INCREASE Project Presentation · •Questionnaire to gather the insight on challenges and solutions...
Transcript of INCREASE Project Presentation · •Questionnaire to gather the insight on challenges and solutions...
www.project-increase.eu
xxx
INCREASE Project Presentation
Joint Project Workshop
19. March 2015, Aachen, Germany
Prof. dr. Andrej Gubina
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Andreas Tuerk, MBA
Joanneum Research
www.project-increase.eu
Overview
• Overview of the role of the DSO
• Feedback and results of DSO questionnaire carried out last year
• Progress of the proposed solution referring to results presented in several Deliverables
• Mapping to 10 questions
www.project-increase.eu
Overview of the role of the DSO
• In INCREASE, the DSO: • Is the facilitator of the INCREASE solutions • Is one of the key beneficiaries of the results • Provides key inputs and comments to the development • Field test cases in 4 DSO networks
• Envisioned impact on DSO: • Smart inverters provide services to them • Designed control tools utilize Smart Grid infrastructure • Evaluation of possible commercial roles of DSO • Regulatory barriers identified and addressed • Additional light shed into risk management questions:
• Upgrade the grid or operate closer to limits, actively?
www.project-increase.eu
Overview
• Overview of the role of the DSO
• Feedback and results of DSO questionnaire carried out last year
• Progress of the proposed solution referring to results presented in several Deliverables
• Mapping to 10 questions
www.project-increase.eu
Practical challenges and solutions from the DSO perspective
• Questionnaire to gather the insight on challenges and solutions • Questions covered four key DN issues of INCREASE project:
voltage control, voltage unbalance mitigation, line congestion mitigation and reserve provision.
• We have received responses from Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.
• The aspects investigated covered • Technology challenges (planning, operation and
measurement issues), • Proposed solutions (control strategies and topology),
financial support for AS and the • Regulatory framework issues.
www.project-increase.eu
Questionnaire
Technology challenges Policy aspects
Solutions for preventing voltage-unbalance problems
Are any of the AS specified in the DSO Grid Code?
Kind of reactive power control mechanisms integrated in the power plant that the DSO can prescribe
Specific aspects of market provision of the AS (for voltage and reserve provision) to be taken into account
Operation issues Measurement issues
Requirements on frequency-dependable reduction of real-power
DSO ability to prescribe an interface for real power reduction and access to other measurements
Requirements for real-power reduction dependent on measurement voltage
Measurements currently available in the LV and MV network
Stipulated power factor range for distributed generators
Additional measurements to be installed in the near future
Control curves that can be stipulated by the DSO
www.project-increase.eu
Overview
• Overview of the role of the DSO
• Feedback and results of DSO questionnaire carried out last year
• Progress of the proposed solution referring to results presented in several Deliverables
• Mapping to 10 questions
www.project-increase.eu
LV Distribution Networks
8
• Distribution grid originally designed for consumption
• Objectives: • Voltage criterion in accordance to EN 50160 (UΝ ±10 %)
• Compensation for the voltage drop in the power line
• Stationary adjustment to the ratio at the transformer (on-load ?)
• .
