Evaluation and Grouping of Power Market Scenarios in Security of Electricity Supply Analysis

In power system reliability assessment, at the transmission system level, a basic requirement of the analysis is models describing load and generation profiles at the individual buses, as these variables are needed as input to the power flow problem. As a consequence of deregulation and the increasing share of renewable energy sources in the generation system, the modelling of load and generation patterns has, over the last decades, become more difficult.For electric power systems, it is often the case that a certain mix of load and generation (spread out at the individual buses) cause the system to be vulnerable, as it might lead to, e.g., too high load on certain transmission lines or too little generation reserve in certain areas. An important aspect of power system reliability assessment is to reveal and analyse such vulnerabilities. Thus, it is necessary to check different mixes of generation and load in conjunct with (a large number of) component outage combinations to reveal as many system vulnerabilities as possible.Typically, only peak load situations are analysed in power system reliability assessments. However, the transmission system can be vulnerable due to bottlenecks in the system, as a consequence of large local loads and/or nondispatchable generation, even though the total demand might be well below the peak demand. To improve the generation and load modelling, the reliability assessment framework discussed in the thesis use a power market model to generate (future) load and generation scenarios. The generated scenarios are interpreted as a sample of future power market behaviour, and are used as basis for a reliability assessment. Depending on the type of power market model, this analysis can take into account different market structures, renewable energy sources, hydro inflow scenarios, etc.The power market models tends to produce a large number of load and generation scenarios, and to include all these scenarios in a reliability assessment results in excessive computation time. In this thesis, the scenario selection method is proposed and discussed. The scenario selection method finds groups of similar load and generation scenarios, and then, for each group, chooses one scenario to represent the group characteristics. The set of chosen scenarios is denoted the representative set, and only this set of scenarios is used as basis for a reliability assessment. Essentially, the scenario selection method keeps the sample variation of the full sample of load and generation scenarios more or less intact, but at the same time severely reduces the computational requirements of the reliability assessment. Based on the results of the case studies in this thesis, these main conclusions (with respect to application of the scenario selection method) are drawn:• Feature selection, i.e., selection of variables used for quantifying similarity among load and generation scenarios, is a case dependent process, and ideally the feature selection should be customised to suit the analysis to get optimal results. However, the power injections (P and Q at the buses in the power system under study) give good results when used as features for scenario selection, and is the best general recommendation.• The problem of finding groups of similar load and generation scenarios is most likely a segmentation problem. Thus, there is no objective method for determining the number of natural groups k in the set of load and generation scenarios, and k must be selected based on experience. The results of the case studies indicate that k ≈ 0.1 · n is a sensible choice (where n is the total number of load and generation scenarios).• In a segmentation problem, the goal of the clustering algorithm is to group together load and generation scenarios which are very similar. An agglomerative clustering algorithm, with complete linkage, tends to produce small and compact groups, and is therefore thought of as an appropriate algorithm for this problem. The results of the case studies support this assumption, as agglomerative clustering with complete linkage is, overall, the algorithm with the best results when applied for scenario selection. The k-means algorithm gives similar results as the agglomerative clustering algorithm, while more advanced clustering algorithms perform at the same level, or worse, than the agglomerative clustering algorithm when applied for scenario selection.• The scenario selection method can reduce the computation time of the reliability assessment by about 90% (by setting k ≈ 0.1 · n), and simultaneously keep the error in the reliability indices within a 5-10% margin. This is thought of as an appropriate trade-off between reduced computation time and maintaining the accuracy of the analysis. An alternative method for reducing the computation time of the reliability assessment, is to only analyse those scenarios with the highest overall system load, e.g., exclude 90% of the load and generation scenarios from the analysis by taking away those with a “low“ system load. The scenario selection method is a more systematic and consistent method for reducing the scenario set compared to such (rule-based) methods, and it is shown that the scenario selection method gives much better results than such (rule-based) methods.

[1]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning , 2001 .

[2]  Teuvo Kohonen,et al.  Self-Organization and Associative Memory, Third Edition , 1989, Springer Series in Information Sciences.

[3]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Distributed nature of residential customer outage costs , 1996 .

[4]  N. J. Balu,et al.  Composite generation/transmission reliability evaluation , 1992, Proc. IEEE.

[5]  P. Pourbeik,et al.  Review of the Current Status of Tools and Techniques for Risk-Based and Probabilistic Planning in Power Systems , 2011 .

[6]  Ove Wolfgang,et al.  Hydro reservoir handling in Norway before and after deregulation , 2009 .

[7]  Kjetil Uhlen,et al.  A Probabilistic Security Criterion for Determination of Power Transfer Limits in a Deregulated Environment , 2000 .

[8]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification (2nd ed.) , 1999 .

[9]  R. Billinton,et al.  Bulk electric system well-being analysis using sequential Monte Carlo simulation , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[10]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Hierarchical Dirichlet Processes , 2006 .

[11]  V. Miranda,et al.  Composite Reliability Assessment Based on Monte Carlo Simulation and Artificial Neural Networks , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[12]  Dilan Görür,et al.  Dirichlet process Gaussian mixture models: choice of the base distribution , 2010 .

[13]  Wenyuan Li,et al.  Reliability Assessment of Electric Power Systems Using Monte Carlo Methods , 1994 .

[14]  Hyungchul Kim,et al.  Power System Adequacy and Security Calculations Using Monte Carlo Simulation incorporating Intelligent System Methodology , 2006, 2006 International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems.

[15]  A. D. Patton,et al.  Power system reliability evaluation using self organizing map , 2000, 2000 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37077).

[16]  Xiao-Bai Li,et al.  Data reduction via adaptive sampling , 2002, Commun. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Neural networks for pattern recognition , 1995 .

[18]  Ulrike von Luxburg,et al.  A tutorial on spectral clustering , 2007, Stat. Comput..

[19]  Oddbjørn Gjerde,et al.  Integrated approach for security of electricity supply analysis , 2010, Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manag..

[20]  A.M.L. da Silva,et al.  Well-being analysis for composite generation and transmission systems , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[21]  M.T. Schilling,et al.  Reliability Assessment of the Brazilian Power System Using Enumeration and Monte Carlo , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[22]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Statistical Pattern Recognition: A Review , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[23]  Jerry Nedelman,et al.  Book review: “Bayesian Data Analysis,” Second Edition by A. Gelman, J.B. Carlin, H.S. Stern, and D.B. Rubin Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2004 , 2005, Comput. Stat..

[24]  A. Gjelsvik,et al.  Generation scheduling in a deregulated system. The Norwegian case , 1999 .

[25]  R. Billinton,et al.  Power system reliability and its assessment. 2. Composite generation and transmission systems , 1992 .

[26]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic , 2000 .

[27]  N. Growe-Kuska,et al.  Scenario reduction and scenario tree construction for power management problems , 2003, 2003 IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference Proceedings,.

[28]  K. Samdal,et al.  Customer Costs Related to Interruptions and Voltage Problems: Methodology and Results , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[29]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Bibliography on Power Systems Probabilistic Security Analysis 1968-2008 , 2009 .

[30]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Pseudo-chronological simulation for composite reliability analysis with time varying loads , 2000 .

[31]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Probability distribution approach to describe customer costs due to electric supply interruptions , 1994 .

[32]  David B. Dunson,et al.  Bayesian Data Analysis , 2010 .

[33]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Composite generation and transmission systems , 1984 .

[34]  Composite power system reliability evaluation using support vector machines on a multicore platform , 2011, The 2011 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks.

[35]  Arild Helseth,et al.  A hydrothermal market model for simulation of area prices including detailed network analyses , 2013 .

[36]  S. H. F. Cunha,et al.  A Technique for Reducing Computational Effort in Monte-Carlo Based Composite Reliability Evaluation , 1989, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[37]  Radford M. Neal Markov Chain Sampling Methods for Dirichlet Process Mixture Models , 2000 .

[38]  Chanan Singh,et al.  Power system probabilistic security assessment using Bayes classifier , 2005 .

[39]  Chanan Singh,et al.  Composite system reliability evaluation using state space pruning , 1997 .

[40]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Variance reduction techniques for use with sequential Monte Carlo simulation in bulk power system reliability evaluation , 1996, Proceedings of 1996 Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering.

[41]  Vladimiro Miranda,et al.  Well-being analysis for composite generation and transmission systems based on pattern recognition techniques , 2008 .

[42]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Composite power system health analysis using a security constrained adequacy evaluation procedure , 1994 .

[43]  O. S. Grande,et al.  Experience with the Nord Pool design and implementation , 2003 .

[44]  Hakon Kile,et al.  Data reduction via clustering and averaging for contingency and reliability analysis , 2012 .

[45]  R. Billinton,et al.  Probabilistic assessment of power systems , 2000, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[46]  D. Srinivasan,et al.  Composite Reliability Evaluation Using Monte Carlo Simulation and Least Squares Support Vector Classifier , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[47]  G. Warland,et al.  Long-term hydro-thermal scheduling including network constraints , 2010, 2010 7th International Conference on the European Energy Market.

[48]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  The Infinite Gaussian Mixture Model , 1999, NIPS.

[49]  A. M. Leite da Silva,et al.  Evaluation of reliability worth in composite systems based on pseudo-sequential Monte Carlo simulation , 1994 .

[50]  Roy Billinton,et al.  Sequential Monte Carlo simulation for composite power system reliability analysis with time varying loads , 1995 .

[51]  K. Uhlen,et al.  Vulnerability analysis of the Nordic power system , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.