Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Increased loading
Increased power quality &
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
2/52
3 socio-economic tendencies
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
3/52
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
4/52
DER technologies
Distributed Generation:
Reciprocating engines
Gas turbines
Micro-turbines
Fuel cells
Photovoltaic panels
Wind turbines
Energy Storage
Batteries
Flywheels
Supercapacitors
Rev. fuel cells
Superconducting coils
Rotor
Armature
Winding
Holders
CHP configuration
Powder Iron
Toroids
Field
Winding
& Bobbin
Housing
Endcap
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
5/52
Current DG penetration
Forecast: 7.2% DG share in 2004 to 14% in 2012
(WADE)
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
6/52
Grid of tomorrow ?
Local generation
Local storage
Controllable loads, DSM
(NegaWatts)
Power quality and reliability
is a bigger issue
Growth (?):
o
o
o
Balancing:
o
o
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
7/52
Source: KEMA
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
8/52
SmartGrids Vision
EU Technology Platform
preparing FP7
Involving specialists from
industry, academia,
Vision paper published in
2006
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
9/52
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
10/52
Enabling Technologies
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
11/52
Virtual Utilities:
Configure and
deliver ->
Internet model
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
12/52
Microgrids:
Low voltage
networks with DG
sources, local
storage and
controllable loads,
automatic islanding
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
13/52
Microgrid idea
Technically, parts of the
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
14/52
Is a Microgrid new ?
History of electricity networks:
No ?
o
o
Yes !
o
o
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
15/52
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
16/52
DG%
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
17/52
Problem:
Technological solution:
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
18/52
P (kW)
Q (kVar)
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
Time (min)
1.06
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05
1.04
1.03
1.02
1.01
1
0.99
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
Time (min)
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
19/52
Substation
connecting
to HV-grid
Location:
LeuvenHaasrode,
Brabanthal +
SME-zone
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
20/52
10
101
101
102
102
201
103
103
104
104
202
202
203
203
301
301
105
105
402
402
205
205
204
204
303
303
302
401
401
106
106
403
403
404
404
206
206
108
108
207
207
304
304
405
405
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
107
107
406
109
111
111
110
110
208
208
305
305
407
408
409
21/52
101
102
201
201 202
301
301
401
103
104 105
205
203
203 204
303
302
402
403
106 107
404
405
206
304
406
407
108
109 110
207
111
208
208
305
305
408
409
22/52
11
Voltage dips
Voltage at node 2 branch 1-2 open
Voltage dips at node 2 with synchronous DG case
SUB
101
102
103
201
201 202
301
301
104
105
203
203 204
106
205
303
302
107
108
206
304
304
109
207
110
111
208
208
305
305
407
406
408
409
23/52
Ur
Ur
Pload + jQload
Zload
Critical Point
Pmax
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
Pload
24/52
12
SUB
101
102
103
104
105
SUB
106 2 107
108 104 109 110
101 102
103
105 106 107 108
201
201 202
301
301
201
201 202
301
301
203
203 204
302
303
205
205
203
203 204
302
206
401
404
402 207
403
303
206
304
304
208
208
405
406 407
Induction
DG
304
304
305
305
111
110
109
207
111
208
208
305
305
408
409
cases
408 409
401 402
406 407
403on 404 405
9DG Location has significant
impact
voltage stability limit.
DG unit: 3 MW
9Synchronous DG unit has better
Calculate
contribution to
voltage voltage
stability stability
limits. limit at node 111, is the furthest
25/52
Weather-driven (many
renewables)
Heat-demand driven (CHP)
Stabilising and balancing in
cable-dominated distribution
grids is not as easy as in HV
grids
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
active power
frequency
reactive power
voltage
26/52
13
Market-based control
o
o
Alternative networks
o
o
27/52
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
28/52
14
voltage before
voltage after
current before
current after
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
29/52
P1old P1new
MC
P2new P2old
P
MC
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
30/52
15
Safety
Problem:
Bidirectional flows
o
Solution:
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
31/52
SUB
SUB
Short-Circuit Current
101
101
102
102
201
201
202
202
301
301
401
401
kA
103
103
104
104
203
203
106
106
205
205
204
204
303
303
302
402
402
105
105
403
403
404
404
107
107
206
206
108
108
207
207
304
304
405
405
406
109
111
111
110
110
208
208
305
305
407
408
409
kA
4.0
0.40
3.5
With DG connection
0.35
Base case
0.30
With DG connection
3.0
Base case
2.5
0.25
2.0
0.20
1.5
0.15
1.0
0.5
0.0
99.5
0.10
s
100.0
100.5
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
101.0
101.5
102.0
s
99.5
100.0
100.5
101.0
101.5
102.0
32/52
16
Societal issues
Problems:
Environmental effects
o
Solution:
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
Multi-energy
vector approach
Open debate on
security of supply
33/52
Economic issues
Problems:
System costs
o
o
Solution:
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
Interdisciplinary
regulation, not
only legal
Need some real
deregulation
34/52
17
DG
introduction
does not mean
lowered losses
Optimum is 2/3
power at 2/3
distance
Other
injections
generally
cause higher
system losses
HV subst.
