Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today The Market Value of Demand Response Aaron Breidenbaugh Demand Response Program Coordinator New York Independent.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proposal For Improvement to the Current ICAP Market Markets Committee October 12, 2004 Ken Bekman Con Edison Energy.
Advertisements

Definition of Firm Energy and Interruptible Transmission Two Issues Causing Problems for Business in the Western Interconnection.
Demand Resource Operable Capacity Analysis – Assumptions for FCA 5.
Gloria Godson VP, Federal Regulatory Policy Reliability Pricing Model Part 2.
1 July 15, 2007Alcoa Energy Regulatory Affairs NARUC / FERC Demand Response Collaborative Perspectives of a Large End Use Participant of NYISO Programs.
Demand Response in New York State Northwest Power and Conservation Council DR workshop February 24, 2006.
Resource Adequacy in PJM
Reliability Risks and Lessons Learned In The Wake Of The Polar Vortex OPSI Annual Meeting October 14, 2014.
MISO’s Midwest Market Initiative APEX Ron McNamara October 31, 2005.
Robert G. Ethier, Ph.D. Director, Market Monitoring May 4, 2005 ISO New England State of the Market Report 2004.
Enhancing Interruptible Rates Through MISO Demand Response: WIEG Annual Meeting June 19, 2008 Presented by: Kavita Maini, Principal KM Energy Consulting,
Susan Covino Senior Consultant, Emerging Markets March 31, 2015
Solutions to California’s Energy Crisis: Real-Time Pricing by Frank Wolak Chairman, Market Surveillance Committee March 17, 2001.
Utility Regulation March 10, 2011 Raj Addepalli Deputy Director, Electric, Office of Electric,Gas and Water New York State Department of Public Service.
A Capacity Market that Makes Sense Peter Cramton & Steven Stoft 18 March 2005.
Overview of LMP Markets Features of ISOs / RTOs David Withrow Senior Market Economist Fall 2007 Meeting of the NARUC Staff Subcommittee on Accounting and.
Demand Response in MISO Markets NASUCA Panel on DR November 12, 2012.
John Dumas Director of Wholesale Market Operations ERCOT Operating Reserve Demand Curve.
ERCOT Public 1 AS Demand Curves for Real-Time Co-optimization of Energy & Ancillary Services.
ECON 101: Introduction to Economics - I Lecture 3 – Demand and Supply.
Battling Load Growth in NYC Chris Smith NYSERDA NARUC 2007 Summer Meeting.
© 2013 McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC October 17, 2013 Robert A. Weishaar, Jr. ON SITE ENERGY – INTERPLAY WITH PJM DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAMS Harrisburg, PA.
Welcome New York Independent System Operator. (Pre-NYISO) Regulated Market Physical contracts Regulated industry Cost Based System Two Party Deals Bundled.
3 DEMAND AND SUPPLY.
Overview of FIP Issues in the RUC, Verifiable Cost, and other Nodal Market Processes January 28, 2009 WMS Meeting.
1 New England Demand Response Resources: Present Observations and Future Challenges Henry Yoshimura Demand Resources Department ISO New England, Inc. Holyoke,
Page 1 Schedule Experimental Energy Reduction (EER) updated 2005 Note: This program is available to qualified participants within the EntergyArkansas,
Overview of the Capacity Markets in the United States 2008 APEX Conference in Sydney, Australia October 13-14, 2008 Hung-po Chao Director, Market Strategy.
EPSA REGULATORY AFFAIR CONFERENCE 2006 Washington, DC October 25, 2006 Garry Brown Vice President, External Affairs New York ISO.
Main Office Other Locations 540 Broadway 38 High Rock Avenue, #2C767 Third Avenue, btwn 48 th & 49 th 601 Pennsylvania Avenue HQ Hartford, 100 Pearl Street,
1 Capacity Markets Investment in Generation Capacity Payments October 31, 2005 J. W. Charlton.
Colombian Firm Energy Market: Discussion and Simulation Peter Cramton (joint with Steven Stoft and Jeffrey West) 9 August 2006.
Charles Goldman E. O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Michael Kintner-Meyer Pacific Northwest National Laboratory DOE Office of.
NYISO Demand Side Programs and Issues
Colombia’s Forward Energy Market Peter Cramton University of Maryland 5 November 2007.
“Demand Response: Completing the Link Between Wholesale and Retail Pricing” Paul Crumrine Director, Regulatory Strategies & Services Institute for Regulatory.
Rate Design Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) presented by Nick Phillips Brubaker &
E x p e r i e n c e C o m m i t m e n t SM ERCOT Nodal – Fuel Cost Analysis Verifiable Cost Working Group October 6, 2008.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Economic DR participation in energy market ERCOT April 14, 2014 Pete Langbein.
1March 24, 2000California PX Demand Responsiveness Workshop Christensen Associates Lessons from California The Role of Demand Response Energy Markets in.
Demand Side Products in PJM Joseph BowringCornell University January 17, 2011.
Demand Response in Energy and Capacity Markets David Kathan FERC IRPS Conference May 12, 2006.
3 CHAPTER Demand and Supply © Pearson Education 2012 After studying this chapter you will be able to:  Describe a competitive market and think about.
PJM© Demand Response in PJM 2009 NASUCA Mid-Year Meeting June 30, 2009 Boston, MA Panel: Price Responsive Demand – A Long-Term Bargain.
PJM © 2006 The Institute for Regulatory Policy Studies Illinois State University Conference May 12, 2006 Jeff Bladen PJM Interconnection.
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.
Resource Adequacy Task Force (RATF) Update to WMS June 12, 2013.
Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) A Success Story… In Progress Ingmar Sterzing United States Association of Energy Economics (USAEE) Pittsburgh.
DAM Overview: Processes & Tools in the DAM Shams Siddiqi, Ph.D. Crescent Power, Inc. (512) April 2, 2008.
Emergency Demand Response Concept Overview and Examples Presented to: ERCOT December 3, 2004 Presented by: Neenan Associates.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SM Southern California Edison Company’s Proposal to Participate in Convergence Bidding August 23, 2010.
Load Resources Negative RRS Bidding in the Nodal Market Credit Working Group January 30, 2008.
OPSI Annual Meeting October 13, Session 6 Reliability Pricing Model: Are Further Changes Necessary? Reluctantly…yes But States should also be.
Floyd Trefny, P.E. Director of Wholesale Market Design Nodal Market Tools to Manage Wind Generation January 29, 2009 Presentation to the Renewables Technology.
An Overview of Demand Response in California July 2011.
ERCOT CWG/MCWG April 24, 2013 DAM Credit Parameters.
Demand Response Programs: An Emerging Resource for Competitive Electricity Markets Charles Goldman (510) E. O. Lawrence Berkeley.
Programs/Products that ERCOT Does Not Presently Offer ERCOT Demand Side Working Group New DR Product Options Subgroup Jay Zarnikau Frontier Associates.
Linnfall Consulting Market design: the energy-only market model Linnfall Consulting September 2015.
Overview of FIP Issues in the RUC, Verifiable Cost, and other Nodal Market Processes November 12, 2008 VCWG Meeting.
©2003 PJM 1 Presentation to: Maryland Public Service Commission May 16, 2003.
1 City of Palo Alto Utilities Large Commercial Customer Pilot Demand Response Program Customer Meeting March 8, 2012.
California Independent System Operator 1 Department of Market Analysis California Independent System Operator California ISO Creation Time: July,
Overview of the NYISO Demand Response Programs
Allegheny Power Residential Demand Response Program
What To Do About Western Wholesale Markets?
Benefits of ICAP Reliability Economics
Long-term Capacity Market
Mod_38_18 Limitation of Capacity Market Difference Payments to Loss Adjusted Metered Quantity. 12th December 2018.
Presentation transcript:

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today The Market Value of Demand Response Aaron Breidenbaugh Demand Response Program Coordinator New York Independent System Operator Prepared for: PLMA Fall 2004 Conference September 30, 2004

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 2 Reliability Programs  Emergency Demand Response Program  ICAP Special Case Resources Program Economic Program  Day-Ahead Demand Response Program NYISO’s Demand Response Programs

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 3 Emergency/Reliability Program Response is Purely Voluntary Minimum Resource Size: 100 kW, may aggregate within Zones Activated in Response to Operating Reserve Deficiency Payment Only for Actual Energy (kWh) Reduction Provided Provider notified of activation 2 hours ahead, if possible  Paid the greater of real-time marginal price or $500/MWh & guaranteed 4 hour minimum  May set real-time market price at $500 Available to interruptible load & emergency backup generation (including generation in excess of host load) Activated after ICAP SCR resources if deemed necessary by Operators Emergency Demand Response Program (EDRP)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 4 Emergency/Reliability Program Response is Mandatory Minimum Resource Size: 100 kW, may aggregate within Zones Activated in Response to Operating Reserve Deficiency Payment for Capacity (kW) Commitment plus Payment for Actual Energy (kWh) Reduction Provided Provider advised 21 hours ahead with 2 hour in-day notification during Operating Reserve deficiency  Paid for energy reduction: real-time market price or Strike Price (maximum $500/MWh), whichever is greater & guaranteed 4 hour minimum  May set real time market price under scarcity pricing rules Available to interruptible load & emergency backup generation (including generation in excess of host load) Activated prior to Emergency Demand Response resources ICAP Special Case Resources (SCR) Program

