Dora Nakafuji from HECO describes her experiences on planning and integrating renewable energy into the California grid, and how Hawaii will deal with those same challenges. Slides from the REIS seminar series at the University of Hawaii at Manoa on 2009-09-17.

1. Managing the Winds of Change
California Experiences
Dora Nakafuji
University of Hawaii
September 17, 2009
1

2. World Perspective – We’re not alone!
• Reduce and mitigate climate change impacts (pollution,
GHG)
• Strengthen energy security by reducing dependence on oil
• Eliminate fuel poverty by diversifying with environmentally-
friendly resources
• Support economic growth & competitiveness
2

3. Overview
• Answers to TEST at end
of seminar
• Policies Drivers &
Integration Challenges
• Where we are Today
– Wind Resources Solano
65 MW
– Research & Support
Altamont Pass
Efforts 562 MW San Gorgonio
– Statewide Integration & Pacheco Pass
359 MW
Planning 16 MW
• 2020 and Beyond? Tehachapi Ranges
710 MW
Orange
San Diego
36 MW
4 MW
*2005
3

4. Renewable Integration TEST Questions
• What will the future electricity system look like and
where will renewable resources likely to come from –
remote locations, out-of-state?
– How do we currently get electricity today, tomorrow, future?
• What is needed for the grid to accommodate
renewables (technologies/infrastructure, market,
regulation)?
– What are the drivers and challenges for integration?
• What are the impacts of increasing renewable energy
penetration on system reliability and dispatchability?
– Why all the fuss about integration?
• Will the “planned” system last another 30-40 years?
– Why is the life span for wind generators, PV systems etc?
4

5. Renewable Portfolio Standards
• 28 states have different mandatory RPS (portfolios mix of resources)
• Combination of new Energy Efficiency or Renewable Energy resources
5

6. Renewable Energy & Climate Change Policies
• A flexible, market-driven policy to ensure that a certain
amount of renewable energy is included in the portfolio
of electricity resources serving a state or country
• Ensures that renewable energy technologies (i.e. solar,
wind) and the public benefits of these clean
technologies be recognized as cost-effective and
competitive in the electricity markets.
• Helps put the Key Renewable Energy Policy Impacting California
2010 2016 2020
electricity
industry on a
Accelerated RPS Renewables Renewables
(from IEPR / EAP /
20% of generation 33% of generation
SB1250/107
path toward Governor’s Response) (~54,000 GWh) (~98,000 GWh)
increasing California Solar 3,000 MW of new solar
sustainability. Initiative (~5,000 GWh 1)
20% of RPS from biopower 20% of RPS from biopower
(~11,000 GWh1) (~20,000 GWh1)
State Bioenergy Goal
(Executive Order S-06-06)
20% biofuels produced in 40% biofuels produced in
California California
Governor’s GHG
Specific GHG reduction targets allocated to RE will most likely be contained in the
Reduction Targets &
Climate Action Team Recommendations to the Governor, expected in 2006.
AB32
6

7. CA RPS Eligible Technologies
• Biomass • Municipal solid waste
• Biodiesel conversion
• Conduit hydro • Ocean wave, ocean thermal,
tidal current
• Fuel cells using • Photovoltaic
renewable fuel
• Digester gas • Small hydro
• Geothermal • Solar thermal electric
• Landfill gas • Wind
7

8. Great so what’s the problem?
8

9. A Critical Question
How do we accommodate a large amount of renewable
energy resources onto our power system without
sacrificing reliability?
Facts of Life:
• Mandated Renewable Portfolio Standard (wind, geothermal,
biomass, etc)
9

10. Ex. California RPS Projections
Projected Renewables to Meet California Policy Goals
∼ ∼
000
Renewable Energy Generated Statew ide ('
Gap
Small Hydro/Ocean
Solar PV
SolarCSP
Biomass
G Wh)
Geo
Wind
Data Sources: 2004, CEC Electricity Report which includes all renewables in the State, not just IOUs; 2010 and 2020, PIER Renewables Projections.
10

