nach oben

Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports

Erschienen in:

09.06.2020 | Regional Renewable Energy (M Negrete-Pincetic, Section Editor)

Challenges in the Management of Hydroelectric Generation in Power System Operations

verfasst von: Álvaro Lorca, Marcel Favereau, Daniel Olivares

Erschienen in: Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The management of hydroelectric generation in the context of power system operations has been a difficult and important problem since the inception of power systems more than a century ago; however, various current developments are leading to important new associated challenges and opportunities: massive integration of variable renewable energy and other disruptive technologies, climate change effects on the availability of hydro inflows, and also new efficient techniques for optimization under uncertainty.

Recent Findings

Multistage stochastic optimization and stochastic dual dynamic programming are currently the dominant techniques for hydroelectric generation scheduling problems; however, there are many recent extensions and improvements on such techniques, and alternative approaches are being developed with significant potential for future concrete applications from power system operators and policy makers.

Summary

In this context, this paper presents a literature review on hydroelectric generation scheduling models, and a discussion on the critical challenges, open research questions, and future lines of research associated to this problem.

Vorheriger Artikel Prospects for a Highly Electric Road Transportation Sector in the USA

Nächster Artikel Recent Advancements in the Life Cycle Analysis of Lignocellulosic Biomass

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Shapiro A, Dentcheva D, Ruszczyński A. Lectures on stochastic programming. Lectures on Stochastic Programming. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; 2009. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898718751.

•• Pereira MVF, Pinto LMVG. Multi-stage stochastic optimization applied to energy planning. Math Program. 1991;52(1–3):359–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01582895.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Benders JF. Partitioning procedures for solving mixed-variables programming problems. Numer Math. 1962;4(1):238–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01386316.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Pereira MVF. Optimal stochastic operations scheduling of large hydroelectric systems. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst. 1989;11(3):161–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-0615(89)90025-2.CrossRef

Maceira MEP, Damázio JM. USE of the PAR(p) model in the stochastic dual dynamic programming optimization scheme used in the operation planning of the Brazilian hydropower system. Probability Eng Inform Sci. 2006;20(1):143–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269964806060098.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Røtting TA, Gjelsvik A. Stochastic dual dynamic programming for seasonal scheduling in the norwegian power system. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 1992;7(1):273–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/59.141714.CrossRef

Mo B, Gjelsvik A, Grundt A. Integrated risk management of hydro power scheduling and contract management. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2001;16(2):216–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/59.918289.CrossRef

Homem-De-Mello T, De Matos VL, Finardi EC. Sampling strategies and stopping criteria for stochastic dual dynamic programming: a case study in long-term hydrothermal scheduling. Energy Syst. 2011;2(1):1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-011-0024-y.CrossRef

Bezerra B, Veiga A, Barroso LA, Pereira M. Assessment of parameter uncertainty in autoregressive streamflow models for stochastic long-term hydrothermal scheduling. In: IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/PESGM.2012.6345322.

10.

Philpott AB, De Matos VL. Dynamic sampling algorithms for multi-stage stochastic programs with risk aversion. Eur J Oper Res. 2012;218(2):470–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2011.10.056.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

11.

Philpott A, De Matos V, Finardi E. On solving multistage stochastic programs with coherent risk measures. Oper Res. 2013;61(4):957–70. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2013.1175.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

12.

•• Homem-De-Mello T, Pagnoncelli BK. Risk aversion in multistage stochastic programming: a modeling and algorithmic perspective. Eur J Oper Res. 2016;249(1):188–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.048.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

13.

Shapiro A, Tekaya W, Soares MP, Da Costa JP. Worst-case-expectation approach to optimization under uncertainty. Oper Res. 2013;61(6):1435–49. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2013.1229.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

14.

Rudloff B, Street A, Valladão DM. Time consistency and risk averse dynamic decision models: definition, interpretation and practical consequences. Eur J Oper Res. 2014;234(3):743–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.11.037.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

15.

Brigatto A, Street A, Valladão DM. Assessing the cost of time-inconsistent operation policies in hydrothermal power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2016;32(6):4541–50. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2017.2672204.CrossRef

16.

