DOCSLIB.ORG

Electric Power Distribution Reliability

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Electric Power Distribution Reliability Richard E. Brown ABB Inc. Raleigh, North Carolina MARCEL MARCEL DEKKER, INC. NEW YORK • BASEL D E K K E R ISBN: 0-8247-0798-2 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Headquarters Marcel Dekker, Inc. 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 tel: 212-696-9000; fax: 212-685-4540 Eastern Hemisphere Distribution Marcel Dekker AG Hutgasse 4, Postfach 812, CH-4001 Basel, Switzerland tel: 41-61-261-8482; fax: 41-61-261-8896 World Wide Web http://www.dekker.com The publisher offers discounts on this book when ordered in bulk quantities. For more infor- mation, write to Special Sales/Professional Marketing at the headquarters address above. Copyright © 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Neither this book nor any part may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Current printing (last digit): 10 987654321 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA POWER ENGINEERING Series Editors H. Lee Willis ABB Electric Systems Technology Institute Raleigh, North Carolina Anthony F. Sleva Sleva Associates Al lent own, Pennsylvania Mohammad Shahidehpour Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, Illinois 1. Power Distribution Planning Reference Book, H. Lee Willis 2. Transmission Network Protection: Theory and Practice, Y. G. Paithan- kar 3. Electrical Insulation in Power Systems, N. H. Malik, A. A. AI-Arainy, and M. I. Qureshi 4. Electrical Power Equipment Maintenance and Testing, Paul Gill 5. Protective Relaying: Principles and Applications, Second Edition, J. Lewis Blackburn 6. Understanding Electric Utilities and De-Regulation, Lorrin Philipson and H. Lee Willis 7. Electrical Power Cable Engineering, William A. Thue 8. Electric Systems, Dynamics, and Stability with Artificial Intelligence Applications, James A. Momoh and Mohamed E. EI-Hawary 9. Insulation Coordination for Power Systems, Andrew R. Hileman 10. Distributed Power Generation: Planning and Evaluation, H. Lee Willis and Walter G. Scott 11. Electric Power System Applications of Optimization, James A. Momoh 12. Aging Power Delivery Infrastructures, H. Lee Willis, Gregory V. Welch, and Randall R. Schrieber 13. Restructured Electrical Power Systems: Operation, Trading, and Vola- tility, Mohammad Shahidehpour and Muwaffaq Alomoush 14. Electric Power Distribution Reliability, Richard E. Brown ADDITIONAL VOLUMES IN PREPARATION Computer-Aided Power System Analysis, Ramasamy Natarajan Power System Analysis, J. C. Das Power Transformers: Principles and Applications, John J. Winders, Jr. Series Introduction Power engineering is the oldest and most traditional of the various areas within electrical engineering, yet no other facet of modern technology is currently un- dergoing a more dramatic revolution in technology or business structure. Perhaps the most fundamental change taking place in the electric utility industry is the move toward a quantitative basis for the management of service reliability. Tra- ditionally, electric utilities achieved satisfactory customer service quality through the use of more or less "one size fits all situations" standards and criteria that experience had shown would lead to no more than an acceptable level of trouble on their system. Tried and true, these methods succeeded in achieving acceptable service quality. But evolving industry requirements changed the relevance of these methods in two ways. First, the needs of modern electric energy consumers changed. Even into the early 1980s, very short (less than 10 second) interruptions of power had minimal impact on most consumers. Then, utilities routinely per- formed field switching of feeders in the early morning hours, creating 10-second interruptions of power flow that most consumers would not even notice. But where the synchronous-motor alarm clocks of the 1960s and 1970s would just fall a few seconds behind during such interruptions, modern digital clocks, mi- croelectronic equipment and computers cease working altogether. Homeowners of the 1970s woke up the next morning—not even knowing or caring—that their alarm clocks were a few seconds behind. Homeowners today wake up minutes or hours late, to blinking digital displays throughout their home. In this and many other ways, the widespread use of digital equipment and automated processes has redefined the term "acceptable service quality" and has particularly in- creased the importance of interruption frequency as a measure of utility perform- ance. Second, while the traditional standards-driven paradigm did achieve satisfac- iil iv Series Introduction tory service quality in most cases, it did not do so at the lowest possible cost. In addition, it had no mechanism for achieving reliability targets