Distributed Generation

Introduction: With the increase of the power demand and issues introduced by the large transmission networks, the concept of distributed generation, generates electricity from many small energy sources, has led to new considerations concerning the distribution networks (M.Sospedra, S.Vutukuru, J.Brouwer, D.Dabdub,2010). Compared to the traditional paradigm of large, centralized power plants, distributed generation has apparent advantages in terms of economy (energy loss), stability and environment. As s result of these benefits, according to A. Gravin, W. Patrick and W.William(2005), many private sectors and governmental organizations have already promoted the deployment of distributed electricity generation (DG) technologies for several years. This paper will analysis both advantages and limitations of distributed generation with the help of graphs, real life figures and mathematical models. Generation plants type: For centralized generation, as a huge power is required, the most common plant is the combustion plant, which is relatively independent of external conditions. For, distributed generation, according to N. Greene and R. Hammerschlag(2005), people usually take advantage of wind, solar, fuel cells, micro turbines, and internal combustion plant to generate electricity.

Advantage 1---Economic benefits (Transmission loss reduction) The distributed generation system can offer significant economic benefits. One of the most immediate benefits from introducing additional generators closer to the

consumer is that transmission and distribution costs can be dramatically reduced.. According to G. Marinopoulos, C. Alexiadis and S. Dokopoulos(2011), transmission of electricity from a power plant to a typical user wastes roughly 4.2 to 8.9 percent of the electricity as a consequence of aging transmission equipment. These wastes are included in customers energy bills. This energy loss can be significantly reduced by DG system.

LIU, BAO and WANG(2011) have done a cost calculation based 3 generators and 9 loads, as shown below:

In their calculation, the cost per unit energy from DG is assumed to be much higher than that from centralized generation; the calculation equation is listed below.

Comparing table1 and table3, the cost of networks in DG is about 20% smaller than that without DG. However, the method they used to approximate the cost is too complicate for me. To make the problem simple and apparent, with the help of what I have learnt in the workshop, a 2 generators with 3 loads model is used to show the benefit of distributed generation. The matlab model is shown below: note G3 is used as a load.

Given power demand and transmission line impedance (relatively small compared to the transmission line in real life). SD1=8+3j pu; SD2=5+2.5j pu; SD3=8+5j pu. ZTL12=0.01+0.03j pu;

ZTL23=0.0125+0.025jpu ZTL13=0.02+0.04j pu Report from matlab (note: only one phase is remained in the report to save space):
[3] Machine Load Flow solution: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: Q: Pmec: Torque: Vf: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: Q: Pmec: Torque: Vf: G2 100 MVA -8.35 15600 Vrms [1.04 pu] 21.65 36307 Arms [9.433 pu] -74.29 3.9999e+008 W 4.2535e+008 W 2.7079e+007 N.m 13.242 pu G1 100 MVA Swing bus 0.00 15750 Vrms [1.05 pu] 30.00 68766 Arms [17.87 pu] -13.24 1.8261e+009 W 1.917e+009 W 23.492 pu [18.26 pu] [4.296 pu] [19.17 pu] [19.17 pu] 4.2961e+008 Vars 1.2204e+008 N.m 15 kV rms [4 pu] [8.958 pu] [4.253 pu] [4.253 pu] 8.9578e+008 Vars 15 kV rms P & V generator

Total line loss is SG1+SG2-SD1-SD2-SD3=18.26+4.296j+4+8.958j- (8+3j +5+2.5j+8+5j)=1.26+3.254j pu Simulate DG is installed by add one more generator to load 3. Then, rerun the simulation, the matlab report is shown below:
[3] Machine Load Flow solution: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: G3 100 MVA -0.65 15637 Vrms [1.042 pu] 29.35 34833 Arms [9.05 pu] -32.66 8e+008 W [8 pu] 15 kV rms P & Q generator

Q: Pmec: Torque: Vf: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: Q: Pmec: Torque: Vf: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: Q: Pmec: Torque: Vf:

5e+008 Vars 8.2334e+008 W

[5 pu] [8.233 pu] [8.233 pu]

5.2416e+007 N.m 12.309 pu G2 100 MVA -1.06

15 kV rms

P & V generator 15600 Vrms [1.04 pu] 28.94 17342 Arms [4.506 pu] -32.46 4e+008 W [4 pu] [2.441 pu] [4.058 pu] [4.058 pu] 2.4409e+008 Vars 4.0579e+008 W 2.5833e+007 N.m 6.3694 pu G1 100 MVA Swing bus -0.00 15750 Vrms [1.05 pu] 30.00 35114 Arms [9.123 pu] -19.22 9.0453e+008 W 9.2825e+008 W 5.9094e+007 N.m 12.178 pu [9.045 pu] [3.153 pu] [9.283 pu] [9.283 pu] 3.1531e+008 Vars 15 kV rms

With DG, the total line loss is SG1+SG2+SG3-SD1-SD2-SD3=9.045+3.153j+4+2.441j+8+5j- (8+3j +5+2.5j+8+5j)=0.045+0.094j pu Based on the simulation above, it is quite safe to conclude that the line loss with DG is much smaller than the line loss without DG. In real life, this reduction in line loss leads to a significant saving. This is shown in the research by DPCA (2000).

In conclusion, distributed generators can be sited close to the end-user, thus decrease transmission and distribution costs and electrical losses, which leads huge economic benefits.

Advantage 2---Stability In addition to economic savings, DG technologies may also provide benefits in the form of more reliable power for industries that require uninterrupted service. When a fault or short-circuit occurs in an electric power system, all synchronous generators contribute current directly to that fault until protective equipment acts to either isolate the fault or trip (switch off) the generators. The Electric Power Research Institute reported that power outages and quality disturbances cost American businesses $119 billion per year. In 2001, the International Energy Agency (2002) estimated that the average cost of a one-hour power outage was $6,480,000 for brokerage operations and $2,580,000 for credit card operations. The figures grow more impressively for the semiconductor industry, where a two hour power outage can cost close to $48,000,000. Given these numbers, it remains no mystery why several firms have already installed DG facilities to ensure consistent power supplies. The problem described above can be solved using DG system. Based on the research done by Azmy(2011), DG units are able to increase both transient stability and the voltage stability. Take the voltage stability as an example:

The figure above shows the voltage deviation at two load nodes when a load of 1Mvar is switched on at the terminals of the first load of them (Azmy, 2011). The second load node is about 2km away from the switching point. A large voltage decrease occurs at the switching point when the DG units are not utilized. This voltage decrease is significantly reduced when the 28.3% penetration DG units is considered. The other load terminals in the distribution system incorporate also some improvements in the voltage profiles when DG units are used. The voltage decrease and the relative improvements in the voltage profiles at these terminals vary depending on their relative locations with respect to the switching point. Back to the 2 generators with 3 loads simplified model to see the influences of load change on terminal voltages. Change SD3=8+5j pu to SD3=4+2.5j pu and compare the voltage performance with and without the extra generator. Without the extra generator (2 generator and 3 buses): Voltage before (from previous simulation):
Uan phase: Uab: -10.42 13190 Vrms [0.8793 pu] 19.58

Voltage after the 50% demand change:

[3] Machine Load Flow solution: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: Q: Pmec: Torque: G3 100 MVA -5.06 14564 Vrms [0.9709 pu] 24.94 18699 Arms [4.858 pu] 142.94 -4e+008 W [-4 pu] [-2.5 pu] [-3.933 pu] [-3.933 pu] -2.5e+008 Vars -3.9327e+008 W -2.5037e+007 N.m 15 kV rms P & Q generator

Vf:

5.6364 pu

With the extra generator (3 generators and 3 buses): Voltage before (from previous simulation):
Uan phase: Uab: -0.65 15637 Vrms [1.042 pu] 29.35

Voltage after the 50% demand change:

[3] Machine Load Flow solution: Machine: Nominal: Bus Type: Uan phase: Uab: Ia: P: Q: Pmec: Torque: Vf: G3 100 MVA -0.66 15651 Vrms [1.043 pu] 29.34 17401 Arms [4.521 pu] -32.67 4e+008 W [4 pu] [2.5 pu] [4.058 pu] [4.058 pu] 2.5e+008 Vars 4.0582e+008 W 2.5836e+007 N.m 6.4016 pu 15 kV rms P & Q generator

Apparently, with an extra generator (approximation of DG system), the change on voltage is almost ignorable compared to that change in the 2-generators system. Based on the results and discussion above, it can be concluded that DG can improve the stability of power systems if suitable types and appropriate locations are selected. Therefore, factories can benefit significantly under a stable electricity system from distributed generation networks. Advantage 3---environmental friendly Distributed generation promises a number of environmental advantages including reduced fossil fuel consumption and lower CO2 emissions (Shelor, 1998). The distribution of smaller, modular units would also encourage the permeation of renewable generation technologies into the mainstream energy portfolio (Douglas, 1999). The widespread adoption of natural gas and displacement of coal would lead to gains in CO2 reductions and improved air quality. As mentioned before, plant types for distributed generation are usually wind, solar, fuel cells, microturbines and ICE. The chart of emissions for different generations is listed below.

Apparently, combustion plants produce much more emissions than other plants. Hence, the emissions could be significantly reduced by distributed generation system. To be specific, Photovoltaic and wind turbines are used to generate electricity. Since neither technology combusts or reforms fossil fuels, they produce no significant air emissions. Fuel cells are actually a family of technologies, each with a different mode of operation, though all with the same fundamental chemical reaction at their core. Fuel cells technically need only hydrogen. (N. Greene and R. Hammerschlag, 2005) In addition, distributed generations plants are relatively easy to control, as the generation is organized by individuals or small groups separately. Though some distributed generation technologies are environmentally harmful if uncontrolled, a number of measures exist to mitigate the impacts. Policymakers should encourage these measures wherever possible, and especially in states that are actively encouraging distributed generation. As states adopt streamlined interconnection procedures, they should tailor system benefits charge funds, tax incentives, and net metering laws to favor installations that take advantage of these measures. Distribution utilities also have an important role to play in ensuring that distributed generation goes where it can do the most good in both economic and environmental terms. (N. Greene and R. Hammerschlag, 2005) Limitation: There are many potential benefits of the distributed generation model; however, limitations should also be taken into consideration. Firstly, the placement of electric generation units within the community could face significant community resistance from poor public perception. Based on the research done by Garvin, Patrick, Abigail, and William (2005), most of people have concerns on living near generation plants, particularly, plants introducing apparent influence to the neighborhood environment. Hence, the concept of distributed generation is unlikely to be accepted by citizens,

unless safe, cheap and clean generation methods are invented and this technology convince most people. Secondly, DG leads to a huge change in energy operating system and related policy and budget. According to LIU, BAO and WANG (2011), the DG industry is a newly starting undertaking whose construction cost and operating costs are far more than the same scale coal-fired power project, and the price structure, influence factors and the change rule are also different from the traditional power. Therefore, to maintain the development of DG industry healthy and sustainable, confirming the generation price and the government subsidies amount through the market and the competition is inevitable. In addition, many new maintaining points should be constructed to ensure the operation of the distributed generation networks. Compared with centralized generation, much more engineers are needed in distributed generation operation. Lastly, the efficiency of the distributed generation system may be not as high as expected. This inefficiency can be as a result of the difficulty in resource distribution in huge networks. That means some of plants are not in fully active mode. For example, wind generation and photovoltaic generation depend on weather. On the other hand, harmonic waves produced by different generators are unavoidable. These waves introduce undesired performance in load flow. In conclusion, as a new system, distributed generation will take some time to maximize its operating efficiency. Conclusion: Distributed generation is a relatively new generation approach that employs small-scale technologies to produce electricity close to the end users of power. DG technologies often consist of modular renewable-energy generators, and they offer a number of potential benefits, such as lower-cost electricity and higher power reliability. In contrast to the use of a few large-scale generating stations located far from load centers--the approach used in the traditional electric power paradigm--DG systems employ numerous, but small plants and can provide power onsite with little reliance on the distribution and transmission grid (Douglas,1999) However, the development of distributed generation networks also takes negative concerns. Government energy policy and people perception need a huge change to fit this new generation system. The problem caused be the connection between multiple systems is being studied. In conclusion, DG has its apparent advantages over centralized generation while, to meet the need of real life, the technology of DG and related policy need to be more mature.

Bibliography: Azmy , Impact of Installation of Distributed Generation Units on Power System Transient Stability, European Journal of Scientific Research, 12/17/2011, Vol. 66 Issue 2, p225-232, 2011

Alireza S. and Mehdi E., A possibilisticprobabilistic tool for evaluating the impact of stochastic renewable and controllable power generation on energy losses in distribution networksA case study, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser, Vol 15 pp794800, 2011.

B. Nguyen and M.A. Pai, A sensitivity-based approach for studying stability impact of distributed generation, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser Vol 30, pp 442446,2008.

Douglas, J, The Electricity Technology Roadmap: Power Delivery in the 21st Century, EPRI Journal, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 1999 Summer.

DPCA, Distributed Power Coalition of America, www site, http://www.dpc.org/, 2000.

Garvin A. & Patrick W. & Abigail S. & William W, Quantifying the Air Pollution Exposure Consequences of Distributed Electricity Generation, Development and Technology, University of California Energy Institute, UC Berkeley, 11/01/2005

LIU L. & BAO H. & WANG L., Calculation of the Critical Value Price of Distributed Generation Considering Transmission Loss Cost, Elsevier Ltd. 2011 Energy Procedia, 12 pp163-169 ,

M. Carreras-Sospedra &

S. Vutukuru & J. Brouwer& D. Dabdub, Central power

generation versus distributed generation e An air quality assessment in the South

Coast Air Basin of California, Atmospheric Environment 44 pp 3215-3133, 2010.

G. Marinopoulos & C. Alexiadis & S. Dokopoulos, Energy losses in a distribution line with distributed generation based on stochastic power flow, Electric Power Systems Research, 81 pp1986-1994, journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser,2011.

V. DEVI & M. MURTY, Stochastic search techniques for post-fault restoration of electrical distribution systems, Sadhana, Vol. 25, Part 1, February 2000, pp. 455, 2000.

Shelor, F.M., Mini-Merchants for Distributed Generation, Power Engineering, v102, n8, pp34-38. 1998.

Jin-O Kim & Jae-Chul Kim & C. Singh, Optimal Operating Strategy for Distributed Generation Considering Hourly Reliability Worth, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS VOL. 19, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2004

N, Greene and R, Hammerschlag, Small and Clean Is Beautiful: Exploring the Emissions of Distributed Generation and Pollution Prevention Policies Elsevier Science Inc., 1040-6190, June 2000.