A comparison of price-taker and production cost models for determining system value, revenue, and scheduling of concentrating solar power plants

Abstract Concentrating solar power (CSP) plants convert solar energy into electricity and can be coupled with low-cost thermal energy storage to provide a dispatchable renewable resource. Maximizing the economic benefits of CSP systems requires deliberate selection of the timing of thermal energy dispatch to coincide with high-price or high-value periods. The performance and value of CSP systems have traditionally been evaluated using two distinct approaches: (1) production cost models (PCMs), which optimize commitment and dispatch schedules for an entire fleet of generators to minimize the cost of satisfying electricity demand; and (2) price-taker (PT) models, which optimize dispatch of the CSP system against historical or forecasted electricity prices to maximize revenue available to the CSP operator. The PCM approach is, in principle, superior because of the ability to capture system-level details such as transmission pathways and associated constraints, and feedback between CSP dispatch schedules and operation of other generators. The computationally simpler PT technique cannot explicitly address these concerns, but the comparative reduction in solution time is attractive for sensitivity analysis and rigorous optimization of CSP plant design and operation. In this work, we directly compare the dispatch profiles, net revenue, and operational value of CSP systems using implementations of each technique to assess how closely the solutions from the PT technique can approach those from the PCM for a specific market scenario. The PT implementation produced characteristically similar dispatch profiles as the PCM for both a large solar-multiple configuration and a small solar-multiple peaking configuration, while requiring only 1% of the computational time of the PCM. In addition, dispatching the CSP plant according to the self-scheduled PT solution—as opposed to the system-optimized PCM solution—only reduced the total CSP operational value by 1–5%, with consistent trends across CSP configurations and locations. This analysis validates the ability of the PT approach to substantially capture the economic benefits of CSP systems when pricing profiles are available, and indicates that the PT approach is suitable for initial design and optimization of CSP technologies.

[1]  P. Denholm,et al.  The Value of Concentrating Solar Power and Thermal Energy Storage , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy.

[2]  Christoph Kost,et al.  Concentrating solar power plant investment and operation decisions under different price and support mechanisms , 2013 .

[3]  José Manuel Bravo,et al.  A MPC approach for optimal generation scheduling in CSP plants , 2016 .

[4]  Alexander Mitsos,et al.  Optimal operation of a solar-thermal power plant with energy storage and electricity buy-back from grid , 2013 .

[5]  Alexandra M. Newman,et al.  Optimized dispatch in a first-principles concentrating solar power production model , 2017 .

[6]  Daniele Cocco,et al.  Comparison of three different approaches for the optimization of the CSP plant scheduling , 2017 .

[7]  Craig Turchi,et al.  An Assessment of the Net Value of CSP Systems Integrated with Thermal Energy Storage , 2015 .

[8]  M. Wagner Simulation and predictive performance modeling of utility-scale central receiver system power plants , 2008 .

[9]  N.P. Padhy,et al.  Unit commitment-a bibliographical survey , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[10]  Amine Boudghene Stambouli,et al.  The value of dispatchability of CSP plants in the electricity systems of Morocco and Algeria , 2012 .

[11]  Samiha Tahseen,et al.  Deploying storage assets to facilitate variable renewable energy integration: The impacts of grid flexibility, renewable penetration, and market structure , 2018 .

[12]  Gerald B. Sheblé,et al.  Unit commitment literature synopsis , 1994 .

[13]  Paul Denholm,et al.  How Thermal Energy Storage Enhances the Economic Viability of Concentrating Solar Power , 2012, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[14]  A. Conejo,et al.  Optimal offering strategy for a concentrating solar power plant , 2012 .

[15]  Víctor Manuel Fernandes Mendes,et al.  Self-scheduling for energy and spinning reserve of wind/CSP plants by a MILP approach , 2014 .

[16]  P. Denholm,et al.  Estimating the Capacity Value of Concentrating Solar Power Plants: A Case Study of the Southwestern United States , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[17]  Chongqing Kang,et al.  Optimal Offering Strategy for Concentrating Solar Power Plants in Joint Energy, Reserve and Regulation Markets , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy.

[18]  Mohd Wazir Mustafa,et al.  Recent approaches of unit commitment in the presence of intermittent renewable energy resources: A review , 2017 .