in a demonstrated least-cost manner. As a result, in the late 20th century, electric utility manage- ment, public utility regulators, and energy consumers alike realized there had to be a more economically effective way to achieve satisfactory reliability levels of electric service. This was to engineer the system to provide the type of reliability needed at the lowest possible cost, creating a need for rigorous, quantitative reli- ability analysis and engineering methods—techniques capable of "engineering reliability into a system" in the same way that capacity or voltage regulation tar- gets had traditionally been targeted and designed to. Many people throughout the industry contributed to the development of what are today the accepted methods of reliability analysis and predictive design. But none contributed as much to either theory, or practice, as Richard Brown. His work is the foundation of modern power distribution reliability engineering. It is therefore with great pride that I welcome Electric Power Distribution Reliability as the newest addition to the Marcel Dekker series on Power Engineering. This is all the more rewarding to me because for the past six years Richard Brown has been one of my most trusted co-workers and research collaborators at ABB, and a good friend. Dr. Brown's book lays out the rules and structure for modern power distribu- tion reliability engineering in a rigorous yet accessible manner. While scrupu- lously correct in theory and mathematics, his book provides a wealth of practical experience and useful knowledge that can be applied by any electric power engi- neer to improve power distribution reliability performance. Thus, Electric Power Distribution Reliability fits particularly well into the theme of Marcel Dekker's Power Engineering Series, which focuses on providing modern power technol- ogy in a context of proven, practical application—books useful as references as well as for self-study and classroom use. I have no doubt that this book will be the reference in power delivery reliability engineering for years to come. Good work, Richard. H. Lee Willis Preface Distribution reliability is one of the most important topics in the electric power industry due to its high impact on the cost of electricity and its high correlation with customer satisfaction. The breadth and depth of issues relating to this sub- ject span nearly every distribution company department including procurement, operations, engineering, planning, rate making, customer relations and regula- tory. Due in large part to its all-encompassing nature, distribution reliability has been difficult for utilities to address in a holistic manner. Most departments, if they address reliability at all, do so in isolation without considering how their actions may relate to those in different parts of the company—an understandable situation since there has been no single reference that covers all related issues and explains their interrelationships. This book is an attempt to fill this void by serving as a comprehensive tutorial and reference book covering all major topics related to distribution reliability. Each subject has been extensively researched and referenced with the intent of presenting a balance of theory, practical knowl- edge and practical applications. After reading this book, readers will have a ba- sic understanding of distribution reliability issues and will know how these issues have affected typical utilities in the past. Further, readers will be knowledgeable about techniques capable of addressing reliability issues and will have a basic feel for the results that can be expected from their proper application. Electric Power Distribution Reliability is intended for engineering profes- sionals interested in the topic described by its title. Utility distribution planners will find it of greatest use, but it also contains valuable information for engi- neers, dispatchers, operations personnel and maintenance personnel. Because of its breadth, this book may also find use with distribution company directors and executives, as well as with state regulatory authorities. It is intended to be a scholarly work and is suitable for use with senior or graduate level instruction as well as for self-instruction. vi Preface This book is divided into seven chapters. Although each is a self-contained topic, the book is written so that each chapter builds upon the knowledge of prior chapters. As such, this book should be read through sequentially upon first en- counter. Terminology and context introduced in prior chapters are required knowledge to fully comprehend and assimilate subsequent topics. After an initial reading, this book
Recommended publications
  • Replacing Property Taxes on Utility Generation with Revenues from a Carbon-Based Tax: a Minnesota Tax Shift Opportunity I