Source: Dr. Bernhard Ernst, EPIA-EDSO for Smart Grids Conference on Grid Management, 24 June 2014, Brussels, Belgium
www.project-increase.eu
Major Challenges: Transition from a downstream unidirectional to a bidirectional power scheme
Overvoltage and possible violation of EN 50160 • Limiting the capacity for DG
Other Technical Issues: Traditionally not monitored and/or controlled
Other operational issues • DG units not uniformly distributed to the three phases • Considerable voltage unbalances • Congestion issues on power lines and/or on transformers
LV Distribution Networks
9
Source: Dr. Bernhard Ernst, EPIA-EDSO for Smart Grids Conference on Grid Management, 24 June 2014, Brussels, Belgium
www.project-increase.eu
LV Distribution Networks
10
• Possible Solutions: • Reinforcement of the DN feeders
• Implementing electric energy storage
• Needs investments
• Use of OLTCs or/and voltage regulators • Needs investments
• Reliability issues
• Operational limitations
• Reactive power support • Limited by inverter rated power
• Inefficient for LV networks with high R/X ratio
• Increasing network losses
• Active power curtailment
www.project-increase.eu
INCREASE Issues Tackled
Grid support:
• Voltage control
• Over- and undervoltages
• Voltage unbalance
• Line congestion
• Provision of reserve
• Ancillary services:
– Towards DSOs & TSOs
– Voltage control
– Provision of reserve
– The ancillary service market
• The regulatory framework
• Market models
Technical: Beyond technicalities:
For the low and medium voltage grid
Focus on the low voltage grid
www.project-increase.eu
WP 3
WP 5
Framework conditions
Analysis to evaulate benefits
Results
KPIsCBA
SWOT+RA
MarketsProposed AS
Bussiness cases
WP 2Technology
Control strategy
Results
Finding the value in the services provided
www.project-increase.eu
INCREASE Solution Multi Agent Structure Control
Local control
Overlaying control
Scheduling control Service layer
Middleware layer
Physical layer DRES
LC
DRES
LC
LOAD … …
Real-time line rating Demand-side management
Forecasting tools Active network management
Multi-objective optimisation
AS market Electricity
market
Agent
Aggregator
www.project-increase.eu
The INCREASE Control Schemes
14
• Objectives: • Increase the penetration of DG units in existing
networks • Active management of LV distribution networks via a
distributed multi-agent systems • Enhance the observability and controllability of LV
networks • Facilitating DNOs transition to DSOs
• Control Schemes: • Local Control • Overlaying Control • Scheduling Control
www.project-increase.eu
Local Control Overview
15
• Objectives: Real time mitigation of overvoltages and of voltage unbalances • Low-level control scheme
• Stand-alone operation, use of local parameters (e.g. voltage at the PCC)
• Immediate reaction on changes of grid operational state • Enhancing the smooth/safe operation of the distribution grid
• Implementation: • Applied to DG units via INCREASE developed controllable grid-interfaced inverters
• Two basic control schemes are incorporated: droop control and voltage unbalance mitigation
• Conclusions: • INCREASE Local Control scheme: combines
• Droop control scheme reduces overvoltages efficiently, but not voltage unbalances
• Unbalance control scheme tackles asymmetries but cannot control overvoltages
• The voltage profile along the feeder is actively controlled.
• Unacceptable overvoltages avoided by curtailing part of injected real power of DG units • The total injected real power, in cases of high DG injection, is increased
• Higher penetration of DG units is feasible
• Voltage unbalances are considerably mitigated
www.project-increase.eu
Overlaying Control Overview
16
• INCREASE Local Control • Unequal active power curtailment among DG units of
the same feeder
• Overlaying Control (OC) • Based on a Multi-Agent System (MAS) • To effectively redistribute curtailed power to DG units, • According to their rated power
• Simulation results of OC: • May result in higher active power curtailment • Increased fairness compared to Local Control)
• Different policies of DSOs can be integrated in OC scheme
16
www.project-increase.eu
Overlaying Control Overview
Objective: Uniform active power curtailment among DG units of the same feeder
Conceptual design: • 15 minutes timeslot • First 5 minutes: Only Local Control • Remaining 10 minutes: Activation of
Overlaying Control
Implementation: • Distributed Multi-Agent System (MAS) • Hierarchical Architecture (Agent-Aggregator) • An Agent in each controllable DG unit • Aggregator is usually sited at the DSO • Wired or Wireless communication between
Agents and Aggregator
17
Overlaying control
Local control
t+15 min t
www.project-increase.eu 18
Overlaying Control Overview
Main procedure: 1. Each agent messages the aggregator
• Injected active power • Voltage at the connection point
2. The aggregator agent checks uniform
power curtailment along a feeder
3. In case of uniform curtailment, DG units are only locally controlled.
4. If not, taking into account the network configuration and the rated power of the DG units, new set-points are calculated, corresponding to new droop curves for each DG unit and are communicated to local agents
5. Thus, a uniform active power curtailment is achieved according to the rated power of the DG units
www.project-increase.eu
Overlaying Control Overview
Remarks: • Overvoltage mitigation is achieved
• Voltage profile is continuously
controlled by Local/Overlaying control
• Both controls result in similar voltage
profile along the feeder
• There is a margin between the feeder maximum voltage after the Overlaying control and the upper voltage threshold of 1.1 pu (as defined by EN 50160)
• Thus, there is a potential for further increasing active power injection
19 19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1.05
1.06
1.07
1.08
1.09
1.1
1.11
1.12
Nodes
Positiv
e S
equence V
oltage M
agnitude (p
u)
Without control
Only Local
Overlaying-Local
Upper threshold (EN 50160)
www.project-increase.eu
Scheduling Control Overview
20
• Overlaying control (OC) agents • Take care of individual feeders
• No PQ violations
• Scheduling control (SC) • Optimizes operating schedule
of DR in regulation zone
• Provides link to markets
• Coordinates other MAS levels
www.project-increase.eu
Scheduling Control: Expected Benefits to the DSO
21
• Expectations: • Optimal DRES energy injection enabled
• DR schedules are optimized based on market signals
• DSO will: • Encounter fewer congestions and voltage problems –
reduced need to invest in network upgrade
• Retain the final word over operating schedules via „traffic light“ mechanism OCA DRES
www.project-increase.eu
Scheduling Control Model
Model optimizes schedule of DR units
Demand response algorithm (incl. predicted grid constraints)
Power flow analysis +
Schedules of DR units
Flexibility information
No Yes
Real Time
Market data (pricing, etc.)
Topology, day-ahead forecasts
Day Ahead
Overlay Control
Local Control
Production and consumption profiles
www.project-increase.eu
Implemented solution Assumptions
• Step 1: Calculate optimal DR schedule (day-ahead) • Inputs (current, forecast)
• DR units parameters (e.g. Power, Energy, ToU, Flexibility).
• Approximate grid topology
• Market data (e.g. day-ahead market prices)
• Unmetered demand pattern
• PV power production
• Output: DR unit schedule for day-ahead
• Step 2: Checking of viability of the DR schedule • Via the power flow analysis
• Depending on the results, we either • Reiterate the DR algorithm or
• Send the DR schedule to the next time layer.
www.project-increase.eu
Flexible Energy Product
• Flexibility: defined as a property or behaviour. • Hard to quantify and to monetize this way
• We need a product!
• Flexible Energy Product (FEP) • Product +
• Stakeholders (supplying, receiving) +
• Market (open, tender…) =
• = Service
• Provided by various providers, including DG, DR and DRES (with forecasting)
• Can be sold on the markets
www.project-increase.eu
Flexible Energy Product
• FEP parameters • Internal price of the providing unit.
• Time of provision (cumulative duration, time of day)
• Ramping capability (ramp rates, dwell times,break points, etc.)
• Power
• Energy
www.project-increase.eu
Connection of WP3 Results to Markets
Scheduling Control DR
Flexible Energy Product
Overlaying Control DRES
Energy
Reserve Markets t > 7 d
Reserve Energy Product
Balancing Market 15 min < t < 30 min
Energy Product
Intraday Market 1 h < t < 24 h
Energy Product
Day-ahead Market 1 d < t < 7 d
Energy Product
Local Control DRES
VC, VUM, LCM
TSO
DSO
INCREASE Services Markets Stakeholders
TSO
DSO
Co
nsu
me
rs,
Co
mm
erc.
en
tity
www.project-increase.eu
INCREASE WP4 Field Trials
• Implementation of the INCREASE solutions in real-life network
• Four distribution networks in four different EU countries: • Austria (Energienetze Steiermark)
• Belgium (Eandis)
• Slovenia (Elektro Gorenjska)
• Netherlands (Alliander)
• Various operating issues
• Different network properties
• Wide range of possibilities for future implementation of the INCREASE solutions
www.project-increase.eu
INCREASE WP4 Field Trials
Field test scenario Austria the Netherlands Slovenia Belgium
OLTC control x x
DRES droop control x x x
Voltage unbalance control x
OLTC remote control x x
Technical Fairnes curtailment x
DRES coordinated control
(congestion management) x
DRES and OLTC coordinated
control x
Local control
Overlaying control
www.project-increase.eu
WP 5 Analysis Framework
Boundary conditions Analysis
INCREASE Technology
MAS control strategies
ProductsFlexible Energy Product
Stakeholders- Regulated: DSOs, TSOs- Commercial: DRES operators, Demand Response, aggregators
Services - DSO/TSO level- Existing/New
Markets- Day-ahead- Intra-day- Balancing- Reserve
Value Analysis
Assumptions- Analysis scenarios- Business cases- Measurements- Regulatory framework
Proposed improvements- Regulatory framework- Market framework
Results - Within current/improved framework- With current/new services
Assessment tools & KPIs - CBA, SWOT, Risk Analysis
www.project-increase.eu
Overview
• Overview of the role of the DSO
• Feedback and results of DSO questionnaire carried out last year
• Progress of the proposed solution referring to results presented in several Deliverables
• Mapping to 10 questions
www.project-increase.eu
Question 1
• Consider the most relevant outputs of your project for DSOs. When you expect these solutions (concepts or technical solutions) to be feasible and profitable for DSOs compared to passive network design? • Key INCREASE outputs:
• Technology (3phase inverters)
• MAS – control strategies
• Products: Flexible Energy Product -> services: 4 key services
• Regulatory + market improvements
• Feasible and profitable: • When the penetration of RES (especially solar PV) is high
enough.
• Simulation scenarios assume above 40% PV penetration in the rural DN.
www.project-increase.eu
DSO Cost Optimization
www.project-increase.eu
Question 1
5 10 15 20
very passive
active
some active elements
passive
very active
today short mid long
3 phase inverters
Multi Agent System (MAS)
years
www.project-increase.eu
Question 1a
• Feasibility and profitability: Explain what critical factors must be fulfilled. • Feasibility and economic evaluation: WP5 analysis
• Profitability: issues to consider
• DSO will always compare any solution to passive network reinforcement (a one-time expense). • DSOs will need to optimize between both extreme strategies.
• Part of the risk management when operating closer to the margins
• Is DSO expected to pay for the new services? • Demand response flexibility payment
• Green energy curtailment: • Proposed in INCREASE
• Choose the most cost efficient curtailment strategy
• Regulatory aspects • How much of costs could be passed through to consumers?
www.project-increase.eu
Question 1b
• Scale of solutions: • first trials, forefront DSO,
• Only where there is • Large enough penetration of DRES,
• Regulation to enable operation of DR, and
• AMI and smart meter infrastructure to enable MAS.
www.project-increase.eu
Question 1b
• Coordination of control interests is optimized based on total welfare for the society. • KPIs: total welfare is beyond INCREASE, as we would
need a macroeconomic model of the society for this.
• No CBA in INCREASE
• DSO: if total welfare is defined as social optimum, • DSOs are obliged to account for it when choosing grid solutions
• E.g.: choose between paying for reinforcement or flex products
www.project-increase.eu
Question 2
• Which EU distribution automation trends does your project/concept fit into and how? • Very Active Distribution Networks
www.project-increase.eu
Question 3
• Which information would the DSO need, to observe the impacts of intermittent distributed energy resources (DG, DR, storage)? • Some of these info have been investigated in the
Questionnaire. • DSO: needs the following information:
• MV: • Type and purpose of connection,
• Info when your load profile will change heavily, even if you are not violating contractual boundaries.
• Technical configuration to ensure security of operation and customers personnel.
• LV: requirements are not this strict.
• Info level depends on voltage level of connection (planning phase)
www.project-increase.eu
Question 4
• What is the expected requirement to supply reliability (power quality and supply reliability) and how that might be reached? • DSO: The EN 50160 standard needs to be always
respected. • Control algorthms of INCREASE are proposing also to take into
account the operational security of the grid.
• INCREASE sets limits of MAS strategies to this norm,
• +- 10% trying to integrate more DRES without breaching V boundaries.
• Does the DSO security-prompted curtailment of DRES energy result in any market liability? • In TSO, TN, vis major.
www.project-increase.eu
Question 5
• What kinds of technologies and functionalities DSOs will need to utilize for occasional congestion management? • INCREASE technology
• 3 phase inverters
• Overlaying Control: traffic light prevents PQ violations in near real time.
• Local control: event driven. DSO does not interfere with it
• Overloading network assets can be allowed in a certain level with a short time duration. • INCREASE tried a solution to resolve the congestion by
curtailing equally power injection among PV inverters.
• Only the congestion with reverse power flow due to surplus PV injection considered at the moment.
www.project-increase.eu
Question 6
• What flexibilities, services and technological solutions are available to the DSO to host increasing RES and DERs? • Technology:
• Multi-Agent Structure; smart single and 3-phase Inverters
• Flexibilities: • MAS-controlled agents providing FEP
• Scheduling Control layer of INCREASE, we use flexibility from Demand Response to accommodate more RES.
• Optimal DR schedules allow to avoid curtailment of DRES injection.
• Ancillary Services: • 4 key ones, but looking for new ones
www.project-increase.eu
Question 7
• According to your active network concept what for, when (which year) and where DSO will purchase flexibility services? • Procuring FEP to mitigate network issues involves
uncertainty, as forecasting is uncertain.
• As the penetration of RES keeps increasing DSOs will operate their network closer to the limits. We expect for DSO to need the flexibility within 5 years.
• DSO: Will the DSO ever pay for flexibility? • If you have to pay for flex for 50y, maybe grid reinforcement is
cheaper on long term. DSO has to search for social optimum
• Reason: alleviate congestion in various time frames, and to make money (commercial)
• Stakeholders purchase services from INCREASE: • TSO: active power reserve: Balancing market.
• DSO: VC, VUM, CM: tendering.
www.project-increase.eu
Question 8
• How the coordination of flexibility resources between DSO, TSO, retailer, balance responsible party, etc. should be realized? • INCREASE envisions this done through an SC agent;
• DSO will act as the ultimate traffic light.
• Some of the roles are available for commercial actors (aggregator).
• The coordination should be done in a market fashion.
• DSO: may slowly assume more responsibilities on DN – namely DG istalled in DN • DSO: DN asset building and maintenance
• DN system operation: congestion mitigation, voltage control
www.project-increase.eu
Scheduling Control (SC) Overview
44
www.project-increase.eu
Question 9
• What kind of standardization is needed for information exchange needs in active networks? • DSO: Information exchange needs to cover timestamps,
timings and other contractual arrangements etc.
• All the solutions need to account for EU-wide standards (e.g. EN 50160)
• INCREASE WP4 field test cases take this into account
www.project-increase.eu
Question 10
• How should the regulation framework be changed for realizing your concept of active network? • INCREASE intends to analyze and is due on a report in
1 year.
• DSO: Green energy curtailment should become possible, not something undesirable. • Flexibility should become default, fixed amount and flex free
band, seen as an option.
• TSO: Active network operation should be performed in a cost minimizing way (e.g. market approach), making sure the grid constraints are not violated
www.project-increase.eu
Any questions?
Thank you for your attention!