2021
DOI: 10.1109/mpe.2020.3043570
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Fragile Grid: The Physics and Economics of Security Services in Low-Carbon Power Systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…New important techno‐economic challenges that are emerging are associated with inherent difficulties in dealing with complex physical system requirements—and then market products—in low‐carbon grids with increasing shares of PECs, but still with a large presence of synchronous machines. These difficulties in dealing with the “new physics” of low‐carbon grids justify the so‐called “bottom‐up” approach “from physics to economics” to define new market and regulatory requirements, services and products (Billimoria et al, 2020; Mancarella & Billimoria, 2021). Examples of such issues are: difficulty in defining physical features of low‐carbon grids (e.g., “system strength” is related to network impedance, voltage/reactive power control, synchronizing torque, inertia, and short‐circuit current—it is not straightforward to even “define” in a clear but comprehensive manner); inseparability of certain services (e.g., a synchronous generator provides fault current, but also inevitably inertia, thus affecting other markets/products); integrality constraints (e.g., an SC can only provide none, or all, of its inertia and fault‐current capacity when off or on, respectively, thus leading to “binary” or “integer” service provision that is not easy to incorporate within market solution algorithms); non‐intuitive stability characteristics of complex hybrid (continuous‐discrete) dynamical systems (e.g., synchronous and PEC‐based technologies); and difficulty in defining whether all security services are actually “public goods,” as historically thought, or whether some of them may have different economic properties (e.g., provision and access to some services may become increasingly “contentious” due to system congestion).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New important techno‐economic challenges that are emerging are associated with inherent difficulties in dealing with complex physical system requirements—and then market products—in low‐carbon grids with increasing shares of PECs, but still with a large presence of synchronous machines. These difficulties in dealing with the “new physics” of low‐carbon grids justify the so‐called “bottom‐up” approach “from physics to economics” to define new market and regulatory requirements, services and products (Billimoria et al, 2020; Mancarella & Billimoria, 2021). Examples of such issues are: difficulty in defining physical features of low‐carbon grids (e.g., “system strength” is related to network impedance, voltage/reactive power control, synchronizing torque, inertia, and short‐circuit current—it is not straightforward to even “define” in a clear but comprehensive manner); inseparability of certain services (e.g., a synchronous generator provides fault current, but also inevitably inertia, thus affecting other markets/products); integrality constraints (e.g., an SC can only provide none, or all, of its inertia and fault‐current capacity when off or on, respectively, thus leading to “binary” or “integer” service provision that is not easy to incorporate within market solution algorithms); non‐intuitive stability characteristics of complex hybrid (continuous‐discrete) dynamical systems (e.g., synchronous and PEC‐based technologies); and difficulty in defining whether all security services are actually “public goods,” as historically thought, or whether some of them may have different economic properties (e.g., provision and access to some services may become increasingly “contentious” due to system congestion).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Low and variable rotational inertia poses a challenge to grid frequency stability because a large disturbance from the nominal frequency can trigger frequency-dependent load shedding and other protection schemes. The triggering of protection schemes ultimately causes cascading failures that could result in a system-wide blackout [2], [4], [6].…”
Section: A Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ctive distribution networks (ADNs) with many inverterbased resources (IBRs) are potential candidates for the provision of flexibility and system services. These will be more needed in low-carbon grids that may be prone to frequency instability under low-inertia conditions [1][2] and to voltage instability at weak grid connections due to reduction in short-circuit level [3]. Most previous works have focused on the capabilities of inverter-based technologies (e.g., photovoltaic (PV) units [4], battery energy storage systems [5][6]) in providing voltage/reactive and frequency/active dynamic supports in transmission systems [4][5][6] or DC/AC micro-grids [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With regard to small-signal analysis (e.g., up to 1-2 Hz frequency oscillations following generation/load outage/shedding in conventional power systems [20], which may be even larger in low-inertia future grids [2]), this work investigates the potential benefits in frequency response from IBRs. Moreover, we mathematically discuss how this frequency response may result in voltage violations due to low system strength.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%