Zusammenfassung
The decentralization of the power infrastructure poses new challenges for power plant operators and aggregators. A large number of power plants must be coordinated to successfully participate in energy markets. This requires to take uncertain exogenous influences, such as weather and market price, into account when determining operational schedules of energy resources and quantity-price tuples for bids to energy and reserve markets. Stochastic programming techniques are commonly applied to these decision problems. But, the resulting models are usually large-scale and hard to solve. We propose a temporal decomposition heuristic to speed-up the solution process of such models. The heuristic is based on mixed-integer programming formulations. Therefore, it is flexible with respect to the kinds of power plants and market environments that can be considered. We validate our findings on a realistic benchmark set of large stochastic programs and confirm its suitability to significantly reduce computational effort while retaining near-optimal solution quality.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barth, R. / Brand, H. / Meibom, P. /Weber, C. (2006): A stochastic unit-commitment model for the evaluation of the impacts of integration of large amounts of intermittent wind power. In: 2006 International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems. IEEE, pp. 1–8.
Birge, J. R. / Louveaux, F. (2011): Introduction to stochastic programming. Springer Science & Business Media.
Bonami, P. / Salvagnin, D. / Tramontani, A. (2020): Implementing automatic Benders decomposition in a modern MIP solver. In: International Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization. Springer, pp. 78-90.
Cao, K.-K. / Krbek, K. von / Wetzel, M. / Cebulla, F. / Schreck, S. (2019): Classification and evaluation of concepts for improving the performance of applied energy system optimization models. In: Energies, vol. 12, no. 24, p. 4656.
Commission Regulation 2017/2195 (EU) (2017): Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/2195 of 23 November 2017 establishing a guideline on electricity balancing.
Correa-Posada, C. M. / Morales-España, G. / Dueñas, P. / Sánchez-Martín, P. (2017): Dynamic ramping model including intraperiod ramp-rate changes in unit commitment. In: IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 43–50.
Garver, L. L. (1962): Power generation scheduling by integer programmingdevelopment of theory. In: Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers. Part III: Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. 81, no. 3, pp. 730–734. XX Leopold Kuttner, Martin Scheffler, Udo Buscher
- Knueven, B. / Ostrowski, J. /Wang, J. (2018): The ramping polytope and cut generation for the unit commitment problem. In: INFORMS Journal on Computing, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 739–749.
Mantawy, A. / Abdel-Magid, Y. L. / Selim, S. Z. (1999): Integrating genetic algorithms, tabu search, and simulated annealing for the unit commitment problem. In: IEEE Transactions on Power systems, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 829–836.
Marquant, J. F. / Evins, R. / Carmeliet, J. (2015): Reducing computation time with a rolling horizon approach applied to a MILP formulation of multiple urban energy hub system. In: Procedia Computer Science, vol. 51, pp. 2137–2146.
Mazzi, N. / Kazempour, J. / Pinson, P. (2018): Price-taker offering strategy in electricity pay-as-bid markets. In: IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 2175–2183.
Nemati, M. / Braun, M. / Tenbohlen, S. (2018): Optimization of unit commitment and economic dispatch in microgrids based on genetic algorithm and mixed integer linear programming. In: Applied energy, vol. 210, pp. 944–963.
Ostrowski, J. / Anjos, M. F. / Vannelli, A. (2011): Tight mixed integer linear programming formulations for the unit commitment problem. In: IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 39–46.
Senjyu, T. / Miyagi, T. / Yousuf, S. A. / Urasaki, N. / Funabashi, T. (2007): A technique for unit commitment with energy storage system. In: International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 91–98.
Silvente, J. / Kopanos, G. M. / Pistikopoulos, E. N. / Espuña, A. (2015): A rolling horizon optimization framework for the simultaneous energy supply and demand planning in microgrids. In: Applied Energy, vol. 155, pp. 485–501.
Soares, J. / Silva, M. / Sousa, T. / Vale, Z. / Morais, H. (2012): Distributed energy resource short-term scheduling using Signaled Particle Swarm Optimization. In: Energy, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 466–476.
Weerdt, M. de / Morales-Espana, G. / Linden, K. van der (2018): Optimal non-zero price bids for EVs in energy and reserves markets using stochastic 1 MIP-based decomposition heuristic for energy resource scheduling XXI optimization. In: 2018 15th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM). IEEE, pp. 1–5.
