0% found this document useful (0 votes)

51 views60 pages

2022 LTSA Report

The 2022 Long-Term System Assessment (LTSA) for the ERCOT region evaluates the need for increased transmission and generation capacity over a 10- to 15-year horizon, as mandated by Texas law. Key findings indicate significant growth in inverter-based resources and advanced natural gas generation, a shift in scarcity hours from summer to winter, and challenges in transmission for renewable resources. The assessment utilizes scenario-based planning to guide future investments and ensure system reliability amid evolving demand and resource dynamics.

Uploaded by

Adeleke Olaoluwa

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

51 views60 pages

2022 LTSA Report

Uploaded by

Adeleke Olaoluwa

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 60

2022 Long-Term System Assessment ERCOT Public

2022 Long-Term System Assessment

for the ERCOT Region
December 2022

ERCOT
2022 Long-Term System Assessment ERCOT Public

Executive Summary
Section 39.904(k) of the Public Utility Regulatory Act (PURA) requires that the Public Utility
Commission of Texas (PUCT) and Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. (ERCOT) study the need
for increased transmission and generation capacity and report such needs to the Texas Legislature.
A report documenting this study must be filed with the Legislature by December 31 of each even-
numbered year.
By definition, the bulk transmission network within ERCOT consists of the 60-kilovolt (kV) and higher
transmission lines and associated equipment. In planning for both additions and upgrades to this
infrastructure, ERCOT conducts a variety of forward-looking reviews to help ensure continued system
reliability and efficiency.
ERCOT’s planning process covers several time horizons to identify and endorse new transmission
investments. The near-term needs are assessed in the six-year planning horizon through the
development of the Regional Transmission Plan (RTP). The Long-Term System Assessment (LTSA)
provides an evaluation of the potential needs of ERCOT’s extra-high voltage (345-kV) system in the
10- to 15-year planning horizon.
The LTSA guides the six-year planning process by providing a longer-term view of system reliability
and economic needs. While a small transmission improvement may appear to be sufficient in the six-
year planning horizon, the longer LTSA planning horizon may reveal that a more extensive project
could be required. A larger project may also be more cost-effective than multiple smaller projects -
each being recommended in successive RTPs.
ERCOT studies different scenarios in its long-term planning process to account for the inherent
uncertainty of planning the system beyond six years. The goal of using scenarios in the LTSA is to
identify upgrades that are robust across a range of scenarios or more economical than the upgrades
that would be determined if considering only near-term needs.
At the time of this analysis, ERCOT’s economic criteria for project evaluation was pending. As a result,
potential economically driven transmission improvements were not evaluated in the 2022 LTSA.
The following set of future scenarios was developed considering stakeholder feedback received via
survey and at Regional Planning Group (RPG) meetings:
• Current Trends
• Expanded System Outlook
• Demand Side Evolution
The 2022 LTSA also included a sensitivity for the Demand Side Evolution scenario with a few modified
assumptions based on stakeholder feedback.
Using the assumptions and guidelines in the scenario descriptions, ERCOT prepared different demand
forecasts.
Planning for transmission 10 and 15 years into the future requires ERCOT to make assumptions
regarding what types of new resources can be developed. ERCOT conducted capacity-expansion and

retirement analysis1 for the three future scenarios using the guidelines in the scenario descriptions.
ERCOT also conducted transmission congestion analysis for the Current Trends scenario.
Based on the results of the 2022 LTSA, ERCOT identified the following key findings:
• Significant growth of inverter-based resources (IBR) and more advanced natural gas
generation with higher efficiencies than today’s conventional generation technology was
observed across all three scenarios.
• Growth in renewable resources and electric vehicle adoption led to a shift in scarcity hours to
later in the day, similar to previous LTSAs, and also a gradual shift in scarcity hours from
primarily in the summer season to the winter season.
• Annual capacity factors for conventional generators were significantly higher in the Demand
Side Evolution scenario compared with the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook
scenarios.
• Transmission challenges were identified for both the export from the renewable resource-rich
region and the import into the demand centers.
In all three scenarios, a mix of IBR and natural gas generation was added to the system to serve the
growing demand and replace retired capacity. Wind and natural gas generation additions represented
the two largest resource capacity changes on the system for the three scenarios. As seen in Figure 1
below, total wind generation capacity additions ranged from 13,700 MW to 27,100 MW in the three
scenarios. Total natural gas generation capacity additions ranged from 19,968 MW to 30,324 MW
across the scenarios. Conversely, close to 20,000 MW of existing coal and natural gas generation
capacity was retired by 2037 in all scenarios. The capacity-expansion and retirement analysis also
accelerated some fixed age retirements based on economics, and the timing of specific unit
retirements prior to 2037 were different across the scenarios.

1 This analysis was conducted using the Aurora forecasting model, licensed by Energy Exemplar.

Figure 1: New Capacity Additions Across All Scenarios

Retired coal and natural gas generation was replaced by solar, wind, and new natural gas generation,
and battery energy storage. The share of demand served by wind and solar generation increased in
each of the three scenarios studied. These results indicate the possibility that there may be hours
when demand could theoretically be served entirely by wind and solar resources. Thermal and stability
constraints on the transmission system, as well as operational considerations such as ramping
limitations and maintaining a minimum level of system inertia, will need to be assessed further to
ensure reliability under high renewable penetration.
The study results also showed a shift in scarcity hours to later in the day in the Current Trends and
Expanded System Outlook scenarios, similar to findings from previous LTSAs, while the Demand Side
Evolution scenario did not have any scarcity hours. The gradual shift of scarcity hours from primarily
in the summer season to the winter season was also observed in the 2022 LTSA. While scarcity hours
in 2027 mostly happened in summer, more than half of the scarcity hours in 2032, and almost all
scarcity hours in 2037, occurred in winter. The shift of the scarcity hours was driven primarily by an
assumed increase in electric vehicle adoption rates and the amount of new solar generation in the
resource mix. As renewable penetration on the ERCOT system continues to increase, possible system
conditions during high net load hours (customer demand minus aggregate wind and solar output) need
to be included in planning studies.
The Demand Side Evolution scenario observed significantly higher annual capacity factors for the
conventional generators compared with the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook scenarios.
The scenario incorporated 16 GW of price responsive Large Flexible Load (LFL)2 based on stakeholder
feedback from an informal survey in early 2022. The LFL was expected to remain flat and only ramp

2 LFLs are currently defined as Loads at least 20 MW in size directly connected to Generation Resources, or standalone Loads at
least 75 MW in size, that plan to reach the maximum size within two years. The vast majority of LFLs (both in operation and undergoing
interconnection study) are bitcoin mining facilities. https://www.ercot.com/services/comm/mkt_notices/detail?id=fc84b65f-72fe-4704-
9974-b52974cdb81e

down when the market price exceeded the assumed strike price. In addition, more aggressive
Electrical vehicle (EV) adoption together with managed EV charging were assumed in the scenario.
The concept of managed EV charging was to mitigate the potential load impact of EV charging with
the assumption that EV charging would happen during renewable-abundant hours when non-EV load
was not high, which resulted in more charging activities in late-evening and early-morning hours. To
serve the LFL throughout the day and EV charging load during the late evening and early morning
hours, the annual capacity factors for the conventional generators increased significantly compared
with the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook scenarios. The capacity factor increase was
most significant for natural gas generation, especially combustion turbine generation, due to their
operational flexibility and availability to meet the load during the hours with lower renewable output.
Similar to findings from the 2020 LTSA3, significant congestion was observed on the West Texas
export interface, which measures the export of the renewable generation out of the resource-rich
region in the west part of the system. Significant congestion was also observed on the paths into
demand centers such as Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston. The areas with the most congestion during
2037 are shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Top Congestion Areas for the Current Trends Scenario in 2037

3 https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2020/12/23/2020_LTSA_Report.zip

Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................................i

Chapter 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2. LTSA Process ............................................................................................................................... 2

Chapter 3. Key Findings .................................................................................................................................. 5

Key Finding 1: Significant growth of inverter-based resources (IBR) and advanced natural gas
generation with higher efficiencies than today’s conventional generation technology was observed
across all three scenarios. ........................................................................................................................... 5

Key Finding 2: Growth in renewable resources and electric vehicle adoption leads to a shift in scarcity
hours to later in the day, similar to previous LTSAs, and also a gradual shift of scarcity hours from
primarily in the summer season to the winter season. ............................................................................... 10

Key Finding 3: Annual capacity factors for conventional generators were significantly higher in the
Demand Side Evolution scenario compared with the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook
scenarios …….... ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Key Finding 4: Transmission challenges were identified for both the export from the renewable
resource-rich region and the import into the demand centers. .................................................................. 18

Appendices ................................................................................................................................................... 20

Appendix I: LTSA Process......................................................................................................................... 20

Appendix II: Resource Siting Methodology ................................................................................................ 33

Appendix III: Fixed-Age Generation Retirements ...................................................................................... 34

Appendix IV: Scenario Results Summary .................................................................................................. 35

Chapter 1. Introduction

ERCOT manages the flow of electric power to more than 26 million Texas customers—representing
about 90 percent of the state’s electric demand. ERCOT schedules power on an electric grid that
connects more than 52,700 miles of transmission lines and more than 1030 generation units.
As part of its responsibility to adequately plan the transmission system, ERCOT must develop a
biennial assessment of needed transmission infrastructure. PURA § 39.904(k) requires the PUCT and
ERCOT to study the need for increased transmission and generation capacity throughout the state of
Texas and report to the Legislature the results of the study and any recommendations for legislation.
The report must be filed with the Legislature no later than December 31 of each even-numbered year.
ERCOT has developed this 2022 Long-Term System Assessment (LTSA) in satisfaction of that
requirement.
This LTSA includes analysis of system needs for the long-term, 10- to 15-year planning horizon and
is designed to guide near-term transmission planning decisions. Given the long-term nature of the
LTSA study horizon, the findings and observations from the LTSA are based on analysis of multiple
scenarios. Such scenarios are developed by collaboration among ERCOT and stakeholders and are
based on projections of certain key assumptions. The LTSA projections - specifically: demand,
generation, and transmission expansion plans - are outcomes of these scenario-specific studies.
These projections should not be considered ERCOT’s official forecasts for the long-term horizon.
The findings and observations from the LTSA are intended to provide information for ERCOT
stakeholders and policymakers to consider in their decision-making, and are based upon complex
analysis of multiple possible, but not necessarily probable, futures. Key limitations of the 2022 LTSA
analysis should also be considered by interested parties, including the following:
• Hourly simulations used for economic analysis in both capacity-expansion and transmission
expansion studies may not fully capture the intra-hour revenue and potential benefits of
resources. Conducting intra-hour simulations was not feasible for the 2022 LTSA.
• The hourly wind and solar generation profiles used in the capacity-expansion analysis do not
fully capture all of the considerations used by developers when selecting generation sites.
• While the scenarios selected are meant to investigate the boundaries of potential futures, they
do not represent the entirety of possible future outcomes. Future conditions may deviate from
those studied in the 2022 LTSA.
• The Demand Side Evolution scenario included in the 2022 LTSA analysis may not be fully
representative of increasingly complex and evolving customer behavior. As such, it should be
considered a starting point for evaluating the increased adoption of demand-side technologies,
increased flexibility of certain types of demand, and their significant impact on the ERCOT
system.

Chapter 2. LTSA Process

The process of planning a reliable and efficient transmission system for the ERCOT region is
composed of several complementary activities and studies. The ERCOT-administered system
planning activities comprise near-term studies, including the RTP and Regional Planning Group (RPG)
projects, and ongoing, long-range studies, which are documented in the LTSA. In addition to these
activities, transmission service providers (TSPs) conduct analyses of local transmission needs. Those
TSP analyses are supplemental to the ERCOT planning process.
The LTSA guides the near-term planning horizon (RTP) through scenario-based assessment of
divergent future outcomes. As future study assumptions become more certain, the RTP supports
actionable plans to meet near-term economic- and reliability-driven system needs. In support of
stakeholder-identified or ERCOT-assessed projects, the RPG review process leads to the
endorsement of individual projects that maintain reliability or increase system efficiency. Collectively,
these activities create a robust planning process to ensure the reliability and efficiency of the ERCOT
transmission system for the foreseeable future.
The LTSA is a composite study made up of various processes and analyses such as scenario
development, demand forecasting, capacity-expansion and retirement analysis, and transmission
expansion analysis. ERCOT uses a scenario-based approach to perform the LTSA. The purpose of
the scenario-based approach is to provide a structured format for stakeholders and ERCOT to identify
the most critical trends, drivers, and uncertainties over a ten- to fifteen-year period. Scenarios
developed in collaboration with stakeholders provided high-level guidelines for preparing cases to be
used in the LTSA. The scenario descriptions were converted to modeling assumptions using available
reference data. In addition, for each scenario, a scenario-specific demand forecast was created using
inputs from the scenario descriptions.
The demand forecast and other scenario-specific generation input assumptions such as capital costs,
operations and maintenance costs, emission costs, etc. were used to create each capacity-expansion
and retirement plan. These plans describe the total amount of generation additions by technology. The
plans also identify any retirements required as a result of the scenario assumptions. The generation
additions were later added to transmission study models using the generation siting process as
documented in the generation siting methodology.4 The LTSA culminated in a transmission expansion
analysis which involved evaluating the potential needs for the ERCOT grid under different demand
and generation assumptions as developed during the demand-forecasting and capacity-expansion
and retirement-planning stages. Figure 3 below provides a simplified depiction of the LTSA process.
A detailed description of analyses and studies that went into the LTSA can be found in Appendix I.