DG
Power flow along cable
Before DG
Zero point
After DG
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
35/52
Evolution of losses
8
Penetration level of DG
DG
x 100
P loss (%)
PLDG
P
(%) =
P
Induc PF 0.9
Con PF 1.0
Syn PF 0.9
5
4
3
2
1
First:
0
0
80
40
60
80
100
Penetration level (%)
120
140
160
120
140
160
Induc PF 0.9
Con PF 1.0
Syn PF 0.9
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
20
20
40
60
80
100
Penetretion level (%)
36/52
18
Usable storage
Activated intelligent loads (demand response technology), also
playing on a market?
Boundary condition: minimize losses
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
37/52
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
38/52
19
C?
Optimization goals:
o
o
o
o
Optimization
Constraints:
o
o
o
o
non-convex
multiple objectives
mixed discrete-continuous
long term vs. short term interactions
net balance
load flow equations
acceptable voltage profile
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
39/52
DER Planning
Single objective
Min (Energy Loss)
very straightforward
does not represent the real problem
Multi-objective
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
40/52
20
DER Planning
Long term planning problem efficiently handled by
using Genetic Algorithms
Gen A
Gen B
Node i
Network topology
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
41/52
Test case
42/52
21
Test case
Load data are based on actual measurements
residential buildings
period of 1 year
on a 15-minute basis
Summer,
high load
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
43/52
Test case
low load
(e.g. weekend)
winter
summer
high load
(e.g. working day)
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
44/52
22
Test case
Evolution of total power loss in the optimal solution of
each generation in the SummerLow scenario
Optimal and stable solution reached after 100 generations
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
45/52
Test case
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
46/52
23
Test case
Cross-comparison test :
use solution of scenario i
in fitness function of scenario j
Using
optimal
DG of
scenario
Load scenarios
SH
SL
WH
WL
SH
23.4
17.5
130.2
13.9
SL
26.9
13.1
160.0
18.8
WH
59.1
52.9
48.1
74.7
WL
36.9
19.7
107.7
11.9
63.5
30.9
219.9
40.4
No DG
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
47/52
DER Planning
Instead of single-objective optimization, the use of true multiobjective optimization is proposed
Single objective
Multi-objective
pool of solutions
trade-offs between objectives
insight in the potential of the grid
which objectives are conflicting?
48/52
24
DER Planning
What is a trade-off?
f1
f2
Pareto front
f2
feasible
translation from
variable space to
objective space
trade-offs
unfeasible
x1 , x2
f1
49/52
DER Planning
Fitness of a DER topology is calculated by running
a scenario with assumed loads and grid topology
What if
9 Storage is to be optimized?
9 Load has an elastic behavior?
9 Production is dispatchable?
Control?
Demand Response?
Forecasting?
secondary control
economic optimum
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
50/52
25
Conclusion
Current grid:
Interconnection
Higher PQ level required
DER looking around the corner
Whose optimum?
role of loads?
51/52
more information:
http://www.esat.kuleuven.be/electa
check publications sections, e.g.:
Pepermans G., Driesen J., Haeseldonckx D., Belmans R., Dhaeseleer W.:
Distributed Generation: Definition, Benefits And Issues, Energy Policy, Elsevier,
Vol.33, Issue 6, April 2005, pp. 787-798
or contact
johan.driesen@esat.kuleuven.be
Thank you!
(now, let
lets discuss)
K.U.Leuven - ESAT/Electa
26