SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Nodal Insights for Generation Owners and Modeling with AURORAxmp

EPIS Inc, profile picture
EPIS Inc

The document discusses the electric market forecasting, specifically focusing on the PJM congestion and the factors influencing hub and zonal prices, such as shift factors and marginal losses. It highlights the top constraints contributing to the projected 2015 PJM congestion and provides insights into the system topology and pricing dynamics across different zones. Additionally, it emphasizes the complexities of power flow in the PJM region and the role individual generators play in congestion management.

Technology
1 of 19
Downloaded 16 times
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 1 NODAL INSIGHTS 2014 Electric Market Forecasting Conference September 17-19, 2014
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 2 Overview Nodal Background • Constraints -- $ matter • What’s in a Hub price? What’s in a Zonal price? Shift Factors and Congestion Pricing Considerations • Congestion • Marginal Losses Nodal vs. Zonal – the role of Interregional and Local Constraints
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 3 Four constraints account for 50+% of projected 2015 PJM congestion ______________________________ Source: PJM Market Efficiency Analysis Base Congestion Results 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 4 Two of the top four constraints are M2M Source: PJM Market Efficiency Analysis Base Congestion Results Facility Name Area Constraint Type Frequency (Hours) Market Congestion ($ Millions) Share of 2015 Congestion (%) Cumulative 2015 Congestion (%) AP SOUTH L/O BED-BLA PJM INTERFACE 1,627 103.6 17% 17% Monticello to East Winamac 138 kV M2M LINE 2,569 99.0 17% 34% Oak Grove to Galesburg 161 kV M2M LINE 3,281 60.0 10% 44% Cloverdale to Lexington 500 kV AEP - DVP LINE 631 37.0 6% 51% Elliot to Elliot 138 kV AEP LINE 338 30.0 5% 56% AEP-DOM L/O BED-BLA PJM INTERFACE 706 26.7 5% 60% Graceton to BAGLEY 230 kV BGE LINE 826 22.0 4% 64% Miami Fort to Willey 138 kV DEO&K LINE 310 20.0 3% 67% Braidwood to East Frankfort 345 kV CE LINE 147 18.0 3% 70% Hunterstown 230 kV ME XFMR 254 18.0 3% 73% Dravosburg to West Mifflin 138 kV DLCO LINE 1,275 14.4 2% 76% Tiltonsville to Windsor 138 kV AP - AEP LINE 36 12.4 2% 78% Wurno to Claytor Lake 138 kV AEP LINE 84 11.0 2% 80% Cordova to Nelson 345 kV CE LINE 333 9.9 2% 81% Belvidere to Marengo Tap 138 kV CE LINE 227 8.0 1% 83% WESTERN INTERFACE PJM INTERFACE 257 7.1 1% 84% CENTRAL INTERFACE PJM INTERFACE 658 6.6 1% 85% 6EDFERRY to Dickerson Station "D" 230 kV PEPCO - DVP LINE 39 6.3 1% 86% Hennepin to Hennepin 138 kV M2M LINE 570 5.9 1% 87% Kewanee to E D Edwards 138 kV M2M LINE 298 5.9 1% 88% Cherry Valley to Cherry Valley 138 kV CE LINE 119 5.3 1% 89% Woodville to 15USAP 138 kV DLCO LINE 449 5.0 1% 90% 2014 Market Efficiency Analysis Base Congestion Results: 2015 System Topology
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 5 PJM East Hub – it may not be what you think ISO hubs typically consist of numerous individual nodes. Nodes can be geographically and electrically diverse, making it difficult to isolate the impact of individual transmission constraints. • PJM East consists of 216 individual nodes • 84% of the nodes are load nodes • 49% of the nodes are located in the Delmarva area • 92% are located in PECO and Delmarva Transmission Zone EHV GEN LOAD Total % Total AECO 1 1 0% DPL 14 99 113 49% JCPL 1 1 0% PECO 17 81 98 43% PPL 1 1 0% PSEG 1 4 10 15 7% Total 1 36 192 229 100% % Total 0% 16% 84% 100% Bus Type PJM East Hub Definition
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 6 Load buses dominate the composition of PJM Hub definitions Hub Total Buses EHV GEN LOAD Total AEP GEN HUB 39 100% 100% AEP-DAYTON HUB 1108 11% 89% 100% ATSI GEN HUB 64 100% 100% CHICAGO GEN HUB 131 100% 100% CHICAGO HUB 190 5% 95% 100% DOMINION HUB 626 12% 88% 100% EASTERN HUB 216 0% 15% 84% 100% N ILLINOIS HUB 219 11% 89% 100% NEW JERSEY HUB 367 100% 100% OHIO HUB 761 4% 96% 100% WESTERN HUB 99 4% 27% 69% 100%
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 7 Pricing in the PECO zone: Congestion and Marginal Losses
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 8 While average losses basis differentials can be larger than congestion basis differentials, variation in congestion basis differentials is an order of magnitude greater. Liberty Basis Basis Component Year* Average Basis ($/MWh) Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation 2009 (1.48) 1.69 114 2010 (2.56) 5.74 224 2011 (1.66) 2.82 170 2012 (2.98) 4.69 157 2009 (1.25) 0.80 64 2010 (1.60) 1.22 76 2011 (1.52) 1.17 77 2012 (1.46) 0.74 51 2009 (0.23) 1.26 544 2010 (0.96) 5.15 538 2011 (0.14) 2.48 1,782 2012 (1.53) 4.46 293 2009 (0.31) 0.34 110 2010 (0.90) 5.52 616 2011 (0.36) 2.21 611 2012 (0.22) 0.25 112 2009 (0.37) 0.28 75 2010 (0.45) 0.43 95 2011 (0.31) 0.40 127 2012 (0.24) 0.12 51 2009 0.06 0.23 410 2010 (0.44) 5.32 1,198 2011 (0.05) 2.09 4,192 2012 0.02 0.22 1,321 * 2012 values for the period through 3/31/2012 Variation in Basis Differentials LibertyBasistoPECOZone Total LMP Basis Loss Basis Congestion Basis Total LMP Basis Loss Basis Congestion Basis LibertyBasistoPJMEastHubUnitBasistoPECOZoneUnitBasistoPJMEastHub
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 9 Shift factors represent the change in power flow on a line when an injection is made at one bus and a corresponding change in withdrawal is made at the reference bus Shift factors are calculated for a specific system topology. Shift factors change when the topology changes or line impedance changes. Shift factors do not change if the injection/withdrawal amount increases for any set of locations. Source: CAISO
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 10 Generators that drive flows on the Eddystone-Island Road Constraint Unit(s) S.F. Description Eddystone 3 .252 380 MW oil/gas-fired steam (Exelon Generating) Eddystone CT .250 (4) 18-20 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Eddystone 4 .247 380 MW oil/gas-fired steam (Exelon Generating) Liberty CC .231 540 MW gas-fired CC (Equipower Resources) Marcus Hook .139 808 MW gas-fired CC (NextEra Energy) Hay Road 4 .116 182 MW gas-fired CT (Calpine) Edge Moor 5 .116 445 MW oil/gas-fired steam (Calpine) Hay Road 1, 3 .088 (2) 121 MW gas-fired CT (Calpine) Edge Moor 3, 4 .088 86 MW and 174 MW gas-fired steam (Calpine) Units that Increase Congestion on the Eddystone–Island Road Constraint Unit(s) S.F. Description Southwark -.175 (4) 18 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generation) Schuylkill CT -.170 (2) 18 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generation) Grays Ferry Cogeneration -.167 150 MW gas-fired CC (Veolia Environnement S.A.) Schuylkill -.164 175 MW oil-fired steam (Exelon Generation) Delaware CT -.100 (4) 18 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Richmond -.058 (2) 65 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Fairless Works -.036 (2) 680 MW gas-fired CCs (Dominion) Croydon -.035 (8) 60 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Burlington GT -.035 (13) mostly 40-50 MW oil/gas-fired CTs (PSEG) Limerick 1 -.025 1190 MW nuclear (Exelon Generating) Limerick 2 -.018 1190 MW nuclear (Exelon Generating) Units that offset Congestion on the Eddystone–Island Road Constraint
