lightbucket

The capacity credit of wind power

March 12, 2009 · 12 Comments

What happens when the wind doesn’t blow? How much of a wind farm’s output can be relied on as “firm” capacity, and how much backup generating capacity is needed? The answer is in a measure called the “capacity credit”.

wind farm
EIA

In an earlier post, I looked at the capacity factor of wind power. That’s the ratio between a wind farm’s average power output and its maximum or “nameplate” capacity. That ratio is usually between about 20% and 30%. That is, when averaged over a year, a wind farm produces about 20%–30% as much energy as it would if it operated continuously at its maximum power output.

This time around, I’ll look at another key operating parameter for wind power, its “capacity credit”. Whereas the capacity factor is a measure of the average output of a wind farm, the capacity credit is a measure of the worst case minimum output that can be relied on as a part of the total system capacity. The capacity credit is the “firm” capacity of a wind farm that can be counted on as a reliable contribution to the sum of all grid capacity.

Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center
Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center, Texas.
With 736 MW nameplate capacity, it is the world’s largest wind farm.

Put another way, the capacity credit of a wind farm is the amount by which other generating capacity (such as coal, for example) can be removed from the grid without compromising reliability of supply.

Wind power is not the only energy source that varies with time. Tidal power fluctuates on a 12-hour period, and solar power has a seasonal (and, uh, a day-night) variation, and it also has more random variations caused by cloud cover. In fact all generating technologies have planned maintenance outages, and they have some unplanned outages too. Wind is unusual, however, in the unpredictability of its output. It doesn’t have the fixed periodic variations of tidal or solar. This unpredictability of wind power makes the question of its capacity credit a rather complicated one.

What, then, is the capacity credit of wind power? What is that minimum power capacity that a wind farm can reliably provide?

Since a wind farm’s output can drop all the way to zero, it seems at first sight that the capacity credit of wind power must be zero. In fact that’s not the case. It would be true if the wind farm operated in isolation, but a wind farm is usually connected to a much larger supply grid. Supply and demand across the grid vary all the time, and energy planners have developed detailed statistical calculations to handle this problem.

They plan grid capacity so as to meet a given “loss of load probability”, or LOLP. The LOLP is the probability that generation will be insufficient to meet demand. Energy supply planners must ensure that there is sufficient capacity to keep the loss of load probability below some specified level, but they don’t want to spend money needlessly on surplus capacity beyond that. The issue is one of managing risk:

Wind farms can be treated statistically in exactly the same way as conventional power plant. For any type of power plant it is possible to calculate the probability of it not being able to supply the expected load. As wind is variable, the probability that it will not be available at any particular time is higher.

Can We Rely on the Wind?
BWEA [1]
Kentish Flats Offshore Wind Farm
Kentish Flats Offshore Wind Farm, UK.
Its nameplate capacity is 90 MW, 5 of the 30 turbines are shown here.       Elsam

Wind power can be factored into the grid reliability statistics in exactly the same way as every other power source. Wind has a lower probability of being available, but that number is simply fed into the calculations. There is nothing qualitatively different about wind. Energy engineers have taken a careful look at the statistics of wind supply, and their conclusion is that wind has a significant capacity credit after all [2].

How can this be? After all, the wind speed can drop all the way to zero. To answer that, we have to look at the supply statistics across the entire electricity grid. For example, when wind power is geographically dispersed, it becomes less likely that the wind will stop blowing at all wind farm sites simultaneously. That’s not to say it’s impossible, but it is less likely. Also, when wind strength and electricity demand correlate (for example, in regions where the wind is stronger during the winter) there is again a higher likelihood that wind will contribute to that demand.

Capacity Credit:  The Numbers

Going to the next level of detail, what are the actual numbers for the capacity credit of wind power?

The capacity credit of wind depends on the fraction of total grid capacity that is met by wind power. In the jargon, it depends on the “penetration” of wind power on the grid.

When the amount is wind capacity is a negligible fraction of the total grid capacity, the capacity credit of the wind farm can be treated as being equal to the average power of the wind farm [1]. That is, the capacity credit is the same as the capacity factor multiplied by the installed capacity. That’s because at very low levels of wind penetration, the grid can deal with fluctuations in wind output as part of its routine capability.

As wind capacity increases to about 10% of total grid capacity, the capacity credit falls to about 20% of the installed capacity (peak power) of the wind farm. That is, the capacity credit is now lower than the average power of the wind farm.

If still more wind farms are built, so that wind capacity increases to well above 10% of grid capacity, then wind starts to form a very substantial part of total electricity supply. There is now less leeway elsewhere in the system, and the capacity credit falls further still, to about 10% of installed capacity. That is, each 1 GW of installed wind capacity must be treated as only 100 MW of “firm” capacity. Put another way, each 1 GW of installed wind capacity allows 100 MW of conventional (gas or coal) capacity to be removed from the grid, although that wind capacity supplies about 300 MW of power on average (because it still has a 30% capacity factor).

The figures above are for the UK. Figure 1 presents the situation for Germany in greater detail [3]:

capacity credit for Germany
Figure 1.  Relationship between installed wind capacity and its capacity credit, for Germany.
Graph is from Ref.[3].
The “relative capacity credit” is the capacity credit expressed as a fraction of installed or “nameplate” capacity.
The projected capacity credit for 2020 is based on calculations in the DENA 1 study showing the effect on capacity credit of expected improved load factors in Germany, resulting from improved wind power technology (more efficient rotors) and the use of sites with higher wind speeds (offshore).

Germany has 125 GW of generating capacity, of which 20.6 GW, or 16.5%, is wind [4]. From Figure 1, Germany’s wind power has an 8% relative capacity credit, which corresponds to a capacity credit of about 1.5 GW.

Backup Requirement

What does the capacity credit of a wind farm tell us about the backup capacity that a wind farm requires? Because a wind farm can’t always be relied on to deliver its average power, it needs an operating reserve to act as back up. Nowadays that operating reserve is usually gas or coal.

On top of that, there is also the question of “spinning reserve”. Some thermal power stations are kept in a “warm” state, with turbines spinning, so they can deliver full power at very short notice. This is the “spinning reserve” on the grid. At the present low level of wind penetration in the UK, no extra “spinning reserve” is needed. Wind power won’t create a need for additional spinning reserve until its share of total grid capacity exceeds 20% [1].

Looking further ahead, a more elaborate network of renewable power sources can be set up if we have a large enough grid. Between them the various renewables can provide power reliably, even though each renewable individually has a relatively low probability of being available. (That issue is for another blog post though.)

How much backup capacity is needed?

The backup requirement is usually seen as the amount of capacity needed to make up the difference between a wind farm’s average output and its capacity credit (where the capacity credit is its minimum “firm” output):

Backup capacity needed  =  average power − capacity credit

To illustrate this, here are two examples. The first is for a capacity credit of 20% of “nameplate” installed capacity, as would be the case for low levels of wind penetration. The second example is for a capacity credit of 10% of “nameplate” capacity, the case for a high level of wind penetration. A 30% capacity factor is assumed for both cases:

Backup capacity requirement at 20% capacity credit
Installed capacity (peak power) 1000 MW
Average power at 30% capacity factor =  1000 MW × 30%  = 300 MW
Capacity credit =  1000 MW × 20%  = 200 MW
Backup capacity = average power − capacity credit   = 300 MW − 200 MW =   100 MW 

In this case, the 1000 MW of installed capacity generates an average power of 300 MW, and requires an additional backup capacity of 100 MW.

Backup capacity requirement at 10% capacity credit
Installed capacity (peak power) 1000 MW
Average power at 30% capacity factor =  1000 MW × 30%  = 300 MW
Capacity credit =  1000 MW × 10%  = 100 MW
Backup capacity = average power − capacity credit   = 300 MW − 100 MW =   200 MW 

When the capacity credit has fallen to 10% of installed capacity, the 1000 MW of installed capacity still generates the same 300 MW of average wind power, but it now requires 200 MW of backup capacity, more than before, because a lower fraction of the installed capacity can be counted on as “firm” capacity.

Related Posts

References

  1. Can We Rely on the Wind?  British Wind Energy Association, 2007  (Webcite cache)
  2. Wind Power Has a Capacity Credit: A Catalogue of 50+ Supporting Studies, G. Giebel, e-WindEng Journal, 2005  (Webcite cache)
  3. Capacity Credit Values of Wind Power, Wind Energy – The Facts, European Wind Energy Association, 2007  (Webcite cache)
  4. Statistical Pocketbook 2009. Part 2:  Energy, European Commission, 2009  (Table 2.4.1)  (Webcite cache)

Categories: energy policy · wind
Tagged: , , ,

12 responses so far ↓

  • Fab // March 14, 2009 at 5:05 pm

    I am not convinced by your math. A 1000 MW wind installed capacity will have an output constantly variable between 0 and 1000MW, or better between 20-50MW and 900-950MW being unlikely that all the generators are stopped or producing at maximum rated power. It will happen quite often that the wind will drop from 900MW to 300-400 MW or maybe less. In this case, assuming that it does not happen together with a drop in electricity demand, this power will have to be replace with conventional base stations (hydro o gas tipically). So this should be counted as backup power and it is substantially more than 200MW, at low penetrations level existing bakup stations will be used but as wind grows new bakup plants will be needed or existing plants will not be retired from the system.

    Th irish case seems a good fit for this situation:

    http://www.eirgrid.com/EirgridPortal/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=Wind+Generation&TreeLinkModID=2314&TreeLinkItemID=57

  • lightbucket // March 15, 2009 at 10:52 am

    >>A 1000 MW wind installed capacity will have an output constantly variable between 0 and 1000MW, or better between 20-50MW and 900-950MW being unlikely that all the generators are stopped or producing at maximum rated power.

    That’s right, wind can vary all the way from maximum rated capacity to zero. That’s why you look at the average, which for the UK case is about 30%.
    The fact that the power can drop all the way to zero does not mean that the capacity credit is zero. I’ve tried explaining that in the post, but maybe I wasn’t clear enough. You don’t need to back up the whole maximum rated capacity of the wind farm – no one is assuming that that is the contribution to the grid – it’s the average you have to look at.

  • jack cadogan // March 17, 2009 at 3:33 pm

    This post is a good effort to deal with wind energy but does not reflect the extensive analytical and operating experience obtained over the last 30 years. In particular, treating wind as a capacity resource, i.e. capacity credit, and computing backup power requirements, totally misses the fundamental point that wind energy is an energy resource, not one that supplies its energy on peak. If one wants to displace carbon, energy is the ballgame.

    Researchers recognized that in the production modeling context a certain amount (say X MW) of combustion turbines was replaced by the wind plant rated at Y MW. Thus the economic value of the capacity replaced by the wind plant is relatively small because X is usually a fraction of Y (less than or equal to the wind plant’s capacity factor) and the relative cost of the combustion turbines is small compared to the wind plant. With the modern trend to competition in electric power, capacity credit has become less of an issue than the fuel and emissions savings from the wind option.

    With the advent of operating wind plants, attention has shifted from a planning perspective at low penetrations to operating power systems with wind energy at penetrations at and above 5%. The notion that a fixed quantity of backup power is needed for a certain quantity of wind power is grossly misleading because 1) the output of a wind plant does not change significantly from one minute to the next, 2) aggregating the output of many wind plants reduces this variation considerably and 3) electric power systems maintain a reserve of power above instantaneous load to account for increases in load and unexpected loss in generation. Short term variation of wind plants is compatible with short term variations in load.

    Studies and experience in the United States and Europe have shown that this “extra” conventional generation is a small fraction of the instantaneous output of wind generation, typically, 1 to 5%, and not 20 to 100% (as some utilities contend), or the average value, as the post implies. As wind penetration increases over time, the mix of baseload and cycling generation, and customer side of the meter options, would be changed to favor flexibility in response to accommodate the larger quantities of wind power. Dedicated energy storage is not required.

    Consult the Department of Energy’s “20% Wind Energy by 2030″ for information of how wind power can displace a large fraction of carbon emissions from electric power generation. (http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf}

    For more information of the operating impacts of wind energy on the host electric power system, that is, operating reserve including spinning reserve, consult IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, “Working with Wind: Integrating Wind into the Power System,”, Volume 3, No. 6, November, December 2005, and IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, “Wind Integration”, Volume 5, No.6, November/December 2007.