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 5 Economic Program Response is Expected, Energy Not Reduced is Bought Back at Higher of Day-Ahead or Real-Time Price Minimum Resource Size: 1 MW, may aggregate within Zones Load bids interruption in Day-Ahead Market just like a generator - if chosen, can set marginal price. $75/MWh minimum bid. Payment for Actual Energy (kWh) Reduction Provided Parties submitting accepted bids get:  Notified by 11:00 a.m. of schedule for the next day (starting at midnight)  incentive credit (fixed load bid reduced by amount of curtailment provided) Available to interruptible load only (generation excluded) Activated prior to Emergency Demand Response resources Mandatory Response – Penalties Assessed for Non-Compliance  penalized for buy-through at Day-Ahead or Real-Time marginal price, whichever is greater Day-Ahead Demand Response Program (DADRP)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 6 Experience with DR Emergency Programs  Activated ~22 hours each summer  ~700 MW load reduction provided  ~$3-$7 million in energy payments  Neither program activated in 2004 (so far) Economic Programs  > 350 MW registered  < 30 MW bids accepted at any given time  ~5 MW of curtailment typical  $50/MWh bid floor price in effect, slated to increase to $75 November 1, 2004 (change is pending at FERC)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 7 Market Impacts of Reliability Programs (EDRP & SCR)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 8 The standard practice Establish a range of representative Value Of Lost Load (VOLL) values rolling blackouts tend to temper costs of those effected lower range of values ($1 – $2.5/kWh may be most reasonable) Establish LOLP improvement associated with DR curtailments Generally confined to short periods Estimate load at risk Usually relatively confined - 2-5% Result Value = LOLP improvement * load at risk * VOLL Emergency Curtailment Valuation (1)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 9 System rebuild situation Customer without power VOLL reflects extension of an already long period without power at their premise, and at any local or convenient premise Higher VOLL is more appropriate ($3-5/kWh For customers without power LOLP = 1 Load at risk is their entire load System rebuild situation Customer with power An outage after restoration would be more costly than a typical rolling, short duration blackout LOLP change might be greater than under typical curtailments due to lack of system stability Load at risk may be localized, but higher than normal, and subject to a full curtailment Emergency Curtailment Valuation (2)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 10 System Rebuild State  In the case when the system was not entirely recovered, and unsaved load exceeds the DR curtailed  Change in LOLP = 1  High (~4-5/kWh) VOLL applies  Load at risk = Amount of DR curtailments Recovered System state  When the system had been fully re-energized, DR contribute to reestablishing and maintaining design reserve margin  Utilize the same methods that were employed in previous years  Change in LOLP < 1 but higher than “normal”  Lower ($1-2.5/kWh) VOLL applies  Load at Risk = ~2-5% Emergency Curtailment Valuation (3)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 11 Total August event curtailment payments = $7.5 Million System State Fully Recovered Recovering $1,000/MW $11.5 Million $13.6 Million $2,500/MW $28.7 Million $34.1 Million $5,000/MW $57.4 Million $68.1 Million Outage Cost Gross Benefits of August DR Curtailments Fully Recovered value places a lower bound on the value of DR curtailments Recovering places an upper bound on the that value Benefits Net of Payments Fully recovered and low VOLL yields B/C = 1.5 Recovering and high VOLL yields B/C = 9.0 Estimates of Reliability Benefits

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 12 Market and Reliability Benefits Prior to 2003, EDRP benefits did not distinguish between EDRP and ICAP/SCR program registration EDRP participants received $500/MWH: ICAP/SCR participants received higher of their bid, or LBMP EDRP ICAP 8,159 6,632 6,138 6, NA NA EDRP Curtailed MWh Collateral Savings ($M) Reliability Benefits ($M) Program Payments ($M) Reduced Hedge Cost ($M) Impact Ratio

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 13 Value When Programs Not Called EDRP  No payments unless activated so $0 paid out  Does Not mean value is zero  Insurance value regardless of whether program is called  NYISO is considering valuation approaches SCR  Same is true from an energy standpoint  SCR resources paid for capacity whether called or not  Additional capacity in the market makes the market more competitive Need to understand NYISO’s capacity markets…….

