mts working group september 8, 2015. 2 introduction more than smart mission – enabling state...
TRANSCRIPT
MTS Working GroupSeptember 8, 2015
2
Introduction
• More Than Smart• Mission – Enabling state integrated distribution grid efforts
1. Continue the work of CA MTS Working Group - today2. Push to help other state distribution grid efforts around country3. Communications & Outreach push for other states to utilize MTS work
• Areas of Focus• Operationalizing distribution grid planning work• Funding to be a mix of foundation, membership and state/federal grants• Two main MTS forums –MTS Working Group & Regular open webinars• Subgroups for quick turn-around as required
3
MTS Working Group Purpose
Provide an open, voluntary stakeholder forum to educate and discuss core issues toward identifying potential common ground regarding the evolution of California’s distribution system and the seamless integration of DER to meet customers’ needs and public policy. The discussions will be for the benefit of the participants and may be made public without specific participant attribution
4
More Than Smart
• Tony Brunello, More Than Smart [email protected]
• Paul De Martini, MTS/ICF International [email protected]
• Laura Manz, MTS/ICF International [email protected]
• Michael Murray, MTS/Mission:Data [email protected]
• Deborah Shields, MTS [email protected]
• Annie Howley, MTS [email protected]
MTS meetings, webinars and information exchange are designed solely to provide a forum or means for the expression of various points of view in compliance with antitrust laws. Under no circumstances shall MTS activities be used as a means for competing companies to reach any understanding, expressed or implied, which tends to restrict competition, or in any way, to impair the ability of participating members to exercise independent business judgment regarding matters affecting competition or regulatory positions.
Proprietary information shall not be disclosed by any participant during any MTS meeting or its subgroups. In addition, no information of a secret or proprietary nature shall be made available to MTS or its membership. All proprietary information which may nonetheless be publicly disclosed by any participant during any MTS meeting or its subgroups shall be deemed to have been disclosed on a non-confidential basis, without any restrictions on use by anyone, except that no valid copyright or patent right shall be deemed to have been waived by such disclosure
5
Agenda
9:00-9:15am 9:15–10:30am
Introductions Presentations (about 15 minutes each) and group discussion to explore various views on integrated distributed planning process
10:30-noon Facilitated discussion to define IDPP and identify key components to frame further evaluation by WG
Lunch 12:30-1:30pm 1:30-3:00pm
Continuation of IDPP discussion Discussion of DER portfolio scope and overall schedule of activity for working group - scope, timing, subgroups
6
Context: Evolution of DRP
Walk
Jog
Run
No.
of B
enefi
t Cat
egor
ies
&So
phisti
catio
n of
Ana
lysi
s
2015-1H 2016 2H 2016-2019 2020+
Visibility & Initial DPA Locational Benefits
System-wide DRP including LTPP& TPP locational benefits
System-wide DRPs incl. Locational Societal Benefits
Discussion framework from Phase 1
7
Integrated Distribution Planning Process
- develop a working definition
Presentations by MTS Members
8
IDPP Presentations by:
• Heather Sanders, SCE• Ryan Hanley, SolarCity• Will Speer, SDG&E• Lorenzo Kristov, CAISO• Mark Esguerra, PG&E
9
Integrated Statewide Planning Process Alignment
L. Kristov, CAISO
10
There are two aspects to the DRP process alignment
1. Optimally align new DRP cycle with the existing structure of IEPR-LTPP-TPP
• State agencies & legislature are concerned that all procurement & planning processes utilize consistent & up-to-date assumptions
• IEPR-LTPP-TPP alignment created in 2013-14 achieves this for those processes
• DRPs & DER adoption projections & impacts will be key elements of assumptions & scenarios for procurement & planning
• Many DER types reflected in DRPs are load modifiers that need to go into the IEPR demand forecast
• A needed next step is to map the content & timing of important inputs & outputs between DRPs & the other processes
Page 10
11
Second aspect –
2. Distribution investment proposed in DRPs must be input to utility GRCs
• Required by PU Code Sec 769
• Three IOU GRC cycles are three years long & staggered
• IOUs perform annual internal distribution planning processes to plan each year’s infrastructure build-out, based on their own latest GRC approved funding
• What is relationship between existing annual planning process and new DRP cycle?
• How to define the future DRP cycle to address both aspects of the problem?
Page 11
12
Process suggestions
Inter-agency group to address first aspect• Existing inter-agency process alignment group (CPUC-CEC-ISO)
describes & maps most important inputs & outputs • Engage broad group of CPUC staff working on various CPUC procurement
proceedings (LTPP, RPS, EE, DR, Storage, RA)
• Present inter-agency work to IOUs for comment & revisions
MTS Subgroup to address second aspect• Develop initial framework
Full MTS working group• Reviews draft framework presented by subgroups for feedback
Page 12
13
Integrated Distribution Planning Process (DPP) - develop an end-to-end framework
14
• DPP/DRP timing considerations• Relationship with interconnection processes (Rule 21, SGIP)• Enhancements to improving methodologies/assumptions of
analyses• Data Access & Transparency - which data needs to be shared?• Coordination Topics
Page 14
Integrated Distribution Planning Process (DPP)
15
Enhancements to improving methodologies/assumptions of analyses • Integrated Capacity Analysis
• Additional locational value components and enhancements to methods
• Scenario enhancements (incl. DER forecasting)
• And any enhancements
Page 15
Integrated Distribution Planning Process (DPP)
16
Data Access & Transparency - which data needs to be shared? • Hosting Capacity refinements?• Locational Value• Planned Expenditures (capital and OpEx)• Data Access (incl. mechanisms for sharing i.e. RAM maps, etc.)
Page 16
Integrated Distribution Planning Process (DPP)
17
Coordination Topics• DRP/IDSR/other proceedings• Alignment of DPP with TPP/LTPP/IEPR • CAISO coordination whitepaper
Page 17
Integrated Distribution Planning Process (DPP)
18
DER Sourcing Structures & Portfolio Management Scoping Discussion
19
• Planning driven definition of distribution needs• DER Portfolio framework and development considerations• DER Sourcing (rates/pricing, programs, procurements)
considerations• DER portfolio operational “dispatch” consideration (“merit
order
Page 19
Planning and Sourcing
20
DER Services Portfolio Development & Operations
DER Services Development DER Portfolio ManagementDER Portfolio Development
For illustration only
(Renewable DG, Storage, DR, EE, EV & Power Electronics)
21
DER Services Lifecycle Process
Identify grid needs & locational value based on operational & engineering requirements
Specific services are identified and various sourcing mechanisms are employed
Sourcing results from competitive market are assessed against need and any gaps are identified
DER deliver value as measured against specific performance metrics
DER settlement & performance results feed into next distribution planning cycle
PortfolioDevelopment
PortfolioManagement
22
Nested Locational Portfolios
Potentially DR/DER providing value at multiple levels will create nested relationships that will need to be considered
Regional Portfolio
DLAP Portfolio
LMP/LCR Portfolio
Distribution Value
23
DER Value Components for Distribution
Value Component Definition
Distribution
Subtransmission, Substation & Feeder Capacity
Reduced need for local distribution system upgrades
Distribution Losses Value of energy due to losses between wholesale transaction and distribution points of delivery
Distribution Power Quality + Reactive Power
Improved transient & steady-state voltage, reactive power optimization and harmonics
Distribution Reliability + Resiliency+ Security
Reduced frequency and duration of individual outages & withstand and quickly recover from large external natural, physical and cyber threats
Distribution Safety Improved public safety and reduced potential for property damage
Propose to Define Specific Services & Performance Requirements
24
DER Portfolio Development & Management• The identified services needed and the respective
sourcing mechanisms employed create locational portfolios
• Local portfolios can be developed through the use of:• Pricing – Rates & Markets• Programs – EE & DR• Procurements
• These portfolios also aggregate Bulk Power System values that need to be considered and managed
• Development of an optimal portfolio including DSM rates and programs with competitively procured DER services should be discussed by the IDSM proceeding• From a market development perspective, this could
include consideration of the effect of portfolio allocation between the 3 P’s on market development and overall portfolio net benefits effectiveness
• From a quantitative perspective, this could include identifying the option value, if not explicitly understood and the covariance among the various elements in relation to each other to create an optimal mix
DER Portfolio
Pricing Programs Procurement
25
Distributed Energy Resource Sourcing• Attributes
• Technical requirements by value component• Commercial considerations• Control
• Sourcing Consideration• Timing• Prioritization
• Distribution merit order• Allocation
• Interrelationship of Portfolio Categories (EE, DR, DS, DG, EV, etc.)
Page 25
Planning and Sourcing Considerations
26
DER Portfolio framework & development considerations
• Current Customer tariff composition• Scenario for change in tariffs• LMP Nodal Forecasts (CAISO change to Plexus to be more
granular to LMP Nodes)• Scenarios linked to ICA • DSO described barriers – how to consider• Deferral framework
Page 26
27
WG Deliverables
28
WG Deliverables
• Recommendations on an integrated Distribution Planning Process for system-wide implementation by _______.• Recommendations to enhance planning scenarios regarding
granularity and DER forecasting• Recommendations on data sharing and related mechanisms• Recommendations on IDPP to CA state-wide planning
processes alignment• Development of a framework for the intersection of planning
and DSR/DER sourcing• Development of a framework for “DER alternatives”
evaluation and related “merit order ”
Page 28