    Replacing Property Taxes on Utility Generation with Revenues from a Carbon-Based Tax: a Minnesota Tax Shift Opportunity I

    Memo: To: Michael Noble, ME3 From: John Bailey, David Morris, ILSR (Tel: 612-379-3815) Date: 11/15/98 Re: Replacing Property Taxes on Utility Generation With Revenues from a Carbon-Based Tax: A Minnesota Tax Shift Opportunity I. Introduction Electric utilities in Minnesota pay four types of taxes: income tax, franchise fee (or gross receipts tax), sales tax, property tax.1 The total amount paid in each category is shown in Table 1. In 1995, the total came to $375 million. Table 1. Electric Utility Tax Paid in Minnesota in 1995 Property Tax MN Sales Tax MN Income Tax Franchise Fee Total NSP $152,078,365 $65,076,000 $31,709,000 $25,505,000 $274,368,365 Minnesota Power $34,706,493 $5,963,664 $3,843,817 $700,000 $45,213,974 Otter Tail $7,152,715 $4,197,450 $1,370,067 $233,643 $12,953,875 Interstate $3,670,381 $1,935,124 $573,770 $569,969 $6,749,244 Anoka Elec. Coop $3,179,055 $4,658,862 $0 $534,379 $8,372,296 Dakota Elec. Assoc. $4,742,500 $4,487,719 $0 $144,025 $9,374,244 Cooperative Power $7,095,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,095,000 United Power Assoc. $10,827,954 $0 $5,000 $0 $10,832,954 Total $223,452,463 $86,318,819 $37,501,654 $27,687,016 $374,959,952 Source: Minnesota Department of Public Service, 1996 Energy Policy and Conservation Report, December 1996 Recently, Minnesota has re-examined the utility tax structure in light of the restructuring of electricity occurring throughout the country.
  • Nuclear Power Reactors in California

    Nuclear Power Reactors in California

    Nuclear Power Reactors in California As of mid-2012, California had one operating nuclear power plant, the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant near San Luis Obispo. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) owns the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, which consists of two units. Unit 1 is a 1,073 megawatt (MW) Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) which began commercial operation in May 1985, while Unit 2 is a 1,087 MW PWR, which began commercial operation in March 1986. Diablo Canyon's operation license expires in 2024 and 2025 respectively. California currently hosts three commercial nuclear power facilities in various stages of decommissioning.1 Under all NRC operating licenses, once a nuclear plant ceases reactor operations, it must be decommissioned. Decommissioning is defined by federal regulation (10 CFR 50.2) as the safe removal of a facility from service along with the reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits termination of the NRC operating license. In preparation for a plant’s eventual decommissioning, all nuclear plant owners must maintain trust funds while the plants are in operation to ensure sufficient amounts will be available to decommission their facilities and manage the spent nuclear fuel.2 Spent fuel can either be reprocessed to recover usable uranium and plutonium, or it can be managed as a waste for long-term ultimate disposal. Since fuel re-processing is not commercially available in the United States, spent fuel is typically being held in temporary storage at reactor sites until a permanent long-term waste disposal option becomes available.3 In 1976, the state of California placed a moratorium on the construction and licensing of new nuclear fission reactors until the federal government implements a solution to radioactive waste disposal.
  • Toward a Sustainable Electric Utility Sector

    Toward a Sustainable Electric Utility Sector

    The Distributed Utility Concept: Toward a Sustainable Electric Utility Sector Steven Letendre, John Byrne, and Young-Doo Wang, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy, University of Delaware The U.S. electric utility sector is entering an uncertain period as pressure mounts to cut costs and minimize environmental impacts. Many analysts believe that exposing the industry to competition is the key to reducing costs. Most restructuring proposals acknowledge the need to maintain environmental quality and suggest mechanisms for assuring continued support for end-use efficiency and renewable energy in a deregulated electric utility industry. Two of the most prominent ideas are non-bypassable line charges and portfolio standards. This paper suggests another option based on the distributed utility (DU) concept in which net metering and a form of performance-based ratemaking allow distributed generation, storage, and DSM to play an important role in a new competitive electric utility sector. A DU option directly incorporates these resources into the electric system by explicitly acknowledging their value in deferring distribution equipment upgrades. INTRODUCTION electric utility industry. In our view, the DU option has been neglected in the current debate. The electric utility sector in the U.S. is on the verge of A DU strategy involves a fundamental shift in the way fundamental change as regulators, policymakers, and indus- electricity is delivered, with a move away from large-scale try officials seek a strategy for introducing competition into central generation to distributed small-scale generation and the industry. The move toward competition is driven by the storage, and targeted demand-side management. To date, belief that significant efficiency gains could be realized by the DU concept has mainly been analyzed in terms of its exposing the industry to market forces.
  • Mcleod Cooperative Power Twins Clinic a Big Hit with Area Youth