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 11 Pricing across PJM reflects local and broader regional constraints Western Hub AEP – Dayton Hub NI Hub
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 12 Generators competing for west to east transfer across Black Oak – Beddington Unit/Bus Area Shift Factor Capacity at Node (MW) Potential Impact on Constraint % of Potential Impact Cum % Potential Impact Hatfield AP 0.115 1,550 178 9.6% 9.6% 02MNFDG3 FE 0.033 2,682 88 4.7% 14.3% Harrison AP 0.040 1,901 76 4.1% 18.4% Fort Martin AP 0.066 1,072 71 3.8% 22.2% Sammis FE 0.032 1,925 62 3.3% 25.5% 15BVRVL1 DLCO 0.033 1,866 62 3.3% 28.9% 05GVG1 AEP 0.017 2,620 45 2.4% 31.3% 05RKG2 AEP 0.014 3,095 42 2.3% 33.5% KEYS G2 PJM 0.024 1,642 40 2.1% 35.7% 05CDG3 AEP 0.032 1,215 39 2.1% 37.7% 01PLEAS1 AP 0.031 1,222 38 2.0% 39.8% Twin Ridges AP 0.183 200 37 2.0% 41.7% 02CALPG2 FE 0.022 1,633 36 1.9% 43.7% Warrior Run AP 0.200 176 35 1.9% 45.6% 09STUART DAY 0.015 2,255 34 1.8% 47.4% 02PERRG1 FE 0.026 1,281 33 1.8% 49.2% 05CVG4 AEP 0.020 1,580 32 1.7% 50.9%
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 13 The broader regional transmission system will be improved if/when the Byron to Wayne 345 kV line is added Transmission flows across ComEd are generally west-to- east and are limited by the constraints involving the two large 345 kV lines, and its interaction with the underlying 138 kV system.
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 14 Shift factors differ substantially, even for units located geographically close together AEP PJM Contingent Branch Monitored Element From Area To Area All Gen: Max - Min Gen in ComEd Zone: Max - Min Gavin Wauk Byron Dresden Kincaid Zion Keystn CHERRY VA; R_SILVER LK; R NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE 0.207 0.207 0.000 0.091 0.119 (0.016) 0.000 (0.088) 0.000 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.242 0.190 0.023 (0.132) (0.120) (0.137) (0.079) (0.132) 0.023 NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE 0.180 0.180 0.000 0.098 0.077 (0.014) 0.000 (0.082) 0.000 NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.179 0.176 0.013 (0.075) (0.068) (0.076) (0.043) (0.076) 0.013 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE 0.152 0.089 (0.018) 0.110 0.100 0.113 0.065 0.110 (0.018) GARFIELD ; R_To_TAYLOR ; R CE CE 0.077 0.077 0.007 (0.027) (0.022) (0.023) (0.008) (0.027) 0.007 NERC_FG_ID_3222 E FRANKFO; R_To_E FRxmid CE CE 0.074 0.074 0.002 (0.016) (0.012) (0.024) (0.008) (0.016) 0.002 NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE 0.097 0.074 (0.010) 0.065 0.058 0.064 0.036 0.065 (0.010) NERC_FG_ID_2407 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.163 0.041 0.189 0.065 0.053 0.071 0.044 0.065 0.027 8MT STM_8VALLEY_500 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.163 0.041 0.190 0.065 0.054 0.071 0.045 0.065 0.027 AEP-Dom_01PRNTY_8MT STM AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.181 0.040 0.204 0.078 0.067 0.084 0.059 0.078 0.023 05JEFRSO_05ROCKPT 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.066 0.040 0.017 (0.019) (0.025) (0.017) (0.049) (0.019) 0.008 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.180 0.040 0.195 0.071 0.059 0.076 0.052 0.071 0.015 GARFIELD ; B_To_TAYLOR ; B CE CE 0.039 0.039 0.006 (0.026) (0.021) (0.021) (0.006) (0.026) 0.006 05MOUNTN_05BELMON AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.269 0.038 0.262 0.097 0.086 0.103 0.080 0.097 (0.007) 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.040 0.021 0.013 (0.009) (0.014) (0.007) (0.027) (0.009) 0.005 01BEDNGT_01BLACKO APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.026 0.016 0.129 0.110 0.107 0.117 0.103 0.110 0.125 APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.023 0.015 0.103 0.089 0.086 0.095 0.082 0.089 0.099 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2563 CE CE 0.019 0.014 0.001 (0.016) (0.015) (0.017) (0.009) (0.016) 0.001 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_556 CE NIPS 0.019 0.014 0.001 (0.016) (0.015) (0.017) (0.009) (0.016) 0.001 ComEd
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 15 Shift factors can be transformed to highlight differences between nodes and pricing points AEP PJM Contingent Branch Monitored Element From Area To Area Gavin Wauk Byron Dresden Kincaid Zion Keystn CHERRY VA; R_SILVER LK; R NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE (0.119) (0.027) - (0.135) (0.119) (0.207) (0.119) 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.143 (0.011) - (0.017) 0.041 (0.011) 0.143 NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE (0.077) 0.021 - (0.091) (0.077) (0.159) (0.077) NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.081 (0.008) - (0.008) 0.025 (0.008) 0.081 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE (0.118) 0.010 - 0.013 (0.035) 0.010 (0.118) GARFIELD ; R_To_TAYLOR ; R CE CE 0.029 (0.005) - (0.000) 0.015 (0.005) 0.029 NERC_FG_ID_3222 E FRANKFO; R_To_E FRxmid CE CE 0.014 (0.003) - (0.011) 0.004 (0.003) 0.014 NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE (0.068) 0.007 - 0.006 (0.022) 0.007 (0.068) NERC_FG_ID_2407 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.136 0.012 - 0.018 (0.009) 0.012 (0.026) 8MT STM_8VALLEY_500 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.136 0.012 - 0.018 (0.009) 0.012 (0.027) AEP-Dom_01PRNTY_8MT STM AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.137 0.012 - 0.017 (0.008) 0.011 (0.044) 05JEFRSO_05ROCKPT 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.042 0.006 - 0.009 (0.024) 0.006 0.033 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.135 0.011 - 0.017 (0.008) 0.011 (0.045) GARFIELD ; B_To_TAYLOR ; B CE CE 0.027 (0.005) - (0.001) 0.014 (0.005) 0.027 05MOUNTN_05BELMON AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.176 0.011 - 0.017 (0.007) 0.011 (0.093) 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.027 0.005 - 0.007 (0.013) 0.005 0.019 01BEDNGT_01BLACKO APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.021 0.003 - 0.010 (0.004) 0.003 0.017 APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.017 0.003 - 0.009 (0.004) 0.003 0.013 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2563 CE CE 0.016 (0.001) - (0.002) 0.005 (0.001) 0.016 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_556 CE NIPS 0.016 (0.001) - (0.002) 0.005 (0.001) 0.016 ComEd
