Transmission and Distribution Summit             Chicago, IL        November 2-4, 2011 The Grid Side of Smart Grid        ...
Overview• Who we are, who we will be• Our evolution in Grid Automation• Our “Smart Grid” – Distribution System  Demand Res...
Progress Energy• Fully integrated IOU• 3.1 million customers with more  than 21,000 megawatts of  generation     • Progres...
The New “Duke Energy”• Will be the largest utility in the  US• Operations in 6 states• Market Capitalization: $36.5  billi...
Evolution of Our Grid Automation● 1980’s – First GIS developed & DSCADA  Piloted● Mid 1990’s –    ●   Radio Controlled Cap...
How did the data change operations????                                        Alarms                                      ...
What did we learn• Business value of data                Fault Location Accuracy                                  (Within ...
Evolution of Our Grid Automation●   1980’s – First GIS developed & DSCADA Piloted●   Mid 1990’s –    ●    Radio Controlled...
Distribution System Demand Response                    The “Next” Foundation     DSDR Substation                     Volta...
DSDR - How Does it Work?             Flattened profile allows greater Voltage ReductionUpperRegulatoryLimitLowerRegulatory...
DSDR - Benefits• Grid Side – Demand Response     – 310 MW     – 4-6 hours – sustainable• Spinning reserves• Line loss redu...
Implications for changing our operations• Grid is now a virtual generator     – Employees have to think differently• The d...
What have we learned• Don’t underestimate     • the complexity, scale and pace of these       projects     • the people an...
Q&A         Contact Information:     Becky.Harrison@pgnmail.com14
DOE SGIG Funding AcknowledgementAcknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the Department of           ...
Cautionary Statements Regarding Forward-                  Looking InformationThis document contains forward-looking statem...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Virtual Power Plant - Becky Harrison, Progress Energy

1,009 views

Published on

Becky Harrison, Progress Energy, Speaker at the marcus evans Transmission & Distribution Summit Fall 2011 in Wheeling, IL, delivered her presentation on Virtual Power Plant

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,009
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
39
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Fault Detection SystemFeeder Monitoring System (FMS) Installed in 1997Fault Events Captured at 100% of all T/D Substations and Distribution FeedersFault Locating SystemsCymDist Feeder Analysis Software Automated System Integrating FMS with OMS SystemCurrently used to locate feeder lockouts automatically by Distribution DispatchFault Analysis - Web ToolWeb based program to generate daily reports of previous day’s faults with locationLocates permanent as well as temporary faultsIdentifies galloping conductorsPerforms trending analysis
  • Grid Side – Demand Response310 MW4-6 hours – sustainableSpinning reservesLine loss reductions
  • Grid Side – Demand Response310 MW4-6 hours – sustainableSpinning reservesLine loss reductions
  • Virtual Power Plant - Becky Harrison, Progress Energy