    Mcleod Cooperative Power Twins Clinic a Big Hit with Area Youth

    McLeod Cooperative Power June 2017 In this issue... EWS N Twins Clinic a big hit with area youth Our office will be closed on Tuesday, July 4 n Saturday, May 27, about 80 area youth participated in the Minnesota Twins Youth Baseball O Clinic in Arlington MN. Local students were coached by members of the Minnesota Twins organization on hitting, throwing and catching, and baseball fundamentals. There were two 90-minute sessions conducted for each age School safety programs ....8 bracket: 6-9 years of age and 10-13 years of age. The event was hosted locally by McLeod Co-op Power of Official publication of Glencoe and the Arlington Baseball Association. Water for the participants was provided by Locher Bros. Distributing of Green Isle. These youth baseball clinics are sponsored by the Minnesota Twins Foundation and Great River Energy in communities across the state. Participants each received a baseball from McLeod Co-op Power and a backpack from Great River Energy. www.mcleodcoop.com Only a few seats Off-peak programs can lower your bill remain on the MN rograms like the Hot Water air conditioner or heat pump in half, you calculate your personal savings Storage Program and Cycled and you have some significant based on number of persons in the Twins game bus Cooling Program can summer savings. An average family family and help size your water heater Psignificantly reduce your family’s saves $80 per year on the cycled capacity needs. oin the Co-op for an afternoon monthly electric bill. Appliance use on air program.
  • Regularization of Business Investment in the Electric Utility Industry

    Regularization of Business Investment in the Electric Utility Industry

    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Regularization of Business Investment Volume Author/Editor: Universities-National Bureau Volume Publisher: Princeton University Press/NBER Volume ISBN: 0-87014-195-3 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/univ54-1 Publication Date: 1954 Chapter Title: Regularization of Business Investment in the Electric Utility Industry Chapter Author: Edward W. Morehouse Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c3026 Chapter pages in book: (p. 213 - 282) REGULARIZATION OF BUSINESS INVESTMENT IN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY' EDWARD W. MOREHOUSE GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORATION Introduction THIS PAPER explores the possibilities of regularizing business invest- ment by the electric utility industry. The program for the conference adds, "as means of maintaining high productive employment in a private enterprise economy." This ultimate goal of "high productive employment" as an incen- tive for regularization of investment is of less importance in the electric utility industry than in other industries, as data submitted later tend to show. Electric utilities already have achieved a rela- tively high stability of employment of operating personnel, and the impact of investment on wages and employment in electric utility operations is relatively less significant to the total economy than it is in other industries. Any contribution that electric utilities might make by stabilizing their capital expenditures would be a contribu- tion to employment stability generally, and particularly to employ- ment in the building of plant, or the manufacture of plant and equipment items, needed by electric utilities. These indirect em- ployment effects would bulk larger than the direct effects on the number of employees used in utility operations.
  • U.S. Electric Power Industry - Context and Structure

    U.S. Electric Power Industry - Context and Structure

    U.S. Electric Power Industry - Context and Structure Authored by Analysis Group for Advanced Energy Economy November 2011 Industry Organization The electric industry across the United States contains Figure 1 significant variations from the perspectives of structure, A History of the U.S. Electric Industry organization, physical infrastructure characteristics, 1870 cost/price drivers, and regulatory oversight. The variation stems from a mix of geographical influences, population Thomas Edison demonstrates the electric light bulb and generator and industry make up, and the evolution of federal and 1880 state energy law and policy. Edison launches Pearl Street station, the first modern electricity generation station th In the early part of the 20 century, the electric industry 1890 evolved quickly through the creation, growth and Development begins on the Niagra Falls hydroelectric project consolidation of vertically-integrated utilities – that is, Samuel Insull suggests the utility industry is a natural companies that own and operate all of the power plants, 1900 monopoly - electric industry starts to become vertically transmission lines, and distribution systems that generate integrated and deliver power to ultimate customers. At the same Wisconsin enacts first private utility regulation and 30 states time, efficiency of electricity generation dramatically follow suit shortly thereafter 1910 improved, encouraging growth, consolidation of the industry, and expansion into more and more cities, and The Federal Power Act created the Federal Power Commission across a wider geographic area. Over time, consolidated (now FERC) utilities were granted monopoly franchises with exclusive 1920 service territories by states, in exchange for an obligation to serve customers within that territory at rates for service 1 1930 based on state-regulated, cost-of-service ratemaking.
  • Smart Bioenergy – Innovations for a Sustainable Future Come and Join Us!

    Smart Bioenergy – Innovations for a Sustainable Future Come and Join Us!

