4.8 Article

IGDT-Based Complementarity Approach for Dealing With Strategic Decision Making of Price-Maker VPP Considering Demand Flexibility

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 2212-2220

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TII.2019.2932107

关键词

Cogeneration; Mathematical model; Uncertainty; Informatics; Contracts; Real-time systems; Demand flexibility; profit maximization; renewable energy; uncertainty modeling; virtual power plant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this article, we outline a novel bilevel decision-making framework for a price-maker virtual power plant (VPP) to participate in both day-ahead and balancing oligopoly markets considering multiple forward contracts. In principle, the VPP operator with having the possession of financial transmission rights can manage its financial risk through trading electricity among various markets such as centralized pool and contract markets aimed at maximizing its own profit and minimizing the associated risk. Besides, the VPP operator will be able to optimize its procurement expenditures by incentivizing flexible demands proportion to different electricity tariffs. In the proposed bilevel model, the VPP aggregator strives to maximize its own profit at the upper level while an independent system operator seeks to clear both markets at the lower levels with an eye to maximize social welfare. Each lower level is then replaced by its complementarity slackness conditions and, consequently, is recast as a mathematical program with equilibrium constraints that can be solved using off-the-shelf software packages. Furthermore, the uncertainty pertaining to renewables has been envisaged through information gap decision theory resulting in robustness & x002F;opportunity function to deal with self-scheduling of VPP. This article ends up with different illustrative case studies through performing after-the-fact actual market data to verify the applicability of the model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据