Zamani, A. G. / Zakariazadeh, A. / Jadid, S. (2016): Day-ahead resource scheduling of a renewable energy based virtual power plant. In: Applied Energy, vol. 169, pp. 324–340.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the European Union and the Free State of Saxony under SAB-Nr. 100331224.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
List of Symbols
- CPP:
-
Conventional Power Plant
- MG:
-
Microgrid
- MIP:
-
Mixed-Integer Programm
- RER:
-
Renewable Energy Resource
- SPP:
-
Storage Power Plant
- VPP:
-
Virtual Power Plant
List of Symbols
Indices
- i :
-
cell
- j :
-
production level
- k :
-
price bid level
- s :
-
scenario
- t :
-
period
Sets
- \(\mathscr {I}\) :
-
set of all cells i
- \(\mathscr {J}_i\) :
-
set of all production levels j of the conventional power plant in cell i
- \(\mathscr {S}\) :
-
set of all scenarios s
- \(\mathscr {T}\) :
-
set of all periods t
- :
-
set of first time periods of storage recharge intervals for reserve provision
- :
-
set of interim time periods of storage recharge intervals for reserve provision
Variables of the first stage
- :
-
day-ahead spot market sell bid price indicator in period t at price
- :
-
day-ahead spot market purchase bid price indicator in period t at price
- :
-
negative reserve bid price indicator in period t at price
- :
-
positive reserve bid price indicator in period t at price
- :
-
negative reserve bid quantity in period t at price
- :
-
positive reserve bid quantity in period t at price
- :
-
start-up status of the conventional power plant in cell i in period t
- :
-
commitment status of the conventional power plant in cell i in period t
- :
-
shut-down status of the conventional power plant in cell i in period t
- :
-
day-ahead spot market purchase bid quantity in period t at price
- :
-
day-ahead spot market sell bid quantity in period t at price
Scenario independent parameters
- \(C_{i}^{\text {u}}\) :
-
start-up costs of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
marginal costs for one unit of power at production level j in cell i
- :
-
shut-down costs of the conventional power plant in cell i
- \(\underline{C}_{i}^{\mathrm {v}}\) :
-
operating costs at the minimum power output level in cell i
- \(V_{i0}\) :
-
initial commitment status of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
minimum power output of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
maximum power output of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
maximum power output at production level j in cell i
- :
-
maximum ramp-up rate of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
maximum ramp-down rate of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
start-up rate of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
shut-down rate of the conventional power plant in cell i
- :
-
charge efficiency of the storage power plant in cell i
- :
-
discharge efficiency of the storage power plant in cell i
- :
-
maximum state of charge of the storage plant in cell i
- :
-
minimum state of charge of the storage plant in cell i
- :
-
initial state of charge of the storage plant in cell i
- :
-
charge rate limit of the storage plant in cell i
- :
-
discharge rate limit of the storage plant in cell i
Variables of the second stage
- :
-
negative reserve contribution of the storage plant in cell i in scenario s in period t through discharging to the grid: nominally discharge to the grid; cease discharge on reserve activation
- :
-
negative reserve contribution of the storage plant in cell i in scenario s in period t through charging from grid: nominally idle; charge on reserve activation
- :
-
positive reserve contribution of the storage plant in cell i in scenario s in period t through discharging to the grid: nominally idle; discharge on reserve activation
- :
-
positive reserve contribution of the storage plant in cell i in scenario s in period t through charging from grid: nominally charge from the grid; cease charge on reserve activation
- :
-
negative reserve contribution of the conventional power plant in cell i at production level j in scenario s in period t
- :
-
positive reserve contribution of the conventional power plant in cell i at production level j in scenario s in period t
- \(s_{it}\) :
-
state of charge of the storage power plant in cell i in scenario s at the end of period t
- \(\underline{s}_{it}\) :
-
virtual state of charge for the low state of charge contingency case of the storage power plant in cell i in scenario s at the end of period t
- \(\overline{s}_{it}\) :
-
virtual state of charge for the high state of charge contingency case of the storage power plant in cell i in scenario s at the end of period t
- :
-
charging status of the storage in cell i in scenario s in period t
- :
-
discharging status of the storage in cell i in scenario s in period t
- \(y_{sijt}^{\text {c}}\) :
-
power output of the conventional power plant in cell i at production level j in scenario s in period t
- \(y_{sit}^{\text {s,c}}\) :
-
power charge to the storage plant in cell i in scenario s in period t
- \(y_{sit}^{\text {s,d}}\) :
-
power discharge from the storage plant in cell i in scenario s in period t
- \(z_{sit}^{-}\) :
-
power draw of cell i in scenario s in period t
- \(z_{sit}^{+}\) :
-
power feed-in of cell i in scenario s in period t
Scenario dependent parameters
- \(D_{sit}\):
-
energy demand of the load in cell i in scenario s in time period t
- \(M_{tk}^{\text {x}^-}\):
-
upper bound on the day-ahead spot market purchase bid quantity at price in time period t
- \(M_{tk}^{\text {x}^+}\):
-
upper bound on the day-ahead spot market sell bid quantity at price in time period t
- \(M_{tk}^{\text {r}^-}\):
-
upper bound on the negative reserve bid quantity at price in time period t
- \(M_{tk}^{\text {r}^+}\):
-
upper bound on the positive reserve bid quantity at price in time period t
- \(P_s\):
-
Probability of scenario s
- :
-
day-ahead spot market purchase price in scenario s in period t
- :
-
day-ahead spot market sell price in scenario s in period t
- :
-
negative reserve market price in scenario s in period t
- :
-
positive reserve market price in scenario s in period t
- :
-
power output of the renewable energy resource in cell i in scenario s in period t
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert durch Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kuttner, L., Scheffler, M., Buscher, U. (2021). An MIP-Based Heuristic Decomposition Approach for Distributed Energy Resource Scheduling. In: Fritzsche, R., Winter, S., Lohmer, J. (eds) Logistik in Wissenschaft und Praxis. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33480-2_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-33480-2_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-33479-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-33480-2
eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)