    Biogas production on the way towards competitiveness – process optimization options and requirements Jan Liebetrau © Anklam Bioethanol GmbH Bioethanol Anklam© 4th Inter Baltic Biogas Arena Workshop Esbjerg, 25 – 26 August 2016 Background Competitiveness – within which criteria? Cheap electricity and heat? Cheap waste treatment? GHG mitigation? Circular economy? Options: Optimization of cost structure (e.g. substrates, technology) Generating new income (electricity markets, heat, material production) 2 Background – Germany perspective Waste wood based CHP Paper industry Wood based CHP ) Manure based small scale plants MWel ( Flexibility Energy crops based plants Organic waste based plants Biomethan CHP Oil based Installed capacity capacity Installed year Dotzauer et al 2016 • Political support currently rather low, future perspective highly unclear • Discussion about time beyond Feed in tariffs has started – new economic perspectives are needed –and/or relevance for safe electricity provision has to be proven 3 Substrates 4 Biogas plants cost structure - Different situation in different plant configurations - High share of costs for energy crops (agricultural plants) - High investment costs (in particular waste treating plants) - High specific investment costs (manure based plants) - High maintenance and replacement costs (effect of depreciation is limited) - Increasing requirements from authorities - Difference between feed in tariff and market price is for energy crop based and manure based plants currently not conceivable - Waste based
  • Business As Usual and Nuclear Power

    Business As Usual and Nuclear Power

    BUSINESS AS USUAL AND NUCLEAR POWER 1974 .1999 OECD, 2000. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE. All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only. Unauthorised reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any other copyrighted material. All requests should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD Publications Service, 2, rue Andr´e-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. OECD PROCEEDINGS BUSINESS AS USUAL AND NUCLEAR POWER Joint IEA/NEA Meeting Paris, France 14-15 October 1999 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: − to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; − to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and − to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
  • Nuclear Energy: Statistics Dr

    Nuclear Energy: Statistics Dr

    Nuclear Energy: Statistics Dr. Elizabeth K. Ervin Civil Engineering Today’s Motivation The more people learn about nuclear power, the more supportive they are of it { 73% positive in Clean and Safe Energy Coalition survey in 2006. Nuclear power plants produce no controlled air pollutants, such as sulfur and particulates, or greenhouse gases. { The use of nuclear energy helps keep the air clean, preserve the earth's climate, avoid ground-level ozone formation, and prevent acid rain. One of the few growing markets { Jobs, capital… { 2006: 36 new plants under construction in 14 countries, 223 proposed. Worried about Nuclear Power Plants? Dirty Bombs? Radon? U.S. civilian nuclear reactor program: 0 deaths Each year, 100 coal miners and 100 coal transporters are killed; 33,134 total from 1931 to 1995. Aviation deaths since 1938: 54,000 “That’s hot.” { Coal-fired plant releases 100 times more radiation than equivalent nuclear reactor { Three Mile Island released 1/6 of the radiation of a chest x-ray { Despite major human mistakes, 56 Chernobyl deaths Nuclear power plants: 15.2% of the world's electricity production in 2006. 34% of EU 20% France: 78.1% 16 countries > 25% of their electricity 31 countries worldwide operating 439 nuclear reactors for electricity generation. U.S. Nuclear There are 104 commercial nuclear power plants in the United States. They are located at 64 sites in 31 states. { 35 boiling water reactors { 69 pressurized water reactors { 0 next generation reactors Nuclear already provides 20 percent of the United State’s electricity, or 787.2 billion kilowatt-hours (bkWh) Electricity demands expected to increase 30% nationally by 2030.
  • Utility Use of Renewable Resources: Legal and Economic Implications

    Utility Use of Renewable Resources: Legal and Economic Implications

    Denver Law Review Volume 59 Issue 4 Article 4 February 2021 Utility Use of Renewable Resources: Legal and Economic Implications Jan G. Laitos Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Jan G. Laitos, Utility Use of Renewable Resources: Legal and Economic Implications, 59 Denv. L.J. 663 (1982). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Denver Law Review at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. UTILITY USE OF RENEWABLE RESOURCES: LEGAL AND ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS* JAN G. LAITOS** I. Overview: The Nature of Utility Involvement in Renewable Energy Applications ......................................... 666 A. Types of Utilities and Their Differing Relationships to Renewable Energy ...................................... 666 1. Electric Utilities and Renewable Energy .............. 666 2. Gas Utilities and Renewable Energy ................. 669 B. Prospects for Utility Interest in Renewable Energy ....... 671 II. Utilities and Decentralized Renewable Energy Applications ... 672 A. Utilities and Nonelectric, Decentralized, Renewable Technologies ..... ................................ 673 1. The Effect of Nonelectric Renewable Technologies on U tilities ............................................. 673 2. Responses of Utilities to Nonelectric Renewable Technologies ........................................ 676 a. Utility
  • Smart Bioenergy – Innovations for a Sustainable Future Come and Join Us!

