Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Beyond Oxford: Capacity Markets and $263/MWh IWT Output

This is the fifth, and final, post in a series inspired by a UKStudy that concluded a “truism” for natural gas in the coming decades is ‘want wind, need gas.’”

My previous post noted that the need for variable generation capacity, presumably primarily natural gas-fired, does not decrease as wind capacity increases over the next decade, although the annual generation from ‘peaking’ type sources may drop from about 20TWh annually, to 17TWh annually.[i]   The decline for gas producers may be more than offset by the removal of coal-fired generation.  In Ontario, it is frequently noted the costs of the feed-in tariff programs for renewable (FIT and microFIT) have not yet impacted bills.  I’ll demonstrate that isn’t entirely true.  I’ll explore market mechanisms required in a system that includes intermittent generation that is provided with priority purchase status; and the alternate, non-competitive, mechanisms Ontario has substituted for market mechanisms.  That will provide the basis to calculate a figure to add to the accounting for the cost of Ontario’s wind strategy.

I’ve previously noted the large proportion of baseload sources in Ontario’s electricity generation.  Nuclear output, and the minimum output of hydroelectric generators, totals about 72%  of Ontario consumption.  Because Ontario has such a large component of baseload supply, it likely ends up a good indicator of what is to come for other jurisdictions.  From the UK study:
“Notwithstanding the other important findings and future implications for the UK of a growth in installed wind generation capacity, the important conclusion for gas is that until technological breakthroughs are made on demand side management, gas’ central role in providing buffering for variability in wind power generation is assured.  In fact as installed wind capacity grows there is the danger that this ‘crowds out’ scope for less flexible generation technologies such as nuclear and possibly fossil fuels with carbon capture and sequestration, unless this is facilitated by ‘turn-down’ wind generation as accepted means of maintaining system stability”[ii]
That foresees for the UK what we already see in Ontario.  Here we regularly see periods of excess supply where nuclear units dump power, periods where water is run over falls instead of diverted through turbines, and, almost nightly, we dump excess generation on adjacent markets.  We also now have the structure for centralized wind forecasting (which we’ll pay for) in order to pay wind generators as if we purchased output when they get ‘turned-down’ due to an inability to accommodate more electricity on the grid.  Costs specifically related to curtailing production I’ve estimated will start to climb towards $800 million a year by 2017, - but that figure does not account for the costs associated with maintaining capacity to meet demand when the wind is not blowing.

Texas is the US state with the largest Industrial Wind Turbine output, which was, as expected, of little help to it in a hot dry summer.  Prior to the summer, FERC (the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), in its Summer 2011 Energy and Reliability Assessment, had indicated Texas’ ERCOT had the smallest reserve margin (14%) of any system in the US, and cited the average on-peak wind capacity at only 8.7% of nameplate (the capacity value).  When the heat failed to break in Texas, market prices repeatedly hit the capped maximum of $3000/MWh while mothballed coal plants were called back into service.  The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) would conclude (here) the underlying problem to be a shortage of reserves, with a notable assist from a lack of interconnection with other power grids.  The lack of reserves is the issue we’d expect with the addition of supply that does not meet peak demand, unless another market mechanism is added.

The reason we’d expect a lack of reserve supply is because of adding the intermittent source, wind, in situations where it doesn’t remove another source – which is always when it has little capacity value at the expected peak demand periods.  If you have 100 units of supply capacity and you’ve priced it based on it producing 50% of the time, adding another 20 units will lower the price.  If those 20 units are absent at peak, you still need the 100 units but they won’t run 50% of the time, so the cost of the plant, and infrastructure, are spread out over fewer units of production.  

This repeatedly comes as a surprise when wind supply is introduced into new markets.  Here’s the argument from Australia ( I’ve seen it from Denmark and New York state too):  
While the levelised cost of energy from wind farms is higher than that of baseload coal and gas, the deployment of wind energy here and overseas is having a surprising impact on energy market prices: it is causing them to fall.”  
This relationship breaks down rather quickly if you need some reliable supply built.  Lower prices are a market call for reduced production capacity.  The levelized cost of unit energy (LUEC) is a nice concept, but a meaningless one without being able to estimate, with some confidence, the capacity factor (CF) of a planned project.  The Ontario Power Authority, for instance, cites the LUEC for CCGT plants at $65.1/MWh at a CF of 87%, but at a 30% CF they don’t quote the pricier CCGT plants, but conventional combustion turbines, with the price rising to $123/MWh.[iii]  The guaranteed purchase of wind output, regardless of need or impact on other generators therefore increases the LUEC of sources demoted to a support role.

Jurisdictions committed to functioning markets for electricity are developing market mechanisms to deal with this reality.  In the USA, while ERCOT struggled through record peak demands this summer, the PJM market area sailed through it’s record demand without incident.  A New York Times blog entry helps to explain why; generators in the PJM market “…also sell capacity: each utility that serves customers has to go into the wholesale market and buy not only energy but the actual availability of generation.”  This is the flip side of devalued Watts during the productive periods of intermittent generators – paying for the capacity to generate Watts.  It’s worth noting that, at least in the Pennsylvania portion of PJM (the other letters were originally for Jersey and Maryland), FITs are replaced by the market mechanisms of a renewable portfolio standard (RPS).  PJM appears to be an excellent study for proponents of electricity markets.
Germany is catching on to this now to.   Up until now they dealt with increased renewable simply by not taking any existing capacity offline, but recently some Germans are attempting to find a market mechanism to encourage market construction of carbon-emitting sources.[iv]   

Ontario lacks the economic sophistication of the PJM market.  In a rush to replace coal-fired generation with wind, Ontario contracted the construction of CCGT natural gas generation by providing guarantees in the form of ‘Net Revenue Requirements’ – or NRR’s, at an average $7900/MWmonth.[v]  This is the figure that is already hitting electricity bills in Ontario, because we’ve already committed to these contracts with the recent 4000MW of natural gas capacity.  The CCGT plants constructed since 2007 run at well under 30% capacity factors now, and that should decline through 2014, before picking up slightly as nuclear capacity drops during refurbishments.   The reason for the NRR's is the ‘clean’ renewable strategy that seeks to not use the gas generation it required to have to meet demand.

Adding, for each MW of wind capacity, the NRR for it’s complimentary natural gas backup, the calculation is that by 2019 this hidden cost of the wind strategy will be adding about $660 million annually to bills in Ontario.  With this figure added onto our modeling done before, we can go beyond the unrepresentative LUEC figure, which is treated as the FIT rate of $135/MWh.  That is the price for taking everything regardless of the need for it, and for the total cost we need to add the capacity payments, in this case the net revenue requirements, for the CCGT complimentary supply.  By factoring out, from the modeling work communicated in previous posts, the unneeded generation that just creates surplus, and the unneeded generation that prevents the utilization of our existing hydro resources, I’ve calculated the amount of wind output that can be utilized to meet demand in Ontario.  Dividing what it costs us, by what we can use of the output, I've invented the term LUEV to describe the value of 1MW of wind production in Ontario (levelized unit energy value):

Year Wind Generation (MWh) Cost at $135/MWh CCGT NRR for Wind BU SBG MWh Attributed to Wind Hydro Made Excess Due To Wind Utilized Wind Output Utilized as a % of all Generation LUEV of Utilized Wind Output
2006 444,445 $60,000,075 $0 574 0 443,871 99.87% $135
2007 1,037,011 $139,996,485 $37,540,800 609 0 1,036,402 99.94% $171
2008 1,460,529 $197,171,415 $44,745,600 7,186 0 1,453,343 99.51% $166
2009 2,331,428 $314,742,780 $66,834,000 167,923 129,074 2,034,431 87.26% $188
2010 2,809,569 $379,291,815 $102,858,000 272,829 134,370 2,402,370 85.51% $201
2011 4,049,814 $546,724,890 $112,432,800 296,164 260,028 3,493,622 86.27% $189
2012 6,239,063 $842,273,505 $175,948,800 899,518 859,192 4,480,353 71.81% $227
2013 7,435,228 $1,003,755,780 $229,795,200 1,152,979 1,060,276 5,221,973 70.23% $236
2014 10,275,872 $1,387,242,720 $273,877,200 2,117,177 1,839,811 6,318,884 61.49% $263
2015 11,996,952 $1,619,588,520 $365,833,200 1,225,054 1,056,384 9,715,514 80.98% $204
2016 14,253,886 $1,924,274,610 $437,881,200 1,914,090 1,507,570 10,832,226 75.99% $218
2017 16,230,031 $2,191,054,185 $522,253,200 2,269,225 2,153,782 11,807,024 72.75% $230
2018 18,022,431 $2,433,028,185 $594,396,000 3,004,050 2,912,978 12,105,403 67.17% $250
2019 17,989,712 $2,428,611,120 $662,652,000 2,734,898 2,589,679 12,665,135 70.40% $244
2020 18,493,145 $2,496,574,575 $662,652,000 3,124,767 2,667,785 12,700,593 68.68% $249
2021 18,096,398 $2,443,013,730 $662,652,000 3,065,922 2,627,536 12,402,940 68.54% $250
2022 17,781,071 $2,400,444,585 $662,652,000 2,481,469 2,011,299 13,288,303 74.73% $231

