Upload
others
View
7
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2020 OMS-MISO Survey ResultsFurthering our joint commitment to regional resource assessment and
transparency in the MISO region, OMS and MISO are pleased to
announce the results of the 2020 OMS-MISO Survey
June 2020
Projections and data do not account for impacts of recent and future tariff filings, including those related to Resource Availability & Need, and CoViD-19
Updates: - Slide 14 in the appendix added as an aid to slide 4 explaining stacked bars
- Slides 7 and 8 footnotes edited to re-emphasize that cross-zone transactions reported are
included in values shown
- Slides 5, 9 and 10 footnotes indicate ELCC applies to wind and 50% for solar
- Slides 9 and 10 “expected capacity credit” changed to “current new resource capacity credit”
- Slide 11 footnote indicates only resources within the zone are shown
- Slide 13 reference to GIA removed from unavailable resources indicating non-queue units
not counted
Region projected to have adequate resources in 2021, but
continued action needed to ensure sufficiency going forward
• MISO is projected to have 0.8 GW of firm capacity in excess of the 2021
regional Planning Reserve Margin (PRM), based on responses from
over 94% of MISO load and other non-LSE market participants. This
range could reach 7.2 GW if all potential resources are realized.
• Compared to last year, margins are tighter for both the first year and the
full-five year period of the survey. This is primarily driven by an increased
PRM and modest load growth.
• Since the 2019 Survey, additional resources help maintain the regional
balance, but some zones (2, 4, 6, and 7) show potential risk
• Projected demand growth rate rose just slightly, averaging over 0.3% per
year compared to 0.2% in 2019 Survey
• 2020 Survey marks first year using new OMS-MISO Survey module in
the Module E Capacity Tracking tool, which streamlines process for
respondents and MISO and improves data security
2
MISO Resource Adequacy Requirements
3
• Load serving entities within each
zone must have sufficient
resources to meet load and
required reserves
• Surplus resources may be
shared among load serving
entities with resource shortages
to meet reserve requirements
4.7
2.70.8
1.88.6 11.6
12.112.3
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Projected 0.8 GW regional surplus of committed resources in
2021, increasing need for firming additional resources thereafter
4
Projected Regional Installed Capacity (ICAP) Position
GW of surplus/deficit (% Reserves)
7.2 (23.8%)
11.2 (26.9%)
-3.5 (15.3%)
-5.6 (13.5%)-6.8 (12.6%)
• Appendix slide 14 added to further explain the ranges depicted above
• Regional outlook includes projected constraints on capacity, including the Sub-regional Power Balance Constraint (SRPBC)
• These figures will change as future capacity plans are solidified by load serving entities, state commissions, and local regulators
• Potential New Capacity represents capacity in the MISO Generator Interconnection Queue at projected queue certainty factors, updated since
the 2019 Survey (see slides 15 and 16), as of April 23, 2020
• Potentially Unavailable Resources includes potential retirements and capacity which may be constrained by future firm sales across the SRPBC
0.8 (18.6%) -0.4 (17.7%)
12.5 (27.9%)
10.0 (25.9%)
Potential New Capacity
Potentially Unavailable Resources
Committed Capacity Projections
1 d
ay in
10 P
lan
nin
g R
eserv
e M
arg
in P
RM
(18.0
%)
11.1 (26.6%)
4.54.6
4.3
3.1
1.1
0.3
1.1
1.1
2.1 2.1 1.60.8
2021 supply balance is slightly lower due to changes in Planning
Reserve Margin, retirements and Load Modifying Resources
5
2021 Regional Outlook
Committed Capacity Projection Changes since 2019 OMS MISO SurveyGW (ICAP)
ForecastedRegional Surpluses:
2019 OMS-MISO Survey
ForecastedRegional Surplus:
2020 OMS-MISO Survey
