1 / 38

Measuring the impact of innovation

Measuring the impact of innovation. Brussels , March 2011. Concept-Idea. The TWENTIES project aims at:

cece
Télécharger la présentation

Measuring the impact of innovation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measuring the impact of innovation Brussels, March2011

  2. Concept-Idea The TWENTIES project aims at: “demonstrating by early 2014 through real life, large scale demonstrations, the benefits and impacts of several critical technologies required to improve the pan-European transmission network, thus giving Europe a capability of responding to the increasing share of renewable in its energy mix by 2020 and beyond while keeping its present level of reliability performance.” www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  3. 6 high level demonstration objectives Project objectives Task force 1:Contributions of variable generation and flexible load to system services Task force 2:Network operators needs to allow reliable off-shore wind development Task force 3:Improvements in the transmission grid flexibility Demo 1 SYSERWIND Demo 3 DC-Grid Demo 5 NETFLEX Demo 2 DERINT Demo 4 STORM MANAG. Demo 6 FLEXGRID www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  4. Measuringimpact & KPIs Impactassessment Measured data Pre definedMethodology Pre definedMethodology 1 Including WP #17 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  5. Estimating the aggregated impact of the Demos Objective: The objective of EU wide assessment is to provide an integrated global assessment of the impact that the task forces will have on the EU level. Thus, this (WP16) work complements the (WP15) analysis of the economic impact that the demonstrations have on a national level in the countries where they are performed. Approach is to use existing simulation models to support the quantification of this impact. The impact will be included in the simulations mainly by changing input parameters of the models. Thus, model development will be avoided, although some minor adjustments will be needed to include the effect of the demonstrators. The main barrier for the WP16 assessments is generally the limits in access to all relevant data for all Europe, but a relatively detailed market database including all Europe is available www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  6. WP #16. KPIs • The KPIs are selected to quantify the impact of the demonstrated technologies / solutions in terms of • Cost of energy • CO2 emission • Investment costs • Need for transmission capacity • Potential hydro power capacity • Need for spinning reserves • Wind power forecast errors • Costs of ancillary services • KPIs are defined at Project level (4 KPIs) and at Task Force level(22 KPIs) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  7. WP #15: Economic assesment • OBJECTIVES • Assess the local economic and/or technological impact of each demo. • Perform an analysis of the joint impact for all the demos in the same task-force. • Identify the barriers, after the demonstrations but in a continuous way through the project life that should be overcome to scale-up the outcomes of the three task-forces at a member-state or regional level. • Propose solutions to overcome the identified barriers in terms of new regulatory recommendations such as grid codes and electricity market designs. • Perform a transversal analysis of impact of all the demos to provide a reference point for replicating the results at a full scale EU27 level in some tasks of WP16 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  8. WP #15: Economic assesment • IMPACTS & BARRIERS: • The identification of the barriers will be an outcome of this WP: which are the barriers that prevent from taking advantage of the new features demonstrated. An special emphasis will be done in regulatory barriers (market rules, products, etc.) • The assessment will be measured by a number of proposed KPIs. They are classified by Task Force • Besides these KPIs (directly connected to specific objectives of the project), WP15 will produce additional outcomes • KPI’smeasurements • Foreach Demo, and jointlyforeachTasksForce, themainimpactswillbemearsured in economicterms (21 KPIs) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  9. Thanks for your attention, vgonzalez@ree.es www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  10. ANNEX 1. DEMO OBJECTIVES, BARRIERS & IMPACTS www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  11. Demo #1: SYSERWIND • OBJECTIVES: • To demonstrate that secondary frequency control and voltage control in the system can be performed effectively byexisting aggregated wind farms through improving the control systems at EMS and local level. • BARRIERS: • Technical: New tools at turbine and wind farm level to be implemented. It might even mean modifying the existing software of the PLC of the turbines and the algorithms of the local SCADA system of each wind farm. The communication systems speed has to be enhanced considerably to coordinate the different wind farms. The forecast tools have to be enhanced for providing short-term forecast. • Regulatory: the current market structure for secondary regulation is itself a barrier from the forecast tools point of view. • Economical: the current wind farm components may be affected in their performance, in terms of loss of profit, CAPEX and OPEX, electrical infrastructure losses, life of components, etc. at Wind Farm and Wind Turbine level www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  12. Demo #1: SYSERWIND • IMPACT: • Through the new active power control services tested (secondary frequency control), a lower system power reserve due to wind energy penetration might be needed, and a new approach to wind energy market integration could be addressed. • Through the new reactive power control services tested, the wind energy could participate