You are on page 1of 55

Reliable Power

Market Services Stakeholder


Reliable Markets
Session

Thursday, January 7, 2010 Reliable People


Metropolitan Centre, Calgary
Reliable Power

Wind Technical Rule Reliable Markets


John Kehler
Senior Technical Specialist Reliable People
Agenda

• Purpose of Session
• Why a Wind Technical Rule
• Summary of Key Points
• Authoritative Documents
• Inputs to the Wind Technical
Rule
• Overview and Discussion of the
Wind Technical Rule
• Next Steps

3
Background
Market and Operational Framework

• Market and Operational Framework: effective September 26, 2007

• Premise of framework - If the System Operator receives a reasonable


forecast of wind power generation, then they can establish an
operating plan to accommodate the forecast wind energy by using the
following resources/tools:
– Forecasting
– The Energy Market Merit Order
– Regulating Reserves
– Wind Following Services
– Wind Power Management
• AESO Final Recommendations for the implementation of the MOF -
June 18, 2009
4
Purpose

• Review and discuss the Wind Technical Rule with


stakeholders prior to submission of comments (deadline for
comment is Jan 22)
• Encourage stakeholders and suppliers of wind facility
equipment to comment on the Wind Technical Rule

5
Key Points

• The Wind Technical Rule is:


• For all wind power facilities, any considerations for existing and new
facilities will be addressed in the Rule
• In most cases the technical intent remains the same as in the
predecessor standard
• Primarily to add requirements for physical infrastructure at wind
power facilities for wind power forecasting capability, power limiting,
ramp rate limiting and over-frequency control
• Proposing effective date of 180 days post AUC approval to provide
existing facilities a reasonable period of time to add or modify equipment
at wind generating facilities

6
Transition of Wind Technical
Requirements
New ISO Rules Framework
http://www.aeso.ca/rulesprocedures/17885.html

AESO Tariff

Article 4
Customer Interconnection Tran
Requirements sitio
n

Authority for the Technical Authority for Technical


Requirements currently under the Requirements will transition to
Tariff Part 500 of ISO Rules
7
Transition of Wind Technical
Requirements

Existing Requirements
• Use and consistency of definitions
• Clarify the language and incorporate new
or updated definitions
• Clarify the requirements based on last 5
Existing years experience New Rule and
Requirements Requirements
New Requirements
• Add grandfathering
• Add Over Frequency Control requirements
• Add Ramp and Power Limiting Example of an
requirements Information
Document
• Add forecasting and meteorological data
requirements

Existing New
Guide Information
Future Document
8
Considerations in Developing Wind
Technical Rule

• Current Wind Power Facility Technical Requirements - November 2004


• Wind Power Forecasting Pilot Project Work Group recommendations
• Wind Power Management Protocol Work Group recommendations
• Wind Power Management Technical Requirements Work Group
• Transition Of Authoritative Documents (TOAD) policies, template,
framework, standards and principles
• Any applicable provisions of Alberta Reliability Standards
• AESO final recommendations to implement the Market and Operational
Framework for Wind Integration - June 2009

9
Specific Policy Considerations

• All forms of generation in Alberta have certain basic obligations


• Wind Technical Rules are specifically for wind power facilities that
connect to the transmission system
• Wind Power Facility Technical Requirements included “policy place
holders” for future technical requirements
• In a separate and future consultation on wind power integration, the
AESO will consult on how and when wind power or ramp rate limiting,
and wind forecasting, will be used

10
Technical Considerations

• Development of technical requirements in Wind Technical


Rule is based on either:
– NERC/WECC requirements, or
– AESO requirements
• Fairness amongst generating facilities,
• Technical capability of existing wind facility technology

11
Wind Wind Transmission Point of Transmission
Turbine Turbine System Connection System
Generators Generator Step-up
Transformer Transformer

WTG's < 690v 25 - 35 kV

69 - 240kV

WTG's

Collector
Bus

WTG's

WTG's

External Voltage
Regulation / Reactive
Power System

WIND POWER FACILITY 12


Performance Points

• Collector Bus • Point of


– Maximum Wind
Turbine
Wind
Turbine
Transmission
System
Point of
Connection
Transmission
System
Connection
Authorized MW Generators Generator
Transformer
Step-up
Transformer
– Voltage Ride
– Gross MW WTG's < 690v 25 - 35 kV
Through
– Off Nominal
69 - 240kV

