DSWG - June 25, 2014 2013 Four-CP Response for Transmission- and Distribution- Connected ESIIDs in ERCOT Competitive Area Carl L Raish.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
National Town Meeting on Demand Response Focus on Pepcos Washington, DC Residential Smart Meter Pilot Program Presented By Steve Sunderhauf July 14, 2009.
Advertisements

Matt’s Schedule. Headway Variation Estimated Load vs. Passenger Movement.
Results from the 2013 Survey of LSEs to Obtain Retail DR and Dynamic Pricing information Public Summary Frontier Associates LLC June
ERS Update Presented to: Demand Side Working Group December 5, 2014.
Electrical Billing and Rates MAE406 Energy Conservation in Industry Stephen Terry.
TIME OF USE RATES AT THE UNITED ILLUMINATING COMPANY Presented at: Connecticut’s Energy Future December 2, 2004 James D. Lundrigan Pricing Manager The.
1 Econometric Load Forecasting Peak and Energy Forecast 06/14/2005 Econometric Load Forecasting Peak and Energy Forecast 06/14/2005.
2011 Long-Term Load Forecast Review ERCOT Calvin Opheim June 17, 2011.
ANALYZING YOUR ELECTRIC BILL Bob Walker Met-Ed November 7, 2007.
Presentation Overview
1 Price Elasticity of Demand in Current Zonal Market PUCT Demand Response Workshop (Project No ) Jay Zarnikau Frontier Associates January 2007.
October 28, 2014 Update to RMS 1. * Reviewed and Discussed: * ERCOT Protocols and Retail Market Guide Requirements * TDSPs’ Data Processes for IDR vs.
Joel Koepke, P.E. ERCOT Operations Support Engineer ERCOT Experiences During Summer 2011.
ERCOT 2003 UFE ANALYSIS By William Boswell & Carl Raish AEIC Load Research Conference July 13, 2005.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR Data Collection Project and Lessons Learned Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG March 2014.
Price Responsive Load Next Steps – Data Collection Paul Wattles Karen Farley DSWG and RMS sub team October 16, 2012.
1 AMS Data Workshop ERCOT Overview of AMS Data Processes June 27, 2014 ERCOT June 27, 2014.
© 2007, Itron Inc. VELCO Long-Term Demand Forecast Kick-off Meeting June 7, 2010 Eric Fox.
Utah Cost of Service and Rate Design Task Force
Compiled by Load Profiling ERCOT Energy Analysis & Aggregation
1 18-Month Outlook October March 2005 Presented by Greg Hine IMO Long-Term Forecasts and Assessments.
ERCOT Long-Term Demand and Energy Forecasting February 20, 2007 Bill Bojorquez.
UFE 2003 Analysis June 1, UFE 2003 ANALYSIS Compiled by the Load Profiling Group ERCOT Energy Analysis & Aggregation June 1, 2005.
2013 California Statewide Critical Peak Pricing Evaluation Josh L. Bode Candice A. Churchwell DRMEC Spring 2014 Load Impacts Evaluation Workshop San Francisco,
ERCOT Demand Response Spring 2015 ERCOT Operator Seminar.
Market Operations Presentation ERCOT Board of Directors October 21, 2008 Updated as of 10/21/08 Betty Day.
March 1, 2011 Load Analysis Update Calvin Opheim Manager, Load Forecasting and Analysis.
ERCOT Staff Demand Integration Update to DSWG 3/08/2013 DSWG Meeting.
May 03, UFE ANALYSIS Old – New Model Comparison Compiled by the Load Profiling Group ERCOT Energy Analysis & Aggregation May 03, 2007.
September 21, 2005 ICF Consulting RGGI Electricity Sector Modeling Results Updated Reference, RGGI Package and Sensitivities.
Weather Sensitive ERS Training Presenter: Carl Raish Weather Sensitive ERS Training Workshop April 5, 2013.
ERCOT Staff Analysis of Weather Sensitivity Code Changes February 8, 2005.
Settlement Accuracy Analysis Prepared by ERCOT Load Profiling.
UFE 2008 Analysis 1 UFE 2008 ANALYSIS Compiled by Load Profiling Energy Analysis & Aggregation.
1 UFE Workshop Sponsored by COPS October 19, 2004.
NPRR 571 ERS Weather Sensitive Loads Requirements Carl Raish, ERCOT QSE Managers Working Group November 5, 2013.
DSWG – March 9, 2015 Four-CP Response in ERCOT Competitive Area Carl L Raish.
Comparison of New Load Profile Models 14-Month Models vs 21-Month Models ERCOT Load Profiling Staff.
Load Profiling Working Group RMS Presentation 8/01/2002 by Ernie Podraza Reliant Energy Retail Group Chair PWG.
Final Report Weather Sensitive Emergency Response Service (WS ERS) Pilot Project Carl Raish, ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee November 7, 2013.
Blue Grass Energy Cooperative Corporation 2006 Load Forecast Prepared by: East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. Forecasting and Market Analysis Department.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR RMS Update Paul Wattles Carl Raish October 6, 2015.
Analysis of the ERCOT IDR Threshold Requirement Presented by Bill Boswell PWG Meeting May 27, 2009.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR Workshop Paul Wattles Carl Raish Karen Farley REP Roundtable August 5, 2015 – Updates in RED.
09/17/2006 Ken Donohoo ERCOT Peak Day August Initial Settlement Data by Fuel Type.
01/17/ CP Discussion October 16,2002 Retail Market Subcommittee Austin, Texas.
1 Next Steps to Reduce the RTM Settlement Timeline COPS Workshop August 29, 2013 Mandy Bauld ERCOT Director, Settlement & Retail Operations (512)
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR DSWG Update Paul Wattles Carl Raish September 17, 2015.
Price Responsive Load / Retail Demand Response 2013 Analysis Report Overview ERCOT Staff & Frontier Associates RMS Meeting August 5, 2014.
Puget Sound Energy’s Use of RTF Analytical Tools for DSM Valuation Jim Lazar March 4, 2003.
Overview of Governing Document for Weather-Sensitive ERS Pilot Project Stakeholder Workshop Mark Patterson, ERCOT Staff March 1, 2013.
Profiling Working Group 1 PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Direct Energy ERCOT PWG Chair Ed Echols Of Oncor ERCOT PWG Vice Chair for COPS Meeting.
Update: 30-Minute Emergency Response Service (ERS) Pilot Project Mark Patterson, ERCOT October 7, 2013.
Price Responsive Load / Retail DR RMS Update Paul Wattles Carl Raish September 1, 2015.
Demand Response Options Review Carl Raish November 27, 2007.
2015 California Statewide Critical Peak Pricing Evaluation DRMEC Spring 2016 Load Impact Evaluation Workshop San Francisco, California May, 2016 Prepared.
July 15, 2011 Reliability Deployments Task Force Meeting ERCOT Studies and Proposal on Reliability Energy Pricing John Dumas Director Wholesale Market.
Hypothetical Examples of How Residential Photovoltaic (PV) ESI IDs Could be Settled ERCOT Load Profiling.
Distributed Renewable Generation Profiling Methodology ERCOT Load Profiling March 4, 2008.
DRMEC Spring 2016 Load Impacts Evaluation Workshop San Francisco, California May 10, SDG&E Summer Saver Load Impact Evaluation.
Calculations of Peak Load Contribution (PLC) AND Network Service Peak Load (NSPL) As of 1/1/2016.
Weather-Sensitive ERS Pilot Project Proposal March 7, 2013 TAC Meeting.
Draft NPRR Weather Sensitive ERS Loads December 2012.
MAPE Publication Neil McAndrews For Bob Ryan of Deutsche Bank.
2015 SDG&E PTR/SCTD Evaluation DRMEC Spring 2016 Load Impact Workshop George Jiang May 11 th, 2016 Customer Category Mean Active Participants Mean Reference.
2013 Load Impact Evaluation of Southern California Edison’s Peak Time Rebate Program Josh Schellenberg DRMEC Spring 2014 Load Impact Evaluation Workshop.
Analysis of Load Reductions Associated with 4-CP Transmission Charges in ERCOT Carl L Raish Principal Load Profiling and Modeling Demand Side Working Group.
Smart Grid Tariff Changes
Principal Load Profiling and Modeling
Emergency Response Service Baselines
Presentation transcript:

DSWG - June 25, Four-CP Response for Transmission- and Distribution- Connected ESIIDs in ERCOT Competitive Area Carl L Raish

2 4 CP Response Methodology  Analysis was limited to ESIIDs in competitive ERCOT areas with ‘BUSIDRRQ’ profile types  Transmission charges are based on ESIID-specific load during CP intervals  ESIIDs classified by connection at transmission or distribution voltage level  Classified days as CP Days, Near-CP Days and Non-CP Days  Near-CP days were iteratively determined  Started with 12 possible days  Removed days from list if no response detected for the date  Ended up with 7 Near-CP days  Non-CP days were all remaining non-holiday weekdays (June 1 – Sep 30)  Classified ESIIDs based on Weather Sensitivity and Load Factor  Weather sensitivity (R 2 for week-day use vs average temperature >= 0.6)  Load Factor based on week-day afternoon usage (1:00 PM – 6:00 PM)  High LF > 0.85  Medium LF > 0.60  Low LF ≤ 0.60

3 4 CP Response Methodology (continued)  ESIIDs were classified into three response categories based on how they modified usage on CP and Near-CP days  Reduced Day Use -- ESIIDs that lowered usage from 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM) on CP/Near-CP days.  Reduced CP Hour Use -- ESIID that lowered usage during 4:00 PM – 5:00 PM on CP/Near-CP days (but did not reduce day use).  Did not respond – All remaining ESIIDS

4 4 CP Response Methodology (continued) Response Type Load Factor Category HighMediumLowTotal Reduce Day Use Reduce Peak Hour Use Non-Respond Total Number of Transmission ESIIDs by Response Type

5 4 CP Response Methodology (continued) Response Type Load Factor Category HighMediumLowWS * Total Reduce Day Use ,293 Reduce Peak Hour Use ,427 Non-Respond2,4563, ,6617,994 Total2,6934,0652,2951,66110,714 Number of Distribution ESIIDs by Response Type * WS response and type needs additional analysis

6 4 CP Response Methodology (continued)  Baselines were created at the ESIID-level using Non-CP days (May 1 – Sep 30).  Average of 10 days before and 10 days after the CP/Near-CP day.  Baselines were aggregated in groups by response type and load factor category  WS baseline was ERS Regression baseline  Scalar day-of-adjustment applied at the aggregated group level.  Day-of-adjustment window: 0:15 AM – 1:00 PM  Baseline energy for the adjustment window was scaled to the actual energy for the CP/Near-CP day  No scalar adjustment was applied to the group with ‘day-use’ response  Adjusted and unadjusted baselines are shown on graphs for non-responding ESIIDs  In general these ESIIDs had actual use higher than the baseline on CP/Near-CP days than the unadjusted baseline  If these ESIIDs are included in the overall class performance, their increased usage would offset reductions by the remaining ESIIDs

7 4 CP Response Methodology (continued)  September 3, 2013 CP day special handling  Load shapes were different … probably related to being the day following the Labor Day holiday.  Tables and graphs show reductions for baselines with and without day-of- adjustment  Reductions based on scalar adjusted baselines reflect the actual load reduction on that day  Reductions based on unadjusted baselines are probably closer to reductions on more normal CP days.

8 15-Minute Reductions on 4 CP Days Transmission Connected ESIIDs

9 15-Minute Reductions on 4 CP Days Distribution Connected ESIIDs

10 15-Minute Reductions on 4 CP Days Transmission plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs Largest Combined Summer 2013 reduction occurred on August 7

11 Identify Near-CP Days – June 2013 IE 17:00 Near-CP w/ response

12 Identify Near-CP Days – July 2013 IE 17:00 Near-CP w/ response Near-CP no response

13 Identify Near-CP Days – August 2013 IE 17:00 Near-CP w/ response Near-CP no response

14 Identify Near-CP Days – September 2013 IE 16:45 Near-CP no response Note: Sep 1, 2013 Sunday, Sep 2 Labor Day

15 15-Minute Reductions on Near Peak Days Largest Summer 2013 reduction occurred on August 1 Transmission Connected ESIIDs

16 15-Minute Reductions on Near Peak Days Largest Summer 2013 reduction occurred on June 28 Distribution Connected ESIIDs

17 15-Minute Reductions on Near CP Days Transmission plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs

18 Hour-ending 17:00 Reductions on 4 CP Days Transmission Connected ESIIDs

19 Hour-ending 17:00 Reductions on 4 CP Days Distribution Connected ESIIDs

20 Hour-ending 17:00 Reductions on 4 CP Days Transmission plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs Largest Combined Summer 2013 reduction occurred on August 7

21 Hour-ending 17:00 Reductions on Near Peak Days Transmission Connected ESIIDs

22 Hour-ending 17:00 Reductions on Near Peak Days Distribution Connected ESIIDs

23 Hour-ending 17:00 Reductions on Near CP Days Transmission plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs

24 Reduction Percent by Load Factor - Transmission

25 Reduction Percent by Load Factor - Distribution

26 Percent Reduction by Load Factor - Transmission

27 Percent Reduction by Load Factor - Distribution

28 June CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Connected ESIIDs

29 June CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Distribution Connected ESIIDs

30 June CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs

31 July CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Connected ESIIDs

32 July CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Distribution Connected ESIIDs

33 July CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs

34 August CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Connected ESIIDs

35 August CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Distribution Connected ESIIDs

36 August CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs

37 September CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Connected ESIIDs

38 September CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Distribution Connected ESIIDs

39 September CP Day Load – Responding ESIIDs Transmission Plus Distribution Connected ESIIDs

40 June CP Day Load by Reduction Type Transmission Connected ESIIDs

41 June CP Day Load by Reduction Type Distribution Connected ESIIDs

42 July CP Day Load by Reduction Type Transmission Connected ESIIDs

43 July CP Day Load by Reduction Type Distribution Connected ESIIDs

44 August CP Day Load by Reduction Type Transmission Connected ESIIDs

45 August CP Day Load by Reduction Type Distribution Connected ESIIDs

46 September CP Day Load by Reduction Type Transmission Connected ESIIDs

47 September CP Day Load by Reduction Type

48 ON OFF Questions?