11. Ex. Technology – Lay of the Land
• Comprised of multiple utility
service areas
• Mix of generation resources
(base, peak, intermediate &
intermittent)
• More than 124,000 miles of
(T&D) power lines with over
2000 substations
• Supplies over 294 billion
kilowatt-hours per year to
35 million Californians
• Electricity generation of
over 61,000 MW supply
electricity into California’s
grid
• 30% imported from out of
state across high voltage
DC lines
11

12. Components of the Grid
Emission
RECs penalties The electricity system is
a blend of hardware,
market competitive and
regulated components
!#
"$ % $& (
$ ') *
! " $& (
+# '
Power
purchase ,
agreements Transmission access ! - &(
+ $'
agreements
Energy
efficiency
Storage or (PV, DG,
Physical constraints other regulation DER)
services
Process constraints
12

13. Integration Challenges
•
*Source: EIA
Constrained and insufficient
transmission and distribution
(T&D) infrastructure
• Limited peak generating capacity
and flexible units
• Lack of operating experience at
high renewable penetration
levels
• Abundant in-state renewable
resources and aggressive policy
for growth, but lacking a “game
plan” (RPS) to help prioritize
development
• Lack of integrated system
• Aging workforce &
infrastructure!!!
13

14. A Critical Question
How do we accommodate a large amount of renewable
energy resources onto our power system without
sacrificing reliability?
Facts of Life:
• Mandated Renewable Portfolio Standard (wind, geothermal,
biomass, etc)
• Wind, geothermal, biomass…resources have different
generation characteristics
14

15. Geographic
& Seasonal
Variability of
Wind
15

16. Managing the Electrical Grid
• Decisions are based on a set of conditions
– Dispatch of energy is based on existing system
and market signals conditions (demand)
determines dispatch, expertise determines
resources committed and response
– Desired resource response is deterministic – ON
or OFF
– If resources do not respond or are
insufficient…alternatives are dispatched
• Wind and solar add additional variability to
the set of conditions used in informing
decisions
• System operators don’t have a “read” on
the prevailing conditions to adequately
forecast wind and solar
16

17. Typical Summer Demand with Wind & Solar Gen. Profiles
& * Typical Summer Month
0 &
Average System Load
Average Wind
.
Average Solar /
.
Both wind and
solar face
intermittency
challenges
Averaged Solar
Generation Averaged Wind
Curve Generation Source: IAP CEC/PIER
Curve 17

18. Power (MW)
Typical Output Profile for Different Generators
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.5
2.7
2.9
3.1
3.3
3.5
15:56:01
15:57:25
15:58:50
16:00:19
Peaker
16:03:17
16:04:49
16:07:40
16:09:13
Base Generation
16:10:35
16:12:00
16:13:33
Time
16:14:58
16:16:30
Intermittent (Wind)
16:17:51
16:19:16
16:20:48
16:22:17
16:23:46
16:25:07
16:26:31
18
16:27:54

19. A Critical Question
How do we accommodate a large amount of renewable
energy resources onto our power system without
sacrificing reliability?
Facts of Life:
• Mandated Renewable Portfolio Standard (wind, geothermal,
biomass, etc)
• Wind, geothermal, biomass…resources have different
generation characteristics
• Current power systems were not designed to operate with
large amounts of differing and variable renewable resources
19

20. Demand Is Met with Different Generating Unit Types
* Intermittent (wind & solar) resources?
Use peaking units
Typical Daily Demand Profile
Cycling
Use cycling units
MW
Baseload
Use the most efficient, lowest cost baseload units
Midnight 12 noon Midnight
Source: HECO IRP
20