– Reactive Power WTG's

requirements Collector
Bus
Frequency
– Voltage
WTG's

– Power and
Regulation WTG's
Ramp Rate
Limiting
– Voltage External Voltage

– Monitoring
Regulation / Reactive

Operating
Power System

WIND POWER FACILITY

Range
– Over Frequency • Facility
Control
– Meteorological
– Monitoring data

13
Definitions
(Apply to all participants)

General Definitions These definitions will move out


of Wind Technical Rule and
• “generating facilities” into Part 100: General of the
• “maximum authorized MW” ISO Rules
http://www.aeso.ca/rulesprocedures/17885.html
• “operator”
• “person”
• “wind turbine generator”
• “transmission system”
• “voltage regulating system”
• “owner”
• “gross MW”
• “point of connection”

14
Applicability Section 1

Applies to all wind generating facilities


• New facilities must comply
• Existing facilities connected under 2004 technical
requirements must comply
• Grandfathering considerations to those facilities connected
under 1999 technical requirement
• All wind generating facilities participate in wind power
forecasting requirements including meteorological data
requirements

15
Example of Grandfathering Rule

3 18 MW grandfathered to the
MW
1999 technical requirements
3
MW

3
MW
Two 3 MW turbines are
3 upgraded over any period of
MW
time. The upgraded 6 MW
must fully comply with the
3
Wind Technical Rule. The
MW older 12 MW remain under
the 1999 requirements until
3
MW such time they are upgraded.

EXAMPLE:
18 MW WIND GENERATING FACILITY
Under 1999 Technical Requirements 16
Example of Grandfathering Rule

3 Upgraded portion will be required to


MW
comply with voltage ride through, voltage
3 regulation, reactive power, over frequency
MW control, power limiting, ramp rate limiting
and any other requirements that are
3 deficient to the new Wind Technical Rule
MW

3
MW

Grandfathered portion is not likely to comply


3 with the voltage ride through and is not
MW required to comply with the over frequency
control, power limiting and ramp rate limiting
3
MW requirements of the new Wind Technical
Rule

EXAMPLE:
18 MW WIND GENERATING FACILITY
With 6 MW Upgraded

17
Over Frequency Control
Section 15

• Frequency control requires fast measurement and good resolution of


system frequency
– 30 samples per second at 0.004 Hz resolution in the standard
• Consistent with conventional generators
– 0.036 Hz allowable deadband
– Equivalent to 5% speed drop
– Response rate equivalent to gas and hydro
• Coordinates with the off nominal frequency requirements
– Facilities can disconnect from the grid at 61.7 Hz

18
Over Frequency Control Example

• Example of actual over 60.6

Alberta Frequency (Hz)


frequency event in 2009 60.4

• Wind MW is illustrative only


60.2 60.036 Hz Allowable
deadband

60

59.8
• When system frequency Time (10 Minutes Per Division)
exceeds the allowable dead-
band Illustrative Example of Wind Generating Facility
MW (In % of Capacity) MW output to an over frequency event "with"
(20% per division) and without" over frequency controls
• Controls will reduce MW
output of the wind generating
facility

Time (10 Minutes Per Division)


19
Power Limiting and Ramp Rate
Limiting Section 17

• Power limiting and ramp rate limiting manage the MWs


produced at the Point of Connection
– These are the MWs supplied to the market
– These are the MWs that will be forecasted
• Power limiting will be manually put in control with a Directive
• The control system must be fast and precise to maintain the
MWs within reasonable tolerance of the Power Limit during
variable and gusting wind conditions
– Prevent MW from exceeding the power limit by 2% for normal wind
conditions and by 5% during gusts
• Ramp rate limiting is required with a default rate of 10% per
minute
20
Power Limiting Control Example

The instantaneous MW
Power Limiting Example cannot exceed Power Limit
+ 5% of the maximum
authorized MW
Instantaneous MW

1 minute average MW
cannot exceed Power Limit
+ 2% of the maximum
MW

authorized MW

Power Limit for the WPF


1 Min Average MW
Time (1 Minute Per Division)

21
Illustrative Example of How Power
Limiting and Ramp Rate Limiting Could
Coordinate

Illustrative Example of Power Limiting and Ramp Rate


Limiting
MW

10 Minutes Per Division

Potential MWs Power Limit


Combined Power and Ramp Rate Limit Actual MWs

22
SCADA Requirements Section 31

• New SCADA signals from the facility to the AESO


– Potential MW capability signal
– Power limit signal
– On/off status of the power limiting controls

23
Description of potential MW
capability

Measured wind
Local computer speed and
calculates direction
potential MW
from the turbine

WPF SCADA Utility SCADA


system collects system sends
and sums the data to the
potential MW AESO
from all turbines
at the WPF

24
Wind Power Forecasting Data
Collection Section 32
• Met tower with 2 weather
measurement devices
– measurement at the wind turbine
generator hub height and another taking
measurements at a height specified by
the ISO
• Measurements are 10 minute
average values
– wind speed, wind direction, barometric
pressure and ambient temperature
• AESO is currently working on
details for data transfer

