Flexible Resource Adequacy Criteria Must Offer Obligation Straw Proposal Dec 20, 2012

47 Pages·2012·1.15 MB·English

Flexible Resource Adequacy Criteria
and Must-Offer Obligation
December 20, 2012
Karl Meeusen, Ph.D.
Market Design and Regulatory Policy Lead
Introduction and Stakeholder
Process
Tom Cuccia
Page 2
Purpose of this initiative is to ensure the ISO has
sufficient tariff authority to manage Flexible Capacity
RA Resources
• ISO will conduct a two stage process
• The first stage, for 2014 RA compliance, focuses on:
– Default provisions for LRA’s without flexible capacity
procurement obligations
– Backstop procurement authority
• The second stage, for 2015 RA compliance, will focus on:
– Enhanced performance obligations for flexible capacity
resources, including must-offer obligations
– Backstop procurement compensation for flexible capacity
resource obligations, and
– Revisions to the ISO Standard Capacity Product tariff
provisions to apply to flexible RA capacity resources.
Page 3
ISO Stakeholder Initiative Process
We Are Here
Page 4
Stakeholder Meeting – Agenda - 12/20/12
Time Topic Presenter
10:00 – 10:15 Introduction & Meeting Objective Tom Cuccia
10:15 – 10:45 Overview of Need and of the Joint Parties’ Karl Meeusen
Proposal
10:45 – 12:30 Methodology for Determining Flexible Capacity Clyde Loutan and
Procurement Requirements SCE
12:30 – 1:30 Lunch
1:30 – 2:30 Flexible Capacity Procurement Requirements Karl Meeusen
and Backstop Procurement Authority
2:30 – 3:15 Procurement and Counting for Flexible Capacity Karl Meeusen
Resources
3:15 – 3:30 Alternative Hydro Proposal Glenn Goldbeck
(PG&E)
3:30 – 3:50 Issues to Resolve in Stage Two Karl Meeusen
3:50 – 4:00 Next Steps Tom Cuccia
Page 5
Overview of Need and of the Joint
Parties’ Proposal
Karl Meeusen, Ph.D.
Market Design and Regulatory Policy Lead
Conventional resources will be dispatched to
the net load demand curve
CAISO Load, Wind & Solar Profiles – High Load Case
January 2020
46,000 10,000
6,300 MW 13,500 MW
44,000
8,000 MW in 2 hours in 2 hours 9,000
42,000 in 2 hours
8,000
40,000
)
W 38,000 7,000
M
( )
d 36,000 6,000 W
a M
o
L 34,000 (
r
te 5,000 a
N lo
32,000 S
&
&
d 4,000
a 30,000 d
o n
L iW
28,000 3,000
26,000
2,000
24,000
1,000
22,000
20,000 0
0:00 1:30 3:00 4:30 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00
Load Net Load Wind Solar
Slide 7
Assessing future ramping needs: An example
46,000
Required Flexibility Ramp Rate
44,000
42,000
40,000
)W 38,000 Uncertainty Range
M
( d 36,000
a
o
L 34,000
t
e
N
& 32,000
d Ramp =
a
o 30,000
L
17,000 MW
28,000
in 3 hrs
26,000
24,000
22,000
20,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Net Load
Slide 8
8
Net load pattern changes significantly starting
in 2015
CAISO Net Load --- 2012 through 2020
27,000
25,000
Typical March Day – significant
23,000 change starting in 2015
2012
2013
21,000
2014
W 2015
19,000
M
2016
2017
17,000
2018
2019
15,000
2020
13,000 Potential
Over-generation
11,000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Slide 9
Objective of the Joint Parties’ Interim Flexible Capacity
Proposal
• The result of extensive negotiations with IOUs.
• Craft an interim flexible capacity proposal that could:
– Be implemented by the 2014 RA compliance year
– Minimize added complexity and modifications to the
current RA program and
– Start the process of adding flexibility to the forward
procurement process, allowing a more
comprehensive solution to be developed and
implemented by 2017 RA compliance