Shapiro A. Analysis of stochastic dual dynamic programming method. Eur J Oper Res. 2011;209:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2010.08.007.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

17.

Shapiro A, Tekaya W, Da Costa JP, Soares MP. Risk neutral and risk averse stochastic dual dynamic programming method. Eur J Oper Res. 2013;224(2):375–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.08.022.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

18.

Brandi RBDS, Marcato ALM, Dias BH, Ramos TP, Junior ICDS. A convergence criterion for stochastic dual dynamic programming: application to the long-term operation planning problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2018;33(4):3678–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2017.2787462.CrossRef

19.

•• Ding L, Ahmed S, Shapiro A. A Python package for multi-stage stochastic programming. Optimization Online. 2019:1–42.

20.

Löhndorf N, Shapiro A. Modeling time-dependent randomness in stochastic dual dynamic programming. Eur J Oper Res. 2019;273(2):650–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.08.001.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

21.

•• Zou J, Ahmed S, Sun XA. Stochastic dual dynamic integer programming. Math Program. 2019;175(1–2):461–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-018-1249-5.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

22.

Hjelmeland MN, Zou J, Helseth A, Ahmed S. Nonconvex medium-term hydropower scheduling by stochastic dual dynamic integer programming. IEEE Transact Sustain Energy. 2019;10(1):481–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2018.2805164.CrossRef

23.

•• Dowson O, Kapelevich L. SDDP.jl: a Julia package for stochastic dual dynamic programming. Optimization Online. 2017.

24.

•• Asamov T, Salas DF, Powell WB. SDDP vs. ADP: the effect of dimensionality in multistage stochastic optimization for grid level energy storage. 2016.

25.

Löhndorf N, Minner S. Optimal day-ahead trading and storage of renewable energies—an approximate dynamic programming approach. Energy Syst. 2010;1(1):61–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-009-0007-4.CrossRef

26.

Löhndorf N, Wozabal D, Minner S. Optimizing trading decisions for hydro storage systems using approximate dual dynamic programming. Oper Res. 2013;61(4):810–23. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2013.1182.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

27.

• Salas DF, Powell WB. Benchmarking a scalable approximate dynamic programming algorithm for stochastic control of grid-level energy storage. INFORMS J Comput. 2018;30(1):106–23. https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.2017.0768.MathSciNetCrossRef

28.

•• Gauvin C, Delage E, Gendreau M. Decision rule approximations for the risk averse reservoir management problem. Eur J Oper Res. 2017;261(1):317–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.01.044.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

29.

• Gauvin C, Delage E, Gendreau M. A successive linear programming algorithm with non-linear time series for the reservoir management problem. Comput Manag Sci. 2018;15(1):55–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10287-017-0295-4.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

30.

•• Bodur M, Luedtke JR. Two-stage linear decision rules for multi-stage stochastic programming. Math Program. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-018-1339-4.

31.

Delage E, Ye Y. Distributionally robust optimization under moment uncertainty with application to data-driven problems. Oper Res. 2010;58(3):595–612. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1090.0741.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

32.

Ben-Tal A, Den Hertog D, De Waegenaere A, Melenberg B, Rennen G. Robust solutions of optimization problems affected by uncertain probabilities. Manag Sci. 2013;59(2):341–57. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1641.CrossRef

33.

Mohajerin Esfahani P, Kuhn D. Data-driven distributionally robust optimization using the Wasserstein metric: performance guarantees and tractable reformulations. Math Program. 2018;171(1–2):115–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-017-1172-1.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

34.

•• Huang J, Zhou K, Guan Y. A study of distributionally robust multistage stochastic optimization. 2017.

35.

Philpott A, De Matos V, Kapelevich L. Distributionally robust SDDP. Comput Manag Sci. 2018;15:431–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10287-018-0314-0.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

36.

Zhang Z, Zhang Q, Singh VP. Univariate streamflow forecasting using commonly used data-driven models: literature review and case study. Hydrol Sci J. 2018;63(7):1091–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2018.1469756.CrossRef

37.