168,946,585 $22,807,788,975 $5,615,004,000 24,734,434 21,809,764 122,402,387 72.45% $232

The value of the wind output is dependent on the rest of the supply mix.  Notably, wind is most expensive, and least utilized within Ontario, in 2014, which is the peak year for nuclear output in my model.

The UK study noted increasing wind generation carried the possibility, "that this ‘crowds out’ scope for less flexible generation technologies such as nuclear and possibly fossil fuels with carbon capture and sequestration."   The study didn't note that this may be the singular rationale for a wind turbine strategy.  Pages 40-41 of the anti-nuclear World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010-211 argues nuclear is not compatible with renewables because "overcapacity kills efficiency incentives", and because "renewables need flexible complementary capacity:."
Wind seems to be a strikingly expensive proposition that doesn't to do anything aside from generating overcapacity at the expense of efficiency!  It seems like the only thing it does do is make baseload generation, specifically nuclear, unprofitable - and it seems likely that is precisely the objective the pushers of wind have.

[i]   Calculations per my model, ending in 2022 – assumes no new builds of nuclear are operational prior to the removal of service of Pickering’s 3000MW.  Solar production not in model.
[iv] “Capacity Markets – Framework Conditions, Necessity and Key Point for Implementation.”  , referenced here – other groups in Germany are also looking at a move off of FIT and into RPS – see here
[v] Page 15 of this RPP document 


  1. Hmm it looks like your site ate my first comment (it was super long) so I guess I'll just sum it up what I submitted and say, I'm thoroughly enjoying your blog.
    I too am an aspiring blog blogger but I'm still new to the whole thing. Do you have any suggestions for newbie blog writers? I'd definitely
    appreciate it.

    My web page: residential property management courses

  2. I don't know if it's just me or if perhaps everybody else encountering
    problems with your site. It looks like some of the text
    in your posts are running off the screen. Can someone else
    please comment and let me know if this is happening to them too?
    This could be a problem with my web browser because I've had this happen before. Cheers

    my page home improvement websites
    Also see my website -

  3. Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I provide credit
    and sources back to your webpage? My blog site is in the
    very same area of interest as yours and my visitors would definitely benefit from some of the information you provide here.
    Please let me know if this ok with you. Appreciate it!

    Here is my web-site; game bags hunting

  4. Hey there. I'm wondering if you may be interested in doing a website link swap? I notice your blog: and my blog are centered around the same subject. I'd really like to switch links or perhaps guest author a article for you.
    Here is my personal contact: lutherrodriguez@inbox.
    com. You should contact me if you're even slightly interested. Many thanks.

    My web site - gymnastics clothes for girls

  5. Hey. I noticed your site title, "Blogger: Cold Air" does not really reflect the
    content of your website. When composing your website title,
    do you believe it's most beneficial to write it for Web optimization or for your audience? This is one thing I've been struggling with due
    to the fact I want great rankings but at the same time I want
    the best quality for my visitors.

    Visit my site ... women's gymnastics clothing

  6. Howdy! It seems as though we both have a interest
    for the same thing. Your blog, "Blogger: Cold Air" and mine are very similar.

    Have you ever thought of authoring a guest write-up for a similar blog?

    It will certainly help gain publicity to your website (my site recieves a lot of visitors).
    If you happen to be interested, email me at: leesa-goulet@yahoo.
    com. Thanks for your time

    My blog; exercises to lose belly fat after having a baby
    Also see my site :: 80's workout gear guys

  7. Wow that was unusual. I just wrote an extremely long comment but after I clicked submit my comment
    didn't appear. Grrrr... well I'm not writing all that over again.

    Regardless, just wanted to say fantastic blog!

