Presentation on theme: "Discussion: Developing a consistent approach to activating and deactivating constraints within CRR Auctions, SCED and DAM Kris Dixit."— Presentation transcript:
Discussion: Developing a consistent approach to activating and deactivating constraints within CRR Auctions, SCED and DAM Kris Dixit
Goals To provide more consistency and transparency in how ERCOT Operations manages transmission congestion within SCED Make sure that these rules make it easy for the DAM group and the CRR group to account for constraints that are deactivated in SCED
Issues to be discussed Validity of 69kV Lines in SCED, CRR and DAM Clarification of the ERCOT 2% rule in deactivating constraints Activation of constraints during system wide scarcity
Issue 1 – Validity of 69 kV lines in SCED, CRR and DAM Purpose of Analysis – This analysis specifically focuses on 69kV constraints that were deactivated in SCED but were activated in the CRR auctions – These are some examples as a premise for discussion and do not provide an exhaustive list of all constraints that were deactivated within SCED but were activated in the CRR auctions – We also present some 69kV lines as examples of constraints (from CRR Auctions) that do not meet the 2% criteria that ERCOT uses to deactivate constraints – Only two auctions were considered for this analysis. Y1 2012 Annual and Jan 2012 Monthly Auction
Example 1 Constraint: Fort Mason to Gillespie 69kV line Contingency: SFORGIL8:Fort Mason to Gillespie 138kV line Last time this constraint was activated in SCED: April 12, 2011 ERCOT has a MP for this area… Corrective action is to place the Yellow Jacket PST in Manual Mode. This contingency/constraint showed up in the Y1 2012 Auction and the Jan 2012 Auctions. Total Shadow price in Y1 2012 Auction: $229,771 x 16.5MW = $3,758,222 Total Shadow price in Jan 2012 Auction: $60,416 x 27MW = $1,631,252
Example 2 Constraint: Balinger to Humble 69kV line Contingency: SCOLBAL8, Coleman Lake - Ivey Tap to Balinger 138kV line Last time this constraint was activated in SCED: 1/21/2011 After Jan 2011, the flow on this constraint also exceeded capacity in April 2011 and Feb 2012 Reason for Deactivation: The contingency was resolved by adjusting the Firerock phase shifter transformer (PST). This contingency/constraint showed up in the Jan 2012 Auctions. Total Shadow price in Jan 2012 Auction: $73,837 x 24.3MW= $1,794,237
Issue 1 -Other lines that need to be analyzed The following are lines that had shadow prices in the two CRR auctions analyzed but may not get activated in SCED due to the 2% rule. 3580 EDDY1_9 3581 TROY1_9 1 6513 SONR2A 8239 FRIR2A 1 910 HICKORY69 914 LOCUST69 1 110735 BTE_1_8 138 110737 BTE_2_5 345 A2 39750 TNOLDOCEAN0 39870 TNPHILLPS50 1
Examples of 69kV lines deactivated due to the 2% rule (not an exhaustive list) ContingencyElementEqFromToFrom KVTo KVViolationDSTFlag Wickett Tnp to Permian BasinM_69_E5 @PECOSLNPECOSLNSTRTAP69 166.919617N Wickett Tnp to Permian BasinM_69_E1 @WINKLNWINKAAPIPELN69 120.241669N Wickett Tnp to Permian BasinM_69_E3 @LNSTRTAPLNLNSTRTAPAAPIPELN69 117.369682N Wink Tnp to Wink Sub 138 KVM_69_H1 @WICKETTLNWICKETTPYOTE69 104.290611N Wink Tnp Winkat1 138/69 KVM_69_H1 @WICKETTLNWICKETTPYOTE69 104.28714N Wickett Tnp to Permian Basin69_COLT_IH20 @TNCOLIETLNTNCOLIETIH2069 