COAL BY WIRE & MISO - Purdue University€¦ · DuneDune AcresAcres ‐ ‐MichiganMichigan...

1

Indiana Center for Coal Technology ResearchCCTR Basic Facts File # 11

Brian H. Bowen, Marty W. Irwin, Devendra CanchiThe Energy Center at Discovery Park

Purdue UniversityCCTR, Potter Center, 500 Central Drive

West Lafayette, IN 47907-2022http://www.purdue.edu/dp/energy/CCTR/

Email: [email protected]

February 8, 2008

COAL BY WIRE & MISO

22

Transport Coal to Power Plants orGenerate Power at Coal Mines?

Coal By Wire (Generation at Mine Mouth) Avoids Coal Shipment Costs

Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research

33

Transmission Load Carrying Capability

Coal by wire will require increased transmission

Increasing the generation capacity at any existing coal fired power plant will be

constrained by the load carrying capability of the existing transmission lines

If the existing lines have high load factors then it might be necessary to consider building more

transmission capacity


44

Indiana’sPower Grid

765 kV & 345 kV

Transmission lines criss-cross the state

Indiana’sSouth WestMining Region


5

Line Load CarryingCapability & Congestion

• An electricity network has a limited transmission capacity

• Congestion arises due to lack of transmission capacity to accommodate all power flows

• When an interconnection becomes congested, power flows have to be curtailed to relieve the load


6

The Midwest IndependentSystem Operator, MISO

“The Midwest ISO is committed to reliability, the nondiscriminatory operation of the bulk power

transmission system, & to working with all stakeholders to create cost-effective &

innovative solutions for a changing industry”

http://www.midwestiso.org/home


7

About the Midwest ISO, MISO

The Midwest ISO: (1) Ensures reliable operation of & equal access to

93,600 miles of interconnected, high-voltage power lines in 15 U.S. states & the Canadian province of Manitoba

(2) Manages one of the world's largest energy markets, clearing more than $2 Billion in energy transactions monthly

(3) Approved as the nation's first regional transmission organization (RTO) in 2001

(4) Is a non-profit 501(C)4 organization & governed by an independent Board of Directors, headquartered in Carmel IN. Operations centers Carmel IN & St.Paul MN


8

14 MISO States (+ Manitoba)


9Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research


9

NERC Map, North American Electric Reliability Corporation & its 8 Regions

The NERC was established at

federal level to ensure reliability

of electricity supplies

1010

US Department of Energy (DOE) Congestion Areas of Concern

Source: NATIONAL ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION CONGESTION STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARYAUGUST 2006, U.S. Department of Energy

These are areas where a large-scale congestion problem exists or may be emerging, but more information & analysis appear to be needed to determine the magnitude of the problem & the likely relevance of transmission expansion & other solutions.

The DOE has identified four Congestion Areas of Concern:

New EnglandThe Phoenix – Tucson areaThe Seattle – Portland areaThe San Francisco Bay area


1111Source: NATIONAL ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION CONGESTION STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, AUGUST 2006, U.S. Department of Energy

DOE Congestion Areas of Concern


12

Congestion & PTDF

• In order to maintain reliability the North American Reliability Corporation, NERC, uses a parameter called the Power Transfer Distribution Factor (PTDF)

• The PTDF method prevents the dispatch of potentially congesting power-flow from occurring

• PTDFs are calculated at specific points on the transmission system. These points are called flowgates

• Flowgates (FG) are an essential element of the transmission system used for managing congestion

829 flowgates were used in the MISO 2006-2007 period of which 262 (32%) had previous history of congestion


13

Location of Top 10 Congested MISO Lines in 2005


14

Most Congested Flowgates (FG) in Indiana

Monitored Element Friendly Name BalancingArea

1st Year CongestionFG-Hr/Year

Apr 05 - Apr 06

2nd Year CongestionFG-Hr/Year

Apr 06 - Apr 07

MISO Ranking

2005-2006

MISO Ranking

2006-2007

Kokomo HP 230/138 kV XFMR (flo) Jefferson - Greentown 765 kV

CIN 132 1.5% 750 8.6%40 2

Miami Fort 345/138 kV XFMR (flo) East Bend - Terminal 345 kV

CIN 247 20 18 164New London - Webster 230 kV (flo) Jefferson - Greentown 765 kV

CIN 137 92 39 46Dune Acres -Michigan City 138 kV ckts1&2 (flo) Wilton Center - Dumont 765 kV

