ETS and Wind Benefits In The Yukon

Benefits and Costs of Adding Wind and
ETS to the Yukon Electrical Grid
WORKSHOP - ELECTRIC THERMAL STORAGE:
SPACE HEATING WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY
May 13, 2014
Steven Wong
1
Presentation Plan





Introduction - CanmetENERGY
Background and motivation of the study
Baseline information
Simulation and case studies
Summary
2
CanmetENERGY
 The largest energy science and technology organization in Canada
working on clean energy research, technology development,
demonstration and deployment
 Over 400 scientists, engineers and technicians
 More than 100 years of experience
 Budget of $62 million
 Canada's technical resource and knowledge base in the
development of new clean energy technologies, regulations, codes,
standards, policies and programs
 Our vision is to be an S&T leader in the federal government, acting
as a supplier and catalyst for a sustainable energy future for Canada
3
CanmetENERGY – Integration of Renewable
and Distributed Energy Resources
Active
Distribution
Networks
4. Efficient control and reliable operation of
distribution networks with self-healing capability
Sustainable
Microgrids
3. Optimum design and energy management of
grid-connected and remote microgrids
Virtual
Power Plant
2. Balancing power system supply & demand
Distributed
Generation
1. Integration of renewable energy
4
Goal: Consider the Integration of Wind
and ETS in the Yukon electrical grid
Yukon electrical grid
 Disconnected, medium sized grid
 Has large existing flexible hydro resources
 Reliant on diesel to supplement generation during high load
Determine:
 The potential for wind to provide power for current (diesel
supplied) load and future growth
 The part that ETS units can play in increasing load factor and the
role of renewables on the Yukon grid.
5
Approach
 Review the existing system
 Load and supply resources
 Hydro resources and potential
 Explore the potential new resources
 Wind
 Electric thermal storage
 Look at model and analyse case study results
 ETS as a capacity resource
 Generation optimization
 With and without ETS
6
Existing Yukon Electrical Grid
65
 Load
60
Average Load (MW)
 Year 2012, 426 GWh
 Supply (and dispatch order)
 Whitehorse Rapids Hydro
 $10/MWh
 Run-of-the-river
 $330/MWh
 Supplies remaining load
(and provides reserve)
 Source of GHGs
45
40
35
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Summer
Winter
90
80
Total System Load (MW)
 Diesel
50
25
 Mayo A and B and Ashihik
 $10/MWh
 Storage capable
55
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Month
9
10
11
12
Hydro Resources
 Whitehorse Rapids
 Run-of-the-river, no storage (use it or lose it)
 Potential
 0 to 40 MW power output, based on river flows.
Whitehorse Rapids Potential (MW)
45
40
Spilled
35
Captured
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Month
9
10
11
12
 ~238 GWh generation (230 GWh captured in 2012)
 Modelled as fixed potential, with energy either captured or lost
8
Hydro Resources
 Mayo A and B and Aishihik
 Storage capacity enabled by holding back
water in upstream lake
Min. Potential
Max. Generation
Energy
Potential
Average
Generation
Mayo A and B
Aishihik
2.5 MW
0
10 MW (Winter est.)
37 MW
50 GWh (2012)
78 GWh (Design)
143 GWh (2012)
115 GWh (Design)
5.7 MW (2012)
9 MW (Design)
16.3 MW (2012)
13 MW (Design)
9
Potential: Capturing, Displacing,
or Spilling
 At any given instant, potential will be available to generator for
creating electricity.
 With intermittent, non-dispatchable generators, this potential is
lost if not used (e.g. Whitehorse Rapids hydro, wind)
 Some other generators (e.g. Mayo, Aishihik) can save all or a
portion of this potential for use at another time.
 Potential that is used for electricity generation is captured
 Potential that is not used is lost forever, or spilled
 Potential that is saved for another period than it would
otherwise have been used is displaced
10
Additional Potential Resources
0.5
Wind Potential (per unit)
Wind
 Renewable source of energy
 Intermittent potential with
no storage (use it or lose it)
 Costs
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
1
 Capital cost M$3.6 to 5/MW
(k$289 to 401/MW/year at 5%)
 $30/MWh operational cost
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
11
Month
0.8
Wind Potential (per unit)
0.7
 Considerations
 Flexible hydro can be used
to balance this resource,
resulting in its (hydro’s)
displacement or spillage
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
1
11
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Month
9
12
12
Additional Potential Resources
ETS
 Can be used with other resources to add capacity,
or capture potential that otherwise would have been lost,
Average Winter Heating Load
(kW/Unit)
 Thus reducing spillage
and/or diesel generation
 Costs
 Capital cost of ~$11,000/unit
($880 annually over 20 yrs)
3.7
3.65
3.6
3.55
3.5
3.45
3.4
3.35
3.3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
 Smart control
 Best results gained by
operating hourly in real-time
to meet system and user needs.
12
Total System Load (MW)
90
8
80
System Load
70
Heating Load (per unit)
7
6
60
5
50
4
40
3
30
20
2
10
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Day
8
9
10
11
12
Residential Heating Load (kW/Unit)
 Zero operational cost, but
minor storage loss
3.75
Model Summary
 Minimize costs
 Dispatch order:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Wind
Whitehorse Rapids hydro
Mayo and Ashihik hydro
Diesel
 Subject to
 Meeting demand, considering
 Displacement of hydro potential
 Load shifting using ETS units
13
Case Study
– Using ETS to increase load factor
𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 =
Load
Measure of capital utilization
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑
𝑃𝑒𝑎𝑘 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑
Benefits
 Higher asset utilization
 Reduced need for capital investments
Increase
load factor
Load
Methods to increasing load factor
 Reduce load peaks
 Fill in load troughs
Time (over 24 hours)
Time (over 24 hours)
14
Case Study
– Using ETS to increase load factor
 Method: Reduce available diesel from 13.8 MW to 6 MW;
in other words, find 7.8 MW capacity through existing
and additional wind/ETS assets
New
ETS
units
New
Wind
Capacity
Generation
from Wind
Add’l Hydro
Potential
Captured
Energy
Stored in
ETS
Reduction
in Diesel*
1331
0.6 MW
1229 MWh
1324 MWh
2858 MWh
1989 MWh
* Difference in reduction and captured potential due to losses
15
Case Study
– Using ETS to increase load factor
 Increase load factor from 0.59 to 0.64
90
80
Load (MW)
70
With ETS
60
50
40
No ETS
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Hour
Load profile limiting
generation capacity,
Dec. 19, 2012
 171 ETS units per MW
 $430,000 net annual energy savings to system operator
($323 per unit)
 1.49 MWh reduction in diesel consumption/year
(1t CO2e/year)
16
Case Study
– Using ETS to increase load factor
40
35
30
Sum of cAmt
400
Sum of dAmt
Instances
450
25
20
15
350
10
300
70
5
250
60
Discharge
200
Instances
Total charge or discharge (MWh)
500
150
100
50
0
1
50
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Discharge Period Length (hours)
40
30
20
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Hour
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Charge Period Length (hours)
10
11
14
 Charging patterns are not uniform, suggesting that traditional
timer-based operation of ETS can be improved, but
 To achieve such a pattern, near real-time
smart control is need.
17
Reference Scenarios
– Load growth with no wind or ETS
Using 2012 as a reference year
 Total load is increased 2.5% and 5%
 150 and 300 home heating systems are converted from oil
to electric baseboard.
455
Spilled Hydro Potential
450
+694%
+763%
Load
20
445
440
435
15
0
2012
18
-30%
425
-30%
5
430
-19%
-7%
10
+45%
Diesel and Spilled Hydro (GWh)
As is, there is not much
room for GHG free growth.
25
Diesel Generation
+150 homes +2.5% load +5% load
+5% load
150 homes 150 homes 300 homes
420
415
410
Load (GWh)
 Large increases in diesel
generation.
 Small decreases in
spilled hydro.
30
+366%
Results
Scenario Set A
Allow model to add wind and ETS capacity minimizing direct costs
 Wind investments are useful, especially with increase in base load
 No ETS investments suggested (system already flexible)
 Total lost potential stable
 Only marginal increased diesel use
12
Diesel Generation
Spilled Hydro Potential
Wind Generation
Dsl. Gen. (Ref.)
Spilled Hyd. Pot. (Ref.)
New Wind
25
20
10
8
15
6
10
4
5
2
0
0
2012
+150 homes
+2.5% load
150 homes
19
+5% load
150 homes
+5% load
300 homes
Added Wind Capacity (MW)
Wind, Diesel and Spilled Hydro (GWh)
30
Scenario Set A
Annual savings over the reference (no wind or ETS) scenario
Savings
+150 homes
+2.5%, 150 h
+5%, 150 h
+5%, 300
Diesel
1000 MWh
10,000 MWh
19,000 MWh
21,000 MWh
Cost (-)
$143,000
$1,400,000
$2,700,000
$2,900,000
Wind investments coupled with utilizing existing flexible hydro
resources can lead to a vast reduction in diesel consumption, and
consequently costs and GHG emissions.
Average flexible hydro output,
January
50
50
45
45
40
40
35
35
30
25
Total
20
15
10
No Wind
Subtle shifts
in hydro
generation
5
30
25
Total
20
15
10
10 MW Wind
5
0
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
20
Scenario Set B
 Half of home heating conversions from oil are to ETS systems
(instead of baseboard heaters)
 Very little change in optimal wind penetration
New
ETS
Energy
Stored
+150 homes
75
257 MWh
+2.5%, 150 h
75
265 MWh
+5%, 150 h
+5%,300
75
150
266 MWh
527 MWh
12
Diesel Generation
Spilled Hydro Potential
Wind Generation
Dsl. Gen. (Ref.)
Spilled Hyd. Pot. (Ref.)
New Wind
25
20
10
8
15
6
10
4
5
2
0
0
2012
21
+150 homes
+2.5% load
150 homes
+5% load
150 homes
+5% load
300 homes
Added Wind Capacity (MW)
Scenario
Wind, Diesel and Spilled Hydro (GWh)
30
Scenario Set B – ETS Benefits
 Utility savings are from reduced diesel consumption and are
net of increases in associated hydro and wind costs
Utility Savings
Scenario
Reduction in Diesel
Total
Per Unit
Total
(MWh)
Per Unit
(kg CO2e)
+150 homes
$36k
$475
220 MWh
2050
+2.5%, 150 h
$35k
$462
235 MWh
2190
+5%, 150 h
$27k
$365
225 MWh
2100
+5%,300
$58k
$387
443 MWh
2070
22
Summary and Thoughts on ETSs
Findings:
 ETSs can increase load factor and reduce the need
for additional generation capacity
 Utility savings are equal to about half of an ETS unit’s cost
 Benefits of ETSs increase as load increases
 At studied load levels, ETS impacts on wind capacity and
operation is minor (since hydro can provide most of needed
flexibility)
Questions:
 What additional infrastructure is required to support ETS?
 What is the role of the smart grid, and what additional savings does
it bring to ETS over more traditional (timer-based) applications?
 How much, and through what mechanism, should net utility savings
be passed onto the customer?
23
Thank you
Steven Wong, CanmetENERGY-Varennes
Natural Resources Canada
[email protected]
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/electricity-infrastructure
Additional thanks to J.P. Pinard, John Maissan, Doug MacLean,
and M.-A. Lavigne for their valuable input into this work.
24

Download Report