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 16 Aurora’s LMP contribution output provides the basis for identifying those constraints that drive congestion-based LMP differences. Contingent Branch Monitored Element Index # From Area To Area Generator Sample Generators in ComEd Zone Average of all Binding Constraints 2.27 0.20 GARFIELD ; R_To_TAYLOR ; R 1 CE CE 30.32 30.32 NERC_FG_ID_2417 JFRANTBROSUL NERC_FG_ID_2871NHBHBG__PTDF 2 BREC LGEE 36.91 9.77 GARFIELD ; B_To_TAYLOR ; B 3 CE CE 8.51 5.43 05JEFRSO_05ROCKPT 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE 4 OVEC LGEE 12.69 6.55 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2286BURMUNWILDUM 5 CE NIPS 9.28 4.75 CHERRY VA; R_SILVER LK; R NERC_FG_ID_3771PPRZIO__PTDF 6 WEC CE 5.67 5.67 05MOUNTN_05BELMON 05CLOVRD_To_05CLOVRD 7 AEP AEP 170.60 5.15 NERC_FG_ID_3222 EFRGDBEFRGDR E FRANKFO; R_To_E FRxmid 8 CE CE 3.88 3.88 NERC_FG_ID_2353 BLOBEDPRNMTS 05CLOVRD_To_05CLOVRD 9 AEP AEP 134.78 3.85 NERC_FG_ID_3217 BYCH_BBYNWEM NERC_FG_ID_3814MGPSTR__PTDF 10 METC WEC 3.62 3.62 NERC_FG_ID_2417 JFRANTBROSUL 05NAGEL_To_05NAGEL 11 AEP AEP 7.50 2.13 NERC_FG_ID_2407 CLVLEXMTSVAL AEP-DOM 12 AEP DVP 8.77 2.05 01HATFLD_01RONCO CLEVELAND 13 METC METC 3.48 1.71 8MT STM_8VALLEY_500 AEP-DOM 14 AEP DVP 6.10 1.42 NERC_FG_ID_2353 BLOBEDPRNMTS CLEVELAND 15 METC METC 2.48 1.25 AEP-Dom_01PRNTY_8MT STM AEP-DOM 16 AEP DVP 5.93 1.23 05MOUNTN_05BELMON AEP-DOM 17 AEP DVP 6.37 0.84 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2515BURSHE__PTDF 18 NIPS CE 1.43 0.50 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE 19 OVEC LGEE 0.85 0.46 01HATFLD_01RONCO 05KAMMER_To_05WBELLA 20 AEP AEP 53.33 0.13 LMP Contribution (Max - Min)
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 17 While average congestion is similar across generating nodes in the ComEd zone, the impact of individual constraints differs greatly. ComEd nodal prices are driven by constraints located outside of that zone. Const. From Area To Area CE Max - Min Wauk Byron Bright Stalk Wind Farm Lee Energy Dresden Powrtn Quad Cities Will County Kendall County Kincaid Zion Avg all Constraints 0.20 (2.70) (2.70) (2.67) (2.65) (2.61) (2.60) (2.60) (2.59) (2.59) (2.57) (2.50) 1 CE CE 30.32 10.84 8.83 (16.18) 8.38 9.01 10.70 7.32 11.61 14.15 3.16 10.86 2 BREC LGEE 9.77 (16.19) (19.16) (13.70) (20.16) (14.59) (16.00) (23.47) (14.58) (14.91) (21.90) (16.23) 3 CE CE 5.43 5.45 4.35 1.49 4.09 4.47 5.16 3.55 6.84 6.06 1.60 5.49 4 OVEC LGEE 6.55 (3.85) (5.02) (2.92) (5.43) (3.33) (4.18) (6.71) (3.36) (3.53) (9.47) (3.93) 5 CE NIPS 4.75 5.04 4.61 7.77 4.47 5.25 4.91 4.02 5.53 5.03 3.02 5.04 6 WEC CE 5.67 (2.51) (3.26) 0.47 (2.57) 0.44 0.26 (2.26) 0.56 0.58 0.00 2.42 7 AEP AEP 5.15 (99.40) (100.54) (98.49) (100.95) (98.95) (99.64) (102.22) (98.88) (99.05) (103.63) (99.41) 8 CE CE 3.88 1.17 0.89 1.49 0.84 1.70 1.37 0.75 2.97 1.26 0.58 1.17 9 AEP AEP 3.85 (103.79) (104.62) (103.12) (104.92) (103.45) (103.97) (105.86) (103.41) (103.53) (106.97) (103.79) 10 METC WEC 3.62 3.04 3.35 0.00 3.21 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.17 11 AEP AEP 2.13 (4.52) (5.17) (4.00) (5.40) (4.19) (4.51) (6.13) (4.19) (4.27) (5.82) (4.52) 12 AEP DVP 2.05 (3.49) (2.86) (3.99) (2.65) (3.81) (3.52) (1.94) (3.81) (3.74) (2.40) (3.48) 13 METC METC 1.71 (5.91) (4.83) (6.10) (4.77) (5.97) (5.86) (4.57) (6.00) (5.98) (4.39) (5.91) 14 AEP DVP 1.42 (2.44) (2.00) (2.79) (1.86) (2.66) (2.46) (1.37) (2.66) (2.61) (1.68) (2.44) 15 METC METC 1.25 (4.09) (3.31) (4.23) (3.27) (4.14) (4.06) (3.12) (4.16) (4.14) (2.99) (4.09) 16 AEP DVP 1.23 (2.57) (2.19) (2.87) (2.07) (2.76) (2.59) (1.64) (2.76) (2.72) (1.92) (2.57) 17 AEP DVP 0.84 (2.30) (2.04) (2.51) (1.96) (2.44) (2.32) (1.67) (2.43) (2.41) (1.89) (2.30) 18 NIPS CE 0.50 (1.05) (0.95) (0.79) (0.93) (1.08) (1.04) (0.84) (1.08) (1.12) (0.62) (1.05) Selected Generating Plants Located in ComEd Zone
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 18 Congestion contribution can be transformed to highlight differences among nodes and pricing points Const. From Area To Area CE Max - Min Wauk Byron Bright Stalk Wind Farm Lee Energy Dresden Powrtn Quad Cities Will County Kendall County Kincaid Zion Avg all Constraints 0.20 (0.01) - 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.19 1 CE CE 30.32 2.01 - (25.01) (0.46) 0.17 1.87 (1.51) 2.77 5.31 (5.67) 2.03 2 BREC LGEE 9.77 2.97 - 5.46 (1.00) 4.57 3.16 (4.31) 4.59 4.25 (2.74) 2.93 3 CE CE 5.43 1.10 - (2.87) (0.26) 0.11 0.80 (0.81) 2.48 1.71 (2.75) 1.14 4 OVEC LGEE 6.55 1.17 - 2.10 (0.41) 1.69 0.84 (1.68) 1.66 1.49 (4.45) 1.10 5 CE NIPS 4.75 0.44 - 3.17 (0.14) 0.65 0.31 (0.59) 0.92 0.42 (1.59) 0.43 6 WEC CE 5.67 0.75 - 3.73 0.69 3.70 3.51 1.00 3.82 3.84 3.26 5.67 7 AEP AEP 5.15 1.14 - 2.05 (0.41) 1.59 0.90 (1.68) 1.66 1.49 (3.09) 1.13 8 CE CE 3.88 0.28 - 0.60 (0.05) 0.81 0.48 (0.14) 2.08 0.37 (0.31) 0.28 9 AEP AEP 3.85 0.84 - 1.51 (0.30) 1.17 0.65 (1.23) 1.22 1.09 (2.34) 0.83 10 METC WEC 3.62 (0.32) - (3.35) (0.14) (3.35) (3.35) (0.08) (3.35) (3.35) (3.35) (0.18) 11 AEP AEP 2.13 0.66 - 1.18 (0.22) 0.98 0.67 (0.95) 0.98 0.91 (0.64) 0.65 12 AEP DVP 2.05 (0.63) - (1.13) 0.21 (0.95) (0.66) 0.92 (0.95) (0.88) 0.46 (0.62) 13 METC METC 1.71 (1.08) - (1.27) 0.07 (1.13) (1.03) 0.26 (1.17) (1.14) 0.45 (1.08) 14 AEP DVP 1.42 (0.44) - (0.78) 0.15 (0.66) (0.46) 0.63 (0.66) (0.61) 0.32 (0.43) 15 METC METC 1.25 (0.78) - (0.92) 0.05 (0.82) (0.75) 0.20 (0.85) (0.83) 0.33 (0.78) 16 AEP DVP 1.23 (0.38) - (0.68) 0.13 (0.57) (0.40) 0.55 (0.57) (0.53) 0.27 (0.37) 17 AEP DVP 0.84 (0.26) - (0.47) 0.09 (0.39) (0.28) 0.38 (0.39) (0.36) 0.16 (0.26) 18 NIPS CE 0.50 (0.09) - 0.17 0.03 (0.12) (0.08) 0.12 (0.13) (0.17) 0.33 (0.09) 19 OVEC LGEE 0.46 0.10 - 0.18 (0.04) 0.15 0.08 (0.15) 0.15 0.14 (0.28) 0.10 20 AEP DVP 0.23 0.05 - 0.09 (0.02) 0.07 0.04 (0.07) 0.07 0.07 (0.14) 0.05 Selected Generating Plants Located in ComEd Zone
© PA Knowledge Limited 2014 19 Transformation also makes it easier to identify constraints that drive broader interregional congestion PJM 500 Penelec Index # From Area To Area Gavin DC Cook Wauk Byron Bright Stalk Wind Farm Lee Energy Dresden Powrtn Quad Cities Will County Kendall County Kincaid Zion Keystone Average - 0.64 0.66 0.66 0.69 0.71 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.77 0.79 0.86 2.27 1 CE CE - -0.05 13.38 11.37 -13.64 10.92 11.55 13.24 9.86 14.15 16.69 5.70 13.40 0.00 2 BREC LGEE - -22.25 -29.63 -32.60 -27.14 -33.60 -28.02 -29.43 -36.91 -28.01 -28.34 -35.34 -29.66 -7.90 3 CE CE - 0.32 7.09 6.00 3.13 5.74 6.11 6.80 5.19 8.48 7.70 3.24 7.14 0.32 4 OVEC LGEE - -4.24 -7.07 -8.24 -6.14 -8.64 -6.55 -7.40 -9.92 -6.58 -6.74 -12.69 -7.14 -1.76 5 CE NIPS - -0.64 5.91 5.47 8.64 5.33 6.12 5.78 4.89 6.39 5.89 3.88 5.91 0.00 6 WEC CE - 0.02 -2.51 -3.26 0.47 -2.57 0.44 0.26 -2.26 0.56 0.58 0.00 2.42 0.00 7 AEP AEP - 36.29 31.14 30.00 32.06 29.60 31.60 30.90 28.33 31.66 31.49 26.91 31.14 170.60 8 CE CE - -0.29 1.32 1.04 1.64 0.99 1.85 1.52 0.90 3.12 1.42 0.73 1.32 0.00 9 AEP AEP - 12.03 8.25 7.41 8.92 7.11 8.58 8.06 6.18 8.63 8.50 5.07 8.24 134.78 10 METC WEC - 0.00 3.04 3.35 0.00 3.21 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.17 0.00 11 AEP AEP - -2.26 -5.89 -6.54 -5.37 -6.77 -5.56 -5.88 -7.50 -5.56 -5.64 -7.19 -5.89 -0.81 12 AEP DVP - 5.28 6.73 7.36 6.23 7.58 6.42 6.70 8.28 6.42 6.48 7.82 6.74 8.77 13 METC METC - 1.78 -1.52 -0.44 -1.70 -0.37 -1.57 -1.47 -0.18 -1.61 -1.58 0.01 -1.52 1.00 14 AEP DVP - 3.66 4.66 5.10 4.32 5.25 4.45 4.65 5.74 4.45 4.49 5.42 4.67 6.10 15 METC METC - 1.21 -1.12 -0.34 -1.26 -0.30 -1.17 -1.09 -0.15 -1.20 -1.17 -0.02 -1.13 -0.42 16 AEP DVP - 3.25 4.11 4.49 3.81 4.62 3.92 4.09 5.04 3.92 3.96 4.76 4.12 5.93 17 AEP DVP - 3.34 3.90 4.16 3.69 4.25 3.77 3.88 4.54 3.77 3.80 4.32 3.90 6.37 18 NIPS CE - 0.14 -1.22 -1.13 -0.96 -1.10 -1.25 -1.21 -1.01 -1.25 -1.30 -0.79 -1.22 0.00 19 OVEC LGEE - -0.28 -0.48 -0.58 -0.40 -0.61 -0.43 -0.50 -0.73 -0.43 -0.44 -0.85 -0.48 -0.17 20 AEP AEP - 5.18 4.74 4.78 4.72 4.79 4.70 4.73 4.83 4.72 4.72 4.73 4.75 53.33 AEP ComEd