    Smart Bioenergy – Innovations for a Sustainable Future Come and Join Us!

    Flexibilisation of biogas plants and impact on the grid operation Jan Liebetrau, Marcus Trommler, Eric Mauky, Tino Barchmann, Martin Dotzauer © Anklam Bioethanol GmbH © BioethanolAnklam Biogas Workshop, Vlijmen, April 5th 2017 Electricity provision – future scenarios Biogas is in comparison expensive There will be times of excess energy and lack of energy Flexibility will be a must for Biogas Agora Energiewende: 12 insights on Germany's Energiewende February 2013 2 Conditions for flexible operation Different market options with different requirements for participation Biogas plants have individual constructive and operational design which define the limits of flexibility Barchmann et. al. 2016 3 Conditions for flexible operation Barchmann et. al. 2016 [Fuchs 2012] 4 Conclusion - why do we need to operate biogas plants flexible? - provide energy when needed (electricity and heat) - Market price oriented, increase utilization - Grid stabilization oriented - reduces losses at specific operational conditions (e.g. maintenance shutdown, weather changes) - respond to substrate changes in amount and quality 5 Flexibilisation Basic principle for flexibilisation 6 Technical options for flexibility, services to the grid and sector coupling on site • Increase of CHP capacity (and grid access) - in case of constant annual energy output • Increase of gas storage capacity • Control of biogas production rate (controlled feeding, storage of intermediates) • Power to heat • Biomethane • Power to gas 7 Financial support for flexible concepts • EEG 2014: • §54 Flexibility bonus for existing plants • 130 €/kW/a (Allocation to produced electricity ) for 10 years • Appendix 3 Number I: • Direct marketing compulsory • Paverage ≤ 0,2*Pinst • Padded = max. 0,5*Pinst • Registration and expert statement • „Average capacitiy“ (§ 101 EEG 2014) limited • EEG 2017: • Obligation to have twice as much capacity installed in relation to average capacity • 40€/kW installed for existing plants 9 Motivation for flexible operation • Financial motivation 1.
  • State of Oklahoma

    State of Oklahoma

    STATE OF OKLAHOMA 1st Session of the 46th Legislature (1997) HOUSE BILL NO. 1941 By: Morgan AS INTRODUCED An Act relating to public utilities; creating the Oklahoma Electric Utility Reform Act; stating purpose of the act; defining terms; providing for open access to electric distribution systems; directing electric utilities to provide open access; providing purchasing options for customers; authorizing the Corporation Commission to promulgate certain rules; authorizing the Commission to establish certain fees; limiting authority of the Commission to regulate certain entities; making effective date contingent upon certain occurrences; providing for levy of an electric sales gross receipts tax; making tax in lieu of other taxes; providing for apportionment of tax; providing for payment of tax; requiring sellers of electricity to file certain forms; requiring certain reports; requiring preservation of records; providing for semiannual payments in certain circumstances; amending 17 O.S. 1991, Sections 151 and 152, as last amended by Section 6, Chapter 315, O.S.L. 1994 (17 O.S. Supp. 1996, Section 152), which relate to regulation of public utilities; modifying definition; deleting certain statutory cite; amending 17 O.S. 1991, Sections 180.1 and 180.2, which relate to advertising by public utilities; modifying definitions; amending Section 43, Chapter 278, O.S.L. 1993, as amended by Section 1, Chapter 91, O.S.L. 1996 (17 O.S. Supp. 1996, Section 180.11), which relates to public utility assessment; adding certain utility subject to assessment; modifying definition; amending 17 O.S. 1991, Sections 250, 251, as amended by Section 16, Chapter 315, O.S.L. 1994, 252, 253 and 254 (17 O.S.