4.6 Article

Evaluating reactive power reserves scarcity during the energy transition toward 100% renewable supply

期刊

ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS RESEARCH
卷 190, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.epsr.2020.106672

关键词

Reactive power reserves; Security-constrained optimal power flow; TSO/DSO interaction

资金

  1. Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) in the framework of the project ML4SCOPF [INTER/FNRS/19/14015062]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper raises awareness on the key issue of reactive power reserves scarcity in the transition towards renewable-dominated electricity supply and provides quantitative evidence for this issue. It elaborates a methodology to predict when such issue may start to occur, using a tailored AC security-constrained optimal power flow (SCOPF) problem to evaluate the scarcity of reactive power reserves. The usefulness of the proposed methodology is illustrated on two systems of different scales under N - 1 contingencies.
The energy transition toward renewable-dominated electricity supply, which many countries committed to achieve in the next decades, will pose major challenges to power systems reliable operation. A significant anticipated challenge, yet not tackled quantitatively by research works, is that, if countermeasures are not planned, the transmission grid will likely face in the years to come extreme situations of lack and/or excess of reactive power. This paper first raises awareness on the key issue of reactive power reserves scarcity as one moves toward renewable-dominated electricity supply and brings quantitative evidence underpinning this issue. Then, the paper elaborates a crude first version of a methodology to predict when such issue may start to occur. The core of the methodology includes a tailored AC security-constrained optimal power flow (SCOPF) problem which evaluates the reactive power reserves scarcity. The usefulness of the proposed methodology is illustrated on two systems of 5 and 60 buses, respectively, considering N - 1 contingencies.

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

4.6
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