# Presentation: 790229

## SSG-WI Transmission Study2008 Base Case

**June 11, 2003**

## Meeting Objectives

- Reach consensus on remaining base case assumptions
- Agree on validation requirements for base case

## May 21st Meeting Issues & Solutions

## Base Case Assumption Consensus Status

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

****

****

- 

- 

## Presentation Overview

- Analysis
- Base Case Assumptions
- 2008 Case Results
- Deliverables, Results Summary & Next Steps
- Glossary/Acronyms
- Appendix

## Analysis

## Scenarios Included in Study

***5 Gas/Hydro Sensitivities***

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

**High Hydro**

**Average Hydro**

**Low Hydro**

**High Gas**

**Average Gas**

**Low Gas**

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

***2008 Simulation***

## Study Schedule

## Assumption Detail

## Operational Costs (Representative)

***Per Generation Technology / Age***

- _Note: - KLG Judgement_
- Peakers
- Cycling Plants
- Aero-Derivatives, Optimized for SC
- Larger Units, Optimized for CC
- Combined Cycles
- On peakers it is assumed that the  maintenance is deferred until a
-   set number of hours is reached.
-   Baseload plants are assumed to  be staffed  & running.

## Using the WECC 2008 LS case for system definition

Using the most recent path rating  catalog (2/03) for capacity numbers

Using modeling Nomograms reflecting system constraints

- Using the most recent path rating  catalog (2/03) for capacity numbers
- Using modeling Nomograms reflecting system constraints

**Transmission Topology**

## WECC 2008 LS Case

## SSG-WI Paths Limits

**SSG-WI Paths Limits**

## SSG-WI Modeled Nomograms

**SSG-WI Modeled Nomograms**

## Previous Gas Prices

**Notes:**
V.B.2 Evaluation of median, high and low gas prices (5-19 draft)
In modeling transmission congestion in 2008 and 2013, SSG-WI used three alternative gas price assumptions:  a low U.S. natural gas well-head price of $2.00/mcf in 2008 and $2.50/mcf in 2013; a medium well-head price forecast of $3.00 in 2008 and $3.50 in 2013; and a high well-head price forecast $4.50 in 2008 and $5.00 in 2013.  All numbers are in 2000 dollars.
These gas price assumptions were selected to cover a wide range of future prices.  Because it is interested in exploring transmission expansion needs that would be necessary to create a robust transmission system that would provide flexibility to accommodate different generation futures, SSG-WI has chosen a high gas price scenario that exceeds other forecasts.  A gas-fired generation future requires less transmission than other futures where generation is located farther from loads.
The following graph shows how the SSG-WI gas price assumptions compare with recent wellhead gas price forecasts by the Northwest Power Planning Council, the California Energy Commission, the Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2003, GII (formerly DRIWEFA), and EEA.
Basis differentials and gas transportation costs are added to the assumed U.S. wellhead prices.  The basis differentials and transportation adders are from the Northwest Power Planning Council's "Fuel Price Forecasts for the Fifth Power Plan," September 2002.  Appendix  __ [TBA] shows the assumed delivered cost of gas for each of the modeling regions.

## Updated Gas Prices

## Gas Prices at Plants

## Loads by WECC Region

## 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

## Thermal Plant by Technology

## Resource Addition since 1/1/2000

**WGA Hydro Modeling**

**Hydro Generation (GWH)**

**California**

**NW Canada**

**NW US**

**Rocky Mtn**

**AZ-NM**

**California**

**NW Canada**

**NW US**

**California**

**NW Canada**

**NW US**

**SSG-WI Hydro Modeling**

**Hydro Generation (GWH)**

**California**

**NW Canada**

**NW US**

**Rocky Mtn**

**AZ-NM**

**California**

**NW Canada**

**NW US**

**California**

**NW Canada**

**NW US**

## Renewable Resources

**Renewable Resources**

***2008 Wind***

## Maintenance Outages

**Maintenance Outages**

**Unit Type****	****	****%**
- Combined Cycle   	7%
- CT                    		7%
- Coal Plant           	10%
- Steam Oil/Gas        	10%
- Nuclear             		12%
- Geothermal           	10%

