20231018AVU to Staff 6 Attachment A.pdf

SouthwestPowerPool SPPorg southwest-power-poolHelping our members work together to keep the lights on... today and in the future.1
ADVANCED ASSESSMENT RESULTS FOR WINTER 2024-2025
WESTERN RESOURCE ADEQUACY PROGRAM
7-31-2023
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 1 of 35
2
PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 2 of 35
3
DETERMINATION OF 0.1 LOLE
•Study Years: 2024-2025 Winter Season
•Loss of load events were tabulated during the winter hours
•Pure negative capacity (no outages) was added in all hours of the winter until the program footprint (or subregion footprint) reached 0.1 LOLE
•Monthly adjustments were made to ensure all months of the season had at least 0.01 LOLE while maintaining 0.1 LOLE across the season
•Capacity contribution of VERs (wind, solar, ESR) were determined by removing those resources from the model and re-running the simulation.
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 3 of 35
4
PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN CALCULATION
•Planning Reserve Margin is calculated per the following equation after all capacity
was converted to UCAP values (defined below):
𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛 𝑈𝐶𝐴𝑃 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝐷𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝐷𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑∗ 100%
•Planning Reserve Margin (UCAP) was calculated for the non coincident peak demand.
•Non-Coincident Peak Demand is the sum of the monthly single hour peak load forecast for each
transmission zone for the region being studied
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 4 of 35
5
PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN CALCULATION
•The resource capacity were converted to a UCAP value, which is defined
by resource type below:
Resource Type Conversion to UCAP method
Thermal Generation UCAP capacity values from the QCC analysis were used to
replace the ICAP (nameplate) value of all thermal resources.
Variable Energy Resources (VER) and Energy Storage Resources UCAP values for all VER types were determined by calculating the monthly contribution of the aggregate value of all three resource types (wind, solar, ESR) by performing a LOLE analysis without the resources in the model (e.g. 0.1 LOLE) and calculated by the difference in capacity needed
from the model with the resources in service
Run of River Hydro QCC values as determined through average production across the Capacity Critical Hours
Storage Hydro QCC values determined through the Hydro QCC method
Demand Response No conversion – ICAP values used for designed production with five hour duration
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 5 of 35
6
DETERMINATION OF VER UCAP VALUE
•UCAP values for all VER types were determined by calculating
the contribution of the aggregate value of all three resource
types (wind, solar, ESR)
•A monthly LOLE analysis was performed by removing the VER
resources in the model, then adding perfect capacity in all
hours of the winter and summer separately until the RA
Program footprint (or subregion footprint) reached the
seasonal 0.1 LOLE again
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 6 of 35
7
INTERCHANGE EVALUATED
•Regional interchange as determined in the WRAP Design
Guide Document was modeled.
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 7 of 35
8
PRM VALUES / MID-C SUBREGION
January February March November December
LOLE 0.026 0.026 0.01 0.01 0.026
2024‐2025 Peak Demand (NCP) 38,558 37,613 33,426 34,485 38,653
Final Capacity requirement 45,300 44,523 42,133 41,285 45,270
UCAP NCP PRM 17.5% 18.4% 26.1% 19.7% 17.1%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 8 of 35
9
PRM VALUES / SWEDE SUBREGION
January February March November December
LOLE 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04
2024‐2025 Peak Demand (NCP) 20,156 19,539 18,342 18,106 20,222
Final Capacity requirement 23,783 24,057 22,228 21,584 23,799
UCAP NCP PRM 18.0% 23.1% 21.2% 19.2% 17.7%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 9 of 35
10
PRM VALUES / WRAP FOOTPRINT
January February March November December
LOLE 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04
2024‐2025 Peak Demand (NCP) 58,713 57,152 51,768 52,591 58,874
Final Capacity requirement 66,037 65,443 59,257 60,639 65,979
UCAP NCP PRM 12.5% 14.5% 14.5% 15.3% 12.1%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 10 of 35
11
EFFECTIVE LOAD CARRYING CAPABILITY RESULTS
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 11 of 35
12
ELCC SIMULATION METHODOLOGY
•An ELCC study was performed on the 2024-2025 Study Year to
analyze the ability of the VERs to reliably serve each subregion’s
demand
•Different methodology from last assessment which analyzed the
Program footprint demand.
•The VERs analyzed included wind, solar, and energy stoage
resources (ESRs)
•A LOLE analysis was performed by removing the VER test resource
in the model, then adding perfect capacity in all hours of the
winter until the RA Program footprint reached the 0.1 LOLE again
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 12 of 35
13
MONTHLY QCC DETERMINATION
•The seasonal ELCC values were then converted to monthly
QCC values by adjusting the resources in each VER zone in
accordance with their performance during the Capacity
Critical Hours of each month
•The average performance across the Capacity Critical Hours
for each month were pro-rated to average the seasonal ELCC
value
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 13 of 35
14
WRAP WIND VER ZONES
Zone Nameplate
Wind VER 1 5,118 MW
Wind VER 2 2,347 MW
Wind VER 3 1,323 MW
Wind VER 4 2,546 MW
Wind VER 5 747 MW
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 14 of 35
15
WRAP SOLAR VER ZONES
Zone Nameplate
Solar VER 1 1,700 MW
Solar VER 1A 895MW
Solar VER 2 8,674MW
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 15 of 35
16
ESR SUBREGIONS
Zone Nameplate
MID-C ESRs 248MW
SWEDE ESRs 3,407MW
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 16 of 35
17
SYSTEM ELCC ADJUSTMENT
•After the monthly adjustment of the ELCC values was
performed, an adjustment of all ELCC values was performed
to ensure the total of all ELCC values did not exceed the
capacity contribution from the VERS in the LOLE study.