4 The LTSA Generation Siting Methodology is described in Appendix II.

Scenario Development

Transmission
Expansion
Uncertainties

Trends

Drivers

LTSA Capacity
Expansion
Stakeholder
Feedback

Scenario-
Scenario Demand
Specific
Description Forecast
Assumptions

Figure 3: 2022 Long-Term System Assessment Process

Three scenarios were included in the 2022 LTSA. Table 1 provides a summary of each scenario.
Table 1: Scenarios Developed for the 2022 LTSA

Scenario Description
Current Trends The Current Trends scenario was designed to study a future
trajectory consistent with what is known and knowable today (e.g.,
demand growth, economic trends, fuel prices, etc.). Similar to the
2020 LTSA, electric vehicle adoption assumptions were included
in the demand forecast.

Expanded System Outlook The Expanded System Outlook scenario included additional
resources from the interconnection process, i.e., all the resources
included in the December 2021 Capacity, Demand and Reserves
(CDR) report. This scenario is designed to help overcome
challenges with under-selection of some resource types (i.e.,
batteries and solar) and potential better correlation with the
Generator Interconnection Status (GIS) report and CDR report in
terms of both resource mix and siting.
Demand Side Evolution The Demand Side Evolution scenario was developed to study the
impacts of the integration of large amounts of LFL, high rooftop
solar adoption, high EV adoption, and managed EV charging. A
sensitivity analysis was also performed by imposing buildout
limitations on advanced natural gas generators and utilizing tiered
strike prices for the LFLs’ price responses.

Chapter 3. Key Findings

The 2022 LTSA includes a study of three different scenarios. Key findings from the study include:
1. Significant growth of inverter-based resources (IBR) and more advanced natural gas
generation with higher efficiencies than today’s conventional generation technology was
observed across all three scenarios.
2. Growth in renewable resources and electric vehicle adoption led to a shift in scarcity hours to
later in the day, similar to previous LTSAs, and also a gradual shift of scarcity hours from
primarily in the summer season to the winter season.
3. Annual capacity factors for conventional generators were significantly higher in the Demand
Side Evolution scenario and sensitivity compared with the Current Trends and Expanded
System Outlook scenarios.
4. Transmission challenges were identified for both the export from the renewable resource-rich
region and the import into the demand centers.

The capacity-expansion analysis found that retired coal and natural gas generation was replaced by
wind, solar, battery energy storage, and more advanced high-efficiency natural gas generation
technologies. The total installed capacities of IBR and more efficient natural gas generation increased
in all scenarios. These findings are generally consistent with the results from the 2020 LTSA, but less
new capacity was added in the 2022 LTSA.
The primary reason that less new capacity was added in the 2022 LTSA compared with the 2020
LTSA was the lower demand forecast. The peak demand forecast for 2035 was close to 95 GW in
2022 LTSA, which was about 11.6 GW or 11% lower compared to the 2020 LTSA. The 2022 LTSA
used the ERCOT 2021 Long-Term load forecast, which was the most up to date forecast at the time
of the analysis. The decrease in load forecast was influenced by pandemic-related assumptions that
may no longer be applicable. The secondary reason is that the assumed distributed solar growth is
higher than the 2020 LTSA. The assumed distributed solar installed capacity was close to 6,000 MW
for 2035 in the 2022 LTSA Current Trends scenario while it was around 4,000 MW in the 2020 LTSA
Current Trends scenario. Therefore, less new capacity was needed to serve the forecasted demand
in the 2022 LTSA.

Capacity Additions

Total capacity added by the capacity-expansion analysis was 57,425 MW in the Current Trends
scenario and varied from 35,906 MW in the Expanded System Outlook scenario to 95,701 MW in the
Demand Side Evolution sensitivity. Utility-scale solar capacity additions ranged from 0 MW to 18,900
MW across the scenarios. The amount of distributed solar generation added in each scenario was a
model input rather than a result of economic analysis. The assumed distributed solar adoption for
Current Trends and Expanded System outlook scenarios was the same and it grew from 3,400 MW in
2023 to 5,900 MW in 2037. For Demand Side Evolution scenario and its sensitivity, the distributed
solar was assumed to be 5,900 MW in 2023 and increase to 7,400 MW in 2037.

New IBR and more advanced high-efficiency natural gas generators comprised the majority of capacity
additions in all scenarios to meet the demand growth and replace the unit retirements. Since the
assumed capital cost of wind generation was low enough, such that the investment could be recovered
by energy prices, the model added significant amount of wind in the resource mix among all the
scenarios. However, not all scenarios added solar generators in the resource mix. The Demand Side
Evolution sensitivity had the highest solar addition of 18,900 MW among all the scenarios. The
Expanded System Outlook scenario, which had more than 33 GW installed solar capacity in the
starting resource mix, did not add any additional solar capacity. Though wind and solar resources have
different diurnal generation patterns, and they can complement each other to serve demand
throughout the day, the relatively low average capacity factor of solar and the shift of peak net load to
night hours may potentially limit the buildout of solar in certain scenarios depending on the future
economics and penetration of energy storage technologies. The model added the highest combined
cycle capacity in the Demand Side Evolution scenario, since this scenario included 16 GW of LFL and
a significant amount of electric vehicle charging at night, which biased the model to select resources
that were available at night. In the Demand Side Evolution sensitivity, the gas capacity addition was
restricted to one combined cycle per year and 800 MW of simple cycle for each year. This sensitivity
showed the highest amount of solar, wind and battery additions. Figure 4 shows the amount of capacity
added by technology in each scenario and sensitivity.

Combined Cycle Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine Storage Utility-Scale Solar Wind

120,000

100,000

80,000
MW

60,000

40,000

20,000

0
Current Trends Expanded System Demand Side Evolution Demand Side Evolution
Outlook Sensitivity

Figure 4: New Capacity Additions by Scenario by 2037

Generation Retirements

The retirement process for the 2022 LTSA had two distinct parts, similar to the 2020 LTSA. First, a
group of fixed-age retirements was determined for use in all scenarios. These fixed-age retirements
were determined by the age of an existing unit. Natural gas units were retired after 60 years of
operation, and coal units were retired after 45 years of service. The second part of the retirement
process considered economics as the criterion for retirement. Based on economic simulations, if a
unit’s fixed and variable costs were greater than the unit’s total revenue, the unit was retired in the

next model year studied. By 2037, the total fixed-age retirements were 8,116 MW of coal and 11,449
MW of natural gas. The list of affected units and dates of retirement are provided in Appendix III. The
fixed-age retirements for coal were lower than the 2020 LTSA because some of the coal retirements
happened before the end of 2022. The capacity-expansion and retirement analyses also accelerated
some of the fixed age retirements based on economics, and the timing of specific unit retirements prior
to 2037 were different across the scenarios.
The capacity-expansion model retired an additional 105 MW capacity based on economics.
Comparatively, in the 2020 LTSA, the model did not retire any additional capacity based on economics,
but accelerated some fixed age retirements.

Changing Resource Mix

The share of demand served by coal-fired generation declined throughout the 15 years in each of the
three scenarios as well as the sensitivity for the Demand Side Evolution scenario, due to coal
generation retirements and demand growth over the study period. Retired coal and natural gas
generation was replaced by solar, wind, new natural gas generation, and battery energy storage. The
share of IBR increased in all scenarios, driven by the expanded IBR capacity in the final resource mix.
The Expanded System Outlook scenario showed that the starting resource mix alone affected the
capacity-expansion results and final resource mix with all the other assumptions remained the same
as the Current Trends scenario. With 33,146 MW of utility-scale solar already in the starting resource
mix, the Expanded System Outlook scenario did not have any solar additions in capacity expansion
compared with 5,800 MW solar addition in the Current Trends scenario. In addition, with 39,877 MW
of wind in the starting resource mix, the Expanded System Outlook scenario added 13,700 MW of
wind in capacity expansion compared with 27,100 MW wind addition in the Current Trends scenario.
The final resource mix in the Expanded System Outlook scenario had 10 GW more solar and
approximately 11 GW less wind than the Current Trends scenario. Although the Expanded System
Outlook scenario was designed to help overcome challenges with under-selection of some resource
types (i.e., batteries and solar), the final battery capacity was comparable between the Current Trends
scenario and the Expanded System Outlook scenario. The Expanded System Outlook scenario had
close to 4,600 MW batteries in the starting resource mix, which was around 2,500 MW higher than the
starting resource mix for the Current Trends scenario. The capacity expansion in the Expanded
System Outlook scenario added less than 600 MW of batteries and brought the total battery capacity
to slightly over 5,000 MW in the final resource fix. The total battery capacity in the Current Trends
scenario final resource mix was approximately 6,600 MW.
Wind and natural gas are the primary resource types used to serve ERCOT demand in all the
scenarios and sensitivity. In the Current Trends scenario and the Demand Side Evolution sensitivity,
wind generation replaced natural gas generation to become the primary technology by 2037. Figure 5
shows the percent of total energy generated by fuel type in 2037 for all scenarios.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Current Trends Expanded System Demand Side Demand Side
Outlook Evolution Scenario Evolution
Sensitivity

Natural Gas Coal Wind Solar Nuclear Other

Figure 5: Generation by Fuel Type for 2037

Figure 6 below provides a comparison of historical renewable penetration5 experienced in 2021 to that
seen in the Current Trends scenario. It is expected that the number of hours during which the majority
of demand could be served by intermittent renewable resources will increase as more wind and solar
capacity is integrated into the ERCOT system. Given the amount of renewable generation added in
these scenarios, it appears that there may be hours when all ERCOT demand could theoretically be
served by wind and solar resources. However, thermal and stability constraints on the transmission
system and unit commitment limitations caused the grid simulation software to curtail available wind
and solar output. In addition, operational considerations, such as ramping limitations and maintaining
a minimum level of system inertia, would need to be assessed further to ensure reliability under high
renewable penetration conditions.

5 Renewable penetration is defined as the total amount of demand at any given time that is being served by solar and wind generation.

2032 (Potential) 2032 (with Curtailment) 2021 (Potential) 2021 (Actual)

95,000
90,000
85,000
80,000
75,000
Demand (MW)

70,000
65,000
60,000
55,000
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percentage of Renewable Penetration

Figure 6: Renewable Penetration Trends

Key Finding 2: Growth in renewable resources and electric vehicle adoption leads to a shift
in scarcity hours to later in the day, similar to previous LTSAs, and also a gradual shift of
scarcity hours from primarily in the summer season to the winter season.
Scarcity hours shifted to later in the day in the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook
scenarios, similar to previous LTSAs, while the Demand Side Evolution scenario and sensitivity did
not observe any scarcity hours. The Current Trends scenario saw scarcity hours from 7 pm to 1 am,
and the Expanded System Outlook scenario saw scarcity hours from 7 pm to 12 am by 2037.
The gradual shift of scarcity hours from primarily in the summer season to the winter season was also
observed in the 2022 LTSA. While scarcity hours in 2027 mostly happened in summer, more than half
of the scarcity hours in 2032 and almost all scarcity hours in 2037 occurred in winter.
Factors6 influencing the shift in scarcity hours include:
• Increased adoption of electric vehicles could result in a significant shift in hourly demand
profiles. This observation was also noted in the previous LTSAs.
• The drop in solar production experienced in late evening hours can result in a high ramping
rate for net load.7 High net load ramping conditions will likely become more frequent and severe
as solar penetration increases.
• The loss of solar production in late evening hours coupled with limited wind generation output
could lead to stressed system condition.
• The peak net load hour happened in the winter season for all scenarios and sensitivity in 2037
due to the drop in both solar and wind production in late evening hours.
As renewable penetration on the ERCOT system continues to increase, possible system conditions
outside of summer peak, including peak net load conditions, need to be included in planning studies.

Peak Day Load Shape

One potential challenge identified in the study is the need for additional generation resources to offset
the drop in solar production in late evening hours of the summer and morning and late evening hours
of winter seasons. With the amount of solar resource capacities noted in the scenarios in this study,
the loss of solar output in the late evening while air conditioning demand remains high could lead to
extreme system ramping conditions, or possibly insufficient generation to serve demand (especially
on days when there is little to no wind generation output). On some days the model simulation output
indicated limited amounts of unserved energy. Below, Figure 7 shows this potential result for a summer
peak evening in 2037 from the Current Trends scenario. The dashed lines are plotted on the secondary
vertical axis while the solid lines are plotted on the primary vertical axis.

