Ray Bliven, Power Rates Manager for Bonneville Power Administration, describes the practical pitfalls of developing wind resources, how to model wind generation through the EPIS AURORAxmp modeling software, and discusses the issues surrounding wind generation.

1. What Does Wind Really Cost?What Does Wind Really Cost?
Modeling Wind Resources in AURORAModeling Wind Resources in AURORA
presented by
Ray Bliven
Power Rates Manager
Bonneville Power Administration
The views presented in this presentation are those of those of the presenter and
do not necessarily represent the position of BPA on any of these issues.

2. Last TimeLast Time
Building a Cogeneration ResourceBuilding a Cogeneration Resource
Modeling cogeneration in AURORAModeling cogeneration in AURORA

3. Combined Cycle Cogeneration
High Pressure Steam to Process
High Pressure Steam
to Turbine
Low Pressure Steam Return
Low Pressure Steam
for NOx Reduction
Low Pressure Steam to Process
Process
Steam
Use
Heat Recovery
Steam Generator
(HRSG)
Gas Turbine
Exhaust Heat
Recovery
DuctBurners
HPBoiler
SCR
Economizer
Preheater
StackAmmonia
for NOx
Reduction
BFW Pump
Pump
Water
Treatment
Water
Source
MakeupWater
Deaerator
Transformer
Generator
Transformer
Generator
Natural
Gas
Supply
Compressor
Outside
Air
Cumbustors
Cumbustion
Turbine
Gas Turbine Generator
High Pressure Steam
to Turbine
Low Pressure Steam
for NOx Reduction
Water Vapor
Pump
Steam
Condensate
Condensator
Cool
Water
Cooling Tower
Warm Water
Steam
Turbine

4. Last TimeLast Time
Building a Cogeneration ResourceBuilding a Cogeneration Resource
Modeling cogeneration in AURORAModeling cogeneration in AURORA
This time:This time:
Building a Wind ResourceBuilding a Wind Resource
Modeling wind generation in AURORAModeling wind generation in AURORA
Examining issues related to wind generationExamining issues related to wind generation

5. Turbine Parts Arrive by ShipTurbine Parts Arrive by Ship

6. Site Preparation BeginsSite Preparation Begins

7. Foundation Bolts InstalledFoundation Bolts Installed

8. Foundation PouredFoundation Poured

9. Foundation FinishedFoundation Finished

10. Tower Section Trucked to SiteTower Section Trucked to Site

11. Nacelle Trucked to SiteNacelle Trucked to Site

12. Rotor Blade Trucked to SiteRotor Blade Trucked to Site

13. Parts Arrive at SiteParts Arrive at Site

14. Tower InstalledTower Installed

15. Rotor Hub Attached to NacelleRotor Hub Attached to Nacelle

16. Nacelle InstalledNacelle Installed

17. Rotor Blade InstalledRotor Blade Installed

18. Completed TurbineCompleted Turbine

19. Electrical Connection ProceedsElectrical Connection Proceeds

20. Project CompleteProject Complete
83 turbines at 1.8 MW each = 150 MW
Located on 165 acres in Eastern Washington
Produces 50 average megawatts
Site prep began March 2005
First turbine construction began August 2005
Project complete December 2005

22. Phases in Building a Wind ResourcePhases in Building a Wind Resource
Find a SiteFind a Site
Build the MachineBuild the Machine
Integrate onto the GridIntegrate onto the Grid

23. Find a SiteFind a Site
Location, Location, LocationLocation, Location, Location
Site StudiesSite Studies ---- Wind Speed DataWind Speed Data
Permits and LeasesPermits and Leases

24. Windy Sites are Best, ButWindy Sites are Best, But ……

25. Ridgelines are Usually GoodRidgelines are Usually Good

26. Consistently Windy Areas Work GreatConsistently Windy Areas Work Great

27. Wind AtlasWind Atlas –– Winter PotentialWinter Potential

28. Wind AtlasWind Atlas –– Spring PotentialSpring Potential

29. Wind AtlasWind Atlas –– Summer PotentialSummer Potential

30. Wind AtlasWind Atlas –– Autumn PotentialAutumn Potential

31. Build the MachineBuild the Machine
Decide Which Machine and How BigDecide Which Machine and How Big
–– old technologyold technology –– 600 to 660 kW600 to 660 kW
–– new technologynew technology –– 2 to 3 MW2 to 3 MW
–– developing technologydeveloping technology –– 5 MW5 MW
Get In LineGet In Line
–– everyone seems to want wind generatorseveryone seems to want wind generators
–– current order backlogscurrent order backlogs
–– secondary markets developingsecondary markets developing

32. Costs of a Wind GeneratorCosts of a Wind Generator
Site and Site PreparationSite and Site Preparation
HardwareHardware
Integration and TransmissionIntegration and Transmission
Current estimatesCurrent estimates
–– EIAEIA –– 1,200 per kW1,200 per kW
–– NPCCNPCC –– 1,175 per kW1,175 per kW

33. Environmental ConsiderationsEnvironmental Considerations
BirdsBirds
VisualVisual
NoiseNoise
Emissions??Emissions??

34. Wind Generation in the WestWind Generation in the West
19901990 –– 1,650 MW in California1,650 MW in California
19991999 –– 1,975 MW in California + 117 MW1,975 MW in California + 117 MW
20022002 –– 3,000 MW3,000 MW
20042004 –– 4,000 MW4,000 MW
20062006 –– 5,000 MW5,000 MW
20072007 –– 8,000 MW ??8,000 MW ??
20112011 –– 14,000 MW !!!???14,000 MW !!!???