Dashti H, Conejo AJ, Jiang R, Wang J. Weekly two-stage robust generation scheduling for hydrothermal power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2016;31(6):4554–64. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2015.2510628.CrossRef

38.

Bezerra B, Veiga Á, Barroso LA, Pereira M. Stochastic long-term hydrothermal scheduling with parameter uncertainty in autoregressive streamflow models. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2017:1. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2572722.

39.

Castro Souza R, Luí A, Marcato M, Dias BH, Luiz F, Oliveira C. Optimal operation of hydrothermal systems with hydrological scenario generation through bootstrap and periodic autoregressive models. Eur J Oper Res. 2012;222:606–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.020.CrossRef

40.

•• Lohmann T, Hering AS, Rebennack S. Spatio-temporal hydro forecasting of multireservoir inflows for hydro-thermal scheduling. Eur J Oper Res. 2016;255(1):243–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.05.011.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

41.

Yurekli K, Kurunc A, Ozturk F. Application of linear stochastic models to monthly flow data of Kelkit stream. Ecol Model. 2005;183(1):67–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.08.001.CrossRef

42.

Mondal MS, Wasimi SA. Generating and forecasting monthly flows of the Ganges river with PAR model. J Hydrol. 2006;323(1–4):41–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.08.015.CrossRef

43.

Lorca Á, Sun XA, Litvinov E, Zheng T. Multistage adaptive robust optimization for the unit commitment problem. Oper Res. 2016;64(1):32–51. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2015.1456.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

44.

Lorca Á, Sun XA. Adaptive robust optimization with dynamic uncertainty sets for multi-period economic dispatch under significant wind. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2015;30(4):1702–13. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2357714.CrossRef

45.

Bertsimas D, Litvinov E, Sun XA, Zhao J, Zheng T. Adaptive robust optimization for the security constrained unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2013;28(1):52–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2012.2205021.CrossRef

46.

Street A, Brigatto A, Valladão DM. Co-optimization of energy and ancillary services for hydrothermal operation planning under a general security criterion. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 2017;32(6):4914–23. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2017.2672555.CrossRef

47.

Maluenda B, Negrete-Pincetic M, Olivares DE, Lorca Á. Expansion planning under uncertainty for hydrothermal systems with variable resources. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst. 2018;103:644–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.06.008.CrossRef

48.

Vicuna S, Maurer EP, Joyce B, Dracup JA, Purkey D. The sensitivity of California water resources to climate change scenarios. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 2007;43(2):482–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00038.x.CrossRef

49.

Vicuna S, Leonardson R, Hanemann MW, Dale LL, Dracup JA. Climate change impacts on high elevation hydropower generation in California’s Sierra Nevada: a case study in the Upper American River. Clim Chang. 2008;87(1):123–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-9365-x.CrossRef

50.

Garreaud RD, Boisier JP, Rondanelli R, Montecinos A, Sepúlveda HH, Veloso-Aguila D. The Central Chile Mega Drought (2010–2018): a climate dynamics perspective. Int J Climatol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6219.

51.

Pereira-Bonvallet E, Püschel-Løvengreen S, Matus M, Moreno R. Optimizing hydrothermal scheduling with non-convex irrigation constraints: case on the Chilean electricity system. In: Energy Procedia. Elsevier Ltd; 2016. p. 132–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.12.342.

Titel: Challenges in the Management of Hydroelectric Generation in Power System Operations
verfasst von: Álvaro Lorca
Marcel Favereau
Daniel Olivares
Publikationsdatum: 09.06.2020
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports / Ausgabe 3/2020
Elektronische ISSN: 2196-3010
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-020-00152-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Technological Advances in the Production of Polyhydroxyalkanoate Biopolymers

Prospects for a Highly Electric Road Transportation Sector in the USA

Recent Advancements in the Life Cycle Analysis of Lignocellulosic Biomass

Technological Challenges in Enzymatically Produced Functional Foods

Industrial Biocatalysis: an Insight into Trends and Future Directions