6 Please note the additional outages caused by winter storm Uri were not considered in this LTSA study, and average forced outage
rates based on normal historical weather conditions were used in the study.
7Customer demand minus aggregate wind and solar output. Net load is representative of the portion of demand not served by wind
or solar generation.

Figure 7: Summer Peak Net Load Challenge on a Hot Summer Day in 2037

In 2037, peak net load happened in the winter season when the solar production was gone, and the
wind output also greatly dropped. Figure 8 shows this potential result for a winter peak evening in 2037
from the Current Trends scenario.

Figure 8: Winter Peak Net Load Challenge in 2037

Historically, the most stressed system conditions – from both resource-scarcity and transmission-
security standpoints – have been during summer afternoons. In all three scenarios and the sensitivity,
stressed system conditions were observed at other times of day and in the winter season. As wind
and solar penetration on the ERCOT system continue to increase, transmission planning studies need
to consider system conditions outside of summer peak demand hours, and specifically during high net
load hours.

Peak Net Load

A comparison of net load and conventional demand from the Current Trends scenario in year 2037 is
shown below in Figure 9. The net load curve is the part of ERCOT demand that will be served after
intermittent renewable resources (i.e., wind and solar) are utilized. Please note that the wind and solar
generation used in the net load calculation reflects curtailment. The peak load portion of the net load
duration curve is steeper than the conventional load duration curve. The peak net load occurs in a
relatively small number of hours, and, therefore, investors in conventional peaking generation capacity
(e.g., combustion turbines) may not be able to recover investment costs to meet the peak net demand,8
and other resources will be necessary to serve the peak net demand requirement. Such resources will
require suitable availability and ramping capabilities.

8 PUCT’s market redesign initiatives may help to address this issue. For more information see PUCT websites:
https://interchange.puc.texas.gov/search/filings/?UtilityType=A&ControlNumber=52373&ItemMatch=Equal&DocumentType=ALL&S
ortOrder=Ascending and
https://interchange.puc.texas.gov/search/filings/?UtilityType=A&ControlNumber=54335&ItemMatch=Equal&DocumentType=ALL&S
ortOrder=Ascending.

Figure 9: Load vs Net Load for Current Trends Scenario for 2037

Key Finding 3: Annual capacity factors for conventional generators were significantly
higher in the Demand Side Evolution scenario compared with the Current Trends and
Expanded System Outlook scenarios.
The Demand Side Evolution scenario and sensitivity included 16 GW of price responsive LFL based
on an informal survey conducted in early 2022. The LFL was expected to remain flat and only ramp
down when the market price exceeded the assumed strike price. In addition, more aggressive EV
adoption across all vehicle categories from light duty vehicle, to buses, to heavy duty vehicle was
assumed. Managed charging was also utilized to mitigate the potential impact of EV charging by
assuming EV charging during renewable-abundant hours where non-EV load is not high, which
resulted in more charging activities in late evening and early morning. The addition of the significant
amount of the LFL and the managed EV charging presented the need for additional generation
resources to offset the drop in solar production in late evening and early morning hours. It was
observed that conventional generators had significantly higher annual capacity factors compared with
the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook scenarios to serve the LFL throughout the day and
EV charging load during the late evening and early morning hours. The capacity factor increase was
most significant for the natural gas generation, especially combustion turbine generation, due to their
operational flexibility and availability to meet the load during the hours lower renewable output. The
annual capacity factor comparison for 2037 among the different scenarios is shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Annual Capacity Factors for 2037

Expanded Demand Side

Current Demand Side
Resource Technology System Evolution
Trends Evolution
Outlook Sensitivity
Battery 7% 8% 9% 7%
Coal 69% 74% 83% 76%
Combined Cycle 46% 48% 71% 61%
Simple Cycle Turbine
15% 15% 26% 21%
& Gas Steam
Solar 27% 26% 27% 28%
Wind 44% 43% 45% 44%

Large Flexible Loads

Industrial demand growth remains strong on the ERCOT system, driven in part by oil and gas activity
in West Texas and increased demand in data centers and cryptocurrency mining facilities. The
requests for the interconnection of LFLs surged in the past couple of years, and ERCOT continues to
improve its processes to account for such hard-to-forecast, large-scale load additions with short
interconnection timelines. In order to capture the impacts of the LFLs on the ERCOT system from the
long-term planning horizon perspective, the Demand Side Evolution scenario was incorporated in the
2022 LTSA. ERCOT conducted an informal survey in early 2022 to obtain necessary information to
determine the appropriate demand from LFLs to be included. Based on the survey results, 16 GW
demand from LFLs was included in the Demand Side Evolution scenario. Based on historical data
analysis, the strike price for the LFLs to ramp down in response to market price was set to $100/MWh.
The current LFL requests as of October 2022 can be found in Figure 10 below.9

9 Operational – Projects that are currently in operation and projects that are approved to energize by ERCOT. This category also
accounts for staged energization schedules.
Met Planning – Projects that have received approval of the required planning studies.
Deferred – Project MWs that were limited after ERCOT review or for which the project owner has provided an energization schedule.
In Study – Projects that have studies under review by ERCOT.
Planned – Projects that are tracked by ERCOT but that have not yet provided sufficient information to begin review.
https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2022/10/24/LLI%20Queue%20Update%20-%202022-10-24.pdf

Figure 10: LFL Requests as of October 2022

After the completion of the Demand Side Evolution scenario, a Demand Side Evolution sensitivity was
also conducted to incorporate stakeholder feedback. The strike price for the LFL was changed as
follows.
• 60% of LFL (9,600 MW) at 100 $/MWh, this is an energy only curtailment for the standard
mining equipment.
• 30% of LFL (4,800 MW) at 200 $/MWh, this is also an energy only curtailment targeted toward
LFLs with more efficient/newer crypto mining equipment that can curtail at higher price.
• 10% of LFL (1,600 MW) at 1,000 $/MWh, this is for miners that are less price responsive to
real time price swings.
In addition, a max buildout limit for both advanced combined cycle trains and combustion turbines was
also employed, based on stakeholder feedback, in the Demand Side Evolution sensitivity.

Managed EV Charging

An aggressive EV adoption was assumed for the Demand Side Evolution scenario, as shown in Figure
11 below. The adoption levels of local heavy-duty vehicles and long-haul heavy-duty trucks are more
than doubled compared with the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook scenarios. To mitigate
the potential negative consequences of the high-level EV adoption, managed EV charging was utilized
to better align EV charging with high renewable and non-peak load hours.

Electric Vehicles on the Road by Type

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037

% of Light Duty Vehicle % of Buses

% Local Heavy Duty Vehicles % Long-haul Heavy Duty Trucks

Figure 11: High Adoption of EV in Demand Side Evolution

With managed EV charging, EV charging energy demand was balanced throughout the day, with a
focus on reducing energy usage during peak net load periods. EV managed charging profiles were
developed for each season to capture seasonality of renewable generation and non-EV load. The
concept is illustrated in Figure 12 and the detailed description can be found in Appendix IV.

Figure 12: Illustration of EV Charging Load Management Method

Based on the approach documented in Appendix IV, EV charging profiles were developed for each
season in each year. Figures 13 and 14 show the EV charging profiles for each season in 2037.

Hourly Charging Load for 2037 Summer and Winter

16000

14000
EV Charging Load (MW)

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Summer Winter

Figure 13: Summer and Winter Managed EV Charging

Hourly Charging Load for 2037 Spring and Fall

16000

14000
EV Charging Load (MW)

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Spring Fall

Figure 14: Spring and Fall Managed EV Charging

Key Finding 4: Transmission challenges were identified for both the export from the
renewable resource-rich region and the import into the demand centers.
Comparable to findings from the 2020 LTSA, ERCOT identified the significant congestions on the
West Texas Export interface and the import paths to demand centers such as Dallas-Fort Worth and
Houston. This congestion pattern is driven by both a changing resource mix and trends in customer
demand growth with consequent challenges for both power transfer across the system and customer
delivery. Large industrial load additions are occurring, and are projected to continue occurring, in both
rural and urban areas. The time of use and flexibility of customer demand are also shifting as new
technologies are adopted.
Figure 8 shows the top constraints observed in 2032 for the Current Trends scenario. Figure 16 shows
the same in 2037. The sizes of the bubbles indicate the relative amount of congestion rent experienced
by each transmission element.

Figure 8: Top Constraints for the Current Trends Scenario (2032)

Figure 9: Top Constraints for the Current Trends Scenario (2037)

The Dallas-Fort Worth area was highly congested in the Current Trends scenario, driven by both
generation additions to the northwest of the area and load growth within the area. This observation is
consistent with both the findings of the 2020 LTSA and near-term needs identified by the 2022 RTP.
The import paths into Houston, including the North to Houston interface and the 345-kV transmission
lines from South Texas Project to WA Parish and Hillje, were also highly congested. The congestion
was driven by the conventional generation retirement and load growth in Houston and the renewable
generation additions in both the south and northwest areas of the system.
The West Texas export interface also experienced high congestion in the Current Trends scenario.
The congestion rent for the West Texas export interface was close to $1 billion in 2037 due to the
significant renewables added by the capacity-expansion model in north and West Texas.
At the time of the analysis, ERCOT’s economic criteria for project evaluation was pending.10 As a
result, potential economically driven transmission improvements were not evaluated in the 2022 LTSA.

10The Commission recently adopted rule amendments establishing these criteria. See PUC rulemaking Project No. 53403, Review of
Chapter §25.101 Certification Criteria, Order Adopting Amendments to 16 TAC 25.101 as Approved at the November 30, 2022 Open
Meeting (Dec. 7, 2022);
available at: https://interchange.puc.texas.gov/Documents/53403_86_1256975.PDF.

Appendices
Appendix I: LTSA Process
LTSA Scenario Development

The 2022 LTSA scenario development process focused on stakeholder feedback received via survey
and during Regional Planning Group (RPG) meetings. The scenario-based planning approach
provided a structured way for stakeholders to identify the most critical trends, drivers, and uncertainties
for the upcoming ten- to fifteen-year period. Scenario-based planning considered different, yet
plausible futures and was used to evaluate transmission plans across multiple futures. Some of the
noteworthy drivers considered in the LTSA can be seen in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Key Drivers Considered in the 2022 LTSA

Drivers Brief Description

The US and Texas economy; regional and state-wide population; oil
Economic Conditions & gas, and industrial growth; LNG export terminals; urban/suburban
shifts; financial market conditions; and the business environment.
Environmental regulations including air emissions standards (e.g.,
ozone, MATS, CSAPR), GHG regulations, water regulations (e.g.,
Environmental Regulations
316b), and nuclear safety standards; energy policies include
and Energy Policies
renewable standards and incentives (incl. taxes/financing),
mandated fuel mix, solar mandate, and nuclear relicensing.
Capital cost trends for renewables (solar and wind), technological
Alternative Generation improvements affecting wind-capacity factors, caps on annual
Resources capacity additions, storage costs, other distributed generation (DG)
costs, and financing methods.
Gas prices are a function of total gas production, well productivity,
LNG exports, industrial gas demand growth, and oil prices. Oil
Gas and Oil Prices prices are dependent in part on global supply and demand and the
proliferation of horizontal drilling technologies. Oil and gas prices will
affect drilling locations within Texas.
Government New policies around resource adequacy, transmission buildout,
Regulations/Policy/Mandates interconnections to neighboring regions, and cost recovery.
Improvements in technologies resulting in more efficient turbines or
Technology
higher capacity factor intermittent resources.
End-use technologies, efficiency standards and incentives, demand
End-Use/New Markets response, changes in consumer choices, DG growth, and increased
interest in microgrids.
Weather and water conditions may affect demand growth,
Weather and Water environmental regulations and policies, technology mix, average
Conditions summer temperatures, the frequency of extreme weather events,
and water costs.

Stakeholder feedback on important drivers and potential scenarios was solicited via an online survey
in March 2021. The survey also collected stakeholder feedback on the scenarios in the 2020 LTSA to
assist the scenario development for the 2022 LTSA. A broad range of stakeholder perspectives –
including those representing municipally owned utilities, electric cooperatives, investor-owned utilities,
generators, retail electric providers, consumers, and other interest groups – were included in survey
responses.
A summary of the survey results is illustrated in Figures 17 and 18 using boxplots. The lower and
upper edges of the boxes represent the first and third quartiles of the rankings for each item,
respectively, while the blue bar inside of the boxes represent the median rank. The dots represent the

average ranking, and the ends of the line segments represent the minimum and maximum ranks for
each item. In both figures, a ranking of one indicates highest impact or most useful.

