Smart Power Generation: Flexible Capability for System Optimization

1,216 views
1,090 views

Published on

Catch a recording of the webinar here: http://www.energycentral.com/events/26390/Smart-Power-Generation

Slides by Joseph Ferrari, MSEng, MS-NR, Business Development Analyst, Wärtsilä North America Inc., and Alan Roark, Manager of Risk Assessments, DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability.

Presented on October 17th, 2012.

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

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,216
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
41
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Smart Power Generation: Flexible Capability for System Optimization

  1. 1. Flexible Capability for System Optimization© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  2. 2. Wärtsilä Corporation  Established 1834, based in Finland  Publicly traded $6 Billion company  18,000+ employees  World leader in  Decentralized power plants 1-500 MW  Marine Propulsion  O&M services for power plants and ships© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  3. 3. Wärtsilä Power Plants Installed Base Europe: Output: 11,8 GW Asia: Plants: 1783 Output: 17,2 GW Engines: 3336 Plants: 1619 Engines: 3487 Americas: Output: 9,5 GW Plants: 367 Engines: 1220 Total: 48,8 GW Plants: 4599 Engines: 10159 Countries: 169 Africa & Middle East: Output: 10,4 GW Plants: 830 Engines: 2116 Industrial self-generation * December 2011 Flexible baseload Grid stability & peaking Oil & gas© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  4. 4. Smart Power Generation • Fast, Dynamic and Efficient Generation • Improves system efficiency, enables renewables, lowers cost. Efficient Affordable Enables! Smart Smart Power Power Generation SystemFast Clean Reliable Sustainable Smart Power Generation Desired future!© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  5. 5. Balancing ChallengeInflux of Renewables and the “balancing challenge” Uncertainty increases: uncertainty in forecasts Variability increases: System responds to “Net Load”, not Load© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  6. 6. Net Load as a Driver Load Renewable Generation Net Load NREL, Lew et al., 2011 - More cycling of thermal plants - Lower capacity factors for thermal plants - Baseload? - Greater reliance on sub-hourly schedule/dispatch© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  7. 7. Impact on Thermal DispatchMost volatile (Low load) 20% Wind Wind GTCC 1 week Coal cycling GTCC deep turndown, cyclingNew England Wind Integration Studyhttp://www.iso-ne.com/committees/comm_wkgrps/prtcpnts_comm/pac/reports/2010/newis_report.pdf
  8. 8. Uncertainty, Day Ahead vs. Real Time Real Time Wind Day Ahead Wind DifferenceSource: IMM Quarterly Report Summer 2011:https://www.midwestiso.org/Library/Repository/Report/IMM/2011%20IMM%20Quarterly%20Report%20Summer%20Final.pdf
  9. 9. What do Grid Operators Say they Need?Survey of 33 grid operators, 72% of global wind capacity 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% From Figure 38, Jones, LE (2012) Smart Power http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/pdfs/do e_wind_integration_report.pdf Generation© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  10. 10. Smart Power Generation, features Low Generation Costs – High Efficiency (across whole load spectrum) Efficient – Low CO2 – Low Maintenance Costs (VOM) – No penalties for starts/stops/cycling – Minimal derating due to temperature or altitude – Low gas pressure requirements Cost Effective, Optimal Plant Sizing – Technology should be scalable, competitive – Match generation with load Smart Power – Ability to expand Generation Fast Clean Agility of dispatch CLEAN: Low environmental impact Fast Start (minutes, not hours) Low CO2 and local emissions even when ramping Fast ramp rates up & down and on part load Unrestricted up/down times Minimize water consumption Low minimum loads (wide range of capacity available) High starting reliability and availability© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  11. 