Just a quick cut at Incremental Costs and investments.
- The Coal Scenario has incremental capital costs of ~$24 Billion while the Renewable is ~$22B (on top of ~$19B for the gas case).
- Savings average ~$3.8B for coal and ~$2.7B for renewables, so a 6 and 8 year simple payback.

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

## SSG-WI Study Conclusions

***Seams Steering Group of the Western Interconnection***

- Gas resources require less new transmission to develop
- Resources at remote areas require more transmission and longer time
- Transmission additions, common to all three scenarios, were designed to relieve congestion seen in 2008 and 2013
- Emphasis on reliability to be addressed in the sub-regional process as a necessity
- All scenario additions show to be cost effective
- Other supportive benefits from building transmission:
- Loss savings benefits
- lost time for maintenance
- Symbiotic effects of transmission paving the way for more opportunities (i.e. wind developments in Montana, Coal in the eastern states of WECC)
- There are areas on the grid that will be congested in the near future and solutions should be investigated in sub regional forums