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 14 What is ICAP ? New York’s method to insure that energy is available today, tomorrow and in the future. Who Buys Capacity? All Load Serving Entities (LSE’s) in NYCA Marketers/Traders (resellers) ICAP Suppliers with a capacity shortfall Who Sells Capacity ? Generators Special Case Resources Marketers/Traders ICAP Buyers with Excess Capacity

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 15 How do they Sell It? Bilaterally (No NYISO Involvement) Three NYISO Auctions  Capability Period Auction (“Strip Auction”)  A six month price for an equal amount of monthly MWs  Monthly Auction  May purchase or sell for any month(s) remaining in the Capability Period  Spot Market Auction (SMA)  Auction is for the upcoming month only  SMA held to secure capacity for deficient LSEs (failure to procure) and Suppliers (inability to supply)  NYISO submits bids on behalf of all LSEs at a level determined by applicable ICAP Demand Curve

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 16 ICAP Demand Curve Demand Curve is defined by two points:  Reference Price: Set price point for 100% of requirement  Percentage of requirement for price to be $0.00  NYCA Demand Curve: 112%  LI & NYC Locational Demand Curves: 118%  Max. Demand Curve Clearing Price set at one and one-half times the localized levelized embedded cost of a gas turbine (not a trivial task to determine) Benefits  Increases system & resource reliability  Values additional capacity above NYCA & Locational Requirements  Reduces price volatility

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 17 $13.30 % of Require- ment $/kW/Mo 0% 100% (Reference Price) $0.00 Reference Price Maximum Clearing Price 118% $ % $ Summer Demand Curves *all $/kW/Month values in terms of UCAP $13.30$20.99NYC $10.86$18.28LI $ 5.93$11.20NYCA $20.99 $18.28 $11.20 NYCLI NYCA

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 18 Value of Additional Capacity ICAP prices in NYC and Long Island are set by price caps on divested generating units. Markets nearly always clear at cap values. NYCA (a.k.a. “Rest of State”) markets are competitive and liquid  More supply -> lower market clearing prices  Spot market prices are effectively determined by demand curve, which in turn reflect amount of supply  Economists say “Monthly and strip prices should converge with spot market prices”  ergo; All NYISO markets are influenced by SMA Prices

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 19 Value of Additional Capacity Rest of State Demand Curve means that:  100 MW of new supply = Price decrease of approximately $0.15/kW-mo

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 20 Market Impacts of Economic Program (DADRP)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 21 J F I G C E K D H B A F G H I J DADRP Analysis Pricing Zones West Hudson-Capital NYC Long Island

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 22 Price flexibility = % change in price due to a 1% change in the load served Low flexibilities in 2003, 2004 due to lack of price volatility and no extreme price spikes No “hockey-stick” shaped supply curve observed in 2003, 2004 West Hudson/Capital New York City Long Island / / Comparison of DAM Price Flexibilities (preliminary)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today ,694 MWh 1,468 MWh 1,752 MWh 439 MWh Scheduled DADRP $892,140 $236,745 $45,773 $4,245 Collateral Savings $682,358 $202,349 $161,558 $28,577 Reduction in Hedge Cost $217,487 $110,216 $121,144 $27,357 Program Payments Benefits clearly depend upon size of price responsiveness and scheduled curtailments DADRP Market Price Impacts (Preliminary)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 24 For load above LD supply price above value to customer  DWL: a + b Payment: b + c  NSW: a – c = DWL – Payment = (a+b) – (b+c) Positive  NSW when a>c Price Load DADRP Strike Price LBMP Est. LBMP S D LDL b a c Welfare Effects of DADRP (1)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 25 a As supply curve becomes flatter, e.g. smaller flexibility, area a can be smaller than area c, and as a result total welfare (a – c) is decreased Price Load DADRP LBMP and strike price Est. LBMP S D LDL c Welfare Effects of DADRP (2)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 26 Est. Welfare Effects of DADRP Net Welfare increase in 2001 largely due to bids being scheduled during hours with higher price flexibilities in both regions Negative NSW change due to large number of bids scheduled in low-priced hours Smaller negative NSW change in 2004 due to very small number of bids scheduled West Hudson-Capital -$752 $43,  NSW -$8,628 -$63,  NSW -$3,287 -$20,  NSW -$4,519 -$12,  NSW (preliminary)

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 27 NYISO Response to NSW Results Increase Bid Floor from $50/MWh to $75/MWh Try to Make DADRP look more like emergency programs  Explore implementation of “standing bids”  Explore automated notification system when bids accepted Increased floor should mitigate most NSW losses while other changes help retain bids and response during relatively rare high priced hours

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 28 Questions? Aaron Breidenbaugh

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 29 Demand Response Statistics/Info

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 30 Historic EDRP/SCR Participation

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 31 RIP/CSP/DRP Type EDRP/SCR MW 13 Aggregators412.7MW 3 Direct Customers140.9MW 8 Transmission Owners698.1MW EDRP/SCR Breakdown Effective September 15, LSEs321.5MW DADRP MW 46.5MW 8.0MW 334.4MW 0.0MW DR Participation by Provider Type

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 32 Breakdown Effective September 15, 2004 DR Participation by Zone

Building the Energy Markets of Tomorrow... Today 33