Demand Response in Connecticut Presented by: Bob Laurita ISO New England December 2, 2004.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Achieving Price-Responsive Demand in New England Henry Yoshimura Director, Demand Resource Strategy ISO New England National Town Meeting on Demand Response.
Advertisements

New England Developments in Demand Response and Smart Grid 2010 National Town Meeting on Demand Response and Smart Grid Henry Yoshimura, Director, Demand.
BG&E’s PeakRewards SM Demand Response Program Successful Approaches for Engaging Customers August 20, 2014.
Demand Response in New York State Northwest Power and Conservation Council DR workshop February 24, 2006.
Resource Adequacy in PJM
NARUC-FERC Demand Response Collaborative Meeting NARUC Fall Meeting Anaheim, CA T. Graham Edwards President & CEO November 11, 2007.
WAL-MART STORES, INC. DEMAND RESPONSE. Wal-Mart in New York Supercenters45 Discount Stores45 Neighborhood Markets 0 Sam’s Clubs17 Distribution Centers4.
1 Presentation to the Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group (WIEG) T. Graham Edwards President & CEO August 9, 2007.
Connecticut Energy Efficiency Incentive Program Overview of Program February 2010 DPUC-Approved Energy Efficiency Incentives for Connecticut Electric Users.
Enhancing Interruptible Rates Through MISO Demand Response: WIEG Annual Meeting June 19, 2008 Presented by: Kavita Maini, Principal KM Energy Consulting,
Loads Acting as a Resource Relationships with QSEs and LSEs
Susan Covino Senior Consultant, Emerging Markets March 31, 2015
Connecticut’s Energy Future Connecticut Energy Advisory Board Conference Hartford, Connecticut December 2, 2004 Kevin Kirby Vice President, Market Operations.
The Convergence of Market Designs for Adequate Generating Capacity Peter Cramton and Steven Stoft 24 March 2006.
Demand Response in MISO Markets NASUCA Panel on DR November 12, 2012.
1 Demand Response Update April, Strategic Perspective Demand Response  Aligns with PGE’s Strategic Direction; helping to provide exceptional.
Economic Transmission Case Study: Champlain Wind Link Vermont System Planning Committee March 10, 2010.
ISO New England Regional Update Wholesale Electricity Markets & State Energy Policy Seminar Connecticut Business & Industry Association December 14, 2010.
© 2013 McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC October 17, 2013 Robert A. Weishaar, Jr. ON SITE ENERGY – INTERPLAY WITH PJM DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAMS Harrisburg, PA.
What’s Coming Down with Energy in California Lon W. House, Ph.D ACWA Fall Conference 2003 San Diego, CA.
An Overview of the Australian National Electricity Market Brian Spalding Chief Operating Officer.
Warren Lasher Director, System Planning October 4, 2014 Our Energy Future.
Demand Response in Midwest ISO Markets February 17, 2008.
Overview of the North American and Canadian Markets 2008 APEX Conference in Sydney, Australia October 13, 2008 Hung-po Chao Director, Market Strategy and.
NAESB MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION MODEL BUSINESS PRACTICE RETAIL ELECTRIC DEMAND RESPONSE NARUC update 9/14/09.
1 New England Demand Response Resources: Present Observations and Future Challenges Henry Yoshimura Demand Resources Department ISO New England, Inc. Holyoke,
FERC’s Role in Demand Response David Kathan ABA Teleconference December 14, 2005.
OSC Meeting April 27, Transmission Cost Allocation Overview.
Joe Polidoro, Sr. Engineer PJM Interconnection, LLC Grid of the Future: Integrating Load Response into the Markets.
The Secrets to Successful AMI Deployment – The Ontario Experience Paul Murphy, President & CEO Independent Electricity System Operator February 19, 2007.
Demand Response: Keeping the Power Flowing in Southwest Connecticut Presented by: Henry Yoshimura Manager, Demand Response ISO New England September 30,
Electric Energy Issues and the Region Connecticut Business and Industry Association Stamford, Connecticut December 2, 2004 Kevin Kirby Vice President,