Increased Reserve Requirement due to Resource and
Load Changes
Forecasted Load
Reductions
Increased Availability of
Resources since 2019
New resources include resources with newly signed Interconnection Agreements; wind at ELCC, solar at 50%
Increased availability results from potential resources from 2019 survey that are now committed resources
LMRs – Load Modifying Resources are Demand Response (DR) and Behind the Meter Generation (BTMG)
Changes in Load
Modifying Resources
New Firm Retirements Since 2019
New Resources Since 2019
1 d
ay i
n 1
0 P
RM
2.5
2.30.8
1.9 1.3
0.3
0.71.4
4.8 5.5
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Margins based on Committed Capacity are tighter
than last survey across all five years
66
Projected Capacity PositionICAP GW (% Reserves)
7.2 (23.8%)
11.2 (26.9%)
-3.5 (15.3%)-5.6 (13.5%)
-6.8 (12.6%)
0.8 (18.6%) -0.4 (17.7%)
12.5 (27.9%)10.0 (25.9%)11.1 (26.6%)
5.8 (21.4%)
4.1 (20.0%)
1.2 (17.7%)-1.3 (15.8%)
-2.3 (15.0%)
3.0 (19.2%) 1.1 (17.7%)
3.4 (19.5%)
6.7 (22.1%) 6.8 (22.2%)
2020 Survey
As Reported
2019 Survey
As Reported
Potential New Capacity
Potentially Unavailable Resources
Committed Capacity Projections
4.72.7
0.8
1.8 8.6 11.612.1 12.3
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
• Appendix slide 14 added to further explain the ranges depicted above
0.8
6.5
In 2021, regional surpluses and transmission are
sufficient to cover zones with potential resource deficits
7
1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9
2021 Outlook (ICAP GW)
Lower MIMN, MT,
ND, SD,
West WI
East WI
and
Upper MI
IA IL IN
and KY
AR LA and
TX
1.8 to 2.3
-0.8 to -0.4
1.1 to 1.2
-2.3
4.8 to 4.9
1.3
5MO
10MS
-1.1
1.3 to 1.4
7.2 (23.8%)
0.8 (18.6%)0.0 to -0.1
0.8
Potential Capacity Projection
Committed Capacity Projection
0.4 to 0.51
day i
n 1
0 P
RM
1.0
1 day in 10
PRM (18.0%)
2021 Outlook,
ICAP GW (% Reserves)
• Regional surpluses and potential resources will be critical for all zones to serve their deficits while meeting local requirements
• Positions include reported contractual inter-zonal transfers, but do not reflect other possible transfers between zones
• Exports from Zones 8, 9, and 10 were limited by the Sub-regional Power Balance Constraint
0.6
1.91 day in 10
PRM (18.0%)
Continued focus on load growth changes and generation
additions and retirements will improve out-year uncertainty
8
10.0 (25.9%)
2025 Outlook,
ICAP GW (% Reserves)
-0.4
0.9 to 1.6
-3.4
3.5 to 4.9
0.7 to 1.1
-1.6
0.9 to 1.8
-0.4-6.8 (12.6%)
0.1
-3.0
1.2
1.7
-0.7
1.0
Potential Capacity Projection
Committed Capacity Projection 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9Lower MIMN, MT,
ND, SD,
West WI
East WI
and
Upper MI
IA IL IN
and KY
AR LA and
TX
5MO
10MS
1 d
ay i
n 1
0 P
RM
2025 Outlook (ICAP GW)
• Regional surpluses and potential resources will be critical for all zones to serve their deficits while meeting local requirements
• Positions include reported contractual inter-zonal transfers, but do not reflect other possible transfers between zones
• Exports from Zones 8, 9, and 10 were limited by the Sub-regional Power Balance Constraint
5.0
14.3
18.219.6
20.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
9
• Potential New Capacity represents capacity in the MISO Generator Interconnection Queue at projected queue
certainty factors as of April 23, 2020. Wind and solar resources are modeled shown at expected current new
resource capacity credit (ELCC for Wind, 50% for solar)
Future resource ranges will shift as planned generation
interconnections are firmed up
Not Started Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3Generator Interconnection Agreement Phase
Signed Generator Interconnection Agreement
Included in potential capacity1
Included in committed capacity
1“Potential capacity”
values shown here are
higher than amounts
shown on pg 4 because
they do not factor in
SRPBC limitations.