11. Engines for Power 20V34SG 10 to 200+ MW Efficiency 47%**, 5 min start (9.34 MW* / unit)18V50SG Efficiency 48.6%**,(18.76 MW* / unit) 50 to 400+ MW 10 min start Efficiency 18V50SG 52.6%**, 50 to 500+ MW (Flexicycle™) 10/45 min 20.32 MW*/unit start* Generator Terminals, sea level, radiator cooled, 25C(77F) PLANT SIZE** Generator Terminals, 5% tolerance, LHV , sea level, radiator cooled, 25C(77F)© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  12. 12. Wärtsilä Flexicycle(TM) ~90% of MW ~10% of MW12
  13. 13. Wärtsilä Modular Solution - scale plant size to match need - Allows for future expansion 325 300 188 113 MW 16 x 18V50SG 16 x 18V50SG 10 x 18V50SG 18V50SG Flexicycle™ x 6 Flexicycle™ Simple Cycle© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  14. 14. Plant Efficiency (Example, 10 x 18V50SG) 10 x 18V50SG, Plant Output = 188 MW 5 units 6 units 7 units 8 units 9 units 10 units Min stable plant load = 5.6 MW 50% Performance Basis: 25C (77F), sea level, radiator cooling, generator terminals (Lower Heating Value), Methane Number > 80, 5% Tolerance© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  15. 15. Start / Stop Profile (20V34SG) Run Stop Gas purge 5 min from start to full load time Full load again in 5 min 1min cycle Load 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 40% Load in 2 min 20% 10% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 min 12 13 14 15 16 17 min Prelubrication & Gas Purge Cycle Synchronization 5 min© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  16. 16. WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN (BIG PICTURE)? Power Systems Need Flexible thermal assets. Wärtsilä Smart Power Generation: Fast, Efficient, Clean How to Quantify the Value of Smart Power Generation?© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  17. 17. Quantifying the Value of SPG (system level) Spanish 2020 renewable target = 42%Simulation year 2020Over 120 power plants simulated (plus additional renewables)Base Case: The envisioned capacity mixAlternative: Same as above but add 9 GW of Wärtsilä Flexicycle™Time scale/Platform: 10 minute time scale, PLEXOS™© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  18. 18. Smart Power Generation Delivers Savings BASE CASE (2020) 9 GW OF FLEXICYCLE™ ADDED SMART POWER GENERATION: 422 GWh/week, 633 MUSD/year in savings. 4.3% reduction in production cost for the system!© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  19. 19. SummaryAdding intermittent generation (wind, solar) should not pushassets into regimes of operation they are not optimized forWärtsilä SPG is the most appropriate technology for efficientenergy production, load following, cycling, daily starts/stops. • Highest simple cycle efficiency commercially available (47-48+%) • Combined Cycle (Flexicycle™) efficiency 53% • Plant sizes from 10 to 500+ MW • When included in a diverse portfolio, reduces costly cycling of other technologies (optimizes dispatch of other assets) • Enables integration of renewable energy while minimizing cost© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  20. 20. Thank You! www.smartpowergeneration.com Joseph Ferrari Market Development Analyst Wärtsilä North America, Inc. Q&A 900 Bestgate Road, Suite 400 Annapolis MD 21401 410-573-2100 Joseph.Ferrari@Wartsila.com© Wärtsilä October 17, 2012 Joe Ferrari
  21. 21. Quantifying Smart Power Generation BenefitsDNV KEMA Energy & SustainabilityOctober 17, 2012
  22. 22. Our Global Experience of Professionals in Energy and Sustainability provide Insight across the Energy Value Chain Policy & Transport & Production Trading Use Strategy Distribution  Our passionate professionals work in multidisciplinary teams to enable our customers in finding the optimal solutions.  Their impartiality, high-level expertise, and experience are widely recognized.  They understand the business consequences of a technical decision and the technical consequences of a business decision.  They are present at major conferences and seminars and participate in international advisory boards, associations, and standardization bodies to share knowledge and stimulate innovative thinking.Enabling the energy transition 22
