Upload
cullen-tanner
View
29
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Houston Area Dynamic Reactive Project March 11, 2011. Background. Houston area becomes high import area in 2002 NRG (formally Texas Genco ) retires 3800 MW in early 2005 Dynamic reactive support lost - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Houston Area Dynamic Reactive Project
March 11, 2011
1
Background
Houston area becomes high import area in 2002 NRG (formally Texas Genco) retires 3800 MW in early 2005 Dynamic reactive support lost Houston imports 25% or more of load requirement from resources
external to the CenterPoint Energy footprint
Local dynamic reactive supply has declined• More vulnerable to voltage collapse• Houston’s high concentration of residential air conditioning load makes the
situation worse• Load continues to grow
2
3
With units on-line With units off(Voltage Collapse)
3-phase fault with delayed clearing
Effect of Retiring 3800MW of Local Generation
Steps Taken to Address Voltage Stability Concerns
Under voltage load shedding (UVLS) scheme at CenterPoint Energy completed in 2005
Participation in EPRI load modeling efforts 2004-2010 More than 1550 MVAR of capacitor banks added to the
transmission system since 2005 Houston Area Constraint Mitigation projects
STP – Hillje – WAP circuits Singleton and Zenith substations Fayetteville – Zenith circuits
Installed a total of 280 MVAR of dynamic reactive compensation in 2008 TSC’s at Bellaire and Crosby 140 MVAR each
4
Recent and Future system developments
Received Notices of Suspension of Operations for approximately 900 MW of generation (~470 MVAR of total continuous reactive capability) within the past year
2014 maximum Houston import UPLAN dispatched case with recently approved transmission projects shows an additional 1800 MW of local Houston area generation offline.
ERCOT’s December 2010 Long-Term System Assessment Report highlights the need for additional supply of local dynamic reactive power and “will conduct further analysis of these potential reactive needs in cooperation with the transmission service provider for the Houston area”
5
Houston Dynamic Reactive Study
Dynamic analysis is required to determine proper dynamic reactive compensation solution 2013 Summer Peak base case UPLAN Generation Dispatch provided by ERCOT
Dynamic analysis requirements Detailed generator models, complex load models including induction
motors, UVLS models, and Over-excitation limiter models Disturbance studied: 3-phase fault cleared by breaker failure
relaying taking two elements out of service• NERC Category D• No more than 1250 MW of UVLS should be lost - Reserve a portion of
UVLS as safety net due to modeling uncertainties and avoid over-frequency excursions
• Transmission system voltages must recover so that no generator terminal voltage remains below 90% of rated voltage for more than 10 seconds.
6
Study methodology
Contingency Screening Time domain contingency screening to determine worst case event Contingency #58 proved to be the worst case event leading to Fault-
Induced Delayed Voltage Recovery violating both aspects of the performance criteria
Load modeling sensitivities Various types of load models were considered including large, small,
and air conditioning motor models Load model sensitivity analysis also includes a variation of the motor
model parameters Load Model #1 – represents large and small motors with
conventional induction motor models Provided more reasonable and realistic results Development research for Load Model #2 is still ongoing
7
Houston Dynamic Reactive Study
8
Load Model #1 - 2013 Base CaseResults in 5185 MW of UVLS Eight local generator terminal voltages do not recover to 90% voltage within 10 seconds
Voltage Recovery Solutions
Dynamic reactive device technologies considered STATCOM STATCOM with Overload Capability SVC TSC
Additional option to package each technology with an additional Mechanically Switched Fixed Capacitor
Dynamic models of distinct characteristics of each technology were included
Primarily concerned with capacitive compensation to satisfy performance requirements
9
Location Considerations
10
2008 Installations
New Proposed Installations
Dynamic Reactive Projects
ROTHWOOD
ZENITH
ADDICKS BELLAIRE
CROSBY
Required Dynamic Reactive Devices Ratings
11
Type of Dynamic Reactive Device
Addicks & Rothwood Addicks & Zenith
MVAR capacitive output of each
device measured at High side voltage
Resulting MW Load Shed
MVAR capacitive output of each
device measured at High side voltage
Resulting MW Load Shed
STATCOM OC Short-term rating 371
1190347
855Continuous rating 139 130
STATCOM OC w/140 MVAR FC
Short-term rating 2781232
278754
Continuous rating 104 104
STATCOM 383 783 360 783
STATCOM w/140 MVAR FC 293 783 270 1185
SVC 518 1232 518 1148
SVC w/140 MVAR FC 428 1157 428 783
TSC 540 1061 540 783
System voltage recovery with SVC Example
12
System voltage response with addition of 518 MVAR SVC
Results in 1148 MW of UVLS All local generator terminal voltages recover to 90% voltage within 10 seconds
Proposed Schedule
February 2011: Project submitted for RPG comments
March – May 2011: ERCOT Independent Review
June 2011: Bid package and specification released to vendors
February 2012: Award contract to vendor
2nd Quarter 2014: Complete Commissioning
13
Summary
Houston area in need of dynamic reactive support due to generation retirements, increased imports, and load growth
CenterPoint studies showed a need for 350 – 550 MVAR of dynamic reactive compensation at two sites each in order to satisfy performance criteria
Final amount of reactive compensation will be dependent on technology type and vender bids.
Estimated cost is $125 million Estimated completion date in 2nd Quarter 2014
14