march 1, 2011 load analysis update calvin opheim manager, load forecasting and analysis
TRANSCRIPT
March 1, 2011
Load Analysis Update
Calvin OpheimManager, Load Forecasting and Analysis
2
Agenda
• Current work underway
– Load Forecast
– Energy Efficiency
– Plug-In Electric Vehicles (PEV)
• Future work
– Distributed Generation (premise)
– Demand Response
March 1, 2011
3
Load Forecast
• Completing the Business as Usual (BAU) scenario load forecast
– Economic Data• Moody’s economic forecast (base economic forecast)
• Expect to be receiving their low and high case economic forecasts by the end of March (used in future sensitivities)
– Energy Efficiency Impacts• Based on data that was reported to the PUC
• Effects from the historical time period used in model development are included in the forecast
• Will not include additional incremental energy efficiency adjustments in the first iteration of the business as usual load forecast
March 1, 2011
4
Load Forecast
• Completing the Business as Usual (BAU) scenario load forecast (cont)
– Distributed Generation Impacts
– Demand Response Impacts
– Plug-in Electric Vehicles Impacts
Will not be including additional incremental energy adjustments for the above in the first iteration of the business as usual load forecast
• Load forecast will be created at the county level
March 1, 2011
5
Energy Efficiency
• ERCOT is evaluating the following three approaches for developing energy efficiency impacts to the load forecast
– Building a “bottom up” model of impacts using data from the “Assessment of Feasible and Achievable LeveIs of Electricity Savings from Investor Owned Utilities in Texas: 2009-2018” (http://www.puc.state.tx.us/electric/reports/misc/Electricity_Saving_2009-2018_122308.pdf)
– Building a “bottom up” model of impacts using the model that has been developed by Dr. Haberl from Texas A&M
– Building a “top down” model. This approach is being investigated in California (http://www.calmac.org/events/2010-2012_Energy_Efficiency_EM&V_Plan_12-20-10.pdf, Chapter 7)
March 1, 2011
6
Energy Efficiency – Bottom Up Models
• “Bottom up” models measure individual impacts– Examples (far from an exhaustive list)
• Replacing existing air conditioning unit with higher SEER unit,• Implementing an energy management system,• Replacing incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent lamps
(CFLs), lighting controls, etc.
• The change in electric consumption is calculated for the specific location. The estimated savings from the location are then generalized to all similar locations.
March 1, 2011
7
Energy Efficiency – Top Down Models
• “Top down” models quantify the energy efficiency impact based on aggregate customer levels such as residential, commercial, or industrial.
• Using aggregate customer 15-minute load shapes, determine statistically the component of load that is weather sensitive and the component of load that is not weather sensitive (base load).
• By applying assumed energy efficiency improvements for weather sensitive load and/or base load, an adjusted aggregate customer load shape can be created.
March 1, 2011
8
Energy Efficiency
• Note there is no consensus as to which approach is “better”
• Goal is to complete the first iteration of the long-term energy efficiency load forecast by June
March 1, 2011
9
Plug-In Electric Vehicles
• Data has been collected and an initial model has been created
• Contains four charging pattern scenarios from the report entitled “Costs and Emissions Associated with Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging in the Xcel Energy Colorado Service Territory” (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/41410.pdf).
– Uncontrolled - charging occurs only at home at the owners discretion
– Continuous - charging occurs at anytime during the day
– Delayed - charging at home beginning at 10 pm
– Off peak - charging at home during the overnight hours when prices are assumed to be lowest
March 1, 2011
10
Plug-In Electric Vehicles
• Used hourly load shape from a NYISO report entitled “Alternate Route: Electrifying the Transportation Sector Potential Impacts of Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles on New York State’s Electricity System” (http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/newsroom/press_releases/2009/Alternate_Route_NYISO_PHEV_Paper_062909.pdf)
March 1, 2011
11
Future Work – Distributed Generation
• Create Distributed Generation (DG) premise models
– Currently there are 1,100 premises with DG in competitive areas
– Of these, 340 have interval data meters (15-minute data)
• Will analyze the interval data and the registration information to assist in the development of the models
March 1, 2011
12
Future Work – Demand Response
• Create Demand Response (DR) model
• Will analyze the FERC report and investigate the possible transfer of some/all of their methodology to ERCOT (http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/06-17-10-demand-response.pdf)
March 1, 2011
13
Questions
March 1, 2011
ON
OFF
14
Contact Information
For additional information:
• Email [email protected]
• Phone 512-248-3152
March 1, 2011