## Loads & Resources

## Position by Region of Plant Location

## 2008 Case Results

## Transmission Paths

**Transmission Paths**
**No Transmission Constraints**
**Flows on Existing Paths**

- Southern
- California

- Alberta

- Central
- California

- N.
- Nevada

- Utah

- Wyoming

- SE
- Idaho

- Colorado

- S.
- Nevada

- Arizona

- Jim
- Bridger

- East
- Colorado

- Four
- Corners

- Snake

- Northern
- California

- Idaho

- Oregon

- WA

- British
- Columbia

- MT

- East
- WA

**Notes:**
Existing Load Demand Location:  129,059 MW

Switching to Pie Charts

1999 Summer Demand from WSCC June Load & Resource Report - new report to be out soon

Expected  coincident values
Variations can occur
	Weather related:  Heat Storms, Arctic Express
	Economy Related

Other Seasons are different, WSCC Coincident peak high is in summer

## Estimated Annual Average LMP - 2008 Gas Cases

## 2008 Case - Fuel Mix by Scenario

## Installed Capacity by Fuel Type

## Interface Low Limit Expansion Shadow Prices

## Interface High Limit Expansion Shadow Prices

## Interface Flows - Expansion Shadow Prices $/MW

## Interface Flows - Expansion Shadow Prices $/MW (cont.)

## Interface Flows - Average

## Interface Flows - Average (cont.)

## Deliverables, Results Summary & Next Steps

## Deliverables

**Deliverables**

- Defined Congested Paths
- Year 2008 Summary
- Determined LMP or
- Optimal Solutions
- Outlined methodological approaches being taken to develop conceptual plans for electricity transmission in the west
- Completed all scenarios

## Existing WECC Transmission Cost
WECC 2008 Case shows some bottle-necked inexpensive resources
Implication would be transmission underbuild

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

- WECC 2008 Case shows some bottle-necked inexpensive resources
- Implication would be transmission underbuild
- 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

**Preliminary Results**

## Scenario Results Summary

- Determined that Gas has to makeup the difference for Hydro
- Defined the boundaries of usage and their associated costs; specific path usage profile vary depending on:
- Hydro conditions
- Gas price sensitivities
- location of expected loads and resources

## Variable Operating Costs - 2008 Cases

## Base Case Validation (2008)
SSG-WI consensus

Base Case (2013)

Analytical Support
Provide analytical summaries to report writers

Sub-Regional Solutions

FERC Filing

- SSG-WI consensus
- Base Case (2013)
- Analytical Support
- Provide analytical summaries to report writers
- Sub-Regional Solutions
- FERC Filing

**Next Steps**

## Glossary/Acronyms

- AW_HG 	- Average (or Medium) Water/High Gas
- 	     AW_LG 	- Average Water/Low Gas
-           AW_MG 	- Average Water/Medium Gas
- HW_LG 	- High Water/Low Gas
-           LW_HG	- Low Water/High Gas
- CCCT 	– Combined Cycle Combustion Turbine (or Combined)
- LMP 	– Locational Marginal Price.
- Nomogram – Network limitations  reflecting the interaction of several Paths, or Paths 	    and generators, or Paths and loads, or paths and generators and loads.
- Paths or Cutplanes
- 		– Reference points on a set of transmission lines that define capacity 		   restrictions under certain operating conditions or when facilities are out of 	   service. They are identified with transmission constraints.
- SCCT 	– Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine (or Simple, GT, CT)
- Shadow Price
- 		–  the cost to relieve a constraint by 1 MW.  Thus, the cost/value of 		    constraint(s) to load is the ‘shadow price(s) * the MW load affected’.
-  Steam	– Conventional Steam Turbine/Boiler
- TCA 	– Study by Tabors Caramanis & Associates on the Costs & Benefits of RTO 	    West.
- VOM  	– Variable Operating & Maintenance Costs.  Variable Fuel and Non-Fuel costs.
- WGA  	– Western Governors Association

## Appendix

## Combined PACI & PDCI

**Base Case**

## TOT 4B

**TOT 4B**

**Base Case**

## PAVANT, INTRMTN - GONDER 230 KV

**PAVANT, INTRMTN - GONDER 230 KV**

**Base Case**

## IMP VALLEY to MIGUEL

**IMP VALLEY to MIGUEL**

**Base Case**

## HASSYAMP- N.GILA (EOR line)

**HASSYAMP- N.GILA (EOR line)**

**Base Case**

## SOUTH of SAN ONOFRE

**SOUTH of SAN ONOFRE**

**Base Case**

## TOT 2C

**TOT 2C**

**Base Case**

## BRIDGER WEST

**BRIDGER WEST**

**Base Case**

## MIDWAY - LOS BANOS

**MIDWAY - LOS BANOS**

**Base Case**

## ALBERTA -  BRITISH COLUMBIA

**ALBERTA -  BRITISH COLUMBIA**

**Base Case**