NIPS 241 107 19 44Culley - Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR

SIGE 539 284 11 13Culley - Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson - A.B. Brown 138 kV

SIGE 586 6.7% 84 1.0%9 51

A.B. Brown - Henderson 138 kV (flo) Culley - Grandview 138 kV

SIGE 220 6 21 367Culley - Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR

SIGE 164 33 27 111


15

Breed Power Station

New London ‐Webster 230 kV (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kVKokomo HP 230/138 kV XFMR (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kVNew London ‐Webster 230 kV (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kVKokomo HP 230/138 kV XFMR (flo) Jefferson ‐ Greentown 765 kV

Miami Fort 345/138 kV XFMR (flo) East Bend ‐ Terminal 345 kVMiami Fort 345/138 kV XFMR (flo) East Bend ‐ Terminal 345 kV

Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMRCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson ‐ A.B. Brown 138 kVA.B. Brown ‐ Henderson 138 kV (flo) Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kVCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR

Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMRCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson ‐ A.B. Brown 138 kVA.B. Brown ‐ Henderson 138 kV (flo) Culley ‐ Grandview 138 kVCulley ‐ Grandview 138 kV (flo) Henderson 161/138 kV XFMR

Dune Acres ‐Michigan City 138 kV ckts 1&2 (flo) Wilton Center ‐ Dumont 765 kVDune Acres ‐Michigan City 138 kV ckts 1&2 (flo) Wilton Center ‐ Dumont 765 kV

Indiana’s MostCongested Flowgates

Station StateWilton Center ILDune Acres INDumont INNew London INWebster INJefferson INGreentown INKokomo IN

Miami Fort OHEast Bend OHF. B. Culley INA.B. Brown INGrandview INHenderson KY



16

MISO Modeling Process

Transmission expansions are considered for each of the following four design scenarios:(a)Reference Future(b)Environmental Future(c)Renewable Future(d)Limited Supply Future


17

DOE NETL 2007, Coal Plant Total CostsSupercritical PC plant without CO2 capture $1,574/kWSupercritical PC plant with CO2 capture $2,868/kWIGCC (E-Gas) without CO2 capture $1,733/kWIGCC (E-Gas) with CO2 capture $2,431/kW

MISO Generation Prototype DataInputs to MISO’s 2007 Four Scenarios

Sources: MISO MTEP-08 Planning Process“Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, DOE NETL, April10, 2007

Seq = With sequestrationPC = Pulverized CoalIGCC = Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle

MISO Data 2007



18

MISO’s Four Scenarios, 2008-2027

(a)

(d)

(c)

(b)



19

MISO 2008-2027, Four Futures ScenariosCumulative New Generation Capacity (MW)

Source: MISO – MTEP -08 Planning Process

(a) (b) (d) (c)



20

2007 Review of Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards

Source: http://www.ferc.gov/market-oversight/mkt-snp-sht/mkt-snp-sht.asp


21

MISO & Indiana’s Proposed Expansions

Coal

CT

Wind

CC

(d) Limited Fuel Future

MW

Cap

acity

(a) Reference Future

(b) Environmental Future

(c) Renewable Future

Schafer

Schafer

Benton County

Montgomery County

CayugaGibson County

Vigo County

Edwardsport

Merom

Greenfield, Kosciusko County

Sugar Creek& Noblesville

Eagle Valley

GallagherSource: MISO- MTEP 08 Planning Process Generation Siting


22

MISO Reference Future Scenario (a)Suggested Transmission, MISO Centric

Transmission Coloring


23

MISO Reference Future Scenario (a)Suggested Transmission, Eastern Interconnect

Transmission Coloring

2424

Transmission Serving IndianapolisLoad Factors


25

11 22

3344 55

66

77

88

99

1010

1111

16THOMPS

16STOUT

16FRANCS 1212

Line DescriptionFrom Bus – To Bus

Total Energy flow in One Year (MWh)

Maximum Rated Energy Flow in One

Year (MWh)Rating (KV)

Average Load Factor

(%)

Max Hourly Load Factor

(%)1 16PETE-16THOMPS 5,289,636 8,374,560 345 63.2 84.42 16PETE-16FRANCS 4,910,507 8,374,560 345 58.6 76.83 16HANNA-16FRANCS 4,142,149 8,374,560 345 49.5 66.94 16STOUT-16THOMPS 2,403,381 8,374,560 345 28.7 45.45 16HANNA-16STOUT 551,997 8,374,560 345 6.6 22.66 16ROCKVL-16THOMPS 2,877,490 8,374,560 345 34.4 55.47 16GUION-16ROCKVL 989,454 8,374,560 345 11.8 28.28 08WHITST-16GUION 3,112,936 8,374,560 345 37.2 79.49 16HANNA-16SUNNYS 2,418,854 8,374,560 345 28.9 44.410 08GWYNN-16SUNNYS 868,739 8,409,600 345 10.3 22.411 05FALL C-16SUNNYS 1,560,777 8,374,560 345 18.6 45.512 05TANNER-16HANNA 1,021,208 8,374,560 345 12.2 58.6

Transmission Serving Indianapolis

2006 Load Factors

765 kV

345 kV

230 kV

MARION

HENDRICKS

HAMILTON

HANCOCK

MORGAN JOHNSON

SHELBYAll loading factors are based on PROMOD simulation using NERC and MISO 2006 event file under Security constrained Economic Dispatch

26

• Make the benefits of a competitive energy market available to customers by providing access to the lowest possible electric energy costs

• Provide a transmission infrastructure that safeguards local andregional reliability• Support state and federal renewable energy objectives by planning for access to all such resources (e.g. wind, biomass, demand side management).

• Create a mechanism to ensure investment implementationoccurs in a timely manner

• Develop a transmission system scenario model and make it available to state and federal energy policy makers to provide context and make informed choices

MISO’s 5 Guiding PrinciplesMISO’s 5 Guiding Principles

Source: Midwest ISO Board of Directors, Statement of Guiding Principles for the Midwest ISO Transmission Expansion Planshttp://www.midwestiso.org/page/Planning


27

AEP has its large generators located outside of its service area but in close proximity to the coal supplies. Its 765 kV transmission line takes AEP electricity north (Cincinnati dispatch)

NIPSCO has coal transported to its largest power plant which islocated in its northern Indiana service area but is outside the coal mining region

Examples of Indiana’s Shipmentsof Coal & Electricity



28

2004 CoalConsumed

(MTons)

2005 CoalProduction

(MTons)

2004 Electricity Net Flow *

(GWh)

Indiana 73.7 34.5 -42.0Michigan 38.5 0.0 -6.6

Wisconsin 26.7 0.0 +33.3

Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_use/total/use_tot_in.htmlhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/coal.htmlhttp://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/coal/coaldistrib/d_mi.html

* Net interstate flow of electricity:-ve = net export+ve = net import

5MW for 1 year ≈ 42 GWh

Can Indiana Transmit More Electricity to MI & WI?

Michigan 2002 coal imports (MTons) from WY 12.87, MN 6.46,WV 3.62, KY 3.52, PA 1.01, CO 0.39, OH 0.26, VA 0.12

Wisconsin 2002 coal imports (MTons) from WY 21.80, MN 2.92,CO 1.50, IL 0.66, UT 0.66, PA 0.60, IN 0.39, KY 0.09



29

Increasing Indiana’s electricity exportswill depend on transmission capacity

Can Indiana Coal Be Used for Increased Export Power?

Wisconsin 2002 coal imports (MTons)from WY 21.80, MN 2.92, CO 1.50, IL 0.66, UT 0.66, PA 0.60, IN 0.39, KY 0.09

Michigan 2002 coal imports (MTons)from WY 12.87, MN 6.46, WV 3.62, KY 3.52, PA 1.01, CO 0.39, OH 0.26, VA 0.12

A Strengthened Transmission Infrastructure is required to enable more Indiana electricity

exports to go to neighboring states

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table26.html


30

Indiana Coal & MISO Planning

Increased electricity transmission capacity will enable Indiana to transmit more export power

MISO maintains reliability & plans regionally

COAL BY WIRE & MISO - Purdue University€¦ · DuneDune AcresAcres ‐ ‐MichiganMichigan...

Documents

Transcript of COAL BY WIRE & MISO - Purdue University€¦ · DuneDune AcresAcres ‐ ‐MichiganMichigan...