Computers in power system planning

Knight, U.G.; Booth, R. R.; Mallard, S. A.; Lewis, D.M.

doi:10.1109/proc.1974.9540

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Introduction1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1976

1987

Publication Types

Select...

Article5

Other1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent6

Authors

Journals

Cited by 11 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…where the subscript p denotes per phase quantities and a is the angle p between the phase voltage and phase current:. Iu a three-phllee syt;t..::m, the total real power is (7) cus e -P L ,…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between dispersed nuclear power plants and a nuclear energy center at a hypothetical site on Kentucky Lake, Tennessee. Volume II. Transmission of power

Reister¹,

Zelby²

1976

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison is made among power transmission systems required to serve a single set of load center demands from four modes of siting the generating facilities: a single generation site with an ultimate generation capacity of 48,000 MW; four generation sites each with a generation capacity of 12,000 MW; 10 generation sites each with a generation capacity of 4,800 MW; and a system that resulted when the existing utility plan for future generation was logically expanded. The time period for the study is from the year 1985 to the year 2020, when the full 48,000 MW of new capacity from the single large nuclear energy center is on-line, The load centers served are Huntsville,

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%