21. Managing the Mix
•
* Typical Summer Month
PLANNED OPS
Always striking a 60000
balance between 50000
IMPORTS
HYDRO
changing demand and
Generation (MW)
PSH
40000
supply (temporal and WIND
SOLAR PV
locational variant) 30000
SOLAR CON.
•
GAS TURBINE
20000
CA loading order 10000
COMB. CYCLE
STEAM
requires energy BIOMASS
GEOTHERMAL
efficiency, renewables, 0
1 25 49 73 97 121 145
NUCLEAR
clean NG Hour
40000
ACTUAL OPS
35000 IMPORTS
HYDRO
30000
Generation (MW)
PSH
25000 WIND
SOLAR PV
20000
SOLAR CON.
15000 GAS TURBINE
COMB. CYCLE
10000
STEAM
5000 BIOMASS
GEOTHERMAL
0
NUCLEAR
1 25 49 73 97 121 145
Hour
21

22. Ideal Situation
Supply Meets Demand
Output of
MW
intermittent units
(as available)
Min & Max output of
base (firm)
generating units
Midnight 12 noon Midnight
22

23. Problems Encountered
Supply exceeds Supply does not
Demand at meet demand at
minimum load maximum load
Excess Energy –
curtailed or
dumped WE
PAY FOR
Costly Energy –
procured, WE
PAY FOR
Output of
MW
THIS
intermittent units
(as available)
Min & Max output of
base (firm)
generating units
Midnight 12 noon Midnight
23

24. Wind Ramps and Impacts on Other Generation
Wind drop off
over 15 minutes
Flexible unit
started to fill gap • Wind (or solar) ramping
down
• If available - stand-by
or reactive units must
ramp up to continue to
meet demand
3500
Ramp Rate Down Capacity
3000
2500
PSH
CA ramping using available
(MW/min)
2000 GAS TURBINE
STEAM hydro-power
1500 COMB. CYCLE
HYDRO (200MW/min limit*)
1000
* Source: HI & CEC
500
0
1 25 49 73 97 121 145
Hours
24

25. A Critical Question
How do we accommodate a large amount of renewable
energy resources onto our power system without
sacrificing reliability?
Facts of Life:
• Mandated Renewable Portfolio Standard (wind, geothermal,
biomass, etc)
• Wind, geothermal, biomass…resources have different
generation characteristics
• Current power systems were not designed to operate with
large amounts of differing and variable renewable resources
• When ANY resource is not carefully integrated (planned)
onto the power system, the system will be more prone to
failures
25

26. Managing the Mix 2010 Load Duration Curve
July 21, 2003
6-9AM
55000
•
July 19, 2004
Striking a balance
6-9AM QSS CAISO load, actual, MW
50000 2010X Total Actual L-W-S
D1 2010T Total Actual L-W-S
between changing 45000
A A8
A1
A4
July 1, 2002
6-9AM
May 3. 2004
4-7AM
May 3. 2004
demand and supply 40000
A12 B2
A9
F1
8-11 PM
February 16,
•
A1 May 15. 2003 2004
A A1 H2 1-4 AM QSS 00-2AM
Do it at the least cost 35000 3 H F2 B3 A11
D2 A3
G1 G4 B6 B1
MW
A1 G5
B4 G2
•
A5 A2
30000 A14 B5 C3
Do it without sacrificing
G3 I1 C1
G G7 G10 G8
June 24, 2004
B7 G9 G11 I3 C2
25000 H3 J2 I2
reliability
4-7PM QSS C4
J1
•
20000
Do it so it can be 15000
B#1 B#2 B#3 B#4 B#5 B#6 B#7 B#8 B#9 B#10
3
sustained 10000
0 2630 5260 7890 10520 13150 15780 18410 21040 23670 26300
Hours
* Known system stress conditions
Current Paradigm
Demand = Supply
Emerging Paradigm ∞
Demand = Supply + VariableSupply
0
26