  23. 23. SPG Study Focus  As the amount of renewable generation increases, the need for Ancillary Services will increase: - We focus on both generation cost and ancillary services  We decided to use CAISO as a study system - well-developed market that shares many features with other ISOs/RTOs- increased renewable penetration, retirements of GW of capacity - In CAISO Ancillary Services includes load following (up and down), regulation (up and down) spinning and non-spinningEnabling the energy transition 23
  24. 24. SPG Study Scenarios: CAISO 2020  To analyze CAISO we used the WECC model (and isolated the impacts on CAISO). - We used CPUC and CAISO LTPP projections for the Base Case (Environmentally constrained case + High Load scenario) - We focus on comparing 5.5 GW of new and Once Through Cooling (OTC) repowered with 5.5 GW of gas turbines in simple and combined cycle (scenario 1, the “base case”). These are the “OTC replacement” units.  We then explored several scenarios of changing out or adding to the new or OTC replacement units with Wärtsilä SPG.  Today we’ll focus on one of the scenarios (Scenario 4). - In this scenario we added 3.2 GW of Flexicycle and 2.3 GW of Wärtsilä 34SGs in addition to the already included 3.2 GW of GTCCs and 2.3 GW of simple cycle GTs. - We allowed the dispatch software to pick/choose the most appropriate dispatch sequence to meet the load projections for CAISO 2020 with 33% renewable penetration.Enabling the energy transition 24
  25. 25. Scenarios to Highlight SPG Benefits in 2020  Scenario 1: Base Case - Environmentally constrained generation asset assumptions - Includes 5,517 MW of new and Once Through Cooling (OTC) re-powered assets - High Load sensitivity case  Scenario 2: SPG in Simple Cycle instead of new and OTC - Base Case assumptions, except - Instead of 5,517 MW of new and OTC re-powered assets use 5,500 MW of simple cycle SPG  Scenario 3: SPG mix instead of new and OTC - Base Case assumptions, except - Instead of 5,517 MW of new and OTC re-powered assets use 3,300 MW of combined cycle SPG and 2,200 MW of simple cycle SPG  Scenario 4: Optimal Mix of new and OTC with SPG - Base Case assumptions, and - Add 3,300 MW of combined cycle SPG and 2,200 MW of simple cycle SPGEnabling the energy transition 25
  26. 26. Smart Power Generation – Deployed in concert with other energy resources, enhances the grid and provides other benefits…. Peak Hour Supply  Measuring benefits of Flexible Capacity in 70,000 Load + Flexibility = 64,254 MW 60,000 Load = 56,018 MW North American RTO (CAISO) 50,000 Imports = 10,474 MW Import(+)/Export(-) - Net savings in generation costs are about 5% 40,000 New OTC = 4,157 MW New OTC Gens Gas - Reserve margins can be managed at lower costs MW Nat Gas = 14,764 MW Hydro Wind 30,000 Solar Hydro = 7,523 MW Other 20,000 Nuclear Wind = 1,147 MW  Minimizing cost of providing Ancillary Services Load + Flexibility Solar = 8,776 MW 10,000 Other = 4,575 MW New OTC = re- in an RTO (CAISO) 0 Nuclear = 4,486 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 powered Once- Through-Cooling capacity which is gas fired. - Regulation (Up and Down) Hour - Load Following (Up and Down) - Spinning - Non-Spinning  Determining how Smart Power Generation plays in concert in a Resource Portfolio - SPG competes in different markets against different resources - Resource adequacy improvesEnabling the energy transition 26
  27. 27. Trends faced by North American RTOs  Renewable Portfolio Standards  Thermal plant retirements and additions  Environmental restrictions on siting new plants and operations of existing plants  Increased demand response and distributed resources  Changing Power Flows and High levels of import/export activityEnabling the energy transition 27
