Loadseer Overview For Dawg

Page 1
DAWG DF PUP:
LoadSEER demo & Expert Panel Meeting
11/16/2012
Tom Osterhus (IA) - Tom.Osterhus@IntegralAnalytics.com

Dick Stevie (IA) - Richard.Stevie@IntegralAnalytics.com
Scott Smith (IA) - Scott.Smith@IntegralAnalytics.com
Luther Dow (QT) - Ldow@Quanta-Technology.com
Donovan Currey (PG&E) - DDC4@pge.com
© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Background Page 2
 In 2009, PG&E requested Quanta Technology review the

PG&E load forecasting methodology
 Asked to make recommendations that would:
 Strengthen the forecast
 Automate the process
 Provide the consistency and documentation necessary for detailed
regulatory review
 Recommendations
 Do nothing
 Modify the existing LG7 system
 Build an automated, template based self-documented short-range
process around a new forecast algorithm
 Previous recommendation with a dual short – and long-range process
and method
 Previous recommendation with a comprehensive single short to long
range forecast process
Project Purpose Page 3
Goals
 Integrated forecasting process among corporate, transmission and distribution level.
 Improve the management, the consistency, and the use of input data;
 Introduce enhanced review and approval process supported by appropriate
documentation to support regulatory assessment.
Requirements
 Normalized data for weather and time
 Improved handling of adjustment factors
 Automatic feed of forecasting results into the planning tool
 Archival of historical results/output supported with appropriate documentation
Groups Impacted
 Distribution Planning Group
 Transmission Planning Group
 Information Technology Group
 Corporate / Load Research Forecasting Group
 Geographical Information Systems Group
 Meteorology Group

Project Result Page 4
 A load forecasting tool and process that gathers and uses

current available data such as (but not limited to) customer,
load, weather and land use patterns to help create a distribution
load forecast that is consistent with the corporate load forecast
and is approved at levels within the distribution organization
 A major component is the tool called LoadSEER

Page 5
Software & Methods Overview

IA Software Overview Page 6
DSMore Leading tool for DSM Cost Effectiveness

DR Pricer Values DR using advanced risk management methodologies
LoadSEER Forecasts circuit loads, acre level, targets DSM by circuit
IDROP Mathematically guaranteed least cost dynamic dispatching
GridStore Valuation of storage batteries, energy and ancillary markets
WindStore Value of wind firming using demand side options
EV Forecasting EPRI’s lead investigator for EV risk and forecasting
Switching Forecasting Accurately predicts customer switching in dereg markets
TLM for EV Identifies transformers at risk, now, and from future EV
SubSEER Spatial optimization of distribution asset additions vs. DSM
IRPeak Integrates micro level IRP plans, with solar, DG, DSM
XactFit Advanced billing analysis for EE and home energy reports
Bill Insure Improves cost margin on peak using IDROP algorithms
Fixed Bill Forecasts and evaluates risk and margin of fixed bill product
ProfiSeek Calculates accurate margins by customer using smart meter data
DSPatch Micro IRP analysis for peak day resources
Improved accuracy of our software where smart meter data exists,

especially DSMore, LoadSEER, IDROP, ProfiSeek, TLM

Detailed Covariance Analysis Matters Page 7
Why Covariance Matters
Problems Arise When Covariance Analysis is IGNORED

California was hit with huge financial losses 2000 – 2001, when price/load covariance
materialized. Same with Alberta, Cinergy hub 1998-99, and others.
Wall Street (USA) financial sector failed, when they ignored the covariance risk between
mortgage loan defaults and an economic downturn.
Two Key Types of Covariance Impacts on Energy
Between Loads and Prices/Costs (commodity risk. DSMore, IDROP)
Spatial/ Locational Covariance of co-located users (grid risk, LoadSEER)

