# Presentation: 826858

## GridWest Redispatch Market Modeling Using PowerWorld Simulator OPF

***Kurt J. Conger***
***PowerWorld Users Group***
*November 3**rd**, 2005*

## Market and Operational Functions

## Estimate of Quantifiable Benefits

| Cost Saving Category | 4 Control Areas Consolidated |  |  | 10 Control Areas Consolidated* |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | High | Med | Low | High | Med | Low |
| 1.  Contingency Reserve | 39 | 30 | 20 | 73 | 55 | 37 |
| 2.  Regulating Reserve | 10 | 8 | 5 | 26 | 21 | 14 |
| 3.  Redispatch Efficiencies | 65 | 56 | 41 | 385 | 332 | 128 |
| 4.  Bulk Electric System Reliability | 83 | 50 | 27 | 83 | 50 | 27 |
| 5.  Power Delivery System Reliability | 98 | 58 | 17 | 203 | 119 | 36 |
| 6.  Eliminating Rate Pancakes | 61 | 20 | 4 | 61 | 20 | 4 |
| 7.  Reconfiguration – Transmission Utilization | 52 | 30 | 18 | 52 | 30 | 18 |

- (All figures in $million/year)

- * Included in the 10-control-area consolidation are the control areas of Avista Corporation, B.C. Transmission Corporation, Bonneville Power Administration, Idaho Power Company, NorthWestern Energy, PacifiCorp (east and west), Portland General Electric, Puget Sound Energy, Inc., and Sierra Pacific Power.

**Notes:**
This table summarizes the range of potential quantifiable benefits of Grid West for each of the seven categories analyzed. All figures represent cost savings estimated in millions of dollars per year.
Below the major column heading labeled “4 Control Areas Consolidated” are High, Medium and Low benefit estimates are based on the assumption that the control areas of BPA, PacifiCorp and Idaho are consolidated into a single control area. The “10 Control Areas Consolidated” columns provide comparable estimates for the assumption that all of the utilities shown on page 5 consolidate their control areas.
---------------- skip ---------------------
I want to emphasize the importance of considering the assumptions underlying the range of the benefit estimates. A day-long seminar was held in late July to discuss these assumptions. A workshop is scheduled for August 16th to further elaborate on the assumptions and methods used for the analysis.
---------------- skip ---------------------
Note that there are no totals provided in the chart above. The report includes a tabular worksheet for parties use as a tool to add up their own totals.
Prior to Decision Point 4, a complete cost/benefit analysis will be conducted to confirm benefit estimates based on the final operational design of Grid West, and system information available when the study is performed.

## Redispatch Efficiencies

***What is the effect of changing the system control topology and implementing Real-time Balancing Service (RBS)?***
***Study Hypothesis***
- By consolidating control area operations and creating a market for real-time balancing energy, Grid West can achieve lower hourly, system-wide production costs than multiple autonomous control areas.
***Basis for Study***
- Measure of benefits determined by comparing dispatch costs of multiple, autonomous control areas with various consolidated control area configurations.
- Implementation of Grid West Real-time Balancing Service (RBS)
- Redispatch market within CCA – utilizing all physically available transmission system capability (security constrained economic dispatch)
- Eliminating real-time area-to-area schedule constraints within the CCA – no Scheduled Interchange within consolidated areas
- Larger pool of generating resources available for real-time dispatch
- Flow-based, netting, reduction of transmission reserve margin (TRM), Capacity Benefit Margin (CBM)

## Interchange Schedule Input Values, Factors for Consideration and Constraints:

- Power and transmission contracts rights, interpretation and use
- Contract Path Point-to-Point type 888 Tariff Schedules
- NERC, WECC, NWPP and other scheduling rules
- Bilateral energy trades
- Capacity margins (e.g., Capacity Benefit Margin, Transmission Reserve Margin)
- Transmission rights held for flexibility and for hedging outage performance
- WSPP bilateral wholesale power products
- Treatment of load forecast error and risk
- Planned maintenance (transmission and generation-if known)
- Unit Commitment plans
- Pricing of transmission
- Reserves
- Treatment of weather forecasts and other external factors
- Assumptions of other operational conditions, e.g., loopflow (inadvertent flows)

## Modeling Process

-  Unit Commitment
-  Dynamic Schedules
-  Sched. Interchange

-  Gen Op by CA
-  Actual Flows
-  Actual Losses
-  Fuel & Production
-  Cost
-  LMPs

_**Settlement &**_
_**Allocation**_
-  Billing
-  Revenues
-  Rates

- Delivered
- Power Costs
- to Customers

_**Flow Based **_
_**Least Cost **_
_**Security Constrained **_
_**Dispatch**_
**PowerWorld**
**Optimal Power Flow Simulator**

- Fixed Costs, Contract Costs, Trades

***Modeling Process***

## Base Case Description

- 4 Seasons, light-load and heavy-load hour WECC operating cases used for individual control area to control area schedules and net scheduled interchange.
- June 14, 2004 disturbance case used as the spring, LLH case, based upon actual interchange schedules.
- These cases were used to analyze performance over a “typical” year.

## Grid West Cases:Consolidated Control Area Cases

***4 Control Areas Consolidated ***
- BPA
- PAC – East
- PAC – West
- Idaho Power Company

***10 Control Areas Consolidated***
- BPA, Idaho, PACW, PACE, Avista, British Columbia Transmission Corporation, NorthWestern Energy, Portland General Electric, Puget Sound Energy and, Sierra Pacific.

## Case Assumptions

- WECC max/min generator limits
- WECC data reflects actual interchange schedules
- Attempted to replicate actual operations (e.g., dynamic schedules, discretionary and non- discretionary hydro dispatch)
- SSG-WI and RMATs variable costs for thermal units.
- Gas price range: $5.84 to $7.22 per MMBtu (approx. $50 per MWh weighted average)
- Coal marginal cost range: $5 to $27 per MWh (approx. $12 per MWh weighted average)
- Sensitivities on Hydro opportunity costs ($20; $30; $40; $50; $65/MW-hour; Dow Jones average Mid- C and weighted average)

## Modeling Approach PowerWorld Simulator

***Time domain simulation of electric power grid***
- Models defined for a representative one-hour period
***Topology changes to WECC operating cases***
- Separated WECC Northwest Area into separate control areas
- Added flowgates and detailed path ratings
- Created zones defined by flowgates
- Modeled dynamic schedules, e.g. Mid-C unit allocations
- Load following scheduled most hydro in the CCA (limited amount of hydro available for Real-time Balancing Service)
***Solves Optimal Power Flow in individual Control Areas while holding Net Scheduled Interchange constant as a proxy for actual Control Area generation dispatch (AGC)***
- Economic Dispatch constrained by system physical limits: WECC path ratings, system element limits, voltage schedules
- Modeled both individual control areas (base cases) or consolidated control areas (change cases)

## Production Cost Savings v. Hydro Opportunity Cost

- 4 CCA Cases

## Historical Price Probability Data

- Source: Clearing Up 1197

## Recent Price Probability Data

- Source: Clearing Up 1197

## Price Frequencies for Annualization

- 2004 Data Series
- HLH = 16 hrs/day

## Resulting Product: Annualized Production Cost Savings

- 2004 Data Series – HLH Example

## Redispatch EfficiencyBenefit Estimates