25
Wind Power Forecasting Data
Collection Section 36

• Historical data and facility information necessary for wind


power forecasting
– Historical 10 minute averaged meteorological data, containing
details on wind speed, wind direction, temperature and barometric
pressure
– Historical data and records referenced in subsection for up to 2
calendar years prior to the commissioning period of wind generating
facilities
– Provide wind turbine generator data and records, including hub
height, turbine land coordinates, turbine power curves, high wind
speed cut-out, and any applicable temperature cut-outs

26
Other Changes

• Transfer trip or anti-islanding schemes are proposed


additions where the facility is not required to voltage ride
through
• Monitoring requirements were a “may require” - we are now
proposing a “must require”
• Harmonic and Flicker measurements/tests were a “must
require” - we are proposing a “may require”
• Figures and tables moved into appendixes

27
Next Steps

• January 22, 2010


– Stakeholder comments back to the AESO
• February, 2010
– Post Stakeholder comments
– Post AESO response to stakeholder comments
• March 2010**
– File Wind Technical Rule with AUC

**Date may change depending on any material changes as a result of consultation

28
Questions ?
Contact Information

John Kehler
Ph: 403-539-2622
John.kehler@aeso.ca

Kevin Wiens
Ph: 403-539-2672
Kevin.wiens@aeso.ca

30
Reliable Power

Wind Power Forecasting


Reliable Markets
Update

Rob Baker Reliable People


Manager Forecasting

Rob Baker
Forecasting
Agenda – Wind Power Forecasting

• Pilot Study
• Wind Power Forecast RFP
• Purpose and Benefits of Wind Power Forecasts
• Wind Forecast Service Cost Recovery
• Next Steps
• Questions

32
Wind Power Forecasting Pilot
Project

• AESO conducted a wind forecasting pilot project in 2006 to


– Trial different methods and providers
– Identify the most effective forecasting methods in Alberta
– Identify the most effective providers of wind power forecasts
– Educate industry on the capabilities of wind power forecasting in
Alberta
• Project funded by Dept of Energy, Alberta Energy Research
Institute, AESO with expertise provided by CanWEA
• Wind forecasters were AWS Truewind, energy & meteo, and
WEPROG
• Industry working group monitored results from pilot project
and provided recommendations to AESO used to develop
Forecasting Service RFP 33
Wind Power Forecasting RFP

• AESO issued a request for proposals in June 2009


• The objective of the RFP is to solicit proposals to deliver
accurate wind power forecasts for the AIES with these
outcomes:
– Availability of a production Wind Power Forecasting Service for the
AESO
– Accuracy and reduced uncertainty of wind power forecasts
– A high quality Wind Power Forecasting Service and ongoing
performance improvements
• AESO involved industry stakeholders (ENMAX, Canadian
Hydro, Shell, Suncor, TransAlta, and CanWEA) to provide
input and advice to the AESO regarding the selection and
RFP review process
• Negotiations with a vendor are underway 34
Purpose and Benefits of Wind
Power Forecasts

AESO
• Reliable operation of the power system
– Ancillary service forecasting and procurement
– Supply adequacy

Wind Developers
• Each individual wind generating facility will have access to the forecast
for its facility

Industry / Market Participants


• Aggregate forecasts provided on the AESO website
• Transparency of aggregate wind forecasts to market participants

35
Wind forecast service cost
recovery

• External wind power forecasting service cost will be


allocated amongst wind power facility owners as a $/MWh
charge
• Cost recovery will begin in Q4 2010 and will be levelized
over Q4 2010 and the subsequent 3 years
• An escalation factor of 10% to the $/MWh rate will be
applied
• Variances from forecast costs and revenues will be
reconciled on an annual basis

36
Next Steps

• Finalize contract and announce successful vendor


• AESO expects to start receiving wind forecast data in
January 2010
• Phased implementation of IT infrastructure for data
management and integration into AESO system operator
tools
• Establish a Wind Power Forecasting Working Group for
continuous improvement on forecasting performance

37
Questions ?
Contact Information

Rob Baker
Ph: 403-539-2614
rob.baker@aeso.ca

39
Transmission Constraints Reliable Power

Management (TCM)
Reliable Markets

Gordon Nadeau
Reliable People
Market Design Specialist
Agenda

• TCM Rule 9.4 AUC Re-Filing Proposal Discussion Paper


– AUC Decision 2009-042:
• Review AESO views on Commission findings
• Review AESO proposals on Commission directions

• Remedial Action Scheme (RAS) in the planning domain


– Review AESO approach in RAS comment response matrix

41
Proposed TCM Rule 9.4
Protocol Steps to Manage Constraints

1. Determine effective generation and load


2. Directives to generate above MC are canceled
3. Dispatch off downstream Dispatch Down Service (DDS) providers
4. Curtail imports/exports as appropriate
5. Curtail downstream Demand Opportunity Service (DOS)
6. Dispatch effective TMR (use DDS to reconstitute price)
7. Curtail upstream energy in reverse merit order (RMO) based on energy
offer price followed by pro rata, if congestion is sustained beyond T-2
period, use pro rata only
8. Dispatch downstream energy using the merit order up to replace the
curtailed upstream energy
9. Curtail downstream load
10. When curtailing effective upstream assets, curtail ancillary services
before energy

42
Review of Findings in
AUC Decision 2009-042 on TCM Rule 9.4

• Economic Dispatch: The use of the merit order for dispatch instructions
is aligned with regulation.