    1. 1. Transmission and Distribution Summit Chicago, IL November 2-4, 2011 The Grid Side of Smart Grid Becky Harrison Director, Smart Grid Technology and Outreach
    2. 2. Overview• Who we are, who we will be• Our evolution in Grid Automation• Our “Smart Grid” – Distribution System Demand Response• What have we learned2
    3. 3. Progress Energy• Fully integrated IOU• 3.1 million customers with more than 21,000 megawatts of generation • Progress Energy Carolinas Progress Energy - 1.5 million customers • Progress Energy Florida - 1.6 million customers 3
    4. 4. The New “Duke Energy”• Will be the largest utility in the US• Operations in 6 states• Market Capitalization: $36.5 billion***• Total Assets: $90.6 billion*• Revenues: $22.7 billion**• Customers: 7.1 million electric and 500,000 gas• Generating Capacity: 57,200 megawatts * As of stock close September 30, 2010 ** As of December 31, 2009 4 *** As of December 31, 2010
    5. 5. Evolution of Our Grid Automation● 1980’s – First GIS developed & DSCADA Piloted● Mid 1990’s – ● Radio Controlled Capacitor System ● Outage Management System (OMS) ● Feeder Monitoring System (FMS) ● DSCADA fully deployed● Late 1990’s –Distribution faults located using FMS event data● Early 2000’s - Fault location integrated into OMS5
    6. 6. How did the data change operations???? Alarms DSCADA Server Initiated to Fault Occurs Substation RTU Download FMS Event Data Dispatch Computer Displays Fault Location Next Day Fault Automated Location Trending Restoration6
    7. 7. What did we learn• Business value of data Fault Location Accuracy (Within 0.5 miles of Predicted Location) changed over time 90%• Innovation took place 85% 80% 85% once the data was 75% 70% 72% 77% available 65% 2004 2005 2006• Use of data drove better data• Process change took time7
    8. 8. Evolution of Our Grid Automation● 1980’s – First GIS developed & DSCADA Piloted● Mid 1990’s – ● Radio Controlled Capacitor System ● Outage Management System (OMS) ● Feeder Monitoring System (FMS) ● DSCADA fully deployed● Late 1990’s –Distribution faults located using FMS event data● Early 2000’s - Fault location integrated into OMS• 2008-2012 - Distribution System Demand Response • Upgrade DSCADA • Two Way Cellular Controlled Capacitors • Replace FMS functionality • Deploy Distribution Management System (DMS)8
    9. 9. Distribution System Demand Response The “Next” Foundation DSDR Substation Voltage Feeder Regulator Breaker Distribution Feeder S S VR VRC SEL Recloser Cap Bank (may be sensors) Sensor Regulator (Controllers) Cap Bank Gateway PQ Meter (Controllers) SwitchTelecom PGN Wireless Commercial WirelessCabinet Router PGN/Carrier PGN Carrier Network Network Network Communications Communications Communications EMS DSCADA VMS FMS DSM/AMI DMS 9
    10. 10. DSDR - How Does it Work? Flattened profile allows greater Voltage ReductionUpperRegulatoryLimitLowerRegulatoryLimit Existing Lower Voltage to Reduce MWs Flattened Profile 10
    11. 11. DSDR - Benefits• Grid Side – Demand Response – 310 MW – 4-6 hours – sustainable• Spinning reserves• Line loss reductions11
    12. 12. Implications for changing our operations• Grid is now a virtual generator – Employees have to think differently• The data – Load flows analysis 5 years 15 minutes• Data integrity critical – Define system of record – Integration of critical systems12
    13. 13. What have we learned• Don’t underestimate • the complexity, scale and pace of these projects • the people and process change• Remember you are building the foundation• Changing roles and interfaces • OTIT• Use and value of data will evolve13
    14. 14. Q&A Contact Information: Becky.Harrison@pgnmail.com14
    15. 15. DOE SGIG Funding AcknowledgementAcknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number OE0000213.Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Referenced herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinion of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.15
    16. 16. Cautionary Statements Regarding Forward- Looking InformationThis document contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words or phrases such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,”“intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “target,” “forecast,” and other words and terms of similar meaning. Forward-looking statements involveestimates, expectations, projections, goals, forecasts, assumptions, risks and uncertainties. Duke Energy and Progress Energy caution readersthat any forward-looking statement is not a guarantee of future performance and that actual results could differ materially from thosecontained in the forward-looking statement. Such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the benefitsof the proposed merger involving Duke Energy and Progress Energy, including future financial and operating results, Progress Energy’s orDuke Energy’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions, the expected timing of completion of the transaction, and other statements thatare not historical facts. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by such forward-lookingstatements include risks and uncertainties relating to: the ability to obtain the requisite Duke Energy and Progress Energy shareholderapprovals; the risk that Progress Energy or Duke Energy may be unable to obtain governmental and regulatory approvals required for themerger, or required governmental and regulatory approvals may delay the merger or result in the imposition of conditions that could causethe parties to abandon the merger; the risk that a condition to closing of the merger may not be satisfied; the timing to consummate theproposed merger; the risk that the businesses will not be integrated successfully; the risk that the cost savings and any other synergies fromthe transaction may not be fully realized or may take longer to realize than expected; disruption from the transaction making it more difficultto maintain relationships with customers, employees or suppliers; the diversion of management time on merger-related issues; generalworldwide economic conditions and related uncertainties; the effect of changes in governmental regulations; and other factors discussed orreferred to in the “Risk Factors” section of each of Duke Energy’s and Progress Energy’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). These risks, as well as other risks associated with the merger, are more fully discussed in thepreliminary joint proxy statement/prospectus that is included in the Registration Statement on Form S-4 that was filed by Duke Energy withthe SEC on March 17, 2011 in connection with the merger as well as in any amendments to that Registration Statement filed after thatdate. Additional risks and uncertainties are identified and discussed in Progress Energy’s and Duke Energy’s reports filed with the SEC andavailable at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of the particular statement andneither Progress Energy nor Duke Energy undertakes any obligation to update or revise its forward-looking statements, whether as a result ofnew information, future events or otherwise.16

    ×