Figure 17. Key Driver Rankings from the 2022 LTSA Stakeholder Survey

Figure 18. Ranking of 2020 LTSA Scenarios

ERCOT considered stakeholder feedback received from the online survey and during RPG meetings
to develop a proposal for additional scenarios. The scenario proposal and draft assumptions for
proposed scenarios were presented to stakeholders at the October 2021 RPG meeting. Further
stakeholder feedback received, following the scenario proposal, led to the final development of the
scenarios considered for the 2022 LTSA. Table 4 summarizes the unique elements of each scenario.

Table 4: Scenarios Studied in the 2022 LTSA

Scenario Description
Current Trends The Current Trend scenario describes the trajectory of what we
know today (e.g., demand growth, economic trends, fuel prices,
etc.). Similar to the 2020 LTSA, EV adoption was included in the
assumptions for the Current Trends scenario in the 2022 LTSA.
Expanded System Outlook The Expanded System Outlook scenario included additional
resources from the interconnection process, i.e., all the resources
included in the December 2021 CDR report. This scenario is
designed to help overcome challenges with under-selection of
some resource types (i.e., batteries and solar) and potential better
correlation with the GIS and CDR reports in terms of both resource
mix and siting.
Demand Side Evolution The Demand Side Evolution scenario was developed to study the
impacts of the integration of large amounts of LFL, high rooftop
solar adoption, high EV adoption and managed EV charging. A
sensitivity analysis was also performed by imposing buildout
limitations on advanced natural gas generators and utilize tiered
strike prices for LFLs’ price responses.

The final input assumptions used in creating the 2022 LTSA study are documented in Table 5 below.

Table 5: 2022 LTSA Input Assumptions

Demand Generation
Renewable
Additional
Demand Electric Distributed Renewable Annual Natural
Large Flexible Carbon
Scenario and Energy Vehicle Solar Incentives Capacity Gas
Load Pricing
Forecast Assumptions Assumptions (ITC/PTC) Addition Prices
Assumptions
Limit
ERCOT
2021 Long-
No additional
Term
demand beyond Wind: 3,000
Demand Approximately 5.9 GW by
that included in Current MW 2021 AEO
Current and Energy 3.6 million cars 2037
the ERCOT schedule for None Reference
Trends Forecast and pickup Solar: 4000
Long-Term To be updated retirement Case
based on trucks by 2037 MW
Demand and
the 2013
Energy Forecast
weather
year
Same
Expanded Same as Same as Extended Same as Same as
Same as Same as Current as
System Current Current through Current Current
Current Trends Trends Current
Outlook Trends Trends 2035 Trends Trends
Trends
Approximately Same
Demand Same as Same as Same as Same as
5.2 million cars 16 GW of Large 7.4 GW by as
Side Current Current Current Current
and pickup Flexible Load 2037 Current
Evolution Trends Trends Trends Trends
trucks by 2037 Trends

Demand Forecasting

One key component to any long-term transmission plan is an appropriate forecast of electric demand.
Changes in electricity consumption contribute to future transmission needs, as do new generation
technologies, generator obsolescence, and economic, commercial, and policy factors. Transmission
plans study the reliable movement of electricity from generation sources to consumer demand
locations; therefore, planners need to know which resources can provide electricity as well as how
much electricity will be required and where. The uncertainty in many of these factors can be significant;
as such, demand forecasters often prepare several forecasts that reflect different possible futures and
circumstances so transmission planners can study demand, generation, and transmission needs for
those various futures and conditions.
The demand forecast was created for the years between 2023 and 2037 to support the scenarios
included in this study.
The demand forecast combined econometric and scenario-specific assumptions as inputs into
forecast models to describe the hourly demand in the region. Factors considered included certain
economic measures (e.g., nonfarm payroll employment, housing stock, population, number of
premises) and weather variables (e.g., heating and cooling degree days, temperature, cloud cover,
dew point, and wind speed). Detailed documentation on ERCOT’s Long-Term Hourly Peak Demand
and Energy Forecast can be found on the long-term load forecast page on the ERCOT website.11
ERCOT consists of eight distinct weather zones. Each of these weather zones represents a
geographic region within which all areas have similar climatological trends and characteristics. The
ERCOT forecast is the sum of all the weather zone forecasts. A map of the ERCOT weather zones is
shown in Figure 19 below.

11 http://www.ercot.com/gridinfo/load/forecast

Figure19: ERCOT Weather Zones

The forecast used models that combine weather, economic data, and calendar variables to capture
and project the long-term trends extracted from the historical demand data. The models were
developed using historical data from 2016 through summer 2021.
Premises were separated into three different customer classes for modeling purposes: residential,
business, and industrial. The premises count models considered changes in population, housing
stock, and non-farm employment. An autoregressive model (AR1) was used for all premises models.
The long-term trend in hourly energy was modeled by estimating a relationship for each of the eight
ERCOT weather zones between the dependent variable, hourly energy, and the following:
• Month,
• Season,
• Day Type (day of the week, holiday),
Weather Variables:
• Temperature,
• Temperature Squared,
• Temperature Cubed,
• Dew Point,
• Cloud Cover,
© 2022 ERCOT
All rights reserved. 26
2022 Long-Term System Assessment ERCOT Public

• Wind Speed,
• Cooling Degree Days (base 65),
• Heating Degree Days (base 65),
• Lag Cooling Degree Days (1,2, or 3 previous days),
• Lag Heating Degree Days (1,2, or 3 previous days), and
• Lag Temperature (1, 2, and 3, 24, 48, or 72 previous hours)
Interactions:
• Hour and Day of Week,
• Hour and Temperature,
• Hour and Dew Point,
• Temperature and Dew Point,
• Hour and Temperature and Dew Point.
• Number of premises12, and
• Non-Farm Employment/Housing Stock/Population
All the variables listed above are used to identify the best candidates for inclusion in the forecast model
and to provide details on the types of variables that were evaluated in the creation of the model. Not
every variable listed above was included in each model. Unique models were created for each weather
zone to account for the different demand characteristics for each area.
Another key input is the forecast for the number of premises in each customer class. Premises
forecasts are developed using historical premise count data and various economic variables, such as
non-farm employment, housing stock, and population. ERCOT extracted the historical premises data
from its internal settlement databases. Since May of 2010, there has been a reasonably close
agreement between actual non-farm employment in Texas and Moody’s base economic forecast.
Given this trend, ERCOT used the Moody’s base economic forecast of non-farm employment in these
forecasts. Separate premises forecast models were developed for each weather zone. The premises
were separated into three different groups for modeling purposes: residential (including street lighting),
business or small commercial, and industrial (premises that are required by Protocol to have an
interval data recorder meter).
• Residential Premises Forecast: Residential premises counts were modeled by estimating a
relationship for each of the eight ERCOT weather zones between the dependent variable
(residential premises) and the following:
o Housing Stock and
o Population.
• Business Premises Forecast: Business premises counts were modeled by estimating a
relationship for each of the eight ERCOT weather zones between the dependent variable
(business premises) and the following:
o Housing Stock,
o Population, and
o Non-Farm employment.

12 Used in Coast, East, North Central, South, and South Central weather zones.

• Industrial Premises Forecast: Industrial premises counts were modeled by estimating a

relationship for each of the eight ERCOT weather zones between the dependent variable
(industrial premises), and the
o Housing Stock,
o Population, and
o Non-Farm employment.
The 2022 LTSA capacity-expansion, retirement, and transmission economic analyses used an 8,760-
hour demand forecast. This base demand forecast before adjustments for all scenarios was based on
the 2013 weather year. The Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook scenarios used the base
forecast plus the projected EV charging load. The Demand Side Evolution scenario and sensitivity
used the base forecast plus higher projected EV charging load and an additional 16 GW of LFL.
ERCOT’s demand forecasts include losses, which were removed before adjusting demand because
the software packages used for both reliability and economic analyses account for losses separately
from the demand. Furthermore, scenario-specific demand adjustments were also applied based on
the input assumptions.
For instance, distributed solar was assumed to be concentrated in the urban demand centers and was
modeled based on residential (distributed solar) generation profiles. The assumed distributed solar
adoption for the Current Trends and Expanded System outlook scenarios was the same and it grew
from 3,400 MW in 2023 to 5,900 MW in 2037. For the Demand Side Evolution scenario and its
sensitivity, the distributed solar was assumed to be 5,900 MW in 2023 and increase to 7,400 MW in
2037
EV-charging patterns for cars, short-haul trucks, buses, and long-haul trucks were used to model the
effect of EV adoption. Details for EV-charging patterns can be found in Appendix IV of this report.
Also, the demand forecasts did not include self-served load. The self-served loads were left
unchanged from the base cases used for transmission expansion while the demand forecasts (net of
losses) were distributed to all other loads in the cases on a by-weather-zone basis.

Capacity-Expansion and Retirement Analysis

Capacity-expansion analysis is used to estimate the types and amount of new generation resources
to be added, and the existing generation resources to be retired for every scenario. To provide a
reference point for the selection of other future scenarios, a Current Trends scenario is developed as
the first scenario. The primary input assumptions for all scenarios were the capital cost, new
technology types, incentives, and wind and solar locations and profiles. The long-term capacity-
expansion and retirement concept is depicted in Figure .

Expansion Limits:
System Topology
1. Annual maximum solar capacity Fuel and Emission Prices
addition
2. Annual maximum wind capacity
addition
Load forecasts AS Reserve Requirements

Generation Expansion
Existing Generators: Candidates:
1. Fixed O&M 1. Capacity cost projection
2. Variable O&M 2. Fixed O&M
3. Incentives (PTC ) 3. Variable O&M
4. Heat rate 4. WACC
5. Emission rate 5. GDP growth rate
6. Hourly profiles 6. Incentives (PTC, ITC, etc.)
7. Forced outage data 7. Heat rate
8. Maintenance data 8. Emission rate
9. Ramp rate 9. Hourly profiles
10. Charging and discharging

$
10. Forced outage data
efficiency 11. Maintenance data
11. Ancillary service 12. Ramp rate
qualification 13. Ancillary service qual
... ...

New capacity additions, retirements,

energy prices etc.

Figure 20: Long-Term Capacity-Expansion and Retirement Concept

Trends in capital costs for new expansion technologies generally increased at an assumed GDP
growth rate in this analysis except for the wind, utility-scale solar, and battery energy storage
technologies which were forecasted to decline rapidly through the early part of the study period.
Commodity prices for gas were set as the EIA AEO 2021 Reference Case.
The technologies included for capacity expansion in this LTSA were current and advanced gas-fired
combined cycles and combustion turbines, solar, geothermal, compressed air energy storage (CAES),
Lithium-ion battery energy storage, biomass, coal, coal with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS),
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC), IGCC with CCS, and nuclear. The solar technology
evaluated in the capacity-expansion process was utility-scale, solar single-axis, tracking.

Additionally, the 2017 extensions13 of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) and the Investment Tax Credit
(ITC) were included in all three scenarios for renewable generation.
In 2020, ERCOT procured hourly wind-generation profiles based on actual weather data for the
previous 40 years (1980-2019). These wind profiles include hourly wind output patterns for 148
hypothetical future wind generation units and were developed using a power conversion model
reflecting current and near-future wind turbine technologies. The 148 profiles were distributed
throughout Texas. Each profile is representative of the historical wind output in a specific county if
there is an existing wind farm in the county. These wind profiles were incorporated in all scenarios.
In 2020, ERCOT also procured new hourly solar-generation profiles based on actual weather data for
the previous 40 years. These patterns contained profiles representative of the west and panhandle
Texas counties for two different types of solar technologies: single-axis and dual-axis tracking. Four
distributed solar profiles have been developed for four urban demand centers including Dallas-Fort
Worth, Austin, Houston, San Antonio, and rural areas. ERCOT selected single-axis tracking and
residential profiles for inclusion in this LTSA.
A significant aspect of the expansion-decision process is capital-cost recovery. Using the specified
capital costs, recovery period, inflation rate, and cost of capital, the capacity-expansion optimization
model calculated a repayment that was paid in equal installments over the capital-recovery period.
The inflation rate ensures that units that were added in the future have their capital costs appropriately
adjusted for inflation, providing consistency with the other specified costs. In addition, the modeled
ancillary service prices were much lower than historical ancillary service prices. Average ancillary
service prices based on the past three years (2018-2020) were used in the decision-making process
of new capacity additions and existing generator retirements. A summary of this analysis can be found
in Appendix IV.
The amount of renewable generation included in the scenarios is partially a result of the use of an
hourly system dispatch model to develop the capacity-expansion plan. This type of model does not
simulate intra-hour balancing reserve deployment and the need for commitment of additional
resources to limit the impact of variable generation forecasting error consistent with increased levels
of renewable generation integration. Separate analysis needs to be conducted to determine the need
for additional system flexibility to integrate levels of renewable resources seen in this analysis.