27. O p e ra tio n P ro c es s Iss u e s
1 Y e ar
Unit Dispatch
Slower (Years)
700
1 *2
Time Scales for System Planning and Operation
C ap a c ity V a lu a tio n 600
500
R e s o u rc e a n d (U C A P , IC A P )
C ap a c ity P la n n in g 3 and
400
MW
300
L o n g -T erm L o a d 200
(R e lia b ility) G row th F o re c as tin g 100
Processes vary across a wide range
3' 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Hour
1 Day
2001 A verag e L o ad vs A verag e W in d
4 *
3 0 ,0 0 0 1 ,6 0 0
1 ,4 0 0
2 5 ,0 0 0
Wind Output (MW)
NYISO Load (MW)
U n it C o m m itm e n t D a y-a h e a d an d 2 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,2 0 0
an d
1 ,0 0 0
M u lti-D a y
,3
*
D a y-A h e ad F o re c a s tin g
1 5 ,0 0 0 80 0
60 0
S c h e d u lin g 1 0 ,0 0 0
40 0
Time Frame
5 ,0 0 0
. *, 35 0
1
J u ly lo ad
J u ly w in d
6
A u g u s t lo ad
A u g u s t w in d
11 16
Se p te m b e r lo ad
Se p te m b e r w in d
21
20 0
0
H our
30 0 0
3 H ou rs
1 *5 H o u r-A h ea d
25 0 0
F o re c a stin g 20 0 0
L o a d F o llo w in g and
!*
% ( 15 0 0
MW
(5 M in u te D is p atc h ) P la n t A c tive P o w e r
M a n eu ve rin g a n d 10 0 0
M a n ag e m e n t
* 5 500
0
Faster (seconds)
1 61 121
M i n u te s
S ep t em b er Mo rn in g A u gu s t Mo rn ing M ay Ev e n in g Oc t ob e r Ev e n in g A p r il A f te rn o on
R e a l-T im e an d 10 M inu tes
F re q u e n c y a n d A u to n o m o u s P ro te c tio n
T ie -L in e R e g u la tio n
5 6(A G C )
3 2 *1
a n d C o n tro l F u n c tio n s
(A G C , L V R T , P S S ,
G o ve rn o r, V -R eg , e tc .)
! (
27

28. Managing the Risks – New Markets & Infrastructure
• Traditional processes no longer
adequate – new modeling tools
Wind Mixed
Renewables &
and technology specific
Wind
Hydro
Clean Coal information now needed
• Increasing reliance on out-of-state
and out-of-region renewable
Wind resources makes CA dependent
Wind on conditions of that state or
Wind
Wind region (e.g., extended drought or
Hydro
storm conditions)
Geo
Geo Wind
Wind
• Planning and forecasting
Wind capability must now include
Wind
Geo
Hydro
consideration of climate impacts
on the combined output of all
in state
Bio/PV
Wind weather dependent resources -
Solar
Wind
Solar
wind, solar, hydro versus only a
Geo
Solar single resource
Wind
Wind Solar
LOTS OF UNKNOWNS &
UNCERTAINTIES
28

29. Timing & Economic Analysis
0.1
0.09
LCOE ($/KWh) - Current Dollar
0.08
& 32 17/
0.07
8.00
0.06
7.00
0.05
6.00
0.04 5.00
cents/kWh
4.00
0.03
3.00
0.02
2.00
Wholesale Price - CEC Forecast Wholesale price - CPUC Forecast
0.01 Wind No PTC - current $ Wind with PTC - current $
1.00
Combined cycle - current $
0.00
0 Alameda Solano Riverside LA/Kern San San Diego
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 Bernardino
Year 29

30. Three Pulls – Technology, Market, Policy/Regulatory
Not an overnight process • Characterize renewable
resources
• Limitations of transmission
Significant Need and Technology infrastructure
Potential to help build a • Mix of generation resources
resilient Future System • Age and lifespan of existing
technology
• Understanding of new technology
• Fit of new technology to existing
infrastructure
Policy Market
• Local state & national energy policy • Renewables incentives
& regulatory environment • Cost and demand for new
• Power purchase agreements limits, technology
terms and conditions • Cost-benefit of new technology
• FERC & national policy • Utility structure (deregulated or
• Other standards – Environmental, vertical)
air quality, energy efficiency • Green energy service credit for
renewables 30

