 |
Inaugural Workshop
Breakout Sessions
This section summarizes the activities resulting from the topic-specific breakout sessions, including the goals, current related activities, next steps identified, the lead and the other participants. Additional details on topic activities can be accessed by linking on the session title below.
Session attendees:
Karlynn Cory (NREL)
Michael Leifman (DOE-EERE)
Lynn McLarty (TMS)
Chris Namovicz (DOE-EIA)
Phil Patterson (DOE-EERE)
Michael Reed (NETL)
Walter Short (NREL)
Richard Watson (BLM)
Carol White (FERC)
Topic clarification:
- For both topics, there are three main questions
- What level of regional detail is appropriate for national models?
- What tools/analyses are available/required to answer regional questions?
- What is the cost/benefit tradeoff of regional detail?
- Model development costs,
- Operational complexity,
- Interpretation/uncertainty of results.
- Need to separate out regionality from transmission constraints — both large topics.
Important Decision Makers Identified:
- State government, including governors and legislatures,
- Organizations that influence regional transmission organization (RTO) activities,
- Utilities,
- Generation developers,
- Industry and trade groups.
(A) Regional Technology Characterizations in Energy Models
Data needs for improving regional technology characterizations in energy models
- Resource quality — regional and local,
- Water supply,
- Emission constraints — differs by region (sometimes city),
- Better identification of siting opportunities and constraints
- Regional and local acceptance,
- Population density and land availability,
- Infrastructure — societal, political, regulatory, and incentives.
- Constraints associated with energy/fuel transportation (e.g., coal),
- More accurate demand/load profiles that include temporal resolution
- Right now, population growth is a baseline input, not a feedback into the model.
Performing energy modeling of regional technology characterizations
- Renewables have a heterogeneous resource supply (quality) and dispersion (location).
- Characterization of existing and evolving generation mix; how this impacts the regional energy value (regions with lots of coal are cheaper than if mostly natural gas).
- What level of regionality do you need in a national model? (false precision)
- What level of investment yields the specificity desired?
- To what degree do national models need to include regionality?
Collaboration process — regional characterizations
- Better data you have going in, better outputs — let's develop better data/inputs
- Issue: lots of government work is contracted out using proprietary models and much is held in the private sector, or at RTOs; how to do effective collaboration?
(B) Transmission Constraints in Energy Models
Data needs for improving transmission constraint representation in energy models -
- Accurate information and inclusion of all transmission options
- Costs and losses associated with transmission expansion,
- Accurate representation of pancaking; intra- and inter-region energy trading,
- Model reactive losses,
- Demand-side management,
- Storage,
- Plug-in hybrids (perhaps modeled as a resource, not just a drain).
- Better capture of geographical relationships between demand center, generation locations, resource locations and grid operations.
Performing energy modeling of transmission constraints
- Access to existing transmission (contractual vs. actually available; time dependency).
- Siting and cost of expanding transmission; RE limited by locality and natural gas is very flexible.
- What is the impact on grid of additional nondispatchable, variable technologies?
- Need better representation of regional flow in models.
- Need to include all transmission alternatives in models: generation, storage, demand side management as well.
- NEMS doesn't see congestion; a better understanding could address those needs in the model and can highlight options for decision makers.
Collaboration process — transmission constraints
- Restructured areas without Integrated Resource Planning need particular help in thinking about the trade-offs between transmission, generation, and other options. RTOs may be watching, but they don't have any authority to require action.
- Modeling transmission is complicated; often large transfers between regions.
- Issues with increased representation of transmission constraints
- The more granular you get, harder to see what you've got,
- Each new variable adds complexity, cost and run time.
- Coordinate disaster planning by coordinating analysis of potential disasters.
Activities decided by the group:
- Inventory existing capabilities
- Identify and inventory of existing regional models - determine what tools are available now that are required for regional questions? REMAP (renewable energy modeling analysis partnership) effort — try to assess what is available out there — NETL, NREL, states, CESA.
- Inventory capabilities of tools/capabilities, strengths, capabilities of analysis organizations — PAE, NREL, etc.
- Look at what the Lab Working Group is doing to identify a starting place for DOE.
- Determine what EPA is doing to improve MARKAL on a regional level — PAE.
- Link MARKAL with the REMI (local detailed economic model) — for RGGI states? "Economic geography model,"
- Supporting (data) to the RGGI states — using MARKAL to do analysis,
- Effort in research triangle park to link environmental pollutant work through a MARKAL model on a regional basis.
- GEMSET as a model; to utilize it as a tool — NETL is willing to lead.
- GIS tool — dedicated core group of people; emergency services, disaster planning. If a hurricane does this much damage, what are the energy impacts on that area — create maps and see geography, overlay pipeline, etc. can characterize what is, but can do geographic analysis of where the wind areas are, transmission is, etc. — NETL.
- Share existing data, if possible
- Find a means by which we can share our GIS databases (although some are proprietary); might not be able to do this, unless multiple entities purchase it together (change contract process). Perhaps they could purchase together. Darrell would like to use GIS for target customers.
- Examine regionality and transmission improvements in existing models
- NREL and NETL will examine value of incorporating regionality into SEDS for purpose of sensitivity analyses. Additional effort: There could be a collaboration to look at regionality to SEDS — goal to have it turn around in 10 minutes and not three days. Do a sensitivity analysis to see what level of regionality makes sense.
- Investigate whether NEMS should represent NERC regions or RTOs. EIA — electricity regions; considering using NERC based regions or RTO regions? What data changes would you need to make to do this in NEMS? Is it worth going from an NERC region to an RTO region — DOE/EIA, NREL, NETL, FERC.
- Use of existing transmission lines — how best to capture that in these models. NREL.
- Calibrate between models
- Sensitivity analyses within a model and across models. EX SEDS — Michael Reed is getting trained on Analytica to learn how to do SEDS (one region model). He will take on an exploration of sensitivity — which variables does it make sense to put uncertainty ranges around? REMAP effort with respect to RPS (NETL)
|
|