13 The Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit: In Brief (fas.org)

Transmission Expansion Analysis

Transmission expansion analysis in the LTSA involves evaluating the potential needs for the ERCOT
grid under different demand and generation assumptions as developed during the demand-forecasting
and capacity-expansion and retirement-planning stages. Transmission-expansion analysis was
conducted for the Current Trends scenario. The Transmission expansion analysis was focused on
analyzing congestion on ERCOT’s 345-kV and 138-kV network.
ERCOT used the UPLAN NPM model to perform transmission-expansion analysis. ERCOT used the
start case for the year 2027 from the 2022 RTP economic analysis as a starting point for the Current
Trends scenario. This case was first updated to incorporate status changes for existing and planned
generation, which occurred before the start of this study, as well as status changes to near-term
transmission projects.
For each scenario and each study year, the case was then modified with the scenario-specific
generation fleet changes and demand adjustments, which resulted from the inputs from the scenario
development. ERCOT used the resource profile, including generation retirements, generation
additions, and profiles for demand response, as developed by capacity-expansion and retirement
analysis, to model capacity additions for each scenario and study year. The locations of new resources
were determined based on the limitations of the technology; certain technologies such as combustion
turbines are more flexible and can be built in many areas across the state, whereas the availability of
the natural resources limits solar- and wind-resource locations. Figure 21 shows the results of
generation siting in the Current Trends scenario, considered for transmission-expansion analysis. The
resources were modeled in the cases at the appropriate buses as outlined in the guidelines from the
resource siting methodology provided as Appendix II. Similarly, generating units were retired
consistent with the resource-expansion results. Detailed information for generation retirements is
included in Appendix III.

Figure 21: Generation Additions and Retirements in the Current Trends Scenario (2037)

ERCOT analyzed each of the scenario-appropriate base cases created for 2032 and 2037 for the
congestion patterns of the system. ERCOT studied NERC TPL-001-5.1 Planning Events P0, P1, and
P7, which included the loss of a generator, a transmission circuit, or a transformer. ERCOT’s P7
planning events also included the loss of double circuit lines that share towers for more than half a
mile. In addition to the above contingencies, ERCOT included generator maintenance outages in this
evaluation.
ERCOT evaluated the contingencies at all voltage levels, but mainly focused on violations and
congestion on the network connected at 100-kV and above, as the needs to resolve violations and
congestion on the 69-kV network were assumed to be addressed through the RTP process and/or
other near-term planning processes. To reveal the potential violations and congestion on the 345-kV
network, ERCOT added transmission upgrades due to identified local needs to facilitate generation
addition and demand growth in the corresponding start cases and did not monitor the 69-kV
transmission elements.
ERCOT evaluated the reliability and congestion needs of the system for the Current Trends scenario.
At the time of the analysis, ERCOT’s economic criteria for project evaluation was pending. As a result,
potential transmission projects to alleviate observed congestions in the system were not evaluated. A
summary of this analysis can be found in Appendix IV below.
© 2022 ERCOT
All rights reserved. 32
2022 Long-Term System Assessment ERCOT Public

Appendix II: Resource Siting Methodology

The Long-Term System Assessment Resource Siting Methodology is included in a separate document
attached with the report.

Appendix III: Fixed-Age Generation Retirements

Unit Name Unit ID Fuel summer Capacity In Service Retirement Date
MARTIN LAKE 2 MLSES_UNIT2 Coal 805 1978 12/31/2023
W A PARISH 6 WAP_WAP_G6 Coal 663 1978 12/31/2023
HANDLEY 3 HLSES_UNIT3 Gas 395 1963 12/31/2023
FAYETTE POWER PROJECT 1 FPPYD1_FPP_G1 Coal 604 1979 12/31/2024
MARTIN LAKE 3 MLSES_UNIT3 Coal 805 1979 12/31/2024
COLETO CREEK COLETO_COLETOG1 Coal 655 1980 12/31/2025
FAYETTE POWER PROJECT 2 FPPYD1_FPP_G2 Coal 599 1980 12/31/2025
W A PARISH 7 WAP_WAP_G7 Coal 577 1980 12/31/2025
SIM GIDEON 1 GIDEON_GIDEONG1 Gas 130 1965 12/31/2025
STRYKER CREEK 2 SCSES_UNIT2 Gas 502 1965 12/31/2025
TRINIDAD 6 TRSES_UNIT6 Gas 235 1965 12/31/2025
POWERLANE PLANT 1 STEAM1a_STEAM_1 Gas 18 1966 12/31/2026
V H BRAUNIG 1 BRAUNIG_VHB1 Gas 217 1966 12/31/2026
SAN MIGUEL 1 SANMIGL_G1 Coal 391 1982 12/31/2027
W A PARISH 8 WAP_WAP_G8 Coal 610 1982 12/31/2027
T H WHARTON G1 THW_THWGT_1 Gas 14 1967 12/31/2027
W A PARISH T1 WAP_WAPGT_1 Gas 13 1967 12/31/2027
MOUNTAIN CREEK 8 MCSES_UNIT8 Gas 568 1967 12/31/2027
POWERLANE PLANT 2 STEAM_STEAM_2 Gas 24 1967 12/31/2027
RAY OLINGER 1 OLINGR_OLING_1 Gas 78 1967 12/31/2027
R W MILLER 1 MIL_MILLERG1 Gas 70 1968 12/31/2028
SIM GIDEON 2 GIDEON_GIDEONG2 Gas 135 1968 12/31/2028
V H BRAUNIG 2 BRAUNIG_VHB2 Gas 230 1968 12/31/2028
W A PARISH 4 WAP_WAP_G4 Gas 527 1968 12/31/2028
GRAHAM 2 GRSES_UNIT2 Gas 390 1969 12/31/2029
LIMESTONE 1 LEG_LEG_G1 Coal 824 1985 12/31/2030
CEDAR BAYOU 1 CBY_CBY_G1 Gas 745 1970 12/31/2030
LAKE HUBBARD 1 LHSES_UNIT1 Gas 392 1970 12/31/2030
V H BRAUNIG 3 BRAUNIG_VHB3 Gas 412 1970 12/31/2030
LIMESTONE 2 LEG_LEG_G2 Coal 836 1986 12/31/2031
RAY OLINGER 2 OLINGR_OLING_2 Gas 107 1971 12/31/2031
NUECES BAY STG 7 NUECES_B_NUECESG7 Gas 567 1972 12/31/2032
CEDAR BAYOU 2 CBY_CBY_G2 Gas 749 1972 12/31/2032
O W SOMMERS 1 CALAVERS_OWS1 Gas 420 1972 12/31/2032
R W MILLER 2 MIL_MILLERG2 Gas 118 1972 12/31/2032
SIM GIDEON 3 GIDEON_GIDEONG3 Gas 336 1972 12/31/2032
NUECES BAY STG 7_DB NUECES_B_NUECESG7_DB Gas 66 1972 12/31/2032
FAYETTE POWER PROJECT 3 FPPYD2_FPP_G3 Coal 437 1988 12/31/2033
ATKINS 7 ATKINS_ATKINSG7 Gas 18 1973 12/31/2033
LAKE HUBBARD 2 LHSES_UNIT2A Gas 523 1973 12/31/2033
T H WHARTON STG 3 THW_THWST_3 Gas 326 1974 12/31/2034
T H WHARTON STG 4 THW_THWST_4 Gas 326 1974 12/31/2034
B M DAVIS 1 B_DAVIS_B_DAVIG1 Gas 300 1974 12/31/2034
O W SOMMERS 2 CALAVERS_OWS2 Gas 410 1974 12/31/2034
TWIN OAKS 1 TNP_ONE_TNP_O_1 Coal 155 1990 12/31/2035
T H WHARTON 51 THW_THWGT51 Gas 56 1975 12/31/2035
T H WHARTON 52 THW_THWGT52 Gas 56 1975 12/31/2035
T H WHARTON 53 THW_THWGT53 Gas 56 1975 12/31/2035
T H WHARTON 54 THW_THWGT54 Gas 56 1975 12/31/2035
T H WHARTON 55 THW_THWGT55 Gas 56 1975 12/31/2035
T H WHARTON 56 THW_THWGT56 Gas 56 1975 12/31/2035
R W MILLER 3 MIL_MILLERG3 Gas 208 1975 12/31/2035
RAY OLINGER 3 OLINGR_OLING_3 Gas 146 1975 12/31/2035
B M DAVIS STG 2 B_DAVIS_B_DAVIG2 Gas 615 1976 12/31/2036
TWIN OAKS 2 TNP_ONE_TNP_O_2 Coal 155 1991 12/31/2036
GREENS BAYOU 73 GBY_GBYGT73 Gas 56 1976 12/31/2036
GREENS BAYOU 74 GBY_GBYGT74 Gas 56 1976 12/31/2036
GREENS BAYOU 81 GBY_GBYGT81 Gas 56 1976 12/31/2036
GREENS BAYOU 82 GBY_GBYGT82 Gas 50 1976 12/31/2036
GREENS BAYOU 83 GBY_GBYGT83 Gas 56 1976 12/31/2036
GREENS BAYOU 84 GBY_GBYGT84 Gas 56 1976 12/31/2036
HANDLEY 4 HLSES_UNIT4 Gas 435 1976 12/31/2036
B M DAVIS STG 2_DB B_DAVIS_B_DAVIG2_DB Gas 18 1976 12/31/2036
J K SPRUCE 1 CALAVERS_JKS1 Coal 560 1992 12/31/2037
HANDLEY 5 HLSES_UNIT5 Gas 435 1977 12/31/2037

Appendix IV: Scenario Results Summary

Demand Forecasts

The load forecasts for the Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook scenarios were the same.
The load forecasts were developed by applying the following three adjustments to the long-term load
forecast based on 2013 weather year released in January 2021: (1) the Private Use Network (PUN)
load was added on the top of the long-term load forecast; (2) the distributed solar was treated as a
negative load modifier; and (3) the EV-charging load was also included. The resulted summer peak
demand and annual energy forecasts are shown in Figure 22.

2022 LTSA Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook

Peak Load and Annual Energy
110,000 700,000

100,000 600,000

Annual Energy (GWh)

90,000 500,000
Peak Load (MW)

80,000 400,000

70,000 300,000

60,000 200,000

50,000 100,000

40,000 0
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037

Peak MW Energy GWh

Figure 22: Energy and Peak Demand for Current Trends and Expanded System Outlook Scenarios

A high EV adoption and an aggressive distributed solar projection were used for the Demand Side
Evolution scenario and sensitivity case. The biggest change in the load forecast was the inclusion of
16 GW of LFLs. Therefore, the load forecasts are much higher than the Current Trends and Expanded
System Outlook scenarios. The summer peak demand and annual energy forecast for the Demand
Side Evolution scenario and sensitivity are depicted in Figure 23.

Figure 23: Energy and Peak Demand for Demand Side Evolution Scenario and Sensitivity

Current Trends Scenario

The Current Trends scenario was designed to simulate current market conditions extended 15 years
into the future. The Current Trends scenario included an EV assumption and the moderate distributed
solar projection14 presented at the May 2021 SAWG meeting as outlined below.
EV adoption by type, based on adjusted Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) 2020 projection,15
was included in this scenario as shown in Figure 24. Transportation electrification was assumed to
start slowly but grow exponentially as wider availability of desirable models and cost reductions in
battery technology are realized. The light-duty vehicles category includes both cars and pickup trucks,
but different adoption rates were used for them. Assumed EV growth was determined by adjusting the
BNEF projection (time-shifting curve to match actual sales from 2015 through 2020). The three
categories of EVs identified in the 2020 LTSA were expanded to 4 categories in the 2022 LTSA by
separating buses and short haul trucks given the availability of the buses’ charging patterns/metrics.
Miles driven by trucks were also estimated since growth projections, which were not available in time
for the 2020 LTSA, exist now. Electric load was based on miles-driven data for trucks and buses from
Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) and Texas Education Agency (TEA) data.

14 https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/05/18/SAWG__Meeting_5-18-2021_Updated_Rooftop_Solar_Growth_Projectionsv3.pptx
15 https://about.bnef.com/new-energy-outlook-2020/

Electrical Vehicle Adoption by Type

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037

% of LDV on the road % of Buses on the road

% LocalHDs on the road % Heavy duty Trucks on the road

Figure 24: Adoption of EV in the Current Trends Scenario

For 2037, the peak charging demand for all EVs was estimated to be over 9,300 MW at midnight.
Approximately 1,500 to 2,600 MW of charging demand was expected during hours ending between 9
am and 5 pm. In this scenario, peak electric vehicle demand was assumed to occur at approximately
11 pm. Below, Figure 25 shows the hourly charging pattern by type.

Hourly Charging Load in 2037

8,000

7,000

6,000
Charging Load (MW)

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

LDV Buses LocalHD Trucks LongHaulHDTrucks

Figure 25: Estimated Total Charging Demand of EVs in 2037

Distributed solar adoption was assumed to follow a moderate growth sigmoid (or S-curve) pattern. The
maximum distributed solar potential in urban and rural areas was estimated by Underwriters
Laboratories (UL) in a screening analysis.16 The market saturation rate was assumed to be 20%; fast
growth was assumed to start in 2021; and the takeover time was assumed to be seven years. Figure
26 shows assumed distributed solar adoption by year. The distributed solar peaked at close to 5,920
MW.

16https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2020/07/31/ERCOT_SolarPVProfiles_1980-2019.zip

Moderate Growth Projection, Installed Capacity

7 year takeover with 20% Market Saturation
7,000

6,000

5,000
Megawatts

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

-
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039

Figure 26: Distributed Solar Adoption by Year

The generation retirement process for the Current Trends scenario had two distinct parts. First, a
group of fixed-age retirements were determined for use in all scenarios. These fixed-age retirements
were determined by the age of an existing unit. Natural gas units were retired after 60 years of
operation, and coal units were retired after 45 years of service. The second part of the generation
retirement process considered economics as the criterion for retirement. Based on economic
simulations, if a unit’s fixed and variable costs were greater than the unit’s total revenue the unit was
retired by the model. Total resources retired by 2037 were 19,670 MW. The retirements for different
technology types are shown in Table 6.
The Current Trends scenario resulted in additions of 19,494 MW of combined cycle, 474 MW of simple
cycle combustion turbine, 5,800 MW of utility-scale solar, 27,100 MW of wind, and 4,557 MW of battery
energy storage. Fixed-aged retirements totaling 4,140 MW were accelerated based on economic
analysis. Table 6 shows the starting capacity mix, retirements, and capacity-expansion additions for
the Current Trends scenario for the 15-year study period.

Table 6: Capacity-Expansion Results for the Current Trends Scenario

2022LTSA - Current Trends (MW)

Operational Planned Total Starting Capacity
Retirements Total Resources
Resources Resources Capacity Mix Expansion
Battery 235 1,807 2,042 - 4,557 6,598
Combined Cycle 37,478 86 37,564 1,918 19,494 55,139
CT & IC 12,616 860 13,476 711 474 13,239
Gas Steam 11,620 60 11,680 8,819 - 2,861
Solar 4,095 13,332 17,427 - 5,800 23,227
Wind 25,203 11,821 37,024 - 27,100 64,124
Coal 12,151 - 12,151 8,116 - 4,034
Hydro 536 - 536 - - 536
Nuclear 5,153 - 5,153 - - 5,153
Other 920 - 920 105 - 815
Total 110,006 27,965 137,972 19,670 57,425 175,726

A summary of the capacity-expansion results for the Current Trends scenario is shown in Table 7
below. In this scenario the reserve margin varied between 10% to 20% from 2023 to 2037. For 2027,
2032, and 2037 the number of scarcity hours were 12, 23, and 11 hours respectively. For the same
study years, during the summer season the unserved energy occurred between 3 pm to 8 pm, and
during winter the unserved energy is between 6 pm and 1 am. The 15-year comparison of capacity
additions for different technology types between the 2020 LTSA and the 2022 LTSA is shown in Figure
27, found below Table 7. Compared to the 2020 LTSA, the 2022 Current Trends scenario resulted in
more combined cycle and battery energy storage capacity, but less solar, wind and combustion turbine
capacity.

Table 7: Summary of the Results for Current Trends Scenario

Description Units 2023 2027 2032 2037 Total

CC Adds MW - - 2,166 17,328 19,494

CT Adds MW - - 474 - 474
Coal Adds MW - - - - -
Nuclear Adds MW - - - - -
Storage Adds MW - 800 3,180 577 4,557
Solar Adds MW - - 5,800 - 5,800
Wind Adds MW 600 9,300 13,100 4,100 27,100
Annual Capacity Additions MW 600 10,100 24,720 22,005
Cumulative Capacity Additions MW 600 10,700 35,420 57,425
Retirements MW - 7,123 5,447 7,099
Cumulative Retirements MW - 7,123 12,571 19,670
Reserve Margin % 20 10 11 16
Coincident Peak MW 84,499 87,430 91,891 97,279
Peak Net Load (1) MW 69,651 71,840 76,458 86,558
Minimum Net load (1) MW 9,491 8,065 4,592 5,497
Annual Energy GWhs 475,132 506,060 550,505 601,975
Average LMP $/MWh 25.44 49.26 68.85 47.45
Natural Gas Price $/MMbtu 3.10 3.44 4.39 5.04
Average Market Heat Rate MMbtu/MWh 8.20 14.34 15.70 9.41
Natural Gas Generation % 43.14 40.35 35.03 38.03
Coal Generation % 9.36 6.85 4.91 3.97
Wind Generation % 28.80 35.16 41.49 41.00
Solar Generation % 8.41 8.00 9.80 8.99
Scarcity Hours HRS - 12 23 11
Unserved Energy GWhs - 21.77 71.64 37.63
(1) Hourly Net Load = Hourly Load Forecast – Hourly Wind Output – Hourly Solar Output

Figure 27: 15-Year capacity expansion comparison of the 2020 versus 2022 LTSA Current Trends Scenario

As described in Appendix I, ERCOT used the UPLAN NPM model to perform transmission expansion
analysis. Any recently approved RPG projects and local 138-kV upgrades and additions were included
in the start cases. Figure 2828 and 29 show a map of Texas with the top congested elements
connected at levels 100-kV and higher for the 2032 and 2037 study years, respectively. The size of
each bubble indicates the amount of annual congestion rent. At the time of the analysis, ERCOT’s
economic criteria for project evaluation was pending. As a result, potential economically driven
transmission improvements were not evaluated in the 2022 LTSA.

Figure 28: Top Constraints for the Current Trends Scenario (2032)

Figure 1029: Top Constraints for Current Trends Scenario (2037)

Expanded System Outlook

The Current Trends scenario included planned resources meeting the requirements of Planning Guide
Section 6.9(1) as of March 31, 2021 in the starting capacity mix used for capacity-expansion and
retirement analysis. The Expanded System Outlook scenario was designed to help overcome
challenges with under-selection of some resource types (i.e., batteries and solar). The capacity-
expansion results for the Current Trends scenario showed less new battery energy storage, solar, and
wind capacities than what was reflected in the December 2021 Capacity, Demand and Reserve (CDR)
report.17 In this scenario, additional planned resources from the December 2021 CDR were included
to evaluate the impact on capacity-expansion results.
Table 8 shows the starting capacity mix comparison between the Current Trends and the Expanded
System Outlook scenarios. In the Expanded System Outlook scenario, an additional 2,523 MW of
battery energy storage, 663 MW of gas, 15,719 MW of solar and 2,853 MW of wind were included
compared with the Current Trends scenario. This resulted in 159,730 MW of starting capacity
resources as an input to the model compared to 137,972 MW in the Current Trends scenario. Please
note Table 8 does not reflect the fixed and planned unit retirements.
Table 8: Starting capacity mix comparison between the Current Trends and the Expanded System Outlook scenarios

2022LTSA - Current Trends (MW) Expanded System Outlook (MW)

Operational Planned Total Starting Resources Total Starting

Resources Resources Capacity Mix incremental to CT1 Capacity Mix

Battery 235 1,807 2,042 2,523 4,565

Combined Cycle 37,478 86 37,564 - 37,564
CT & IC 12,616 860 13,476 663 14,139
Gas Steam 11,620 60 11,680 - 11,680
Solar 4,095 13,332 17,427 15,719 33,146
Wind 25,203 11,821 37,024 2,853 39,877
Coal 12,151 - 12,151 - 12,151
Hydro 536 - 536 - 536
Nuclear 5,153 - 5,153 - 5,153
Other 920 - 920 - 920
Total 110,006 27,965 137,972 21,759 159,730

Table 9 shows the starting capacity mix, the retirements by 2037, and the capacity-expansion additions
by 2037 for the Expanded System Outlook scenario. In this scenario 546 MW of battery energy
storage, 21,660 MW of combined cycles, and 13,700 MW of wind expansion capacity were added by
the model to meet the load growth and replace the retirements. The total fixed and economic
retirements were 19,683 MW. This resulted in total resources of 175,953 MW by 2037 for this scenario.

17 https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/12/29/CapacityDemandandReservesReport_December2021.xlsx

Table 9: Starting Capacity Mix, Retirements, and Capacity-Expansion Results for the Expanded System Outlook
Scenario

Expanded System Outlook (MW)

Total Starting Capacity Total

Retirements
Capacity Mix Expansion Resources

Battery 4,565 - 546 5,111

Combined Cycle 37,564 1,918 21,660 57,305
CT & IC 14,139 711 - 13,427
Gas Steam 11,680 8,819 - 2,861
Solar 33,146 - - 33,146
Wind 39,877 13 13,700 53,564
Coal 12,151 8,116 - 4,034
Hydro 536 - - 536
Nuclear 5,153 - - 5,153
Other 920 105 - 815
Total 159,730 19,683 35,906 175,953
Table 10 shows the summary of the results for the Expanded System Outlook scenario. In this scenario
the reserve margin varied between 22% to 30% from 2023 to 2037. For 2027, 2032, and 2037 the
number of scarcity hours were 1, 10, and 7 hours respectively. For the same study years, during the
summer season, the unserved energy occurred at 8 pm, and, during winter the unserved energy is
between 7 pm and 12 am midnight.

Table 10: Summary of the Results for the Expanded System Outlook Scenario

Description Units 2023 2027 2032 2037 Total

CC Adds MW - - 7,581 14,079 21,660

CT Adds MW - - - - -
Coal Adds MW - - - - -
Nuclear Adds MW - - - - -
Storage Adds MW - 156 - 390 546
Solar Adds MW - - - - -
Wind Adds MW - 3,400 7,900 2,400 13,700
Annual Capacity Additions MW - 3,556 15,481 16,869
Cumulative Capacity Additions MW - 3,556 19,037 35,906
Retirements MW 13 8,198 5,563 5,909
Cumulative Retirements MW 13 8,210 13,773 19,682
Reserve Margin % 30 23 22 24
Coincident Peak MW 84,499 87,430 91,891 97,279
Peak Net Load (1) MW 68,922 72,218 76,898 87,089
Minimum Net load (1) MW 7,764 6,719 6,213 6,282
Annual Energy GWhs 475,132 506,060 550,505 601,975
Average LMP $/MWh 23.85 29.84 49.24 46.09
Natural Gas Price $/MMbtu 3.10 3.44 4.39 5.04
Average Market Heat Rate MMbtu/MWh 7.69 8.69 11.23 9.14
Natural Gas Generation % 38.98 37.97 37.71 41.66
Coal Generation % 8.30 6.62 5.21 4.25
Wind Generation % 29.55 31.14 34.69 33.47
Solar Generation % 12.94 14.71 13.55 12.47
Scarcity Hours HRS - 1 10 7
Unserved Energy GWhs - 2.26 27.63 19.38
(1) Hourly Net Load = Hourly Load Forecast – Hourly Wind Output – Hourly Solar Output

Demand Side Evolution

This scenario was developed to evaluate an increased adoption of demand-side technologies, as well
as studying the impact of flexibility of certain types of demand on system needs. The key input
assumptions that differed from the Current Trends scenario are shown below:
• High distributed solar adoption
• High EV adoption
• Managed EV charging
• Addition of 16 GW of LFL based on an informal survey that was conducted in early 2022.
• LFL was allowed to be curtailed at market price of 100 $/MWh or above.
Distributed solar adoption was assumed to follow an aggressive growth S-curve pattern. The maximum
distributed solar potential in urban and rural areas was estimated by UL in a screening analysis.18 The
market saturation rate was assumed to be 25%; fast growth was assumed to start in 2021; and the
takeover time was assumed to be four years. Figure 30 shows assumed distributed solar adoption by

18 https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2020/07/31/ERCOT_SolarPVProfiles_1980-2019.zip

year and compared with the S-curve projection for the Current Trends scenario. The aggressive
distributed solar peaked at close to 7,380 MW.
8000

7000

6000

5000
MW

4000

3000

2000

1000

Demand-Side Evolution Current Trends

Figure 30: S-Curve for Aggressive Growth Projection of Distributed Solar

An aggressive EV adoption was assumed for the Demand Side Evolution scenario as shown in Figure
31. The adoption levels of local heavy-duty vehicles and long-haul heavy-duty trucks were more than
doubled. To mitigate the potential negative consequences of the high-level EV adoption, EV charging
load should be wisely distributed across hours in a day.