in the grid voltage control in a similar way as the conventional power plants. It will lower the power losses and the voltage control complexity for the TSO. • As a result of the two new services provided by wind energy, the cost of the system operation will be reduced, and it will allow an increase in the wind energy penetration by preserving the grid security and stability. • KPI’s measurements: • Dynamic Response of both active and reactive power regulators (fullfills the same requirements that conventional generators) (KPI.D1.1.2, KPI.D1.2.2, KPI.D1.2.4, KPI.D1.2.6) • Accuracy and Reliability of the offered services (KPI.D1.1.1, KPI.D1.1.3, KPI.D1.2.1, KPI.D1.2.3, KPI.D1.2.5) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  13. Demo #2: DERINT • OBJECTIVES: • To show at large scale that aggregating wind production with flexible DER and loads within appropriate regulatory schemes lead to a more secure and efficient electricity system having high scalability potential. • To create an alternative to deliver ancillary services from the traditional fossil fired power plants. • BARRIERS: • Technical: Scalability of the IT platform and optimization algorithms. Transform LU capabilities into ancillary services. Providing a standardized solution for LU control • Regulatory: The TSO may not create the necessary ancillary market to handle consumption units thereby making it possible for the VPP to act on the market.The TSO may not be willing to allow an aggregation of small units to deliver ancillary services. • Economical: Customers may not be willing to participate if cannot measure the economic benefits of joining the VPP. The LU may technically not be suitable for connecting to the VPP.Potential poor business case for connecting a LU. www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  14. Demo #2: DERINT • IMPACT: • Physical outcomes: A 100 MW VPP system operating in the Danish power system. The VPP platform should be applicable to other technical and market environments, e.g. Spain • Intellectual outcomes: New optimization models, etc. manifested as academic papers and/or patent applications. Analyses, documentation and guidelines that facilitates the implementation of a VPP solution in a new technical and market environment, e.g. Spain. • Financial outcomes: To demonstrate commercial incentives for the TSO, for the ancillary service provider and for the local asset owner. This is exemplified in any amount of income to DONG Energy’s VPP solution in Denmark, its TSO customer (Energinet.dk) and its energy customers (local asset owners, both B2B and B2C) that demonstrates the value of the VPP concept. • Environmental outcomes: The increase in supply of ancillary services will decrease the price, thereby lowering the overall electricity cost for the consumer. The VPP provides a flexible solution that allows larger amounts of fluctuating renewable resources www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  15. Demo #2: DERINT • KPI’s measurements: • Number of Units integrated into the VPP (KPI.D2.1) • Number of different technologies in VPP portfolio(KPI.D2.2) • Active capacity made available by VPP in Spot Market and for Ancillary Services (KPI.D2.3) • Actual energy delivered by VPP in Spot Market and for Ancillary Services (KPI.D2.4) • Reactive capacity made available by VPP to grid operator (KPI.D2.5) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  16. Demo #3: DCGRID • OBJECTIVES: • Show that the long term increase of off-shore wind generation will request innovative solutions in transmission topologies more complex and more adapted to RES features • Set up economic and technical requirements for designing and operating future off-shore grids in parallel with AC mainland grid • Propose from the already existing connections and available technologies, a step-by-step roadmap for off-shore network development for several scenarios of target • BARRIERS: • The technical feasibility and operability of MTDC grids with wind generators in normal but also disturbed conditions is not proven yet, as no MTDC grid with wind farm connections is operated over the world today and no standards are available up to now • The lack of a DC breaker at appropriate voltage level is commonly identified as a drawback today; moreover the complete protection plan design is still missing and its feasibility should be proven as well (detection, selection, clearance). • The high cost of HVDC technology and wind inherent intermittency make it difficult to settle economic criteria for developing off-shore networks “just for” wind www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  17. Demo #3: DCGRID • IMPACT: • Technological impact: It will be highlighted the most feasible grid topologies at the 2030 scenario based on existing HVDC technology and/or development of components (e.g. breakers and converters). Optimal and secure operation by TSO’s of the DC/AC System • Economic impact:The drivers for developing HVDC off-shore networks on an European basis and taking into account on-shore conditions will be analysed in detail through probabilistic methods. Capacity increase among countries and capacity sharing with wind generation will be analysed as a key issue for market applications. • KPI’s measurements: • Performance of the DC breaker prototype (KPI.D3.1) • Number of basic topologies fully investigated (KPI.D3.2) • Control and protection design for 2 HVDC technologies and 2 converter architectures (KPI.D3.3) • Volume and location of off-shore wind generation on European shore (KPI.D3.4) • Capacity of the off-shore network to transmit power after a disturbance on the DC side (KPI.D3.5) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  18. Demo #4: STORMMANAGEMENT • OBJECTIVES: • Improve assessment of offshore storm forecasting • Improve wind turbine flexibility • Explore different operational management strategies and test some of them • Operate the HVDC interconnection with respect to real-time balancing • Define hydro power control strategies • Investigate consequences for the Nordic system caused by this demonstration for the different solution methods proposed, • Explore reasonable compensation measures for forced regulations under stormy conditions • IMPACT: • Impact on wind turbine performance • Impact on balancing management by storm forecasting • Impact of hydro system control • Impact of coordinated action www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  19. Demo #4: STORMMANAGEMENT • KPI’s measurements: • Maximum power forecast error on wind farm level (KPI.D4.1) • Improved wind turbine flexibility (KPI.D4.2) • Management strategies for a storm (KPI.D4.3) • Operating the HVDC interconnection with respect to real time balancing (KPI.D4.4) • Hydro power control strategies (KPI.D4.5) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  20. Demo #5: NETFLEX • OBJECTIVES: • Demonstrate the enhanced grid flexibility • By forecasting overhead line dynamic thermal ratings (DLR) • By coordinating PhaseShifterTransformers (PSTs) and HVDC-links actions • While monitoring the stability of this flexible system facilitates further integration of wind generation • BARRIERS: • Technical in order to be able to forecast security margins accurately enough • Strategic because of the cross-country impact oflargerinterconnectioncapacity • IMPACTS: • Enhanced use of the system • Through forecasting line ratings (1) • Through coordination among‘active’griddevices(2) • By combining the previous results: I(1+2) ≥ I(1) + I(2) • With out compromising system stability www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  21. Demo #5: NETFLEX µ = -2% µ = 5% µ = ±10% µ = 5% µ = 0% • KPI’s measurements: • Manageable wind uncertainty (KPI.D5.Smart-PFC.2) • Additional wind integration • Gain from DLR (1) (KPI.D5.NETFLEX.2) • Gain from optimising the coordination of PSTs and HVDC-links (2) (KPI.D5.NETFLEX.3) • Loss from stability constraints (3) (KPI.D5.NETFLEX.4) • Gain from the set of technologies (KPI.D5.NETFLEX.4) • I(1+2) ≥ I(1) + I(2) • I(3) very small www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  22. Demo #6: FLEXGRID • OBJECTIVES: • Reduce the number of times when curtailment in wind production is needed due to overloads in transmission lines • Make use of the maximum transmission capacity without taking over high risks • Provide the suitable information to allow real time decision by the operator in a scenario with high level of wind production • Better management of bottlenecks in transmission lines with wind power • Maximize wind integration without compromising system integrity • BARRIERS: • Technical: • RTTR: To be able to forecast accurately the actual capacity and correlate it with wind production, implementation of novel technologies (OPPC) • FACTS: Outstanding detail engineering works to ensure successful implementation, stability of the electrical signal and proper durability of the device • Regulatory (FACTS): Singular devices should be fitted into the Network planning and find a suitable economic framework www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  23. Demo #6: FLEXGRID • IMPACT: • RTTR models and new algorithms in order to expand the network capacity to evacuate more wind energy and to improve security • Allow more flexible operation of the lines to improve the operation in N and N-X situations • New alternative device to use in the network planning • Reduction of profit losses for wind generators • Significant increase of network capacity and the integration of renewable energy • KPI’s measurements: • Correlation between RTTR and Wind Generation (KPI.D6.1) • Capacity Gain using RTTR and FACTS (KPI.D6.2Y; KPI.D6.4Y) • Errors in the forecast of the Thermal Rating (KPI.D6.3) • Cost and profitability of RTTR and FACTS (KPI.D6.5.1; KPI.D6.5.1; KPI.D6.5.1; KPI.D6.6) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  24. WP #17: Smart licensing for off-shore interconnectors • OBJECTIVES: • To address the issues of smart licensing of subsea interconnectors • Focus on submarine interconnectors with and without wind parks in the North Sea and Baltic Sea • To draw applicable conclusions about common licensing barriers • To propose concrete regulatory measures to anticipate licensing problems • BARRIERS: • Regulatory: harmonization of the regulation for several countries • IMPACT • Reduction of cost and time for applying interconnector projects • KPI’s measurements • Reduction of cost and time of applying interconnector projects (KPI.WP17.1) • Effectiveness of the smart licensing process (KPI.WP17.2) www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  25. ANNEX 2. DETAILED KPIs LIST www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  26. DEMO #1 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  27. DEMO #2 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  28. DEMO #3 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  29. DEMO #4 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  30. DEMO #5 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  31. DEMO #6 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  32. WP #17 KPI’s www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  33. WP #15 KPI’s • KPIs for Task-force 1 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  34. WP #15 KPI’s • KPIs for Task-force 2 • KPIs for Task-force 3 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  35. WP #16 KPI’s • Project level KPIs www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  36. WP #16 KPI’s • KPIs for Task-force 1 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  37. WP #16 KPI’s • KPIs for Task-force 2 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

  38. WP #16 KPI’s • KPIs for Task-force 3 www.twenties-project.eu EWEA Conference 2011

More Related