Potential Cost Savings in MISO from Demand Response. MWDRI Steering Committee September 24, 2007. Purpose of study: It’s Helpful to Quantify DR Benefits.
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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
MWDRI Steering Committee
September 24, 2007
Demand Reduction Only
Demand and Energy Reduction
*REF – Reference Case Demand & Energy are from 2007 Module E forecasts by each company
Demand Reduction – Difference in Demand from Reference Case
Energy Reduction (Cases DE1-DE5 Only) – Difference in Energy from Reference Case
20 Year Demand Reduction – Percent decrease in Demand = Demand Reduction / Reference Demand
20 Year Energy Reduction - Percent decrease in Demand = Energy Reduction / Reference Energy
Demand Reductions from Base Case
* Queue Generation includes only generation in the Midwest ISO Queue with a signed Interconnection Agr.
** Wind Additions were fixed at 12,600 MW to meet state mandates (Wind contributes 15% to Reserve Margin Requirements and Runs at a 40% Capacity Factor for new Wind units and 33% Capacity Factor for existing Wind Units)
Change in Emissions from Reference Case = Reference Case Emissions – Scenario Emissions
Percent Emission Reduction = 100 x Change in Emissions / Reference Case Emissions
Average Emission Reduction = Change in Emissions / (1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 Respective of the scenario modeled)
Note: Production Costs Include costs for all emissions except CO2. Production costs with a CO2 tax are on the next slide.
Average Cost Savings = Total Cost Savings / (1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 Respective of the Scenario Modeled)
Maximum Demand Response Value = 1000 x Total Cost Savings / Demand Reduction in the Scenario
Maximum Demand Reduction Value/kW:
Case D5 $849
Case DE5 $1971
Source: Vermont Deliberative Polling Reference Document
Cost Savings does not include a Cost for Demand Response Program or a Tax on CO2 Emissions
Savings are based on load served by MISO within each state – additional savings could be gained by other load serving entities
Source: From Regional Expansion with values applied to the state level. IN & OH have a load weighted calculation since they are in multiple study regions.
Note: Values do not include a Cost for the Demand Response Program or a Tax on CO2 Emissions
Note: No Firm Transmission is included in the Central Region Reserve Margins After Expansion
*Source: 2007 NERC Reliability Assessment
**Source: 2007 MISO Module E
Source: Midwest ISO
Load Based Multiplier = Total MISO Demand in State / Total 2008 MISO Peak Demand