Detailed Covariance Analysis Matters Page 8
Why Covariance Matters To

Smart Grid and Energy Efficiency Efforts
A Simple Example. Imagine serving a customer in a 5 hour day. Scenario 1
represents valuation using an unrelated avoided cost and load profile.
In Scenario 2 the load profile and avoided cost are co-varied.
Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Both scenarios average 2 Hr MW $ / MWH Total MW $ / MWH Total
MW and $50 per MWH, but 1 2 $50 $100 1 $20 $20
2 2 $50 $100 1 $20 $20
total costs differ when
3 2 $50 $100 2 $50 $50
viewed hourly. 4 2 $50 $100 3 $90 $270
5 2 $50 $100 3 $90 $270
2 50 $500 2 50 $630
This difference ($500 v. $630) is due to the co-varying of prices with

loads, or covariance (correlation). This covariance value (or risk) is
paid by suppliers when supply is short, or weather extreme.
Accurate valuation of energy requires detailed covariance analysis.

DSMore Values Hundreds of Scenarios Page 9
Smart Grid programs Avoided

target the Zone of Generation
Covariance Costs ($$) High Value Target Zone
More Extreme
Weather
Covariance Driven
By Key Factors
Hot Weather
Cold Weather
Drought (hydro) Increasing
Forced Outage Market Prices
High Fuel Costs
Market Forces $60/MWH
Cool
$30/MWH
Hot

Avoided Costs Vary By Customer Page 10
Average Costs (6 cents) vs Marginal Costs (3 to 10 cents)
University
Even with standard
tariff pricing, we
can target higher Newspaper
cost customers
with more unique Smart Charged
Office Tower
energy efficiency Electric Vehicle Peak

Charged
programs to lower Electric
Manufacturer Vehicle Water Park
costs for all With Co-Gen
Street
Average: $42/ MWH. Lights
Range $30 to $120/MWH.
RED LINE shows a

distribution of true/actual
COST OF SERVICE
Flat Loads (lower price) Peaky Loads (higher price)

Locational Covariance & Cost of Homes Page 11
Above
Average
Number of
Average Cost
High Cost
To Serve
Homes

Covariance And Target Marketing Page 12
High Users = Green (uses a lot, but may have efficient building)
Energy Losers = Yellow (inefficient, with higher kwh/degree) Targeted Energy
Recommendations
Red = Both More efficient
HVAC
Insulation
High User Infiltration
Both
High User
Both
Inefficient
Inefficient
Targeted Energy
Added Worry: High income customers
also like EV fast charging ( corr = .3 ). Recommendations
Convenience trumps Cost, again. Lower Temp Set
Lighting
Pool Temp Set
Sub Hourly Covariance (IDROP) Page 13
Integrating Distributed Resources into

Optimal Portfolios (micro level IRP)

13
IDROP Optimizes Energy AND Demand Page 14
Typical Results: From Pilot Testing
Net Peak Reduction

For the Hour (~10% to 30%)
Loads are NOT perfectly flatlined, purposely, because:

We are optimizing on marginal costs, not only on total load.
AC units need minimum run times, as does EV smart charging.

14
DR versus DD (Dynamic Dispatching) Page 15
Customers usually know when DR is underway.

With dynamic dispatching (DD), customers DO NOT NOTICE.
No price signals or credits.

5% to 15% reductions in 2008
15% to 30% 2010 in warmer climate
.
15

IDROP Protects Transformers Page 16
Viewed At The Transformer Level
Bumps intentional
Random Choreographed to limit the extent
that AC units are
IDROP only needs started/stopped,
25%-40% customer and to optimize on
participation to customer marginal
levelize load, which costs, not just on
saves utility money load alone.
and does not force
customers to
participate.
Six transformers, 30 homes, displaying normal volatility in load

prior to IDROP vs. after optimizations are operational.