    Jack Cadogan
    US Department of Enenrgy Wind Program (retired)
    Springfield VA 22151.

  • lightbucket // March 17, 2009 at 4:15 pm

    Hello Jack,
    Thanks for the information.
    >>Studies and experience in the United States and Europe have shown that this “extra” conventional generation is a small fraction of the instantaneous output of wind generation, typically, 1 to 5%, and not 20 to 100% (as some utilities contend), or the average value, as the post implies.

    In fact the post claims that the backup requirement is substantially smaller than the average output.

  • Fab // March 19, 2009 at 8:15 am

    “As wind penetration increases over time, the mix of baseload and cycling generation, and customer side of the meter options, would be changed to favor flexibility in response to accommodate the larger quantities of wind power. Dedicated energy storage is not required.”

    This means more natural gas power plants are required? Like in Spain?

  • Patrick // April 2, 2009 at 2:57 am

    If one is to reduce CO2 emissions by a factor of 4, then in an “all-renewable” option, wind (which can be seen as wind + solar eventually, which are both fluctuating resources although with different statistical properties), we would need at least a penetration factor of say 60 – 70%, otherwise it is just a “drop on a hot plate”, so what is the capacity credit of a distributed wind (and solar) system with a grid penetration of 70% ?

  • lightbucket // April 2, 2009 at 9:18 am

    Hello Patrick,

    >> so what is the capacity credit of a distributed wind (and solar) system with a grid penetration of 70% ?

    For the German data above, (i.e. for German grid as it currently exists, and the EWEA’s view of capacity credit) the capacity credit for wind would be slightly under 5%. Germany’s wind capacity factor is 17%.

  • Patrick // April 2, 2009 at 4:54 pm

    Mmm, that would mean that if the average grid power is, say, 60 GW of which 42 GW average wind (hence 42 GW / 0.17 = 247 GW installed nameplate power) we can consider 247 GW x 0.05 = 12.4 GW “reliable”, and so we’d need 30 GW of “reliable” backup, while if we would consider that capacity credit to be zero, we’d need 42 GW of reliable backup.

  • nofreewind // May 18, 2009 at 11:47 am

    Kudos for attempting a difficult subject. I hope to add more, but start here with a US study into Capacity Credit.
    http://the-green-wind.com/integration/determining_capacity_value.pdf
    PJM supplies electricity to 4 or 5 states in NE USA, including Pennsylvania, my state. They give wind only a 13% capacity credit.

    http://www.nofreewind.com/integration.html – much more here.
    http://nofreewind.blogspot.com/

  • Chris Travers // July 8, 2009 at 5:18 am

    Interesting article.

    However, one thing that makes the issue even more complex is that as grid interconnects get better, it may be possible to disperse wind farms over wider areas. In these cases, the capacity credit may be far higher because wind blowing on one wind farm higher than average would off-set lower-than-normal wind on another.

    This is an area that invites a lot of work in the future. Wind has a lot of potential, but the grid needs work to make it live up to potential.

  • lightbucket // July 8, 2009 at 10:01 am

    Hello Chris,
    I touched on this very briefly in the post (“Looking further ahead, a more elaborate network of renewable power sources can be set up if we have a large enough grid…”) but I’m hoping to say more about transmission grids in a future post, (when/if I ever get around to it…)

  • Alex, Tunbridge Wells // July 30, 2009 at 5:11 pm

    This assumes that demand is not responsive to changes in supply. Heating using electric heat pumps, refrigeration, electric vehicle charging, and more, are all demand loads that can very often be postponed by a matter of hours.

    The other question is what does extra capacity cost?
    - Gas power stations are surprisingly cheap to build (£1 billion for 3GW).
    - Norway has huge potential to convert hydro power to pumped storage.
    - and the one I like, future nuclear power stations could be built with a large thermal mass to store power over several days, (except that the nuclear industry sees the wind industry as it’s mortal enemy, so will never propose this).

Leave a Comment