DOCSLIB.ORG

Electric Grid Market- Control Structure June 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Electric Grid Market- Control Structure June 2017 PNNL-26753 Electric Grid Market- Control Structure June 2017 JD Taft Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 PNNL-26753 Electric Grid Market-Control Structure JD Taft1 June 2017 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 1 Chief Architect for Electric Grid Transformation, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Acknowledgments The author wishes to gratefully acknowledge the many discussions with Paul De Martini and Lorenzo Kristov that contributed greatly to the thinking in this paper. iii Contents Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ iii 1.0 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Complementary Views of Markets and Controls for Electric Power Systems ..................................... 4 3.0 Control Engineers: How to Think About Electricity Markets .............................................................. 5 4.0 Market Economists: How to Think About Electric Grid Control Systems .......................................... 6 5.0 Market-Control Regimes for Bulk Power Systems .............................................................................. 7 6.0 Electricity Markets and Controls: Essential Relationships ................................................................... 9 6.1 Principle of Market Participant Limits ....................................................................................... 10 6.2 Principle of Control System Endpoint Limits ............................................................................ 11 6.3 Principle of Market Update Rate Limits .................................................................................... 11 6.4 Principle of Control System Update Rate Limits ....................................................................... 11 7.0 Market-Control Regime Structures..................................................................................................... 12 7.1 Basic Grid with Local Control and Regulation/Stabilization ..................................................... 12 7.2 Market Directed Control ............................................................................................................ 13 7.3 Integrated Real Time (RT) Market-Control ............................................................................... 13 7.4 Combined Market Directed and Integrated Real Time Market-Control Loops ......................... 14 7.5 Market Authorized Control ........................................................................................................ 15 7.6 Extended Model ......................................................................................................................... 16 8.0 Essential Differences Between Bulk Electric Systems and Distribution Systems ............................. 18 9.0 Implications for DER Integration ....................................................................................................... 19 10.0 Final Comments .................................................................................................................................. 20 v Figures 1 Simplified View of Bulk System Markets and Controls....................................................................... 8 2 Regions of Support for Electric System Markets and Controls .......................................................... 10 3 Basic Electric System ......................................................................................................................... 12 4 Market Directed Control ..................................................................................................................... 13 5 Integrated Real Time Market-Controls ............................................................................................... 14 6 Combined Market-Directed and Real Time Integrated Market-Control Loops .................................. 15 7 Market Authorized Control ................................................................................................................. 16 8 Extended Market-Control Model ........................................................................................................ 17 vi 1.0 Background Markets and controls are frequently portrayed as being polar opposites, incompatible alternative paradigms, or even competing philosophies for organizing the activities of large complex systems. In the electricity industry in the US prior to the 1990s, the dominant organizational structure was the vertically- integrated utility, characterized by a well-defined geographic and electrical service territory and the ownership or control of most generating facilities,1 a transmission network, local distribution systems and a monopoly over retail electric service for most if not all of the end-users in the territory. A vertically- integrated utility, many of which still exist today, operates mostly on controls with very little scope for markets or market transactions. In the 1990s federal laws and regulations prompted a major restructuring of the industry to enable wholesale competition among generating companies. To that end wholesale markets were created in several regions of the country to facilitate the development of competitive wholesale energy markets and to optimize the use of transmission systems. As such, in the several regions with independent system operators there is a prevailing view that markets are a core component of the 21st century electric system. Markets are seen by some as vastly superior to command-and-control regimes in terms of economic efficiency. Consequently, the role and application of controls have thus been pushed to the edges of many industry discussions except that the operators of grids and generating plants still depend on controls such as plant governors, automatic generation control, and automatic regulation systems to maintain reliable operation. From an architectural perspective, it is clear that markets and controls can and must coexist, even in the most market-oriented electric systems. Only through the complementary roles and functions of markets and controls can complex large-scale systems like the regional interconnected power systems of North America fulfill the societal objectives they are intended to serve. This paper analyzes the markets and control systems for the For the control engineer, electric power grid and show how their interactions are this paper shows how to embodied in a set of combined or integrated “market-control” view markets as tools for structures. It provides a logical way to examine the bounds of each such structure by mapping them into a two-dimensional power system management; space defined by the number of end points or participants and for market economists this the needed update or refresh rate of the essential functions these paper shows how controls structures must perform. For the control engineer, this paper connect markets to physical shows how to view markets as tools for power system management; for market economists this paper shows how systems. controls connect markets to physical systems. These issues are increasingly important as the industry moves toward the integration of high penetration level of DERs. For the purposes of this paper, a control is a means to direct, regulate, or stabilize the behavior of a physical device or system. A control system consists of a device or system to be controlled, a device that directs the desired behavior (“controller”), methods for determining appropriate control signals to elicit the desired behavior from the system (“control algorithms”), and means of communication for sending control signals to the control elements that drive the system and may include sensing and measurement feedback to the controller. The word “control” by itself will refer to the method for determining control signal; the term “controller” will refer the device or devices that compute or otherwise determine control signals. For simple device and system controls, the thing being controlled will always respond (within 1 The 1978 PURPA introduced customer onsite co-generation in the 1980s. 1 physical limits) to the control command or signal and that the control mechanism determines the behavior to be commanded.2 For control of stochastic systems, the situation is more complex. In this case the overall system can be controlled to behave in a statistical sense, even if individual elements are not guaranteed or even known to behave in a particular manner. Consider the example of a nuclear reactor: the overall power output can be controlled even though it is not possible to predict, control, or even know when any specific atom will undergo fission. A well-known example from electric system operation is a demand response virtual resource comprised of thousands of residential air conditioners, whose aggregate behavior can be reasonably well controlled to be acceptable although the behavior of the individual devices is not predictable. For decentralized systems, the control devices, controllers, sensors and actuators, and connections to devices or systems being controlled constitute a control network. Understanding the network concept in relation to the power system network and other grid structures such
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wind Energy Technology Data Update: 2020 Edition
    Wind Energy Technology Data Update: 2020 Edition Ryan Wiser1, Mark Bolinger1, Ben Hoen, Dev Millstein, Joe Rand, Galen Barbose, Naïm Darghouth, Will Gorman, Seongeun Jeong, Andrew Mills, Ben Paulos Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Corresponding authors August 2020 This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Wind Energy Technologies Office, under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. The views and opinions of the authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. Photo source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory ENERGY T ECHNOLOGIES AREA ENERGY ANALYSISAND ENVIRONMENTAL I MPACTS DIVISION ELECTRICITY M ARKETS & POLICY Disclaimer This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California.
    [Show full text]
  • Microgeneration Strategy: Progress Report
    MICROGENERATION STRATEGY Progress Report JUNE 2008 Foreword by Malcolm Wicks It is just over two years since The Microgeneration Strategy was launched. Since then climate change and renewables have jumped to the top of the global and political agendas. Consequently, it is more important than ever that reliable microgeneration offers individual householders the chance to play their part in tackling climate change. In March 2006, there was limited knowledge in the UK about the everyday use of microgeneration technologies, such as solar thermal heating, ground source heat pumps, micro wind or solar photovolatics. Much has changed since then. Thousands of people have considered installing these technologies or have examined grants under the Low Carbon Buildings Programme. Many have installed microgeneration and, in doing so, will have helped to reduce their demand for energy, thereby cutting both their CO2 emissions and their utility bills. The Government’s aim in the Strategy was to identify obstacles to creating a sustainable microgeneration market. I am pleased that the majority of the actions have been completed and this report sets out the excellent progress we have made. As a consequence of our work over the last two years, we have benefited from a deeper understanding of how the microgeneration market works and how it can make an important contribution to a 60% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050. Building an evidence base, for example, from research into consumer behaviour, from tackling planning restrictions and from tracking capital costs, means that we are now in a better position to take forward work on building a sustainable market for microgeneration in the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Power Distribution in the World: Today and Tomorrow
    Electric Power Distribution in the World: Today and Tomorrow EPRG Working Paper 1826 Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 1846 Sinan Küfeoğlu, Michael Pollitt & Karim Anaya Abstract In light of the increasing importance of distributed energy resources (DERs) in the electricity system, there is an ongoing need to understand the current status of electric power distribution across the world. This review paper compiles key information about the distribution systems in 175 countries worldwide. The findings for each country include the number, legal structure and ownership of distribution system operators, the access to electricity they provide, distribution level voltages, electric power frequency and the significance of renewable electricity generation. This study covers 99.4% of the world’s population. As of June 2018, there are around 7600 distribution system operators in these 175 countries. After reviewing today’s distribution system status, this paper also reviews the various discussions and proposals for tomorrow’s electric power distribution. The discussion covers both system operation and market platform roles as well as data management options for DSOs in the near future. Keywords distribution system operator; DSO; market platform; transmission system operator; TSO JEL Classification L94 Contact [email protected] Publication August 2018 Financial Support None www.eprg.group.cam.ac.uk Electric Power Distribution in the World: Today and Tomorrow Sinan Küfeoğlu1 Michael G. Pollitt Karim Anaya Energy Policy Research Group Energy Policy Research Group Energy Policy Research Group University of Cambridge University of Cambridge University of Cambridge Abstract In light of the increasing importance of distributed energy resources (DERs) in the electricity system, there is an ongoing need to understand the current status of electric power distribution across the world.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Era for Wind Power in the United States
    Chapter 3 Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United States 1 Photo from iStock 7943575 1 This page is intentionally left blank 3 Impacts of the Wind Vision Summary Chapter 3 of the Wind Vision identifies and quantifies an array of impacts associated with continued deployment of wind energy. This 3 | Summary Chapter chapter provides a detailed accounting of the methods applied and results from this work. Costs, benefits, and other impacts are assessed for a future scenario that is consistent with economic modeling outcomes detailed in Chapter 1 of the Wind Vision, as well as exist- ing industry construction and manufacturing capacity, and past research. Impacts reported here are intended to facilitate informed discus- sions of the broad-based value of wind energy as part of the nation’s electricity future. The primary tool used to evaluate impacts is the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model. ReEDS is a capacity expan- sion model that simulates the construction and operation of generation and transmission capacity to meet electricity demand. In addition to the ReEDS model, other methods are applied to analyze and quantify additional impacts. Modeling analysis is focused on the Wind Vision Study Scenario (referred to as the Study Scenario) and the Baseline Scenario. The Study Scenario is defined as wind penetration, as a share of annual end-use electricity demand, of 10% by 2020, 20% by 2030, and 35% by 2050. In contrast, the Baseline Scenario holds the installed capacity of wind constant at levels observed through year-end 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • The Potential for Combined Heat and Power in Massachusetts
    The Potential for Combined Heat and Power in Massachusetts Lauren Mattison and Dragoljub Kosanovic, University of Massachusetts Amherst ABSTRACT Use of combined heat and power (CHP) can benefit both the user and society by providing benefits to the economy, the environment and energy security. This study investigated the potential for use of CHP in Massachusetts. Research identified 120 existing CHP systems in the commercial/institutional, industrial and multifamily residential sectors in the state, with total electrical capacity of 375 MW and average system size of 3.1 MW. Technical potential for new CHP installations was determined using current average energy consumption and hours of operation for each facility type, and was based on existing CHP technologies. The remaining technical potential for CHP in Massachusetts was found to be more than 4,700 MW at 18,500 sites, with an average system size of 256 kW. The majority of the potential is in small systems of 50-500 kW in commercial/institutional buildings. The only area in which there has been significant market penetration to date is large systems of at least 5 MW. Reducing congestion of the electric grid and lowering the overall cost of energy with increased use of CHP would be particularly beneficial in Massachusetts where electricity rates are among the highest in the country. By reporting the current status of CHP in the state, considering the facility types best suited for CHP and estimating the size of the potential market, this study lays the groundwork for further analysis and development of CHP technology and policy in Massachusetts.
    [Show full text]
  • Time-Frequency Connectedness Between Coal Market Prices, New Energy Stock Prices and CO2 Emissions Trading Prices in China
    sustainability Article Time-frequency Connectedness between Coal Market Prices, New Energy Stock Prices and CO2 Emissions Trading Prices in China Chun Jiang 1, Yi-Fan Wu 1, Xiao-Lin Li 2 and Xin Li 2,* 1 Department of Finance, School of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 476411, China; [email protected] (C.J.); [email protected] (Y.-F.W.) 2 Department of Finance, School of Economics, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 15 March 2020; Accepted: 1 April 2020; Published: 2 April 2020 Abstract: This paper aims to examine whether there is inherent dynamic connectedness among coal market prices, new energy stock prices and carbon emission trading (CET) prices in China under time- and frequency-varying perspectives. For this purpose, we apply a novel wavelet method proposed by Aguiar-Conraria et al. (2018). Specifically, utilizing the single wavelet power spectrum, the multiple wavelet coherency, the partial wavelet coherency, also combined with the partial phase difference and the partial wavelet gains, this paper discovers the time-frequency interaction between three markets. The empirical results show that the connectedness between the CET market price and the coal price is frequency-varying and mainly occur in the lower and higher frequency bands, while the connectedness between the CET market price and the new energy stock price mainly happen in the middle and lower frequency bands. In the high-frequency domain, the CET market price is mainly affected by the coal price, while the CET market price is dominated by the new energy stock price in the middle frequency.
    [Show full text]
  • Reshaping the Energy Market: the Impact of New Central Market Systems and the Role of Central Market Facilitation Cgi.Com 2 TABLE of CONTENTS
    Reshaping the Energy Market: The Impact of New Central Market Systems and the Role of Central Market Facilitation cgi.com 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................................................................02 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................................03 DRIVERS OF LIBERALIZATION...................................................................................................................................................04 DE-REGULATION AND MARKET ROLES....................................................................................................................................04 BACK TO THE FUTURE..............................................................................................................................................................04 MOVING TO A LEANER, OPTIMIZED AND MODERN ENERGY MARKET....................................................................................05 CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MARKET FACILITATION.............................................................................................................06 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................................................................08 ABSTRACT The energy market has never been more
    [Show full text]
  • Benefits of Demand Response in Electricity Markets and Recommendations for Achieving Them
    BENEFITS OF DEMAND RESPONSE IN ELECTRICITY MARKETS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACHIEVING THEM A REPORT TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1252 OF THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005 Price of Demand Electricity Supply Supply DemandDR P PDR QDR Q Quantity of Electricity February 2006 . U.S. Department of Energy ii U.S. Department of Energy Benefits of Demand Response and Recommendations The Secretary [of Energy] shall be responsible for… not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, providing Congress with a report that identifies and quantifies the national benefits of demand response and makes a recommendation on achieving specific levels of such benefits by January 1, 2007. --Sec. 1252(d), the Energy Policy Act of 2005, August 8, 2005 U.S. Department of Energy Benefits of Demand Response and Recommendations iii iv U.S. Department of Energy Benefits of Demand Response and Recommendations EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Sections 1252(e) and (f) of the U.S. Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT)1 state that it is the policy of the United States to encourage “time-based pricing and other forms of demand response” and encourage States to coordinate, on a regional basis, State energy policies to provide reliable and affordable demand response services to the public. The law also requires the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to provide a report to Congress, not later than 180 days after its enactment, which “identifies and quantifies the national benefits of demand response and makes a recommendation on achieving specific levels of such benefits by January 1, 2007” (EPACT, Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Market Design and the Southeast United States
