Priority Lists for Power System Investments: Locating Phasor Measurement Units

Power systems incrementally and continuously upgrade their components, such as transmission lines, reactive capacitors, or generating units. Decision-making tools often support the selection of the best set of components to upgrade. Optimization models are often used to support decision making at a given point in time. After certain time intervals, re-optimization is performed to find new components to add. In this paper, we propose a decision-making framework for incrementally updating power system components. This is an alternative approach to the classical sequential re-optimization decision making for an investment problem with modeled budget constraints. Our approach provides a priority list as a solution with a list of new components to upgrade. We show that i) our framework is consistent with the evolution of power system upgrades, and ii) in particular circumstances, both frameworks provide the same solution if the problem satisfies submodularity property.We have selected the problem of phasor measurement unit localization and compared the solution with the classical sequential re-optimization framework. For this particular problem, we show that the two approaches provide close results, while only our proposed algorithm is applicable in practice. The cases of 14 and 118 IEEE buses are used to illustrate the proposed methodology.

[1]  Hugh Rudnick,et al.  Risk allocation for efficient and timely transmission investment under markets with high demand growth , 2009, 2009 IEEE Bucharest PowerTech.

[2]  John Lygeros,et al.  Optimal Sensor and Actuator Placement in Complex Dynamical Networks , 2013, ArXiv.

[3]  Alexandre Street,et al.  Distributionally Robust Transmission Expansion Planning: A Multi-Scale Uncertainty Approach , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[4]  Antonio J. Conejo,et al.  Electric Energy Systems : Analysis and Operation , 2008 .

[5]  László Lovász,et al.  Submodular functions and convexity , 1982, ISMP.

[6]  Enzo Sauma,et al.  Climate-aware generation and transmission expansion planning: A three-stage robust optimization approach , 2021, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[7]  M. Shahidehpour,et al.  Contingency-Constrained PMU Placement in Power Networks , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[8]  Xiuli Wang,et al.  An Extension of Reduced Disjunctive Model for Multi-Stage Security-Constrained Transmission Expansion Planning , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[9]  Shan Jin,et al.  A Tri-Level Model of Centralized Transmission and Decentralized Generation Expansion Planning for an Electricity Market—Part I , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[10]  O. Wasynczuk,et al.  PMU data characterization and application to stability monitoring , 2006, 2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting.

[11]  Mohd Rihan,et al.  Optimal selection of PMU locations for enhanced state estimation in smart grid , 2013 .

[12]  John Lygeros,et al.  On Submodularity and Controllability in Complex Dynamical Networks , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems.

[13]  Meisam Farrokhifar,et al.  Energy systems planning: A survey on models for integrated power and natural gas networks coordination , 2020 .

[14]  Roberto Horowitz,et al.  A Submodular Approach for Optimal Sensor Placement in Traffic Networks , 2018, 2018 Annual American Control Conference (ACC).

[15]  N. Amjady,et al.  Two-Stage Robust Generation Expansion Planning: A Mixed Integer Linear Programming Model , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[16]  W. Marsden I and J , 2012 .

[17]  David Pozo,et al.  Empirical Analysis of Capacity Investment Solution in Distribution Grids , 2021, ArXiv.

[18]  Enzo Sauma,et al.  Energy storage and transmission expansion planning: substitutes or complements? , 2017 .

[19]  S.A. Soman,et al.  Optimal Multistage Scheduling of PMU Placement: An ILP Approach , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.