NPRR 571 ERS Weather Sensitive Loads Requirements Carl Raish, ERCOT QSE Managers Working Group November 5, 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ERCOT Draft NPRR Phase 2 ORDC RATF July 8, ERCOT draft NPRR Phase 2 ORDC Draft NPRR will include the following clarifications or additions: Updates.
Advertisements

Unresolved Issues in NPRR 555 Texas Steel Companies July 9, 2013.
ERS Update Presented to: Demand Side Working Group December 5, 2014.
February 25, 2011 Demand Side Working Group EILS Update Mark Patterson ERCOT, Manager Demand Integration.
Loads in SCED v2 Subgroup The LMP-G Journey 1. TAC Endorsement of LMP-G TAC voted to endorse “LMP-G” rather than “Full LMP” as the mechanism to enable.
Loads Acting as a Resource Relationships with QSEs and LSEs
NERC LTRA Update / CDR Capacity Counting Issues
Loads in SCED Version 2 Proxy G Proposal. This is a proposal from Carl Raish as an individual … it has not been vetted internally at ERCOT and should.
PLWG Report to ROS July 9, PGRRs needing vote PGRR043 – FIS Scoping Amendment – PGRR043 moves the Subsynchronous Resonance (SSR) Study out of the.
ERCOT Tool to manage unexpected incremental load November 16, 2006.
ERCOT PUBLIC 7/14/ Long-Term Load Forecasting Calvin Opheim ERCOT Manager, Forecasting & Analysis LTSA Scenario Development Workshop July 14, 2015.
ERS Update for DSWG June 1, Agenda June – September 2012 Procurement XML Project Update Clearing Price discussion NPRR 451 Q & A.
ERS Procurement Methodology 09/04/2013 ERS Workshop Presented By: ERCOT Staff.
Presented By: Mark Patterson ERCOT Manager, Demand Integration November 29, Minute ERS Pilot update to TAC 1.
Demand Side Working Group Load Resource Performance Subgroup April 9, 2010 Mary Anne Brelinsky EDF Trading North America.
ERCOT Emergency Interruptible Load Service EILS Technical Workshop Commissioners Hearing Room, PUC July 17, 2009.
Demand Response Products. Discussion Points 1.Setting the scene….. 2.Virtual Power Station 3.Reserves deployment order 4.Demand Response Products.
ERCOT Long-Term Demand and Energy Forecasting February 20, 2007 Bill Bojorquez.
1 Presented to ERCOT Retail Market Subcommittee January 9, 2002 Profiling Working Group Darryl Nelson, Chair Load Profiling Operating Guides (LPOG)
Demand Response Workshop September 15, Definitions are important Demand response –“Changes in electricity usage by end-use customers from their.
Demand Integration Update to DSWG ERCOT Emergency Responsive Service (ERS) Report to the Public Utility Commission of Texas for the 2013 ERS Program Year.
Section 5.9 – added export language Each ERS Generator site must have an interconnection agreement with its TDSP prior to submitting an ERS offer and must.
Grabbing Balancing Up Load (BUL) by the Horns December 2006.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Economic DR participation in energy market ERCOT April 14, 2014 Pete Langbein.
ERS Update Plus Revisions to Proposed Changes for ERS Time Periods Presented to: Demand Side Working Group November 5, 2014.
Hour Ahead Dispatchable Loads Applicable Updates to Procedures Presentation to the Market Operations Standing Committee April 23, 2003
Quick Start Resource – Payment for Start-Up at less than LSL Current NPRR language: ( 8) If a QSGR comes On-Line as a result of a Base Point less than.
Weather Sensitive ERS Training Presenter: Carl Raish Weather Sensitive ERS Training Workshop April 5, 2013.
1 Reliability Deployment Task Force (RDTF Meeting) December 20 th 2011 December 20, 2011.
DSWG – March 9, 2015 Four-CP Response in ERCOT Competitive Area Carl L Raish.
Application of High Sustainable Limit With PRR 666/676 WMS November 15, 2006 Ino Gonzalez ERCOT Settlements.