More Related Content

PPT
Purple cow employee benefits 2011 - costs
mervinabagat
 
PPT
Chapter4
purplecowph
 
PPT
Purple cow employee benefits 2011 (costs)
mervinabagat
 
PPT
Purple cow employee benefits costs
mervinabagat
 
PPT
Purple cow employee benefits for sme 2011 (costs)
thepurplecowph
 
PPT
Purple cow employee benefits 2011 (costs)
mervinabagat
 
PDF
Harmonic csg gh_specsheet
Electromate
 
PPT
Presentación energía linea industrial
GUSTAVO HURTADO
 
Purple cow employee benefits 2011 - costs
mervinabagat
 
Chapter4
purplecowph
 
Purple cow employee benefits 2011 (costs)
mervinabagat
 
Purple cow employee benefits costs
mervinabagat
 
Purple cow employee benefits for sme 2011 (costs)
thepurplecowph
 
Purple cow employee benefits 2011 (costs)
mervinabagat
 
Harmonic csg gh_specsheet
Electromate
 
Presentación energía linea industrial
GUSTAVO HURTADO
 

What's hot (19)

PDF
Harmonic drive ultra flat_component_specsheet
Electromate
 
PDF
Shimpo able vrl_brochure
Electromate
 
PDF
Harmonic fr specsheet
Electromate
 
PDF
Optimus Energy Australian Wholesale Price list
Optimus Energy Philippines
 
PDF
Harmonic csd shd_catalog
Electromate
 
PDF
Torque systems mdm-5000_product_guide
Electromate
 
PDF
Harmonic drive hdt t cup_specsheet
Electromate
 
PDF
Ptg gc couplings 2018 5 7
Timo Ala-Jaaski
 
PDF
Harmonic shd 2uh_lw_catalog
Electromate
 
PDF
CS Unitec Nut Runners: 6 1014 0010
CS Unitec
 
PDF
Harmonic drive sha cg specsheet
Electromate
 
PDF
LCC Asia Pacific Engineering & Contractors Update 294
LCC Asia Pacific Corporate Finance
 
PDF
CS Unitec Mixers: 7 1112 0010
CS Unitec
 
PDF
CS Unitec Mixers: 7 1111 0010
CS Unitec
 
PDF
SCS110AG Standard Model LTspice Model (Free SPICE Model)
Tsuyoshi Horigome
 
PDF
CS Unitec Nut Runners: 6 1014 0075
CS Unitec
 
PDF
SCS110AG (LTspice Model)
Tsuyoshi Horigome
 
PDF
CS Unitec Nut Runners: 6 1014 0099
CS Unitec
 
PDF
Exoplanet exoplanet.eu catalog updated.cs
thomasrimlinger
 
Harmonic drive ultra flat_component_specsheet
Electromate
 
Shimpo able vrl_brochure
Electromate
 
Harmonic fr specsheet
Electromate
 
Optimus Energy Australian Wholesale Price list
Optimus Energy Philippines
 
Harmonic csd shd_catalog
Electromate
 
Torque systems mdm-5000_product_guide
Electromate
 
Harmonic drive hdt t cup_specsheet
Electromate
 
Ptg gc couplings 2018 5 7
Timo Ala-Jaaski
 
Harmonic shd 2uh_lw_catalog
Electromate
 
CS Unitec Nut Runners: 6 1014 0010
CS Unitec
 
Harmonic drive sha cg specsheet
Electromate
 
LCC Asia Pacific Engineering & Contractors Update 294
LCC Asia Pacific Corporate Finance
 
CS Unitec Mixers: 7 1112 0010
CS Unitec
 
CS Unitec Mixers: 7 1111 0010
CS Unitec
 
SCS110AG Standard Model LTspice Model (Free SPICE Model)
Tsuyoshi Horigome
 
CS Unitec Nut Runners: 6 1014 0075
CS Unitec
 
SCS110AG (LTspice Model)
Tsuyoshi Horigome
 
CS Unitec Nut Runners: 6 1014 0099
CS Unitec
 
Exoplanet exoplanet.eu catalog updated.cs
thomasrimlinger
 
Ad

Viewers also liked (19)

PDF
Day-Ahead LMP Forecasting with AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
Final Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy for the ERCOT Region, Summer 2...
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
2009 Wind Technologies Market Report - Powerpoint
Glenn Klith Andersen
 
PDF
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: Interconnection Standards in C...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: Optimizing PV Designs with HelioScope:...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Reliability, Operations & Maintenance Workshop: Unlocking Opportuniti...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Reliability, Operations & Maintenance Workshop: O&M with SCADA, AlsoE...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
Grid 20/20 Public Policy and Wholesale Energy Markets
Daymark Energy Advisors
 
PDF
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: CA Rule 21 Update: Tom Bialek,...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: Capabilities of Advanced Inver...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
3Gender and Energy Resource Management Projects
Nancy Drost
 
PDF
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: Data and Models for High Penet...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: European codes & guidelines fo...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: SolarAnywhere: WebWeb-Accessible Irrad...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Reliability, Operations & Maintenance Workshop: HelioPower
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: Results from Flash Testing at Multiple...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PDF
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: Inverter performance models Opportunit...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
PPT
transmission line
singh1515
 
PPTX
High Voltage Dc (HVDC) transmission
ZunAib Ali
 
Day-Ahead LMP Forecasting with AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
Final Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy for the ERCOT Region, Summer 2...
EPIS Inc
 
2009 Wind Technologies Market Report - Powerpoint
Glenn Klith Andersen
 
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: Interconnection Standards in C...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: Optimizing PV Designs with HelioScope:...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Reliability, Operations & Maintenance Workshop: Unlocking Opportuniti...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Reliability, Operations & Maintenance Workshop: O&M with SCADA, AlsoE...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
Grid 20/20 Public Policy and Wholesale Energy Markets
Daymark Energy Advisors
 
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: CA Rule 21 Update: Tom Bialek,...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: Capabilities of Advanced Inver...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
3Gender and Energy Resource Management Projects
Nancy Drost
 
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: Data and Models for High Penet...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Distribution System Modeling Workshop: European codes & guidelines fo...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: SolarAnywhere: WebWeb-Accessible Irrad...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Reliability, Operations & Maintenance Workshop: HelioPower
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: Results from Flash Testing at Multiple...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
2014 PV Performance Modeling Workshop: Inverter performance models Opportunit...
Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
 
transmission line
singh1515
 
High Voltage Dc (HVDC) transmission
ZunAib Ali
 
Ad

Similar to Nodal Insights for Generation Owners and Modeling with AURORAxmp (20)

PDF
Kirloskar Gensets - Reliable and Efficient Power Solutions for Every Need
myspanpower
 
PDF
Diesel Gensets from Myspan Power - Reliable and Efficient Power Solutions
myspanpower
 
PDF
Petrol Gensets from Myspan Power - Portable and Efficient Power Solutions
myspanpower
 
PDF
Kirloskar Gensets from Myspan Power - Trusted Power Solutions for All Needs
myspanpower
 
PDF
Generators in Dubai - Reliable Power Solutions | MySpan-Power
myspanpower
 
PDF
TTI San Antonio Work in Eagle Ford Shale
Texas A&M Transportation Institute
 
PDF
Ceylon Electricity Board Statistical Digest 2015
Private Consultants
 
PPT
GPL - HT Network - 25.10.21.ppt
nivyamachado
 
PDF
TMI MOTOR 3512 1GZ
Giovanny Bocanegra
 
PDF
WEG Contactors Oveload Relays
Allan Bernardino
 
PPTX
Combustion Turbine Efficiency Impact
Katherine Corcoran
 
PDF
Corporate presentation 2 q 14 vf wa
Empresa de Energía de Bogotá
 
PPTX
Cost Efficiency in electric power production: a random parameter model for Br...
MauricioMachado69
 
PDF
Corporate presentation 2 q 14 v ff sa
Empresa de Energía de Bogotá
 
PPTX
Review Week_12_Customer_PulauPanggung (PT.BAS).pptx
noelmanroe1
 
PPTX
Advanced energy storage sizing case RTSoft
ViktorSinenko
 
PPTX
SALALAH Recycle Plant - Feasibility Study for SRF Production.pptx
AdelezzatOmran
 
PDF
Power flex400
Trung Dang
 
PPTX
Presentation (group)
Ankit Grover
 
PDF
lcc asia pacific weekly engineering report edition 442
LCC Asia Pacific Corporate Finance
 
Kirloskar Gensets - Reliable and Efficient Power Solutions for Every Need
myspanpower
 
Diesel Gensets from Myspan Power - Reliable and Efficient Power Solutions
myspanpower
 
Petrol Gensets from Myspan Power - Portable and Efficient Power Solutions
myspanpower
 
Kirloskar Gensets from Myspan Power - Trusted Power Solutions for All Needs
myspanpower
 
Generators in Dubai - Reliable Power Solutions | MySpan-Power
myspanpower
 
TTI San Antonio Work in Eagle Ford Shale
Texas A&M Transportation Institute
 
Ceylon Electricity Board Statistical Digest 2015
Private Consultants
 
GPL - HT Network - 25.10.21.ppt
nivyamachado
 
TMI MOTOR 3512 1GZ
Giovanny Bocanegra
 
WEG Contactors Oveload Relays
Allan Bernardino
 
Combustion Turbine Efficiency Impact
Katherine Corcoran
 
Corporate presentation 2 q 14 vf wa
Empresa de Energía de Bogotá
 
Cost Efficiency in electric power production: a random parameter model for Br...
MauricioMachado69
 
Corporate presentation 2 q 14 v ff sa
Empresa de Energía de Bogotá
 
Review Week_12_Customer_PulauPanggung (PT.BAS).pptx
noelmanroe1
 
Advanced energy storage sizing case RTSoft
ViktorSinenko
 
SALALAH Recycle Plant - Feasibility Study for SRF Production.pptx
AdelezzatOmran
 
Power flex400
Trung Dang
 
Presentation (group)
Ankit Grover
 
lcc asia pacific weekly engineering report edition 442
LCC Asia Pacific Corporate Finance
 

More from EPIS Inc (8)

PDF
Preliminary Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy for the ERCOT Region, Su...
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
2015 Long-Term Reliability Assessment by NERC
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
2015 Summer Reliability Assessment by NERC
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
Using Historical Data To Fine-Tune AURORAxmp Predictive Capabilities
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
How Idaho Power Company uses AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
Southern Company History and Usage of AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
Modeling and Valuing Cogeneration with AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
PDF
What does wind really cost? Modeling Wind Resources In AURORAxmp.
EPIS Inc
 
Preliminary Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy for the ERCOT Region, Su...
EPIS Inc
 
2015 Long-Term Reliability Assessment by NERC
EPIS Inc
 
2015 Summer Reliability Assessment by NERC
EPIS Inc
 
Using Historical Data To Fine-Tune AURORAxmp Predictive Capabilities
EPIS Inc
 
How Idaho Power Company uses AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
Southern Company History and Usage of AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
Modeling and Valuing Cogeneration with AURORAxmp
EPIS Inc
 
What does wind really cost? Modeling Wind Resources In AURORAxmp.
EPIS Inc
 

Recently uploaded (20)

PPTX
Spectroscopy.pptx food analysis technology
nawahassan45
 
PPTX
Programs and apps: productivity, graphics, security and other tools
4mqw9zch22
 
PDF
Optimiser vos workloads AI/ML sur Amazon EC2 et AWS Graviton
Julien SIMON
 
PPTX
20250228 LYD VKU AI Blended-Learning.pptx
DatVoNgoc
 
PPTX
VMware vSphere Foundation How to Sell Presentation-Ver1.4-2-14-2024.pptx
blackmambaettijean
 
PDF
A comparative analysis of optical character recognition models for extracting...
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
Electronic commerce courselecture one. Pdf
OmerMohamed64
 
PDF
The Rise and Fall of 3GPP – Time for a Sabbatical?
3G4G
 
PPT
“AI and Expert System Decision Support & Business Intelligence Systems”
ZubinRadhakrishnan
 
PDF
Encapsulation theory and applications.pdf
gurumoop
 
PDF
Peak of Data & AI Encore- AI for Metadata and Smarter Workflows
Safe Software
 
PDF
Encapsulation_ Review paper, used for researhc scholars
gurumoop
 
PDF
gpt5_lecture_notes_comprehensive_20250812015547.pdf
Chinchu40
 
PDF
Dropbox Q2 2025 Financial Results & Investor Presentation
Dropbox
 
PPTX
A Presentation on Artificial Intelligence
memembruh336
 
PDF
MIND Revenue Release Quarter 2 2025 Press Release
MIND CTI
 
PPTX
Cloud computing and distributed systems.
kkkkkhan
 
PDF
Reach Out and Touch Someone: Haptics and Empathic Computing
Mark Billinghurst
 
PDF
Blue Purple Modern Animated Computer Science Presentation.pdf.pdf
Akar16
 
PPTX
KOM of Painting work and Equipment Insulation REV00 update 25-dec.pptx
muhammadmuneebnaeem7
 
Spectroscopy.pptx food analysis technology
nawahassan45
 
Programs and apps: productivity, graphics, security and other tools
4mqw9zch22
 
Optimiser vos workloads AI/ML sur Amazon EC2 et AWS Graviton
Julien SIMON
 
20250228 LYD VKU AI Blended-Learning.pptx
DatVoNgoc
 
VMware vSphere Foundation How to Sell Presentation-Ver1.4-2-14-2024.pptx
blackmambaettijean
 
A comparative analysis of optical character recognition models for extracting...
IAESIJAI
 
Electronic commerce courselecture one. Pdf
OmerMohamed64
 
The Rise and Fall of 3GPP – Time for a Sabbatical?
3G4G
 
“AI and Expert System Decision Support & Business Intelligence Systems”
ZubinRadhakrishnan
 
Encapsulation theory and applications.pdf
gurumoop
 
Peak of Data & AI Encore- AI for Metadata and Smarter Workflows
Safe Software
 
Encapsulation_ Review paper, used for researhc scholars
gurumoop
 
gpt5_lecture_notes_comprehensive_20250812015547.pdf
Chinchu40
 
Dropbox Q2 2025 Financial Results & Investor Presentation
Dropbox
 
A Presentation on Artificial Intelligence
memembruh336
 
MIND Revenue Release Quarter 2 2025 Press Release
MIND CTI
 
Cloud computing and distributed systems.
kkkkkhan
 
Reach Out and Touch Someone: Haptics and Empathic Computing
Mark Billinghurst
 
Blue Purple Modern Animated Computer Science Presentation.pdf.pdf
Akar16
 
KOM of Painting work and Equipment Insulation REV00 update 25-dec.pptx
muhammadmuneebnaeem7
 