46. Modeling Wind Generation in AURORAModeling Wind Generation in AURORA
Obtain hourly generation or wind speedsObtain hourly generation or wind speeds
–– Wind speeds for Washington & OregonWind speeds for Washington & Oregon
–– wwwwww--k12.atmos.washington.edu/k12/grayskies/nw_weather.htmlk12.atmos.washington.edu/k12/grayskies/nw_weather.html
Adjust for tower heightAdjust for tower height
–– Speed increases by a factor of 1/7th with heightSpeed increases by a factor of 1/7th with height
Apply power curveApply power curve
–– Power increases by a cube function with wind speedPower increases by a cube function with wind speed
Normalize to average outputNormalize to average output
–– Wind speed readings arenWind speed readings aren’’t always at the wind sitet always at the wind site

47. Tower Height AdjustmentTower Height Adjustment
www.rpc.com.au/products/windturbines/wind_faq.htmlwww.rpc.com.au/products/windturbines/wind_faq.html

48. Power CurvePower Curve
www.windpower.org/en/tour/wres/pwr.htmwww.windpower.org/en/tour/wres/pwr.htm

49. Modeling Wind Generation in AURORAModeling Wind Generation in AURORA
Choose a representative week for each monthChoose a representative week for each month
Convert each hourConvert each hour’’s generation into a forceds generation into a forced
outage factor for each of the 168 hours of weekoutage factor for each of the 168 hours of week
Result is 168 hours for 12 months per siteResult is 168 hours for 12 months per site
Use monthly time series vector to refer toUse monthly time series vector to refer to
appropriate weekly time series vectorappropriate weekly time series vector
For each wind resource, point to the monthly timeFor each wind resource, point to the monthly time
series with that resourceseries with that resource’’s forced outage values forced outage value

50. ExamplesExamples
Wind speed =Wind speed = mphmph 11 55 1010 1515 2020
Height adjust =Height adjust = mphmph 22 77 1515 2222 3030
Power curve =Power curve = kWkW 00 1010 8080 270270 640640
Forced outage =Forced outage = %% 100100 9999 9292 7373 3636
Wind speed =Wind speed = mphmph 2525 3030 3535 4040
Height adjust =Height adjust = mphmph 3737 4545 5252 6060
Power curve =Power curve = kWkW 10001000 10001000 10001000 00
Forced outage =Forced outage = %% 00 00 00 100100

51. AURORA setupAURORA setup –– Weekly VectorsWeekly Vectors

52. AURORA setupAURORA setup –– Monthly VectorsMonthly Vectors

53. AURORA setupAURORA setup –– ResourcesResources

54. AURORA setupAURORA setup –– FuelFuel
set to zero
AURORA setupAURORA setup –– AnnualAnnual
actual VOM minus Production Tax Credit

55. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind OutputOutput
January 2007 – Existing Wind Resources – 5,500 MW capacity

56. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind OutputOutput
Year 2007 – Existing Wind Resources – 5,500 MW capacity

57. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind OutputOutput
January 2007 – Future Wind Resources – 14,000 MW capacity

58. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind OutputOutput
Year 2007 – Future Wind Resources – 14,000 MW capacity

59. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind PricesPrices
Avg = 78.89; Stdev = 10.2 Avg = 78.18; Stdev = 9.4
January 2007 – Existing Wind Resources – Mid-C Prices

60. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind PricesPrices
Avg = 73.30; Stdev = 9.5Avg = 70.36; Stdev = 16.7
January 2007 – Future Wind Resources – Mid-C Prices

61. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind PricesPrices
Avg = 80.04; Stdev = 17.4 Avg = 80.04; Stdev = 17.1
Year 2007 – Existing Wind Resources – Mid-C Prices

62. Results of Wind ShapingResults of Wind Shaping
Shaped WindShaped Wind v.v. Flat WindFlat Wind PricesPrices
Avg = 75.96; Stdev = 17.1Avg = 75.33; Stdev = 18.5
Year 2007 – Future Wind Resources – Mid-C Prices

63. Geographic ConcentrationGeographic Concentration
Wind generation in Washington and OregonWind generation in Washington and Oregon
may grow to about 4,500 MW within fivemay grow to about 4,500 MW within five
yearsyears
Almost 3,000 MW is targeted to the easternAlmost 3,000 MW is targeted to the eastern
Columbia River gorge and another 1,000Columbia River gorge and another 1,000
MW 50 miles east of the gorgeMW 50 miles east of the gorge
How will this concentration affect the systemHow will this concentration affect the system
operations and market clearing pricesoperations and market clearing prices