16
IDROP Levels Loads Dynamically Page 17
Only need 30% of customers to flatten load

Load following replaced by Plant Following, Wind
Following, Cost Following, Solar Following, and Supply
Response (vs. Demand Response)
Total Load kW
Generation Costs Heroically assumes

All 10% Smart Charge
Dynamic Dispatching
AC @ 30% of customers
WH 1 to 4 hours (@30%)
SmartCharging (all 10%)
Dynamic Dispatching
Enables More Efficient Baseload

Optimizing NEGATIVE Covariance Page 18
The Value of Optimal Arbitrage on Demands

 Wind availability, weather conditions, electric prices and
demand for heating and cooling are forecast and
optimized to arrive at the least cost dispatch strategy.
Heat :
Thermal Storage
Cooling :
Also works well with hydro, Ice Storage
where loss of hydro is possible

Sub-Hourly Covariance and FREE HEAT Page 19
+ WindStore
Sub Hourly Dynamic Dispatching not only firms up wind,
It can create nearly FREE HEAT to customers with thermal bricks
Savings
DR
$300 Strategy
$600
Dynamic
$1,420 Dispatch
Strategy
$1,800
$2,000
Operational costs only; ignores construction costs

Arbitraging of Energy vs. Ancillary Page 20
+ GridStore Sub-Hourly Dynamic

3 Year Payback Dispatching of Battery
Saves the Battery Life
Optimizes Energy Value
Optimal Strategy is not a

simple peak vs off-peak one

Bill Insure Can Reduce Costs 300%+ Page 21
+ Bill Insure
(aka Guaranteed Conservation)
Uses Dynamic Dispatching (DD)
Customers Do Not Notice Any Comfort Loss
Is Fixed Bill Without The Moral Hazard Risk
Locks In Guaranteed Conservation
Can Increase Avoided Costs 300+% On Peak

How Does Bill Insure Do It ? Page 22
Optimal Dynamic Dispatching

Bill Insure Can Reduce Costs 300%+ Page 23
Example Bill Normal $25 target

One Week
Customer Bill $28.34 $25.00
Total Cost of $26.93 $20.05
Service
Total AC Use 254 240
(KWh)
Total Water 100 84
Heater KWh
Avoided cost/ $1.41 $4.95
difference
Percent Better 352%

Nuances of Evolving Marginal Costs Page 24
The Nuanced Valuation of DR Pricer

Mild Weather Year
After ~500 MW of SmartGrid EE/DR, High Market Prices
SmartGrid customers are price
setters, not the supply side
(<$75KWyr). $140.00
$120.00
Price based solutions will be $100.00
increasingly less influential, as $80.00

$/kW Capacity
$60.00 Savings
SmartGrid succeeds.
$40.00
10
…adjust capacity value as a function of $20.00
60
150
$-
increasing hours available and increasing
400
MW Deployed 312
800
magnitude…..are 10 to 15 factors that will 120
216
1300
40
Hours Deployed
de-rate peaker proxy value…. 8
DR Pricer covers 12 to 15 other non price

factors including advance notice, duration, IRP runs for range of forward market prices and hourly
days of week, etc. to yield optimal design weather conditions. Value is delta revenue
requirements in KW value, for the hours deployed.

Page 25
Methodology, System Parts

and Annual Process

LoadSEER Methodology Page 26
Simulation
Land use simulation – model/simulate customer growth based on land-
use/urban planning concepts and historical satellite imagery.
Trending
Trending – extrapolate past trends in peak demand growth on a distribution
circuit and bank using economic and weather variable forecasts.
Hybrid
Hybrid methods –combines features of trending and simulation in order to

obtain the a advantages of each without the disadvantages. In general,
trending methods are more accurate in the short-term whereas simulation
methods are more accurate in the long-term.

LoadSEER System Page 27
- LoadSEER-GIS (Geographic Information System) is the established spatial forecasting desktop

application that is used by 1 or 2 Senior Analysts to allocate the System peak forecast down to each substation, bank,
and circuit respectively. LoadSEER-GIS replicates urban development processes based on historical land use change,
zoning information from government, customer rate class from utilities, and transportation network patterns. The
summation of these substation, bank, and circuit forecasts is guaranteed to equal the System’s peak forecast.
- LoadSEER-FIT (Forecast Integration Tool) is the new load trending web-based application that is used by
1-100 Distribution Engineers to adjusts substation, bank, and circuit forecasts with their local knowledge and judgment.
LoadSEER-FIT integrates the spatial forecast with peak load regression analysis using BOTH weather and economic
variables at the circuit, bank and substation level. It also offers new capacity planning functions to help engineers plan
mitigations to forecasted deficiencies (e.g. a load transfer or new feeder).
ESRI
Personal
Geodatabase
Area & Division Load Adjustments

