2016 OMS MISO Survey Results

Transcription

1 Page: 1 of OMS MISO Survey Results Furthering our joint commitment to regional resource assessment and transparency in the MISO region, OMS and MISO are pleased to announce the results of the 2016 OMS MISO Survey June 2016

2 OMS MISO Survey Executive Summary Page: 2 of 13 MISO Region is projected to have adequate resources to meet its Planning Reserve Requirement for 2017; additional action will be needed to ensure sufficient resources are available going forward For 2017, The region has 2.7 GW (2.2%) in excess of the projected resource requirement Recent publicly announced retirements decrease this excess to 0.9 GW (0.7%) Several zones are below their resource requirement and will rely on imports Demand has shrunk due to reduced forecasts and point load reductions Supply has declined due to plant retirements in excess of new resource additions Beyond 2017, Continued resource adequacy will depend on uncommitted resources or resources with potential retirements Continued commitment to firming up planned generation interconnections through the MISO process will also be required This outlook depends heavily on load projections; current forecasts of modest load growth are not in line with recent history of flat year-to-year loads 1

3 Understanding Resource Adequacy Requirements Page: 3 of 13 Load serving entities within each zone must have sufficient committed resources to meet load and required reserves Uncommitted resources may be used by load serving entities with resource shortages to meet reserve requirements 2

4 Understanding Resource Availability Page: 4 of 13 High Certainty Resources are committed to serving MISO load Resources within the rate base of MISO utilities New generators with signed interconnection agreements External resources with firm contracts to MISO load Low Certainty Resources may be available to serve MISO load but do not have any firm commitments to do so Most of these resources are potential retirements or suspensions Unavailable resources are not included in the survey totals Resources with firm commitments to non-miso load Units with finalized retirements or suspensions Potential new generators without a signed Generator Interconnection Agreement 3

5 In 2017, modest excess capacity is projected to address zonal deficits Page: 5 of Outlook, ICAP GW (% Reserves) 2.7 (17.4%) Projected Capacity against Reserve Requirement* (ICAP GW) (15.9%) to to to 1.5 Low Certainty Resource Impact on Surplus / Deficit Surplus / Deficit with High Certainty Resources Shading represents total low certainty resources when there is a deficit of high certainty resources MN, MT, ND, SD, West WI East WI and Upper MI 1.2 IA IL MO IN and KY Lower MI AR LA and TX 10 MS *Positions include reported inter zonal transfers Publicly announced potential retirements as of June 1, 2016 were included as low certainty resources Exports from Zone 1 were limited by the zone s Capacity Export Limit to 0.6 GW Exports from Zone 8, 9, and 10 were limited by the Subregional Power Balance Constraint to 0.98 GW 4 One day in ten PRM (15.2%)

6 For 2017, all projected capacity is not available to serve load outside of its zone due to transfer limitations Page: 6 of High Certainty Resources Available to Support Other Zones (ICAP) 0.6 GW 0.2 GW 0.9 GW 0.3 GW 0.6 GW 0.8 GW 1.2 GW 0.98 GW Transfer Limited Capacity Projected surplus Projected deficit 5

7 The 2017 results show the impacts of potential or actual generation retirements, as well as changes in load 2017 Outlook Comparison of High Certainty Resources In GW (ICAP) Page: 7 of Forecasted Regional Surplus: 2015 OMS MISO Survey Point Load Reductions Forecasted Load Reductions Increase in Reserve Requirement (Average Forced Outage Rate Increase) Increase In New Resources Decrease in High Certainty Resources (Confirmed and potential retirements) Forecasted Regional Surplus: 2016 OMS MISO Survey 6

8 Action is required in the near term to ensure sufficient resources in future years Projected Capacity Position in ICAP GW (% Reserves) 2.7 (17.4%) 2.2 (16.9%) 2.5 (17.1%) Page: 8 of 13 Low Certainty Resource Impact on Surplus / Deficit Surplus / Deficit with High Certainty Resources Shading represents total low certainty resources when there is a deficit of high certainty resources (15.9%) (16.1%) (15.5%) (14.9%) 0.5 (14.8%) 1.9 (13.8%) 2.6 (13.2%) Regional outlook includes projected constraints on capacity, including Capacity Export Limits and the Subregional Power Balancing Constraint Resources with publicly announced potential retirements or suspensions as of June 1, 2016 were counted as low certainty. These figures will change as future capacity plans are solidified by load serving entities and state commissions. 7 1 day in 10 PRM (15.2%)

9 2021 Capacity Projections Page: 9 of Outlook, ICAP GW (% Reserves) (15.5 %) Projected Capacity against Reserve Requirement* (ICAP GW) (13.2 %) Low Certainty Resource Impact on Surplus / Deficit Surplus / Deficit with High Certainty Resources Shading represents total low certainty resources when there is a deficit of high certainty resources MN, MT, ND, SD, West WI 0.3 East WI and Upper MI to 0.3 IA IL MO IN and KY 0.6 Lower MI to to 1.4 AR LA and TX 10 MS *Positions include reported inter zonal transfers Publicly announced potential retirements as of June 1, 2016 were included as low certainty resources Exports from Zone 8, 9, and 10 were limited by the Subregional Power Balance Constraint to 1.5 GW 8 One day in ten PRM (15.2%)

10 Continued commitment to firming up planned generation interconnections through the MISO process will be required Page: 10 of 13 Potential Generation Additions, in GW* 2021 Capacity against Reserve Requirement LRZ 1 LRZ 2 LRZ 3 LRZ 4 LRZ 5 LRZ 6 LRZ 7 LRZ 8 LRZ 9 LRZ Regional High Certainty Balance Not yet submitted (not included in available capacity) Preliminary studies (not included in available capacity) Final studies (not included in available capacity) Signed agreements (included in available capacity) *Wind and solar resources are represented at their expected capacity credit 9

11 OMS MISO Survey Executive Summary Page: 11 of 13 MISO Region is projected to have adequate resources to meet its Planning Reserve Requirement for 2017; additional action will be needed to ensure sufficient resources are available going forward For 2017, The region has 2.7 GW (2.2%) in excess of the projected resource requirement Recent publicly announced retirements decrease this excess to 0.9 GW (0.7%) Several zones are below their resource requirement and will rely on imports Demand has shrunk due to reduced forecasts and point load reductions Supply has declined due to plant retirements in excess of new resource additions Beyond 2017, Continued resource adequacy will depend on uncommitted resources or resources with potential retirements Continued commitment to firming up planned generation interconnections through the MISO queue process will also be required This outlook depends heavily on load projections; current forecasts of modest load growth are not in line with recent history of flat year-to-year loads 10

12 Appendix Page: 12 of 13 11

13 Survey Improvements Page: 13 of 13 Documentation and survey format Survey documentation created and reviewed with stakeholders Improvements made to format of the survey requests and the resulting balance sheet to reduce the burden on respondents Data collection Surveys sent to Load Serving Entities and Independent Power Producers Load forecasts were aligned with the load submissions used in the most recent Planning Resource Auction Post-Processing Separation of Zone 4 and Zone 5 results Aligned survey results with publically announced potential suspensions and retirements 12

14 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company Updated MISO Region Capacity View Schedule: R2 Years Surplus/(Shortfall) Page: 1 of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Line Planning Year No. 2018/ / / /22 1 OMS-MISO Survey Results MW (400) (500) (1,900) (2,600) 2 3 Illinois Nuclear Generation MW 1,530 1,530 1,530 1, Palisades Retirement MW (820) (820) (820) (820) 6 7 Total MW (1,190) (1,890)

15 Michigan Public Service Commission Case. No.: U DTE Electric Company MISO 2016/2017 Planning Resource Auction Results Schedule: R3 Page: 1 of 1

16 Michigan Public Service Commission Case. No.: U DTE Electric Company MISO 2017/2018 Preliminary Planning Resource Auction Data Schedule: R4 Page: 1 of 1

17 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company MISO Zone 7 Capacity Projections PY18-PY21 Schedule: R5 Years Page: 1 of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Line Planning Year No. 2018/ / / /22 1 Zone 7 Planning Reserve Margin Requirement (PRMR) MW 22,511 22,636 22,647 22, Zone 7 Local Clearing Requirement (LCR) MW 21,286 21,274 21,286 21, Zone 7 Planning Resources (From U-17992, Adjusted for DTE Changes) MW 21,773 22,158 21,974 22, Palisades Retirement (UCAP, using Class-Average EFORd) MW (753) (753) (753) (753) 8 9 Zone 7 Position to PRMR MW (1,490) (1,231) (1,426) (1,199) Zone 7 Position to LCR MW (266) 131 (64) 179

18 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company DTE Electric Capacity Position Projection PY18-PY21 Schedule: R6 Years Page: 1 of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Line Planning Year No. 2018/ / / /22 1 MISO Planning Reserve Margin Requirement (PRMR) MW 10,794 10,769 10,745 10, DTE Planning Resources MW 10,541 10,839 10,773 11, DTE Net Position Surplus/(Shortfall) MW (253)

19 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company Capacity Queue Example Schedule: R7 Page: 1 of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) Line No. Customer Load Return Date 6/1/18-5/31/19 6/1/19-5/31/20 6/1/20-5/31/21 Planning Year 2018/19 Planning Year 2019/20 Planning Year 2020/21 Excess Capacity Customer Status Excess Capacity Customer Status Excess Capacity Customer Status 0 Firm Date 6/1/18 50 Firm Date 6/1/ Firm Date 6/1/20 1 A 25 8/1/2017 Int. Firm 2 B 10 9/15/2017 Int. Firm 3 C 30 10/10/2017 Int. Firm/Int. 4 D 80 12/15/2017 Int. Int. Firm 5 E 75 2/3/2018 Int. Int. Firm 6 F 25 8/10/2017 Int. Int. Firm 7 Returning G 50 12/5/2017 Int. Int. Firm 8 Capacity H 40 12/8/2017 Int. Int. Firm/Int. 9 Queue I 30 6/2/2018 Int. Int. Int. 10 J 150 6/3/2018 Int. Int. Int. 11 K 20 6/5/2018 Int. Int. Int. 12 L 20 8/1/2018 Int. Int. Int. 13 M 10 10/1/2018 Int. Int. Int. 14 N 5 10/11/2018 Int. Int. Int. 15 O 50 12/1/2018 Int. Int. Int.

20 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company Projected 2017 PURPA Capacity-Related Generation Cost Schedule: R8 Page: 1 of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Line No. Description Gen Forecast Contract Fixed Price Component Contract O&M Price Component Total Capacity Related Generation Cost (MWh) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) ($1,000) 1 PURPA/PA2 Contracts 2 Ann Arbor - Barton Dam 5, Ann Arbor - Superior 2, STS French Landing 7, Charter Township of Ypsilanti - Ford Lake (JYRO) 8, BFI - Arbor Hills 124, ,065 7 EQ Waste Energy Services (Wayne Energy) 4, Greater Detroit RRA 237, ,626 9 Ann Arbor Landfill, Michigan Cogen. Sys. 3, Riverview Energy #1 39, , Sumpter Energy Assoc. - City Sand and Carleton Farms 89, , Sumpter Energy Assoc. - Pine Tree Acres Landfill 71, , Total PURPA/PA2 593,951 23,833

21 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company Projected 2017 PA295 Capacity-Related Generation Cost Schedule: R9 Page: 1 of 1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) Line No. Description Gen Forecast LCOE/ Contract Price Transfer Price Price Recovered in PSCR Variable/Fuel Price Fixed/Capacity Price Total Capacity- Related Generation Cost (MWh) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) ($1,000) 1 Renewable - Company Owned 2 Gratiot 2 267, ,276 3 Minden 117, ,821 4 Sigel 235, ,643 5 McKinley 52, ,520 6 Echo 406, ,792 7 Brookfield 274, ,228 8 Pinnebog 183, ,023 9 DTE Solar Currents 16,373 N/A , Romulus/Brownstown Solar 1,414 N/A Demille/Turrill/O'Shea Solar 87, , Total Renewable - Company Owned 1,643, , Renewable - PPA Wind 16 Heritage - SC/Garden 85, , Invenergy - Gratiot 1 297, , NextEra - Tuscola Bay 398, , NextEra - Tuscola Wind II 323, , NextEra - Pheasant Run 285, , Heritage - Big Turtle 78, , Total PPA Wind 1,469,656 91, Renewable - PPA LFG/Biomass 26 L'Anse Warden 111, , Blue Water Renewables 18, , Waste Management 24, , Total PPA LFG/Biomass 154,971 12, Total PA295 Capacity-Related Generation Cost 212,988

22 Michigan Public Service Commission DTE Electric Company Projected 2017 Capacity-Related Generation Cost 0 & Energy Sales Revenue Net of Fuel Cost Page: 1 of 1 (a) Line No. Description ($000) 1 Capacity-Related Generation Cost 2 PURPA/PA2 Contracts - $1,000 $ 23,833 3 PA295 Renewable - Company Owned - $1, ,441 4 PA295 Renewable - PPA Wind - $1,000 91,768 5 PA295 Renewable - PPA LFG/Biomass - $1,000 12,779 6 Capacity Purchases - $1,000-7 Total Capacity-Related Generation Costs in 2017 PSCR - $1,000 $ 236, Energy Sales Revenue 11 Total Projected 2017 Energy Sales - GWh 3, Projected 2017 Energy Market Sales (U Exhibit A-6) - $1,000 $ 110, Projected 2017 Off-System Energy Sales - $1, Projected 2017 Unit Specific Bilateral Energy Sales - $1, Projected 2017 Regulation, Spinning, and Supplemental Ancillary Services Sales (U-18143) - $1, Projected 2017 Schedule 2 Reactive Ancillary Services Revenue (U-18143) - $1,000 1, Total Projected 2017 Energy Sales Revenue - $1,000 $ 111, Fuel Related Cost 21 Fuel (U Exhibit A-3) - $1,000 $ 800, Emission Allowances (U Exhibit A-3) - $1, Chemical Costs (U Exhibit A-3) - $1,000 29, Total Projected 2017 Fuel & Fuel Related Generation Cost - $1,000 $ 829, Projected 2017 Generation - GWh 41, Projected 2017 Generation Fuel Price - $/MWh (Line 24 Line 25) $ Projected 2017 Energy Sales Fuel Cost - $1,000 (Line 11 * Line 26) $ 67, Schedule 17 Administrative Service Cost for Energy Sales $ Projected Energy Sales Revenue Net of Projected Fuel Costs (Line 17 - Line 28 - Line 30) $ 43,949 (b)