Electric Vehicles on the Road by Type

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037

% of Light Duty Vehicle % of Buses

% Local Heavy Duty Vehicles % Long-haul Heavy Duty Trucks

Figure 31: High Adoption of EV in the Demand Side Evolution Scenario

Impacts of EV adoption is heavily dependent on charging patterns. In this scenario, EV charging

energy demand was balanced throughout the day, with a focus on reducing energy usage during peak
net load periods. EV managed charging profiles were developed for each season to capture
seasonality of renewable generation and non-EV load. To simplify the problem, three charging load
levels were assumed (high, medium, and low). There were two steps to determine EV charging load
for each hour. First, hourly average net load for each season was calculated since net load reflects
both renewable generation output and non-EV load level; then, based on the gap between the peak
net load and hourly average net load, EV charging level was determined with the consideration of
driving needs as shown in Figure 32. EV charging load was high when the gap was big and driving
needs are low, for example, hour ending 1:00-6:00, 10:00-11:00 and 24:00 in summer. EV charging
load was medium when the gap or driving needs were medium, for example, though the gap is big in
hour ending 7:00 and 9:00 but morning commute starts and ends in these two hours, respectively, so
EV charging load was medium for these hours. For hour ending 12:00-15:00 and 23:00, the gap was
medium, there were also substantial driving needs during lunch hours, so EV charging load was also
medium for these hours. For hours ending 8:00 and 16:00-22:00, the gap in hour ending 8:00 was
high, but it is the peak hour for morning commutes, so vehicles are not available for charging and
charging load should be low; for the other hours, the gap was small so charging load was low. Based
on this approach, EV charging profiles were developed for each season in each year. Figures 33 and
34 show the EV charging profiles for each season in 2037.

Figure 32: Illustration of EV Charging Load Management Method

Hourly Charging Load for 2037 Summer and Winter

16000

14000
EV Charging Load (MW)

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Summer Winter

Figure 33: Summer and Winter Managed EV Charging

Hourly Charging Load for 2037 Spring and Fall

16000

14000
EV Charging Load (MW)

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Spring Fall

Figure 34: Spring and Fall Managed EV Charging

The operational and planned resources for the Demand Side Evolution scenario were the same as the
Current Trends scenario so the total starting capacity mix was the same for the two scenarios. This
scenario included 16 GW of LFL based on an informal survey that was put out in early 2022. The 16
GW LFL was allowed to be curtailed at market price of 100 $/MWh or above. Table 11 shows the
starting capacity mix, retirements, and the expansion capacity additions for the Demand Side Evolution
scenario. In this scenario, 370 MW of battery energy storage, 30,324 MW of combined cycles, 1,100
MW of solar, and 19,800 MW of wind expansion capacity were added by the model. The total
expansion capacity addition was 51,594 MW. The total fixed and economic retirements were 19,565
MW. This resulted in total resources of 170,001 MW by 2037 for this scenario. The significant increase
in the combined cycle addition was to meet the managed EV charging load for an aggressive EV
adoption and the 16 GW LFL.
Table 11: Starting Capacity Mix, Retirements, and Capacity-Expansion Results for Demand Side Evolution Scenario

Demand Side Evolution (MW)

Operational Planned Total Starting Capacity Total
Retirements
Resources Resources Capacity Mix Expansion Resources
Battery 235 1,807 2,042 - 370 2,411
Combined Cycle 37,478 86 37,564 1,918 30,324 65,969
CT & IC 12,616 860 13,476 711 - 12,765
Gas Steam 11,620 60 11,680 8,819 - 2,861
Solar 4,095 13,332 17,427 - 1,100 18,527
Wind 25,203 11,821 37,024 - 19,800 56,824
Coal 12,151 - 12,151 8,116 - 4,034
Hydro 536 - 536 - - 536
Nuclear 5,153 - 5,153 - - 5,153
Other 920 - 920 - - 920
Total 110,006 27,965 137,972 19,565 51,594 170,001

Table 12 shows the summary of the results for the Demand Side Evolution scenario. In this scenario
the reserve margin varied between 16% to 18% from 2023 to 2037. This scenario didn’t show any
scarcity hours due to the flexibility provided by the LFL. The LFL was curtailed at 100 $/MWh. The
curtailment hours are show in Table 12 and they ranged from 514 to 927 hours from 2023 to 2037.

Table 12: Summary of the Expansion Results for the Demand Side Evolution Scenario

Description Units 2023 2027 2032 2037 Total

CC Adds MW - 6,498 9,747 14,079 30,324

CT Adds MW - - - - -
Coal Adds MW - - - - -
Nuclear Adds MW - - - - -
Storage Adds MW - 200 170 - 370
Solar Adds MW 1,100 - - - 1,100
Wind Adds MW 3,000 11,000 5,400 400 19,800
Annual Capacity Additions MW 4,100 17,698 15,317 14,479
Cumulative Capacity Additions MW 4,100 21,798 37,115 51,594
Retirements MW - 6,596 5,975 6,994
Cumulative Retirements MW - 6,596 12,571 19,565
Reserve Margin % 18 18 18 16
Coincident Peak MW 99,633 102,588 106,576 114,881
Peak Net Load (1) MW 84,515 86,286 90,872 101,215
Minimum Net load (1) MW 9,553 8,559 9,293 9,333
Annual Energy GWhs 612,664 647,526 703,485 772,811
Average LMP $/MWh 34.65 36.65 43.20 48.46
Natural Gas Price $/MMbtu 3.10 3.44 4.39 5.04
Average Market Heat Rate MMbtu/MWh 11.17 10.67 9.85 9.61
Natural Gas Generation % 48.88 48.07 50.05 54.69
Coal Generation % 11.08 6.28 4.72 3.70
Wind Generation % 24.26 30.69 31.46 28.84
Solar Generation % 6.99 6.71 6.21 5.64
Scarcity Hours Hours - - - -
Unserved Energy GWhs - - - -
Large Flexible Load Curtailment Hours 514 589 652 927
(1) Hourly Net Load = Hourly Load Forecast – Hourly Wind Output – Hourly Solar Output

Demand Side Evolution Sensitivity

Based on stakeholder feedback, the Demand Side Evolution sensitivity case was run with the following
assumption changes to the Demand Side Evolution scenario:
• The combined cycle build was limited to one per year with the buildout starting in 2025.
• The simple cycle combustion turbine build was limited to 800 MW per year.
• The large flexible load curtailment was split into three categories.
o 60% of the LFL (9,600 MW) could be curtailed at 100 $/MWh; this is an energy only
curtailment for the standard mining equipment.
o 30% of the LFL (4,800 MW) could be curtailed at 200 $/MWh; this is also an energy only
targeted toward LFLs with more efficient/newer crypto mining equipment that can curtail
at higher price.
o 10% of the LFL (1,600 MW) could be curtailed at 1,000 $/MWh; this is for miners that are
less price responsive to market price.

Table 13 shows the starting capacity mix, retirements, and the capacity-expansion comparison of the
two Demand Side Evolution cases. The starting capacity mix between the two cases were identical.
The retirements were almost the same except that the Demand Side Evolution sensitivity had an
additional 105 MW of economic retirement. The Demand Side Evolution sensitivity showed
significantly higher capacity addition compared to any other scenario because of the limitation on
combined cycle build. This case added 8,176 MW of battery, 14,079 MW of combined cycles, 11,046
MW of simple cycle combustion turbine, 18,900 MW of solar, and 43,500 MW of wind. The total final
resource was 214,002 MW which was higher than any other scenario.
Table 13: 15-Year Total Resources (Plus Capacity Expansion) Comparison of Demand Side Evolution Scenarios

Demand Side Evolution (MW) Demand Side Evolution Sensitivity (MW)

Operational Planned Total Starting Capacity Total Capacity Total
Retirements Retirements
Resources Resources Capacity Mix Expansion Resources Expansion Resources
Battery 235 1,807 2,042 - 370 2,411 - 8,176 10,217
Combined Cycle 37,478 86 37,564 1,918 30,324 65,969 1,918 14,079 49,724
CT & IC 12,616 860 13,476 711 - 12,765 711 11,046 23,811
Gas Steam 11,620 60 11,680 8,819 - 2,861 8,819 - 2,861
Solar 4,095 13,332 17,427 - 1,100 18,527 - 18,900 36,327
Wind 25,203 11,821 37,024 - 19,800 56,824 - 43,500 80,524
Coal 12,151 - 12,151 8,116 - 4,034 8,116 - 4,034
Hydro 536 - 536 - - 536 - - 536
Nuclear 5,153 - 5,153 - - 5,153 - - 5,153
Other 920 - 920 - - 920 105 - 815
Total 110,006 27,965 137,972 19,565 51,594 170,001 19,670 95,701 214,002

Table 14 shows the summary of the results for the Demand Side Evolution sensitivity. In this scenario
the reserve margin varied between 21% to 32% from 2023 to 2037. This scenario didn’t show any
scarcity hours due to the flexibility provided by the large flexible load. The curtailment hours of large
flexible load ranged from 100 to 248 hours from 2023 to 2037. This sensitivity showed lower
curtailment hours because 40% of LFLs had higher curtailing prices than the Demand Side Evolution
scenario and on average the LMP was 5 $/MWh lower than the Demand Side Evolution scenario. The
lower LMP was due to lower combined cycles and higher renewables buildout in this sensitivity.

Table 14: Summary of Expansion Results for Demand Side Evolution Scenario Sensitivity

Description Units 2023 2027 2032 2037 Total

CC Adds MW - 3,249 5,415 5,415 14,079

CT Adds MW - 3,156 3,945 3,945 11,046
Coal Adds MW - - - - -
Nuclear Adds MW - - - - -
Storage Adds MW 2,400 1,800 - 3,976 8,176
Solar Adds MW 4,000 10,500 2,900 1,500 18,900
Wind Adds MW 3,000 12,000 15,000 13,500 43,500
Annual Capacity Additions MW 9,400 30,705 27,260 28,336
Cumulative Capacity Additions MW 9,400 40,105 67,365 95,701
Retirements MW - 6,310 6,366 6,994
Cumulative Retirements MW - 6,310 12,676 19,670
Reserve Margin % 21 29 32 28
Coincident Peak MW 99,633 102,588 106,576 114,881
Peak Net Load (1) MW 84,124 85,663 89,697 99,666
Minimum Net load (1) MW 7,732 5,954 4,996 1,552
Annual Energy GWhs 612,664 647,526 703,485 772,811
Average LMP $/MWh 31.43 31.55 36.50 42.08
Natural Gas Price $/MMbtu 3.10 3.44 4.39 5.04
Average Market Heat Rate MMbtu/MWh 10.14 9.18 8.32 8.35
Natural Gas Generation % 48.18 42.97 39.37 38.53
Coal Generation % 10.98 6.31 4.40 3.39
Wind Generation % 24.17 30.84 36.96 39.92
Solar Generation % 8.19 12.05 12.12 11.49
Scarcity Hours Hours - - - -
Unserved Energy GWhs - - - -
Large Flexible Load Curtailment Hours 189 109 100 248
(1) Hourly Net Load = Hourly Load Forecast – Hourly Wind Output – Hourly Solar Output

Principles of Energy Storage Systems
From Everand
Principles of Energy Storage Systems
Jayarama P. Reddy
No ratings yet
IESR Indonesia Solar Energy Outlook ISEO 2023 Final
No ratings yet
IESR Indonesia Solar Energy Outlook ISEO 2023 Final
43 pages
Preliminary Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy For The ERCOT Region (SARA) Winter 2020/2021
No ratings yet
Preliminary Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy For The ERCOT Region (SARA) Winter 2020/2021
12 pages
Innovation Landscape brief: Electric-vehicle smart charging
From Everand
Innovation Landscape brief: Electric-vehicle smart charging
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
Simulation and Calculation of Aep Using Pvsyst of Grid Connected 100 KW Solar PV Project in Noida, U.P
No ratings yet
Simulation and Calculation of Aep Using Pvsyst of Grid Connected 100 KW Solar PV Project in Noida, U.P
14 pages
2024 Long-Term System Assessment (LTSA) Current Trends - Transmission - v4.1
No ratings yet
2024 Long-Term System Assessment (LTSA) Current Trends - Transmission - v4.1
8 pages
2017.10.23 Denton Presentation v1.2
No ratings yet
2017.10.23 Denton Presentation v1.2
38 pages
ERCOT Experience in Using Online Stability Analysis in Real-Time Operations
No ratings yet
ERCOT Experience in Using Online Stability Analysis in Real-Time Operations
5 pages
ERCOT 2025 Long Term Load Forecast Report
No ratings yet
ERCOT 2025 Long Term Load Forecast Report
20 pages
ERCOT GFM Final
No ratings yet
ERCOT GFM Final
10 pages
ERCOT Permian Basin Reliability Plan Study - Report - 2024!07!25
No ratings yet
ERCOT Permian Basin Reliability Plan Study - Report - 2024!07!25
72 pages
3 2 GIZ17 XXX Presentation Sandip Sharma
No ratings yet
3 2 GIZ17 XXX Presentation Sandip Sharma
49 pages
Renewables Integration and Managing Uncertainty - PLN - NREL Slides
No ratings yet
Renewables Integration and Managing Uncertainty - PLN - NREL Slides
29 pages
2022 LTSA ResourceSitingMethodology
No ratings yet
2022 LTSA ResourceSitingMethodology
43 pages
System Operator Example of Stability With High Penetrations of Wind - Julia Matevosyan
No ratings yet
System Operator Example of Stability With High Penetrations of Wind - Julia Matevosyan
18 pages
20220826-5190 - Comments of Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc.
No ratings yet
20220826-5190 - Comments of Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc.
7 pages
2021 Texas Power Outages: Facts and Initial Thoughts: February 22, 2021
No ratings yet
2021 Texas Power Outages: Facts and Initial Thoughts: February 22, 2021
20 pages
ERCOT Inertia Analysis in Planning and Operations
No ratings yet
ERCOT Inertia Analysis in Planning and Operations
31 pages
Energy Storage in Grids with High Penetration of Variable Generation
From Everand
Energy Storage in Grids with High Penetration of Variable Generation
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
Microsoft Excel-Based Tool Kit for Planning Hybrid Energy Systems: A User Guide
From Everand
Microsoft Excel-Based Tool Kit for Planning Hybrid Energy Systems: A User Guide
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
ERCOTs Operational Experience With Battery Energy Storage Nitika Mago
No ratings yet
ERCOTs Operational Experience With Battery Energy Storage Nitika Mago
26 pages
ERCOT Monthly March2025
No ratings yet
ERCOT Monthly March2025
8 pages
Facilitating Power Trade in the Greater Mekong Subregion: Establishing and Implementing a Regional Grid Code
From Everand
Facilitating Power Trade in the Greater Mekong Subregion: Establishing and Implementing a Regional Grid Code
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
How The U.S. Power Grid Kept The
No ratings yet
How The U.S. Power Grid Kept The
20 pages
EU China Energy Magazine 2022 March Issue: 2022, #2
From Everand
EU China Energy Magazine 2022 March Issue: 2022, #2
EU-China Energy Cooperation Platform Project
No ratings yet
Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy For The ERCOT Region (SARA) Winter 2022/23
No ratings yet
Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy For The ERCOT Region (SARA) Winter 2022/23
21 pages
CAREC Energy Strategy 2030: Common Borders. Common Solutions. Common Energy Future.
From Everand
CAREC Energy Strategy 2030: Common Borders. Common Solutions. Common Energy Future.
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
ERCOT Ancillary Services Study Final White Paper
No ratings yet
ERCOT Ancillary Services Study Final White Paper
57 pages
Deployment of Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems in Minigrids
From Everand
Deployment of Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems in Minigrids
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
EU China Energy Magazine 2023 September Issue: 2023, #8
From Everand
EU China Energy Magazine 2023 September Issue: 2023, #8
EU-China Energy Cooperation Platform Project
No ratings yet
Electricity Market Design Evolution To Efficiently Integrate Wind and Other Emerging Technologies - ERCOT Style
No ratings yet
Electricity Market Design Evolution To Efficiently Integrate Wind and Other Emerging Technologies - ERCOT Style
15 pages
Energies 17 02515 v2
No ratings yet
Energies 17 02515 v2
24 pages
Impacts of Spatial Resolution in A High-Fidelity Capacity Expansion Model: An ERCOT Case Study
No ratings yet
Impacts of Spatial Resolution in A High-Fidelity Capacity Expansion Model: An ERCOT Case Study
9 pages
Handbook on Battery Energy Storage System
From Everand
Handbook on Battery Energy Storage System
Asian Development Bank
4.5/5 (2)
SARA PreliminaryWinter2020 2021 1
No ratings yet
SARA PreliminaryWinter2020 2021 1
1 page
DOE Reliability and Baseload Report Draft June 26
100% (6)
DOE Reliability and Baseload Report Draft June 26
142 pages
Nerc Ltra 2023
No ratings yet
Nerc Ltra 2023
135 pages
The Application of MCA
No ratings yet
The Application of MCA
21 pages
Retiring Coal Plants While Protecting System Reliability
No ratings yet
Retiring Coal Plants While Protecting System Reliability
5 pages
Innovation Landscape brief: Utility-scale Batteries
From Everand
Innovation Landscape brief: Utility-scale Batteries
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
Hybrid and Battery Energy Storage Systems: Review and Recommendations for Pacific Island Projects
From Everand
Hybrid and Battery Energy Storage Systems: Review and Recommendations for Pacific Island Projects
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
EU China Energy Magazine 2023 May Issue: 2023, #5
From Everand
EU China Energy Magazine 2023 May Issue: 2023, #5
EU-China Energy Cooperation Platform Project
No ratings yet
1 s2.0 S136403212500070X Main
No ratings yet
1 s2.0 S136403212500070X Main
21 pages
ENTSO-E Grid Planning Modelling Showcase for China: Joint Statement Report Series, #4
From Everand
ENTSO-E Grid Planning Modelling Showcase for China: Joint Statement Report Series, #4
EU-China Energy Cooperation Platform Project
No ratings yet
RE-organising Power Systems for the Transition
From Everand
RE-organising Power Systems for the Transition
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
Report On The Capacity, Demand and Reserves (CDR) in The ERCOT Region, 2023-2032
No ratings yet
Report On The Capacity, Demand and Reserves (CDR) in The ERCOT Region, 2023-2032
44 pages
Renewable Energy Integration For Bulk Power Systems: Pengwei Du
No ratings yet
Renewable Energy Integration For Bulk Power Systems: Pengwei Du
293 pages
Nicholas Institute Modeling of The IRA Act (Jan 25 2024)
No ratings yet
Nicholas Institute Modeling of The IRA Act (Jan 25 2024)
25 pages
Global hydrogen trade to meet the 1.5°C climate goal: Part III – Green hydrogen cost and potential
From Everand
Global hydrogen trade to meet the 1.5°C climate goal: Part III – Green hydrogen cost and potential
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
13.3 2023 ERCOT Methodologies For Determining Minimum Ancillary Service Requirements
No ratings yet
13.3 2023 ERCOT Methodologies For Determining Minimum Ancillary Service Requirements
24 pages
Grid Codes for Renewable Powered Systems
From Everand
Grid Codes for Renewable Powered Systems
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
ERCOT 2024 State of The Grid
No ratings yet
ERCOT 2024 State of The Grid
20 pages
Renewable power generation costs in 2022
From Everand
Renewable power generation costs in 2022
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
Socioeconomic Impact Assessment of the Malalison Island Solar Photovoltaic Hybrid Project in the Philippines
From Everand
Socioeconomic Impact Assessment of the Malalison Island Solar Photovoltaic Hybrid Project in the Philippines
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
COVID-19 and Energy Sector Development in Asia and the Pacific: Guidance Note
From Everand
COVID-19 and Energy Sector Development in Asia and the Pacific: Guidance Note
Asian Development Bank
No ratings yet
IRENA Power System Flexibility 1 2018
No ratings yet
IRENA Power System Flexibility 1 2018
48 pages
Review of February 2021 Extreme Cold Weather Event - ERCOT Presentation
No ratings yet
Review of February 2021 Extreme Cold Weather Event - ERCOT Presentation
23 pages
Impact of Demand Side Management in ERCOT
No ratings yet
Impact of Demand Side Management in ERCOT
38 pages
Renewable power generation costs in 2018
From Everand
Renewable power generation costs in 2018
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
No ratings yet
PIPPA - House COE 4 June 2021-FINAL
No ratings yet
PIPPA - House COE 4 June 2021-FINAL
8 pages
A Review of Current Challenges and Trends in Energy Systems Modeling
No ratings yet
A Review of Current Challenges and Trends in Energy Systems Modeling
11 pages
Electric Sector
No ratings yet
Electric Sector
27 pages
Bus Participation Factor Analysis For Harmonic Instability in Power Electronics Based Power Systems
No ratings yet
Bus Participation Factor Analysis For Harmonic Instability in Power Electronics Based Power Systems
11 pages
Evaluation of Voltage Stability Assessment Methodologies in Transmission Systems
No ratings yet
Evaluation of Voltage Stability Assessment Methodologies in Transmission Systems
92 pages
Hybrid Energy Storage For A Microgrid
No ratings yet
Hybrid Energy Storage For A Microgrid
5 pages
Distributed Flooding-then-Clustering: A Lazy Networking Approach For Distributed Multiple Target Tracking
No ratings yet
Distributed Flooding-then-Clustering: A Lazy Networking Approach For Distributed Multiple Target Tracking
9 pages
Transfer
No ratings yet
Transfer
1 page
Moving To A Smart Distribution Grid
No ratings yet
Moving To A Smart Distribution Grid
94 pages
2024 10 12 NREL Small Signal Stability
No ratings yet
2024 10 12 NREL Small Signal Stability
8 pages
Voltage and Transient Stability Historical Review Methodology
No ratings yet
Voltage and Transient Stability Historical Review Methodology
41 pages
Voltage Stability Assessment of A Large Power System
No ratings yet
Voltage Stability Assessment of A Large Power System
7 pages
2021 State of The Market Report
No ratings yet
2021 State of The Market Report
211 pages
Best Practices Handbook For The Collection and Use of Solar Resource Data For Solar Energy Applications
No ratings yet
Best Practices Handbook For The Collection and Use of Solar Resource Data For Solar Energy Applications
570 pages
Gtzounas Phdthesis
No ratings yet
Gtzounas Phdthesis
185 pages
Engie Solar Becomes More Agile With Cisco Iot Solutions
No ratings yet
Engie Solar Becomes More Agile With Cisco Iot Solutions
4 pages
KNX Solutions en
No ratings yet
KNX Solutions en
32 pages
A Review of Key Power Systern Stability Challenges For Large-Scale PV Integration
No ratings yet
A Review of Key Power Systern Stability Challenges For Large-Scale PV Integration
14 pages
Ц2 10 266 - Blagoj Gajdardziski - Hristina Murgovska - Instaliranje Plutajucih Fotonaponskih Elektrana Na Akumulacijama Hidroelektrana u Sever
No ratings yet
Ц2 10 266 - Blagoj Gajdardziski - Hristina Murgovska - Instaliranje Plutajucih Fotonaponskih Elektrana Na Akumulacijama Hidroelektrana u Sever
11 pages
Annual Report 2023
No ratings yet
Annual Report 2023
65 pages
M300 AES Compact Liberia
No ratings yet
M300 AES Compact Liberia
26 pages
Ashraf PROJECT REPORT
100% (1)
Ashraf PROJECT REPORT
73 pages
Canal Top Article
No ratings yet
Canal Top Article
5 pages
Case Study
No ratings yet
Case Study
60 pages
Past Papers Unit 5 and 6 2018-2023
No ratings yet
Past Papers Unit 5 and 6 2018-2023
10 pages
QP Esl 202306 PR
No ratings yet
QP Esl 202306 PR
28 pages
Hossam Abdelhameed V02 2025
No ratings yet
Hossam Abdelhameed V02 2025
2 pages
Study Assessing Viability of Installing 20kw Solar Power For The Electrical & Electronic Engineering Department Rufus Giwa Polytechnic Owo
No ratings yet
Study Assessing Viability of Installing 20kw Solar Power For The Electrical & Electronic Engineering Department Rufus Giwa Polytechnic Owo
6 pages
Booklet Qualification Pack SCGJ
No ratings yet
Booklet Qualification Pack SCGJ
32 pages
Q4 2023 India RE Update - JMK Research - Revised
No ratings yet
Q4 2023 India RE Update - JMK Research - Revised
32 pages
Significance of Solar Inverters
No ratings yet
Significance of Solar Inverters
10 pages
PHD Thesis Topics in Energy Economics
100% (3)
PHD Thesis Topics in Energy Economics
7 pages
Pitch Analysis Paper
No ratings yet
Pitch Analysis Paper
7 pages
METKA EGN Company Profile PDF
No ratings yet
METKA EGN Company Profile PDF
11 pages
Feasibility Study of A 100Mw Photovoltaic Power Plant at Bati, Ethiopia Using Retscreen
No ratings yet
Feasibility Study of A 100Mw Photovoltaic Power Plant at Bati, Ethiopia Using Retscreen
8 pages
VAKA EKHAYA Project Prospectus
No ratings yet
VAKA EKHAYA Project Prospectus
32 pages
Sherabad Solar PV Project
No ratings yet
Sherabad Solar PV Project
11 pages
Global Plant Project DB-Solar
No ratings yet
Global Plant Project DB-Solar
12 pages
Full - 2 Day Renewable Energy Project Finance and Modelling - June2023
No ratings yet
Full - 2 Day Renewable Energy Project Finance and Modelling - June2023
9 pages
Utility-Scale Solar Photovoltaic Power Plants: Guided by Prof Kalyan Agarwal
No ratings yet
Utility-Scale Solar Photovoltaic Power Plants: Guided by Prof Kalyan Agarwal
15 pages
G CHANDRA CHAITANYA M230973AR Draft Report - PSC
No ratings yet
G CHANDRA CHAITANYA M230973AR Draft Report - PSC
27 pages
Sun Bear Project Information 11-6
No ratings yet
Sun Bear Project Information 11-6
11 pages
Validation of Solar Power Plant Dynamic Model Using Commissioning Test Measurements
No ratings yet
Validation of Solar Power Plant Dynamic Model Using Commissioning Test Measurements
8 pages