    June 2021 Energy Market Design and the Southeast United States Prepared by the American Council on Renewable Energy, in coordination with the American Clean Power Association and the Solar Energy Industries Association TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 2 I. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2 II. Real-Time Markets and Their Forms .............................................................................. 3 III. Benefits Associated with Real-Time Markets ................................................................ 7 Consumer Savings ........................................................................................................ 7 Effective Integration of Renewable Energy ............................................................... 8 Environmental Benefits .............................................................................................10 IV. Explaining the Southeast Energy Exchange Market (SEEM) ......................................11 V. How a Real-Time Market in the SEEM Footprint Might Lower Consumer Costs .....15 VI. How a Real-Time Market in the SEEM Footprint Might Enhance Low-Cost Renewable Energy Deployment ................................................................................17 VII. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy Cost Analysis: Hydropower
    IRENA International Renewable Energy Agency ER P A G P IN K R RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES: COST ANALYSIS SERIES O IRENA W Volume 1: Power Sector Issue 3/5 Hydropower June 2012 Copyright © IRENA 2012 Unless otherwise indicated, material in this publication may be used freely, shared or reprinted, but acknowledgement is requested. About IRENA The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) is an intergovernmental organisation dedi- cated to renewable energy. In accordance with its Statute, IRENA’s objective is to “promote the widespread and increased adoption and the sustainable use of all forms of renewable energy”. This concerns all forms of energy produced from renewable sources in a sustainable manner and includes bioenergy, geothermal energy, hydropower, ocean, solar and wind energy. As of May 2012, the membership of IRENA comprised 158 States and the European Union (EU), out of which 94 States and the EU have ratified the Statute. Acknowledgement This paper was prepared by the IRENA Secretariat. The paper benefitted from an internal IRENA review, as well as valuable comments and guidance from Ken Adams (Hydro Manitoba), Eman- uel Branche (EDF), Professor LIU Heng (International Center on Small Hydropower), Truls Holtedahl (Norconsult AS), Frederic Louis (World Bank), Margaret Mann (NREL), Judith Plummer (Cam- bridge University), Richard Taylor (IHA) and Manuel Welsch (KTH). For further information or to provide feedback, please contact Michael Taylor, IRENA Innovation and Technology Centre, Robert-Schuman-Platz 3, 53175 Bonn, Germany; [email protected]. This working paper is available for download from www.irena.org/Publications Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of materials herein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the International Renewable Energy Agency concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or con- cerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • IEA Wind Task 24 Integration of Wind and Hydropower Systems Volume 1: Issues, Impacts, and Economics of Wind and Hydropower Integration
    IEA Wind Task 24 Final Report, Vol. 1 1 IEA Wind Task 24 Integration of Wind and Hydropower Systems Volume 1: Issues, Impacts, and Economics of Wind and Hydropower Integration Authors: Tom Acker, Northern Arizona University on behalf of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory U.S. Department of Energy Wind and Hydropower Program Prepared for the International Energy Agency Implementing Agreement for Co-operation in the Research, Development, and Deployment of Wind Energy Systems National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 1617 Cole Boulevard Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Golden, Colorado 80401 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-50181 December 2011 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual U.S. Transmission Data Review
    Annual U.S. Transmission Data Review March 2018 United States Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Annual U.S. Transmission Data Review March 2018 Acknowledgements This report was prepared by the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Technical support was coordinated by Joseph Eto, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), with additional research and support provided by Kristina Hamachi LaCommare and Dana Robson (LBNL). Readers who have questions, comments, or suggestions for future reports in this series should send them to [email protected]. Data for this publication was sourced from documents available as of publication; in some cases draft documents may have been available, but were not included as they were not finalized at the time of this publication. All reference URLs were accurate as of November, 2017. Comments on a draft of this report were provided by: · California ISO (CAISO) · Eastern Interconnection Planning Committee (EIPC) · Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) · ISO New England (ISO-NE) · Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) · Monitoring Analytics · New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) · North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) · Open Access Technology International (OATI) · PJM Interconnection (PJM) · Potomac Economics · Southern Company · Southwest Power Pool (SPP) · U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) · Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Department of Energy | March 2018 Table of Contents
    [Show full text]