64. Expected Geographic ConcentrationExpected Geographic Concentration
about 200 MW each

65. Test Geographic DispersionTest Geographic Dispersion
about 200 MW each

66. Results of Wind DispersionResults of Wind Dispersion
Concentrated WindConcentrated Wind v.v. Dispersed WindDispersed Wind ProductionProduction
January 2007 – Washington/Oregon Wind Resources

67. Results of Wind DispersionResults of Wind Dispersion
Concentrated WindConcentrated Wind v.v. Dispersed WindDispersed Wind ProductionProduction
January 2007 – Washington/Oregon Wind Resources

68. Results of Wind DispersionResults of Wind Dispersion
Concentrated WindConcentrated Wind v.v. Dispersed WindDispersed Wind ProductionProduction
Year 2007 – Washington/Oregon Wind Resources

69. Results of Wind DispersionResults of Wind Dispersion
Concentrated WindConcentrated Wind v.v. Dispersed WindDispersed Wind ProductionProduction
Year 2007 – Washington/Oregon Wind Resources

70. How Does Wind Produce Emissions?How Does Wind Produce Emissions?
The Overlooked Environmental Cost of a WindThe Overlooked Environmental Cost of a Wind
Generation Portfolio to Serve the Need for PowerGeneration Portfolio to Serve the Need for Power
–– draft paper by Lincolndraft paper by Lincoln WolvertonWolverton (attached)(attached)
Premise of the paperPremise of the paper
–– In a closed system, wind generation may not change theIn a closed system, wind generation may not change the
amount of fossil fuel burnedamount of fossil fuel burned
–– In an open system, the addition of wind generation willIn an open system, the addition of wind generation will
change the system operations from base load plants tochange the system operations from base load plants to
cycling plantscycling plants

71. Testing the Premise with AURORATesting the Premise with AURORA
First, test the closed system premiseFirst, test the closed system premise
–– Use AURORAUse AURORA’’s closed system dispatch features closed system dispatch feature
to examine two portfoliosto examine two portfolios
One portfolio has a 100 MW wind generator and aOne portfolio has a 100 MW wind generator and a
100 MW single cycle combustion turbine100 MW single cycle combustion turbine
–– Heat rate = 9500Heat rate = 9500
Other portfolio has a 100 MW combined cycleOther portfolio has a 100 MW combined cycle
combustion turbinecombustion turbine
–– Heat rate = 7300Heat rate = 7300

72. Testing the Premise with AURORATesting the Premise with AURORA
Results:Results:
–– Fossil fuel usage increases from wind case toFossil fuel usage increases from wind case to
CCCT case by 6.6%CCCT case by 6.6%
–– GHG production increases by 8.8%GHG production increases by 8.8%
–– NONOxx production decreases by 73%production decreases by 73%
–– SOSO22 production decreases by 33%production decreases by 33%

73. Testing the Premise with AURORATesting the Premise with AURORA
Next, test the open system premiseNext, test the open system premise
–– Examine two casesExamine two cases
First, compare the future system with windFirst, compare the future system with wind
generation presentgeneration present
Second, replace the future system wind with anSecond, replace the future system wind with an
equivalent amount of energy production fromequivalent amount of energy production from
combined cycle combustion turbinescombined cycle combustion turbines
14,000 MW of wind producing 4,13514,000 MW of wind producing 4,135 aMWaMW ofof
energy replaced with combustion turbines inenergy replaced with combustion turbines in
each area with wind plantseach area with wind plants

74. Testing the Premise with AURORATesting the Premise with AURORA
Results:Results:
–– Fossil fuel usage increases from wind case to CCCTFossil fuel usage increases from wind case to CCCT
case by 5.7% across all of WECCcase by 5.7% across all of WECC
–– GHG production increases by 4.0%GHG production increases by 4.0%
18.7% increase in CCCT GHG offset by18.7% increase in CCCT GHG offset by peakerpeaker reductionsreductions
–– NONOxx production increases by 0.8%production increases by 0.8%
18.2% increase in CCCT NO18.2% increase in CCCT NOxx offset byoffset by peakerpeaker reductionsreductions
–– SOSO22 production increases by 0.1%production increases by 0.1%
19.5% increase in CCCT SO19.5% increase in CCCT SO22 offset byoffset by peakerpeaker reductionsreductions

75. Testing the Premise with AURORATesting the Premise with AURORA
Conclusions:Conclusions:
–– Wind generation in the WECC is now of suchWind generation in the WECC is now of such
size that hourly modeling is an important factorsize that hourly modeling is an important factor
in predicting market clearing pricesin predicting market clearing prices
–– Geographic concentration of wind generation isGeographic concentration of wind generation is
more expensive tomore expensive to MCPsMCPs than diverse locationsthan diverse locations
–– Emissions savings from wind generation areEmissions savings from wind generation are
minimized if SCCT operation increases tominimized if SCCT operation increases to
regulate wind output to meet loadregulate wind output to meet load