  28. 28. Time Domains for SPG Benefits in Frequency Control/Ancillary Services in an Uncertain Portfolio Seconds Inertia Primary Governor Response Control SPG strengths Secondary Minutes Regulation Control Tertiary Minutes Economic Dispatch Control Flex Ramp Time Hours Supply Stack Control 10 minutes Spinning Reserve Contingency 30 minutes Reserve Non-Spinning Reserve Minutes Forecast Error Load FollowingEnabling the energy transition 28
  29. 29. Scenario 1: Base Case Capacity Mix to Meet Peak Load and Flexibility in 2020 Peak Hour Supply 70,000 Load + Flexibility = 64,254 MW 60,000 Load = 56,018 MW Flexibility: Spinning & Load 50,000 Imports = 10,474 MW Following Up: Import(+)/Export(-) 49% supplied New OTC = 4,157 MW New OTC Gens by existing CCGT 40,000 Gas Regulation UP: MW Nat Gas = 14,764 MW Hydro 38% supplied by Wind 30,000 hydro; 38% supplied Solar by OTC CT Hydro = 7,523 MW Other 20,000 Nuclear During peak hour, Wind = 1,147 MW Load + Flexibility Demand Response Solar = 8,776 MW Provided portions. 10,000 Other = 4,575 MW New OTC = re- Nuclear = 4,486 powered Once- 0 Through-Cooling 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 capacity which is gas fired. HourEnabling the energy transition 29
  30. 30. Scenario 1: Base Case Has Substantial Increase in Energy and Ancillary Services in 2020; SPG reduces Costs 2020 Base Case 2011 2020 Base Ancillary Case + SPG Ancillary + $158 Services = Costs in Millions $ Services met by CT - $33 Ancillary = $139 backstop* = Services $381 = $348 Generation 5% Cost = Generation Generation $8,061 - $1,359 Cost = - $349 Cost = $6,702 $6,351 Gas Gas Gas OTC 60%Ancillary Services 0% target GWh and Hydro CT Backstop Hydro suppliers A/S = 45,687 GWh OTC SPG Hydro A/S 72,662 GWh A/S 72,662 GWh *Sources: 2011 State of Market Report, LTPP assumptions, simulation results. Using the Demand Response backstop costing on average $17,500/MWh and with shortfall penalties the cost is $1,2 billion for the base case.Enabling the energy transition 30
  31. 31. Scenario 1: Base Case with Demand Response supplying Ancillary Service Shortfall at $17,500/MWh 2020 Base Case 2011 2020 Base Ancillary Case + SPG Ancillary + $1,062 Services Costs in Millions $ Services - $777 Ancillary = $139 = $1,201 Services = $348 Generation 15% Cost = Generation Generation $8,061 - $1,359 Cost = - $349 Cost = $6,702 $6,351 Gas Gas Gas OTC 60%Ancillary Services 0% target GWh and Hydro Demand Response Hydro suppliers A/S = 45,687 GWh OTC SPG Hydro A/S 72,662 GWh A/S 72,662 GWh *Sources: 2011 State of Market Report, LTPP assumptions, simulation resultsEnabling the energy transition 31
  32. 32. SPG Cost Savings in RTD: Peak Hour Day Scenario 1 RTD: Base Case Scenario 2 RTD: All Generators 8 41% savings by: 7 • Reducing high cost 6 Demand $/MW for 5 minute interval Response 5 • Cheaper 4 start/stop and ramping 3 2 1 0 100 109 118 127 136 145 154 163 172 181 190 199 208 217 226 235 244 253 262 271 280 289 82 91 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 1 5 minute dispatch intervalEnabling the energy transition 32
  33. 33. Resource Adequacy = Deliverability @ Risk Base Case Probability Base Case + SPG 1 day in 10 Years Event Capacity 364 MW Resource Mix Delivery risk with: 1) Thermal units (35%) 1) Forced Outage 2) Demand Response (15%) 2) Start up Failure 3) Renewables – 33% 3) Ramping 4) Imports – 20% 4) Miss-forecastEnabling the energy transition 33
  34. 34. For more information Mikael Backman Joseph Ferrari Market Development Director, Americas Market Development Analyst, Americas Wartsila Power Plants Wartsila Power Plants +1-410-573-2100, tel +1-410-573-2100, tel Mikael.backman@wartsila.com Joseph.ferrari@wartsila.com Alan Roark Principal Consultant Manager, Risk Assessments +1-215-997-4500, tel Alan.roark@dnvkema.com www.smartpowergeneration.com34 / 15 © Wärtsilä Doc.ID: Revision: Status:

×