Value-based reliability transmission planning

Bulk power risk analysis: Ranking infrastructure elements according to their risk significance

“…Engineers at the Duke Power Company have proposed a value-based approach to investment planning regarding upgrades to the power system [15]. Their methodology looks at the expected cost of proposed improvements and the expected cost to customers of future outages without this improvement.…”

Estimated Value of Service Reliability for Electric Utility Customers in the United States

“…For example see: (Munasinghe, 1979), (Burns and Gross, 1990), (Sanghvi et al, 1991), (Allan and Billinton, 1992), (Sullivan et al, 1996), (Sullivan and Keane, 1995), , , , (Woo and Train, 1988), (Matsukawa and Fujii, 1994), (Dalton et al, 1996), (de Nooij et al, 2006) and2008), (Ghajar and Billinton, 2005), , (Wangdee and Billinton, 2004), (Reitz and Sen, 2006) and (Rose et al, 2007) (LaCommare andEto, 2006) Value-based planning is designed to match the level of investment in reliability with the societal benefit of the improvement in reliability. The use of value-based planning requires a method for estimating customers' economic value of service reliability.…”

Reliability Standards for the Operation and Planning of Future Electricity Networks

“…Furthermore, given that network security is provided mainly through asset redundancy, this approach may create a barrier against innovation in network operation and design, and prevent the implementation of technically effective and economically efficient solutions that could enhance the utilization of the existing network assets and maximize value for the users of the network. Over the last decade in particular, significant investigations (Siddiqi and Baughman, 1995;Dalton III et al, 1996;Strbac et al, 1998;Ni et al, 2003;McCalley et al, 1999;McCalley et al, 2000;McCalley et al, 2004;Choi et al, 2005;Xiao and McCalley, 2007;Jirutitijaroen and Singh, 2008;Moreno et al, 2013;North American Reliability Corporation, 1996) have questioned this historical approach to electricity network operation and design, and provided growing evidence that a radically different paradigm may be needed to facilitate a cost-effective delivery of energy policy objectives, particularly in relation to integrating low-carbon generation, and application of smart grid technologies. In several jurisdictions North American Reliability Corporation, 1996;Gleadow et al, 2009;Araneda, 2009;CIGRE, 2010), electricity distribution and transmission network reliability standards and practices have been reviewed and modified.…”

“…Such a deterministic standard might be good on average but it will not be appropriate for any individual event. Therefore, a probabilistic approach must be used to adequately identify the risk for each individual event as shown in Strbac et al, 2011;Moreno et al, 2012;Kirschen and Jayaweera, 2007;Kariuki and Allan, 1996;He et al, 2010;Dalton III et al, 1996;McCalley et al, 2004;Choi et al, 2005;Xiao and McCalley, 2007;Jirutitijaroen and Singh, 2008;Moreno et al, 2013;North American Reliability Corporation, 1996;Gleadow et al, 2009;Araneda, 2009;CIGRE, 2010;and Moreno et al, 2010a. It is fundamentally problematic to apply corrective control in a deterministic framework since its post-fault cost impacts, which could be significant, would be ignored (for instance, post-fault cost associated with operating SPS over demand and generation can be as high as £30,000/MWh and £400,000/trip, respectively). 1 Hence deterministic criteria can be applied through mainly preventive control since applying corrective control actions in a deterministic framework that fundamentally ignores corresponding costs, would clearly lead to a suboptimal solution.…”