Reliability constrained unit commitment problem incorporating demand response program

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Manisha Govardhan
Fenil Master
Ranjit Roy

Abstract

In a restructured power market, the independent system operator (ISO) executes the reliability constrained unit commitment (RCUC) program to plan a reliable and an economical hourly generation schedule for the day-ahead market. This work presents probabilistic method for the incorporation of the unavailability of the generating units in the solution of the Unit commitment (UC) problem. In this paper, Gbest Artificial Bee Colony (GABC) algorithm is used for solving the UC problem, while the evaluation of the required spinning reserve capacity is performed by using Loss of Load Probability (LOLP) index. IEEE RTS 24 bus system is used to demonstrate RCUC problem for different reliability levels. Considerable developments in the real time telemetry of demand-side systems allow ISO to use reserves provided by demand response programs (DRPs) in a restructured power market. In this paper, the hourly demand response is incorporated into RCUC for economic and reliability purposes. The RCUC problem with Emergency Demand Response Program (EDRP) is tested on IEEE RTS 24 bus system. Minimum cost results for each case and reduction in load demands for DRPs are formulated.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Govardhan, M., Master, F., & Roy, R. (2014). Reliability constrained unit commitment problem incorporating demand response program. Power Research - A Journal of CPRI, 465–480. Retrieved from https://node6473.myfcloud.com/~geosocin/CPRI/index.php/pr/article/view/789

References

  1. N P Padhy, “Unit Commitment-A Bibliographical survey”, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 1196-1205, May 2004.
  2. R Billinton and R N Allan, Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems, 2nd ed. New York: Plenum, 1996.
  3. L T Anstine, et. al, ‘‘Application of probability methods to the determination of spinning reserve requirement for the Pennsylvania - New Jersey - Maryland interconnection,’’ IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-82, No. 68, pp. 720-735, Oct. 1963.
  4. H B Gooi, D P Mendes, K R W Bell, and D S Kirschen, ‘‘Optimal scheduling of spinning reserve,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 1485-1492, Nov. 1999.
  5. D Chattopadhyay and R Baldick, ‘‘Unit commitment with probabilistic reserve,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Winter Meeting, New York, Jan. 2002, Vol. 1, pp. 280-285.
  6. R Billinton and M Fotuhi-Firuzabad, “Generating system operating health analysis considering stand-by units, interruptible load and postponable outages,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 1618-1625, Aug. 1994.
  7. R Billinton and R Karki, “Capacity reserve assessment using system well-being analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 433-438, May 1999.
  8. R Billinton and M Fotuhi-Firuzabad, ‘‘A basic framework for generating system operating health analysis,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 1610-1617, Aug. 1994.
  9. D N Simopoulos, S D Kavatza, and C D Vournas, ‘‘Reliability constrained unit commitment using simulated annealing,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 1699-1706, Nov. 2006.
  10. J Bai, H B Gooi, L M Xia, G Strbac, and B Venkatesh, ‘‘A probabilistic reserve market incorporating interruptible load,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 1079-1087, Aug. 2006.
  11. J Bai, H B Gooi, and L M Xia, ‘‘Probabilistic reserve schedule with demand-side participation,’’ Elect. Power Comput. Syst., Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 138-151, Feb. 2008.
  12. F Aminifar, M Fotuhi-Firuzabad, and M Shahidehpour, ‘‘Unit commitment with probabilistic spinning reserve and interruptible load considerations,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 388397, Feb. 2009.
  13. K Chandrasekaran, S P Simon, “Network and reliability constrained unit commitment problem using binary real coded firefly algorithm,” Electrical Power and Energy Systems 43 (2012) pp. 921-932.
  14. Charles River Associates, “Primer on demand side management”, Report for the World Bank, February 2005
  15. U S Department of Energy, “Energy policy Act of 2005”, section 1252, February 2006.
  16. D S Kirschen, G Strbac, P Cumperayot, and D Mendes, “Factoring the elasticity of demand in electricity prices,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 612-617, May 2000.
  17. H A Aalami, M Parsa Moghaddam, G R Yousefi, “Demand response modeling considering Interruptible/Curtailable loads and capacity market programs”, Applied Energy 87 (2010) pp. 243-250.
  18. H A Aalami, M Parsa Moghaddam, G R Yousefi, “Modeling and prioritizing demand response programs in power markets”, Electric Power System Research 80 (2010) pp. 426-435.
  19. FERC: Staff Report, ‘Assessment of demand response and advanced metering’. [Online]. Available at http://www.FERC.gov. August 2006.
  20. FERC: Staff Report, ‘Assessment of demand response and advanced metering’. [Online]. Available at http://www.FERC.gov. August 2006.
  21. FERC: Staff Report, ‘Assessment of demand response and advanced metering’. [Online]. Available at http://www.FERC.gov. August 2006.
  22. Schweppe F, Caramanis M, Tabors R Evaluation of spot price based electricity rates. IEEE Transaction on Power Apparatus Systems PAS 1985;104(7): pp. 1644-55.
  23. B Basturk and D Karaboga, “An Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) Algorithm for Numeric function Optimization,” IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium May 12-14, 2006, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
  24. Guopu Zhu, Sam Kwong, “Gbestguided artificial bee colony algorithm for numerical function optimization,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, 217 (2010), pp. 3166-3173.
  25. Deb K (2000). “An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 186(2–4), pp. 311-338.
  26. M Nikzad, B Mozafari, M Bashirvand, S Solaymani, “Designing time-of-use program based on stochastic security constrained unit commitment considering reliability index,” Energy 41 (2012) pp. 541-548.