talib
Uploaded by
14 SLIDES
282 VUES
140LIKES

Exploring Charging Options for HV Connected Generators in Generation Dominated Areas

DESCRIPTION

The MIG workgroup is addressing charging mechanisms for HV connected generators in Generation Dominated Areas (GDA). Building on research from Frontier Economics, five meetings have established a revised GDA specification, identified charging options, and initiated analysis based on the latest Long-Term Development Scenarios (LTDS). Two new tests validate generation and demand loading over various time horizons. The workgroup is considering three charging options, balancing cost reflectivity and transparency, with a preliminary recommendation favoring a locationally varying charging regime.

1 / 14

Télécharger la présentation

Exploring Charging Options for HV Connected Generators in Generation Dominated Areas

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. Generation Dominated Areas Oliver Day

  2. Generation Dominated Areas • MIG workgroup set up to explore three ‘charging’ options for HV connected generators and submit a DCUSA change proposal • Workgroup picks up from the work previously undertaken by Frontier Economics • Five meetings have taken place • Group have: • Establish a revised GDA specification • Developed a GDA identification template • Started to analyse results based on latest LTDS • Started to draft ‘final’ report

  3. Test for GDA • GDA is defined as “a primary substation where thermal reinforcement is more likely to be caused by generation than demand, within a specific time period” • GDA test uses a variation of the test developed by Frontier Economics and uses LTDS data on primary substations • A second test has been added to ensure a ‘charge’ signal is not removed where a generator is supporting a demand loaded substation • The second test validates whether generation loading is higher than the demand loading • Both tests are conducted over 2.5 year, 5 year, 7.5 year and 10 year time horizons

  4. First test Substation Firm Capacity (summer) < Gen Capt – Min Demandt Test considers the net of generation and min demand growth and asks will it exceed the substation firm capacity in a given year? Is generation driving reinforcement? • Substation Firm Capacity (summer) • = Firm capacity x Summer weighting • Gen Capt • = Estimated generation capacity in year t • Min Demandt • = Estimated minimum demand in year t

  5. Second test Gen Capt – Min Demandt > Max Demandt – Min Generationt Test considers the generation and min demand growth and asks will it exceed the max demand and min generation growth in a given year? Is demand still a factor in the need to reinforce? • Max Demandt • = Estimated max demand in year t • Min Generationt • = Estimated min generation capacity in year t

  6. Charging Options Workgroup explored three charging options Option 1: The introduction of a very simple locationally varying charging regime for HV generation Option 2: The introduction of a simple regime for levying credits on HV generation Option 3: To amend the existing charging regime so that credits are removed from HV generation in locations that are considered to be generator dominated

  7. Option 1 Simple locational varying Mirrors existing HV structures Eight sets of charge Each primary substation given generation dominance ‘rating’ Four x Intermittent Four x Non-intermittent Each HV generator assigned to a primary substation 1 ‘Norm’ – Full Credit – 10 years to GDA 2 ‘Low’ – 67% Credit – 7.5 years to GDA 3 ‘Med’ – 33% Credit – 5 years to GDA 4 ‘High’ – No Credit – 2.5 years to GDA

  8. Option 2 Simple credit regime Existing HV structures Two sets of charge DNO area adjustment based on GDA in 5 years 1 Intermittent x factor Capacity of GDA substations Total capacity 2 Non-intermittent x factor

  9. Option 3 Remove credits from GDA Mirrors existing HV structures Four sets of charge Each primary substation given generation dominance ‘rating’ if GDA in 7.5 years 1 Intermittent GDA – no credit 2 Each HV generator assigned to a primary substation Intermittent ‘norm’ – full credit 3 Non-intermittent GDA – no credit 4 Non-intermittent ‘norm’ – full credit

  10. Option variants • Many variants of the options considered • Workgroup trying to balance cost reflectivity with sensible and transparent application • Other variants include: • % reduction in credit only to apply to network level of generation dominance i.e. Primary substation • Credit remains for those sites with Generation Side Management (GSM) agreements • No variant ruled out – desire for pragmatic approach

  11. Option preference • Workgroup evaluated options based on charging principles • Option 1 provided most pragmatic approach when GDA identified • Option 2 would reduce credits at locations where generation support was most needed • Option 3 would cause most potential for volatility if substations flipped one year to next • Workgroup preferred to provide a granular price signal • Current preference to recommend option 1

  12. Initial analysis • *Based on previous LTDS data used for Frontier analysis

  13. Initial impact • *Based on previous LTDS data used for Frontier analysis – sample from 1 DNO group

  14. Next Steps • DNOs currently populating GDA template based on latest LTDS data • Workgroup drafting report for MIG with recommendation and DCUSA change proposal • Aiming to deliver report to MIG for 19 April

More Related