103.898262N Oldocean to Sclpcogn 69G69_R @SWEENYLNSWEENYOLDOCEAN69 117.582298N Oldocean to Sclpcogn 69G69_P2 @CLMNSTAPLNCLMNSTAPSWEENY69 138.773087N Oldocean to Sclpcogn 69G69_P1 @BRAZORIALNBRAZORIACLMNSTAP69 139.121536N Apache to Caddotn 138HEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT2XFHEIGHTTN 69138117.955467N Apache to Caddotn 138G69_J @INTRCITYLNINTRCITYLAMARQUE69 117.824669N Apache to Caddotn 138HEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT1XFHEIGHTTN 6913899.628922N Apache to Amocotn 138G69_J @INTRCITYLNINTRCITYLAMARQUE69 112.270386N Apache to Amocotn 138HEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT2XFHEIGHTTN 69138104.250679N Tejas To Coman_Tn 138 KV / GHEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT2XFHEIGHTTN 69138128.405396 Tejas To Coman_Tn 138 KV / GG69_F2 @CHOCTAPLNCHOCTAPCHOCTAW69 121.094742 Tejas To Coman_Tn 138 KV / GG69_E1A @HEIGHTTNLNHEIGHTTNNTHSDTAP69 121.016785 Tejas To Coman_Tn 138 KV / GG69_F1 @HEIGHTTNLNHEIGHTTNCHOCTAP69 115.06675 Tejas To Coman_Tn 138 KV / GHEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT1XFHEIGHTTN 69138114.243271 Tejas To Coman_Tn 138 KV / GG69_E1B @TXCITYMNLNTXCITYMNNTHSDTAP69 112.962669 Navy Kickapoo to Navy Kickap6856 @BMRTNLNBMRTNSMOUR69 109.9012N Navy Kickapoo to Navy KickapMUND_SEYM_1B @BAYLOR_TLNBAYLOR_TBMRTN69 105.9874N Caddotn To Apache 138 KV / GHEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT2XFHEIGHTTN 69138135.572632 Airline TransformerWinding 1AIRLINE TRANSF 138_69A2XFAIRLINE 69138112.469193 Caddotn To Apache 138 KV / GG69_F2 @CHOCTAPLNCHOCTAPCHOCTAW69 121.688423 Apache To Amocotn 138 KV / GG69_F2 @CHOCTAPLNCHOCTAPCHOCTAW69 114.290504 Apache To Amocotn 138 KV / GHEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT2XFHEIGHTTN 69138128.594254 Caddotn To Apache 138 KV / GHEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT1XFHEIGHTTN 69138123.576469 Caddotn To Apache 138 KV / GG69_E1A @HEIGHTTNLNHEIGHTTNNTHSDTAP69 121.476585 Apache To Amocotn 138 KV / GHEIGHTTN TRANSF HEIGHAT1XFHEIGHTTN 69138118.834656 Caddotn To Apache 138 KV / GG69_F1 @HEIGHTTNLNHEIGHTTNCHOCTAP69 115.548386 Apache To Amocotn 138 KV / GG69_E1A @HEIGHTTNLNHEIGHTTNNTHSDTAP69 115.115501 Apache To Amocotn 138 KV / GG69_F1 @HEIGHTTNLNHEIGHTTNCHOCTAP69 109.282425 Caddotn To Apache 138 KV / GG69_E1B @TXCITYMNLNTXCITYMNNTHSDTAP69 113.258202 Magruder To Victoria 69 KV /N_VICT_VICTOR1@N_VICTLNN_VICTVICTORIA69 109.260178 Apache To Amocotn 138 KV / GG69_E1B @TXCITYMNLNTXCITYMNNTHSDTAP69 107.825638
Issue 2 –Clarification of the 2% rule Should ERCOT operations activate constraints that have multiple generators with greater than 2% shift factor on that constraint but cannot move those generators because 1.Generator is a wind generator and cannot be dispatched up from its current level 2.Generator has a high negative shift factor on the constraint but is offline 3.Generator has a high negative shift factor on the constraint but is currently operating at its HSL How does the ERCOT DAM group account for these constraints within the DAM Engine? How does the ERCOT CRR group account for these constraints within the CRR Auction Engine? – Is it possible for ERCOT operations to give the CRR auction group a list of lines that they will not activate because of the issues specified above?