Nodal Insights for Generation Owners and Modeling with AURORAxmp

  • 1. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 1 NODAL INSIGHTS 2014 Electric Market Forecasting Conference September 17-19, 2014
  • 2. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 2 Overview Nodal Background • Constraints -- $ matter • What’s in a Hub price? What’s in a Zonal price? Shift Factors and Congestion Pricing Considerations • Congestion • Marginal Losses Nodal vs. Zonal – the role of Interregional and Local Constraints
  • 3. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 3 Four constraints account for 50+% of projected 2015 PJM congestion ______________________________ Source: PJM Market Efficiency Analysis Base Congestion Results 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
  • 4. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 4 Two of the top four constraints are M2M Source: PJM Market Efficiency Analysis Base Congestion Results Facility Name Area Constraint Type Frequency (Hours) Market Congestion ($ Millions) Share of 2015 Congestion (%) Cumulative 2015 Congestion (%) AP SOUTH L/O BED-BLA PJM INTERFACE 1,627 103.6 17% 17% Monticello to East Winamac 138 kV M2M LINE 2,569 99.0 17% 34% Oak Grove to Galesburg 161 kV M2M LINE 3,281 60.0 10% 44% Cloverdale to Lexington 500 kV AEP - DVP LINE 631 37.0 6% 51% Elliot to Elliot 138 kV AEP LINE 338 30.0 5% 56% AEP-DOM L/O BED-BLA PJM INTERFACE 706 26.7 5% 60% Graceton to BAGLEY 230 kV BGE LINE 826 22.0 4% 64% Miami Fort to Willey 138 kV DEO&K LINE 310 20.0 3% 67% Braidwood to East Frankfort 345 kV CE LINE 147 18.0 3% 70% Hunterstown 230 kV ME XFMR 254 18.0 3% 73% Dravosburg to West Mifflin 138 kV DLCO LINE 1,275 14.4 2% 76% Tiltonsville to Windsor 138 kV AP - AEP LINE 36 12.4 2% 78% Wurno to Claytor Lake 138 kV AEP LINE 84 11.0 2% 80% Cordova to Nelson 345 kV CE LINE 333 9.9 2% 81% Belvidere to Marengo Tap 138 kV CE LINE 227 8.0 1% 83% WESTERN INTERFACE PJM INTERFACE 257 7.1 1% 84% CENTRAL INTERFACE PJM INTERFACE 658 6.6 1% 85% 6EDFERRY to Dickerson Station "D" 230 kV PEPCO - DVP LINE 39 6.3 1% 86% Hennepin to Hennepin 138 kV M2M LINE 570 5.9 1% 87% Kewanee to E D Edwards 138 kV M2M LINE 298 5.9 1% 88% Cherry Valley to Cherry Valley 138 kV CE LINE 119 5.3 1% 89% Woodville to 15USAP 138 kV DLCO LINE 449 5.0 1% 90% 2014 Market Efficiency Analysis Base Congestion Results: 2015 System Topology
  • 5. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 5 PJM East Hub – it may not be what you think ISO hubs typically consist of numerous individual nodes. Nodes can be geographically and electrically diverse, making it difficult to isolate the impact of individual transmission constraints. • PJM East consists of 216 individual nodes • 84% of the nodes are load nodes • 49% of the nodes are located in the Delmarva area • 92% are located in PECO and Delmarva Transmission Zone EHV GEN LOAD Total % Total AECO 1 1 0% DPL 14 99 113 49% JCPL 1 1 0% PECO 17 81 98 43% PPL 1 1 0% PSEG 1 4 10 15 7% Total 1 36 192 229 100% % Total 0% 16% 84% 100% Bus Type PJM East Hub Definition
  • 6. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 6 Load buses dominate the composition of PJM Hub definitions Hub Total Buses EHV GEN LOAD Total AEP GEN HUB 39 100% 100% AEP-DAYTON HUB 1108 11% 89% 100% ATSI GEN HUB 64 100% 100% CHICAGO GEN HUB 131 100% 100% CHICAGO HUB 190 5% 95% 100% DOMINION HUB 626 12% 88% 100% EASTERN HUB 216 0% 15% 84% 100% N ILLINOIS HUB 219 11% 89% 100% NEW JERSEY HUB 367 100% 100% OHIO HUB 761 4% 96% 100% WESTERN HUB 99 4% 27% 69% 100%
  • 7. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 7 Pricing in the PECO zone: Congestion and Marginal Losses
  • 8. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 8 While average losses basis differentials can be larger than congestion basis differentials, variation in congestion basis differentials is an order of magnitude greater. Liberty Basis Basis Component Year* Average Basis ($/MWh) Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation 2009 (1.48) 1.69 114 2010 (2.56) 5.74 224 2011 (1.66) 2.82 170 2012 (2.98) 4.69 157 2009 (1.25) 0.80 64 2010 (1.60) 1.22 76 2011 (1.52) 1.17 77 2012 (1.46) 0.74 51 2009 (0.23) 1.26 544 2010 (0.96) 5.15 538 2011 (0.14) 2.48 1,782 2012 (1.53) 4.46 293 2009 (0.31) 0.34 110 2010 (0.90) 5.52 616 2011 (0.36) 2.21 611 2012 (0.22) 0.25 112 2009 (0.37) 0.28 75 2010 (0.45) 0.43 95 2011 (0.31) 0.40 127 2012 (0.24) 0.12 51 2009 0.06 0.23 410 2010 (0.44) 5.32 1,198 2011 (0.05) 2.09 4,192 2012 0.02 0.22 1,321 * 2012 values for the period through 3/31/2012 Variation in Basis Differentials LibertyBasistoPECOZone Total LMP Basis Loss Basis Congestion Basis Total LMP Basis Loss Basis Congestion Basis LibertyBasistoPJMEastHubUnitBasistoPECOZoneUnitBasistoPJMEastHub
  • 9. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 9 Shift factors represent the change in power flow on a line when an injection is made at one bus and a corresponding change in withdrawal is made at the reference bus Shift factors are calculated for a specific system topology. Shift factors change when the topology changes or line impedance changes. Shift factors do not change if the injection/withdrawal amount increases for any set of locations. Source: CAISO
  • 10. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 10 Generators that drive flows on the Eddystone-Island Road Constraint Unit(s) S.F. Description Eddystone 3 .252 380 MW oil/gas-fired steam (Exelon Generating) Eddystone CT .250 (4) 18-20 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Eddystone 4 .247 380 MW oil/gas-fired steam (Exelon Generating) Liberty CC .231 540 MW gas-fired CC (Equipower Resources) Marcus Hook .139 808 MW gas-fired CC (NextEra Energy) Hay Road 4 .116 182 MW gas-fired CT (Calpine) Edge Moor 5 .116 445 MW oil/gas-fired steam (Calpine) Hay Road 1, 3 .088 (2) 121 MW gas-fired CT (Calpine) Edge Moor 3, 4 .088 86 MW and 174 MW gas-fired steam (Calpine) Units that Increase Congestion on the Eddystone–Island Road Constraint Unit(s) S.F. Description Southwark -.175 (4) 18 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generation) Schuylkill CT -.170 (2) 18 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generation) Grays Ferry Cogeneration -.167 150 MW gas-fired CC (Veolia Environnement S.A.) Schuylkill -.164 175 MW oil-fired steam (Exelon Generation) Delaware CT -.100 (4) 18 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Richmond -.058 (2) 65 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Fairless Works -.036 (2) 680 MW gas-fired CCs (Dominion) Croydon -.035 (8) 60 MW oil-fired CTs (Exelon Generating) Burlington GT -.035 (13) mostly 40-50 MW oil/gas-fired CTs (PSEG) Limerick 1 -.025 1190 MW nuclear (Exelon Generating) Limerick 2 -.018 1190 MW nuclear (Exelon Generating) Units that offset Congestion on the Eddystone–Island Road Constraint
  • 11. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 11 Pricing across PJM reflects local and broader regional constraints Western Hub AEP – Dayton Hub NI Hub