    Here is my web-site: ballet shoes toddler

  8. Hey there just wanted to give you a quick heads up.
    The text in your content seem to be running off the
    screen in Safari. I'm not sure if this is a format issue or something to do with browser compatibility but I thought I'd post to let you know.
    The design and style look great though! Hope you get the issue solved soon.

    Many thanks

    Also visit my page - silicon wafer manufacturing processes

  9. Hey there just wanted to give you a quick heads up. The words in
    your post seem to be running off the screen in Firefox.
    I'm not sure if this is a formatting issue or something to do with internet browser compatibility but I figured I'd post to let you know.
    The design look great though! Hope you get the issue fixed soon.

    Here is my web page;

  10. Iím not that much of a online reader to be honest but your sites really nice, keep it up!
    I'll go ahead and bookmark your site to come back in the future. Cheers

    Also visit my weblog :: air conditioning contractors of america manual d

  11. Do you mind if I quote a few of your blog posts as
    long as I provide credit and sources returning to your website: http:
    I will aslo be certain to give you the appropriate anchortext link using
    your blog title: Blogger: Cold Air. Please let me know if this is ok with you.
    Thank you

    My blog ... vacation rentals in orlando fl

  12. Searching I noticed your site bookmarked as:
    Blogger: Cold Air. I am assuming you book marked it yourself and wanted to ask if social
    bookmarking gets you a lot of targeted traffic? I've been thinking about doing some social bookmarking for a few of my websites but wasn't
    sure if it would yield any positive results. Many thanks.

    Also visit my weblog :: home appliances online shopping kerala

  13. Doh! I was domain name shopping at and went to type in the
    domain name: and guess who already acquired it?
    You did! haha j/k. I was about to purchase this domain name
    but realized it had been taken so I decided I'd come check it out. Wonderful blog!

    my blog post :: maytag refrigerators filters

  14. Greetings from Carolina! I'm bored at work so I decided to check out your site on my iphone during lunch break. I really like the info you provide here and can't wait to
    take a look when I get home. I'm amazed at how fast your blog loaded on my mobile .. I'm
    not even using WIFI, just 3G .. Anyways, wonderful

    Look at my weblog :: frigidaire washer repair troubleshooting

  15. Howdy this is kind of of off topic but I was wanting to know if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you
    have to manually code with HTML. I'm starting a blog soon but have no coding skills so I wanted to get guidance from someone with experience. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Also visit my site ... frigidaire appliances

  16. Thanks for another informative site. The place else could I get that
    type of information written in such an ideal manner?
    I've a challenge that I'm simply now running on, and I've been on the look out for such information.

    My web-site flying airplane games

  17. It's really a great and helpful piece of info. I am glad that you shared this helpful info with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.

    my website: golf short game classes

  18. Hi! This is my first comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout out and say I genuinely enjoy reading through your articles.

    Can you recommend any other blogs/websites/forums that deal with the same subjects?

    Feel free to visit my web page - home remodeling pittsburgh pa

  19. An impressive share! I have just forwarded this onto a friend who was conducting
    a little homework on this. And he actually bought me
    breakfast due to the fact that I stumbled upon it for
    him... lol. So let me reword this.... Thank YOU for the meal!

    ! But yeah, thanx for spending time to talk about this issue here on your website.

    Here is my weblog: naaptol buy home kitchen appliances refrigerators

  20. Wow that was odd. I just wrote an very long comment but after I clicked
    submit my comment didn't show up. Grrrr... well I'm
    not writing all that over again. Regardless, just wanted to say superb blog!

    my web site ... photos of kitchens with islands

  21. I’m not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your sites really nice, keep it
    up! I'll go ahead and bookmark your site to come back later on. Many thanks

    Review my web-site appliance repair help kenmore washer

  22. I do not write many comments, however I looked at a few of
    the responses on this page "Beyond Oxford: Capacity Markets and $263/MWh IWT Output".
    I actually do have 2 questions for you if you don't mind. Could it be only me or do a few of the remarks appear like they are written by brain dead individuals? :-P And, if you are writing on other social sites, I would like to keep up with anything fresh you have to post. Would you list of every one of all your social sites like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?

    My web page spinal stenosis cervical

  23. Wow, amazing weblog structure! How lengthy have you ever been blogging for?
    you make running a blog glance easy. The full look of your site is fantastic, let alone the content!

    My webpage mandarin chinese translator