Forecast
Approval
DPA Customer class based

LoadSEER FIT – SQL Server Central LoadSEER GIS –
Forecast Repository: spatial load growth
Approval Web client Load Forecasting Database
Desktop client simulation
Area Forecast
Aggregation
Bank/Circuit Peak Load System Load Allocation

Normalization & Trending and Optimization

LoadSEER Annual Process Page 28

Page 29
Spatial Forecasting Methodology

It begins with Satellite Image Analysis… Page 30

Satellite Image Analysis… 1991 Page 31

Satellite Image Analysis… 2011 Page 32

Satellite Image Conversion Process Page 33

Satellite Image Conversion Process Page 34

Adding Circuits and Transformer Overlays Page 35

Satellite Image Analysis… Change detection Page 36

Model calibration Page 37
Income Segments vs. Distance from Hospital
40.00
20.00
Population
Avg. Utilities
0.00
Low Income
-20.00
Median Income
-40.00
High Income
-60.00
-80.00
1/2 1 mile 2 miles 5 miles 10 30
miles miles miles
Distance from Hospital
*Avg. Utilities is the Average Preference Score for each Segment. Notice: Customer show
significant preference for locating within 10 miles of a hospital.

Model calibration Page 38
Income Segments vs. Distance from Highway
50.00
40.00
30.00
Avg. Utilities
20.00 Population
10.00 Low Income
0.00
-10.00 Median Income
-20.00 High Income
-30.00
-40.00
-50.00
s
s
ile
ile
ile
rd
ile
ile
ile
m
m
m
ya
m
1
4
2
0
10
1/
1/
10
Distance from Highway
*Avg. Utilities is the Average Preference Score for each Segment. Notice: The preference to
located near highways peaks at 2 – 5 miles; customers want to live close, but not too close to
a highway.

Residential Commercial Industrial
Page 39
1991 2001 2011
2021 2031 2041

Data Types & Schema Page 40
- Points
- Lines
- Polygons
Land Use Transportation Activity Center
Polygons Lines Points

Proximity Score 0 - 100 Page 41
 Euclidean Distance to an object

Surrounding Score 0 - 100 Page 42
 Count of small areas within a given radius of a small

area
4 100

Activity Centers Page 43
A major employment area has a large and wide influence on the areas around
it: every one wants to get as close to it as they can. This circular,
decreasing value function of distance, centered at the downtown area,
represents this influence.

Page 44

Page 45

Page 46

Page 47
Econometric MWH Models

At the Circuit Level

LoadSEER Forecast Model Page 48
 The GIS model provides a long-term view of growth for

an area.
 Economic factors can drive the near-term projection of
load more so than a forecast of long-term land
development.
 Integral Analytics has applied standard econometric
techniques to estimate equations to predict MWH by
customer class.

48
MWH Forecast Model Page 49
 MWH Model Objective

 Forecast summer MWH by class for use in projecting peak load for
a feeder
 Key Components
 Use feeder level load data for each customer class for the summer
period
 Breadth of data is limited
 Estimate model for each applicable customer class
 Residential
 Commercial
 Industrial
 Agricultural

 Key Components
 Variables
 Historical data on MWH sales by customer class
 Historical cooling degree days (CDD)
 Number of customers
 Economic variables include:
 Real Gross Regional Product
 Real Total Retail Sales
 Real Total Personal Income
 Real Proprietor Income
 Total Nonfarm Employment
 Agricultural employment


 Model Estimation
 Each model tested to identify best structure in terms of weather
and economic variable, weather only, economic variable only, or
just a constant term
 Feeder class models with identical structure are pooled at the
Division level using seemingly unrelated regressions (SUR) to
improve model efficiency

 Model Estimation
 18 Division Areas
 Up to four customer classes per feeder
 Multiple feeders per Distribution Planning Area
 Multiple Distribution Planning Areas in a Division
 Approximately 3,000 feeders leading to estimation of roughly
10,000 individual equations with 220 SUR models

Sample Result for Division 16 Page 54




Peak Forecast Page 58
 The Peak MW forecast is developed for each customer

class using the forecast of MWH and class level load
factors
 PG&E load research studies provide estimates of load factors for
each rate class in a distribution planning area.
 The load factors were categorized by customer class and
averaged across planning areas within a division to arrive at an
estimate of the load factor used to convert the MWH forecast to
a MW forecast.

Page 59
Forecast Integration Tool

Page 60

Page 61

Page 62

Page 63

Page 64

South Fresno DPA – 2013 Page 65
Relative Loading
125 %
100 %
75 %
50 %

South Fresno DPA – 2022 , Continued Sprawl Page 66
Relative Loading
125 %
100 %
75 %
50 %

South Fresno DPA – 2022 , HSR Station & Infill Page 67
Relative Loading
125 %
100 %
75 %
50 %

Page 68

Page 69

69
LoadSEER Recap…The “Where” Element Page 70
 Developing spatial forecasts provides stronger support for

where the sub-regional growth is expected to occur.
 Spatial forecasts can help T&D planners develop reserve margins required for
the network (as opposed to generation based reserve margins)
 This can help the corporate system level forecast in explaining not just what the
growth will be, but where it will occur. Getting the T&D planners working more
with the load forecasters improves forecast accuracy and credibility for
everyone.
 Regulatory requirements are changing too

 As regulatory agencies demand IRP type modeling for the T&D systems, spatial
forecasting becomes imperative. (e.g. California and Indiana, FERC 1000)
 Spatial forecasts can be used to identify tight points in the network and assess
the benefits and costs of targeted energy efficiency programs.

Loadseer Overview For Dawg

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Loadseer Overview For Dawg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page 1

Tom Osterhus (IA) - Tom.Osterhus@IntegralAnalytics.com

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

 In 2009, PG&E requested Quanta Technology review the

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

 A load forecasting tool and process that gathers and uses

 A major component is the tool called LoadSEER

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Software & Methods Overview

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

DSMore Leading tool for DSM Cost Effectiveness

Improved accuracy of our software where smart meter data exists,

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Why Covariance Matters

Problems Arise When Covariance Analysis is IGNORED

Two Key Types of Covariance Impacts on Energy

Between Loads and Prices/Costs (commodity risk. DSMore, IDROP)

Spatial/ Locational Covariance of co-located users (grid risk, LoadSEER)

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Why Covariance Matters To

This difference ($500 v. $630) is due to the co-varying of prices with

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Smart Grid programs Avoided

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Average Costs (6 cents) vs Marginal Costs (3 to 10 cents)

energy efficiency Electric Vehicle Peak

RED LINE shows a

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Integrating Distributed Resources into

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Typical Results: From Pilot Testing

Net Peak Reduction

Loads are NOT perfectly flatlined, purposely, because:

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Customers usually know when DR is underway.

No price signals or credits.

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Viewed At The Transformer Level

Six transformers, 30 homes, displaying normal volatility in load

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Only need 30% of customers to flatten load

Generation Costs Heroically assumes

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

The Value of Optimal Arbitrage on Demands

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Operational costs only; ignores construction costs

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

+ GridStore Sub-Hourly Dynamic

Optimal Strategy is not a

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Uses Dynamic Dispatching (DD)

Customers Do Not Notice Any Comfort Loss

Is Fixed Bill Without The Moral Hazard Risk

Locks In Guaranteed Conservation

Can Increase Avoided Costs 300+% On Peak

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Optimal Dynamic Dispatching

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

Example Bill Normal $25 target

© 2012 Integral Analytics Inc.

The Nuanced Valuation of DR Pricer

Price based solutions will be $100.00