A proposal for investment recovery of FACTS devices in deregulated electricity markets

The paper presents a methodology to quantify the benefits, in terms of monetary values, of FACTS devices when used in deregulated electricity market for congestion management. The proposed methodology is used in the proposal for investment recovery of FACTS devices. Despite the long history of development and mature technology, the practical installations of FACTS devices are still limited. The main reasons for few installations are high investment cost and lack of viable measures to quantify the long list of benefits offered by FACTS device. In this respect, the methodology proposed in the paper provides a promising solution. The proposed methodology is based on establishing pricing schemes with and without FACTS devices using OPF formulation. The volume of market with FACTS devices and the increase in surplus due to them forms the basis of quantifying their benefits. The pricing scheme does not destroy the incentive effect in short run and also makes possible the provision of merchant FACTS. The proposed concept was tested and validated with TCSC in five-bus test system. Result shows that, when TCSC is used to relieve congestion in the system and the investment on TCSC can be recovered.

[1]  G. B. Shrestha,et al.  Effects of series compensation on spot price power markets , 2005 .

[2]  Nadarajah Mithulananthan,et al.  Facts about flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS) controllers: Practical installations and benefits , 2005 .

[3]  Seema Singh,et al.  Optimal location of FACTS devices for congestion management , 2001 .

[4]  Alan Rosenberg Congestion Pricing or Monopoly Pricing , 2000 .

[5]  S. C. Srivastava,et al.  Impact of FACTS devices on transmission pricing in a de-regulated electricity market , 2000, DRPT2000. International Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies. Proceedings (Cat. No.00EX382).

[6]  Y. H. Song,et al.  Combined Active and Reactive Congestion Management with FACTS Devices , 2002 .

[7]  Hari Om Gupta,et al.  Location of unified power flow controller for congestion management , 2001 .

[8]  C. Lehmkoster,et al.  Security Constrained Optimal Power Flow for an Economical Operation of FACTS Devices in Liberalized Energy Markets , 2002, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[9]  J. Tirole,et al.  Transmission rights and market power on electric power networks , 1999 .

[10]  Göran Andersson,et al.  Determining the value of controllable devices in a liberalized electricity market: a new approach , 2003, 2003 IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference Proceedings,.

[11]  T.T. Lie,et al.  Optimal dispatch in pool market with FACTS devices , 2004, IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2004..

[12]  Y. Z. Sun,et al.  Power Flow Control Approach to Power Systems with Embedded Facts Devices , 2002, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[13]  N. Mithulananthan,et al.  Comparison of Shunt Capacitor, SVC and STATCOM in Static Voltage Stability Margin Enhancement , 2004 .

[14]  S. Gerbex,et al.  Optimal Location of Multi-Type FACTS Devices in a Power System by Means of Genetic Algorithms , 2001, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[15]  Georgios C. Stamtsis,et al.  Optimal choice and allocation of FACTS devices in deregulated electricity market using genetic algorithms , 2004, IEEE PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition, 2004..

[16]  Laszlo Gyugyi,et al.  Understanding FACTS: Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems , 1999 .