Issue 3 – ERCOT deactivating constraints during system wide scarcity Should ERCOT deactivate constraints in times of system wide scarcity? With the Texas Two Step, during system wide scarcity the first step should create a reference price of system wide offer cap Under such circumstances the only way a generator will get a base point to reduce generation would be if it has * – 56% positive shift factor on an Interface constraint – 62% positive shift factor on a 345kV line constraint – 80% positive shift factor on a 138kV line constraint – 100% positive shift factor on a 69kV line constraint If a generator is found to have any of the above shift factors, ERCOT should identify such generators and contingency/constraint pairs prior to the CRR auction and let MPs know that they do not intend to activate those constraints Accordingly the CRR auction must deactivate those constraints within its model as well to maintain consistency * Assumes a max marginal cost of $200 for all generators
August 2011 high and low SPPs when congestion was allowed to occur (8/1/2011 HE 14:05) Top 10 PricesBottom 10 Prices SPNC_SPNCE_4$3,409STEA_STEAM_1$2,935 SPNC_SPNCE_5$3,409STEAM_ENG123$2,935 WHTTAIL_WR1$3,307STEA_STEAM_2$2,935 JACKCNTY_CC1$3,204STEA_STEAM_3$2,935 JACKCNTY_CT1$3,204LHSES_UNIT1$2,932 JACKCNTY_CT2$3,204LHSES_UNIT2$2,932 JACKCNTY_STG$3,204OLIN_OLING_1$2,931 NTX_NTX_123$3,123OLIN_OLING_2$2,931 BRTSW_BCW1$3,091OLIN_OLING_3$2,931 WFCOGEN_13$3,084OLIN_OLING_4$2,931 WFCOGEN_24$3,084NEWM_NEWMA_5$2,931
Questions for CMWG Issue 1 – Should we question the validity of 69kV lines within SCED given that There are many lines that need only a few outages to cross the 2% threshold, thus making it difficult to remove them from the CRR models They are generally a very small upgrade away from not congesting any more – Or should we consider leaving all 69kV lines in SCED and revisit 69kV shadow price caps? Issue 3 – What are the benefits of deactivating all constraints during system wide scarcity given that locational price signals are high across the board? What are the impacts to the CRR Markets when there is uncertainty in real time constraint management by ERCOT operations?
Did uncertainty in constraint management impact CRR auction results? MPs spent approximately $385MM in the 2011 CRR auctions (including BOY 11 auction). They valued the entire ERCOT congestion market for 2011 at a little over $400MM In the Cal 12 year auction, MPs spent approximately $158MM. Since 55% of capacity was sold, they valued the ERCOT congestion market for 2012 at a little over $280MM* What portion of this $120 MM difference was because of credit issues? What portion of this was because of uncertainty in constraint management? What portion of this $120 MM difference was because of resale of CRRs acquired in BOY 2011? * Price was adjusted for gas forwards on Oct 15, based on gas forwards for each previous monthly auction. In this particular case, the gas forwards for Cal 12 averaged higher than the gas forwards for each of the previous 2011 months. Hence the CRR auction revenue was used as is.
CRR Auction Revenues AuctionCRR Auction Revenue% of CapacityTotal Market Value Jan-11$15,843,028 Feb-11$14,726,765 Mar-11$19,870,198 Apr-11$19,837,830 May-11$21,924,935 Jun-11$31,392,092 Jul-11$23,545,860 Aug-11$24,480,429 Sep-11$14,518,171 Oct-11$13,369,077 Nov-11$8,168,286 Dec-11$12,781,620 BOY 11$141,724,188 Total$362,182,47990%$402,424,976 Cal 2012$155,977,43955%$283,595,343