1 / 13

Item A-3 AD02-18-000 5/30/02 Commission Meeting

Item A-3 AD02-18-000 5/30/02 Commission Meeting. Staff Presentation on Northeast RTO Developments By Thanh Luong (OMTR) and Steve Rodgers (OMTR). ISONE. -. HQ. Ontario Hydro.

merrill-bryan
Télécharger la présentation

Item A-3 AD02-18-000 5/30/02 Commission Meeting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation 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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Item A-3 AD02-18-000 5/30/02 Commission Meeting Staff Presentation on Northeast RTO Developments By Thanh Luong (OMTR) and Steve Rodgers (OMTR)

  2. ISONE - HQ Ontario Hydro Hydro Quebec New Brunswick ISO - NE ISONE - NB NYISO - IMO NYISO - ISONE NYISO PJM - FE (ECAR) PJM NYISO - PJM PJM - APS (ECAR) PJM - VAP NYISO- HQ

  3. 2000 & 2001 ACTUAL INTERCHANGE NET RECEIPTS (GWh) New Brunswick Hydro Quebec 11,457 7,843 3,965 3,718 Ontario Hydro 6,8263,432 ISO-NE 2,2551,827 2,386 3,508 NYISO 13,47115,419 9,384 9,553 ECAR PJM 3,4454,249 VACAR 2000 Net Receipts 2001 Net Receipts Sources: NYISO, ISO-NE and PJM

  4. Estimated Transfer Capabilities (MW) New Brunswick 700 Hydro Quebec 2,225 Ontario Hydro 1,500 ISO-NE 2,350 NYISO 1,400 2,150 2,550 2,918 ECAR PJM 3,950 VACAR Sources: NPCC Summer 2001 Multi-Area Probability Assessment and NERC’s 2001 Summer Assessment

  5. Summary • ISO-NE: net import region • Imported from NYISO and Canada • NYISO: net import region • Imported from PJM and Canada; export to ISO-NE • Transfer capabilities from Canada and ISO-NE to NYISO are more than double the capability from PJM • PJM: net import region • Imported from APS, FE, and VAP; export to NY • Transfer capabilities from ECAR and VAP to PJM are more than double the capability from NYISO

  6. Highlights of May 14 Preliminary Cost-Benefit Study of NYISO/ISO-NE • Estimated annual savings of $220 million in 2005 and $150 million in 2010 for New York/New England RTO • Most savings related to elimination of export fees, elimination of seams and standardized markets

  7. Highlights of May 14 Preliminary Cost-Benefit Study of NYISO/ISO-NE (con’t) • New York fares relatively better in a NY/New England RTO, with annual savings of $282 million in 2005 and $147 million in 2010 • New England’s costs increase by $62 million per year in 2005, with $3 million in savings in 2010 • In a 3-way RTO (including PJM), New York has $367 million in annual savings in 2005, while New England’s and PJM’s costs increase

  8. Highlights of May 14 Preliminary Cost-Benefit Study of NYISO/ISO-NE (con’t) • Sensitivity runs show New England benefits increase significantly if fuel prices are higher than projected • Environmental impacts small relative to total emissions

  9. Some Highlights of May 28 FERC/State Commission Panel on the Northeast • Strong consensus among New England commissioners on governance and Board independence issues, general consensus on market monitoring issues, but lack of consensus on proper RTO footprint • General consensus among states that good market rules/SMD and resolution of seams is more important than, and should precede, RTO formation

  10. Some Highlights of May 28 FERC/State Commission Panel on Northeast (con’t) • New England views on governance and Board independence: • RTO/ISO Boards should be completely independent of market participants and draw all their authority from FERC • The Board selection process should be more transparent, with greater accountability to FERC

  11. Some Highlights of May 28 FERC/State Commission Panel on Northeast (con’t) • On market monitoring, general interest among NY and New England commissioners to get more involved in this, and interest in better information sharing among Federal and state regulators • Interest among some New England commissioners to have a regional authority help guide generation and transmission siting

  12. Some Highlights of May 28 FERC/State Commission Panel on Northeast (con’t) • General perception among NY and New England that seams resolution has suffered because of ISOs’ aggressive work on RTO filing • States generally feel that fixing flawed market rules and seams problems should be focus of ISOs ahead of RTO development

  13. Some Highlights of May 28 FERC/State Commission Panel on Northeast (con’t) • Proposed State Solutions: • FERC should relax pressure on ISOs to make an RTO filing, with greater opportunity for state input before any RTO filing is made • Primary focus should be to reach decisions on SMD, resolution of seams issues, and governance, instead of on RTO formation • FERC should require Northeastern ISOs to promptly identify their seams problems, and then hold them accountable through regular progress reports

More Related