  • 12. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 12 Generators competing for west to east transfer across Black Oak – Beddington Unit/Bus Area Shift Factor Capacity at Node (MW) Potential Impact on Constraint % of Potential Impact Cum % Potential Impact Hatfield AP 0.115 1,550 178 9.6% 9.6% 02MNFDG3 FE 0.033 2,682 88 4.7% 14.3% Harrison AP 0.040 1,901 76 4.1% 18.4% Fort Martin AP 0.066 1,072 71 3.8% 22.2% Sammis FE 0.032 1,925 62 3.3% 25.5% 15BVRVL1 DLCO 0.033 1,866 62 3.3% 28.9% 05GVG1 AEP 0.017 2,620 45 2.4% 31.3% 05RKG2 AEP 0.014 3,095 42 2.3% 33.5% KEYS G2 PJM 0.024 1,642 40 2.1% 35.7% 05CDG3 AEP 0.032 1,215 39 2.1% 37.7% 01PLEAS1 AP 0.031 1,222 38 2.0% 39.8% Twin Ridges AP 0.183 200 37 2.0% 41.7% 02CALPG2 FE 0.022 1,633 36 1.9% 43.7% Warrior Run AP 0.200 176 35 1.9% 45.6% 09STUART DAY 0.015 2,255 34 1.8% 47.4% 02PERRG1 FE 0.026 1,281 33 1.8% 49.2% 05CVG4 AEP 0.020 1,580 32 1.7% 50.9%
  • 13. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 13 The broader regional transmission system will be improved if/when the Byron to Wayne 345 kV line is added Transmission flows across ComEd are generally west-to- east and are limited by the constraints involving the two large 345 kV lines, and its interaction with the underlying 138 kV system.
  • 14. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 14 Shift factors differ substantially, even for units located geographically close together AEP PJM Contingent Branch Monitored Element From Area To Area All Gen: Max - Min Gen in ComEd Zone: Max - Min Gavin Wauk Byron Dresden Kincaid Zion Keystn CHERRY VA; R_SILVER LK; R NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE 0.207 0.207 0.000 0.091 0.119 (0.016) 0.000 (0.088) 0.000 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.242 0.190 0.023 (0.132) (0.120) (0.137) (0.079) (0.132) 0.023 NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE 0.180 0.180 0.000 0.098 0.077 (0.014) 0.000 (0.082) 0.000 NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.179 0.176 0.013 (0.075) (0.068) (0.076) (0.043) (0.076) 0.013 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE 0.152 0.089 (0.018) 0.110 0.100 0.113 0.065 0.110 (0.018) GARFIELD ; R_To_TAYLOR ; R CE CE 0.077 0.077 0.007 (0.027) (0.022) (0.023) (0.008) (0.027) 0.007 NERC_FG_ID_3222 E FRANKFO; R_To_E FRxmid CE CE 0.074 0.074 0.002 (0.016) (0.012) (0.024) (0.008) (0.016) 0.002 NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE 0.097 0.074 (0.010) 0.065 0.058 0.064 0.036 0.065 (0.010) NERC_FG_ID_2407 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.163 0.041 0.189 0.065 0.053 0.071 0.044 0.065 0.027 8MT STM_8VALLEY_500 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.163 0.041 0.190 0.065 0.054 0.071 0.045 0.065 0.027 AEP-Dom_01PRNTY_8MT STM AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.181 0.040 0.204 0.078 0.067 0.084 0.059 0.078 0.023 05JEFRSO_05ROCKPT 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.066 0.040 0.017 (0.019) (0.025) (0.017) (0.049) (0.019) 0.008 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.180 0.040 0.195 0.071 0.059 0.076 0.052 0.071 0.015 GARFIELD ; B_To_TAYLOR ; B CE CE 0.039 0.039 0.006 (0.026) (0.021) (0.021) (0.006) (0.026) 0.006 05MOUNTN_05BELMON AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.269 0.038 0.262 0.097 0.086 0.103 0.080 0.097 (0.007) 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.040 0.021 0.013 (0.009) (0.014) (0.007) (0.027) (0.009) 0.005 01BEDNGT_01BLACKO APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.026 0.016 0.129 0.110 0.107 0.117 0.103 0.110 0.125 APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.023 0.015 0.103 0.089 0.086 0.095 0.082 0.089 0.099 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2563 CE CE 0.019 0.014 0.001 (0.016) (0.015) (0.017) (0.009) (0.016) 0.001 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_556 CE NIPS 0.019 0.014 0.001 (0.016) (0.015) (0.017) (0.009) (0.016) 0.001 ComEd
  • 15. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 15 Shift factors can be transformed to highlight differences between nodes and pricing points AEP PJM Contingent Branch Monitored Element From Area To Area Gavin Wauk Byron Dresden Kincaid Zion Keystn CHERRY VA; R_SILVER LK; R NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE (0.119) (0.027) - (0.135) (0.119) (0.207) (0.119) 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.143 (0.011) - (0.017) 0.041 (0.011) 0.143 NERC_FG_ID_3771 WEC CE (0.077) 0.021 - (0.091) (0.077) (0.159) (0.077) NERC_FG_ID_2286 CE NIPS 0.081 (0.008) - (0.008) 0.025 (0.008) 0.081 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE (0.118) 0.010 - 0.013 (0.035) 0.010 (0.118) GARFIELD ; R_To_TAYLOR ; R CE CE 0.029 (0.005) - (0.000) 0.015 (0.005) 0.029 NERC_FG_ID_3222 E FRANKFO; R_To_E FRxmid CE CE 0.014 (0.003) - (0.011) 0.004 (0.003) 0.014 NERC_FG_ID_2515 NIPS CE (0.068) 0.007 - 0.006 (0.022) 0.007 (0.068) NERC_FG_ID_2407 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.136 0.012 - 0.018 (0.009) 0.012 (0.026) 8MT STM_8VALLEY_500 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.136 0.012 - 0.018 (0.009) 0.012 (0.027) AEP-Dom_01PRNTY_8MT STM AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.137 0.012 - 0.017 (0.008) 0.011 (0.044) 05JEFRSO_05ROCKPT 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.042 0.006 - 0.009 (0.024) 0.006 0.033 AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.135 0.011 - 0.017 (0.008) 0.011 (0.045) GARFIELD ; B_To_TAYLOR ; B CE CE 0.027 (0.005) - (0.001) 0.014 (0.005) 0.027 05MOUNTN_05BELMON AEP-DOM AEP DVP 0.176 0.011 - 0.017 (0.007) 0.011 (0.093) 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE OVEC LGEE 0.027 0.005 - 0.007 (0.013) 0.005 0.019 01BEDNGT_01BLACKO APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.021 0.003 - 0.010 (0.004) 0.003 0.017 APSouthInterface AP DVP 0.017 0.003 - 0.009 (0.004) 0.003 0.013 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2563 CE CE 0.016 (0.001) - (0.002) 0.005 (0.001) 0.016 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_556 CE NIPS 0.016 (0.001) - (0.002) 0.005 (0.001) 0.016 ComEd
  • 16. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 16 Aurora’s LMP contribution output provides the basis for identifying those constraints that drive congestion-based LMP differences. Contingent Branch Monitored Element Index # From Area To Area Generator Sample Generators in ComEd Zone Average of all Binding Constraints 2.27 0.20 GARFIELD ; R_To_TAYLOR ; R 1 CE CE 30.32 30.32 NERC_FG_ID_2417 JFRANTBROSUL NERC_FG_ID_2871NHBHBG__PTDF 2 BREC LGEE 36.91 9.77 GARFIELD ; B_To_TAYLOR ; B 3 CE CE 8.51 5.43 05JEFRSO_05ROCKPT 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE 4 OVEC LGEE 12.69 6.55 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2286BURMUNWILDUM 5 CE NIPS 9.28 4.75 CHERRY VA; R_SILVER LK; R NERC_FG_ID_3771PPRZIO__PTDF 6 WEC CE 5.67 5.67 05MOUNTN_05BELMON 05CLOVRD_To_05CLOVRD 7 AEP AEP 170.60 5.15 NERC_FG_ID_3222 EFRGDBEFRGDR E FRANKFO; R_To_E FRxmid 8 CE CE 3.88 3.88 NERC_FG_ID_2353 BLOBEDPRNMTS 05CLOVRD_To_05CLOVRD 9 AEP AEP 134.78 3.85 NERC_FG_ID_3217 BYCH_BBYNWEM NERC_FG_ID_3814MGPSTR__PTDF 10 METC WEC 3.62 3.62 NERC_FG_ID_2417 JFRANTBROSUL 05NAGEL_To_05NAGEL 11 AEP AEP 7.50 2.13 NERC_FG_ID_2407 CLVLEXMTSVAL AEP-DOM 12 AEP DVP 8.77 2.05 01HATFLD_01RONCO CLEVELAND 13 METC METC 3.48 1.71 8MT STM_8VALLEY_500 AEP-DOM 14 AEP DVP 6.10 1.42 NERC_FG_ID_2353 BLOBEDPRNMTS CLEVELAND 15 METC METC 2.48 1.25 AEP-Dom_01PRNTY_8MT STM AEP-DOM 16 AEP DVP 5.93 1.23 05MOUNTN_05BELMON AEP-DOM 17 AEP DVP 6.37 0.84 05DUMONT_WILTON ; NERC_FG_ID_2515BURSHE__PTDF 18 NIPS CE 1.43 0.50 06CLIFTY_To_7TRIMBLE 19 OVEC LGEE 0.85 0.46 01HATFLD_01RONCO 05KAMMER_To_05WBELLA 20 AEP AEP 53.33 0.13 LMP Contribution (Max - Min)