Final Report Weather Sensitive Emergency Response Service (WS ERS) Pilot Project Carl Raish, ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee November 7, 2013.
Direct Load Control Update Betty Day Manager of Load Profiling and Data Aggregation February 25, 2003 Retail Market Subcommittee.
Load Resources Negative RRS Bidding in the Nodal Market Credit Working Group January 30, 2008.
ERCOT Pilot Project for Fast Responding Regulation Service (FRRS) August 8, 2012 PDCWG August 9, 2012 ETWG/QMWG.
ERS Update – DSWG Presentation September 21, 2012.
2003 State of the Market Report ERCOT Wholesale Electricity Markets.
Discussion and Preliminary Findings Concerning Voltage Reduction (VR) for Peak Shaving Mark Carpenter Sr. VP T&D Operations December 6, 2012 Presentation.
Direct Load Control Update Betty Day Manager of Load Profiling and Data Aggregation February 25, 2003 Retail Market Subcommittee.
Programs/Products that ERCOT Does Not Presently Offer ERCOT Demand Side Working Group New DR Product Options Subgroup Jay Zarnikau Frontier Associates.
Developing Load Reduction Estimates Caused by Interrupting and/or Curtailing Large Customers By Carl L. Raish 2000 AEIC Load Research Conference.
ERS Overview of Upcoming Changes.  Procedure Changes – ERS Generator Resources  Reporting Requirements – ERS Load Resources with Back-Up Generators.
Overview of Governing Document for Weather-Sensitive ERS Pilot Project Stakeholder Workshop Mark Patterson, ERCOT Staff March 1, 2013.
DSWG Update to WMS 2/9/2011. EILS Procurement Results from 1/31 Business Hours 1 HE 0900 through 1300, Monday thru Friday except ERCOT Holidays; 425 hours.
DSWG - June 25, Four-CP Response for Transmission- and Distribution- Connected ESIIDs in ERCOT Competitive Area Carl L Raish.
Third Party DR Self-Deployment Loads in SCEDv2 Subgroup Sept. 18, 2015.
Demand Side Working Group March 5, 2010 Mary Anne Brelinsky EDF Trading North America.
Update: 30-Minute Emergency Response Service (ERS) Pilot Project Mark Patterson, ERCOT October 7, 2013.
ERCOT Pilot Project for Fast Responding Regulation Service (FRRS) June 13, 2012 WMS and June 14, 2012 ROS.
Proxy $G and other Loads in SCED 2 Litmus Tests Loads in SCEDv2 Subgroup Dec. 2, 2014.
Nodal Credit Monitoring and Management – Business Requirements ERCOT CREDIT Department September 28, 2006.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR RMS Update Paul Wattles Carl Raish September 1, 2015.
Demand Response Options Review Carl Raish November 27, 2007.
AEMO: DR Mechanism Baseline Methodology DRM Working Group July 2013.
©2003 PJM 1 Presentation to: Maryland Public Service Commission May 16, 2003.
Weather-Sensitive ERS Pilot Project Proposal March 7, 2013 TAC Meeting.
Draft NPRR Weather Sensitive ERS Loads December 2012.
Load Resource Participation in EILS EILS Subgroup October 27, 2011.
Analysis of Load Reductions Associated with 4-CP Transmission Charges in ERCOT Carl L Raish Principal Load Profiling and Modeling Demand Side Working Group.
Principal Load Profiling and Modeling
Exceptional Fuel Costs in LMP
NPRRs 815NPRR Revise the Limitation of Load Resources Providing Responsive Reserve (RRS) Service.  This Nodal Protocol Revision Request (NPRR) revises.
Current FRRS Language & Explanation of Posted Data
ERCOT Pilot Project for Fast Responding Regulation Service (FRRS)
ERS Procurement Methodology
Emergency Response Service Baselines
Reflecting Losses in DR within ERCOT August 22, 2012
NPRR829 Incorporate Real-Time Telemetered Net Generation for Non-Modeled Generation into the Real-Time Liability Estimate ERCOT PRS Meeting May 11, 2017.
Database Fields for DR PNDRP January 2014.
ERS Update Mark Patterson, ERCOT Demand Side Working Group
Presentation transcript:

NPRR 571 ERS Weather Sensitive Loads Requirements Carl Raish, ERCOT QSE Managers Working Group November 5, 2013

Purpose for Revision Request Primary purpose is to establish ERS rules that facilitate participation by Loads with demand response capability that varies based on weather –Opens up ERS participation to customers willing to have their HVAC systems or other weather sensitive loads curtailed during EEA events Time Periods BH2, BH3 and 13:00 – 20:00 weekends and holidays –Attracts participation that more closely matches ERCOT system load –Creates a framework for evaluating performance and compensating participants based on the variable amount of load reduction actually provided –Establishes rules that deal more systematically for WS ERS participant churn and growth over the course of an ERS Contract Period –Establishes rules that create a disincentive for the submission of over- stated offers by imposing payment reductions ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

NPRR 571 Major Changes Participation contingent on qualification on a weather-sensitive baseline –Aggregations of residential sites automatically qualified –Non-residential aggregations must meet accuracy requirements for the ERCOT Default Regression baseline. All sites must have at least 9 months of historical interval data Accuracy is evaluated for specified time periods using Regression Baseline –R 2 > 90% and MAPE < 7.5%, or –R 2 > 95% and MAPE < 10.0% –Minimum offer for a weather-sensitive load will be 0.5 MW (0.1 MW for other ERS) –Qualification will usually be based on premise load with the anticipation that a weather sensitive end-use will be curtailed Non-weather sensitive end-uses most likely will continue participating in other ERS For example, an office building using back-up generation to offset a fixed amount of load … premise load weather sensitive but load reduction fixed. ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

4 Weather Sensitive ERS Pilot Participation ERCOT Public

NPRR 571 Major Changes QSE can modify the population of a WS ERS Load over the contract term –QSE specifies initial sites and projected number of sites on offer –Once per month update of sites allowed, number of sites can increase by the greater of: 100% of initial number Equivalent of 2 MW worth of sites … (2 MW × projected sites) / offer MW ERCOT will reject offer if the projected increase in sites exceeds both thresholds – Added sites must meet historical interval data requirements, and the modified aggregation must continue to meet weather sensitivity qualification ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

NPRR 571 Major Changes Baselines available –Standard ERS baselines are available – must have historical data that substantiates baseline accuracy –Control-group methodology introduced for WS ERS Residential loads with at least 600 sites only – no historical interval data required, but must be IDR to participate ERCOT determines appropriate number of control groups and randomly assigns sites During tests or EEA events, ERCOT designates a group to be withheld from deployment Average interval-by-interval load of sites in withheld group is used as the baseline and is compared to the average load of deployed sites Following each deployment, the withheld group is changed Site modifications may result in recalculation of number of control groups and control group assignments ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

NPRR 571 Major Changes Deployments –Maximum number of deployments is 2 times number of months in contract term –Maximum duration of a sustained response for any deployment is 3 hours –Can be 10- or 30-minute ramp with corresponding EEA-1 and EEA-2 deployment –Deployment can be at same time as other ERS or separately Self-provision –Same as other ERS –WS ERS self-provision payment offsets WS ERS charges Availability –Availability factor always set to one –Physical availability is established by monthly testing ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

NPRR 571 Major Changes Testing –Two times per month –Test duration up to 3 hours of sustained response –No advance notice of test or duration –Actual EEA Event can result in reduction in total number of tests –Tests do not reduce the number of actual EEA deployments Resource-level Event Performance –Calculations same as other ERS –Capacity obligations as offered, no change for actual weather or site count –Meeting the 10- or 30-minute ramp period is assessed by Comparing interval performance factor for first full interval to average of factors for remaining full intervals If average is less than 75% of remaining average, baseline is reduced to 0.75 times original baseline –This lowers imputed demand reduction and event performance factor ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

NPRR 571 Major Changes QSE Portfolio-level Event Performance –QSE portfolio-level Interval Performance Factor calculations same as other ERS (summed reduction / summed obligation) –Portfolio-level event performance factor is the average of the portfolio-level interval performance factors weighted by the interval fractions and sum of the prorated obligations for the interval Prorated obligation = obligation × participating sites / projected sites QSE Portfolio-level Contract Period Event Performance –Average of the portfolio-level interval performance factors weighted by the interval fractions and sum of the prorated obligations for the interval across all tests/events ERCOT Public November 5, 2013

10 Accelerated Payment Reductions No further payment reduction will be imposed if: QSE Portfolio-level Contract Period Event Performance is ≥ 0.90 QSE portfolio normalized peak demand reduction is ≥ 90% of obligation Otherwise an accelerated reduction will be imposed on a Load as follows: If maximum number of sites < 80% of number projected on the offer, or If average normalized peak DR Value per site < 90% of offer (Offer MW / projected sites) If one of the above is true, baseline is reduced such that the event performance factor equals the square of the original event performance factor If both are true, baseline is reduced such that the event performance factor equals the cube of the original event performance factor If an accelerated reduction is imposed, the QSE Portfolio-level Contract Period Event Performance is recomputed using the revised baselines ERCOT Public

November 5, Accelerated Payment Reductions Example Assume Load had a normalized peak demand reduction less than 90% of obligation Initial EPF Adjusted EPF Adjusted IPF = Initial IPF 2 ERCOT Public

November 5, NPRR 571 Questions? ERCOT Public