“Demand Response: Completing the Link Between Wholesale and Retail Pricing” Paul Crumrine Director, Regulatory Strategies & Services Institute for Regulatory.
Demand Response Workshop September 15, Definitions are important Demand response –“Changes in electricity usage by end-use customers from their.
Rate Design Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) presented by Nick Phillips Brubaker &
Linking the Wholesale and Retail Markets through Dynamic Retail Pricing Presented by: Henry Yoshimura Manager, Demand Response ISO New England September.
Making the Wholesale Market Work for Retail Customers: Connecticut Municipal System Experiences November 11, 2007 Anaheim, California Presented by: Brian.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Economic DR participation in energy market ERCOT April 14, 2014 Pete Langbein.
PJM©2012www.pjm.com PJM’s Experience with Capacity Markets Terry Boston President & CEO PJM Interconnection Power Across Texas September 21, 2012.
Distributed Generation/Demand Resources in ISO New England’s Wholesale Markets 2nd Annual Distributed Energy Conference - Building Resilient Communities.
Demand Response: Next Steps OPSI Annual Meeting October 1, 2012 Howard J. Haas.
Demand Response in Energy and Capacity Markets David Kathan FERC IRPS Conference May 12, 2006.
Chicago Advanced Energy Demand Response & CSP Evolution Kellen Bollettino Comverge Inc. 10/23/14.
PJM© Demand Response in PJM 2009 NASUCA Mid-Year Meeting June 30, 2009 Boston, MA Panel: Price Responsive Demand – A Long-Term Bargain.
Distributed Solar Generation: Value and Pricing Austin Electricity Conference April 9, 2015 Ashley Brown Executive Director, Harvard Electricity Policy.
Demand Response as Capacity in New York National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Winter Committee Meetings Washington, DC February 17,
Demand Response: What It Is and Why It’s Important 2007 APPA National Conference San Antonio, Texas June 26, :00 a.m. to Noon Glenn M. Wilson Director.
Market Participant Experiences with Demand Side Bidding and Future Direction Linda Roberts, EA Technology Richard Formby, EA Technology.
Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) A Success Story… In Progress Ingmar Sterzing United States Association of Energy Economics (USAEE) Pittsburgh.
DR issues in California discussed last year in March Historical DR in California: some background issues –Twenty years of programs/tariffs I/C and AC cycling.
FERC Staff’s Report on Demand Response and Advanced Metering.
Demand Response Programs: An Emerging Resource for Competitive Electricity Markets Charles Goldman (510) E. O. Lawrence Berkeley.
G 200 L 200 ISO NEW ENGLAND T H E P E O P L E B E H I N D N E W E N G L A N D ’ S P O W E R. Southwest Connecticut RFP Markets Committee November 14, 2003.
Demand Response, Planning, and Regional Markets NASUCA Conference June 30, 2009 Joe Rosenthal, CT OCC.
New Incentives for Pursuing Demand Response Scott Strauss and Sean Flynn Spiegel & McDiarmid APPA Legal Seminar San Francisco – November 2004.
More Than Smart – A Distribution System Vision © 2011San Diego Gas & Electric Company. All copyright and trademark rights reserved. Dave Geier – VP Electric.
OPSI Annual Meeting October 8 th Should all capacity resources be paid the same? -Demand Response operational deployment.
Michael A. Chowaniec, Legislative Director Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control Planning Conference on Maryland’s Energy Future July 26, 2007.
San Diego Gas & Electric February 24 th, 2016 Energy Matinee Pricing Tariff Proposal.
Demand Response 2010 and Beyond April 28, 2011 Pete Pengilly.
©2003 PJM 1 Presentation to: Maryland Public Service Commission May 16, 2003.
Narragansett Electric Rate Classes
The Future of Demand Response in New England
Draft 2013 Energy-Efficiency Forecast
Benefits of New England’s Proposed Capacity Market
New England Resource Adequacy
Load Response Products from Constellation NewEnergy
Alternative ICAP Proposal
Wholesale Electricity Costs
LICAP Settlement: Demand Resources
Presentation transcript:

Demand Response in Connecticut Presented by: Bob Laurita ISO New England December 2, 2004

Agenda Definitions Program Descriptions Participation and Performance Southwest Connecticut Myths vs. Facts

What is Demand Response? Customers reducing their electricity consumption in response to either: –High Wholesale Prices –System Reliability Problems Demand Response events happen infrequently Demand Response provides Capacity and Reserves – Not Energy like Traditional Generation or Energy Efficiency

In a Perfect World …. Wholesale markets provide Price Signals for energy, capacity and reserves Suppliers pass Wholesale Price Signals on through Retail Rates Low cost advanced metering and communication systems abound Low cost technology allows customers to quickly control their consumption Retail customers change their behavior in response to high prices or reliability problems. Demand Response happens naturally without any special effort or programs!

In the Real World …. Wholesale Markets are still “Under Construction” Wholesale and Retail markets are Disconnected Suppliers (standard offer and competitive) do not offer Demand Response Rates and Services to customers Interval metering and control technology is limited and more widespread deployment will cost money Customers have little incentive to naturally respond to wholesale prices or reliability problems. Programs are needed until Demand Response is mature enough to be fully integrated into the Wholesale Markets

ISO New England’s Programs Reliability (Demand) Programs: –Customers respond to System Reliability Problems as determined by the ISO New England Control Room Price Programs: –Customers voluntarily respond to Wholesale Prices (LMP) as determined by the Market.

95 MW 42 Customers 39 MW 40 Customers 134 MW Help Maintain Reliability Source: 10/1/2004 Enrollments

2 MW 1 Customer 14 MW 4 Customers 2 MW 6 Customers 8 MW 2 Customers 26 MW Respond to Price Source: 10/1/2004 Enrollments

97 MW 14 MW 41 MW 8 MW 160 MW of Total Demand Response Source: 10/1/2004 Enrollments

Payment and Performance

Customer Benefits: Paid to Get in Shape! Short-Term –Paid for Performance Minimum Payment $0.10 to $0.50/kWh –Paid for Availability* $/kW per Month based on Capacity Market or Supplemental Capacity Agreement Long-Term –Better Load Shape = Better Retail Price! * Reliability Programs Only

Demand Response in Southwest Connecticut

Background Load growth has exceeded the capacity of local generation and transmission to reliably serve customers. New local resources and transmission lines are badly needed. Project delays have creating a “reliability gap”. The serious threat to the region’s reliability could not go unresolved.

ISO New England’s Solicitation RFP issued in December 2003 for up to 300 MW of new emergency resources in Southwest Connecticut for 4 years. Eligible resources included: –Quick Start Generation –Demand Response –On-Peak Energy Conservation

RFP Results 34 Proposals Received –Many offered multiple projects and options 8 Suppliers Selected Contracts Executed in April 2004 All Selected Resources are either Demand Response or On-Peak Conservation

Contract Terms Performance Based Payments –$/kW per Month and $/kWh Penalties for Failing to Deliver and Perform 4 Year Term with 5 th Year Option Monitoring and Verification Plan Approx. $128 Million over 4 years

Selected Suppliers Conservation Services Group

Summary of Selected Resources

Why did Demand Response do so well? Location, Location, and Location –Resources located in the load pockets –No interconnection issues Price –Mostly incremental investments in metering, communications and controls. Permitting –Not an issue for load reduction –Pending changes (Section 42) will make it easier for emergency generators to participate.

August 20 th Performance – All SWCT RFP Resources Started: 11:00 a.m. Ended: 1:30 p.m. Resources had 30 minutes to respond

August 20 th Performance – Emergency Generation Only

August 20 th Performance – Load Reduction Only

Common Myths about Demand Response Slow and Insignificant – it will never provide enough capacity to solve real problems Not Reliable Not Functionally Equivalent to Generation. Should Happen Naturally and would succeed if it were only better advertised. Not Enough Customers will want to do this! It will not make a difference. Source: EnerNOC 9/14/2004

Myths vs. Facts MythFact Slow & Insignificant120 MW in 30-Minutes Not Reliable5-minute data to monitor and verify performance Not Equivalent to Generation Can be implemented quickly and exactly where it is needed Should Happen Naturally Maybe in a perfect world. In the real world, given the imperfections in the market, we need programs to procure this cost-effective resource. Not Enough CustomersIt’s not for everyone! A few customers can have a huge impact on price and reliability for the benefit of everyone.

Bob Laurita ISO New England Office: Cell: