Impact of 4-CP Transmission Charges on Real-Time Prices Analysis
This analysis delves into the impact of 4-CP transmission charges on real-time prices, focusing on how BUSIDRRQ customers and load profiling influence rates. Methodologies and objectives for quantifying the impact are explored, with insights from competitive load data on 4-CP days.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Analysis of the Impact of 4-CP Transmission Charges on Real Time Prices Carl L Raish Principal Load Profiling and Modeling WMS September 6, 2017
How 4-CP Works BUSIDRRQ customers 700 kW or served at transmission (69 kV) voltage are subject to 4-CP charges. Simple average of the metered load during ERCOT system monthly peak 15-minute intervals in four summer months -- June, July, August & September. Multiplied by the applicable prevailing TDSP Tariff, as approved by PUC. Is the basis for the monthly 4-CP-based rates for the following calendar year. Analysis for this report addressed 4-CP in both the competitive and NOIE areas of ERCOT. The analysis used settlement system interval data For ESIIDs in competitive ERCOT areas with BUSIDRRQ profile types. Calculated interval data of the native load in NOIE areas NOIE area boundary metered imports plus generation located inside the NOIE area 2 PUBLIC
Analysis Objective Test quantification of 4-CP impact on real-time prices by: 1. Remove estimated amount of 4-CP response (adding it back to ERCOT load); and, 2. Estimate revised system lambda, taking price response from load and distributed generation into consideration. 3. Issues with generator behavioral response 3 PUBLIC
Analysis Methodology 1. Select 4-CP and Near-CP days in 2015 and 2016. 8 4-CP days 11 Near-CP days in 2015 and 14 Near-CP days in 2016 Use intervals 48 96 for each of the 33 days (1,584 intervals) 2. Calculate revised system lambda with GTBD increased by the 4- CP response amount in each SCED interval 3. Develop ERCOT-level price response model for load and distributed generation Competitive area load using annual survey Load of NOIEs identified as responding to price Exports from distributed generators that respond to price 4. Iteratively: Calculate price response MW based on revised system lambda Modify GTBD based on price response Calculate revised system lambda at the modified GTBD Continue iterating until the point (GTBD adjusted for price response, revised system lambda) matches a point on the aggregated energy offer curve 4 PUBLIC
Competitive Load on 4 CP Days - 2016 July 14, 2016 June 15, 2016 2000 2000 1800 1800 1600 1600 1400 1400 1200 1200 MW MW 1000 1000 800 800 600 600 400 400 CP Reduce = 436 CP Reduce = 452 200 200 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Interval Interval Actual Baseline Reduce HR 17:00 Actual Baseline Reduce HR 17:00 September 19, 2016 August 11, 2016 2000 2000 1800 1800 1600 1600 1400 1400 1200 1200 MW MW 1000 1000 800 800 600 600 400 400 200 200 0 CP Reduce = 626 CP Reduce = 577 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Interval Interval Actual Baseline Reduce HR 17:00 Actual Baseline Reduce HR 17:00 Load reductions for ESIIDs that respond to 4-CP Reductions start around noon and continue to midnight 5 PUBLIC
NOIE 4 Load on CP Days - 2016 July 14, 2016 June 15, 2016 2,000 2,000 14,000 14,000 1,800 1,800 12,000 1,600 12,000 1,600 1,400 1,400 10,000 10,000 1,200 1,200 REDUCE MW REDUCE MW 8,000 8,000 MW MW 1,000 1,000 6,000 800 6,000 800 600 600 4,000 4,000 400 400 CP Reduce = 440 CP Reduce = 481 2,000 2,000 200 200 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Interval Interval Actual Baseline HR 17:00 Reduce Actual Baseline HR 17:00 Reduce August 11, 2016 September 19, 2016 2,000 2,000 14,000 14,000 1,800 1,800 12,000 1,600 12,000 1,600 1,400 1,400 10,000 10,000 1,200 1,200 REDUCE MW REDUCE MW 8,000 8,000 MW MW 1,000 1,000 6,000 800 6,000 800 600 600 4,000 4,000 400 400 2,000 2,000 200 200 0 0 0 0 CP Reduce = 783 CP Reduce = 552 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Interval Interval Actual Baseline HR 17:00 Reduce Actual Baseline HR 17:00 Reduce Load reductions for NOIEs that respond to 4-CP Reductions start around noon and continue to midnight 6 PUBLIC
Competitive + NOIE Response 2009 - 2016 CP Time Reduc e MW Near-CP Date Near-CP Time Reduc e MW CP Time Reduc e MW Near-CP Date Near-CP Time Reduc e MW CP Time Reduc e MW Near-CP Date Near-CP Time Reduc e MW CP Date CP Date CP Date 6/25/2009 7/13/2009 8/5/2009 9/3/2009 16:15 17:00 16:00 16:00 176.3 77.9 109.8 110.4 6/16/2009 6/23/2009 6/24/2009 7/8/2009 7/17/2009 7/31/2009 8/4/2009 8/6/2009 9/2/2009 17:00 16:45 16:30 16:45 16:45 16:00 17:00 17:00 17:00 52.8 98.4 148.8 112.2 0.0 0.0 52.4 0.0 79.2 6/21/2010 7/16/2010 8/23/2010 9/14/2010 16:45 16:30 16:00 16:45 31.8 - 768.4 99.4 6/16/2010 6/18/2010 6/22/2010 7/14/2010 7/15/2010 8/3/2010 8/4/2010 8/5/2010 8/11/2010 8/20/2010 9/1/2010 9/13/2010 16:30 16:00 16:30 17:00 16:45 16:30 16:45 16:30 15:15 15:30 15:30 16:30 189.8 40.2 348.2 0.0 0.0 9.6 324.8 76.0 280.8 274.0 346.8 93.2 6/15/2011 7/27/2011 8/3/2011 9/2/2011 17:00 16:30 17:00 16:30 1,436.3 723.6 1,059.9 1,720.8 6/14/2011 6/16/2011 6/17/2011 6/28/2011 7/7/2011 7/13/2011 7/14/2011 8/1/2011 8/2/2011 8/5/2011 8/9/2011 8/10/2011 8/23/2011 9/1/2011 9/13/2011 17:00 17:00 16:45 17:00 16:45 17:00 16:45 16:45 16:45 16:45 16:30 17:00 16:45 16:45 16:30 905.4 1046.4 1487.8 379.0 74.5 332.1 399.0 581.8 414.5 720.4 330.1 175.9 584.6 552.8 170.6 average 118.6 n=9 average 60.4 average 224.9 n=12 average 165.3 average 1235.1 n=15 average 543.7 6/26/2012 7/31/2012 8/1/2012 9/5/2012 16:30 17:00 17:00 17:00 1,974.9 527.1 568.0 787.3 6/11/2012 6/25/2012 7/20/2012 7/30/2012 8/2/2012 9/4/2012 9/6/2012 9/7/2012 9/28/2012 16:30 17:00 16:00 16:45 16:45 16:45 17:00 16:30 14:30 921.0 1639.8 0.0 381.8 553.2 808.2 1441.2 1435.0 98.6 6/27/2013 7/31/2013 8/7/2013 9/3/2013 17:00 17:00 16:45 16:45 1341.5 613.3 1061.3 476.2 6/19/2013 6/26/2013 6/28/2013 7/9/2013 7/10/2013 8/1/2013 8/6/2013 9/4/2013 9/19/2013 16:30 17:00 17:00 16:45 17:00 16:45 16:45 17:00 16:30 166.8 211.0 1056.6 64.2 733.2 879.8 1631.2 643.4 0.0 6/30/2014 7/21/2014 8/25/2014 9/10/2014 16:30 16:45 17:00 17:00 34.0 75.8 1454.7 893.3 7/8/2014 7/14/2014 7/22/2014 7/25/2014 8/6/2014 8/8/2014 8/21/2014 8/22/2014 9/2/2014 9/9/2014 16:30 15:00 16:45 17:00 17:00 15:45 16:00 16:30 16:30 16:45 355.0 719.8 366.2 0.0 558.8 809.4 653.6 1083.8 897.2 835.6 average 964.3 n=9 average 808.8 average 873.1 n=9 average 598.5 average 614.5 n=10 average 627.9 6/10/2015 7/30/2015 8/10/2015 9/8/2015 16:45 16:45 17:00 16:30 587.1 1,251.0 1,321.3 920.1 6/9/2015 6/24/2015 6/25/2015 7/14/2015 7/27/2015 7/29/2015 8/6/2015 8/11/2015 9/2/2015 9/3/2015 9/4/2015 15:30 16:30 16:45 16:45 16:30 16:45 16:45 16:00 17:00 16:45 16:00 428.1 379.3 473.8 485.4 1186.4 1060.1 1015.2 1044.9 367.1 422.2 504.5 6/15/2016 7/14/2016 8/11/2016 9/19/2016 17:00 16:00 16:30 16:15 876.1 932.2 1408.9 1129.8 6/3/2016 6/16/2016 6/17/2016 7/6/2016 7/7/2016 7/13/2016 7/22/2016 8/2/2016 8/3/2016 8/4/2016 8/8/2016 8/10/2016 9/1/2016 9/8/2016 15:00 16:30 16:30 17:00 16:45 17:00 17:30 17:00 16:30 15:30 16:30 16:00 16:30 16:00 235.8 1087.0 929.8 971.1 802.0 961.0 1089.1 750.8 1088.9 528.4 1220.9 1100.3 870.3 814.8 average 1019.9 n=11 average 669.7 average 1072.4 n=14 average 889.3 7 PUBLIC
Max 4-CP/NearCP Reductions - Hour Ending 17:00 Max Day MW17 Reductions 2009 - 2016 1800 1600 1400 1200 Slope = 21 MW 1000 800 Slope = 2 600 400 Slope = 88 200 2011-Aug 2012-Aug 2009-Aug 2010-Aug 2012-Jun 2013-Aug 2014-Aug 2015-Aug 2016-Aug 2012-Jul 2009-Jul 2010-Jul 2011-Jul 2013-Jul 2014-Jul 2015-Jul 2016-Jul 2009-Jun 2010-Jun 2011-Jun 2011-Sep 2013-Jun 2014-Jun 2015-Jun 2016-Jun 2009-Sep 2010-Sep 2012-Sep 2013-Sep 2014-Sep 2015-Sep 2016-Sep Year-Mon Max MW17 Reduce Linear Trend Piecewise Trend 8 PUBLIC
Growth of ESIIDs and NOIEs with 4-CP Response ESIIDs with 4-CP Reductions 2009 - 2016 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 ESIIDs 1,000 800 Slope = 10 600 400 200 - 2009-Sep 2010-Sep 2011-Sep 2012-Sep 2013-Sep 2014-Sep 2015-Sep 2016-Sep NOIEs with 4-CP Reductions 2009 - 2016 2009-Aug 2016-Aug 2010-Aug 2011-Aug 2012-Aug Year-Mon 2013-Jul 2013-Aug 2014-Aug 2015-Aug 2009-Jul 2010-Jul 2011-Jul 2012-Jul 2014-Jul 2015-Jul 2016-Jul 2009-Jun 2010-Jun 2011-Jun 2012-Jun 2013-Jun 2014-Jun 2015-Jun 2016-Jun ESIIDs Respond Trend 20 18 16 14 12 ESIIDs 10 8 6 4 2 - 2009-Jul 2010-Jul 2011-Jul 2012-Jul 2013-Jul 2014-Jul 2015-Jul 2016-Jul 2011-Aug 2009-Aug 2010-Aug 2012-Aug Year-Mon 2013-Aug 2014-Aug 2015-Aug 2016-Aug 2009-Jun 2010-Jun 2011-Jun 2012-Jun 2013-Jun 2014-Jun 2015-Jun 2016-Jun 2009-Sep 2010-Sep 2011-Sep 2012-Sep 2013-Sep 2014-Sep 2015-Sep 2016-Sep ESIIDs Respond 9 PUBLIC
Max CP/NearCP Reductions - Hour Ending 17:00 Postage Stamp rate for Transmission Cost of Service has more than tripled since 2002 >$7B in Competitive Renewable Energy Zone (CREZ) transmission investment $4.9B of CREZ activated in 2013 alone >$2B in projects activated in 2016 Postage Stamp Transmission Rates 2002-2017 Currently $52.91 Source: PUCT Dockets Slope = 2 The postage stamp rate (per 4-CP kW) is charged to DSPs, who in turn reimburse TSPs for their transmission investments 10 PUBLIC
System Lambda SCED System Lambda The cost of providing one additional MWh of energy at the load electrical buses. Essentially the load weighted average marginal price for energy across nodes Aggregate Energy Offer Curve 1. Identify online generators 2. Identify SCED energy offer curves for each 3. Identify LASL and HASL for each 4. Aggregate the SCED energy offer curves between LASL and HASL across the generators Caveats This approach does not consider generator ramp rates, constraint changes, market behavior changes PUBLIC
Preliminary Impact of 4-CP Back-cast on RT Prices Final system lambda > $200 & system lambda > $50 2015 - 3 days and 19 intervals Average Original System Lambda Average Final System Lambda Number of Intervals Average 4cp Reduction 7/30/2015 8/10/2015 8/11/2015 Mean 3 7 9 74.9 126.3 75.5 94.1 1,029.5 1,268.3 947.1 1,078.4 5,696.5 1,300.5 1,154.7 1,925.5 2016 - 7 days and 40 intervals Average Original System Lambda Average Final System Lambda Number of Intervals Average 4cp Reduction 7/14/2016 7/22/2016 8/2/2016 8/3/2016 8/4/2016 8/11/2016 9/19/2016 Mean 2 1 43.7 37.7 419.7 102.7 38.0 120.2 168.7 180.5 1,023.3 1,384.8 495.8 819.8 1,273.2 1,113.5 1,162.4 874.2 368.2 441.2 887.0 739.5 530.3 595.9 961.5 726.2 10 14 3 7 3 This approach does not consider generator ramp rates, constraint changes, market behavior changes. PUBLIC
Back-cast Impact of 4-CP on Real Time Prices Final system lambda <= $200 | system lambda <= $50 2015 - 15 days and 701 intervals Original System Lambda 4cp Final System Lambda Reduction min median mean max 18.4 32.4 36.1 109.3 1,250.9 - 18.5 33.2 38.8 199.8 190.5 277.1 2016 - 18 days and 824 intervals Original System Lambda Final System Lambda 4cp Reduction min median mean max 15.5 29.5 37.9 622.6 - 15.7 30.2 41.8 660.8 357.8 429.7 1,399.6 This approach does not consider generator ramp rates, constraint changes, market behavior changes. PUBLIC
Quantifying ERCOT level Price Response 1. ERCOT has conducted an annual survey of REPs to identify ESIIDs on several categories of demand/price response programs. 2. ERCOT has used the survey data to quantify the frequency and magnitude of response in competitive areas 3. ERCOT has used NOIE load as calculated from boundary meters to identify NOIEs the respond to price and has quantified the frequency and magnitude of that response. 4. ERCOT has used export data from distributed generators to identify those that respond to price and has quantified the frequency and magnitude of that response. 14 PUBLIC
Competitive Price Response Survey Results ESIIDs Not Deployed 2015 ESIIDs Not Deployed 2016 ESIIDs Deployed 2016 ESIIDs Deployed 2015 2015 MW 2016 MW 4-CP 1,321 1,409 1,800 1,700 9,500 9,700 BI 200 157 9,000 13,000 - - OLC 7 4 12,000 2,000 3,000 7,000 OTH - 15 - 34,000 - 34,000 PR 30 28 45,000 79,000 452,000 435,000 RTP 11 1 5,000 10,000 - - TOU - - 322,000 331,000 - - PUBLIC
Load Price Response Competitive Loads 1. Use the 2015 and 2016 REP survey submissions to identify ESIIDs on Real Time Pricing and Block and Index Pricing. 2. Quantify load reductions by load zone on high price days (at least 4 consecutive intervals with prices >= $200) 3. Estimate regression model of load reduction as a function of price at the load zone level DR Response vs System Lambda NOIE Loads 1. 300 Quantify load reductions by NOIE on high price days (at least 4 consecutive intervals with prices >= $200) and classify as price responsive based on frequency and magnitude of response Estimate regression model of load reduction as a function of price at the load zone level Calculate aggregate model 250 DR Response MW 200 150 100 2. 50 - - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 3. System Lambda PUBLIC
Distributed Generator Price Response Registered Distributed Generators 1. Selected generators being paid Load Zone prices for exports 2. Eliminated any with primary fuel of sun, wind or other 3. Does include exports from PUNs with generators that are not Generation Resources Unregistered Distributed Generators 1. Selected ESIIDs with DG profile type (exports are settled as negative energy) 2. Eliminated Distributed Renewable Generators (PV and WND profile types) Quantify Price Response 1. Followed baseline methodology used for loads to quantify export increases on high price days (at least 4 consecutive intervals with prices >= $200) 2. Classified generators as price responsive based on frequency and magnitude of response (47 of 109, name plate MW 428.9) 3. Estimate regression model of export increase as a function of load zone price 4. Create aggregate model DG Response vs System Lambda 300 250 DG Response MW 200 150 100 50 - - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 System Lambda PUBLIC
Distributed Generator Baseline Examples August 5,2015 250 $1,000 $900 200 $800 $700 150 $600 Price MW $500 100 $400 $300 50 $200 $100 0 $0 March 31, 2016 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Interval 350 $1,400 base actual increase price 300 $1,200 250 $1,000 Price $/MWh 200 $800 MW 150 $600 100 $400 50 $200 0 $0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Interval Axis Title base actual increase price PUBLIC
Interaction of 4-CP and Price Response 1. Removal of 4-CP response would tend to increase prices 2. Price increases would trigger increased price response 3. Find the point on the aggregated offer curve where system lambda for the GTBD adjusted for price volume of price response is consistent with the price response modeled as a function of system lambda. 4. Limited analysis to days identified with significant changes to system lambda when adding 4-CP response. 19 PUBLIC
Adjust System Lambda for Price Response Aggregate Energy Offer Curve System Lambda vs GTBD 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 System Lambda Actual ($75, 66,776.4 MW) 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 - (1,000) 66,600 66,800 67,000 67,200 67,400 67,600 67,800 68,000 GTBD System Lambda vs GTBD PUBLIC
Adjust System Lambda for Price Response Increase GTBD by 1,020 MW of 4-CP Reduction System Lambda vs GTBD 8,000 7,000 ($6,991, 67,796.2 MW) 6,000 5,000 System Lambda 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 - (1,000) 66,600 66,800 67,000 67,200 67,400 67,600 67,800 68,000 GTBD System Lambda vs GTBD Add 4CP PUBLIC
Adjust System Lambda for Price Response Lower GTBD by 408 MW of Price Response System Lambda vs GTBD 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 System Lambda 4,000 3,000 ($197, 67,388.2 MW) 2,000 1,000 - (1,000) 66,600 66,800 67,000 67,200 67,400 67,600 67,800 68,000 GTBD System Lambda vs GTBD Add 4CP Subtract PR PUBLIC
Adjust System Lambda for Price Response Converges at 188 MW of Price Response System Lambda vs GTBD 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 System Lambda 4,000 ($725, 67,608.5 MW) 3,000 2,000 1,000 - (1,000) 66,600 66,800 67,000 67,200 67,400 67,600 67,800 68,000 GTBD System Lambda vs GTBD Add 4CP Subtract PR Adjust PR Amount PUBLIC
Back-cast Impact of 4-CP on Real Time Prices Accounting for anticipated DR/DG price response 2015 - 3 days and 19 intervals Number of Intervals Average Original System Lambda Average Price Response Average Final System Lambda Average 2x Price Response Average Final System Lambda 7/30/2015 8/10/2015 8/11/2015 Mean 3 7 9 74.9 126.3 75.5 94.1 196.2 216.5 165.0 188.9 504.7 709.3 359.3 511.2 209.9 347.7 280.2 293.9 179.5 442.2 284.5 326.0 2016 - 7 days and 40 intervals Number of Intervals Average Original System Lambda Average Price Response Average Final System Lambda Average 2x Price Response Average Final System Lambda 7/14/2016 7/22/2016 8/2/2016 8/3/2016 8/4/2016 8/11/2016 9/19/2016 Mean 2 1 10 14 3 7 3 43.7 37.7 419.7 102.7 38.0 120.2 168.7 854.9 123.4 84.4 277.4 207.7 132.2 178.3 236.6 291.8 234.4 139.6 650.2 558.3 298.9 429.8 750.1 1,191.0 205.1 125.4 380.0 344.3 237.0 302.9 434.3 538.7 195.9 111.5 450.4 401.2 236.8 332.6 602.9 944.5 This approach does not consider generator ramp rates, constraint changes, market behavior changes. PUBLIC
Behavioral Issues 4-CP response is hard to predict including both the deployment days and magnitude Only 10 of the 33 deployment days in 2015 and 2016, disregarding behavioral changes other than price DR and DG price response, could potentially result in significant real time price increases 4-CP and Near-CPDeployments 2009 - 2016 1,800 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 1,600 1,400 1,200 MW Reductions 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 111 113 115 117 119 121 Deployments in Chronological Order 25 PUBLIC
Behavioral Issues Small changes in 4-CP response, disregarding behavioral changes other than price DR and DG price response, can result in significant changes in system lambda Short term behavioral changes in response to higher prices would be likely to draw historically off-line resources into the market and would put significant and highly variable downward pressure on prices Long term behavioral changes of all types would be likely and would further increase the downward pressure 2015 4CP Impact (MW) Price Response (MW) Gen Cap OFF with CST 1 hr Original GTBD Orig Sys Lam Adjusted Load (MW) GTBD Change Adjusted Sys Lam Sys Lam Change Interval 30-Jul-15 cp day 63 64 65 66,654 66,776 66,646 74.95 75.00 74.83 853 111 196 258 67,396 67,600 67,604 742 824 959 461.94 443.06 836.45 386.99 368.06 761.62 11 11 11 1,020 1,216 8/10/2015 cp day 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 68,941 69,114 69,014 69,024 68,880 68,912 68,863 115.79 125.91 125.11 133.05 120.29 132.16 131.80 1,274 1,319 1,344 1,321 1,294 1,236 1,090 208 261 284 324 187 134 117 70,007 70,171 70,074 70,021 69,987 70,014 69,836 1,066 1,058 1,060 997 1,107 1,102 973 500.33 864.00 1,101.53 1,665.75 405.08 231.88 196.34 384.54 738.09 976.42 1,532.70 284.79 0 0 0 37 37 37 37 99.72 64.54 8/11/2015 near-cp day 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 68,642 68,758 68,992 68,884 69,068 68,889 68,781 68,478 68,480 75.12 75.03 96.69 75.02 74.99 78.54 67.31 64.03 72.69 499 634 665 881 90 190 164 208 212 206 203 131 80 69,051 69,202 69,493 69,557 69,901 69,856 69,852 69,599 69,501 409 444 501 673 833 967 148.65 416.22 317.64 504.18 523.26 489.79 475.40 225.29 133.10 73.53 341.19 220.95 429.16 448.27 411.25 408.09 161.26 60.41 0 0 0 0 1,045 1,173 1,274 1,252 1,101 37 0 11 11 11 1,071 1,121 1,021 26 PUBLIC
Behavioral Issues (continued) 2016 4CP Impact (MW) Price Response (MW) Gen Cap OFF with CST 1 hr Original GTBD Orig Sys Lam Adjusted Load (MW) GTBD Change Adjusted Sys Lam Sys Lam Change Interval 7/14/2016 cp day 64 65 67,219 67,384 51.64 35.72 932 76 171 68,075 68,327 856 943 128.04 340.85 76.40 305.13 1,132 951 1,114 7/22/2016 near-cp day 66 67,166 37.74 1,385 84 68,467 1,301 139.57 101.83 929 8/2/2016 near-cp day 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 65,786 66,321 66,486 66,800 67,027 67,147 67,185 67,385 67,316 67,316 694.05 854.90 501.13 726.07 383.37 142.01 128.49 466.46 198.15 102.01 223 265 328 397 451 529 607 678 730 751 223 260 234 278 229 177 188 265 231 176 65,786 66,326 66,580 66,920 67,249 67,499 67,604 67,798 67,816 67,891 - 858.38 656.16 1,029.06 622.15 365.29 407.00 902.16 634.41 358.24 694 - 748 759 653 438 383 222 222 167 112 112 5 3.48 94 119 222 352 419 413 499 575 155.03 302.99 238.78 223.28 278.51 435.70 436.26 256.23 8/3/2016 near-cp day 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 67,874 68,197 68,251 68,567 68,646 68,635 68,542 68,707 68,639 68,639 68,404 68,578 68,440 68,324 100.70 223.21 141.19 150.01 176.15 133.50 71.88 99.63 118.97 64.13 39.19 45.27 37.55 36.57 277 357 436 498 579 846 119 158 178 199 193 256 209 266 269 261 209 254 202 135 68,032 68,396 68,508 68,866 69,032 69,225 69,352 69,530 69,523 69,532 69,324 69,423 69,221 69,048 158 199 258 299 386 590 810 823 884 893 919 845 782 724 199.75 298.02 367.34 457.98 430.90 819.24 504.33 914.25 940.12 866.97 507.62 803.23 470.83 235.77 99.05 74.81 226.15 307.97 254.75 685.74 432.45 814.62 821.15 802.84 468.43 757.96 433.28 199.20 54 54 36 36 36 36 70 70 70 70 70 70 88 143 1,019 1,089 1,153 1,154 1,128 1,099 984 859 27 PUBLIC
Behavioral Issues (continued) 2016 continued 4CP Impact (MW) Price Response (MW) Gen Cap OFF with CST 1 hr Original GTBD Orig Sys Lam Adjusted Load (MW) GTBD Change Adjusted Sys Lam Sys Lam Change Interval 8/4/2016 near-cp day 66 67 68 68,646 68,622 68,472 38.17 38.63 37.07 1,222 1,286 1,312 75 93 228 69,793 69,815 69,556 1,147 1,193 1,084 127.14 152.51 617.20 88.97 113.88 580.13 325 325 325 8/11/2016 cp day 57 60 64 65 66 67 68 69,456 70,653 71,449 71,254 71,451 71,367 71,221 213.16 83.74 120.25 101.62 114.79 108.00 100.10 396 578 140 86 213 234 238 217 120 69,712 71,145 72,446 72,384 72,622 72,571 72,517 256 492 996 248.35 142.04 530.02 655.89 682.87 548.37 201.12 35.19 58.30 409.77 554.27 568.08 440.37 101.02 1,185 819 799 831 833 795 816 1,209 1,365 1,409 1,422 1,416 1,131 1,171 1,205 1,296 9/19/2016 cp day 66 67 68 66,658 66,903 66,617 109.74 315.40 80.92 1,151 1,185 1,151 180 292 238 67,629 67,796 67,530 971 893 913 373.57 1,190.98 685.67 263.83 875.58 604.75 604 604 420 28 PUBLIC
Observations 1. Back cast analysis of removing 4-CP load reductions without any other adjustment does show a significant and highly volatile impact on real time prices in 2015 and 2016 for ten days (59 intervals). 2. 4-CP reduction across intervals and across days are highly variable and back cast prices are highly volatile. 3. The back cast analysis shows small changes on the remaining 23 days days not likely to trigger DG and DR price response or behavioral changes among Generation Resources. 4. Considering price response from DG and DR in the back-cast analysis does show reductions in the impact on real time prices, but the volatility of the impact remains high. 5. On days with significant impacts, Generation Resources would be likely to modify their offer decisions based on the potential for the higher price increases identified above. 6. The short and long term potential for behavioral changes in DR, DG and Generation Resources clearly exists and likely would be highly variable as well. PUBLIC
Questions? ON OFF craish@ercot.com 512/248-3876 30 PUBLIC
