C.Central Region
Many participants in the Central Region conference stated that gas-electric coordination in the region is not currently a problem. However, a representative of MISO suggested that this could change in 2013-2015 when it expects approximately 30,000 MW of coal-fired generation to either be retired or taken off line for retrofits to meet emissions standards over the 2012-2015 period. MISO’s representative anticipates this will result in a greater reliance upon gas-fired generators, and said that it is particularly concerned about the unavailability of coal units during the December – April period, when natural gas demand is highest.
Participants came down on all sides of the gas-electric scheduling question. Some suggested that both markets would benefit if the market schedules were more aligned: if the electric market cleared earlier in the day and the timely (first) gas nomination cycle occurred later in the day, market participants would be able to make gas supply arrangements at a time when the natural gas market is more liquid, based upon knowing earlier which generation plants were going to run. Others asserted that the earlier day-ahead electric commitments are made, the less accurate the load and price forecasts become. Some firm gas pipeline shippers expressed concern about the impact of increased gas-fired generation upon the quality of their firm pipeline services. Suggestions to improve gas pipeline flexibility include revisiting the “no-bump” rule and making intra-day capacity release more flexible. A few shippers noted what they
described as the high quality and flexibility of their pipeline transportation services. One pipeline representative expressed a willingness to continue to create flexible services for customers, including offering short-term capacity and volumetric rates.
Participants generally reported that there is little direct communication between the pipelines and electric system operators in this region. Many participants asserted that responsibility for information-sharing lies with the generator, and that generators should be responsible for communicating and sharing outage, capacity, and expected gas burn information with both the pipelines and the RTOs/ISOs. Several participants suggested that information sharing could be improved by having RTOs/ISOs provide the gas pipelines with hourly generator commitments, so that pipelines would know in advance which gas-fired generators are likely to run. Many expressed concern, however, about the market sensitivity and the potential for violations of the Commission’s regulations prohibiting undue discrimination or preference associated with sharing such information. They suggested that adequate protections would need to be in place to ensure such information was confined only to operating personnel and not shared with marketing departments.
Another example identified at this conference was gas-electric communications during emergencies and peak demand situations. While generators often provide the pipelines with a day-ahead hourly burn profiles as required by NAESB gas-electric business standards,15 pipelines suggested more real-time information would also be useful, especially during electric contingencies that could affect gas facilities such as electric compression, production or storage. Again, concerns were raised about violating the Commission’s regulations against anti-competitive conduct.
Addressing reliability concerns, it was suggested that entities responsible for resource adequacy should evaluate fuel availability in their loss of load probability (LOLP) studies for both winter and summer planning. MISO’s representative suggested that this could be accomplished by including unavailability due to lack of fuel in the generators’ forced outage rate. However, there was concern expressed that the forced outage rates are historical and do not reflect the expected unavailability due to increases in capacity factors of gas-fired generation.
Central Regional Initiatives
A representative of MISO noted that it is continuing to refine and update an October 2011 study,16 which looked at whether current generation capacity is sufficient given planned coal plant retirements and planned retrofit outages expected in the 2013-2015 period. MISO’s representative committed to working with the pipelines that serve the generators in its control area and obtaining a more definitive planned outage/maintenance schedule from coal-fired generation as they move into the 2013-2015 time period. In addition, he noted that MISO recently formed a task force to work on general gas-electric coordination issues.17
A representative of ERCOT suggested it could act as a host for tabletop exercises for RTOs/ISOs and pipelines to review emergency procedures and discuss communication issues and risks on the bulk power and natural gas systems.
Many participants in the Central Region conference stated that gas-electric coordination in the region is not currently a problem. However, a representative of MISO suggested that this could change in 2013-2015 when it expects approximately 30,000 MW of coal-fired generation to either be retired or taken off line for retrofits to meet emissions standards over the 2012-2015 period. MISO’s representative anticipates this will result in a greater reliance upon gas-fired generators, and said that it is particularly concerned about the unavailability of coal units during the December – April period, when natural gas demand is highest.Participants came down on all sides of the gas-electric scheduling question. Some suggested that both markets would benefit if the market schedules were more aligned: if the electric market cleared earlier in the day and the timely (first) gas nomination cycle occurred later in the day, market participants would be able to make gas supply arrangements at a time when the natural gas market is more liquid, based upon knowing earlier which generation plants were going to run. Others asserted that the earlier day-ahead electric commitments are made, the less accurate the load and price forecasts become. Some firm gas pipeline shippers expressed concern about the impact of increased gas-fired generation upon the quality of their firm pipeline services. Suggestions to improve gas pipeline flexibility include revisiting the “no-bump” rule and making intra-day capacity release more flexible. A few shippers noted what they
described as the high quality and flexibility of their pipeline transportation services. One pipeline representative expressed a willingness to continue to create flexible services for customers, including offering short-term capacity and volumetric rates.
Participants generally reported that there is little direct communication between the pipelines and electric system operators in this region. Many participants asserted that responsibility for information-sharing lies with the generator, and that generators should be responsible for communicating and sharing outage, capacity, and expected gas burn information with both the pipelines and the RTOs/ISOs. Several participants suggested that information sharing could be improved by having RTOs/ISOs provide the gas pipelines with hourly generator commitments, so that pipelines would know in advance which gas-fired generators are likely to run. Many expressed concern, however, about the market sensitivity and the potential for violations of the Commission’s regulations prohibiting undue discrimination or preference associated with sharing such information. They suggested that adequate protections would need to be in place to ensure such information was confined only to operating personnel and not shared with marketing departments.
Another example identified at this conference was gas-electric communications during emergencies and peak demand situations. While generators often provide the pipelines with a day-ahead hourly burn profiles as required by NAESB gas-electric business standards,15 pipelines suggested more real-time information would also be useful, especially during electric contingencies that could affect gas facilities such as electric compression, production or storage. Again, concerns were raised about violating the Commission’s regulations against anti-competitive conduct.
Addressing reliability concerns, it was suggested that entities responsible for resource adequacy should evaluate fuel availability in their loss of load probability (LOLP) studies for both winter and summer planning. MISO’s representative suggested that this could be accomplished by including unavailability due to lack of fuel in the generators’ forced outage rate. However, there was concern expressed that the forced outage rates are historical and do not reflect the expected unavailability due to increases in capacity factors of gas-fired generation.
Central Regional Initiatives
A representative of MISO noted that it is continuing to refine and update an October 2011 study,16 which looked at whether current generation capacity is sufficient given planned coal plant retirements and planned retrofit outages expected in the 2013-2015 period. MISO’s representative committed to working with the pipelines that serve the generators in its control area and obtaining a more definitive planned outage/maintenance schedule from coal-fired generation as they move into the 2013-2015 time period. In addition, he noted that MISO recently formed a task force to work on general gas-electric coordination issues.17
A representative of ERCOT suggested it could act as a host for tabletop exercises for RTOs/ISOs and pipelines to review emergency procedures and discuss communication issues and risks on the bulk power and natural gas systems.
0 comments: