MAPS Study Results

1
MAPS Study Results
Western Governors AssociationTransmission Plan
Working GroupJune 29, 2001
2
MAPS Transmission Study

• Case Definitions
• Load and Resource Plans
• Study Assumptions
• MAPS Inputs/Outputs
• Results
• Benchmark (Line Loading)
• Clearing Prices
• Shadow Prices
• Line Loading
• Energy Mix, Capacity Factors
• Fuel Cost Savings
• Conclusions

3
WGA MAPS Study Cases
4
MAPS Output
MAPS Input
Unit Dispatch
Hourly Dispatch Profile Number of Starts
Capacity Factor by Intervals Hourly Emission
Profile Duration Curve by Intervals
Load Data
Up to 80 load areas
Transmission Data
Location BasedMarginal Pricesat Generator
Load Buses
Up to 20000 lines 3500 constraints
Unit Data
Transmission Flows
Up to 2500 units
Hourly Flow Profile Identification of
Limiting Lines Congestion Costs on Constraining
Lines
5
WSCC Loads ResourcesSummer 2001 (Normal Hydro)
6
Generation Additions

• Gas Expansion Scenario
• 25 Summer Reserve Margin For WSCC
• Mostly Gas Combined Cycles / Combustion Turbines
• Under Construction
• With CEC Permit
• Applied for CEC Permit (Except Southwest and
  Canada)
• Canada as per WSCC 4/2000 Loads and Resources
  Report
• Alternative Fuels Scenario
• 25 Summer Reserve Margin For WSCC
• Alternative Fuels Coal Renewable Plants Under
  Consideration
• Gas Combined Cycles and Combustion Turbines
• Under Construction
• 50 of Those With CEC Permits on State by State
  Basis

7
WSCC Loads ResourcesGas Expansion
ScenarioSummer 2010
Note (1)
Desert Southwest new generation includes plants
under construction plus plants with
permits. California, Rocky Mountain and Northwest
new generation includes plants under
construction, plants that have received permits
and plants that have applied for permits. Canada
new generation includes additions reported in the
WSCC Loads and Resources report
(4/2000). Inoperable and derates also includes
retirements.
(2)
(3)
(4)
8
WSCC Loads ResourcesAlternative Fuels Scenario
ExpansionSummer 2010
Note (1)
New gas generation includes only projects that
are currently under construction plus 1/2 of
those that have received CEC permits. Canada new
generation includes additions reported in the
WSCC Loads and Resources report (4/2000) plus new
coal and hydro development.
(2)
9
Natural Gas Prices/MMBtu
10
WSCC Hydro Modeling
Rocky Mtn
AZ-NM
California
California
NW Canada
Hydro Generation (GWH)
NW Canada
California
NW Canada
NW US
NW US
NW US
11
WSCC Hydro Modeling
Wet
Median
Dry
Hydro Generation (GWH)
12
Transmission Paths Defined
Brownlee East
Borah West
Tot 4B
Bridger West
Pacific DC Tie
Pacific AC Tie
BonanzaWest
Tot 1A
Tot 3
Tot 2C
Tot 2A
Path 15
S W of Four Corners
13
Line Loading Actual Loading (2000) Versus MAPS
Simulation
gt75
Per Cent of Time Flow Exceeds XX of Capability
gt90
gt95
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
14
Line Loading Actual Loading (2000) Versus MAPS
Simulation
Per Cent of Time Flow Exceeds XX of Capability
gt75
gt90
gt95
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
MAPS
15
Gas Expansion Scenarios
Clearing Prices(Energy Only) /MWH Case 1 2001
Base 50.7 /MWH Case 2 Gas Exp w/ 2004 Trans
34.8 /MWH Case 3 Gas Exp w/ 2010 Trans 34.7
/MWH
John Day 1.9/-0.8/-0.9
Borah/Brady 2.7/0.2/0.1
Jim Bridger -1.9/0.1/0.0
Tesla 4.0/0.0/0.0
Craig -6.6/0.2/0.3
Sylmar 6.6/1.5/1.4
Four Corners -2.1/-0.2/-0.1
Navajo -2.5/-0.6/-0.5
Lugo 0.6/1.5/1.4
Westwing -2.3/-0.9/-0.8
16
Alternative Fuels Scenarios
Clearing Prices(Energy Only) /MWH Case 1 2001
Base 50.7 /MWH Case 4 AFS w/ Gas
Transmission 29.9 /MWH Case 5 AFS w/ 2010
Transmission 29.3 /MWH
John Day 1.9/6.0/4.2
Borah/Brady 2.7/6.7/0.2
Jim Bridger -1.9/-17.0/-4.4
Tesla 4.0/7.1/5.3
Craig -6.6/-14.8/-9.8
Sylmar 6.6/5.5/2.1
Four Corners -2.1/-2.4/-5.8
Navajo -2.5/2.1/2.0
Lugo 0.6/4.5/4.3
Westwing -2.3/2.4/1.9
17
Path 15 Line Flow
Limited 572 Hours
North to South MW South to North
Limit
Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Jul Aug Sept
Oct Nov Dec
18
Hourly Clearing Prices
NP 15
Clearing Price - /MWH
SP 15
Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Jul Aug Sept
Oct Nov Dec
19
Path 15 Shadow Price
Difference NP15 Minus SP15 All Reasons
Clearing Price - /MWH
Difference NP15 Minus SP15 Due to Path 15
Constraint Shadow Price 572 Hours x 7 /MWH 4.0
/kW-Yr
Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Jul Aug Sept
Oct Nov Dec
20
Constrained Paths
Shadow Price - /kW
Case 1
Case 2
Hours Loaded Above 95
21
Gas Expansion Scenario Shadow Prices (/kW-Yr)
22
Alternative Fuel Scenario Shadow Prices (/kW-Yr)
23
WSCC Energy Mix
34.7
26.3
24.9
30.9
39.4
40.8
27.0
26.9
26.9
7.4
7.4
7.4
Alt Fuels Scen w/ 2010 AFS Transm
Gas Scenario w/ 2010 Gas Transm
Alt Fuels Scen w/ 2010 Gas Transm
24
Coal Plant Capacity Factors
27.0
27.0
25
Incremental Fuel Costs
2.3 B
4.2 B
2.3 B
Billions of Dollars
26
Conclusions

• Shadow prices from the MAPS simulation indicate
  relative values of relieving constraints. The
  values themselves are conservative and represent
  a floor.
• Benchmark Cases
• Comparison of MAPS simulations to actual flows in
  the WSCC during 2000 shows that MAPS did a
  reasonably good job of modeling the WSCC
  transmission system.
• Gas Generation Scenarios
• Adding significant amounts of new efficient
  generation near load centers may reduce the need
  for transmission from todays requirements.
• Alternative Fuels Scenarios (AFS)
• Significant amounts of transmission would need to
  be added to accomplish the AFS as modeled.
• Transmission system proposed for the AFS would
  solve most of the bottlenecks. Most of the
  remaining bottlenecks could be resolved with
  minor fixes, I.e., upgrading transformers, adding
  series reactors or phase shifters.
• Fuel savings of the Alternative Fuels Scenario
  (Case 5) over the Gas Generation Scenario (Case
  3) could approach 2 to 4 Billion, depending on
  the price of natural gas.
• In the Alternative Fuels scenario, both existing
  and new power plants located in Montana,
  Wyoming, Colorado and Alberta could benefit from
  additional integrating transmission.
• Added generators and transmission mitigate
  transmission congestion and high gas prices
  during times of critical hydro.