• Price Impact: Price impact of the TCM rule will be reasonable under
current and anticipated market conditions.

• Compensation: Constrained down payments are not contemplated


under regulation.

43
Review of Findings in
AUC Decision 2009-042 on TCM Rule 9.4

• Transmission “rights”: Regulation provides for reasonable system


access which does not equate to a “right”. The AESO is allowed to
assign a RAS under regulation where appropriate.

• Use of TMR/DDS: The use of TMR/DDS may be applicable in certain


situations but that it is not appropriate in all constraint situations.

44
AESO Proposals regarding Commission
Directions on TCM Rule 9.4

Directions: Proposal:
• Scope of Rule • 9.4 is real time rule only

• Use of TMR • TMR for reliability only and


not price management

• Pay as bid protocol • Pay as Bid not recommended

• Define fundamental terms • Definitions provided for load


pocket and other terms

• Explain use of TMR/DDS within


• Clarify TCM process steps
steps
45
Pay as Bid Discussion

Pros Cons
• Price impact of constraint • Does not promote price fidelity
removed under current market design

• Creates separate side • Not the best price signal and may
payments for constraints not be effective in managing
constraints

• Congestion costs may be


lower than proposed TCM • Not a generic, in-market solution
protocol that applies to all constraint cases

• Operationally and administratively


complex to implement

46
Pay as Bid Discussion

AESO Conclusions
• Price signal is the appropriate method of encouraging FEOC behaviour
not out of market solutions
• The Rule 9.4 protocol:
– Is effective and practical
– works within current market framework
– Is a single protocol that deals with all constraints
– Promotes price fidelity by minimizing the price impact and level of market
distortion

• The AESO does not recommend using any pay as bid protocol within
the TCM Rule
• Severe market distortions are not constraint management issues and
will be dealt with appropriately through other means

47
Remedial Action Scheme Reliable Power

(RAS) in the Planning Domain


Reliable Markets

Reliable People
RAS in the Planning Domain

• Stakeholder comments on the RAS discussion paper and the AESO


response to those comments were published in December 2009
• A review of the AESO approach is provided to facilitate ongoing
stakeholder consultation on RAS

49
RAS Discussion

Transmission Regulation gives the AESO the authority to use RAS


• RAS is permitted under the Transmission Regulation section 15(1),
however, RAS is not an alternative to major system upgrades or key
transmission paths
• RAS can be temporary or permanent under section 15(1)
• Specific temporary RAS exceptions are allowed under sections 15(2)
and 15(3)

50
RAS Discussion

Overarching RAS rules are appropriate


• Requirement for RAS determined by Reliability Criteria and Alberta
Reliability Standards - It is not appropriate to have RAS criteria in the
ISO rules
• Reliability Criteria documentation to be reviewed in 2010 and specific
RAS criteria will be discussed

51
RAS Discussion

Two types of RAS: Connection RAS and System RAS, each of which
serve different purposes and require different approaches
Connection RAS
• Assigned to and paid for by customers on a last in first off
basis - Alternatively, the customer can choose to wait until
facilities are built
• Is temporary, however, the AESO can only provide an
estimate of when it is no longer needed
• Customers do not receive compensation for being
connected to a RAS

52
RAS Discussion

System RAS
• May be assigned or procured
• Customers do not receive compensation for being constrained down
• May be permanent

• System RAS applications unique:


– May develop over time with no single cause
– Variety of solutions may exist
– Could involve generation or load or both
– Compensation may be a consideration depending on the purpose and who
benefits from the protection
– Each application will require consultation on a case by case basis
– May require high level guiding rule
53
Next Steps

• Comments on the TCM paper due January 15, 2010


• AESO response to comments will be provided and may
proceed to re-filing Rule 9.4 with the AUC in Q1
• OPPs will be filed in stages in 2010 and full implementation
of Rule 9.4 thru OPPs and systems to proceed on a yet to
be determined schedule
• Consultation to proceed on RAS rules and a RAS
Information Document in Q1

54
Contact Information

Gordon Nadeau
Ph: 403-539-2568
gordon.nadeau@aeso.ca

55

You might also like