  • 17. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 17 While average congestion is similar across generating nodes in the ComEd zone, the impact of individual constraints differs greatly. ComEd nodal prices are driven by constraints located outside of that zone. Const. From Area To Area CE Max - Min Wauk Byron Bright Stalk Wind Farm Lee Energy Dresden Powrtn Quad Cities Will County Kendall County Kincaid Zion Avg all Constraints 0.20 (2.70) (2.70) (2.67) (2.65) (2.61) (2.60) (2.60) (2.59) (2.59) (2.57) (2.50) 1 CE CE 30.32 10.84 8.83 (16.18) 8.38 9.01 10.70 7.32 11.61 14.15 3.16 10.86 2 BREC LGEE 9.77 (16.19) (19.16) (13.70) (20.16) (14.59) (16.00) (23.47) (14.58) (14.91) (21.90) (16.23) 3 CE CE 5.43 5.45 4.35 1.49 4.09 4.47 5.16 3.55 6.84 6.06 1.60 5.49 4 OVEC LGEE 6.55 (3.85) (5.02) (2.92) (5.43) (3.33) (4.18) (6.71) (3.36) (3.53) (9.47) (3.93) 5 CE NIPS 4.75 5.04 4.61 7.77 4.47 5.25 4.91 4.02 5.53 5.03 3.02 5.04 6 WEC CE 5.67 (2.51) (3.26) 0.47 (2.57) 0.44 0.26 (2.26) 0.56 0.58 0.00 2.42 7 AEP AEP 5.15 (99.40) (100.54) (98.49) (100.95) (98.95) (99.64) (102.22) (98.88) (99.05) (103.63) (99.41) 8 CE CE 3.88 1.17 0.89 1.49 0.84 1.70 1.37 0.75 2.97 1.26 0.58 1.17 9 AEP AEP 3.85 (103.79) (104.62) (103.12) (104.92) (103.45) (103.97) (105.86) (103.41) (103.53) (106.97) (103.79) 10 METC WEC 3.62 3.04 3.35 0.00 3.21 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.17 11 AEP AEP 2.13 (4.52) (5.17) (4.00) (5.40) (4.19) (4.51) (6.13) (4.19) (4.27) (5.82) (4.52) 12 AEP DVP 2.05 (3.49) (2.86) (3.99) (2.65) (3.81) (3.52) (1.94) (3.81) (3.74) (2.40) (3.48) 13 METC METC 1.71 (5.91) (4.83) (6.10) (4.77) (5.97) (5.86) (4.57) (6.00) (5.98) (4.39) (5.91) 14 AEP DVP 1.42 (2.44) (2.00) (2.79) (1.86) (2.66) (2.46) (1.37) (2.66) (2.61) (1.68) (2.44) 15 METC METC 1.25 (4.09) (3.31) (4.23) (3.27) (4.14) (4.06) (3.12) (4.16) (4.14) (2.99) (4.09) 16 AEP DVP 1.23 (2.57) (2.19) (2.87) (2.07) (2.76) (2.59) (1.64) (2.76) (2.72) (1.92) (2.57) 17 AEP DVP 0.84 (2.30) (2.04) (2.51) (1.96) (2.44) (2.32) (1.67) (2.43) (2.41) (1.89) (2.30) 18 NIPS CE 0.50 (1.05) (0.95) (0.79) (0.93) (1.08) (1.04) (0.84) (1.08) (1.12) (0.62) (1.05) Selected Generating Plants Located in ComEd Zone
  • 18. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 18 Congestion contribution can be transformed to highlight differences among nodes and pricing points Const. From Area To Area CE Max - Min Wauk Byron Bright Stalk Wind Farm Lee Energy Dresden Powrtn Quad Cities Will County Kendall County Kincaid Zion Avg all Constraints 0.20 (0.01) - 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.19 1 CE CE 30.32 2.01 - (25.01) (0.46) 0.17 1.87 (1.51) 2.77 5.31 (5.67) 2.03 2 BREC LGEE 9.77 2.97 - 5.46 (1.00) 4.57 3.16 (4.31) 4.59 4.25 (2.74) 2.93 3 CE CE 5.43 1.10 - (2.87) (0.26) 0.11 0.80 (0.81) 2.48 1.71 (2.75) 1.14 4 OVEC LGEE 6.55 1.17 - 2.10 (0.41) 1.69 0.84 (1.68) 1.66 1.49 (4.45) 1.10 5 CE NIPS 4.75 0.44 - 3.17 (0.14) 0.65 0.31 (0.59) 0.92 0.42 (1.59) 0.43 6 WEC CE 5.67 0.75 - 3.73 0.69 3.70 3.51 1.00 3.82 3.84 3.26 5.67 7 AEP AEP 5.15 1.14 - 2.05 (0.41) 1.59 0.90 (1.68) 1.66 1.49 (3.09) 1.13 8 CE CE 3.88 0.28 - 0.60 (0.05) 0.81 0.48 (0.14) 2.08 0.37 (0.31) 0.28 9 AEP AEP 3.85 0.84 - 1.51 (0.30) 1.17 0.65 (1.23) 1.22 1.09 (2.34) 0.83 10 METC WEC 3.62 (0.32) - (3.35) (0.14) (3.35) (3.35) (0.08) (3.35) (3.35) (3.35) (0.18) 11 AEP AEP 2.13 0.66 - 1.18 (0.22) 0.98 0.67 (0.95) 0.98 0.91 (0.64) 0.65 12 AEP DVP 2.05 (0.63) - (1.13) 0.21 (0.95) (0.66) 0.92 (0.95) (0.88) 0.46 (0.62) 13 METC METC 1.71 (1.08) - (1.27) 0.07 (1.13) (1.03) 0.26 (1.17) (1.14) 0.45 (1.08) 14 AEP DVP 1.42 (0.44) - (0.78) 0.15 (0.66) (0.46) 0.63 (0.66) (0.61) 0.32 (0.43) 15 METC METC 1.25 (0.78) - (0.92) 0.05 (0.82) (0.75) 0.20 (0.85) (0.83) 0.33 (0.78) 16 AEP DVP 1.23 (0.38) - (0.68) 0.13 (0.57) (0.40) 0.55 (0.57) (0.53) 0.27 (0.37) 17 AEP DVP 0.84 (0.26) - (0.47) 0.09 (0.39) (0.28) 0.38 (0.39) (0.36) 0.16 (0.26) 18 NIPS CE 0.50 (0.09) - 0.17 0.03 (0.12) (0.08) 0.12 (0.13) (0.17) 0.33 (0.09) 19 OVEC LGEE 0.46 0.10 - 0.18 (0.04) 0.15 0.08 (0.15) 0.15 0.14 (0.28) 0.10 20 AEP DVP 0.23 0.05 - 0.09 (0.02) 0.07 0.04 (0.07) 0.07 0.07 (0.14) 0.05 Selected Generating Plants Located in ComEd Zone
  • 19. © PA Knowledge Limited 2014 19 Transformation also makes it easier to identify constraints that drive broader interregional congestion PJM 500 Penelec Index # From Area To Area Gavin DC Cook Wauk Byron Bright Stalk Wind Farm Lee Energy Dresden Powrtn Quad Cities Will County Kendall County Kincaid Zion Keystone Average - 0.64 0.66 0.66 0.69 0.71 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.77 0.79 0.86 2.27 1 CE CE - -0.05 13.38 11.37 -13.64 10.92 11.55 13.24 9.86 14.15 16.69 5.70 13.40 0.00 2 BREC LGEE - -22.25 -29.63 -32.60 -27.14 -33.60 -28.02 -29.43 -36.91 -28.01 -28.34 -35.34 -29.66 -7.90 3 CE CE - 0.32 7.09 6.00 3.13 5.74 6.11 6.80 5.19 8.48 7.70 3.24 7.14 0.32 4 OVEC LGEE - -4.24 -7.07 -8.24 -6.14 -8.64 -6.55 -7.40 -9.92 -6.58 -6.74 -12.69 -7.14 -1.76 5 CE NIPS - -0.64 5.91 5.47 8.64 5.33 6.12 5.78 4.89 6.39 5.89 3.88 5.91 0.00 6 WEC CE - 0.02 -2.51 -3.26 0.47 -2.57 0.44 0.26 -2.26 0.56 0.58 0.00 2.42 0.00 7 AEP AEP - 36.29 31.14 30.00 32.06 29.60 31.60 30.90 28.33 31.66 31.49 26.91 31.14 170.60 8 CE CE - -0.29 1.32 1.04 1.64 0.99 1.85 1.52 0.90 3.12 1.42 0.73 1.32 0.00 9 AEP AEP - 12.03 8.25 7.41 8.92 7.11 8.58 8.06 6.18 8.63 8.50 5.07 8.24 134.78 10 METC WEC - 0.00 3.04 3.35 0.00 3.21 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.17 0.00 11 AEP AEP - -2.26 -5.89 -6.54 -5.37 -6.77 -5.56 -5.88 -7.50 -5.56 -5.64 -7.19 -5.89 -0.81 12 AEP DVP - 5.28 6.73 7.36 6.23 7.58 6.42 6.70 8.28 6.42 6.48 7.82 6.74 8.77 13 METC METC - 1.78 -1.52 -0.44 -1.70 -0.37 -1.57 -1.47 -0.18 -1.61 -1.58 0.01 -1.52 1.00 14 AEP DVP - 3.66 4.66 5.10 4.32 5.25 4.45 4.65 5.74 4.45 4.49 5.42 4.67 6.10 15 METC METC - 1.21 -1.12 -0.34 -1.26 -0.30 -1.17 -1.09 -0.15 -1.20 -1.17 -0.02 -1.13 -0.42 16 AEP DVP - 3.25 4.11 4.49 3.81 4.62 3.92 4.09 5.04 3.92 3.96 4.76 4.12 5.93 17 AEP DVP - 3.34 3.90 4.16 3.69 4.25 3.77 3.88 4.54 3.77 3.80 4.32 3.90 6.37 18 NIPS CE - 0.14 -1.22 -1.13 -0.96 -1.10 -1.25 -1.21 -1.01 -1.25 -1.30 -0.79 -1.22 0.00 19 OVEC LGEE - -0.28 -0.48 -0.58 -0.40 -0.61 -0.43 -0.50 -0.73 -0.43 -0.44 -0.85 -0.48 -0.17 20 AEP AEP - 5.18 4.74 4.78 4.72 4.79 4.70 4.73 4.83 4.72 4.72 4.73 4.75 53.33 AEP ComEd