1 / 15

Comparison of Regional Reliability Techniques

Comparison of Regional Reliability Techniques. Presented to PSPC November 22, 2004 Westborough, MA. Purpose of Presentation. Compare various planning assumptions NPCC Regions PJM Follow-up to the November 18 th Meeting

arsenio-manning
Download Presentation

Comparison of Regional Reliability Techniques

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparison of Regional Reliability Techniques Presented to PSPC November 22, 2004 Westborough, MA For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  2. Purpose of Presentation • Compare various planning assumptions • NPCC Regions • PJM • Follow-up to the November 18th Meeting • Begin comprehensive discussions of ISO-NE assumptions for 2005/06 Objective Capability • Caveats: • Preliminary data for other areas needs further review For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  3. Comparison of Regional Metrics • “Regional Practices” review to: • Identify range of practices that are in use • Allow relative comparison among industry participants • Establish hypotheses for benefits / problems with outliers • Several industry metrics will be reviewed: • Reserve margin percentages • Tie benefits as a percent of reserve margins • Tie benefits as a percent of regional reserves • Impact of Emergency Operating Procedures For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  4. Reserve Margins Data Needs Further Review For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  5. Tie Benefits Part of Reserves Note: PJM’s 3500 MW CBM Converted to 1500 MW Firm Equivalent Tie Benefit Data Needs Further Review For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  6. 1995 Monthly Load Profiles For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  7. 2002 Monthly Load Profiles For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  8. NERC Region Monthly Profiles For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  9. Weather Based LFU For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  10. NPCC Operating Procedures to Mitigate Resource Shortages NA Excludes Elimination of Required 10 and 30 Minute Operating Reserves For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  11. Emergency Operating Procedures NA For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  12. Emergency Operating Procedures NA For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  13. Risk Profile For NPCC Regions With Resources Currently Available For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  14. EFORd Affects PJM IRM Note: PJM’s EFORd rate does not include two (2) assumed large units whose maintenance is shifted over the summer peak load season. Each large unit has about 1.7 % effect on IRM Source: http://www.pjm.com/committees/reliability/downloads/20040803-item4-irm-study.pdf For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

  15. Sensitivity of OC to Parameters For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

More Related