Hydroelectric Operation Optimization and Unexpected Spillage Indications

It is widely known that hydroelectric power plants benefit from optimized operation schedules, since the latter prevent water and, therefore, monetary wastes, contributing to significant environmental and economic gains. The level of detail on the representation of such systems is related to how far ahead the planning horizon is extended. Aiming at the very short-term optimization of hydroelectric power plants, which usually requires the most detailed models, this paper addresses an undesired effect that, despite being already mentioned in the literature, has not been properly explored and explained yet. This effect is given by the indication of spillage by the optimizer, even when the reservoir does not reach its maximum capacity. Simulations implemented in Julia language using real power plant data expose this phenomenon. Possible ways to circumvent it are presented. Results showed that, in specific cases, spillage allows the achieving of more efficient operating points by reducing the gross head and increasing the amount of water that flows through turbines. Furthermore, it was verified that applying water outflow-based objective functions prevents undesired spillage indications, despite causing machines to operate at lower efficiency levels, compared with the utilization of power losses-based objective functions.

[1]  Mario Kendziorski,et al.  Illustrating the Benefits of Openness: A Large-Scale Spatial Economic Dispatch Model Using the Julia Language , 2019, Energies.

[2]  Erlon Cristian Finardi,et al.  Mixed-integer nonseparable piecewise linear models for the hydropower production function in the Unit Commitment problem , 2020 .

[3]  Erlon Cristian Finardi,et al.  Assessing solution quality and computational performance in the hydro unit commitment problem considering different mathematical programming approaches , 2016 .

[4]  Lei Wu,et al.  Coordinated Scheduling for Improving Uncertain Wind Power Adsorption in Electric Vehicles—Wind Integrated Power Systems by Multiobjective Optimization Approach , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications.

[5]  William D'haeseleer,et al.  Unit commitment constraints in long-term planning models: Relevance, pitfalls and the role of assumptions on flexibility , 2020 .

[6]  He Li,et al.  Robust hydroelectric unit commitment considering integration of large-scale photovoltaic power: A case study in China , 2018, Applied Energy.

[7]  Mads Grahl-Madsen,et al.  PROGRAM OF HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT AS AN EFFECTIVE POSSIBILITIES IN UPPER VISTULA WATER REGION IN POLAND , 2018 .

[8]  Lennart Söder,et al.  Integer modelling of spinning reserve requirements in short term scheduling of hydro systems , 1998 .

[9]  Andrzej Wałęga,et al.  Sensitivity of methods for calculating environmental flows based on hydrological characteristics of watercourses regarding the hydropower potential of rivers , 2020 .

[10]  Fushuan Wen,et al.  Modeling of a District Heating System and Optimal Heat-Power Flow , 2018 .

[11]  Eduardo von Sperling,et al.  Hydropower in Brazil: Overview of Positive and Negative Environmental Aspects , 2012 .

[12]  Scott Samuelsen,et al.  Quantifying climate change impacts on hydropower generation and implications on electric grid greenhouse gas emissions and operation , 2016 .

[13]  M.E.P. Maceira,et al.  A Four-Dimensional Model of Hydro Generation for the Short-Term Hydrothermal Dispatch Problem Considering Head and Spillage Effects , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[14]  Erlon Cristian Finardi,et al.  Assessing solution quality and computational performance in the long-term generation scheduling problem considering different hydro production function approaches , 2019 .

[15]  Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos de Freitas,et al.  Amazon and the expansion of hydropower in Brazil: Vulnerability, impacts and possibilities for adaptation to global climate change , 2011 .

[16]  Edson C Bortoni,et al.  Optimal load distribution between units in a power plant. , 2007, ISA transactions.

[17]  Iain Dunning,et al.  JuMP: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Optimization , 2015, SIAM Rev..

[18]  Yanbin Yuan,et al.  A hybrid chaotic genetic algorithm for short-term hydro system scheduling , 2002, Math. Comput. Simul..

[19]  Lorenz T. Biegler,et al.  On the implementation of an interior-point filter line-search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear programming , 2006, Math. Program..

[20]  J. Bogen,et al.  The impact of a hydroelectric power plant on the sediment load in downstream water bodies, Svartisen, northern Norway. , 2001, The Science of the total environment.

[21]  Agnieszka Operacz The term “effective hydropower potential” based on sustainable development – an initial case study of the Raba river in Poland , 2017 .

[22]  Ricardo de Andrade Lira Rabêlo,et al.  A Reservoir Operation Policy Using Inter-Basin Water Transfer for Maximizing Hydroelectric Benefits in Brazil , 2020 .

[23]  E.L. da Silva,et al.  Solving the hydro unit commitment problem via dual decomposition and sequential quadratic programming , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[24]  Antonio Simoes Costa,et al.  Hydroelectric unit commitment for power plants composed of distinct groups of generating units , 2016 .

[25]  Paula F. V. Ferreira,et al.  Assessment of the environmental impacts associated with hydropower , 2017 .

[26]  Amita Mahor,et al.  Short term generation scheduling of cascaded hydro electric system using novel self adaptive inertia weight PSO , 2012 .

[27]  Yanbin Yuan,et al.  An enhanced differential evolution algorithm for daily optimal hydro generation scheduling , 2008, Comput. Math. Appl..

[28]  Darrell G. Fontane,et al.  Data Consolidation from Hydroelectric Plants , 2010 .