31. Why should WE care? Can we make a difference?
Signs
Current Impacts
Future Impacts
31

32. Today’s Challenges!
V90 Largest land based
wind turbine to date
Vestas V90, 3 MW
80m tower, 90m rotor
B747, 60m wing span
32

33. Tomorrow’s Designs
! "
"
# & ')
( "
$"%
33

34. Increased Data Quality & Confidence
3 *
SOLANO
7 .
• Refines wind resource locations
and new development potential
• Identifies additional land area for 8 . ,
wind development
34

35. Strategic Assessment Approach
Resource Assessment
• Identifies key focus locations for
development
Technical Potential • Considers development timeframe
and economics for maximum public
benefits
Economic Potential – Transmission
– Environmental
Transmission Impact – Other non-energy benefits
• Prioritizes renewable and
transmission build-out
Other Benefits
• Integrate solutions for planning
needs
Prioritized Results
35

36. Wind Resource Assessment
09 :; .
%" <
2 9 :B .
99 %
0:$ .
#$
7 3 9 :B .
<- %
2 5 != (
># $ ? 0
$
2 3 > 0$@
A
5
4
?
8 & ).
7 !8 (
36

37. 5
2 7
Solano Vaca-Dixon-
Contra Costa
275 MW
GenCost: $275 M
Solano Vaca-Dixon
100 MW
GenCost: $100 M
San Bernardino
Trans Cost: $140 M
Etiwanda
280 MW
Alameda GenCost: $280 M
Contra Costa – Tesla Trans Cost: $34 M
132 MW
GenCost: $132 M
Riverside
1416 MW
GenCost: $1416 M
Los Angeles – Kern
Pardee – Vincent
2376 MW San Diego
GenCost: $2376M Glencliff - Los
Trans Cost: $843 M Coches
150 MW
GenCost: $150 M
Los Angeles – Kern
Tehachapi
500 MW
GenCost: $500 M Imperial
San Diego – Miguel
600 MW 82 MW
GenCost: $600 M
Trans Cost: $162 M
/ )
7 5
37

38. Sodar & Tall Tower Monitoring
• Responds to industry’s need
to acquire accurate, upper
atmospheric wind data within
the operating regime of current
wind turbine technologies
• Enables wind data to be
remotely measured at
elevations of 50m to 200m –
typical heights of new turbine
technologies
• Reduces development risk at 7,
new sites with wind data
substantiated by tall tower and
SODAR measurements
• Improves wind plant power
prediction for energy
generation and wind energy
forecasting
• Industry participation: Calpine,
Oakcreek, Enxco
38

39. Improving Wind Forecasting Capabilities
Photo of Altamont Pass by Steve Deutsch, 2003
• Conduct research to help
identify and reduce sources of Continue to narrow
wind forecasting error gap between observed
and predicted power.
• Efforts have identified need for
coupling field monitoring with
modeled wind forecasts to
increase accuracy especially
during summer seasons where
local terrain and thermal heating
drive the winds
• Effort under DOE engages with
the industry to develop and
deploy the Wind SENSE
forecasting capability into the
control room and enable better
integration of intermittent
renewables
- Previous research funded by PIER, CEC
- New Wind SENSE effort funded by DOE
39

40. WindSENSE Project Link Forecasts with Operations
Goal: Develop Wind SENSE to provide control
room operators an awareness or “sense” of the
wind conditions and energy forecasts in their
native operating environments
• Objectives
– Build and enhance California wind
forecasting efforts to improve adoption and
use of optimal wind forecasting capability
– Improve short-term wind energy modeling
capabilities with optimally located remote
sensor networks (i.e. met towers, SODAR,
doppler) providing a 3-D area “sense”
– Develop key indicators based on control
room organizational knowledge to inform the
design for an integrated forecasting interface
* DOE funded
40

41. Transform Statistics to Actions
• Development of a web-portal to Example of
access information tracking, industry avian
trending and monitoring wind observation data
development in California linking their
• Address CA driven issues from behavior to
terrain and
avian, community lighting
impacts, off shore deep water ground cover.
and land use concerns Results translate
• Transform Analysis to
in locations
where wind
actionable information for siting
needs turbines may be
re-sited to have
less impact on
birds in the area.
Funded by CEC/PIER
https://eed.llnl.gov/renewable/ 41

42. Help Bridge the Gaps between Climate Prediction and
Electricity Industry
• Translate the potential impact on Bringing Different Perspectives Together
wind, solar and hydro generationg
resources due to climate change
• Key Objectives:
– Bring climate change considerations to the
forefront of utility planning and longer-term
electricity infrastructure planning
– Work with industry to determine what
information is needed (i.e. resolution, type)
and how to best utilize climate change
results to assess impacts on future
planning and validation needs
3500
3500 Source:
Ramp Rate Down Capacity
3000 CEC - IAP
Ramp Rate Down Capacity
3000
2500
PSH
2500
(MW/min)
2000 GAS TURBINE
PSH
(MW/min)
2000 STEAM TURBINE
GAS
1500 COMB. CYCLE
STEAM
1500 HYDRO
COMB. CYCLE
1000
HYDRO
1000
500
500
0
10 25 49 73 97 121 145
1 25 49
Hours 97
73 121 145
Hours
*Research funded by CEC/PIER
42

43. Looking at System Solutions
Some Wind Industry Challenges in CA:
• Climate change uncertainties, Leveraging CA-
• Intermittency and integration issues, based expertise to
• Long-term RPS siting and planning
• Improved turbine performance and developing industry
site-tailored designs decision tools/aids
Engineering and advance
computational capability to
convert Data (science) to
Knowledge (to deployment) Data to Knowledge Conversion Process
43

44. Developing New Technologies
Control Surface
Translational Tab
Conventional Control Proposed Control
. 3
Patent # 7,028,954 B2
• Homogeneous charge
compression ignition (HCCI)
technology
• Joint industry testing of new
low emission, high efficient
engine for flex-fuels
• Flexible fuels from bio-diesel,
ethanol or other synthetic
fuels
44

45. Points to Consider
• Aging infrastructure – sensors and monitoring
programs, new materials, technology
• Workforce and transition management –
training, simulations, knowledge extraction
• Secure & reliable environment for a commoditize
critical infrastructure – modeling of all levels
• Un-intended consequences (land use, water,
infrastructure)
Need to develop new workforce
Lots of Opportunities = & new technologies
45

46. Making a Difference
• What will the future electricity
system look like and where will
renewable resources likely to
come from – remote locations,
out-of-state?
• What are the impacts of increasing
renewable energy penetration on Wind resource
opportunities
system reliability and dispatchability?
• UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES:
How will our landscape (land use,
water use, waste management)
change as we accommodate
renewables?
• Will the “planned” system last another
30-40 years?
• Will we change or environment as we
change?
46

47. References
• State incentives and news
– http://www.dsireusa.org/
• Global & Climate news and renewables
– http://www.pewclimate.org/what_s_being_done/in_the_states/rps.cfm
• California renewable resource information
– http://energy.ca.gov
• Other states
– Texas: http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/re_rps-portfolio.htm
– New York: http://www.dps.state.ny.us/03e0188.htm
– Hawaii: http://www.pewclimate.org/node/6695
47

48. Continue to Gain Knowledge & Understanding
Questions/Comments??
Contact Info:
Dora Nakafuji
Director of Renewable Energy Planning
dora.nakafuji@heco.com
48