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 17 of 35
18
MID-C ELCC ADJUSTMENT
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 18 of 35
19
SWEDE ELCC ADJUSTMENT
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 19 of 35
20
QCC BY MONTH – WIND VER 1
January February March November December
Wind VER 1 QCC 285 440 702 426 371
Nameplate 5118 5118 5118 5118 5118
QCC %5.6% 8.6% 13.7% 8.3% 7.3%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 20 of 35
21
QCC BY MONTH – WIND VER 2
January February March November December
Wind VER 2 QCC 499 647 655 507 554
Nameplate 2347 2347 2347 2347 2347
QCC %21.2% 27.6% 27.9% 21.6% 23.6%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 21 of 35
22
QCC BY MONTH – WIND VER 3
January February March November December
Wind VER 3 QCC 403 305 480 623 611
Nameplate 1323 1323 1323 1323 1323
QCC %30.5% 23.1% 36.2% 47.1% 46.2%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 22 of 35
23
QCC BY MONTH – WIND VER 4
January February March November December
Wind VER 4 QCC 680 632 768 808 845
Nameplate 2546 2546 2546 2546 2546
QCC %26.7% 24.8% 30.2% 31.7% 33.2%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 23 of 35
24
QCC BY MONTH – WIND VER 5
January February March November December
Wind VER 5 QCC 106 103 116 190 161
Nameplate 747 747 747 747 747
QCC %14.2% 13.8% 15.6% 25.4% 21.6%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 24 of 35
25
QCC BY MONTH – WIND ZONES
January February March November December
VER1 5.6% 8.6% 13.7% 8.3% 7.3%
VER2 21.2% 27.6% 27.9% 21.6% 23.6%
VER3 30.5% 23.1% 36.2% 47.1% 46.2%
VER4 26.7% 24.8% 30.2% 31.7% 33.2%
VER5 14.2% 13.8% 15.6% 25.4% 21.6%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 25 of 35
26
QCC BY MONTH – SOLAR VER 1
January February March November December
Solar VER 1 QCC 56 53 86 21 53
Nameplate 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
QCC %3.3% 3.1% 5.1% 1.3% 3.1%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 26 of 35
27
QCC BY MONTH – SOLAR VER 1A
January February March November December
Solar VER
1A QCC 19 28 28 8 17
Nameplate 895 895 895 895 895
QCC %2.2% 3.1% 3.1% 0.9% 1.9%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 27 of 35
28
QCC BY MONTH – SOLAR VER 2
January February March November December
Solar VER 2 QCC 1317 1315 936 450 903
Nameplate 8674 8674 8674 8674 8674
QCC %15.2% 15.2% 10.8% 5.2% 10.4%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 28 of 35
29
QCC BY MONTH – SOLAR ZONES
January February March November December
VER1 3.3% 3.1% 5.1% 1.3% 3.1%
VER1A 2.2% 3.1% 3.1% 0.9% 1.9%
VER2 15.2% 15.2% 10.8% 5.2% 10.4%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 29 of 35
30
QCC BY MONTH – ESR
January February March November December
ESR MID-C QCC 213 203 248 248 248
Nameplate 248 248 248 248 248
QCC %86.2% 82.1% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
January February March November December
ESR SWEDE QCC 2152 2288 2065 2180 2421
Nameplate 3407 3407 3407 3407 3407
QCC %63.2% 67.2% 60.6% 64.0% 71.1%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 30 of 35
31
QCC FOR RUN OF RIVER HYDRO RESOURCES
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 31 of 35
32
QCC BY MONTH – RUN OF RIVER MID-C
January February March November December
ROR MID-C QCC 908 871 834 997 993
Nameplate 3,568 3,568 3,568 3,568 3,568
QCC %25.5% 24.4% 23.4% 27.9% 27.8%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 32 of 35
33
QCC BY MONTH – RUN OF RIVER SWEDE
January February March November December
ROR SWEDE QCC 293 329 461 216 319
Nameplate 1,253 1,253 1,253 1,253 1,253
QCC %23.4% 26.2% 36.8% 17.2% 25.4%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 33 of 35
34
QCC FOR THERMAL UNITS
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 34 of 35
35
THERMAL QCC
Winter 24-25 Season
WRAP Thermal QCC 41,335 MW
Nameplate 42,126 MW
QCC %98%
Staff_PR_006 Attachment A Page 35 of 35