Forecasted resource mix changes continue to underpin a
number of initiatives in the MISO stakeholder process
10
• Wind and solar resources shown at expected current new resources capacity credit (ELCC for Wind, 50% for solar)
• Potential New Capacity represents the capacity in the MISO Generator Interconnection Queue at projected queue
certainty factors (see slide 15), as of April 23, 2020
2005 Capacity Mix 2025 Capacity Mix (Existing, Certain and
Potential New Resources)
Coal76%
Natural Gas and Other
Gases7%
Nuclear13%
Other4%
Coal31%
Natural Gas and Other Gases
42%
Nuclear8%
Solar3%
Wind3%
Other5%
DR/BTMG/EE8%
New generation and load modifying resources continue
to be important in meeting local resource needs
11• Includes only projected capacity resources within the zone, i.e. does not include imports and interzonal transfers
• Potential Capacity includes both new generation and potential retirements
• Load Modifying Resources include Demand Response (DR) and Behind the Meter Generation (BTMG)
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10
2021 Local Clearing Requirement outlook (ICAP GW)
Committed Capacity Potential Capacity
Behind the Meter Generation Demand Response
Local Clearing Requirement
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10
2025 Local Clearing Requirement outlook (ICAP GW)
Committed Capacity Potential Capacity
Behind the Meter Generation Demand Response
Local Clearing Requirement
Appendix
Understanding Resource Projections
• Committed Capacity Projections - resources committed to serving MISO load
• Resources within MISO utilities’ rate base
• New generators with signed interconnection agreements
• External resources with firm contracts to MISO load
• Non-rate base units without announced retirements or commitments to non-MISO load
• Potential Capacity Projections - resources that may be available to serve MISO load but do not have firm commitments to do so
• Potential retirements or suspensions
• Capacity in the MISO Generator Interconnection Queue at their expected current new resource capacity credit and projected queue certainty factors
• Unavailable resources are not included in the survey totals
• Resources with firm commitments to non-MISO load
• Resources with finalized retirements or suspensions
• Potential new generators without a signed Generator Interconnection Agreement or generators which have not entered the MISO Generator Interconnection Queue
13
-2.3
-6.8
4.5
12.3
0.8
4.7
1.8
0.8
Interpreting the range of resource balances shown
in the Survey summary
14
Potential New Capacity
Potentially Unavailable Resources
Committed Capacity Projections
Examples from MISO Region balance forecast on slides 4 and 6
Balance with only Committed
2025 Forecast
2021 Forecast
Add Potentially Unavailable
Add Potential New
Full range shown on p.4
5.5
7.2
-6.8
10.0
Balance with all 3 resources
Balance with only Committed
Balance with Committed plus Potentially Unavailable
Balance with all 3 resources
Balance with only Committed
Balance with Committed plus Potentially Unavailable
Balance with only Committed
Add Potentially Unavailable
Add Potential New
Full range shown on p.4
2020 OMS-MISO Survey Queue Treatment
Apply Capacity
Credit
Wind 16.6%
Solar 50%
All other 100%
Apply DPP Study Phase
Weighting
Not Started and
Phase 1= 10%
Phase 2 = 75% Non-Intermittent, 50%
Intermittent
GIA in Progress and Phase 3 = 90%
Requested In-Service Date
If requested in-service date is
prior to the first Survey year,
projects moved to their DPP
study cycle end date, unless an updated date
provided in the OMS-MISO
Survey
DPP Study Cycle Not Started
If DPP Study Cycle not
started, the requested in-
service dates are moved to the
DPP study cycle end date plus 2
years unless updated date
provided in the OMS-MISO
Survey
15
• DPP Study Phase Weighting is applied to recognize that as projects move through the queue process they generally
become more certain
• In-service adjusted if the DPP Study Cycle Not Started to recognize that a project likely can’t get capacity credit until at
least the end of the DPP study cycle and additional 2 years to to reflect expected GIA dates and construction timelines
• Yellow denotes changes form last year
Updated Queue Weights account for very
few phase 3 and low phase 2 withdrawals
2019 DPP Study Phase Weighting
Not Started/Phase 1 = 10%
Phase 2 = 50% Non-Intermittent / 25% Intermittent
Phase 3 = 75% Non-Intermittent / 50% Intermittent
GIA in Progress = 90%
16
2020 Proposed Weighting
Not Started/Phase 1 = No Change
Phase 2 = 75% Non-Intermittent / 50% Intermittent
GIA in Progress, Phase 3 = 90%
»
2019 by MW
• Yellow denotes changes form last year